HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009/09/15 Item 18
',ij'
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
SUMMARY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
~ \ 'f:. CITY OF
. 1t - (HULA VISTA
Item: 6?
Meeting Date:09/15/09
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN' APPEAL OF THE
DETERiVIINATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
DIRECTOR THAT THE PROJECT (TMP 08-08 SUBDIVISION
OF A 23,381 SQUARE FOOT SITE INTO THREE LEGAL LOTS)
IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF
THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT PER
SECTION 15315 OF THE STATE CEQA GUIDELINES. THE
SITE IS LOCATED AT 634 SECOND AVE.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA DENYING THE APPEAL AND UPHOLDING
THE DECISION OF THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
DIRECTOR THAT THE PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY
EXEMPT FROM CEQA PURSUANT TO SECTION 15315
(MINOR LAND DIVISION) OF THE STATE CEQA
GUIDELINES AND TO DENY THE REQUEST TO WAIVE ALL
APPLICATION FEES FOR THIS PROJECT-SAVE OUR
HERITAGE ORGANIZATION>.rI--
DEPUTY CITY MANAG~hEVELOPMENT SERVICES
DIRECTOR
CITY MANAGE~
4/5THS VOTE: YES
NO X
--
Consideration of an appeal of the project's (TPM 08-08 subdivision of a 23,381 square foot sitc
mto three legal lots) categorical exemption from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act and a request to waive all application fees at 634 Second Avenue. Appellant: Save
Our Heritage Organization.
18-1
Item No.: /'i!
Meeting Date: 9/15/09
Page 2
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act and has determined that the project qualifies for a
Class 15 categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15315 (minor land division) of the State
CEQA Guidelines. Thus, no further environmental review is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION
Council conduct the public hearing and adopt the Resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
On May IS, 2009, the City Engineer and Development Services Director conditionally approved
a Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide a 23,3S1 square-foot site into three legal lots pursuant to
Chula Vista Municipal Code (CYMC) Section IS.20.
On May 2S, 2009 an appeal was submitted by Save Our Heritage Organization, Inc. of the
decision of the Development Services Department's conditional approval of Tentative Parcel
Map, TPM OS-OS. The Planning Commission considered the appeal on July S, 2009 and voted, 5-2-
0-0 to deny the appeal of TPM OS-OS and uphold the decision of the City Engineer and
Development Services Director to approve TPM OS-OS (see Attachment B, Planning Commission
Minutes, TPM-OS-OS). Pursuant to the Chula Vista Municipal Code, the Planning Commission has
the final decision making authority on Tentative Parcel Maps and a Tentative Parcel Map can not be
appealed to the City Council. However, the environmental exemption status on a project may be
appealed to the City Council pursuant to Section 21151 of the California Environmental Quality
Act.
On July 17, 2009, an appeal was submitted by Save Our Heritage Organization, Inc. of the
decision of the Development Services Director that the project (TPM OS-OS subdivision of a
23,3S1 square foot site into three legal lots) is categorically exempt from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15315 of the State CEQA guidelines. The
appellant also requests a waiver of all application fees based on financial hardship and denial of
due process.
DISCUSSION
Project Site Characteristics:
The 23,3S1 square-foot project site is located at 634 Second Ave. The project site is comprised
of one parcel located in the urbanized northwestern portion of the City of Chula Vista
(Attachment A-Locator Map). The project site is relatively flat with vehicular access from
Second Ave, with a driveway shared by both the subject property and the property to the north.
The project site currently contains a one-story, 1,124 square-foot single-family residential home
with a detached 76S square-foot garage. The existing surrounding land uses are as follows:
18-2
Item No.: / Z
Meeting Date: 9/15/09
Page 3
General Plan
Zoning
Current Land Use
Site: Residential Low Medium
South: Residential Low Medium
North: Residential Low Medium
East: Residential Low Medium
West: Residential Low Medium
Rl-Single-Family Residential
RI-Single-Family Residential
Rl-Single-Family Residential
Rl-l5-Single-Family Residential
Rl-Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
Project Description:
The overall proposal consists of a 23,381 square-foot lot that is being subdivided into three legal
lots for individual ownership and the demolition of the existing single-family residence and
detached garage. Each lot will be accessed off a 20-ft shared driveway pursuant to Chula Vista
Municipal Code Section 19.22.150. Three guest parking spaces will be provided.
ANAL YSIS:
1) SOHO Appeal of the Project's Categorically Exemption per CEQA
On July 17, 2009, SOHO submitted an appeal, stating the following:
"The City's adoption of a categorical exemption is unlawful because the project may result in a
significant environmental impact via the demolition of the Percy House. There is substantial
expert evidencc in the record that the house may qualify for the California Register of Historical
Resources. There is also substantial evidence in the record that the proposed
subdivision/demolition project may have significant aesthetic impacts. Due to these unusual
circumstances, an environmental impact report should be prepared to assess project impacts and
feasible alternatives to demolition."
Staff Response: Upon preliminary review of the project, staff determined that the project
qualifies for a categorical exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act under
Section 15315 (Minor Land Divisions). The tentative parcel map would result in four or fewer
parcels, is consistent with the Chula Vista General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, does not require
any exceptions or variances, has access to public services, and does not have any slopes over
twenty percent.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2(f) (Exceptions) states the following: Historic Resources. A
categorical exemplion shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a historic resource.
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15060, a preliminary environmental review was
conducted. As part of the preliminary review an assessment of potential historic resources was
conducted by a qualified historic expert ("Expert"). Through this assessment, the Expert
determined that the existing stmcture, a bungalow built in 1912, is not significant. The analysis
and findings of the Expert can be found in the report titled "CEQA Historical Resource Analysis
Report", revised January 2009 ("Report"), attached hereto as "Attachment 0". The Report
examines each of the criteria under CEQA for determining historical significance.
18-3
Item No.: / f:
Meeting Date: 9/15/09
Page 4
Under CEQA there are essentially three categories of ."Historic Resources": 1) Mandatory
Historic Resources, 2) Presumptive Historic Resources, and 3) Discretionary Historic Resources.
A Mandatory Historic Resource is one that is listed in the California Register of Historic
Resources ("Register") or is determined by the State Historic Resources Commission to be
eligible to be listed. With respect to this structure neither applies; therefore, it is not a mandatory
historic resource. A Presumptive Historic Resource is one that is included in a local register of
historic resources or is identified in a historical resource survey as meeting requirements of
Public Resources Code Section 5024.1(g). As detailed in the Report, neither of these
requirements is met, so the structure is not considered a Presumptive Historical Resource.
Finally, there is the category of Discretionary Historic Resources, which allows a lead agency to
elect to use its discretion to determine whether a structure is a historic resource notwithstanding
the determinations in categories 1 and 2. Generally, under this category a lead agency examines
whether the resource meets the criteria for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources
and as such would be eligible for listing in the Register. In the current situation, the Expert
analyzed this question and determined that it did not meet any of the criterion. Therefore, the
existing structure is not considered significant pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5
and it is appropriate to apply the categorical exemption stated in CEQA Guidelines Section
15315 to the project.
Additionally, there is a claim put forward by the appellant related to the standard for determining
whether a resource is historic. The claim is that when reviewing whether a structure is eligible
for listing in the Register (the discretionary category), the "fair argument" standard should be
applied. The claim is without merit. Although a "fair argument" standard exists in CEQA, it
does not apply when determining whether a structure is historic.l The actual standard as
identified in section 15064.5(a)(3) is the "substantial evidence" standard. This standard basically
states that in order be obligated to classify a resource as historic, that it is eligible for listing in
the Register, the lead agency must first find that "substantial evidence" based on the record as a
whole exists. Without "substantial evidence" in the record, the lead agency has no obligation to
list the resource as historic. In this situation, the Expert did a thorough review of whether the
structure is eligible for listing in the Register. The Report indicates that the Expert found that no
evidence that would make the structure eligible for listing in the Register. Absent substantial
evidence, the structure would not be considered historic.
2) SOHO Appeal of all Application Fees
On July 17, 2009, SOHO submitted an appeal, stating the following:
"The appeal fee of $7,000 is also objected to as denying due process. Pursuant to 3.45.010 of the
Municipal Code, we the Chula Vista Historic Homeowners, hereby request a waiver of the
appeal fee of $7,000. The sole income of the Historic Homeowners is the profit earned on the
Chula Vista Historic Home Tours. Two years ago, our group donated $25,000 of our money to
the City to be used for an update of the historic building inventory. This contribution drastically
1 The "fair argument" standard applies only after a resource is determined "historic". If a resource has been
determined "historic" the "fair argument" standard will apply to the question of whether the proposed project "may
cause a significant adverse change in the significance of the historic resource" and thereby have a significant effect
on the environment.
18-4
Item No.: If?
Meeting Date: 9/15/09
Page 5
depleted our preservation fund. In addition to this appeal fee, we will need to pay a preservation
expert for a report on this matter. These expenses will completely wipe out our remaining funds.
In fact, depending on the cost, we may not have enough money to pay for the report at all. This
will mean that there will be no funds left in our account to finance another home tour, which we
are hoping to have next year. These tours benefit the City and are enjoyed by many of our
citizens. It would be unfortunate if we were not able to have the tour due to the expenses
incurred for this appeal. However, we feel this issue is so important to our City that we must go
forward with the appeal in the hope of saving the most historic neighborhood in our City."
Staff Response:
Current Council Policy and Chapter 3.45 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code provide an option
for the City Council to waive all or a portion of the processing fees for nonprofit organizations.
In order to waive all or a portion of processing fees, Council must find that a "peculiar economic
hardship or other injustice would result to applicant, which outweighs, when balanced against
the need for the City revenue and the need for a uniform method of recovering same from
those against whom it is imposed." CYMC Section 3.45.010(C)(3). The benefit of the services
provided by a non-profit organizalion may be included in the determination. Council Policy
267 -05
In the current economic environment, the failure of the City to collect the funds from the
applicant would cause financial hardship to the City, in that the City would not cover any of the
costs that the City has expended associated with this appeal; which could exceed approximately
$7,004.00 dollars. The failure to recover these funds would directly impact the City's General
Fund.
a. The Amount of the Processing Fee. In order to determine the correct processing fees
to cover all expenditures, a fee study was conducted to determine the total amount of
staff hours to process an application. Based upon staff's research, the $7,004.00
dollars would cover approximately all of staffs charges on a public hearing appeal
application; therefore, on March 26, 2007 the City Council adopted the fee in the
Master Fee Schedule.
b. Uniform Method of Recovering Fees. Since the adoption of the appeal fee in the
Master Fee Schedule, the Planning DIvision has processed several other public
hearing appeal applications and has found that the processing fee of $ 7 ,004 dollars is
adequate, if not less than what staffs actual billing hours are for a public hearing
appeal application.
In addition, the Appellant argues that the 57,004.00 dollar fee is an excessive amount to pay for
an appeal, so therefore, it is a denial of due process. In response to thIS claim, it should be noted
that the Planning Commission has already heard this appeal, considered all of the evidence
presented, and determined that the structure was not an "Historic Resource" and, thus, exempt
from CEQA review. Though CEQA does require that a City grant an appeal to its highest
decision~making body (in this case the City Council), CEQA does not require an appeal to the
Planning Commission prior to the appeal to Council. By prOVIding the first appeal, the City has
added an additional layer of procedural due process protections for the Appellant. Also, the first
appeal was heard at public hearing and provided at a cost below the actual costs incurred by the
18-5
Item No.: If?
Meeting Date: 9/15/09
Page 6
City. The appeal to the Planning Commission cost the Appellant $350.00 so, the General Fund
has already been impacted in the appeal of this project. By reducing the fees for this appeal, the
impact to the General Fund will be even greater.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICTS:
Conflict:
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found a conflict, in that
Councilmember Pamela Bensoussan has property holdings within 500 feet of the boundary ofthe
property which is the subject ofthis action.
CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT
The application fee and processing cost are paid for by the Appellant. There.is no impact to the
City's General Fund if the City Council approves the attached resolution, PCM-09-20, denying
the request to waive all application fees for this project.
However, if the City Council were to approve the reimbursement of the application fee and
processing cost to the Appellant, the City's General Fund could be impacted up to approximately
$7,004.00 dollars or more, which is the application fee to process a public hearing appeal
according to the approved Master Fee Schedule.
Due to the processing of the first appeal, TPM 08-08 by the Appellants, the City's General Fund
has already been impacted in the amount of $7,893.17. Any reduction in the current application
fees of PCM-09-20, will further affect the City's General Fund.
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
Not applicable.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Locator Map
B. Planning Commission Minutes, TPM-OS-OS
C. PCM-09-20 Appeal Application
D. CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
E. Project Plan
Prepared by: Caroline Young, Assistant Planner, Planning Division
nPI:mning\Caroline\Discretionary Permits\Kevin 0' Neill Lot Split\PCM-09-20 Appeal\PCM-09-20 Final CC Starr Report.doc
18-6
18-7
ATTACHMENT A
Locator Map
"
.,
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DE PARTM E NT
,
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) APPLICANT: Kevin O'Neill PLANNING COMMISSION APPIEAL .
PROJECT 634 Second Av Project Summary: Appeal of the DSD that the prcject (TPM-D8-08)
ADDRESS: is categorically exempt per section 15315 of the state CEOA guidelines.
,
I SCALE: FILE NUMBER:
NORTH No Scale PCM-09-20 Related cases: 15-(19-011, TPM..(Ja.oa
L:\G2be Files\locators\pcm0920.cdr 08 26.09
18-8
ATTACHMENT B
Planning Commission Minutes, TPM-08-08
18-9
MINUTES OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
6:00 p.m.
July 8, 2009
Council Chambers
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California
CALL TO ORDER: 6:05:27 PM
ROLL CALL / MOTIONS TO EXCUSE:
Members Present: Tripp, Clayton, Moctezuma. Vinson, Spethman, Thompson,
Felber
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: Read into the record by Chair Tripp
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: June 10,2009
MSC (Thompson/Clayton) (5-0-1-1) to approve minutes of June 10, 2009 as submitted.
Motion carried with Cmr. Thompson abstaining and Cmr. Moctezuma absent for the vote.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
No public input.
CONSENT AGENDA:
None
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. Public Hearing:
TPM 08-08; Consideration of an appeal of a conditional
approval of Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide a 23,381 sf
site in the R-1 zone into three legal lots. The site is
located at 634 Second Avenue. Appellant: Save Our
Heritage Organization.
Background: Rima Thomas reported that Save Our Heritage Organization (SOHO) filed an
appeal of the decision of the Development Services Department's conditional approval of
Tentative Parcel Map TPM 08-08.
The project site is comprised of a single 23,381 sf parcel located at 634 Second Avenue
with an existing one-story residence and detached garage. Vehicular access is available
from Second Avenue with a driveway shared by both the subject property and the property
to the north. The proposal consists of subdividing the single parcel into three lots for
individual ownership and the demolition of the existing residence and garage.
18-10
Planning Commission Minutes
-2-
July 8, 2009
Steve Power cited the following as grounds for the appeal:
. The TPM violates the Public Resources Code and the exemption is not proper when a
project may have a significant impact on a historic resource.
. The site is not physically suitable for the development in light of the proposed demolition
of an architecturally and historically important structure of cultural and aesthetic value to
the community.
Mr. Power's response was that pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15060 an assessment
of potential historic resources was conducted by a qualified expert who examined each of
the criteria for determining historical significance, they are: 1.) Mandatory Historic Resource,
2.) Presumptive Historic Resources, and 3.) Discretionary Historic Resources. The project
was found to not qualify under any of those criteria and it was determined that it qualified for
a categorical exemption from CEQA under Section 15315 (Minor Land Divisions).
Each one of the lots meets the lot size and dimension requirements of the R-1 zone,
therefore, the project is consistent with the applicable criteria for land division.
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt the resolution denying the
appeal and approving Tentative Parcel Map TPM 08-08 based on the findings of fact
contained therein.
Public Hearing Opened. 6:29:04 PM
Bruce Coons, the appellant, representing Save Our Heritage Organization stated that
collectively they have extensive years of experience evaluating historic resources and it is
their professional opinion that the building has the potential of being a historic resource
under CEQA.
Mr. Coons further stated that the City's approval of TPM via a CEQA exemption is not
proper when a project may have a significant impact on a historic resource. Expert evidence
supports a fair argument that the house is eligible for listing on the California Register of
Historic Resources. According to prior case law a building must be treated as historic for
determining the level of CEQA review required if there is a fair argument of historic status.
6:35:05 PM Colleen Flemming stated she opposes the proposed project because it would
ruin the integrity of this historic neighborhood, therefore, she supports the appeal and
opposes staff's recommendation for approval of TPM 08-08.
6:36:19 PM Peter Watry stated he opposed the project because the density increase will
change the historic character of the neighborhood. Additionally, three dwelling units sharing
a single driveway may create a potential problem with access for emergency vehicles. He
supports the appeal and opposes staff's approval of TPM 08-08.
6:39:25 PM Eric Fotiadi, Architect and Structural Engineer stated he has retrofitted historic
homes in Coronado, integrating them into the fabric of the neighborhood. He described the
unique characteristics of the type, period and method of construction of the Craftsman
bungalo and urged the Commission to preserve it for posterity.
6:42:25 PM Coreen McCall stated she believes the Percy Clay house meets the criteria to
be eligible for designation in the California Register of Historical Resources based on the
18-11
Planning Commission Minutes
-3-
July 8, 2009
following criteria: 1.) it's associated with patterns of events that made a significant
contribution in local or regional history; 2.) it's associated with the lives of persons important
to local or regional history; and 3.) it embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type,
period, or method of construction with artistic values. Ms. McCall then gave a historical
overview of the house and surrounding neighborhood. She expressed concern. with
increased density, parking along the shared single driveway and blocking access of
emergency vehicles. She supports the appeal and opposes staff's approval of TPM 08-08.
Carol Flemming, stated it would be a tragedy to demolish a house that will be 100 years old
when the City celebrates its Centennial; she supports the appeal and opposes the proposal.
Jill Galvez stated she opposes the destruction of the Percy Clay home and stated that this
historic neighborhood is one of the crown jewels of Chula Vista that is showcased in the
Annual Historic Home Tour attracting visitors and hobbyists from the region.
Glenda Devaney, organizer of the Historic Home Tours, stated the tour raises awareness of
the treasure of historic homes and enhances the image of Chula Vista; they have donated
$25,000 to be used in completing a new inventory of historic buildings. The Percy Clay
home needs to be preserved and the neighborhood protected from over-development.
James McVeigh stated the City has invested in developing a Historic Preservation
Ordinance and the City's General Plan is designed to preserve and protect historic
neighborhoods on the west side. He urged the Commission to look beyond at the long-
range benefits of preserving our valuable resources.
Jim Peterson stated that the area between I and J along Del Mar and Second Ave was
determined by a study the City commissioned back in 1992 that this neighborhood
contained the most important historic structures in Chula Vista. Degradation of the
neighborhood is evident by having one long driveway serving three residents.
Georgie Stillman stated the house is listed in our Historical Resource Inventory and was
built by a pioneer Chula Vistan. Back when Greg Cox was Mayor he proposed that the
neighborhood be designated a Historic District, which meant that if you develop on it you
would keep in stylistic harmony with the neighborhood.
Kevin O'Neill stated he's heard all of the arguments as to why this is a historical house, but
more importantly it's not substantiated by the facts as outlined in the CEQA Historical
Resource Analysis Report prepared by Wendy Becker, a highly credential expert in the field.
All of the issued that have been raised have been addressed in the report.
Public Hearing Closed. 7:09:47 PM
Commission Questions.
Cmrs. Thompson asked if staff had had adequate time to review the materials that were
placed on the dais tonight and if they in any way changed their analysis.
Mary Ladiana stated they did review the materials and it didn't change their findings in any
way.
18-12
Planning Commission Minutes
-4.
July 8, 2009
Cmr. Moctezuma asked for clarification on a statement made by Mr. Coons that when two
expert opinions differ, the assumption is made in favor of the expert who believes a building
has historical significance.
7:14:59 PM Deputy City Attorney Miller stated that the standard that has been presented by
SOHO is incorrect; the proper standard under CEQA is Substantial Evidence on the record
that the home is of a historic nature. The Fair Argument Standard does not apply until after
the home is declared historic to determine whether or not there would be an environmental
effect.
Cmr. Spethman stated there was mention of preserving the home, but adding a second
story in order to maximizing this property's profitability; he asked Ms. Becker's opinion on
the matter. Additionally, Cmr. Spethman asked how feasible would it be to relocate the
house somewhere else on the lot; could the structure withstand the move.
Ms. Becker stated that if the perspective is that the building is a historical resource, adding a
second story would constitute the same level of material impact as demolition would; it
would negate the integrity of the building. With regard to the move, Ms. Becker stated that
she's not a structural engineer nor does she know what is the structural integrity of the
house. It's always possible to relocate a historic building; the feasibility is more financial in
nature.
Cmr. Thompson stated that looking at the plot it appears that there could be three 7,000 sf
lots with the house being preserved and asked if the applicant had given any consideration
to that.
Mr. O'Neill stated he had, however, there is an existing hammer-head condition that was
created when the adjacent lot was split and based on Fire Department requirements, it didn't
work.
Cmr. Vinson stated he knows Mr. O'Neill to be a fair-minded businessman who champions
and is a protector of the Single Family Residential zone in Chula Vista. Cmr. Vinson also
fervently believes in owner property rights, therefore, he supports staff's recommendation to
deny the appeal.
Cmr. Felber stated he is a big supporter of historic resources, however, in his opinion, the
evidence was not compelling enough to make the necessary findings against the project,
therefore, he supports staff's recommendation to deny the appeal.
Cmr. Clayton stated the Commission is placed in a very difficult position of having to look at
protecting owner property rights and the neighboring owners' perception as to how this
change will affect them. She concurs with her fellow commissioner's comments that there is
no compelling rebuttal to support the appeal, therefore, she is supporting staff's
recommendation.
Cmr. Thompson stated that in spite of Ms. Becker's analysis he feels like we're losing a
community resource and wished there could be a way for the applicant and the neighbors to
sit down and work out a plan where the house could be preserved.
18-13
Planning Commission Minutes
-5-
July 8, 2009
Cmr. Moctezuma echoed Cmr. Thompson's comments and stated she is torn between the
two because, in her opinion, there is substantial evidence in the record that mentions the
house and may qualify for the California Register of Historical Resources.
Cmr. Tripp stated that in many case, two parties come to different conclusions, however,
from an outsiders point of view, what can tip the scale is evaluating two equally credentialed
experts' analysis; in his opinion, the appellant did not prevail in providing substantial
evidence to make the necessary findings in his favor.
MSC (ClaytonNinson) (5-2) that the Planning Commission adopt the resolution
denying the appeal and approving Tentative Parcel Map TPM 08-08 based. on the
findings of fact contained therein. Motion carried with Cmrs. Moctezuma and
Thompson voting against the motion. 7:42:30 PM
2. Public Hearing:
EIR 07-01; Close of the public review period for the Draft
Second Tier Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern
Urban Center Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan and
Tentative Subdivision Map.
Marni Borg stated that the purpose of the public hearing is to hear oral comments on the
adequacy of the EUC Draft EIR and to close the forty-five day public comment period. All
comments received this evening will be considered and addressed in writing as part of the
Final EIR. No motion or vote by the Planning Commission is necessary this evening; the 45
day public review comment period on the Draft EIR will end with the closing of the public
hearing tonight.
Public Hearing Opened.
Ahmad Solomon, representing SDG&E stated they do not oppose the EUC SPA Plan,
however, they would like to continue working with the City, as well as the developer, in siting
an electric facility that can serve the future growth planned in this particular development.
Public Hearing Closed. (7:58.39)
ACTION ITEMS: 7:58:32 PM
1. Selection of new Chair and Vice Chair for FY 09-10
Cmrs. Clayton and Vinson were nominated to serve as Chair and Vice Chair; they both
accepted the nomination.
Cmr. Clayton was nominated to serve as Chair; nomination failed with a vote of (2-5).
Cmr. Vinson was nominated to serve as Chair; nomination passed with a vote of (5-2).
Cmr. Clayton was nominated to serve as Vice Chair; nomination passed with a vote of (7-0).
18-14
Planning Commission Minutes
-6-
July 8, 2009
2. Consideration to change starting hour for Planning Commission meetings.
There was discussion regarding the reason for the request, which are mostly due to
budgetary reasons i.e. staff overtime payment.
Although some members of the Commission stated they have flexible work schedules and
could meet earlier, the majority felt that due to their work schedule, an earlier time would
create a hardship to them, notwithstanding the fact that starting earlier might preclude
members of the public from being in attendance at these meetings because of their work
schedule; for these reasons they would like to retain the same starting hour of 6:00 p.m.
Adjournment to a regular Planning Commission meeting on July 22, 2009.
Submitted by,
Diana Vargas
Secretary to the Planning Commission
18-15
ATTACHMENT C
PCM-09-20 Appeal Application
18-16
~\~
~
p I ann
n g
&
Building
Planning Division I
Department
Development Processing
mY OF
CHULA VISfA
APPEAL APPLICATION FORM
Appeal the decision of the:
o Zoning Administrator
o Design Review Committee
JSl Planning Commission
Application Information
Name of
Appellant: Save Our Heritage Organisation
Home Address: None
Business Address: 947R S,,, Di~go AV~""P S,,, D;P3"o C'A ",0.110
Project Address:
63+ Second Avenue
Project Description: Tentative Darcel maD. TPM #OS-DS
(Example: zone change, variance, conditional use permit, design review, etc.)
o
Please use the space below to provide a response to the decision you are appealing. Attach
additional sheets, if necessary.
Appeal of Planning Commission approval of a tentative map
The City's adoption of a cate?;orical exemption is unlawful because the pro;ect IIiaV result in a signiflcant
.environmental impact via the demolition of the Percy Clav House. There is substantial eA-pert evi deuce in the
record that the house may QUalifv for the California Recister of Historical Resources. There is also substantial
evidence in the record that the proposed subdivision! dereolition proiect m.av have sie:n.ificant aesthetic irnoacts.
Due to these tIDusual cirCU!!lStances. an e!lvironmental impact report should be prepared to assess prolect
iTTmacts and feasible alternatives to de.D:!..olition.
The anpeal fee of $7000 is also obiected to as den vin~ due process.
~'N1". ~/ ~/?_ /nc;- ~n
Signature of Appellant Date I / / ~~ ~ :::u
-----------------------------------------~e--~--~--
DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE ~~ pi 0
;0 - [Tl
A;:= -..J _
v:>r < '
o:t> ~ fTl
~~ \,Q CJ
(Co --' I'..
rn ::> -.J
The above matter has been scheduled for public hearing before the:
o Planning Commission
o City Council
on
Planning Commission Secretary
City Clerk
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista
California
91910
(6191691-5101
18-17
Corinne McCall
642 Second Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
RECEIVED
'Q9 Jt 17 A9 :~7
Jim Sandoval
City Manager
City of Chula Vista
CITY OF CHUlA VIS1 t.
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
July 16,2009
RE: Appeal/Tentative Parcel Map
634 Second Avenue
Dear Mr. Sandoval,
Regarding the appeal that is being filed regarding CEQA compliance on the above
tentative parcel map, it is my understanding that this appeal, and the $7,000. appeal
fee will be held in suspense while discussions with Mr. 0' Neil to settle this matter
are pursued.
Please be advised that the funds for this $7,000. fee are being paid by the Chula Vista
Historic Homeowners group, of which I am a member. These funds are from monies our
group has saved by conducting historic homes in the city of Chula Vista
Our group has asked the Save Our Heritage Orgalllzation (SOHO) to represent us in
this case because of their expertise in preservation law and CEQA statutes. The appeal
and the fee are being filed within the prescribed 10 day period to preserve our appeal
rights.
We will also ftle a request for a waiver of the $7,000. fee in the event that the discussions
with !vk O'Neil are not successful; although, it is my sincere hope that they will be.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Corinne McCall
Chula Vista Historic Homeowners Group
18-18
RECEIVED
17 July 2009
'09 .it 17 P 5 :39
City Council of Chula Vista:
CITY OF CHULA VIS r k
CJTY CLERK'S OFFICE
Pursuant to 3.45.010 of the Municipal Code, we, the Chula Vista Historic Homeowners, hereby request a
waiver of the appeal fee of $7,000 in case number TPM 08-08.
The sole income of the Historic Homeowners is the profit eamed on the Chula Vista Historic Home Tours.
Two years ago, our group donated $25,000 of our money to the city to be used for an update of the
historic building inventory. This contribution drastically depleted our preservation fund.
In addition to this appeal fee, we will need to pay a preservation expert for a report on this matter. These
expenses will completely wipe out our remaining funds. In fact, depending on the cost, we may not have
enough money to pay for the report at all.
This will mean that there will be no funds left in our account to finance another home tour, which we are
hoping to have next year. These tours benefit the city and are enjoyed by many of our citizens. It would be
unfortunate if we were not able to have the tour due to the expenses incurred for this appeal.
However, we feel this issue is so important to our city that we must go forward with the appeal in the hope
of saving the most historic neighborhood in our city.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
'-'\~ ~~~ CM-- ~~
(;hcia \iist; Historic Homeowners
e
~
18-19
ATTACHMENT D
CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
18-20
CEQA HISTORICAL RESOURCE ANALYSIS REPORT
634 20' A venue, Chula Vista, CA 91910
APN: 573-\80-12-00
SUBMITTED TO:
City of Chula Vista
Planning Division
430 F Street
Chula Vista, California 91910
&
Kevin O'Neill
M. Kevin O'Neill Construction
621 Del Mar Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
PREPARED FOR:
Kevin O'Neill
M. Kevin O'Neill Construction
621 Del Mar A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
:-.-.,_____.m___ ...... __ _ ....
I f~;1 ~~~:; i-~Li\~E!L~i:,",
I i J ! i j , ~ 1 ,_ ; :
I W ,"/1 j,\i\) 2 3 2D~9 ;
i
, I
I
PREPARED By:
Wendy L. Tinsley Becker, AICP
Principal Historian / Preservation Planner
Urbana Preservation & Planning
255 G Street #399, San Diego, CA 92101, 619-S43-0693/P
wendy@urbanapreservation.com
Revised January 2009
PRflfRVMION 8. PlhNNING
18-21
--.--.:
PL~J~~?' J;
-._._----~....,--_._.
CEQA Historical Resource Analvsis Report
6342" Avenue, Chula Vista, Calijornia, 9/910
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Executive Summary
II. Introduction......................
Methodology ..............
...........................................1
............................. .. 2
.... 2
City ofChula Vista Historic Preservation Framework,..,...
...........2
...4
.......5
..... 13
CEQA and Historical Resources ...... ...............,...........................
Ill. Historical & Architectural Overview...... .................. .........................
IV. Significance Criteria...
California Register of Historical Resources ,...
..13
.....15
. IS
..... IS
............ 17
V. CEQA Interpretation .....................................
Historical Resource Detennination......
VI. Conclusions / Summary .
VII. Bibliography... .
Works Cited ....
............ 17
APPENDICES
1. San Diego County Assessors Office Confidential Residential Building Record - 634 2nd Avenue,
(APN: 573-]80-]2) Chula Vista, CA 91910.
2. Department of Parks & Recreation 523 Series Forms - 634 20' A venue, Chula Vista, CA 91910
(Prepared by Urbana Preservation & Planning, November 2008).
3. Department of Parks & Recreation Historic Resources Inventory Forms - 634 2nd Avenue, Chula Vista,
CA 91910 (Prepared by the City orChula Vista, September 1985).
Urbana Prell?rvotion & Planning
January 2009
ii
18-22
CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
634 2IJd Avenue, Chula Vista, California, 919]0
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Historical Resource Analysis Report (HRAR) was prepared at the request of property owner and
project applicant Kevin O'Neill in order to evaluate the potential historical and architectural significance of
a single-family dwelling located at 634 20' Avenue on Lot 14, Block 2 of the Chula Vista Villa Tract
recorded as map number I] 34 on May 2], ] 908. The 634 2nd A venue property is identified as Assessors
Parcel Number (APN) 573-180-12-00.
Originally constructed in approximately 19] 2, the 634 2nd Avenue property exhibits basic design
characteristics attributed to the vernacular Craftsman style of architecture, which was popularized
throughout the country, especially in California, after completion of the Gamble House in Pasadena,
California by the firm Greene & Greene. The Gamble House serves as an iconic example of the Craftsman
style, and brothers Charles Sumner Greene and Henry Mather Greene were considered purveyors of the
style, alongside with Gustav Stickley, who published Craftsman style house plans and articles on the
themes of art and architecture in his magazine The Craftsman between 1900 and 1916. The Craftsman
style was readily adapted for owner and carpenter built vernacular bungalows and cottages erected in
Southern California from the 191 Os through the 1920s.
Many of these bungalows and cottages were of vernacular (built without the intervention of a professional
architect) design and construction and shared very few common design characteristics or exterior finishes
originally employed by Greene & Greene at the Gamble House, or by Gustav Stickley in his publications.
Rather, many of the vernacular dwellings, including the home at 634 2nd Avenue, fall short of distinction
when compared to the iconic examples of the style due to a lack of features and design components that
fonn the Craftsman style and philosophical aesthetic. As a result many of these dwellings do not appear to
be individually eligible for designation or recognition as an historical reSOurce due to architectural
distinction, rather groupings of these intact properties are better represented as historic districts that, in
sum, represent and embody lower and middle-class housing and domestic architecture in the early part of
the Twentieth century.
The 634 2nd Avenue residence was documented on Historic Resources Inventory forms as part of the City
of Chula Vista's 1985 historical survey efforts, and subsequent site designation program. A statement of
significance was not prepared for the home, nor was a National Register of Historic Places status code
assigned for the property, which was the standard eligibility criteria utilized in the mid-1980s at the time of
the Chula Vista survey. As part of the 1985 survey the 634 20' A venue property was determined to be a
"good example of the 19] Os bungalow". The dwelling is not currently designated or officially recognized
on the City ofChula Vista Historic Sites Register (also known as the Draft City ofChu[a Vista Local
Register of Historical Resources) or the California Register of Historical Resources.
The subject property is proposed for demolition in order to construct a new residential project at the site.
Because the residence at 634 2nd Avenue is more than 50 years old an intensive level historical survey for
the property is necessary prior to the issuance of any discretionary permits for projects there in order to
determine whether the residence may be considered historically or architecturally significant, and
consequently, considered to meet the definition of an historical resource under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This HRAR was prepared in accordance with the policies and
regulatory framework included in the City ofChuJa Vista General Plan and the Guidelines of the California
Environmental Quality Act ir. order to:
assist in the determination of whether the 634 2nd Avenue property is individually eligible for
inclusion on the California Register of Historica[ Resources, or the City of Chula Vista Historic
Sites Register; .
assist in the determination of whether the 634 2nd A venue property meets the definition of an
historical resource set forth in S 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, and
aid in the evaluation of the potential effects or impacts the proposed demolition may have on
historical resources.
As part of this analysis the 634 2nd Avenue property was determined to be of average quality and
architectural distinction. It was not observed to be a good example, which indicates excellent or high
qualities. The property was not found to embody the distinctive characteristics of the Craftsman style of
Urbano Prelervatian & Planning
January 2009
]
18-23
CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
634 2nd Avenue. Chula Vista, California. 91910
architecrure, nor was it identified as an excellent example of a bungalow constructed in the first decade of
the Twentieth century. The home was observed to be of average quality and of typical character, and was
found to not meet the eligibility criteria for individual inclusion on the California Register of Historical
Resources and therefore does not appear to be individually eligible for local level designation or
recognition by the City of Chula Vista Resources Conservation Commission.
The building does not appear to be a significant example of vernacular Craftsman style architecture, nor
does it appear to hold a significant and direct association with the historical development ofChula Vista in
the first part of the Twentieth Century As a property type, the dwelling is a modest bungalow which does
not fully articulate or convey the stylistic details or underlying philos.ophical influences which culminated
into the American bungalow from the 1880s fOrNard. Additionally no information was found to support a
statement of significance for past owners or occupants of the home. Because the dwelling has been
determined ineligible for inclusion on any local, state, or national historic sites register, the 634 2nd Avenue
property does not appear to meet the definition of an historical resource under the CEQA Guidelines, and
therefore, demohtion or another project at the site would not appear to cause a significant adverse effect in
a historical resource of the environment pursuant to California Public Resources Code S 15064.5.
Urbano Prmrvotion & Planning
January 2009
2
18-24
CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
634 2"d Avenue, Chu{a Vista, California, 91910
n. INTRODUCTION
This Historical Resource Analysis Report (HR.P..R) was prepared in November 2008 and revised in January
2009 by \Vendy L. Tinsley Becker, A1CP, Principal Historian / Preservation Planner of Urbana
Preservation & Planning, in order to evaluate the potential historical and architectural significance of 3.
historic-era home at 634 2nd Avenue in Chula Vista, California.
The 634 2nd Avenue property was constructed in approximately 1912, according to San Diego County
Assessors Building Records, and is approximately 96 years old. Any property over 50 years old may be
reviewed for eligibility as a Historical Resource under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
during the discretionary permit review and approval process. This HRA.R was prepared to assist in the
determination of whether the 634 2nd Avenue property is individually eligible for inclusion on the
California Register of Historical Resources, or the City of Chula Vista Historic Sites Register; assist in the
determination of whether the 634 2nd Avenue property meets the definition of an historical resource set
forth in S 15064.5 of the CEQA Public Resources Code; and aid in the evaluation of the potential effects or
impacts the proposed demolition may have on historical resources.
l'rfethodology
The methodological approach for this HRAR consisted of a site visit, and historical property and
neighborhood research conducted at the Chula Vista Public Library, the City of Chula Vista Planning,
Building and Engineering Departments, the San Diego County Assessors Office, the City of San Diego
Public Library, and the San Diego Historical Society. Supplemental research on the property and the
surrounding neighborhood was conducted via the Internet and using the consultant's in-house library.
In October 2008 a site visit was made to the 634 2nd Avenue property in order to photograph the building
and vicinity. During the site visit a brief architectural description of the property was created for use in this
report.
A search for building permits and water and sewer connection records was conducted at the City of Chula
Vista Planning, Building and Engineering Department; no information was located relative to the 634 2nd
A venue property. A search was also conducted for previously submitted historical resource survey
documentation for the 634 2nd A venue residence; the property was documented as part of the 1985 City of
Chula Vista Historical Survey and the results of that documentation efforts are included in this report. No
information was identified for the property at the California Historical Resources Information System's
South Coastal Inforrnation Center, and the property is not listed on the California State Office of Historic
Preservation's Historic Property Data File for San Diego County. A Confidential Building Record was
obtained for the dwelling from the San Diego County Assessors Office - Realty Division in Kearney Mesa,
and a copy of the May 2008 Chula Vista Villa Tract map was obtained from the San Diego County
Recorders Office. The home's Master Property Record was also reviewed at the San Diego County
Assessors Office in Room 103 of the County Administration Center.
Historical research conducted at the Chula Vista Public Library, San Diego Public Library California
History Room and the San Diego Historical Society included a review of San Diego City & County
Directories. Sanborn Fire lnsurance Maps (1918-1950s) and San Diego Union-Tribune articles relating to
past occupants of the 634 2nd Avenue property. Research conducted at the San Diego Historical Society
entailed a review of assorted reference resources including historic photograph books of Chula Vista.
Resources utilized from Urbana's in-house library include previously prepared historic context statements
on the Craftsman style, published books on the Craftsman style and the associated bungalow property type,
and the seminal publication Chula Vista Heritage, 1911-1986 prepared by the City ofChula Vista to
commemorate the C~ty's 75U, anniversary celebration.
City of Chula Vista Historic Preservation Framework
Chula Vista General Plan
Language pertaining to demolition of buildings, and specific policies, goals and objectives for Chula
Vista's historic preservation program are contained within the City's General Plan as follows.
Urbana Prelervation 8. Planning
January 2009
3
18-25
CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
634 rd Avenue, Chula Vista, Cal!fornia, 91910
S 1544.050 Demolition, removal - Pennit required:
o Before any building within the city is demolished or removed, the person, firm or
corporation doing the demolishing or removing shall first obtain a permit from the
building and housing department.
. 97.02.010 State and local environmental review process:
o The city council, from time to time. shall adopt by resolution procedural guidelines to be
followed to insure compliance with CEQA and local environmental processes.
Chula Vista Municipal Code
Although the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code does not currently contain a historic preservation
ordinance, the City's Resources Conservation Commission advises the Chula Vista City Council on local
historic preservation issues pursuant to Municipal Code section 2.32.070 and section 2.32.090
Chula Vista Local Criteria/or Historic Site Consideration
The City of Chula Vista criteria for local historic site consideration are included here, however, for the
purposes ofCEQA review the City utilizes the eligibility criteria of the California Register of Historical
Resources. For a property to be considered for inclusion on the Chula Vista List of Historic Sites a
property must meet at least one of the following criteria.
1. Bears a relationship to overall heritage on a local, state, or national basis, or
2. Relates to a historic personage who played an important role historically, on a local, state, or
national basis, or
3. A site where an important event took place, or
4. Distinguishing architecrural characteristics that are identifiable, or
5. Archaeologically significant in its association with pre-history of the area, or
6. Has integrity (Evidence of original fearures).
CEQA and Historical Resources
For the purposes of CEQA review the City of Chula Vista utilizes the eligibility criteria of the California
Register of Historical Resources. CEQA Public Resources Code 921084.1 provides that any project that
may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource is a project that may
have a significant effect on the environment. Public Resources Code g5020.1 (q) defines "substantial
adverse change" as demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance of the
historical resource would be impaired. According to Public Resources Code 95024. I, an historical resource
is a resource that is listed in, or detem'1ined to be eligible for listing in the California Register or Historical
Resources; included in a ioca! register of historical resources; or is identified as significant in an historic
resource survey if that survey meets the criteria specified in Public Resources Code 95024.1 (g).
In order to be eligible for designation by the State Historical Resource Commission and therefore eligible
for inclusion on the California Register of Historical Resources a property must meet one of the four
criteria.
1. It is associated with events or patterns of events that have made a significant contribution to
the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the
United States; or
2. It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; or
3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction,
or represents the work ofa master, or possesses high artistic values; or
4. It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history
of the local area, state or the nation.
The property at 634 2nd A venue was researched and evaluated in accordance with the significance
guidelines and eligibility criteria of the California Register of Historical Resources by Wendy L. Tinsley
Becker, AlCP, Principal Historian I Preservation Planner of Urbana Preservation & Planning in November
2008.
Urbana Preservation 8, Planning
January 2009
4
18-26
CEQA Historic~1 Resource Analysis Report
634 2nd Avenue, Chula Vista, California, 91910
The 634 2nd A venue property is not currently included on the California Register of Historical Resources or
designated as a historically significant site in the City ofChula Vista. As part of this HRA.R the 634 2nd
Avenue property has been determined ineligible for inclusion on the California Register of Historical
Resources. In order to comply with the local CEQA review process, the California Register of Historical
Resources eligibility criteria have been applied as part of this review. The California Register eligibility
criteria are broadly worded to account for the possibility of local level significance for properties and as
such, serve as the primary threshold for eligibility reviews throughout the state for those municipalities
without adopted local eligibility criteria.
III. HISTORICAL & ARCHITECTURAL OVERVIEW
The present-day 634 2nd A venue property is located on the southern 80 feet of Lot 14 Block 2 of the Chula
Vista Villa Tract (Recorded May 21, 1908 as Map No. 1134) which was a partial re-subdivision of Section
139 of the San Diego Land & Town Company's (SDL TC) ,\Iap afChu/a Vista, San Diego Coun~/, Ca/ as
recorded on March 13, 1888 and f1!ed as San Diego County subdivision map number 505. The SDLTC's
Map ofChu/a Vista predates the first fonn of the State Subdivision Map Act passed in 1893 that mandated
filing of subdivision or land plat maps prior to physical subdivision or
sale of land lots illustrated within. According to the publication Chula
Vista Heritage, 19 JJ -1986 the SOL TC .~'~,'::~'~~';;Y'.:~.~I ,.
Approached the developmen: ofChu!a Vista with a totally different
attitude. The company wanted to induce permanent settlement an
improvement of the tract, notjusl sell the land. To this end, the 5,000-
acre tract was cleared of brush, graded and subdivided into a gridiron
pattern. The 40-acre blocks of 1 Q-acre parcels were laid out to the east
of what would eventually be called National Avemle, with 60-acre
blocks of I Q-acre parcels to the west. Streets SO feet wide were
graded and sidewalks leveled. Hundreds of trees. including evergreen,
pepper, olive, cypress, eucalyptus and palm, planted by the Land and
Town Company, enhanced the appearance of the property. The
company spent over S50,000 on improver:1ents.1
Figure 1:
San Diego Land & Town Company's Map olehl/fa Visla, San Diego County,
Col.
(Map No. 505. Recarded March /3 /888).
Based on a review of a.N. Sanford's 1894 Piot ofChuia Vista the
Residence Suburb o/San Diego the 634 2nd Avenue property is believed
to have been originally owned
by the 'Gulick Brothers' and according to Sanford's map notations,
the property was not planted with deciduous fruit trees as was
typical to SDL TC lots purchased and developed in the tirst two
decades of the town's history.
'\
\ ,;
\
,
}
{
!
I
/
~o
:;--\-,
\
\
\
"\
"
,
....1
<i'~' . ".
.....~.
,;"
"
q.
..)r,
..'.}
.,
;.; . ~~ .;
;. ~'~. "...;>::, ."" .,;
tJj~~!JLf,i
,..",.~.,
.,' '~Wll~ ",
" ....' ~(jll~~;t:.j.'.;.l......\,;,::.~.'.:~.,:;:....:....:,;.~...":,,,,'"~,,':,"":,':.".::."...':."
;i~;~~~~~~i~~~; I,;,
',m;
In 1888, faced with deflated land values and poor lot sales, the
SDL Te established a new incentive program for potential
purchasers offering twenty acres of free land on the condition that
the property owner plant the acreage with citrus trees; after five
years the SDL Te would deed ten acres to the property owner, and
sell the remaining ten acres to a new purchaser. It appears from
Sanford's observation's and map description, the present-day 634
2nd A venue property was not developed with a citrus or other fruit
trees, and was oat likely part ofa SDL TC free twenty-acre laod
promotion. The dwelling constructed at 634 2nd Avenue residence
is not a Chula Vista 'Orchard House'.
(RIGHT) Figure 2: o.N. Sanford's Plat Map ofChula Vista the Residence
Suburb of San Diego, /894.
Urbano Prelervorion & Planning
January 2009
5
18-27
CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
634]"" Avenue, Chula Vista, California, 91910
(LEFT) Figure 3.... .,
Detail olo.N. Sanford's Plat Map olChl/la Vista the Residence '
Suburb olSon Diego showing 1894 ownership information of the
presenT-day 634 2nd Avenue properly.
At the turn of the century, as new lots were purchased and
developed, changes to street patterns and street names
occurred throughout Chula Vista's downtown core. By the
1910s further subdivision of large parcels and installation of
new streets occurred throughout the original Chula Vista town
site centered at the intersection of 3rd A venue and F Street.
: ....~'" 1 .'., 'n. '.'
"
,.
In 1906 the southeast quarter of Section 139 of the Chula
Vista town site was surveyed and platted in support of the
Chula Vista Villa Tract (CVVT) recorded in May 1908. The U
CVVT re-subdivided the V. section into two Blocks, identified
as Block I and Block 2, with Block 1 containing eight lots
and Block 2 containing fourteen lots measuring approximately 29 I feet (depth) by 165 feet (width).
Additionally, present-day Del Mar Avenue was installed in a north-south direction between Blocks 1 and 2.
According to Chula Vista Heritage
"
The Chula Vista Villa Tract was advertised as orfering 165 by 291-foot "villa lots" for $1,000. The
ads promoted the tract as a high-grade suburban property featuring beautiful views; excellent soil;
good, wide, graded streets; concrete sidewalks; end a congenial neighborhood. They suggested that
the lots were suitable for ownership by merchants and proressional men,,,2
! /
:::''''.c~-c'';-~':'::"'oW
'-~~~-~~~~
/
~.til~
, \
'~I
1 '1 ,=.~.,_.,~,_
1: 't4~'~'.:~~-;;.~.:;~.:
iI" .--'-
'f~~J~i~t
",
,1..{AP
CHULA VISTA" VILL A TRACT
....,. ..__~_ _,~, .., 4 J_~ ; <_"'_ ~.,
"'--"',.,.."....
L<~~;~~~~~..
!
_J L~_::.____
'.1 V.--
~ I f ~
I
I
i
Iii i
"-
"'--"'r
, ;.,
1'1
" I ,
., i
.. Ll
r-' . ""- III
;t-~__-"--~ _" [~ ....
i I',
I
I
I
"-$
'f .._-.
!i
_;L_
.......""'"
.-'1
I
.' "......-
/ Figure 4 Map 01 the 1908 Chula VISta Villa
Tract showing land subdIvIsIOn pat/ems and
presenl~day location a/the 634 r" Avenue
property
Jennie MacDonald is cited as the original
owner of the present-day 634 2nd Avenue
property (originally identified as 4th
Avenue), having purchased the lot on
February 4, 191 I] MacDonald resided
nearby in the CVVT at 644 4" Avenue
(present-day y,d A venue) and constructed a
single-story single-family dwelling in the
Craftsman vernacular style at 634 4th
Avenue to be utilized as a rental property.
Because the MacDonald's land was not in
the central core of the then fledgling town,
neither the MacDonald residence nor nearby
their rental property was delineated by the
Sanborn Fire Insurance Company as part of
the 1918 survey of Chula Vista.
In the 1920 Federal Census of San Diego
and Chula Vista 54 year old Jennie McDonald was listed as the wife of73 year old Scotland native William
MacDonald, who with their son William R. MacDonald, identified themselves as the owners of their
residence at 644 4lh Avenue.4 The MacDonald's tenants of the rental property at 634 4th Avenue were
recorded on the same 1920 Census enumeration page (sheet 320 B).. Percy Clay, a 60 old white man
employed as a life insurance agent resided at the home with his 56 year old wife Anna M. Clay, and their
J 6 year old daughter Mary Elizabeth. As in 1918 neither of the MacDonald properties were recorded in the
1926 building survey efforts for Chula Vista by the Sanborn Fire Insurance Company, likely due to the
distance from the central core and the bucolic nature and dimensions of the land lots in the area.
18-28
Urbana Prmrvatian & Planning
January 2009
6
CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
634 2nd Avenue, Chula Vista, California, 91910
By the time of the 1930 Census 64 year old Jennie MacDonald was widowed and was identified as the head
ofhouseho!d at 644 4lh Avenue with her 44 year old son William who was listed as unmarried and without
an occupation, still residing at the famity home.s The Clay's were not identified in the 1930 Census records
for San Digo or Chula Vista, indicidating that by early 1930 the family no longer occupied the present-day
634 2nd Avenue property. This is further substantiated by the Census enumerator's ommission of634 4th
Avenue from the Census sheet having surveyed the properties at 614 and then 644 4\h Avenue with no
description for 634.
Jennie MacDonald owned the 634 4th Avenue property into the early 1940s with the next major owners,
Everett P. and Louise Hackney, aquiring the property from MacDonald. A review of San Diego Suburban
Directories disclose that Everett Pearlie Hackney was employed as a machinist and with his wife Louise
resided at the present-day 634 2" A venue property through at least 1970,
The home does not appear to maintain an association with significant persons, Neither the Clay's nor the
Hackney's appear to be considered important persons in Chula Vista history, and longtime propeny owner
Jennie MacDonald, although regarded as a well known longstanding community member, did not reside in
the 634 2nd Avenue dwelling, nor did she maintain a direct connection with the property other than having
commissioned its construction for the purposes ofa rental property that would provide additional income
for the MacDonald family. Available historical directory listings and census survey findings disclose that
the MacDonald family never occupied the properry.
The present-day 634 2nd A venue property was not delineated as part of the 1950 Sanborn Fire Insurance
Company survey of Chula Vista. The Sanborn Company mapping efforts stopped one block west of the
subject property showing the east side of the 600 block of Del Mar A venue, but not delineating the building
envelopes on the west side of the 600 block of 2nd Avenue, both of which comprise Block 2 of the ] 908
Chula Vista Villa Tract.
Figure 5' "
/94/ Street Map ofChula Vista showing location a/the present-doy
634 2nd Avenue propertv.
The Craftsman Style & California Bungalows
The bungalow defines the architectural aesthetic of residential
neighborhoods developed in the San Diego region during the
first two decades of the Twentieth Century. Nationally
popular from 1900 to 1920, the majority of Craftsman style
dwellings in the San Diego region, including Chula Vista, date
from the 1910s forward,
The style was influenced by the English Arts and Crafts
movement and emphasized handcrafted products over
machine~made details in reaction to the profusion of the mass-
manufactured ornamentation of the Victorian styles. The
movement embodied every aspect of residential design from
furniture, to the bucolic setting of one's own yard, to the art
pottery and the wallpaper that decorated house interiors.
Popular literature, examples of which include, The Craftsman,
Ladies Home Journal, Bungalow Magazine, and House
Beaut/fill,'distributed the movement's ideals to the middle
class. The Craftsman style had broad boundaries that were
further defined by regional tastes and interests.
(Ill L \ \'L>;T,\ crT\' fllREC
I(Hl
"
!
~_0.
:\- .,~~~
1,;/
I?
:,;'r(f'-
.' ,.,,~
':,~"\
.\:
\ (' 11
" '.-II
....: '
"
\
\
i
i
.;t~i.,~\ "
,j
I '-_
Craftsman-style design was popular nationwide, but flourished in California, because the mild climate
allowed for an integration of interior and exterior spaces, as exemplified by large porches and balconies, In
Califomia, the Craftsman style often incorporated varying influences, including California's Mission
tradition, Shingle style, as well as Middle Eastern and Asian influences.
18-29
UrbonoPnmrvotion &Plonning
January 2009
7
CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
634 2"d A venue, Chu/a Vista, California, 91910
;..-.....
~
"
'~.._.; ...
~
._,............
Figure 6 (LEFT) & 7 (BELOW):
Gustav Srickley, ed., The Craftsman, Sketch &
Rendering oj a Craftsman House: Series oj 1904,
Number VI.
~
! "'<
~~---- -/::~-~----
,:, ':;t;.::~
Ef1'{ II t; > I"
~I ."'''~r'i'"
-- ~ ~ !(,t:~~ rlG-'"~p. ~ ",. -
_ ~'i 'JF1"1: If'ril. I ".~'"
- - ~T I "r r
,,~~..~~,~;---;\.-...:;-=:' .
-n~Jif 'f:' ..Jr. ~,~. '!r.
t ~i/ fJ.n',JII '
) ~ if
,f!.. 1;i.,:,
.,..C___
. .
"'.'.'; ._;,-"",,;?j-'Y~'----:-'i-~~;::::
AiL)~ . :
-:~ll~~IT~~
I /' TTTT f
~. ~..;"~~'''''=.'.,~\..,.:;='\i.--=-=:
'fl ~tf ,..-..-'~. ,.,., ~..
i,~il tlid,fli " ,i
1 '.. '
:;;,:':: ~ "'_',-:"::-::-"L'.~~~ ~__.
~ :
.~.
Figures 8 (ABOVE LEFT) & 9 (ABOVE RIGHT). Gustav Stickley. ed. The Craftsman. Sketch of a Craftsman House:
Series of 1904. Number IV,
The Craftsman style is often
associated with and applied to
bungalows-low one-story houses
with large front porches. However,
ornamentation in other styles, such as
Queen Anne and Classical Revival,
has also often been applied to the
bungalow house fOnTI. The
California version of a bungalow was
usually a one.story detached house,
however, variations on this nann
included bungalow courts (several
houses around a courtyard) and
houses with an inhabitable attic.
Figure 10: Rendering of a Craftsman
COllage/Bungalow published in the
February 1905 edition of 'The
Craftsman' and featured in Gusfav
Stickley's 1909 book 'Craftsman Homes '.
A PLEASANT AND HOMELIKE COTTAGE DESIGNED
FOR A SMALL FAMILY
. ,.. . ,.".....~. ,......', "....
vir'" ~. rllTT~C1 '00>1 ".. """T
Urbana Pr",rvalian & Planning
January 2009
8
18-30
CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
634 2nd Avenue, Chula Vista, California, 91910
Consistent plan features include the entrance directly into the living room with no parlor and a large
kitchen. Many had sleeping porches, breakfast nooks, and inglenooks (or fireplace seats). Bungalows were
usually constructed on small- to medium-sized lots. Many two-story houses were designed with Craftsman
features, such as the large front porch, natural materia!s, and interior plan. Nationwide, the style often
employed materials such as fieldstone, regular and clinker brick. The basic character-defining features
typical to the Craftsman style are:
Low-pitched gabled roof,
Wide unenclosed eave overhang,
Decorative beams or braces under the gables,
Columns or column bases that continue to the ground level without interruption at porch floor,
Exposed roof rafters, and
Full-or-partial-width porches.
Beyond the above~listed typical or common design features, additional elaborations original to a property
that support a determination ofarchitecrural significance for an individual Craftsman bungalow, cottage or
house are:
Irregular or non-symmetrical composition and irregular plan (not solely rectilinear)
Multiple roof planes,
Airplane design with 'cockpit' feature comprised of an attic room projecting above the 'wings' of
its roof,
Half-columns at the front porch (secondary, non-structural) for decorative urns or potted plants
Sloping or battered foundations and porch supports,
Stone exterior chimneys,
Trellised porch or Porte Cochere roof extending beyond the exterior wall plane,
Large gabled or shed roof donners,
Window boxes
Stained glass window designs
Mix of exterior building materials including a combination of all or some of the following materia is:
o Wood boards,
o Wood shingles,
o Stone,
o Brick or Clinker brick
o Concrete block, and
o Stucco, and
Secondary design features attributed to the Tudor, Oriental/Japanesque, Swiss, Prairie or Mission
styles including:
o False half-timbering,
o Oriental roof forms - upswept, peaked or flared roofline articulations reminiscent of a
Pagoda structure,
o Japanesque turned-up porch columns
o Arts & Crafts mortise4and-tenon paired porch colums, and
o Swiss balustrades.
With ready-made drawings and materials for sale from local and regional design-build companies and the
popularity of mail-order house catalogues, the proliferation of Craftsman bungalow construction fonned the
suburban landscape that typifies regional neighborhoods developed in the first two decades of the
Twentieth Century. The majority of these vernacular Craftsman-style residences constructed in the San
Diego region and in the city of Chula Vista are wood frame with either wood siding or an applied stucco
exterior finish, and do not feature the more distinctive character-defining characteristics or materials that
convey the underlying philosophy or origins of the Craftsman style in the English Arts & Crafts movement
and support a statement of individual architectural significance.
Following are local properties that appear to meet or exceed the significance thresholds established by
featuring many of the above-listed additional character-defining elaborations.
Urbano Pr!mrvaHon & Planning
January 2009
9
18-31
CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
634 2ml Avenue, Chula Vista, California, 91910
Figure 1/: A significant local example
of a side-gabled bungalow featuring a
mix of exterior building materials
including wood shingle siding with
SlOne at the porch supports,
balustrade, and chimney: as wet! as
paired porch posts with multiple
extended beams in the lower cross
gable at the front elevation.
. ,~._,.......
'\
Figure 12: A significant local example featuring
multiple roof planes, asymmetrical composition and
plan configuration, a mix of exterior building
materials including clapboard siding and brick, 'with
a pergola as porte cochere extending over the linear
drive, a wraparound porch constnlcted of a brick
balustrade in a custom pattern with stepped porch
urns with concrete coping; the home also features an
extensive amount of bracing and false beams at the
visible elevations.
'.
Figure 13: A significant local example
of an Airplane Bungalow with the
upper level as the 'cockpit' which
projects beyond the roofline 'wings'
and featuring multiple roof planes
around {he perimeter, afull-length
front porch, and extended and false
beams with exposed rafter ends.
UrbonoPremvafion &Plonning
January 2009
10
18-32
CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
634 2"d Avenue, Chu/a Vista, California, 91910
634 2nd Avenue
Illustrated in the photographs included on the following pages, the dwelling at 634 2nd A venue is rectilinear
in plan constructed atop a board fonn concrete foundation with board siding at the exterior walls and wood
shingles in the front and rear gable wall sections. The gable roof is of moderate pitch and clad in
composition shingles with visible rafter ends at the eave walls and decorative (false) beams under the
gables at the front and rear elevations. The front and rear porches are each covered by a lower front gabled
roof.
At the front elevation, facing 2nd A venue is a full~length raised porch accessible by two separate sets of four
concrete steps at the southwest corner. The concrete work appears to be recent, likely poured' in the last
two decades. The roof support system is simple post and lintel construction comprised of three squared
columns with simple wood capitals (posts) atop a base (likely concrete) covered by a flat stone veneer
intended to simulate cobblestone or river rock as was employed on many original Craftsman homes of
higher style. Between the column capitals and the extended beams and eaves of the principal and lower
roofs respectively is a beam (lintel) installed to provide support and also for decorative appeal. The stone
veneer is referenced in the 1985 Chula Vista survey forms completed for the property and may have been
applied as part of a general property construction and renovation campaign completed in 1984 when the
origina! garage was replaced with the current structure at the rear of the home.
Window types observed vary and include wood framed one-aver-one single-or-double-hung sash, seven-
over-one wood sash, two over one wood sash, and replacement aluminum slider. At the rear elevation, a
second entry door flanked by two one-over one wood windows provides access from the rear porch, which
has been altered from its original design.
Overall, although no invasive material analysis was conducted, the building exterior appears to be in fair to
good condition. While in fair-to-good exterior condition, the dwelling does not appear to be a significant
example ofa Craftsman style bungalow as it is of typical design with only the basic features attributed to
the Craftsman style or the bungalow property type. It is rectilinear with a front gabled roof and an
additional lower gable atop a section of the front porch, which has been altered through the application of a
stone veneer at the balustrade. Beyond the most elementary characteristics, the dwelling does not
adequately articulate or embody the distinctive characteristics of the Craftsman style, nor does it derive
individual architectural significance simply as an example of a common and typical bungalow property
type.
Figure J 4.
Current photograph of
634 2nd Avenue.
View northwesterly of
front (east) elevation.
Urbana Prelervatian & Planning
January 2009
11
18-33
CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
634 ]"d Avenue, Chu/a Vis/a, Califarnia, 91910
Figure 15:
Front porch detail showing concrete landing and steps, andfront
entry door flanked on each side by fixed multi-lite windows
Figure 16:
View southwesterly affront and
right side elevation.
Figure 17-
View of right-side elevation
from northwest building corner
showing fenestration pattern.
Urbana Prelervatian & Planning
January 2009
12
18-34
CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
634 2"d Avenue, Chula Vis/a, California, 91910
Figure 18:
Rear elevation showing rear
porch covered by lower gable
roof A privacy fence partia!!y
obscures view of the rear
elevation.
Figure 19:
View westerly oj left side
elevation. Vie\V is partia!!y
obscured by privacy fencing.
Additional wood sash windows
are sited along the left
elevation.
IV. SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
The City of Chula Vista Municipal Code calls for local compliance with state environmental review laws
and procedures including the California Environmental Quality Act. The CEQA Guidelines generally
define a historical resource as a building, structure, object, etc. that is listed on or eligible for listing on the
California Register of Historical Resources.
The California Register program is modeled after the National Register program, but with a greater focus
on those resources considered to have local, regional, or statewide importance in California history. A
California property found ineligible for listing in the California Register is not eligible for listing in the
National Register. For the purposes of this evaluation, only the significance criteria for the California
Register have been applied.
California Register of Historical Resources
The California Register of Historical Resources is an authoritative guide to California's significant
historical and archaeological resources to be used by state and local agencies) private groups, and citizens
Urbana P,,,,rvatian & Planning
January 2009
13
18-35
CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
634 2nd Avenue, Chula Vista, California, 91910
in identifying the existing historical resources of the state, and to indicate which resources deserve to be
protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse change. Properties eligible for listing
in the California Register of Historical Resources include buildings, structures, objects, or historic districts
that retain historic integrity and are historically significant at the local, state or national leve! under one or
more of the following criteria.
1. It is associated with events or patterns of events that have made a significant contribution to the
broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United
States; or
The 634 2nd Avenue property is believed to have been constructed in approximately 1912 at its current
location as a rental dwelling within the boundaries of the Chula Vista Villa Tract, which was advertised as
a high quality suburban neighborhood and targeted towards Chula Vista's middle and upper middle class.
The dwelling appears to have been constnlcted in response to deed requirements, which stipulated that lots
not remain vacant after individual purchase. The original property owner lived nearby at present-day 644
2nd Avenue, which is now designated Chula Vista Historic Site #41. The 634 2nd Avenue property does not
appear to maintain a direct association with early development patterns or specific events in Chula Vista
history. nor does it reflect the neighborhood aesthetic advertised as part of the Chula Vista Villa Tract. No
information was uncoveredfor the 634 2nd Avenue property that would assist in a successful determination
of eligibility for individual inclusion on the California Register of Historical Resources under Criterion I.
Neither the dvvelling itselfnor the former occupants appear to be associated with an event or patterns of
events considered significant in local, regional, state or national history.
2. It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; or
The 634 2nd Avenue property does not appear to maintain an association with persons important to local,
California or national history. Jennie }';lacDonald owned the housefrom completion ofconstnlction
through the :930s. The lv!acI?onaldfam~'J lived nearby.in an original Victoria.n sty.le Orcha~d House. The
MacDonald s did not reSIde In the 634 2 Avenue dwelling. The house was pnmanly occupIed by the
family Percy & Anna Clay, who resided at the home in the 1920s, and then Everett Pearlie Hackney and
his wife Louise Hackney from the 1940s through at least 1970. /920 Us. Census records disclose that
Percy Clay worked as a life insurance agent in 1920, and San Diego Suburban Directories disclose that
Everett Pearlie Hackney worked as a machinist into the 1950s. No information was identified to assist in
the successful determination of eligibility for the 634 rd Avenue property to be considered significant
under California Register criterion 2 relative to past owners or occupants associated with the property.
3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or
represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values; or
Today the 634 2nd Avenue property exhibits vernacular design characteristics attributed to the Craftsman
architectural style (ca. 1905 to ca. 1920s) The 634 2nd Avenue property is of modest construction methods
and stylistic details. It does not appear to be indiVidually eligible for inclusion on the California Register
of Historical Resources under California Register Criterion 3 as it does notfeature any design
characteristics beyond the features commonly employedfor every vernacular Craftsman style bungalow
constructed throughout the 19/ Os and 1920s. As such, due to the lack of architectural/eatures the dwelling
does not merit individual eligibility based on architecture.
Multiple local examples in the neighborhood surrounding 634 2nd Avenue were observed which would
appear to qualify for individual historic site recognition for their embodiment of the distinctive
characteristics of the Craftsman bungalow style and method of construction. These nearby properties are
identified as 614 ;nd Avenue (designated as Chula Vista Historic Site #41), 659 Del lYlar Avenue and 640
Del Mar Avenue, all of which embody the distinctive characteristics of the Craftsman style and appear to
be eligible for designation or inclusion on the Local or California Register because each property
respectively meets and exceeds the minimum and secondary features that exemplify the Craftsman style.
Images and brief description of each of these three significant / potentially significant properties are
included on page 10 of this report.
Urbana Premvatian & Planning
January 2009
14
18-36
CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
634 2nd Avenue, Chula Vista, California, 91910
4. It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of
the local area, state or the nation.
The 634 2nd Avenue property has not yielded information important fa the prehistory ofChula Vista, San
Diego County, California or the nation, nor does the building appear to have the potential to yield
information important to the prehistory ofChula Vista, San Diego County, California or the nation.
Beyond what is discussed in this report, barring additional information being discoveredfor the property,
the dwelling at 634 2nd A. venue does not appear likely to yield additional information important to the
history or prehistOlY oJthe local area, state or the nation.
V. CEQA INTERPRETATION
CEQA Public Resources Code 921084.1 provides that any project that may cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of an historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the
environment. Public Resources Code S5020.1(q) defines "substantial adverse change" as demolition,
destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance of the historical resource would be impaired.
According to Public Resources Code 95024, I, an historical resource is a resource that is listed in, or
determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources; included in a local
register of historical resources; or is identified as significant in an historic resource survey if that survey
meets the criteria specified in Public Resources Code S5024.1(g). According to CEQA Guidelines
S 15064.5(a)(3), a lead agency can find a resource has been determined to be significant in the architectural,
engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of
California, provided that the determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole
record.
Historical Resource Determination
The 634 2r1d A venue property is not designated or listed, either individually or as part of a district, on a
local, state, or national historical sites register. It is not listed in the California State Office of Historic
Preservation's Historic Property Data File for San Diego County. The 634 2nd A venue property was found
ineligible for individual inclusion on the California Register of Historical Resources as part of this
Historical Resource Analysis Report, and consequently, the 634 2nd Avenue property does not appear to
meet the definition of an historical resource under CEQA Guidelines S I 5064.5,
The 634 2nd Avenue property has not been determined to be a historical resource for the purposes of
CEQA; therefore, its demolition or removal would not cause a substantial adverse change to a historical
resource or significant environmental effect. As a result no specific mitigation measures have been
recommended for the proposed project, although for basic material conservation efforts, it is generally
recommended that any original building features or materials, such as windows, be removed and offered for
re-use, if possible, at another historic-era property.
VI. CONCLUSIONS / SUMMARY
This Historical Resource Analysis Report (HRAR) was prepared by Wendy L. Tinsley Becker, AlCP,
Principal Historian / Preservation Planner of Urbana in order to evaluate the potential historical and
architectural significance ofa single-family dwelling located at 634 2nd Avenue on Lot 14, Block 2 of the
Chula Vista Villa Tract.
Originally constructed in approximately 1912, the 634 2nd A venue property exhibits basic design
characteristics attributed to the vernacular Craftsman style of architecture popularized after completion of
the Gamble House in Pasadena, California by the firm Greene & Greene. The Gamble House serves as an
iconic example of the Craftsman style, and brothers Charles Sumner Greene and Henry Mather Greene
were considered purveyors of the style, alongside with Gustav Stickley, who published Craftsman style
house plans in his magazine The Craftsman between 1900 and 1916. The Craftsman style, and its
architectural features, was readily adapted for owner and carpenter built vernacular bungalows and cottages
erected in Southern California from the 1910s through the 1920s. With ready~made drawings and materials
for sale from local and regional design-build companies and the popularity of mail-order house catalogues,
the proliferation of Craftsman bungalow construction formed the suburban landscape that typifies regional
neighborhoods developed in the first two decades of the Twentieth Century. The majority of these
Urbana Premvation 8. Planning
January 2009
15
18-37
CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
634 2nd Avenue. Chu/a Vista, Cabfornia, 919/0
vernacular Craftsman-style residences constructed in the San Diego region and in the city of Chula Vista
are wood frame with either wood siding or an applied stucco exterior finish, and do not feature the more
distinctive character-defining characteristics or materials that convey the underlying philosophy or origins
ofthe Craftsman style in the English Arts & Crafts movement and do not support a statement of individual
architectural significance, Those individual properties constucted with additional elaborations beyond the
typical features which have retained integrity of design generally would appear to qualify for individual
architectural significance, whereas the multitude of basic bungalows constructed in a vernacular Craftsman
style, including the dwelling at 634 2nd Avenue, are generally regarded as not individually eligible with
respect to California Register criterion 3 (architecture/design),
The 634 2nd Avenue residence was documented on Historic Resources Inventory forms as part of the City
ofChula Vista's 1985 historical survey efforts and subsequent site designation program, At the time of the
1985 survey a statement of significance was not prepared for the home, nor was a National Register of
Historic Places status code assigned for the property, which was the standard eligibility criteria utilized in
the mid-1980s at the time of the Chula Vista survey, The home was observed to be a "good example ofa
1910s bungalow", although further intensive-level review of the home's extant features (both original and
not original) reverses this previous determination, Rather the home at 634 2nd A venue is a,typical and
common example of a 191 Os bungalow constructed in the vernacular Craftsman style, and while it is
charming in appearance, it does not meet the threshold for significance and eligibility with respect to
embodying the distinctive and character-defining features ofa historic Craftsman bungalow.
More noteworthy and distinctive examples of Craftsman bungalows have been identified locally in Chula
Vista. These significant or potentially significant examples were surveyed in order to develop a context
and threshold for individual architectural significance of the Craftsman style in Chula Vista, and helped to
guide the eligibility conclusions included in the report for dwelling at 634 2nd Avenue. Three noteworthy
examples of the style which include both the basic and additional distinctive and character-defining
features are located at 614 2nd Avenue, 640 Del Mar Avenue and 659 Del mar Avenue, Images and brief
descriptions of these three properties are included on page 10 of this report.
The dwelling at 634 2nd A venue is not currently designated or officially recognized on the City of Chula
Vista Register of Historic Sites or the California Register of Historical Resources, The building does not
appear to be a significant example of vernacular Craftsman style architecture, nor does it appear to hold a
significant and direct association with the historical development of Chula Vista in the first part of the
Twentieth Century. As a property type, the dwelling is a modest bungalow that does not fully articulate or
convey the stylistic details or underlying philosophical influences that culminated into the American
bungalow from the 1880s forward. Additionally no information was found to support a statement of
significance for past owners or occupants of the home.
Because the dwelling has been determined ineligible for inclusion on the California Register of Historical
Resources sites, the 634 2nd Avenue property does not appear to meet the definition of an historical
resource under the CEQA Guidelines, and therefore, demolition or another discretionary project at the site
would not appear to cause a significant adverse effect to a historical resource pursuant to California Public
Resources Code &15064.5.
Although no specific mitigation measures have been required as part of this report, it is recommended that
extant historic-era features from the dwelling at 634 2nd Avenue be offered to owners of similar historic-era
properties in need of repair, and that any new construction at the parcel be designed and built in an
aesthetic and manner that is sensitive to the integrity of nearby designated historic sites.
Urbana Prl?lefvatian & Planning
January 2009
16
18-38
CEQA Historical Resource Analysis Report
634 2nd Avenue, Chula Vista, California, 91910
VII. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Chula Vista Historic Homes, Historic Site List, \VW\\",cyhistorichomes_com/historic site list.htnl.
Duchscherer, Paul & Douglas Keister, The Bungalow: America's Arts & Crafts Home (Penguin Group:
New York) 1995.
Foster, Gerald, American Houses: A Field Guide to the Architecture afthe Horne (Houghton Mifflin
Company: Boston) 2004.
MeAl ester, Virginia & Lee, A Field Guide to American Houses (Alfred A. Knopf: New York) 1997.
Stickley, Gustav, "The Craftsman, Volume 6, April1904-September 1904" (Gustav Stickley: Syracuse)
1904
~,Craftsman Homes (The Craftsman Publishing Company: New York) 1909.
TVorks Cited/Endnotes
I City ofChula Vista, Chu/a Vista Heritage. 1911-1986 (Chula Vista, CA: City ofChu]a Vista / 75th Diamond
Anniversary Committee) 7.
2 Chula Vista Heritage, 19/1-/986,45.
3 City ofChula Vista, Historic Resource Inventory Forms _ 634 Td Avenue, 1985.
4 United States Department of Commerce - Census Bureau, Fourteenth Census of the United States: /920~Popu!atjon.
San Diego Township, Chula Vista City, Precinct x3, January 22-23, 1920.
S United States Department of Commerce - Census Bureau, Fifieenrh Census o/the United States: 1930-Popula(ion,
San Diego Township, Chula Vista Township, April 8, 1930.
Urbano Preserlotion & Planning
January 2009
17
18-39
"~N':;~lu~~~rC~~;:~;~;NIA -- RESIDENTIAL BUILDING RECORD slim
.__~_._, .____._.._._~ ADDRESS.1:lX:__.. ,,1/.J!D A ~
/
OF /
SIIEErS PARCEL r /1- IJ'O-/1
---
.,).
DESCRIPTION OF BUILDING
J; 5"'01)
CLASS 8 SHAPE COHSTRVCTION STRUCTURAl
...:...D ~ ..f' I *-. Light X Tram,
Sub-Standard ~ __ ~., . ~
ARCHJTECrUR~ X Standard Shr;vIMII'I
Abore.Standard COf/crt}~ Block
~~~L__.__ ... 8.&8.1 Ir<1G._
TYPE
Use I oesi n
i\ SinQI;: X ^
Brick
EXTERIOR ROOF liGHTING AIR CONOITION
5t/lceo on Flat,Ai Pihh ); wJrin(i - X H(Q,if/ oolinq FLOORS
-~ - ---- ~'- ROOMS
x Gobl~ '14 n K.T CondUIt ((He,d ~an'g B I 2
X :>idin'l I '.. ~1. lIip 4 - '-- -li.x~"" c;;;/; Grrmt lIumid. All X
fC-" -- -',00
Jhed 4 _ ~ures WaJl UnU ____ _ ....
Ell/ Up ".._ Fe... Ch~op . ~ [n/l/ull __
Dormlrs ~_ ~~_ ); MerI. L Floor /)flIl lmng _ __I I
Roll. ....0;... Many Spd'~_ lOnf!!Unit Din;1I9
!100M AHO FINISII DETAil
[FlOOR FINISH TRIM ___IIiTER./DR
Moler/al 6roJ~ lVo/lJ
H(,vA ,,~ J' L
FINISH
CediflCjs
ISIOF/'u
FOUNOA TlON
AckJb~
; !.')inglr:
Shoke
8,a8.( 1r.~G.
____.1-_______00
Centro!"
------
.._ PLUMBING _ __ B,d -3, Ilf!,.rL f"; J
~:d SJJ'-t><!.I~_. __ ,~~). .:.51-.1.1 .. W-~ Bed ---r-- _ _ -t--------- __..._. __ _.__ __._._~
S/(l~ Snoke qi~ flurn~r .._.... n_. _... __u "._ ~..._ __ __n.. ,. ,"._ __...._.__._____ ___~__
WINDOW STile 10; SillA _ __.. \
.\ D.H I IC~~~~~ ]-'-/t: Trim ,"l ~.::_':..ndr'( M-B I: U_ nh-
,,- c .----. Ie' -'.c' --I n h ' /- - f _:-, "_---::._n -::0- ----;;;; ;;, ~/" ------
__ -:~_ Insula led cllmlJl... ~~ ~~.:!.~.__..__ ~_ _9!!'J!.?~i.... -.---f~ WQf:!:....:.'-!!..r:..:.!!ufo_ )f/~~p,ace _ I r; e;'1 . _In/u ,H j"'L. ~I (' 01 .___
_ [Unj/~ U9hlllH~~2 Inwlof~.d flolIJ X. Screen:... "". Co~po,~'!f,!?/~_.__ Waf,,! _ Snfr,,8r _ Droin Od. Maleool; 11 i Lqfh; L Ft. SDloJ_~~ r>\ I
CONSTRUCTION i?tcoRD EFFEC, APPII. NORMAL % GOOD RATING (f:,G,A.F.P) GATH DETAIL
Permll YEAR YEAR ~mrrirl'g Afcfl.IFlJnc. Con. iOf~~ W"r),. F FINISH _ _ FIXTURES
-~-No. For Amounl Dal<l Agt Lih Tohl, % Cand. AH;.. if>lan form ;:;;;P-b'd "hjcf ~i7jh 1. No. - Floors Wo/fJ ~ Wc- L~.riub Type Grode
ONn 2f:.kT~_' '2Jl-LL-llLL_ .LJJ.L_.-ff- It .iPfi-!l5..--1!..::. _/1 ; r_ll._ ..!1~__fL .t1_ ..L,.{, /.L/l'~ I PL'f"'A!,I! / OcD A
;";;;iC~7~~ :;~t-:-~~~"=-1n=--L~{LL__)S" _15'" bi'l.:~3lL A- ---;-A ,- .r:;:_'lz. li-!:""fiL-i--
g- ------: ~-=-= ==- n__~__ n_n___- =-~---- --- d .._ .. :-r= ~-~_~ ~__ __ -= ----=~. Boo' c"" SPE~~~~ mF:,,~:~qIlES V."I'O" 8N"",
_ _... I Sh;;H~~s __...___ fJ --;;o:.:;:;(p~~~ .--.-.'- ...,=~._
I ._.__.~..~~.~.=_=~~. -.....h _" .I~:---;---=~."'_ --~-==! ~- ."_" ...._ Vod F<1n ~.. Olslrwash.:r ._. n
Ii ~VlIQLti;;:(M?t4\;;; il~..iJ.i~fO~:~/TA~~:~__lJn"
g;~~! CO$I CD~~ CO$I Col;, Cost CO:Jf COAl Cost COBI
tto_l,j;$ 1.1.t?_]t,I/~ ____
IIG._: 1 n __ _._110' J:l 0
U__ -- '100 '3..9 0
C(jJ_______ :.Jil___. 7.,-() ___2fjJ2___..__n___ a_!D2.._.____~__
{; VI' ____,...: / / ~___ ___iI'!.... ------.i_t 7_______'___/ (,3'
Wi/jJ_____ _, .fC'-.......LQ.Q 50:_______.5~
UJILidiV...iL.. I--;'Fo _.J(I._ __JL __ __ z?
Yil ,M..::J.... l "7 no
J<...(i~~~._ '. ~...-:---- "-
jJ!_L.,g G::: 'n_ ____n-"-----~_~------
-- ~~=
TOTAl i 1>-/ RJub I
- - --_... ....------- -....
NORMAL % GOOD 1/6- .3 7
__ .._R.c..LND--.:----~to.. ----$.12'!- -~~,j7'6
1'1'
_ D(Jublt
OUQhx
_~!-'mlfjJ
'_ f/(}/~COIlf..I
Molal
CMcr~/... >. F,'ooijlUJ/.
... j?'infor~.~~_ _~: IH: .t ./
_ __._ ~__ _ 2"";.~~:........
.._ Wo~ __~___.. __ Sub-Flon!
Pu:rJ ConcrtlffJ f/oor
Guffer,J
SHOWER
I. ili.'PfF/rJl.sh
,
.... _.. --L.__
--,'----
, --
_!If'proiser
UnJt
a Dote
f~~._..-
, 11.:1.J-
-.---
g~~~_I= CD'~ -:~:_~ CD'/- -'gflr -co~,
=---_nn =-J-- .---f--h- ___-- --- ..~=
..-~r---n- ------ L-
=-f===~
,
.._---~-_.. --
-I-~
1
,
,
p
;/}o-T::t9~ __'
I roo.. n_____ ..______
/Q 7'6 S'.
100'
.-------- --
A-II 8-56
A 3-54
51 7
J
I{.;I ~ I I
:,; "q .
.~ I
,<ti .
I
I
I
i
I !
I i
I
~
'" .0:
"-'
Q:
::;, "
h c
u G::
::;,
Q:
h ~
'" C
C
C;:
I
I I
I I
I
I i
'"
::;,
a
'" ~
~ ~
-.J
-.J
4J ~
'-' <=
'" (l
i
I
I
I
I
!
i
J j ~
III
I II
I
I
."
co
"
<2
'"
...
.2 to
(oJ -ll
t: ~
Ui '"
,~:-- tii-;- . -. r, ,-:-Tr," , ,
iitt+ : 1 ;i'--j:f H+ "
! I l I '.J:TTT I
~' ~.1...J...~,. I
, ,J I.~ I , I 1__1._' , "
, . 'i!'-L ! , +1-' I
--;~.:): ;; +r'--I' , -l-TT.
t--t-r-rt-!- ;-In-r I I . i ~
I \ I LLJ:': I
i 1- I (i;r-;Tt-T
I t- .;-~.T I I !
I 1"1 -Tl LLl I
: I IITTT
, I 1 1_1.
,,_+ ., -~_+-2+ -', I
Ii, ;j-+l~~1-
t:tH't ) ~ I I I I
, '~-r-->-
~~- - '-. r-'
'1-.1- ,I.:... :
I [ ),
, ,
, I
I , I: f' ,--; f-H:.++(-H: I
"";_,1 L.!...--Ll_~'.; ri :+rrl I
__~_ i I I ; ! ! _ j 'T I I I I
I "'. I I' I i-
*-t- 1: I ~I I:
~+- ! -H++H-t,"
" I ,.t-, ' I II! i
I I II J t I J
:.,' :ffi"J-+---l--L, I-~
"ii- . --[ .,-:1: f~H:-
. : I' -[.
+w, '.+~" ,
" , .++ --f-L' 'i
tt-' i I~i I L ; I
, r+
,
i-~1=l'-~ J:Lltt I
I '\1 , --i-, III I, I I
:"1_._ I; 1-4-1-1+
++f- ' :
I ! m I
If i Ic~' I (
I j'7i-'i-J'..~:~fF
\ !
I! '
,~ ----r-i I
,. I I
iI" I
I "
~. : I
, I
I
i
",'.,.h
~ " '"
~
-<-
lr,'-.\
--::,:.
I I
I \, I
-"
'i'
"t;-,i
\JVJ
~~
".
i I
i ",I
~I
;:: \z.
~'"
:0
<l.
~
a
'-'
A'
J
,
?d
~!
I...J!
~
\
--;.. ---:,..
" C> '"'
~ ~ "-
" ---
t.o Q
~ x
""---.s
'"l
""
Vo
r;-~
, :+' t-H-f
. tll'
H-t++-
: ,
, ,
I j \
I ;-r-rr++r...
,
i ttfd+ -;
, ,
i-+-~ -f-"- I
:
"
Ii
,
, ,
, I
I: !
..LL'
i Ii
I'
,
4-
r I
, ,
, ,
-1 -t
t I 1 ~_~ I !
I : ,-J::i;CLrt., "
m"l I : I I I
! I I' TTII
Ii:) I
, :' +-H-+ : I'~ - S t- -! . , ,
, 'i1- ; ,-1+ +1--1 '--i ,': -h. 't. h
: ::+++;-1 ~_I .; .I+~ftt I ! I :! I
...~++- -t- I I
: ""
'-.;.-W.
;_T: 1'1
I
r-
,
I: I I I
,
! i I 1_ I
I t-t-! !
: ~_..L-L ,'rl
I -'-j! :-r-
1--1 '
-'H-. '+-->---I-L
j I .L:.... i! I
Iii T II)
,
, I'
j-++++~j;. ;
1';iH"~.
L"'2. ,--1
, ,
,
i ,
r+
" ,
,
tt~;=f-+
f J...l ' I
I I: I
,
, ,
,
,
. t
._ _LL
, ,
, ,
,
,
T
I "
J I I -L
r+ +--+-, -t;,
II 1;1 I
,., I I I'" I I j
~ -1 ! I I I I I I .t't-:J:- __1..i I
, ! I I I LW-- r_""4. I I , 1+_
, r, +..U I I f :-:"1 ITT1 I
I I (-f T -- I I I I - T! I I
T "
, _LLLJ. __ . ~~~ ~'--'- -+T" ..1. . I I L--'-.L
J'- w=r.: \)Q. LL +. I --j.T I r-,
, " E!) .j TI r,'M ,-1'-
I IT I ~tl ,1+Ii-q.....1--+--rL' ,
" I I r-;- I ) ,i- , ! I .
I' l...L.' I t++J ,,', '" I' ' I '
r'~-r' 'i"- -j- -4-L,. -+i-,- - ,+""C'
+- I 'I, I J. I I . '---1 '
'. I , L+-i-- ++--+.i:l'" . ,
:, I _L' i: I IH-T-H :
, 'H I ,: : I 1'"
, " --r:--;-T. , '-T:r~
I I'
,
Ii
t-
,.j '---
'I I I
, I
I
18-41
'"
'\l
~
'-;
I~
,
"
.~ r,'
--n-
.,
)'-1- ~lli
---r
"
, ,
-\--1-;'-1
-j"
, I
-1+ +-
,
! I
"
I -+:
;-J.-r I
'I,
,
I
,
I
11 I I
,
"
"
,
"
,
, !
"
!
, "
" I
"1
"i
,
; ,
, I
-r1-:
r II I I r I
I~ I
'f I Iii I
: ~li c+
",'1
, ~u"~II_
. I I I
I~II
:-;>,t ., ,
'->.LI I
P ,
-1- I I
"
j ,
;
I
I I I
, ,
._u
,
, ,
, ,
- ++
, ,
" ,
'" .
Q
I ,
, "
J It {
I ~tt- I
l.iT
, ,
r-I I I
\ I I r 11III
,. ,
,
-H+
, ,
r
I
j I I I I
1
,
l- +~',-, .. - , +. -+-t+
1_ l-l-+-+ r I 1 ~ \ I I
I l=tcX: :-t-I ;-l-t r -+:~; : I I I_H+
-H -\ t-f-+-I--H - H-+ I 1+ - t- ._f-!. .f-1-+
_+ 4-L t-hU I :t-h- I
-'l-rt H+ i-rH- C:r- f. :,
'; :; .,-H+ +H--iH'H +-i+
I I I ...------r-t'"i I 1 I
, , ,
I I . J! I
State of California - The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
PRIMARY RECORD
Primary#:
HRI#:
Trinomial #: N/ A
NRHP Status Code:
Other Listings: None
6Z
Review Code
Date
Page 1 of1 *Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder) 634 2nd Avenue Chula Vista CA 91910
PI. Other Identifier:
*P2. Location: 0 Not for Publication 0' Unrestricted
*a. County San Diel!o
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Date: T _; R _; _ Y. of _ Y. of Sec _; _B.M.
c. Address: 634 2nd Avenue City. Chula Vista Zip: 91910
d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resourccs) Zone _. mE! mN
e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions:o resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate)
Parcel #573~ 180-12, Lot 14 (portion), Block 2 of the 1908 Chula Vista Villa Tract (Map No. 1143)
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major clements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations. size, setting, and boundaries)
The dwelling at 634 2nd A venue is rectilinear in plan constructed atop a board form concrete foundation with board siding at the exterior walls and wood
shingles in the front and rear gable wall sections. The gable roof is of moderate pitch and clad in composition shingles with visible rafter ends at the
eave walls and decorative (false) beams under the gables atlhe front and rear elevations. The front and rear porches are each covered by a lower front
gabled roof. At the front elevation, facing 2nd Avenue is a full-length raised porch accessible by two separate sets of four concrete steps at the southwest
corner. The concrete work appears to be recent, likely poured in the last t\.vo decades. The roofsupport system is simple post and lintel construction
comprised of three squared columns with simple wood capitals (posts) atop a base (likely concrete) covered by a flat stone veneer intended to simulate
cobblestone or river rock as was employed on many original Craftsman homes of higher style. Between the column capitals and the extended beams and
eaves of the principal and lower roofs respectively is a beam (lintel) installed to provide support and also for decorative appeal. The stone veneer is
referenced in the 1985 Chula Vista survey fOnTls completed for the property and may have been applied as part ofa general property construction and
renovation campaign completed in ] 984 when the original garage was replaced with the Cllrrent stnlclUre at the rear of the heme. Window types
observed vary and include weod framed one-ever-one single-or-double-hung sash, seven-over-one wood sash, two over one wood sash, and replacement
aluminum slider. At the rear elevation, a second entry door flanked by two one-over one wood windows provides access from the rear porch, which has
been altered from its original design. Overall the building exterior appears to be in fair to good condition, although no invasive material analysis was
conducted. While in fair-to-good exterior condition, the dwelling does not appear to be a significant example of domestic architecture or of Craftsman
vernacular constmction methods.
*P3 b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP2 Single Family Property
*N. Resources Present: 0Building OStructure OObject OSite ODistrict OElement of District OOther (Isolates, etc.)
P5b. Description of Photo:
(View, date, accession #)
Front Elevation
Photo Date: October 2008
*P6. Date Constructed/Age aod
Source:
0Historic, c. 19]2
Assessors Building: Record
*P7. Owner and Address:
Kevin & Carol O'Neill
621 Del Mar Avenue
Chula Vista CA 9 1 91 0
*P8. Recorded by:
(Namc, affiliation, and address)
Wp.ndy Tindpy Prinripnl
IJrhnnn Prplprvnhon R. Plnnning
III (, If",! #199 Ian Di'qo fA 97101
i6llid1-0091/Phonp)
7481'; lle,,1 #841 Ooklood fA 94007
(11O.o01-74411Phooe)
*P9. Date Recorded: November 2008
*PIO. Survey Type: (Describe)
Intensive Level! Sing:le Site CEOA
Reviewer
*PII, Report Citation: (Citc survcy report and other sources. or entcr "none.")
Urbana Preservation & Plannincr CEOA Historical Resource Analvsis Reoort: 634 2ml A venue Chula Vista CA 919 10 November 2008.
* Attachments: ONONE DLocation Map 0Continuation Sheet 0Building, Structure, and Object Record
OArchaeologicaI Record ODistrict Record OLinear Feature Record OMilling Station Record ORock Art Record
OArtifact Record OPhotograph Record 0 Other (List):
DPR 523A (1/95)
18-42
"Reauired information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #:
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #:
BUILDlJ'\TC, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
Page ~ of ~ *NRHP Status Code: 6Z
*Resource Name or # (Assigned by rccordcr) 634 2nd A venue Chula Vista. CA 91910
81. Historic Name: Percy Clay House I MacDonald Family Rental Prooertv
B2. Common Name: Not Identified
83. Original Use: Sine:le Familv Resictence
*B5. Architectural Style: Vernacular Craftsman
*86. Construction History: (Construction date. alterations, and datc ofaltcrations)
Originally constructed in approximately 1912; stone veneer believed to have been applied to the front porch in c.1984.
*87. Moved? 0No DYes DUnknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features: None
B9a. Architect Not Identified b. Builder: Not Identified
*B10. Significance: Theme: N/A Area: N/A
Period of Significance: N/A Property Type: Residential Applicable Criteria: N/A
In ]906 tb.e southeast quarter of Section 139 of the Chula Vista town site was surveyed and platted in support of the Chu]a Vista Villa Tract (CVVT)
recorded in May 1908. The CVVT re-subdivided the 1(. section into two Blocks, identified as Block 1 and Block 2, with Block 1 containing eight lots
and Block 2 containing fourteen lots measuring approximately 291 feet (depth) by 165 feet (width). Jennie MacDonald is cited as the original owner of
the present-day 634 2"d Avenue property (originally identified as 4'.'1 Avenue), having purchased the lot on F.ebruary 4, 19 J I. MacDonald resided nearbv
in the CVVT at 644 4th Avenue (present-day 2nd Avenue) and constructed a single-story single-fnmily dwelling in the Craftsman vernacular style at 634
4'h Avenue to be utilized as a rental property Because the MacDonald's land was not in the central core of the then fledgling town, neither the
MacDonald residence nor nearby their rental property was delineated by the Sanborn Fire Insurance Company as part of the 19] 8 survey of Chula Vista.
In the 1920 Federal Census of San Diego and Chula Vista 54 year old Jennie McDonald was listed as the wife of 73 year old Scotland native Wiltiam
MacDonald, who with their son William R. MacDonald, identified t~emselves as the owne,s of their residence at 644 410 Avenue. The MacDonald's
tenants of the rental property at 634 41.'1 Avenue were recorded on :he same 1920 Census enumeration page (sheet 320 B). Percy Clay, a 60 old white
man employed as a life insurance agent resided at the home with his 56 year old wife Anna M. Clay, and their 16 year old daughter Mary Elizabeth. As
in I 9lS neither of the MacDonald properties were recorded in the 1926 building survey efforts for Chula Vista by the Sanbom Fire Insurance Company,
likely due to the distance from the central core and the bucolic nature and dimensions of the land lots in the area. By the time of the ]930 Census 64
year old Jennie MacDonald was widowed and was identified as the head ofhollsehold at 644 41h Avenue with her 44 year old Son William who was
listed as unmarried and without an occupation, still residing at the family home. The Clay's were not identified in the 1930 Census records for San Digo
or Chula Vista, indicidating that by early 1930 the family no longer occupied the present-day 634 2"d A venue property This is further substantiated by
the Census enumerator's om mission of 634 41h Avenue from the Census sheet having surveyed the properties at 614 and then 644 41h Avenue with no
description for 634. Jennie MacDonald owned the 634 41; Avenue property into the early I 940s w:th the next major owners, Everett P and Louise
Hackney, aquiring the property from MacDonald. A review of San Diego Suburban Directories disclose that Everett Pearlie Hackney was employed as
a machinist and with his wife Louise resided at the present-day 634 2nd Avenue property through at least 1970. The present-day 634 2nd Avenue property
was not delineated as part of the 1950 Sanborn Fire rnsurance Company survey ofChula Vista. The Sanborn Company mapping efforts stopped one
block west of the subject property showing the east side of the 600 block of Del Mar A venue, but not delineating the building envelopes on the west side
of the 600 block of2"d Avenue, both of which comprise Block 2 ofthe 1908 Chula Vista Villa Tract. The building does not appear to be a significant'
example ofvemacular Craftsman style architecture, nor dot.:s it appear to hold a significant and direct association with the historical development of
Chula Vista in the tlrst part of the Twentieth Century. As a property type, the
dwelling is a modest bungalow which docs not fully articulate or convey the stylistic
details or underlying philosophical influences which culminated into the American
bungalow from the 18305 forward. Additionally no information was found to
support a statement of significance for past owners or occl1pants of the home.
Beca.use the dwelling has been determined ineligible for inclusion on any local,
state. or national historic.sites register, the 634 2nd Avenue property does not appear
to meet the definition of an historical resource under the CEQA Guidelines, and
therefore, demolition or another project at the site would not a.ppear to cause a
significant adverse effect in a historical resource of the environment pursuant to
Califomia Public Resources Code ~ 15064.5
B 11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributcs and codes) ~
*B12. References:
City ofChula Vista Library, San Diego Central Library, San Diego Historical
Society, San Diego County Assessor-Recorders Office
B I3. Remarks:
*B14. Evaluator: W(>n~y I Tind.e.v..1rincip..aI' [[[!lnnn Prelp.rvdinn R. Plnnning
148 1rd Itree; #841 Onklond r! 94001 ~ III r, Itr,,; *199 Inn~JjjlillJ
*Date of Evaluation: November 2008
B4. Present Use:
Sine:le Familv Residence
(This space reserved for offici a] comments.)
DPR 5238 (1/95)
18-43
-----___~ L
.$r t
~"'[""""- ,-,,-- .,'. -"'VU,-l r--;j
,,~ ~ ,:.....l~i/)
" r' .---i ": i/
j r,' , " 1hJ;.
1 ____-- I '
:j~ <.{.
TL -r --E" i
i i : " I
: l-f-.------ tl
I" ! .. ql ~
~t~-~--r-----~::i ~! ~
s.' t
f--.. -1 ~
l'
N
*Required information
StJr. No.
HABS_ HAER_ .NR SHL L
UTM; A 493350 ~ 3610TIlY ac_
e 0
~~t 03 2008 lO;42RM M. Kevin O'Neill Constr.
S:tatll 01 C.3Jifon'lia. - The Aes.ourc:!l'S Aq:snc:y
OE.:OAATMENTOF ?ARKS ANO pe<:AEA,'ION
HISTORIC RESCUACES INVENTORY
619-426-6700
F. 1
IDENTIFICATION
1. Common name:
Timothy Bonnet House
2.. Hir.oric name:
Percy Clay Hnuse
3. Street or rural address:
6.34 second Avenue
CiN
Chula.Vista
92010
Zio
4. ?,"''" number: 573-180-12
County
San Diego
5. PrHen't Owner:
Timothy J. Bonnet
Add'....: 634 Second !I.venue
Zip 92010 O""",,.nipis:Public
CiW
Chula vista
6. Pr".m u..: res idential
OriginiU us~:
Pmua
x
residential
DESCRIPTION
7.. Architect\Jr31 nyle: Bunga low
lb. Briefly describe the pre~nt Chy~1 riexriprion of me sit!! or W-Uctun! and de!Cribe any major .alterations from its
originai eonditiQn: -
Legal: CV Villa Tct, Blk 2, S 80' of Lot 14
This charming one story bungalow features a low, front-facing gable
roof with wide eaves, exposed rafter ends and vis ible support beam
ends. The lower part of the right side of the house roof is
extended forward to form the right half of a seco~d street-facing
gable roof that shelters an open entrance porch. . The pardi roof
is supported at each front corner by a large round pillar on a
cobblestone pier. A pergola extends out to the left and a third
pillar balances the design. The house has horizontal wide clapboard
siding, two chimneys, sidelights on each side of the front door,
wood shingle siding in the gable ends, and double hung windows.
or.e window has been replaced by an aluminum sliding sash.
'.
D1>R
8. Con'Str\Jction date:
E:stim.ted 1912 F,etu 01
9, Architl:t:t un]<.nown
10. 8uild.r unknown
1 L Approx.. prcp~rtV Si49 (in fet!t)
Frontag" ~ n D.otl1 ? q 1 . S ~
or approx. acreaQit 0 c:; '1
.')
1 Z. . Dab(s) of !nc:;osad pnorcgraon (5)
, 1985
,Oct 03 2008 10:42AM
H. Kevin 0 ~Nei 11 Constr.
619-426-6700
1".2
13. 'Condition: Exal!lent...1:L-Good _ F<3il" _ Oeterior;;te-d _ No Icn-ger in exineflC!
Aln:rations: (,\T'!~ w1nnnw rp.pl~r.'p.ti bv. ?iuminum slidinc sash
14,
1 S. SurrQundings: to'lecJc rn01"e 'Onll on., i1 noeeuary) ODoi!n land _ Scattered buildings _ Denselv built-up --1i....-
A~Ktefltlal -X-Industri~ _COmrnen:.:al_Other:
16_ Thre3u to she: Nono kMO'W11..1i...-Pri'late develcpment_ Zoning _ Vandalism
?ubliw: W<:lrlq project _ Other:
17. Is the strUC't\..Ire; On its original site?
x
Move<l7
Unknown?
Ta A.lotodleftUr..: shrubs and trees
SIGNIFICANCE
19.. Brleflv state hlstorlCill iIfld{or aTd1itecnlrm imQart.anco fincludQ datas.. !Voents.. and pen<l1U auodated \'1m me $.it6.l
Mrs. Jennie MacDonald purchased this lot on Feb. 4, 1911. Deed
restrictions required her to build a house within a year, and by 1912,
she had done so. She lived, however, at 644 Second Avenue and
apparently used this house as a rental. In 1920, Percy and Anne Clay
lived here. Ee was an insurance agent. Mrs. MacDonald stil'l aImed
the property in 1939. The house retains integrity of design and
materials a~d is a good example of the 19105 bungalows.
" ,
Locotional ,l<atdl mall (d,..... and labotl .it. and
surrounding stTeeti~Coad:sy and prominent Jandmarf:(j):
"., ^ NORTH
IJ
20. Main tllema of 'the historic resour-ar: (If more than one is
c.hedted. nl.UT'lber in order of importance..)
Ardlitea-Jre x . Art:s & uiwr~
E'::On'[)mjclrndustri~ _Ex~on/Setdemer1t,
~emment Military
RRligtOtl SocialIEduc:rtion
21. Sources (Un beaks. doo.:mant:S~ sul"'rc'ys. personal interviews
and tMU- dacsl.
CV Tax Assessment Rolls
SD County Deeds
City~irectories
Water records
22. OatO form llrepond 9 - 9 -1985
By (nomo) K Webster
Ofll3nlza,1on City of Chula V~sta
Addres>: P. O. Box .LO 8 7
Ory rhnl ~ v; sta Zip 92012
Pl1ono: ~ql~qOl
18-45
18-46
ATTACHMENT E
Project Plan
ns
.,.Y
~ ~""~...~ ~'''----, ~ r-----"''1
r---. -1 I EXJSTING I \c)1~ I EXISTIN.O HOOSEp;:
JP'AJRlCJElL Ii J/",~i : JP'AJRr'lFlt.
~ I E>JSTlNG.l"", .-~'";-,;;;; i ,,;:;r
L HOOSE I... - 'PRMWH I . .
\\."....,.-.....iiJS\l~. -
~ . ~ b
" )!-"Ot7;". ~~ ;
.:> l-i'l1t OJES b r& ~2.42. J:SI_
t~ P~G ~ W~
OJESTPARKJI
I~ P ARCEL 3~t:l' ARCEL 2
: ~ 'p:: .~~.-.. 14 ~:~N~1lJi
r-. 20' IGARAGE TO I
~. ~tBE ROlO'wfll1
,:J f2.4"L-----'
'r--;~- .~...--
JP'~iClElL 11~~~~' JP'ARiClElL A
,'J L-mo1 Aii'~~""
~~ ~i~ ~~__w~
/ ", ~.. ~ -""l> ~ i ""TIN' "M' :
, . '\.~. I I
E>J,"", HotJ~::/ ~1('~ \fSJ) l______'"J,..
, L
PARCEL 1
~
CD
I
.po.
-J
'"
,
.,'
___lOiO'lL __
'I
~~
I
x
I
x
I
.::.~
>
~
~
~
B
,
,
~
LEGEND
f22Z1 USEMfNT AREA
fSSSJ ~W'~r ~~r1~~~
[I1]] ~l1nN~~~RN
...
"
IsmiO S10EWA
RG
SECOND AVE
HOT TO SCAlE
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
I EGAL DESCRIPTION
LOT 14, EXCEPTING mE NORlHERLY a$ fEET THEREOf, IN BlOCK 2.,
CHUlA VISTA 'AliA TRACT, IN THE CHY OF O1ULA VISTA. COUNTY
Of SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CAUFORNIA, ACCORDING TO Mil.? ,HEREOf
NO 11J4, F1LlllIN TIlE OFfiCE OF mE COUNTY RECORDER Of SAN
DIEGO COUNTY ..uNf: ... 1906.
ASSESOR'S PARCEL NUMBER
573-160-12
OWNER / ApPLICANT
O'NElLL fAMILY TRUST
llZrDEl M,l,R AV(
CHULAVlS';",CA91910
PHONE; (619) ~2fl-31H
FA' ~19 ~~~6700
.VlNO NEllL,TRUSlE
I I
w
I: "
=r I
. II
; I " SCALE: 1 .~30'
2 . ~s"1 I
"
I:~
~ r'~~ 1.1111>
IlL
I"
I:! i
~
"I B I
I,
rn DtlSl1NG PRlV},lE RO,lJ) AND unurr
[ASEMENT PER DOC. HO. 80-321784
~~~ ~ti; ~~~MOH CR}.NTm
TO PARCEL I 6: 2 OF P~ 10703
l2J TIJRNAROOND AREA INClUDES PRCf'OSEO
,lJ)Dl11ONAL 20'~JO' TO AUGt.lENT EXISTING.
(PARKlfJG PROHIBlrrn)
IJl GUEST PARKING
"II"
~
~
<
f
~
<
or.
','
'"
r.4ITSCHERST.
HALSEY ST.
J.lURRAYST
KINGST
ST.
SI
','
o
"
,
~
CH LA VI
VICINITY MAP
NO SCALE
TA
to
I<"itlvr"t
DAlE
WATER SUPPLY
S\\'EETWATER AUTHORITY
FIRE PROTECTION
cm OF CHULA VISTA
SEWAGE DISPOSAL
CITY or CHULA VISTA
EXISTING & PROPOSED USE:
RESIDENTIAL
EXISTING & PROPOSED ZONING:
R-I SINGLE fMlILY RESIDENTIAL
AREA AREAS Sq. ft.
Gross- '" ceo ...
o.rkln
8232 7208 7001
R , 7782 7258 7051
2
ARCEL 7367 7367 71'>6
,
TOTAL 23J81 flB3J 212~B
SOURCE OF TOPOGRAPHY
ALGERT ENGlNEfRING, INC.
BMP /STORMWA TER /DRAINAGf': NOTE:
1. ALL II.IPERIilOUS SURFACES DRMl INTO lNlDSCAf'EO
AREAS BEFORE EXlTING THE SIlL
2. AlL ROOf DRAINS OUTFAll. INTO THE LANDSCAPED AREAS.
J. mE QRI\o['\IfA'l'S AND SIDEWALKS ARE SlCf'ED TD DRAIN
ONTO THE LANDSCAPED AREAS.
4. THE ARE.... Of 015TURBANCE - 21,000 s.F.
!I. AlL CONSTRUCTION BIoIPS 'MLL BE INSTALlED
INa.UDING STRAW WA TIlES AROUND ll1E PERIt,l(1ER
AND GRAVEl.. BAGS AT THE PL AND 1I10SWAlL IN.ITR~gTll?NS;
II. AlL BMPS PER CITY REOUIREMENTS 'MLL tlE DON~~tii.-,' ,~ ...
TIlE GRADING AtlD CONSTRUCTION OF Tl1IS PROJ~~l~'H::...'.~:"u. <~.::::.__
SITE ADDRESS: ," I!,I '''.'2 ",-.,
1134mOAV't. I
CHULA VISTA. CA 91810
AUlEIlT~ NC.
428 BR(),.WWAI"
a/UL~ \liST^, CA.919JO
TEL (6111) 420-70110
FAX.. (/J19) 420-9JJ9
-d~R (}~r
JAM 'S H. ALGER RCE 19073
I.?"z..='f
DATE
IN.7140
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA DENYING THE APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE DECISION OF
THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR THAT THE PROJECT IS
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM CEQA PURSUANT TO SECTION
15315 (MINOR LAND DIVISION) OF THE STATE CEQA GUIDELINES
AND TO DENY THE REQUEST TO WAIVE ALL APPLICATION FEES
FOR TillS PROJECT - SAVE OUR HERITAGE ORGANIZATION.
1. RECITALS
A. Project Site
WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject of this Resolution is an existing
parcel located at 634 Second Avenue ("Project Site"); and
B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, on August 29, 2008, a duly verified application for a Tentative Parcel Map
was filed with the City of Chula Vista Development Services Department by Kevin O'Neill
("Applicant"); and
-
. WHEREAS, the application requests approval to subdivide a 23,381 square-foot site in the
R-I zone into three legal lots ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, The Environmental Review Coordinator reviewed the proposed project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has determined that the project
qualifies for a Class 15 categorical exemption pursuant to Section 153 I 5 (Minor Land Divisions)
of the State CEQA Guidelines. No fUrther environmental review is necessary; and .
C. Prior Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, the Director of Development Services set the date for the approval of the
Tentative Parcel Map application, and notice of the approval, together with it purpose, was mailed
to property owners and residents within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at
least 10 days prior to the said approval date; and
WHEREAS, on the approval date as advertised, namely May 18,2009, the Director of
Development Services, after considering all reports, evidence and written documentation
received from the public with respect to the Project, approved the Project.
18-48
Page 2
September 15,2009
D. Planning Commission Record on Application Appeal
WHEREAS, on May 28, 2009, a duly verified application for a Tentative Parcel Map
Appeal was filed with the City of Chula Vista Development Services Department by Save Our
Heritage Organization ("Appellant"); and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely July 8,
2009 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Commission, and the hearing was thereafter closed; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after considering all reports, evidence and
written documentation received from the public with respect to the Project, moved to deny the
Appeal of TPM 08-08 and uphold the decision of the City Engineer and Development Services
Director to approve TPM 08-08 by a vote of 5-2-0-0.
E. City Council Record on Application Appeal
WHEREAS, on July 17,2009, a duly verified application for an Appeal of the categorical
exemption pursuant to CEQA ("Appeal") was filed with the City of Chula Vista Development
Services Department by Save Our Heritage Organization ("Appellant"); and
WHEREAS, in said application, Appellant also requests waiver of all application fees
("Waiver") based on fmancial hardship and denial of due process; and
WHEREAS, a hearing on the Appeal and Waiver was held at the time and place as
advertised, namely September 15, 2009 at 4:00 p.m. in the. Council Chambers, 276 Fourth
A venue, before the City Council and the hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista hereby finds that, based on the entire record, including the report titled "CEQA Historical
Resource Analysis Report", revised January 2009, the structure on which this appeal is based,
which is located at 634 SECOND A VENUE, is not an "Historic Resource."
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City Of Chula Vista has
exercised its independent review and judgement and concurs with the Environmental Review
Coordinator's determination that the proposed project complies with the California
Environmental Quality Act and has determined that the project qualifies for a Class 15
categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15315 of the State CEQA Guidelines, since it is a
minor land division of a 23,381 square foot site into three legal lots.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does
hereby uphold the determination by the City Engineer and Director of Development Services that
a Class 15 categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15315 (Minor Land Divisions) of the
CEQA Guidelines applies to this Project, and, thereby, denies the appeal; and
18-49
Page 3
September 15, 2009
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City Of Chula Vista does
hereby adopt the resolution denying the appeal and upholding the decision of the Development
Services Director that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15315
(minor land division) of the State CEQA guidelines; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City Of Chula Vista does
hereby deny the request to waive all application fees for this project.
Presented by
Gary Halbert, P.E., AlCP
Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director
J:\Planning\Caroline\Discretionary Permits\Kevin 0' Neill Lot Split\PCM-09-20 Appeal\PCM-09-20 CC Appeal Reso- 634 Second Ave.doc
18-50
'-' ,.. ~"~,-~-"
Acid; \-1 0 hCLQ
4/1 51 t}q,
It-LfO , Y\A..oJ-LCJY'-
l k-vY> i B
September IS, 2009
1-\1 AGE Ok
~~ <;''1
.~ ~
1969 } ~ ~\ 2009
-1 \~ 5J ,-
I;:: --;::- - ::-J- " ~ ~ .' ---L:::::" - --,-:::f
""""l~~ -J .~O ')Io",.,i[- --'~j:o,.
I . It,vOEP \. . r on
~ 40t/1 ANNIVERSARY ~ ~~
-' ......."
n"ln
^':x:
:Xc::
onr-
ol>
"T1<:
::!.'v'
C-)-<<j
;--n)~~
~
::0
~ rn
()
.-. rn
val' <
-0 rn
N 0
J,;.
0\
Honorable Mayor Cheryl Cox
276 Fourth A venue
Chula Vista, California 9\9\0
RE; ITEM \8: CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF THE DETERMINATION OF THE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR THAT THE PROJECT (TPM 0808 SUBDIVISION
OF A 23,38\ SQUARE FOOT SITE INTO THREE LEGAL LOTS) IS CATEGORICALLY
EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT PER SECTION 15315 OF THE STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, THE SITE IS LOCATED
AT 634 SECOND AVENUE.
Dear Mayor Cox;
On Behalf of the Save our Heritage Organization, the appellant in the above matter currently scheduled as
Item 18 on the City Council Agenda for today.
Please be advised that the Appellant hereby requests the appeal be DISMISSED WITH PREDJUDICE.
An informal "Memorandum of Understanding" has been executed between SOHO and the Developer that
serves the public interest and allows an opportunity to save the subject property.
Respectfully submitted,
Save our Heritage Organisation
4~