Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout92-43 CC ResolutionRESOLUTION NO. 92-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23103 TO SUBDIVIDE 29.2 ACRES INTO 18 SINGLE FAMH~Y RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED IN THE MARGARITA VILLAGE SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 199 AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 919-340-014, 016, 018 AND 923-200-009, 010, 016, AND 923-210-001, 014 AND 923-721-021. (PORTIONS) WHEREAS, The Marlborough Development Corporation fried the Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; 1,WYEREAS, said Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map on March 16, 1992, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WItlZREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map; WHEREAS, the City Council considered said Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map on May 26, 1992, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WItFJIEAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing, the Council approved said Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMF. CULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Finditlgs. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following f'mdings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: Rems 9243 -1- The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general 2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable rime. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. c. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the SWAP and meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit: The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general 2. The City Council finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this rifle, each of the following: a. There is reasonable probability that the Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. c. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. D. Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are made: Resos 92-43 -2- 1. That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 3. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of development. 4. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the proposed density of the development. 5. That the design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. A land division may be approved if it is found that alternate easements for access or for use will be provided and that they will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction. E. The Council in approving the proposed Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103, makes the following findings, to wit: 1. There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the City's future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State law, due to the fact that the project is consistent with existing site development standards in that it proposes articulated design features and site amenities commensurate with existing and anticipated residential development standards. 2. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future and adopted general plan, if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact that the project is in conformance with existing and anticipated land use and design guidelines standards. 3. The proposed use or action complies with state planning and zoning laws, due to the fact that the proposed use conforms with those uses listed as "allowed" within the zoning designation of Specific Plan 199. Resos 92-43 -3- 4. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lot configuration, circulation patterns, access, and density, due to the fact that; adequate area is provided for all proposed residential structures; adequate landscaping is provided along the project's public and private frontages; and the internal circulation plan should not create lraffic conflicts as design provisions are in conformance with adopted City standards. 5. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or welfare, due to the fact that the conditions stated in the approval are based on mitigation measures necessary to reduce or eliminate potential adverse impacts of the project. 6. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property because it does not represent a significant change to the present or planned land use of the area, due to the fact that the proposed project is consistent with the current zoning of the subject site. 7. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural environment as determined in the Negative Declaration for the project, due to the fact that impact mitigation is realized by conformance with the project's Conditions of Approval. 8. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic, due to the fact that the project currenfiy proposes access points from Butterfield Stage Road which has been determined to be adequate by the City Engineer. 9. The design of the subdivision, the type of improvements and the resulting street layout are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the property within the proposed projects, due to the fact that this is clearly represented in the site plan and the project analysis. 10. Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference, due to the fact that they are referenced in the attached Staff Report, Exhibits, and Conditions of Approval. F. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Section 2. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that although the proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and the Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby reaffu-med. Resos 92-43 -4- SECTION 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves the Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 to subdivide 29.2 Acres into 18 single family residential lots located in the Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199 And known as Assessor's Parcel Nos. 919-340-014, 016, 018 and 923-200-009, 010, 016, and 923-210-001, 014 and 923-721-021 (Portions) subject to the following conditions: Ao Riverside County Conditions of Approval dated September 28, 1988. City of Temecula Conditions of Approval dated May 28, 1991. City of Temecula Conditions of Approval dated May 26, 1992. Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of May, 1992. Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor AT'rEST: [SEAL] Reso~ 92-43 -5- STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA ) I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 26th day of May, 1992 by the following vote of the Council: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Moore, Lindemans, Parks NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mufioz S. Greek, City Clerk Resos 92-43 --6- ATTACHMENT 2 CITY OF TEMECULA ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 Commission Approval Date: Expiration Date: March 16, 1992 November 8, 1992 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Unless previously paid, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution. The subdivider shall submit to the Planning Director verification that Section 10.35 of Ordinance No. 460 has been satisfied regarding payment of parks and recreation fees in accordance with Section 10.35 of Ordinance No. 460. Verification shall be submitted prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy. No building permits shall be issued by the City for any residential lot/unit within the project boundary until the developer's successor's-in-interest provides evidence of compliance with public facility financing measures. A cash sum of one-hundred dollars ($100) per lot/unit shall be deposited with the City as mitigation for public library development. This conditionally approved Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 will expire one (1) year after the original expiration date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance 460. The expiration date is November 8, 1992. The subdivider shall comply with the original Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 (see attached) except as amended herein. TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT o Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, the applicant or his assignee shall pay the fair market value of 0.23 acres of parkland to satisfy Quimby requirements. The amount to be paid shall be determined by TCSD staff within thirty (30) days prior to the recordation of said map. S\$TAFFRPTX23103VTM.CC 10 All known slope and open space areas are hereby conditioned to be maintained by an established Homeowner's Association (HOA). Exterior slopes bordering an arterial may be dedicated street shall be offered with an easement to the TCSD for maintenance following compliance to TCSD standards and completion of the application process. All slope and open space areas shall be identified by numbered lot, with the square footage of said areas noted on the f'mal map. (Struck and revised at the Planning Commission meeting on March 16, 1992). DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS The following are the Department of Public Works additional Conditions of Approval for this project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate staff person of the Department of Public Works. It is understood that the Subdivider has correctly shown on the tentative map all existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvements constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. The subdivider shall comply with all previous Conditions of Approval for this project except as amended or superseded herein. PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Subdivider shall deposit with the City of Temecula an amount sufficient to cover the construction of that portion of Butterfield Stage Road between where the westerly property line intersects with the westerly right-of-way line and extends to intersect with the centerline of the street. This portion of Butterfield Stage Road shall be completed by the developer of Tract Map No. 23209, and said funds shall be reimbursed to the developer of Tract Map No. 23209 upon completion of the improvements. The vertical design of Butterfield Stage Road shall be as approved by the City of Temecula. Maintenance for slopes, drainage devices and open space areas must be provided by Tcmecula Community Scrviecs District or the Homeowners Association. The limits of each maintenance area must be defined by numbered lots on the map. (Stuck at the Planning Commission meeting on March 16, 1992). A median island shah be shown on the street improvement plans and shah be constructed within Butterfield Stage Road per City standard No. 100 and as directed by the Depaxtment of Public Works, or bonds shah be posted, as pan of the street improvement plans. $\STAFFRPT~23103VTM.CC 1 1 Sidewalks shall be constructed along both sides of Placer Loudeaonne and Chemin Clinet, or bonds shall be posted, as part of the street improvement plans. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, developer must obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until a NPDES permit is granted or the project is shown to be exempt. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been f'mally established by the date on which developer requests its building permits for the project or any phase thereof, the developer shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been provided to developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer shall post security to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the security shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. Developer understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. S\STAFFRPT\23103VTM.CC 1 2