HomeMy WebLinkAbout98-003 CC ResolutionRESOLUTION NO. 9803
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ~
APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA97-0392 (CONDmONAL
USE PERMI'13 AND DENYING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA97-0392
(CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT- APPEAL), UPHOLDING THE PLANNING
COMMW~SION'S DECISION APPROVING ln_.ANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA97-0392 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT), TO PERMIT THE DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A TOTAL OF 203,300 SQUARE
FE~T OF RET~AIL, RESTAURANT, ARCADES, THEATERS AND SHOPS
AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEb!F. IqTS (HARDSCAPE, PARKING AND
LANDSCAPING) ON 16.$ ACRF~ LOCAT!~I~ WEST OF OLD TOWN
T~VIECULA (100 FF~ET WEST OF PUJOL STREET), 700 FEET SOUTH OF
RIDGE PARK DRIVE/VINCENT MORAGA DRIVE AND EAST OF THE
CITY'S WESTERN BORDER, ~ THE WESTSIDE SPECIFIC PLAN
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 940-310-013, 940-310-044,
940-310-045, 940-310-047, 940-310-048, 940-320-001, 940-320-002, 940-320-003
BASED UI~N THE ANALYSIS CONTAINED IN THE STAFF REPORT
SUBJECT TO ~ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ON FILE IN THE CITY
CLERK'S OFFICE.
WHEREAS, TEV, Inc. filed Planning Application No. PA97-0392 (Conditional Use
Permit) in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA97-0392 (Conditional Use Permit) was
processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application PA97-0392
(Conditional Use Permit) on December 15, 1997, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed
by law, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or in
opposition;
WHEREAS, at the public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the Commission considered all facts relating
to Planning Application No. PA97-0392 (Conditional Use Permi0;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission approved
Planning Application No. PA97-0392 (Conditional Use Permit);
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA97-0392 (Conditional Use Permit- Appeal)
was filed by Albert S. Pratt on December 22, 1997, requesting the City Council deny the approval
Ro~o~\98-03 1
of the Planning Commission and require a subsequent or supplemental Environmental Impact
Report be prepared for the project; and
~, the City Council received a copy of the Commission proceedings and Staff
Report regarding Planning Application No. PA97-0392 (Conditional Use Permit);
NOW, T!~!~'~ORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF T!~!ECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
findings; to wit:
Findings. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following
1. The Project has been the subject of extensive prior environmental review and that
no additional environmental review is needed for the following reasons:
A. On luly 13, 1995, foilowing a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council
of the City of Temecula adopted Resolution No. 95-49 entitled 'A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
95-0031 (FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT) ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT
AND STATF_,MF~NTS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION AND APPROVING THE
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED WEST
OF INTERSTATE 15, EAST OF THE CITY'S WESTERN BORDER, SOUTH OF RANCHO
CALIFORNIA ROAD AND NORTH OF THE SANTA MARGARITA RIVER," certifying the
Environmental Impact Report for the Westaide Specific Plan and Planning Application No. PA95-
0003 (Westside Specific Plan) and changing the zone from R-A-20 (Residential Agricultural -
Twenty Acre Minimum Parcel Size) to S-P (Specific Plan) for the Property.
B. An amendment to the project was approved by the Planning Commission
on March 18, 1996 and by the City Council on March 26, 1996, at which time a finding was
made that no further environmental review was required for the project;
C. The Staff of the Planning ~t has prepared an Initial Environmental
Study 0ES), dated September 17, 1997, analyzing the proposed Development Plan and the prior
environmental actions on the Project, which IES is incorporated herein by this reference.
D. An Initial Environmental Study (IF.S) was conducted to determine if the
project was within the scope of the previously certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for
the Old Town Redevelopment Project (Planning Application No. PA95-0031). Based upon this
analysis, staff determined an Addendum to the previously certified Ell{ be prepared pursuant to
Section 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. The Addendum
was prepared because changes and additions were necessary for the project, but none of the
conditions described in Section 15162 of the Guidelines calling for the preparation of a
subsequent EIR have occurred. Mitigation measures approved with the Old Town Redevelopment
Project (Planning Application No. PA95-0031) will apply to this project.
E. The proposed Project incorporates the provisions of the City's Cmeml Plan,
the Westside Specific Plan, the current zoning reguhtions for the Property, the Mitigation Plan
of Planning Application No. PA95-0031 (Final Environmental Impact Report) and such othe~
ordinances, rules, regulations and official policies governing permitted uses, density, design,
improvement, development fees, and consrotation standards applicable to the Property. All of the
components of the proposed Project which might ffffect the environment were discussed and
analyzed in Planning Application No. PA95-0031 (FEIR). Minor changes to the project have
been reviewed and examined in an Addendum to Planning Application No. PA95-0031 (FEIR).
F. Based on the evidence in the record before it, and after careful consideration
of the evidence and the Addendum, the Planning Commission on October 6, 1997 and the City
Council on November 18, 1997 made findings and determined that neither a Subsequent EIR or
a Supplemental EIR was required pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166, 14 Cal.
Admin. Code Sections 15162 or 15163.
G. The elements of the Project, as described in the Conditional Use Permit
were contemplated and fully and properly analyzed in the EIR certified and approved by the City
Council on July 13, 1995 and the Addendum adopted on November 18, 1997.
H. There have been no subsequent changes to the Project which would require
major revisions of the previous FEIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
I. Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the circumstances
under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous FEIR
due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the
severity of previously identified significant effects.
I. There is no new information since the certification of the previous FEIR
which would show or tend to show that the Project might have one or more significant effects not
discussed in the previous FEIR.
K. There is no new information since the certification of the previous FEIR
which would show or tend to show that significant effects previously examined might be
substantially more severe than shown in the FEIR.
L. There is no new information since the certification of the FFJlR which would
show or tend to show that mitigation measures or altenmfive previously found not to be feasible
would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the
Project.
Rm~\98-03 3
M. Thexe is no new information since the ceaifiol~ of tbe FEIR which would
show or tend to show that mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different
from those analyzed in the previous FEIR would substantially reduce one or more significant
effects on the environment.
Section 2.
findings; to wit:
Finding. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following
1. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the
Development Code. The project meets the Goals and Objectives of the General Plan, is consistent
with the Design Guidelines and Development Standards of the Westside Specific Plan and the
applicable sections of the City's Development Code.
2. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition, and
development of adjacoat uses, buildings, and structures and the proposed conditional use will not
adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures. The project is consistent with the
Design Guidelines and Development Standards of the Westside Specific Plan and the applicable
sections of the City's Development Code. The uses on-site will be compatible with each other in
terms of intensity of use, scale and design. The uses proposed are consistent with the Westside
Specific Plan and are allowed with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. There is adequate
buffering between those uses on-site and those uses which are adjacent (off-site).
3. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to
accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping,
and other development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning
Commission in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. The project is
consistent with the Design Guidelines and Development Standards of the Westside Specific Plan
and the applicable sections of the City's Development Code. The uses on-site will be compatible
with each other in terms of intensity of use, scale and design. The uses proposed are consistent
with the Westside Specific Plan and are allowed with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
There is adequate buffering between those uses on-site and those uses which are adjacent (off-site).
4. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety
and general welfare of the community. The project as designed and conditioned will not be
detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community.
5. The decision to conditionally approve the application is based upon substantial
evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission. The Commission has
received a copy of the Staff Report which includes the necessary analysis, findings and Conditions
of Approval. In addition, the Commission has previously reviewed and recommended approval
of an EIR and Addendum to the EIR, both of which were certified/adopted by the City Council
and which addressed the impacts of this project on the environment and the necessary mitigation
measures.
R~o~\98-03 4
Se~ion 3. C. onditinn~. That the City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves
Planning Application No. PA.97-0392 (Condi~ Use Permit) and denying Planning Application
No. PA97-0392 (Conditional Use Permit - Appeal), upholding the Planning Commission's
decision approving Planning Application No. PA97-0392 (Conditional Use Permit), to permit the
design, construction and operation of a total of 203,300 square feet of retail, restaurant, arcades,
theaters and shops and associated improvements (hardscape, parking and landscaping) on 16.5
acres located west of Old Town Temecuta (100 feet west of Pujol Street), 700 feet south of Ridge
Park Drive/Vincent Moraga Drive and east of the City's western border, within the Westside
Specific Plan and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 940-310-013, 940-310-0~, 940-310-045, 940-
310-047, 940-310-048, 940-320-001, 940-320-002, 940-320-003 based upon the analysis
contained in the Staff Report and subject to the Conditions of Approval set forth on Exhibit A,
attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference and made a part hereof.
Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula, at a
regular meeting held on the 13th day of January, 1998.
ATTEST:
[SEAL]
R~sos~8-03 5
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the
foregoing Resolution No. 98-03 was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Temecula on the 13th day of ~anuary, 1998, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Comerchero, Ford, Lindemans, Roberts
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone
Greek, M~AE
'C-ity-~lerk
Re~o~\984B 6
EXHIBIT A
ON FILE IN THE CITY CLERKS OFFICE