Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Parcel Map Van Ness topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning Commission approves tentative parcel map at Van Ness Avenue

Planning Commission of the City of National City · April 21, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The commission approved a tentative parcel map to split 2241–2245 Van Ness Avenue into two lots (Case 2025‑01 LS), finding the lot division exempt from CEQA under Class 15 and including standard conditions from engineering, fire and Sweetwater Authority.

The Planning Commission voted April 21 to approve a tentative parcel map dividing 2241–2245 Van Ness Avenue into two parcels and found the land division categorically exempt from CEQA under Class 15.

Assistant Planner Sophia Depew presented staff’s recommendation, saying the split is consistent with the general plan and the RS‑2 zoning, and noted conditions from engineering, fire and Sweetwater Authority would apply. Parcel 1 would measure about 7,986 square feet (fronting Van Ness) and Parcel 2 would measure about 9,966 square feet (fronting Harbison). No new development is proposed at this time.

Applicant Abraham Garcia told the commission he and his brother recently inherited the property and said the split would provide options to keep the property in the family; he said existing driveway access would be formalized by an easement to serve the rear house.

Commissioners asked clarifying questions about access and easements. Commissioner Valenzuela moved to adopt the resolution approving the tentative map; Commissioner Armenta seconded. The motion passed; the commission directed staff to file the required notice of exemption and to include standard final‑map conditions.

Staff said any future proposed development on the newly created lots would be evaluated on its own merits and would require appropriate CEQA review at that time.