v . 0 0 5 P a g e | 1
March 17, 2026
ITEM TITLE
Vacation of Easement: Vacate a Portion of Lot 62 and Unnamed Street/Alley of Rosebank Subdivision Report Number: 26-0002
Location: 130 First Avenue
Department: Development Services
G.C. § 84308 Regulations Apply: No
Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the activity qualifies for an Exemption pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines. The action involves an organizational or administrative activity of government that will not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environment.
Recommended Action
Adopt a resolution approving the vacation of a portion of Lot 62 and unnamed street/alley of Rosebank Subdivision.
SUMMARY
The property owner at 130 First Avenue has requested the vacation of a portion of Lot 62 and an adjacent unnamed street/alley within the Rosebank Subdivision, originally dedicated in 1911. Portions of the alley were previously vacated in 1928, 1966, and 2024. The current request involves an additional segment that has never been improved or used for street purposes , is not needed for public street or right -of-way purposes, and does not provide access to any parcel. The vacation meets t he criteria of Government Code § 7050 and Streets and Highways Code §§ 8333–8335 and may be approved by resolution. Staff has confirmed that there will be no impact on access, utilities, or public services. Upon recordation, the City’s easement interest will be extinguished, and the property will revert to the underlying fee owner, subject to existing encumbrances.
P a g e | 2
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the activity qualifies for an Exemption pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines.
BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION
On June 17, 2022, the owner of 130 First Avenue submitted a request to vacate a portion of Lot 62 and an adjacent unnamed street/alley (“Vacation Area”). The Vacation Area is bounded by First Avenue to the east, D Street to the north, Minot Avenue to the west, and E Street to the south, and was originally dedicated as part of the Rosebank Subdivision, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County on January 18, 1911.
Portions of the unnamed street/alley have been vacated over time. A segment west of the subject property was closed by Council Resolution No. 237 passed and adopted on February 7, 1928, and recorded on July 7th, 1952. An additional portion was vacated by City Council Resolution No. 4237 on November 22, 1966 . More recently, on November 13, 2024, the City Clerk recorded as Official Document # 2024 -0314991, vacating a portion of the same unnamed street/alley within the Rosebank Subdivision.
The same property owner has now submitted a request to vacate an additional area of the same easement.
As with previously vacated segments, the Vacation Area has never been improved or used for street purposes and is not needed for public street or right -of-way purposes. Further, the Vacation Area is not part of the City’s Circulation Plan as shown on Figure 5 -13W of the City’s General Plan, Chapter 5 (Land Use and Transportation Element).
California Government Code Section 7050 authorizes a city to vacate a pub lic street, alley, or easement by resolution of the legislative body when the area has not been used for street purpose, and no present or prospective public use will be impaired. California Streets and Highways Code Section 8333(a) further allows a city council to summarily vacate a street, alley, or easement without a public hearing when the area has not been used for street purposes for a period of at least five consecutive years before the vacation proceedings.
Streets and Highways Code Section 8334 al so allows a city council to summarily vacate a street, alley, or easement without a public hearing when the area is excess right -of-way of a street not required for street purposes. Streets and Highways Code Section 8335 provides that when a vacation quali fies under Sections 8333 or 8334, the vacation may be completed by adoption of a resolution of vacation and recordation of a certified copy of the resolution with the County Recorder.
The Vacation Area meets these statutory criteria. The area has never been used for street purposes, has not been used for street purposes for a period of at least five consecutive years before the vacation proceeding, and is excess right-of-way of a street not required for street purposes. Further, the Vacation Area does not provide vehicular or pedestrian access to any parcel, and its vacation will not adversely affect access, circulation, or the provision of public services. In addition, a review by City staff has confirmed that no public P a g e | 3
utility facilities are located within the proposed Vacation Area, or that any existing facilities are adequately protected through separate recorded rights. As such, the proposed vacation will not adversely impact public utilities, emergency access, or other public infrastructure. Also, in accordance with Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 12.40.010, City staff has conducted an investigation and determined that the public interest would be served by vacating this portion of Lot 62 and unna med street/alley of the Rosebank Subdivision because the Vacation Area and land is unnecessary for present or future public use as a street or right -of- way.
Upon recordation of the resolution of vacation, the City’s public easement interest in the vacated area will be extinguished. Title to the vacated area will vest in the owner(s) of the underlying fee interest, typically the adjacent property owner(s), in accordance with California law governing the vacation of public streets and easements, and free of t he former public right -of-way or easement. Any existing private easements, covenants, or other recorded encumbrances not expressly terminated by the resolution of vacation will remain in effect.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the property holdi ngs of the City Council members and has found no property holdings within 1,000 feet of the boundaries of the property which is the subject of this action. Consequently, this item does not present a disqualifying real property -related financial conflict of interest under California Code of Regulations Title 2, section 18702.2(a)(7) or (8), for purposes of the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov’t Code §87100, et seq.).
Staff is not independently aware and has not been informed by any City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision-maker conflict of interest in this matter.
CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT
All costs to process this request are borne by the property owner, resulting in no net fiscal impact to the General Fund or the Development Services Fund.
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
There is no ongoing fiscal impact to the General Fund or Development Services Fund associated with this action.
ATTACHMENT
Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Staff Contact: Jaime Campos, Principal Civil Engineer, Development Services Department Roy Sapa’u, Director of Development Services