HomeMy WebLinkAbout04222020 PC Agenda - SpecialIn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting,
please contact the office of the City Clerk (951) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City
to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35 .102.35.104 ADA Title II].
AGENDA
TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
41000 MAIN STREET
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
APRIL 22, 2020 - 6:00 PM
IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THE MEETING
This meeting is being conducted utilizing teleconferencing and electronic means consistent with State of
California Executive Order N-29-20 dated March 17, 2020, regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. In
accordance with this order, the public may view/listen to the meeting online at https://temeculaca.gov/tv
and not in person at City Hall.
Submission of Public Comments: For those wishing to make public comments at this meeting, please
submit your comments by email to the Principal Management Analyst at lynn .lehner@temeculaca.gov.
Email comments on matters not on the agenda must be submitted prior to the Public Comments item
being called. Email comments on an agenda item must be submitted prior to the close of public
comments on that agenda item. All email comments shall be subject to the same rules as would
otherwise govern speaker comments at noticed meetings. Electronic comments may only be submitted
via email and comments via text and social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) will not be accepted .
Reading of Public Comments: Email comments will be read into the record, provided that the reading
shall not exceed three (3) minutes, or such other time as the Planning Commission may provide,
consistent with the time limit for speakers at noticed meetings .
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Turley-Trejo
FLAG SALUTE: Commissioner Watts
ROLL CALL: Guerriero, Telesio, Turley-Trejo, Watts, Youmans
PUBLIC COMMENT
A total of 30 minutes is provided for members of the public to address the Planning Commission on
items that are listed on the agenda. Each speaker is limited to three minutes. For submission and
reading of public comments into the record see above-referenced notice .
CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one
roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless members of the Planning Commission
Page 1
Planning Commission Agenda April 22, 2020
request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action .
1.Minutes
Approve the Action Minutes of February 19, 2020Recommendation:
ITEM 1
Action Minutes
Attachments:
PUBLIC HEARING
Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before a public hearing or may
appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of the project(s) at the time of the
hearing. If you challenge any of the project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues
you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the
Commission Secretary at, or prior to, the public hearing. Any person dissatisfied with a decision of the
Planning Commission may file an appeal of the Commission's decision. Said appeal must be filed
within fifteen (15) calendar days after service of written notice of the decision. The appeal must be filed
on the appropriate Community Development Department form and be accompanied by the appropriate
filing fee.
2.Planning Application No. PA19-1307, a Modification to a Development Plan for the
construction of an approximately 6,585 square-foot two-story building on the rear portion of the
existing Temecula Hyundai site to include new service bays, parts storage, and offices, located at
27430 Ynez Road, Scott Cooper
Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA19-1307, A MODIFICATION TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 6,585
SQUARE-FOOT TWO-STORY BUILDING ON THE REAR PORTION
OF THE EXISTING TEMECULA HYUNDAI SITE TO INCLUDE
NEW SERVICE BAYS, PARTS STORAGE, AND OFFICES,
LOCATED AT 27430 YNEZ ROAD, AND MAKING A FINDING OF
EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
Recommendation:
ITEM 2.pdf
Staff Report
Aerial Map
Plan Reductions
PC Resolution
Exhibit A - Draft Conditions of Approval
Notice of Exemption
Notice of Public Hearing
Attachments:
Page 2
Planning Commission Agenda April 22, 2020
3.Long Range Project Number LR20-0279, an Amendment to Chapter 17.21 Affordable Housing
Overlay Zoning District to Clarify Timing of the Required Cultural Resources Treatment
Agreement and to Require Affordable Housing Units to be Constructed Concurrently With
Market Rate Housing Units and Integrated Among Market Rate Units, Dale West
Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED, “AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE
17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO AMEND CHAPTER
17.21 REGARDING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY
ZONE, AND MAKING THE DETERMINATION THAT THE
PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS EXEMPT FROM FURTHER
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES
SECTION 15061(B)(3)”
Recommendation:
ITEM 3.pdf
Staff Report
Planning Commission Resolution
Exhibit A - Draft City Council Ordinance
Notice of Public Hearing
Attachments:
4.Long Range Project Number LR18-1506. To conform with State Law Senate Bill (“SB”) 743 by
replacing vehicular Level of Service (LOS) with Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) transportation
analysis metric under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO ADOPT THE
CEQA TRANSPORTATION VMT ANALYSIS GUIDELINES FOR
PURPOSES OF ANALYZING TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS
UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
(“CEQA”), AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER
CEQA (LONG RANGE PLANNING PROJECT NO. LR18-1506)
Recommendation:
Page 3
Planning Commission Agenda April 22, 2020
ITEM 4.pdf
Staff Report
CEQA Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines
Planning Commission Resolution
Exhibit A - City Council Resolution
Notice of Public Hearing
Attachments:
COMMISSIONER REPORTS
COMMISSION SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REPORT
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission will be held on Wednesday, May 6, 2020, at 6:00
p.m., in the Council Chambers located at 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California.
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
Due to the closure of City Hall, the library and other city facilities due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the full
agenda packet (Including staff reports and any supplemental material available after the original posting of the
agenda), will only be available for viewing on the City’s website at
https://temeculaca.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx at least 72 hours prior to meeting. If you have questions regarding
an item on the agenda, please contact the Community Development Department at (951) 694-6400.
Page 4
ITEM 1
ACTION MINUTES
TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
41000 MAIN STREET
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
FEBRUARY 19, 2020 - 6:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER at 6:00 pm: Chairperson Turley-Trejo
FLAG SALUTE: Commissioner Youmans
ROLL CALL: Telesio, Turley-Trejo, Watts, and Youmans
ABSENT: Guerriero
PUBLIC COMMENT - None
CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one
roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless members of the Planning Commission
request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action.
1. Minutes
Recommendation: Approve the Action Minutes of February 5, 2020
Approved the Action Minutes of February 5, 2020 (4-0-1, Guerriero Absent): Motion by
Youmans, Second by Watts. The vote reflected unanimous approval with Guerriero absent.
At this time the order of the agenda was rearranged and the Commission considered Agenda Item Nos. 7
through 10 (Public Hearing); and will come back to Agenda Item Nos. 2 through 4 (Business), and 5
and 6 (Public Hearing).
PUBLIC HEARING
7. Planning Application No. PA19-1016, Home Product Review (Development Plan) for Planning
Area 14 of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan to allow for three (3) unique detached
single-family plans with three (3) architectural styles consisting of 86 lots, Scott Cooper
Recommendation: Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2020-02
Planning Commission Action Minutes February 19, 2020
Page 2
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA19-1016, HOME PRODUCT REVIEW (DEVELOPMENT PLAN)
FOR PLANNING AREA 14 OF THE RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC
PLAN TO ALLOW FOR THREE (3) UNIQUE DETACHED
SINGLE-FAMILY PLANS WITH THREE (3) ARCHITECTURAL
STYLES CONSISTING OF 86 LOTS.
8. Planning Application No. PA19-1017, Home Product Review (Development Plan) for Planning
Area 16A of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan to allow for four (4) unique detached
single-family plans with three (3) architectural styles consisting of 64 lots, Scott Cooper
Recommendation: Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2020-03
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICAITON NO.
PA19-1017, HOME PRODUCT REVIEW (DEVELOPMENT PLAN)
FOR PLANNING AREA 16A OF THE RORIPAUGH RANCH
SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW FOR FOUR (4) UNIQUE DETACHED
SINGLE-FAMILY PLANS WITH THREE (3) ARCHITECTURAL
STYLES CONSISTING OF 64 LOTS
9. Planning Application No. PA19-1018, Home Product Review (Development Plan) for Planning
Area 16B of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan to allow for four (4) unique detached
single-family plans with three (3) architectural styles consisting of 45 lots, Scott Cooper
Recommendation: Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2020-04
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA19-1018, HOME PRODUCT REVIEW (DEVELOPMENT PLAN)
FOR PLANNING AREA 16B OF THE RORIPAUGH RANCH
SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW FOR FOUR (4) UNIQUE DETACHED
SINGLE-FAMILY PLANS WITH THREE (3) ARCHITECTURAL
STYLES CONSISTING OF 45 LOTS
10. Planning Application No. PA19-1019, Home Product Review (Development Plan) for Planning
Area 31B of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan to allow for three (3) unique detached
single-family plans with three (3) architectural styles consisting of 51 lots, Scott Cooper
Recommendation: Adopt a resolution entitled:
Planning Commission Action Minutes February 19, 2020
Page 3
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2020-05
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA19-1019, HOME PRODUCT REVIEW (DEVELOPMENT PLAN)
FOR PLANNING AREA 31B OF THE RORIPAUGH RANCH
SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW FOR THREE (3) UNIQUE DETACHED
SINGLE-FAMILY PLANS WITH THREE (3) ARCHITECTURAL
STYLES CONSISTING OF 51 LOTS
Approved the Staff Recommendation to approve Agenda Items 7 through 10, Planning
Application Nos. PA19-1016, PA19-1017, PA19-1018 and PA19-1019 with Conditions of
Approval as modified (4-0-1, Guerriero Absent): Motion by Youmans, Second by Watts. The
vote reflected unanimous approval with Guerriero absent.
The following items were taken out of order as part of the amended agenda. At this time the Commission
considered Agenda Item Nos. 2, 3, and 4 (Business); see page 1.
BUSINESS
2. Long Range Project Numbers LR17-1757 and LR18-1620, 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs
Assessment and 2021-2029 Housing Element Update, Dale West
Recommendation: Receive and File
Approved the Staff Recommendation to Receive and File as presented.
3. General Plan Consistency Review for an Amendment to the Fiscal Year 2020-24 Capital
Improvement Program (LR20-0258), Sara Toma
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the proposed
amendment to the Fiscal Years 2020-24 Capital Improvement Program
(CIP) and make a determination that the proposed amendment is in
conformance with the adopted City of Temecula General Plan
Approved the Staff Recommendation as presented (4-0-1, Guerriero Absent): Motion by
Youmans, Second by Watts. The vote reflected unanimous approval with Guerriero absent.
4. Director's Hearing Summary Report
Recommendation: Receive and File Director's Hearing Summary Report
Approved the Staff Recommendation (4-0-1, Guerriero Absent): Motion by Youmans, Second by
Telesio. The vote reflected unanimous approval with Guerriero absent.
Planning Commission Action Minutes February 19, 2020
Page 4
The following items were taken out of order as part of the amended agenda. At this time the Commission
considered to return to Agenda Item Nos. 5 and 6 (Public Hearing); see page 1.
PUBLIC HEARING
5. Long Range Project Number LR19-1596, an Amendment to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal
Code Regulating Accessory Dwelling Units, Dale West/Matt Peters
Recommendation: Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2020-06
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED “AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE
17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO DELETE CERTAIN
SUBSECTIONS OF SECTION 17.06.050 PERTAINING TO
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, ESTABLISHING A NEW
CHAPTER 17.23 PERTAINING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING
UNITS, AMENDING TABLE 17.24.040 REGARDING PARKING
REQUIREMENTS, AND FINDING THE ORDINANCE TO BE
EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT.”
Approved the Staff Recommendation (4-0-1, Guerriero Absent): Motion by Watts, Second by
Youmans. The vote reflected unanimous approval with Guerriero absent.
6. Long Range Project Number LR19-1597, an Ordinance revising the Temecula Municipal Code
to conform with Density Bonus Law under the California Government Code, Dale West/Matt
Peters
Recommendation: Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2020-07
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED, “AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE
17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO REVISE
REGULATIONS TO CONFORM WITH DENSITY BONUS LAW
(CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65915), AND
FINDING THE ORDINANCE TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT."
Planning Commission Action Minutes February 19, 2020
Page 5
Approved the Staff Recommendation (4-0-1, Guerriero Absent): Motion by Youmans, Second by
Telesio. The vote reflected unanimous approval with Guerriero absent.
COMMISSIONER REPORTS
COMMISSION SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REPORT
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:20 p.m., the Planning Commission meeting was formally adjourned to the next regular meeting of
the Planning Commission to be held on Wednesday, March 4, 2020, at 6:00 p.m., in the Council
Chambers located at 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California.
_________________________________________
Lanae Turley-Trejo, Chairperson
__________________________________________
Luke Watson, Director of Community Development
ITEM 2
1
STAFF REPORT – PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE OF MEETING: April 22, 2020
TO: Planning Commission Chairperson and members of the Planning
Commission
FROM: Luke Watson, Director of Community Development
PREPARED BY: Scott Cooper, Case Planner
PROJECT
SUMMARY:
Planning Application No. PA19-1307, a Modification to a
Development Plan for the construction of an approximately 6,585
square-foot two-story building on the rear portion of the existing
Temecula Hyundai site to include new service bays, parts storage,
and offices, located at 27430 Ynez Road
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution approving the project subject to Conditions of
Approval
CEQA: Categorically Exempt
Section 15332, Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects
PROJECT DATA SUMMARY
Name of Applicant: Armen Kazanchyan
General Plan
Designation:
Service Commercial (SC)
Zoning Designation: Service Commercial (SC)
Existing Conditions/
Land Use:
Site: Parking Lot / Service Commercial (SC)
North: Existing Multi-Family Residential Apartments/High Density
Residential (H)
South: Ynez Road/Existing Auto Dealership/Service Commercial (SC)
East: Existing Restaurant/Community Commercial (CC)
West: Existing Auto Dealership/Service Commercial (SC)
2
Existing/Proposed Min/Max Allowable or Required
Lot Area: 3.62 Acres 0.92 Acres Minimum
Total Floor Area/Ratio: 19,410 Square Feet of
Proposed & Existing /
12.3%
.30 Maximum
Parking Required/Provided: 200 Parking Spaces 94 Parking Spaces Minimum
BACKGROUND SUMMARY
On May 6, 2015, the City of Temecula Planning Commission approved a Modification to a
Development Plan for the construction of an approximately 6,611 square-foot two-story building
on the rear portion of the existing Temecula Hyundai site to include new service bays, parts
storage, and offices. That approval expired without any extensions of time submitted or
approved.
On September 26, 2019, Armen Kazanchyan submitted Planning Application PA19-1307, a
Modification to a Development Plan for the construction of an approximately 6,585 square-foot
two-story building on the rear portion of the existing Temecula Hyundai site to include new
service bays, parts storage, and offices, located at 27430 Ynez Road. Automobile repair service
shops are a permitted use in the Service Commercial (SC) zone. The auto dealership was
originally approved under PA99-0378 on December 15, 1999 to construct a 12,825-square-foot
automobile dealership.
Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all concerns have been addressed, and the
applicant concurs with the recommended Conditions of Approval.
ANALYSIS
Site Plan
The project is located in the Service Commercial (SC) district at 27430 Ynez Road on a
developed lot. The first floor of the building would contain eight service bays, a restroom, and a
room for the storage of parts. The second floor would contain offices, restroom, conference
room, storage, and a break room.
There are four points of vehicular access to the project site with limited right in/right out access
off of Ynez Road, access to the property to the west through a driveway, access from the north
through an alley that exits onto Solana Way, and access to the east through an alley as well that
exits onto Ynez Road. The project would add a roof to an existing trash enclosure. The proposed
parking on the site exceeds the Development Code requirements.
Architecture
The architectural design of the building is in conformance with the existing building on the
project site. The project incorporates corrugated metal siding, grey concrete masonry unit wall,
3
grey painted sheet metal, white and grey exterior plaster sand finish, and dual pane insulated
windows. The front elevation would also contain four roll-up service bay doors.
Landscaping
The previous approved development of the commercial center was approved with 17.9% of the
area landscaped. Through a previously approved lot line adjustment (PA14-0206), and the
development of the proposed project, the landscaping for the project site has increased to 19.2%.
While there are not any minimum landscape requirements for automobile dealerships , the project
does meet the standards described in Section 17.10.020.D of the City of Temecula Development
Code, which includes landscaping at vehicle display areas, on street frontages, and perimeter
landscape buffers.
LEGAL NOTICING REQUIREMENTS
The notice of the public hearing was published in the U-T San Diego on March 5, 2020, and
April 9, 2020 and mailed to the property owners within 600-foot radius.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project has been
deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review (Section 15332, Class 32,
In-Fill Development Projects).
(a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable
general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
The project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designation because automobile
repair service shops are an allowable use within the Service Commercial district. The project
also meets all applicable General Plan and Zoning policies and regulations.
(b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five
acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.
The project is located within City limits and is located on a developed site containing an
automobile dealership that is less than five acres. The proposed project is substantially
surrounded by commercial development, residential development, and major roadways.
(c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
The proposed project is located on the portion of a fully developed project site that currently
contains parking, asphalt, and a landscape median which contains no value as habitat for
endangered, rare or threatened. The project site is not located within a Multi Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (MSHCP) criteria cell.
(d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air
quality, or water quality.
4
The proposed project was required to prepare a Project-Specific Water Quality Management
Plan (WQMP) that was reviewed and conceptually accepted for entitlement by City Staff as the
WQMP meets the requirements of the City of Temecula. A traffic analysis was not required as
part of this project and the proposed use is allowed within the Service Commercial zoning
district. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to result in any significant effects relating to
traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality as the project, as conditioned, is an allowed use per
the City of Temecula General Plan.
(e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
The project site is surrounded by development and is able to be serviced by all required utilities
and public services.
FINDINGS
Modification (Development Code Section 17.05.010.F)
The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable
requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City.
Automobile repair service shops, as conditioned, are an allowable use within the Service
Commercial zone. Therefore, the use will be consistent with the General Plan for Temecula as
well as the requirements for State law and other Ordinances of the City.
The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety,
and general welfare.
The overall design of the project, including the site, building, parking, circulation and other
associated site improvements, is consistent with, and intended to protect the health and safety of
those working and living in an around the site as the project is consistent with the General Plan,
City Wide Design Guidelines, and Development Code. The project has been reviewed for, and
as conditioned, has been found to be consistent with all applicable policies, guidelines,
standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and
function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare.
ATTACHMENTS 1. Aerial Map
2. Plan Reductions
3. PC Resolution
4. Exhibit A - Draft Conditions of Approval
5. Notice of Exemption
6. Notice of Public Hearing
(N) 2 STORY
STRUCTURE
PRO
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEEXISTING HYUNDAI
DEALERSHIP BUILDING
12,825 S.F.
NEW SERVICE BUILDING
PROPERTY OWNER:
Bob Nouri
BTAA Property Investment II, LLC
6400 Christie Ave, #5405
Emeryville, CA 94608
JOB ADDRESS:
TEMECULA HYUNDAI
27430 YNEZ ROAD
TEMECULA , CA 92591
3786 LA CRESCENTA AVE, SUITE 201
GLENDALE, CA 91208
T: 818-395-2686
ARCHITECT OF RECORD:
ARMEN KAZANCHYAN
KAZANCHYANDESIGN
File Location: S:\Arch-Automotive\Arch-Hyundai\2018-001 - Temecula Hyundai\Drawings\PLANNING\A-101 Site Plan.dwg Last Saved: February 18, 2020, by Kazanchyan Design Plotted: Tuesday, February 18, 2020 2:48:06 PM by KD01
PA19-13071
LEGEND:
A-101
SITE PLAN
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
VICINITY MAP:
PROJECT SITE
PROJECT / BUILDING INFO:
SCOPE OF WORK:
PARKING CALCULATION:
SHEET INDEX:
SHEET NO. SHEET TITLE
ISSUE (SEE BOTTOM OF
SHEET)
ARCHITECTURAL
2PROPERTY EASEMENTS
NEW SERVICE BUILDING
PROPERTY OWNER:
Bob Nouri
BTAA Property Investment II, LLC
6400 Christie Ave, #5405
Emeryville, CA 94608
JOB ADDRESS:
TEMECULA HYUNDAI
27430 YNEZ ROAD
TEMECULA , CA 92591
3786 LA CRESCENTA AVE, SUITE 201
GLENDALE, CA 91208
T: 818-395-2686
ARCHITECT OF RECORD:
ARMEN KAZANCHYAN
KAZANCHYANDESIGN
File Location: S:\Arch-Automotive\Arch-Hyundai\2018-001 - Temecula Hyundai\Drawings\PLANNING\A-102 First Floor Plan.dwg Last Saved: February 18, 2020, by Kazanchyan Design Plotted: Tuesday, February 18, 2020 12:45:55 PM by KD01
PA19-1307
A-102
FLOOR PLAN
1
NET FLOOR AREA (FIRST FLOOR):
TOTAL:
GROSS FLOOR AREA (FIRST FLOOR):
TOTAL:3,049 S.F.
ZONING CODE AREAS:
GROSS FLOOR AREA (FIRST FLOOR):
TOTAL:2,827 S.F.
BUILDING CODE AREA:
PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN
LEGEND:KEYNOTES:
SHOWROOM
B 2,400 24100
TRAVEL DISTANCE
160'
DOOR
13
32
90
Z-1
SHOWROOM
S 1,418 5300
SHOWROOM
B 1,149 11100
TRAVEL DISTANCE
74'
TRAVEL DISTANCE
74'
Z-1 Z-2
LEGEND:KEYNOTES:
SHOWROOM
B 2,400 24100
TRAVEL DISTANCE
160'
DOOR
13
32
90
Z-1
A-103
FLOOR PLAN
1
NEW SERVICE BUILDING
PROPERTY OWNER:
Bob Nouri
BTAA Property Investment II, LLC
6400 Christie Ave, #5405
Emeryville, CA 94608
JOB ADDRESS:
TEMECULA HYUNDAI
27430 YNEZ ROAD
TEMECULA , CA 92591
3786 LA CRESCENTA AVE, SUITE 201
GLENDALE, CA 91208
T: 818-395-2686
ARCHITECT OF RECORD:
ARMEN KAZANCHYAN
KAZANCHYANDESIGN
File Location: S:\Arch-Automotive\Arch-Hyundai\2018-001 - Temecula Hyundai\Drawings\PLANNING\A-103 Second Floor Plan.dwg Last Saved: February 18, 2020, by Kazanchyan Design Plotted: Tuesday, February 18, 2020 12:46:02 PM by KD01
PA19-1307
PLUMBING FIXTURE TABULATION:
B- OCCUPANCY - OFFICES
PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN
NET FLOOR AREA (FIRST FLOOR):
TOTAL:
GROSS FLOOR AREA (FIRST FLOOR):
TOTAL:3,536 S.F.
ZONING CODE AREAS:
GROSS FLOOR AREA (FIRST FLOOR):
TOTAL:2,926 S.F.
BUILDING CODE AREA:
OCCUPANT LOAD CALCULATION:
ZONE 1
ROOM AREA
O.L.
FACTOR
OCCUPAN
TS
# OF EXITS
REQ'D
/PROV.
OPEN OFFICES; BREAK
ROOM
ZONE 2
ROOM AREA
O.L.
FACTOR
OCCUPAN
TS
# OF EXITS
REQ'D
/PROV.
STORAGE
LEGEND:
®
NEW SERVICE BUILDING
PROPERTY OWNER:
Bob Nouri
BTAA Property Investment II, LLC
6400 Christie Ave, #5405
Emeryville, CA 94608
JOB ADDRESS:
TEMECULA HYUNDAI
27430 YNEZ ROAD
TEMECULA , CA 92591
3786 LA CRESCENTA AVE, SUITE 201
GLENDALE, CA 91208
T: 818-395-2686
ARCHITECT OF RECORD:
ARMEN KAZANCHYAN
KAZANCHYANDESIGN
File Location: S:\Arch-Automotive\Arch-Hyundai\2018-001 - Temecula Hyundai\Drawings\PLANNING\A-104 Roof Plan.dwg Last Saved: February 18, 2020, by Kazanchyan Design Plotted: Tuesday, February 18, 2020 12:46:09 PM by KD01
PA19-13071
A-104
ROOF PLAN
PROPOSED ROOF PLAN
EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE:
TAG HATCH MATERIAL COLOR MANF. / SUPPLIER
NEW SERVICE BUILDING
PROPERTY OWNER:
Bob Nouri
BTAA Property Investment II, LLC
6400 Christie Ave, #5405
Emeryville, CA 94608
JOB ADDRESS:
TEMECULA HYUNDAI
27430 YNEZ ROAD
TEMECULA , CA 92591
3786 LA CRESCENTA AVE, SUITE 201
GLENDALE, CA 91208
T: 818-395-2686
ARCHITECT OF RECORD:
ARMEN KAZANCHYAN
KAZANCHYANDESIGN
File Location: S:\Arch-Automotive\Arch-Hyundai\2018-001 - Temecula Hyundai\Drawings\PLANNING\A-201 Elevations.dwg Last Saved: February 18, 2020, by Kazanchyan Design Plotted: Tuesday, February 18, 2020 12:46:49 PM by KD01
PA19-1307
2
A-201
3
1
4
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE:
TAG HATCH MATERIAL COLOR MANF. / SUPPLIER
NORTH ELEVATION
SOUTH ELEVATION
WEST ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION
NEW SERVICE BUILDING
PROPERTY OWNER:
Bob Nouri
BTAA Property Investment II, LLC
6400 Christie Ave, #5405
Emeryville, CA 94608
JOB ADDRESS:
TEMECULA HYUNDAI
27430 YNEZ ROAD
TEMECULA , CA 92591
3786 LA CRESCENTA AVE, SUITE 201
GLENDALE, CA 91208
T: 818-395-2686
ARCHITECT OF RECORD:
ARMEN KAZANCHYAN
KAZANCHYANDESIGN
File Location: S:\Arch-Automotive\Arch-Hyundai\2018-001 - Temecula Hyundai\Drawings\PLANNING\A-301 Sections.dwg Last Saved: February 18, 2020, by Kazanchyan Design Plotted: Tuesday, February 18, 2020 12:47:20 PM by KD01
PA19-1307
A-301
2
1
3
SECTIONS
PROPOSED SECTION A
PROPOSED SECTION C PROPOSED SECTION B
A-401
3B
3A
A-401
A-401
3C
2TRASH ENCLOSURE FLOOR PLAN
3ELEVATIONS
NEW SERVICE BUILDING
PROPERTY OWNER:
Bob Nouri
BTAA Property Investment II, LLC
6400 Christie Ave, #5405
Emeryville, CA 94608
JOB ADDRESS:
TEMECULA HYUNDAI
27430 YNEZ ROAD
TEMECULA , CA 92591
3786 LA CRESCENTA AVE, SUITE 201
GLENDALE, CA 91208
T: 818-395-2686
ARCHITECT OF RECORD:
ARMEN KAZANCHYAN
KAZANCHYANDESIGN
File Location: S:\Arch-Automotive\Arch-Hyundai\2018-001 - Temecula Hyundai\Drawings\PLANNING\A-401 Trash Enclosure.dwg Last Saved: February 18, 2020, by Kazanchyan Design Plotted: Tuesday, February 18, 2020 12:47:26 PM by KD01
PA19-1307
1TRASH ENCLOSURE ROOF PLAN
4
A-401
ENLARGED TRASH ENCLOSURE
NEW SERVICE BUILDINGPROPERTY OWNER:Bob NouriBTAA Property Investment II, LLC6400 Christie Ave, #5405Emeryville, CA 94608JOB ADDRESS:TEMECULA HYUNDAI27430 YNEZ ROADTEMECULA , CA 925913786 LA CRESCENTA AVE, SUITE 201GLENDALE, CA 91208T: 818-395-2686ARCHITECT OF RECORD:ARMEN KAZANCHYANKAZANCHYANDESIGNFile Location: S:\Arch-Automotive\Arch-Hyundai\2018-001 - Temecula Hyundai\Drawings\PLANNING\A-501 + Door & Window Schedule.dwg Last Saved: February 18, 2020, by Kazanchyan Design Plotted: Tuesday, February 18, 2020 12:47:29 PM by KD01PA19-1307FRAMETHICKNESS DIMENSIONSREMARKSDOORTYPE
FRAME
TYPE
FRAME
MATERIAL
FRAME
FINISH
SCREEN
HEIGHTWIDTHSINGLE/PAIRDOORMATERIALDOOR
FINISH DOORDOOR SCHEDULE ABBREVIATIONS:ALUM. - ALUMINUMANOD. - ANODIZEDCL. ANOD. - CLEAR ANODIZEDD. GLSS. - DUAL GLASSGLSS. - GLASSH.M. - HOLLOW METALLAM. - PLASTIC LAMINATEM-SLDR. - MULTI-SLIDERMTL. - METALPNT. - PAINTT.D. GLSS - TEMPERED DUAL GLASSSC - SOLID CORES.S. - STAINLESS STEEL #4S.G. - SAFETY GLAZING MATERIALT. - TEMPERED GLASSWD. - WOODCORE
HEAD
TAG
HARDWAREHARDWARE
THRESHOLD
GLASS LOCATIONDETAILSJAMBROOM NUMBER - ROOM NAMEFLOOR DOOR SCHEDULE:DOOR SCHEDULE NOTES:1DOOR TYPESA-501DOOR SCHEDULEFIRSTSECOND
TTTTNEW SERVICE BUILDINGPROPERTY OWNER:Bob NouriBTAA Property Investment II, LLC6400 Christie Ave, #5405Emeryville, CA 94608JOB ADDRESS:TEMECULA HYUNDAI27430 YNEZ ROADTEMECULA , CA 925913786 LA CRESCENTA AVE, SUITE 201GLENDALE, CA 91208T: 818-395-2686ARCHITECT OF RECORD:ARMEN KAZANCHYANKAZANCHYANDESIGNFile Location: S:\Arch-Automotive\Arch-Hyundai\2018-001 - Temecula Hyundai\Drawings\PLANNING\A-501 + Door & Window Schedule.dwg Last Saved: February 18, 2020, by Kazanchyan Design Plotted: Tuesday, February 18, 2020 12:47:30 PM by KD01PA19-1307WINDOW SCHEDULE:DIMENSIONSREMARKS(SEE REMARK NOTES BELOW)HEIGHTWIDTH
WINDOW
MATERIAL
WINDOW
FINISH WINDOWSHGC
TAG
HEAD
HEIGHT,
A.F.SLAB
VT
GLASS LOCATIONGLASS SPEC.U-FACTOR
OPERATION
SCREENROOM NUMBER - ROOM NAMEFLOORSECONDWINDOWTYPE
1WINDOW TYPESFIRST
A-502WINDOW SCHEDULEWINDOW SCHEDULE NOTES:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA19-1307, A MODIFICATION TO A
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN
APPROXIMATELY 6,585 SQUARE-FOOT TWO-STORY
BUILDING ON THE REAR PORTION OF THE EXISTING
TEMECULA HYUNDAI SITE TO INCLUDE NEW SERVICE
BAYS, PARTS STORAGE, AND OFFICES, LOCATED AT
27430 YNEZ ROAD, AND MAKING A FINDING OF
EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula
does hereby find, determine and declare that:
A. On September 26, 2019, Armen Kazanchyan filed Planning Application No. PA19-
1307 a Modification to a Development Plan in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula
General Plan and Development Code.
B. The Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law.
C. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and
environmental review on April 22, 2020, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at
which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in
support or in opposition to this matter.
D. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration
of the testimony, the Planning Commission approved Planning Application No. PA19-1307,
subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder.
E. All legal preconditions to the adoption of the Resolution have occurred.
Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the
Modification to the Development Application hereby finds, determines and declares that:
Modification, Development Code Section 17.05.010.F
A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with
all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City;
Automobile repair service shops, as conditioned, are an allowable use within the Service
Commercial zone. Therefore the use will be consistent with the General Plan for Temecula
as well as the requirements for State law and other Ordinances of the City.
B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public
health, safety, and general welfare;
The overall design of the project, including the site, building, parking, circulation and
other associated site improvements, is consistent with, and intended to protect the health
and safety of those working and living in an around the site as the project is consistent with
the General Plan, City Wide Design Guidelines, and Development Code. The project has
been reviewed for, and as conditioned, has been found to be consistent with all applicable
policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development
will be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety, and
welfare.
Section 3. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the
following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the
Modification:
A. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project
has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review (Section 15332,
In-Fill Development Projects);
(a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general
plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
The project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designation because automobile repair
service shops are an allowable use within the Service Commercial district. The project also meets
all applicable General Plan and Zoning policies and regulations.
(b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres
substantially surrounded by urban uses.
The project is located within City limits and is located on a developed site containing an
automobile dealership that is less than five acres. The proposed project is substantially
surrounded by commercial development, residential development, and major roadways.
(c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
The proposed project is located on the portion of a fully developed project site that currently
contains parking, asphalt, and a landscape median which contains no value as habitat for
endangered, rare or threatened. The project site is not located within a Multi Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (MSHCP) criteria cell.
(d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air
quality, or water quality.
The proposed project was required to prepare a Project-Specific Water Quality Management Plan
(WQMP) that was reviewed and conceptually accepted for entitlement by City Staff as the WQMP
meets the requirements of the City of Temecula. A traffic analysis was not required as part of this
project and the proposed use is allowed within the Service Commercial zoning district. Therefore,
the project is not anticipated to result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality,
or water quality as the project, as conditioned, is an allowed use per the City of Temecula General
Plan.
(e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
The project site is surrounded by development and is able to be serviced by all required utilities
and public services.
Section 4. Conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approves
Planning Application No. PA19-1307, a Modification to a Development Plan for the construction
of an approximately 6,585 square-foot two-story building on the rear portion of the existing
Temecula Hyundai site to include new service bays, parts storage, and offices, located at 27430
Ynez Road, and makes a finding of exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), subject to the Conditions of Approval set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and
incorporated herein by this reference.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission
this 22nd day of April, 2020.
Lanae Turley-Trejo, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Luke Watson
Secretary
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Luke Watson, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that t he
forgoing PC Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of
the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 22nd day of April, 2020, by the
following vote:
AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Luke Watson
Secretary
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No.:
Project Description:
PA19-1307
A Modification to a Development Plan for the construction of an
approximately 6,585 square-foot two-story building on the rear portion of the
existing Temecula Hyundai site to include new service bays, parts storage,
and offices, located at 27430 Ynez Road.
Assessor's Parcel No.: 921-290-014
Commercial MSHCP Category:
Retail Commercial
DIF Category:
TUMF Category:
Quimby Category:
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
Retail Commercial
N/A (Non-Residential Project)
April 22, 2020
April 22, 2023
New Street In-lieu of Fee: N/A (Project not located in Uptown Temecula Specific Plan Area)
PLANNING DIVISION
Within 48 Hours of the Approval
Filing Notice of Exemption. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Division a
cashiers check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Fifty
Dollars ($50.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of
Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of
Regulations Section 15062. If within said 48-hour period the applicant/ developer has not
delivered to the Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project
granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish and Wildlife Code Section
711.4(c)).
1.
General Requirements
Indemnification of the City. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this
condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City and its
attorneys from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the City
to attack, set aside, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any
action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof,
advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of
the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be deemed for purposes of this
condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed
officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall
promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which
this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The
City reserves the right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of
the City and its citizens in regards to such defense.
2.
Expiration. This approval shall be used within three years of the approval date; otherwise, it
shall become null and void. Use means the beginning of substantial construction
contemplated by this approval within the three year period, which is thereafter diligently
pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this
approval, or use of a property in conformance with a Conditional Use Permit.
3.
Ti me Extension. The Director of Community Development may, upon an application being
filed prior to expiration, and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to three extensions of
time, one year at a time.
4.
Conformance with Approved Plans. The development of the premises shall substantially
conform to the approved site plan and elevations contained on file with the Planning Division.
5.
Signage Permits. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. 6.
Water Quality and Drainage. Other than stormwater, it is illegal to allow liquids, gels, powders,
sediment, fertilizers, landscape debris, and waste from entering the storm drain system or
from leaving the property. To ensure compliance with this Condition of Approval:
a. Spills and leaks shall be cleaned up immediately.
b. Do not hose down parking areas, sidewalks, alleys, or gutters.
c. Ensure that all materials and products stored outside are protected from rain.
d. Ensure all trash bins are covered at all times.
7.
Materials and Colors. The Conditions of Approval specified in this resolution, to the extent
specific items, materials, equipment, techniques, finishes or similar matters are specified, shall
be deemed satisfied by City staff's prior approval of the use or utilization of an item, material,
equipment, finish or technique that City staff determines to be the substantial equivalent of
that required by the Conditions of Approval. Staff may elect to reject the request to substitute,
in which case the real party in interest may appeal, after payment of the regular cost of an
appeal, the decision to the Planning Commission for its decision.
Exterior Walls- Plaster Sand Finish Omega White (Omega Products Int)
Exterior Walls- Plaster Sand Finish Legendary Grey (Omega Products Int –
D36369)
Exterior Walls- CMU Brick Grey
Exterior Walls- Corrugated Metal Siding Mistique Plus (Metal Sales – W31)
Accent Exterior Walls- Painted Sheet Metal Legendary Grey (CRL US
D-36369)
Dual Pane Insulated Glass 6mm Solarban 60 over Clear + 1/2”
Air + 6mm Clear/Black Anodized
Frame
8.
Modifications or Revisions. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or
revisions to the approval of this project.
9.
Trash Enclosures. The trash enclosures shall be large enough to accommodate a recycling
bin, as well as regular solid waste containers.
10.
Trash Enclosures. Trash enclosures shall be provided to house all trash receptacles utilized
on the site. These shall be clearly labeled on the site plan.
11.
Covered Trash Enclosures. All trash enclosures on site shall include a solid cover and the
construction plans shall include all details of the trash enclosures, including the solid cover.
12.
Previous Conditions of Approval. All previous Conditions of Approval from PA99-0378 shall
remain in full effect unless superseded herein.
13.
Construction and Demolition Debris. The developer shall contact the City’s franchised solid
waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris and shall provide the Planning
Division verification of arrangements made with the City’s franchise solid waste hauler for
disposal of construction and demolition debris. Only the City’s franchisee may haul demolition
and construction debris.
14.
Public Art Ordinance. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City’s Public Art
Ordinance as defined in Section 5.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
15.
Property Maintenance. All parkways, including within the right-of-way, entryway median,
landscaping, walls, fencing, recreational facilities, and on-site lighting shall be maintained by
the property owner or maintenance association.
16.
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit
Discovery of Cultural Resources. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the
Grading Plan: “If cultural resources are discovered during the project construction
(inadvertent discoveries), all work in the area of the find shall cease, and the qualified
archaeologist and the Pechanga monitor shall investigate the find, and make
recommendations as to treatment.”
17.
Precise Grading Plans. A copy of the Precise Grading Plans shall be submitted and approved
by the Planning Division.
18.
Human Remains. If human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code
Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County
Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance
until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside
County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage
Commission must be contacted within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission
must then immediately identify the “most likely descendant(s)” of receiving notification of the
discovery. The most likely descendant(s) shall then make recommendations within 48 hours,
and engage in consultations concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public
Resources Code 5097.98 and the Treatment Agreement described in these conditions.
19.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permit
Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). The Western Riverside County of
Governments administers and collects the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). The
City of Temecula adopted an ordinance on March 31, 2003 for a Riverside County area wide
Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). This project is subject to payment of these
fees at the time of building permit issuance (paid to WRCOG). The fees are subject to the
provisions of Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and the fee schedule in effect at
the time of building permit issuance. Additional information on payment, fees, and points of
contact can be found at http://www.wrcog.cog.ca.us/174/TUMF
20.
Downspouts. All downspouts shall be internalized. 21.
Development Impact Fee (DIF). The developer shall comply with the provisions of Title 15,
Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all its resolutions by paying the
appropriate City fee.
22.
Precise Grading Plans. Precise Grading Plans shall be consistent with the approved rough
grading plans including all structural setback measurements.
23.
Utility Screening. All utilities shall be screened from public view. Landscape construction
drawings shall show and label all utilities and provide appropriate screening. Provide a
three-foot clear zone around fire check detectors as required by the Fire Department before
starting the screen. Group utilities together in order to reduce intrusion. Screening of utilities
is not to look like an after-thought. Plan planting beds and design around utilities. Locate all
light poles on plans and ensure that there are no conflicts with trees.
24.
Prior to Release of Power, Building Occupancy or Any Use Allowed by This Permit
Screening of Loading Areas. The applicant shall be required to screen all loading areas and
roof mounted mechanical equipment from view of the all residences and public right -of-ways.
If upon final inspection it is determined that any mechanical equipment, roof equipment or
backs of building parapet walls are visible from any portion of the public right-of-way adjacent
to the project site, the developer shall provide screening by constructing a sloping tile covered
mansard roof element or other screening reviewed and approved by the Director of
Community Development.
25.
Compliance with Conditions of Approval. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with
prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit.
26.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
General Requirements
Conditions of Approval. The developer shall comply with all Conditions of Approval, the
Engineering and Construction Manual and all City codes/standards at no cost to any
governmental agency.
27.
Entitlement Approval. The developer shall comply with the approved site plan, the conceptual
Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and other relevant documents approved during
entitlement. Any significant omission to the representation of site conditions may require the
plans to be resubmitted for further review and revision.
28.
Precise Grading Permit. A precise grading permit for on site improvements (outside of public
right-of-way) shall be obtained from Public Works.
29.
Haul Route Permit. A haul route permit may be required when soils are moved on public
roadways to or from a grading site. The developer/contractor is to verify if the permit is
required. If so, he shall comply with all conditions and requirements per the City’s Engineering
and Construction Manual and as directed by Public Works.
30.
Encroachment Permits. Prior to commencement of any applicable construction,
encroachment permit(s) are required; and shall be obtained:
a. from Public Works for public offsite improvements;
b. from the California Department of Transportation if encroaching within their right-of-way;
and
c. from Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD) if
encroaching within their right-of-way.
31.
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS). The developer shall comply with all constraints per
the recorded ECS with any underlying maps related to the subject property.
32.
Grading/Erosion & Sediment Control Plan. The developer shall submit a grading/erosion &
sediment control plan(s) to be reviewed and approved by Public Works. All plans shall be
coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to
the site. The approved plan shall include all construction-phase pollution-prevention controls
to adequately address non-permitted runoff. Refer to the City’s Engineering & Construction
Manual at: www.TemeculaCA.gov/ECM
33.
Erosion & Sediment Control Securities. The developer shall comply with the provisions of
Chapter 24, Section 18.24.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code by posting security and
entering into an agreement to guarantee the erosion & sediment control improvements.
34.
NPDES General Permit Compliance. The developer shall obtain project coverage under the
State National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for
Construction Activities and shall provide the following:
a. A copy of the Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID) issued by the State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB);
b. The project’s Risk Level (RL) determination number; and
c. The name, contact information and certification number of the Qualified SWPPP
Developer (QSD)
Pursuant to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) requirements and City’s
storm water ordinance, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be generated
and submitted to the Board. Throughout the project duration, the SWPPP shall be routinely
updated and readily available (onsite) to the State and City. Review
www.cabmphandbooks.com for SWPPP guidelines. Refer to the following link:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/construction.shtml
35.
Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and O&M Agreement. The developer shall submit
a final WQMP (prepared by a registered professional engineer) with the initial grading plan
submittal, based on the conceptual WQMP from the entitlement process. It must receive
acceptance by Public Works. A copy of the final project-specific WQMP must be kept onsite at
all times. In addition, a completed W QMP Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement
shall be submitted for review and approval. Upon approval from City staff, the applicant shall
record the O&M agreement at the County Recorder's Office in Temecula. Refer to the WQMP
template and agreement link below:
www.TemeculaCA.gov/WQMP
36.
Soils Report. A soils report, prepared by a registered soil or civil engineer, shall be submitted
to Public Works with the initial grading plan submittal. The report shall address the site’s soil
conditions and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and
preliminary pavement sections.
37.
Letter of Permission/Easement. The developer shall obtain documents (letters of permission
or easements) for any offsite work performed on adjoining properties. The document’s format
is as directed by, and shall be submitted to, Public Works for acceptance. The document
information shall be noted on the approved grading plan.
38.
American Disability Act. The developer shall ensure that all frontage areas to the proposed
development within the public right of way are ADA compliant. Any sidewalk within the public
right of way found to be non-compliant shall be the responsibility of the property owner to be
removed and replaced with ADA compliant sidewalk per the Streets and Highway Code
Section 5610.
39.
Prior to Issuance of Encroachment Permit(s)
Public Utility Agency Work. The developer shall submit all relevant documentation due to
encroaching within City right-of-way; and is responsible for any associated costs and for
making arrangements with each applicable public utility agency.
40.
Traffic Control Plans. A construction area traffic control plan (TCP) will be required for lane
closures and detours or other disruptions to traffic circulation; and shall be reviewed and
approved by Public Works. The TCP shall be designed by a registered civil or traffic engineer
in conformance with the latest edition of the Caltrans Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices (MUTCD) and City standards.
41.
Street Trenching. All street trenches shall conform to City Standard No. 407; refer to the City’s
Paving Notes.
42.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s)
Certifications. Certifications are required from the registered civil engineer-of-record certifying
the building pad elevation(s) per the approved plans and from the soil’s engineer-of-record
certifying compaction of the building pad(s).
43.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
Completion of Improvements. The developer shall complete all work per the approved plans
and Conditions of Approval to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. This includes all on site
work (including water quality facilities), public improvements and the executed WQMP
Operation and Maintenance agreement.
44.
Utility Agency Clearances. The developer shall receive written clearance from applicable
utility agencies (i.e., Rancho California and Eastern Municipal Water Districts, etc.) for the
completion of their respective facilities and provide to Public Works.
45.
Replacement of Damaged Improvements/Monuments. Any appurtenance damaged or broken
during development shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of Public
Works. Any survey monuments damaged or destroyed shall be reset per City Standards by a
qualified professional pursuant to the California Business and Professional Code Section
8771.
46.
Certifications. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies
and public agencies shall be submitted as required by Public Works.
47.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION
General Requirements
Final Building and Safety Conditions. Final Building and Safety conditions will be addressed
when building construction plans are submitted to Building and Safety for review. These
conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), and related
codes which are enforced at the time of building plan submittal.
48.
Compliance with Code. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the
2019 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2019 California
Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, 2019 California Energy Codes, 2019
California Green Building Standards, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and City
of Temecula Municipal Code.
49.
ADA Access. Applicant shall provide details of all applicable disabled access provisions and
building setbacks on plans to include:
a. Disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building.
b. Van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entrance of the building.
c. Accessible path of travel from parking to the furthest point of improvement.
d. Path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
e. Accessible path of travel from public right-of-way to all public areas on site, such as trash
enclosures, clubhouses, and picnic areas.
50.
County of Riverside Mount Palomar Ordinance. Applicant shall submit, at time of plan review,
a complete exterior site lighting plan showing compliance with County of Riverside Mount
Palomar Ordinance Number 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All streetlights and other
outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Building and Safety
Division. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and aimed not to shine directly upon adjoining
property or public rights-of-way. All exterior LED light fixtures shall be 3,000 kelvin or below.
51.
Street Addressing. Applicant must obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings by
requesting street addressing and submitting a site plan for commercial or multi-family
residential projects or a recorded final map for single-family residential projects.
52.
Clearance from TVUSD. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley Unified School
District shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department to ensure the payment or
exemption from School Mitigation Fees.
53.
Obtain Approvals Prior to Construction. Applicant must obtain all building plans and permit
approvals prior to commencement of any construction work.
54.
Obtaining Separate Approvals and Permits. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards,
and any block walls will require separate approvals and permits. Solid covers are required
over new and existing trash enclosures.
55.
Demolition. Demolition permits require separate approvals and permits. 56.
Sewer and Water Plan Approvals. On-site sewer and water plans will require separate
approvals and permits.
57.
Hours of Construction. Signage shall be prominently posted at the entrance to the project,
indicating the hours of construction, as allowed by the City of Temecula Municipal Ordinance
9.20.060, for any site within one-quarter mile of an occupied residence. The permitted hours
of construction are Monday through Saturday from 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. No work is
permitted on Sundays and nationally recognized Government Holidays.
58.
House Electrical Meter. Provide a house electrical meter to provide power for the operation of
exterior lighting, irrigation pedestals and fire alarm systems for each building on the site.
Developments with single user buildings shall clearly show on the plans how the operation of
exterior lighting and fire alarm systems when a house meter is not specifically proposed.
59.
Protection of drains and penetration. Protection of joints and penetrations in fire
resistance-rated assemblies shall not be concealed from view until inspected for all designed
fire protection. Required fire seals/fire barriers in fire assemblies at fire resista nt penetrations
shall be installed by individuals with classification or certification covering the installation of
these systems. Provide certification for the installation of each area and certification of
compliance for Building Official's approval.
60.
FIRE PREVENTION
General Requirements
Fire Hydrants. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances
per CFC Appendix C. Standard fire hydrants (6” x 4” x (2) 2 ½” outlets) shall be located on fire
access roads and adjacent public streets. For all Commercial projects hydrants shall be
spaced at 350 feet apart, and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the
street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be
available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The fire line may be required to be a
looped system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required (CFC Appendix C and
Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020).
61.
Fire Dept. Plan Review. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building
plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on
occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related
codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal.
62.
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s)
Access Road Widths. Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width
of not less than 24 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6
inches (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020).
63.
All Weather Access Roads. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to
support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be with a surface to provide all-weather
driving capabilities. Access roads shall be 80,000 lbs. GVW with a minimum of AC thickness
of .25 feet. In accordance with Section 3310.1, prior to building construction, all locations
where structures are to be built shall have fire apparatus access roads. (CFC Chapter 5 and
City Ordinance 15.16.020).
64.
Turning Radius. Dead end roadways and streets in excess of 150 feet which have not been
completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus (CFC Chapter 5
and City Ordinance 15.16.020).
65.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s)
Required Submittals (Fire Underground Water). The developer shall furnish three copies of
the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation for all
private water systems pertaining to the fire service riser line. Plans shall be signed by a
registered civil engineer, contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block, and
conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. Hydraulic
calculations will be required with the underground submittal to ensure fire flow requirements
are being met for the on-site hydrants. On site fire flow for the hydrants will be 2,500 gpm @
20 psi for a 2 hour duration. The plans must be submitted and approved prior to building
permit being issued (CFC Chapter 33 and Chapter 5).
66.
Required Submittals (Fire Sprinkler Systems). Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the
Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of sprinkler plans must be submitted by the
installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. These plans must be submitted prior to the
issuance of building permit.
67.
Required Submittals (Fire Alarm Systems). Fire alarm plans shall be submitted to the Fire
Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of alarm plans must be submitted by the installing
contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. The fire alarm system is required to have a
dedicated circuit from the house panel. These plans must be submitted prior to the issuance
of building permit.
68.
Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy
Gates and Access. All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access
roads or gates obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox
Rapid entry system for emergency access by fire fighting personnel (CFC Chapter 5).
69.
Hydrant Verification. Hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective
markers (blue dots) (City Ordinance 15.16.020).
70.
Knox Box. A “Knox-Box” shall be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six
feet in height and be located to the right side of the fire riser sprinkler room (CFC Chapter 5).
71.
POLICE DEPARTMENT
General Requirements
Defensible Plants. Applicant shall ensure any landscaping surrounding buildings is kept at a
height of no more than three feet, or below the ground floor window sills. Plants, hedges, and
shrubbery shall be defensible plants to prevent would-be intruders from breaking into the
buildings utilizing lower level windows.
72.
Trees. Applicant shall ensure any trees surrounding building rooftops be kept at a distance to
prevent roof accessibility by would-be burglars. Since trees also act as a natural ladder, the
branches must be pruned to have a six-foot clearance from the buildings.
73.
Berms. Any berms shall not exceed three feet in height. 74.
Exterior Building Lighting. All lighting affixed to the exterior of buildings less than 8 feet high
shall be vandal resistant.
75.
Exterior Door Illumination. All exterior doors shall have a vandal resistant light fixture installed
above the door. The doors shall be illuminated with a minimum one-foot candle illumination at
ground level, evenly dispersed.
76.
Hardware. All doors, windows, locking mechanisms, hinges, and other miscellaneous
hardware shall be commercial or institution grade.
77.
Graffiti. Any graffiti painted or marked upon the buildings or other structures must be removed
or painted over within 24 hours of being discovered. Report all such crimes to the Temecula
Police 24-hour dispatch Center at (951) 696-HELP
78.
Alarm System. Upon completion of construction, each building or business shall have an
alarm system that is monitored by a designated private alarm company to notify the Temecula
Police Department of any intrusion. All multi-tenant offices/suites/businesses located within a
specific building shall each have their own alarm system. This condition is not applicable if
the business is open 24/7.
79.
Roof Hatches. Any roof hatches shall be painted “International Orange.” 80.
Rooftop Addressing. The construction plans shall indicate the application of painted rooftop
addressing plotted on a nine-inch grid pattern with 45-inch tall numerals spaced nine inches
apart. The numerals shall be painted with a standard nine-inch paint roller using fluorescent
yellow paint applied over a contrasting background. The address shall be oriented to the
street and placed as closely as possible to the edge of the building closest to the street.
81.
Public Telephones. Any public telephones located on the exterior of the buildings shall be
placed in a well-lit, highly visible area, and installed with a “call-out only” feature to deter
loitering. This feature is not required for public telephones installed within the interior of the
buildings.
82.
ADA Parking. All disabled parking stalls on the premises shall be marked in accordance with
Section 22511.8 of the California Vehicle Code.
83.
Crime Prevention Through Design. Crime prevention through environmental design, as
developed by the National Crime Prevention Institute (NCPI), supports the concept that “the
proper design and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in the fear and
incidence of crime and an improvement in the quality of life.” The nine primary strategies that
support this concept are included below: 1. Provide clear border definition of controlled space.
Examples of border definition may include fences, shrubbery, or signs in exterior areas.
Within a building, the arrangement of furniture and color definition can serve as a means of
identifying controlled space. 2. Provide clearly marked transitional zones. Persons need to be
able to identify when they are moving from public to semi-public to private space. 3. Gathering
or congregating areas to be located or designated in locations where there is good
surveillance and access control. 4. Place safe activities in unsafe locations. Safe activities
attract normal users to a location and subsequently render the location less attractive to
abnormal users due to observation and possible intervention. 5. Place unsafe activities in safe
locations. Placing unsafe activities in areas of natural surveillance or controlled access will
help overcome risk and make the users of the areas feel safer. 6. Redesign the use of space
to provide natural barriers. Separate activities that may conflict with each other (outdoor
basketball court and children’s play area, for example) by distance, natural terrain or other
functions to avoid such conflict. 7. Improve scheduling of space. The timing in the use of
space can reduce the risk for normal users and cause abnormal users to be of greater risk of
surveillance and intervention. 8. Redesign space to increase the perception of natural
surveillance. Abnormal users need to be award of the risk of detection and possible
intervention. Windows and clear lines-of-sight serve to provide such a perception of
surveillance. 9. Overcome distance and isolation. This strategy may be accomplished through
improved communications (portable two-way radios, for example) and design efficiencies,
such as the location of restrooms in a public building.
84.
Business Security Survey. The Crime Prevention and Plans Unit of the Temecula Police
Department offers free business security surveys, to schedule an appointment contact the unit
at (951) 506-5132.
85.
Contact. Any questions regarding these conditions should be directed to the Temecula Police
Department Crime Prevention and Plans Unit at (951) 506-5132.
86.
C:\Users\legistar\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 8\@BCL@AC0E8318\@BCL@AC0E8318.docx
1
April 23, 2020
Ms. Rosemarie M. Anderson
Supervising Legal Certification Clerk
County of Riverside
P.O. Box 751
Riverside, CA 92501-0751
SUBJECT: Filing of a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA19-1307, a
Modification to a Development Plan for the construction of an approximately
6,585 square-foot two-story building on the rear portion of the existing
Temecula Hyundai site to include new service bays, parts storage, and
offices, located at 27430 Ynez Road
Dear Ms. Anderson:
Enclosed is the Notice of Exemption for the above referenced project. In addition, pursuant to
Assembly Bill 3158 (Chapter 1706) please find a check in the amount of $50.00, for the County
Administrative fee to enable the City to file the Notice of Exemption required under Public
Resources Code Section 21152 and 14 California Code Regulations 1507. The City of
Temecula is paying the $50.00 filing fee under protest. It is the opinion of the City that the
administrative fee has been increased in a manner inconsistent with the provisions of State Law.
Under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and 14 California Code Regulations 1507, the
County is entitled to receive a $25.00 filing fee.
Also, please return a stamped copy of the Notice of Exemption within five working days after
the 35-day posting in the enclosed self-addressed stamped envelope.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Scott Cooper at (951) 506-5137.
Sincerely,
Luke Watson
Director of Community Development
Enclosures: Check
Copies of this letter (2)
Self addressed stamped envelope
[
T
y
p
e
a
q
u
o
t
e
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
o
r
t
h
e
s
u
m
m
a
r
y
o
f
a
n
i
n
t
City of Temecula
Community Development
41000 Main Street • Temecula, CA 92590
Phone (951) 694-6400 • Fax (951) 694-6477 • TemeculaCA.gov
R:\FORMS\CEQA.NOE 4/15/20 klb
City of Temecula
Community Development
Planning Division Notice of Exemption
TO: County Clerk and Recorders Office FROM: Planning Division
County of Riverside City of Temecula
P.O. Box 751 41000 Main Street
Riverside, CA 92501-0751 Temecula, CA 92590
Project Title: Temecula Hyundai (PA19-1307)
Description of Project: A Modification to a Development Plan for the construction of an approximately 6,585
square-foot two-story building on the rear portion of the existing Temecula Hyundai
site to include new service bays, parts storage, and offices
Project Location: 27430 Ynez Road
Applicant/Proponent: City of Temecula, County of Riverside
The Planning Commission approved the above described project on April 22, 2020 and found that the project
is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended.
Exempt Status: (check one)
Ministerial (Section 21080(b)(1); Section 15268);
Declared Emergency (Section 21080(b)(3); Section 15269(a));
Emergency Project (Section 21080(b)(4); Section 15269(b)(c));
Statutory Exemptions (Section Number: )
Categorical Exemption: (Section Number 15332, Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects)
Other: Section 15162 Categorical Exemption
Statement of Reasons Supporting the Finding that the Project is Exempt:
(a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan
policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
The project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designation because automobile repair service
shops are an allowable use within the Service Commercial district. The project also meets all applicable
General Plan and Zoning policies and regulations.
(b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially
surrounded by urban uses.
The project is located within City limits and is located on a developed sit e containing an automobile dealership
that is less than five acres. The proposed project is substantially surrounded by commercial development,
residential development, and major roadways.
(c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
R:\FORMS\CEQA.NOE 4/15/20 klb
The proposed project is located on the portion of a fully developed project site that currently contains parking,
asphalt, and a landscape median which contains no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened. The
project site is not located within a Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) criteria cell.
(d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water
quality.
The proposed project was required to prepare a Project-Specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP)
that was reviewed and conceptually accepted for entitlement by City Staff as the WQMP meets the
requirements of the City of Temecula. A traffic analysis was not required as part of this proj ect and the
proposed use is allowed within the Service Commercial zoning district. Therefore, the project is not anticipated
to result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality as the project, as
conditioned, is an allowed use per the City of Temecula General Plan.
(e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
The project site is surrounded by development and is able to be serviced by all required utilities and public
services.
Contact Person/Title: Scott Cooper, Associate Planner Phone Number: (951) 506-5137
Signature: Date:
Luke Watson
Director of Community Development
Notice of Public Hearing
A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the City of Temecula PLANNING
COMMISSION to consider the matter described below:
CASE NO: PA19-1307 APPLICANT: Armen Kazanchyan
PROPOSAL: A Modification to a Development Plan for the construction of an approximately 6,585
square-foot two-story building on the rear portion of the existing Temecula Hyundai
site to include new service bays, parts storage, and offices, located at 27430 Ynez Road
ENVIRONMENTAL: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed
project is exempt from further environmental review and a Notice of Exemption will be
adopted in compliance with CEQA (15332, Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects)
CASE PLANNER: Scott Cooper, (951) 506-5137
DATE OF HEARING: April 22, 2020 TIME OF HEARING: 6:00 p.m.
PLACE OF HEARING: This meeting is being conducted utilizing teleconferencing and electronic means
consistent with State of California Executive Order N-29-20 dated March 17, 2020,
regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. The live stream of the meeting may be viewed on
television and/or online. Details can be found at temeculaca.gov/tv. In accordance
with Executive Order N-29-20, the public may only view the meeting on television
and/or online and not in the Council Chamber.
The complete agenda packet (including any supplemental materials) will be available for viewing on the City’s
website – TemeculaCA.gov after 4:00 p.m. the Friday before the Planning Commission meeting. Due to the
closure of the Library and other City Buildings and Facilities due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the complete
agenda is only viewable on the City website at https://temeculaca.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx. For more
information or have questions regarding this project, please contact Scott Cooper (951) 506-5137.
Any petition for judicial review of a decision of the Planning Commission shall be filed within time required
by, and controlled by, Sections 1094.5 and 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. In any such action
or proceeding seeking judicial review of, which attacks or seeks to set aside, or void any decision of the
Planning Commission shall be limited to those issues raised at the hearing or in written correspondence
delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing described in this notice.
Submission of Public Comments: For those wishing to make public comments at the April 22, 2020 Planning
Commission meeting, please submit your comments by email to be read aloud at the meeting by the Principal
Management Analyst. Email comments must be submitted to Lynn Lehner at lynn.lehner@temeculaca.gov.
Electronic comments on agenda items for the April 22, 2020 Planning Commission meeting ma y only be
submitted via email and comments via text and social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) will not be accepted.
Reading of Public Comments: The Principal Management Analyst shall read all email comments, provided
that the reading shall not exceed three (3) minutes, or such other time as the Planning Commission may provide,
consistent with the time limit for speakers at a Planning Commission meeting. The email comments submitted
shall become part of the record of the Planning Commission meeting.
Questions? Please call the Case Planner Scott Cooper at (951) 506-5137 or the Community Development
Department at (951) 694-6400.
ITEM 3
1
STAFF REPORT – PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
TO: Planning Commission Chairperson and members of the Planning
Commission
FROM: Luke Watson, Director of Community Development
DATE OF MEETING: April 22, 2020
PREPARED BY: Dale West, Case Planner
APPLICANT NAME: City of Temecula
PROJECT
SUMMARY:
Long Range Project Number LR20-0279, an amendment to Chapter
17.21 Affordable Housing Overlay Zoning District to clarify timing of
the required Cultural Resources Treatment Agreement and to require
affordable housing units to be constructed concurrently with market
rate housing units and integrated among market rate units.
CEQA: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public
Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq. (“CEQA”)), and the State
CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections
15000, et seq.), the proposed Ordinance is exempt from CEQA
because it falls within the scope of the environmental analysis
conducted for the City’s 2014 – 2021 Housing Element and the
Uptown Temecula Specific Plan. Additionally, because it can be seen
with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed amendments
to the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone will have a significant effect
on the environment, the project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3)
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula adopt a
resolution recommending that the City Council of the City of Temecula
adopt an ordinance amending Chapter 17.21 of Title 17 of the Temecula
Municipal Code, Affordable Housing Overlay Zoning District.
BACKGROUND SUMMARY
The Affordable Housing Overlay Zoning District (AHOZ) was adopted by the Temecula City
Council on September 5, 2018. The adoption of the AHOZ implemented Program 1 of the City’s
2014-2021 Housing Element, and is intended to encourage the development of affordable housing
in the City in order to meet the City’s Regional Housing Need Assessment (RHNA). The AHOZ
establishes an overlay zone on 44 parcels within the City. Parcels within the Affordable Housing
Overlay Zone may be developed using the underlying zoning designation, or as an affordable
housing project under the Affordable Housing Overlay, thus providing additional development
2
opportunities to property owners whose properties are located within the overlay zone. If a site is
developed as an affordable housing project, at least 20 percent of the residential units in each
project are to be reserved for households earning no greater than 80 percent of the area median
income adjusted for family size appropriate to the unit. For mixed-use affordable housing projects
in the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan Area, residential uses shall occupy at least 50 percent of
the total floor area of the mixed-use project.
A project seeking to develop under the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone is only subject to
administrative review, and is not subject to any discretionary review. As such, staff is only
permitted to review the project to determine if it complies with the requirements set forth in
Chapter 17.21 of the Temecula Municipal Code. These requirements include ensuring that the
project complies with the following: Development Code standards, Specific Plan standards,
Cultural Resources Treatment Agreement with Pechanga, Multiple Species Habitat Conservation
Plan, Building and Fire Codes, Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF), Development
Impact Fees, Water Quality Management Plan, and certain dedication of improvements (if
applicable). The Development Code standards address such things as height limits, setbacks, lot
coverage, and parking.
As a result of Staff’s review and application of the ordinance, staff has determined there is a need
to amend the AHOZ affecting the timing of the submittal of the Cultural Resources Treatment
Agreement, and the timing of the construction and distribution of affordable housing units on a
development site.
ANALYSIS
The proposed ordinance would amend the timing for the submittal of the Cultural Resources
Treatment Agreement by clarifying that it must be submitted “prior to the approval of the
Administrative Review Application,” as opposed to “before the issuance of the Administrative
Review Application.” The proposed change is necessary, not only to protect the cultural resources
in the area, but it will also ensure that the Cultural Resources Treatment Agreement appropriately
reflects any changes to the project that may occur during the processing of the application.
The proposed ordinance also adds the requirements that affordable housing units must be
constructed concurrently with, or prior to, market rate housing units, and dispersed throughout the
development project. These revisions are necessary to ensure that affordable housing is actually
constructed by project proponents that seek to develop projects using the overlay zone.
LEGAL NOTICING REQUIREMENTS
Notice of the public hearing was published in the SD Union Tribune on March 5, 2020, and on
April 9, 2020.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections
21000, et seq. (“CEQA”)), and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title
14, Sections 15000, et seq.), the proposed Ordinance falls within the scope of the environmental
analysis conducted for the City’s 2014 – 2021 Housing Element and the Uptown Temecula
3
Specific Plan. Additionally, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that
the proposed amendments to the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone will have a significant effect
on the environment, the project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section
15061(b)(3).
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Resolution
2. Exhibit A - Draft City Council Ordinance
3. Notice of Public Hearing
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED, “AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO AMEND CHAPTER 17.21
REGARDING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY
ZONE, AND MAKING THE DETERMINATION THAT THE
PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS EXEMPT FROM FURTHER
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES
SECTION 15061(B)(3)”
Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula
does hereby find, determine and declare that:
A. On March 18, 2020, the Planning Commission identified a need to amend the
adopted Municipal Code to amend Chapter 17.21 of the Temecula Municipal Code regarding the
Affordable Housing Overlay Zoning District (Long Range Project No. LR20-0279).
B. The Ordinance was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law.
C. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the application and
environmental review on March 18, 2020, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law,
at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in
support or in opposition to this matter.
D. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration
of the testimony, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve Long
Range Project No. LR20-0279 subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder.
E. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in recommending that the
City Council approve the Ordinance hereby finds, determines and declares as required by Section
17.01.040 (“Relationship to General Plan”) of the Temecula Municipal Code, that the Ordinance
is consistent with the General Plan as follows:
A. The proposed Ordinance is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and
with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The Ordinance
implements the following policies contained in the City’s Housing Element:
a. Policy 1.1: Provide an inventory of land at varying densities sufficient to
accommodate the existing and projected housing needs in the City;
b. Policy 1.2 Encourage residential development that provides a range of housing
types in terms of cost, density, and type, and presents the opportunity for local
residents to live and work in the same community b y balancing jobs and housing
types;
c. Policy 2.1 Promote a variety of housing opportunities that accommodate the
needs of all income levels of the population, and provide opportunities to meet
Temecula’s fair share of extremely low-, very low-, low-, and moderate-income
housing;
d. Policy 2.2 Support innovative public, private, and nonprofit efforts in the
development of affordable housing, particularly for special needs groups;
e. Policy 3.1 Expedite processing procedures and fees for new construction or
rehabilitation of housing; and
f. Policy 5.2: Support efforts to ensure that all income segments of the community
have unrestricted access to appropriate housing.
Furthermore, the Ordinance implements the following goals and policies contained in the City’s
General Plan Land Use Element:
g. Goal 1: A diverse and integrated mix of residential, commercial, industrial,
recreational, public and open space land uses.
h. Policy 1.6: Encourage flexible zoning techniques in appropriate locations to
encourage mixed use development, preserve natural features, achieve innovative
site design, achieve a range of transition of densities, provide
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. A. Pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq. (“CEQA”)), and the
State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000, et seq.), the
proposed Ordinance falls within the scope of the environmental analysis conducted for the City’s
2014 – 2021 Housing Element and the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan.
A. On January 28, 2014, a Negative Declaration was adopted for the approval of the
2014 – 2021 Housing Element, which analyzed the potential impacts and
determined that less than significant impacts would result from the adoption of the
2014 – 2021 Housing Element. In 2019, the City adopted the Affordable Housing
Overlay Zone which was described in the City’s Housing Element. On November
17, 2015, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH #2013061012) was
certified in connection with the approval of the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan.
The Affordable Housing Overlay Zone ordinance applied the affordable housing
overlay zone to certain parcels located in the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan Area.
B. The proposed amendments to the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone ordinance do
not increase the number of properties that are located within the Affordable
Housing Overlay Zone, or change the zoning designation of any of the properties
within this overlay zone. Instead, the ordinance merely clarifies that (1) a cultural
resources agreement must be entered into with the Pechanga tribe before the
Community Development Director will issue an administrative permit, (2) that
affordable units must be constructed concurrent with or prior to the market rate
units, and (3) that the affordable units must be dispersed throughout the
development project. As such, the environmental impacts for the Project have been
evaluated by the previously adopted Negative Declaration for the Housing Element,
and the EIR for the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan, and no further environmental
review is necessary. None of the circumstances in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
exist to require any additional environmental review and no further documentation
is necessary.
C. In addition, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the
proposed amendments to the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone will have a
significant effect on the environment, the project is exempt from CEQA pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3). Staff is hereby directed to file a Notice
of Exemption.
Section 4. Recommendation. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the
City Council adopt the Ordinance attached hereto as Exhibit “A.”
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning
Commission this 22nd day of April 2020.
Lanae Turley-Trejo, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Luke Watson
Secretary
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Luke Watson, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
the forgoing PC Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 22th day of April
2020, by the following vote:
AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Luke Watson
Secretary
ORDINANCE NO. 2020-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE
TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO AMEND CHAPTER
17.21 REGARDING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
OVERLAY ZONE, AND MAKING THE DETERMINATION
THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS EXEMPT FROM
FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER CEQA
GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(B)(3)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby
find, determine, and declare that:
A. The Planning Commission considered this Ordinance, including the environmental
analysis, on March 18, 2020, at a duly noticed public hearing, as prescribed by law, at which time
the City Staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support of or
opposition to this matter.
B. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration
of the testimony, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2020-__, recommending
approval of the Ordinance by the City Council.
C. The City Council, at a regular meeting, considered the Ordinance, including the
environmental analysis, on _______________ 2020, at a duly noticed public hearing, as prescribed
by law, at which time the City Staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify
either in support or opposition to this matter.
D. Following the public hearing, the City Council considered the entire record of
information received at the public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council.
Section 2. Legislative Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula in
approving the proposed Municipal Code amendment in Long Range Planning Project Number
LR20-0279 hereby makes the following findings:
A. The State Legislature has declared that the lack of housing, including providing for
a variety of housing types for all income levels and special needs groups, is a critical problem that
threatens the economic, environmental, and social quality of life in California.
B. Government Code Section 65583 requires that the City’s Housing Element address
governmental constraints to the development of housing, including providing for a variety of
housing types for all income levels. The City Council of the City of Temecula adopted the City’s
2014-2021 Housing Element on January 28, 2014. The City’s Housing Element identified the
need to amend the City’s Municipal Code to establish an Affordable Housing Overlay Zone to
encourage the development of affordable housing in the City. On September 25, 2018, the City
Council adopted an ordinance establishing the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone.
C. Staff has now determined that the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone ordinance
should be amended to clarify (1) a cultural resources agreement must be entered into with the
Pechanga tribe before the Community Development Director will issue an administrative permit,
and (2) that affordable units must be constructed concurrent with or prior to the market rate units,
and must be dispersed throughout the development project. These revisions are necessary to not
only protect the cultural resources in the area, but also to ensure that affordable housing is actually
constructed by project proponents that seek to develop projects using the overlay zone.
D. The proposed amendments to the affordable housing overlay zone ordinance are in
conformance with the goals, policies, programs and guidelines of elements of the General Plan.
The Ordinance implements the following policies contained in the City’s Housing Element:
1. Policy 1.1: Provide an inventory of land at varying densities sufficient
to accommodate the existing and projected housing needs in the City;
2. Policy 1.2 Encourage residential development that provides a range of
housing types in terms of cost, density, and type, and presents the
opportunity for local residents to live and work in the same community by
balancing jobs and housing types;
3. Policy 2.1 Promote a variety of housing opportunities that
accommodate the needs of all income levels of the population, and provide
opportunities to meet Temecula’s fair share of extremely low-, very low-,
low-, and moderate-income housing;
4. Policy 2.2 Support innovative public, private, and nonprofit efforts in
the development of affordable housing, particularly for special needs
groups;
5. Policy 3.1 Expedite processing procedures and fees for new
construction or rehabilitation of housing; and
6. Policy 5.2: Support efforts to ensure that all income segments of the
community have unrestricted access to appropriate housing.
Furthermore, the Ordinance implements the following goals and policies contained in the City’s
General Plan Land Use Element:
7. Goal 1: A diverse and integrated mix of residential, commercial, industrial,
recreational, public and open space land uses.
8. Policy 1.6: Encourage flexible zoning techniques in appropriate locations
to encourage mixed use development, preserve natural features, achieve
innovative site design, achieve a range of transition of densities, provide
open space and recreation facilities, and/or provide necessary amenities and
facilities.
E. The proposed amendments to the Municipal Code are consistent with the General
Plan and all applicable provisions contained therein. Residential development approved pursuant
to Chapter 17.21 complies with the requirements included in the City’s General Plan Housing
Element.
Section 3. Environmental Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby
makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval
of the proposed Ordinance:
A. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code
Sections 21000, et seq. (“CEQA”)), and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of
Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000, et seq.), the proposed Ordinance falls within the scope of
the environmental analysis conducted for the City’s 2014 – 2021 Housing Element and the Uptown
Temecula Specific Plan.
B. On January 28, 2014, a Negative Declaration was adopted for the approval of the
2014 – 2021 Housing Element, which analyzed the potential impacts and determined that less than
significant impacts would result from the adoption of the 2014 – 2021 Housing Element. In 2019,
the City adopted the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone which was described in the City’s Housing
Element. On November 17, 2015, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH #2013061012)
was certified in connection with the approval of the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan. The
Affordable Housing Overlay Zone ordinance applied the affordable housing overlay zone to
certain parcels located in the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan Area.
C. The proposed amendments to the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone ordinance do
not increase the number of properties that are located within the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone,
or change the zoning designation of any of the properties within this overlay zone. Instead, the
ordinance merely clarifies that (1) a cultural resources agreement must be entered into with the
Pechanga tribe before the Community Development Director will issue an administrative permit,
(2) that affordable units must be constructed concurrent with or prior to the market rate units, and
(3) that the affordable units must be dispersed throughout the development project. As such, the
environmental impacts for the Project have been evaluated by the previously adopted Negative
Declaration for the Housing Element, and the EIR for the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan, and no
further environmental review is necessary. None of the circumstances in CEQA Guidelines
Section 15162 exist to require any additional environmental review and no further documentation
is necessary.
D. In addition, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the
proposed amendments to the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone will have a significant effect on
the environment, the project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section
15061(b)(3). Staff is hereby directed to file a Notice of Exemption.
Section 4. Subsection A of Section 17.21.040 (Compliance with Laws) of Chapter
17.21 (Affordable Housing Overlay Zoning District) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Temecula
Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with all other provisions of Section
17.21.040 remaining unchanged:
“A. The applicant shall enter into a Cultural Reso urces Treatment Agreement with the
Pechanga Tribe, and provide a copy of this agreement to the City before the Director approves the
Administrative Review Application. This Agreement shall address the following:
1. Treatment and disposition of cultural resources;
2. The designation, responsibilities, and participation of professional
Pechanga Tribal monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing
activities;
3. Project grading and development scheduling;
4. Terms of compensation for the Pechange Tribal monitors;
5. Treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and
human remains discovered onsite;
6. Pechanga Tribal monitor’s authority to stop and redirect grading in order to
evaluate the significance of any potential resources discovered on the
property, and to make recommendations as to treatment;
7. The applicant’s agreement to relinquish ownership of all cultural resources,
including all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area, to
the Pechanga Tribe for proper treatment and disposition; and
8. The applicant’s agreement that all Pechanga Tribal sacred sites are to be
avoided and preserved.”
Section 5. Subsection D of Section 17.21.060 (Regulations and Development
Standards.) of Chapter 17.21 (Affordable Housing Overla y Zoning District) of Title 17 (Zoning)
of the Temecula Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with all other provisions
of Section 17.21.060 remaining unchanged:
“D. At least 20 percent of the residential units of each building developed pursuant to this
Chapter 17.21 shall be reserved for households earning no greater than 80 percent of area median
income adjusted for family size appropriate to the unit. The units shall be sold or rented at an
affordable housing cost or affordable rent, as those terms are defined in Sections 50052.5 and
50053 of the California Health and Safety Code. If the units are rental units, the affordable units
shall be deed-restricted for a period of not less than fifty-five (55) years. If the units are for-sale
units, the units shall be sold in accordance with California Government Code Section 65915.
For any project that is developed pursuant to this Chapter 17.21, the affordable units must be
constructed concurrently with or prior to the construction of any market rate units. In addition, the
affordable units must be integrated with the market rate units so that there is a mix of affordable
and market rate units, if any, in each building of the development project.”
Section 5. If any section or provision of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be
invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, or contravened by reason of any
preemptive legislation, the remaining sections and/or provisions of this Ordinance shall remain
valid. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each
section or provision thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more section(s) or provision(s)
may be declared invalid or unconstitutional or contravened via legislation.
Section 6. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and
adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same or a summary thereof to be published and
posted in the manner required by law.
Section 7. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after passage.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this __ day
of ________________, 2020.
James Stewart, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
ATTEST:
Randi Johl-Olson, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl-Olson, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Ordinance No. 2020- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a meeting of the
City Council of the City of Temecula on the ___ day of _____________, 2020, and that thereafter,
said Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a me eting thereof
held on the ___ day of _____________, 2020, the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: [ ]
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: [ ]
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: [ ]
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: [ ]
Randi Johl-Olson, City Clerk
Notice of Public Hearing
A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the City of Temecula
PLANNING COMMISSION to consider the matter described below:
CASE NO: LR20-0279 APPLICANT: City of Temecula
PROPOSAL: An amendment to Chapter 17.21 of Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code clarifying
the timing of submittal of the Cultural Treatment Agreement, and the construction timing and distribution of
affordable housing units within a project.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula adopt a resolution
recommending that the City Council of the City of Temecula adopt an amendment to Chapter 17.21
(Affordable Housing Overlay Zoning District) of Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
ENVIRONMENTAL: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code
Sections 21000, et seq. (“CEQA”)), and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14,
Sections 15000, et seq.), the proposed Ordinance falls withi n the scope of the environmental analysis
conducted for the City’s 2014 – 2021 Housing Element and the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan. On January
28, 2014, a Negative Declaration was adopted for the approval of the 2014 – 2021 Housing Element, which
analyzed the potential impacts and determined that less than significant impacts would result from the adoption
of the 2014 – 2021 Housing Element. In 2019, the City adopted the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone which
implemented Program 1 in the City’s Housing Element. On November 17, 2015, an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) (SCH #2013061012) was certified in connection with the approval of the Uptown Temecula
Specific Plan. The Affordable Housing Overlay Zone ordinance applied the affordable housing overlay zone
to certain parcels located in the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan Area.
This Ordinance does not increase the number of properties that are located within the Affordable Housing
Overlay Zone, or change the zoning designation of any of the properties within this overlay zone. Instead, it
merely clarifies that (1) a cultural resources agreement must be entered into with the Pechanga tribe before the
Community Development Director will issue an administrative permit, and (2) that affordable units must be
constructed concurrent with or prior to the market rate units, and must be dispersed throughout the development
project. As such, the environmental impacts for the Project have been evaluated by the previously adopted
Negative Declaration for the Housing Element and the EIR for the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan, and no
further environmental review is necessary. None of the circumstances in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
exist to require any additional environmental review and no further documentation is necessary.
In addition, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed amendments to
the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone will have a significant effect on the environment, the project is exempt
from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3).
CASE PLANNER: Dale West, (951) 693-3918
DATE OF HEARING: April 22, 2020 TIME OF HEARING: 6:00 p.m.
PLACE OF HEARING: This meeting is being conducted utilizing teleconferencing and electronic means
consistent with State of California Executive Order N-29-20 dated March 17, 2020,
regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. The live stream of the meeting may be viewed
on television and/or online. Details can be found at temeculaca.gov/tv. In
accordance with Executive Order N-29-20, the public may only view the meeting
on television and/or online and not in the Council Chamber.
The complete agenda packet (including any supplemental materials) will be available for viewing on the City’s
website – TemeculaCA.gov after 4:00 p.m. the Friday before the Planning Commission meeting. Due to the
closure of the Library and other City Buildings and Facilities due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the complete
agenda is only viewable on the City website at https://temeculaca.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx. For more
information or have questions regarding this project, please contact Dale West (951) 693-3918.
Any petition for judicial review of a decision of the Planning Commission shall be filed within time required by,
and controlled by, Sections 1094.5 and 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. In any such action or
proceeding seeking judicial review of, which attacks or seeks to set aside, or void any decision of the Planning
Commission shall be limited to those issues raised at the hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the
City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing described in this notice.
Submission of Public Comments: For those wishing to make public comments at the April 22, 2020 Planning
Commission meeting, please submit your comments by email to be read aloud at the meeting by the Principal
Management Analyst. Email comments must be submitted to Lynn Lehner at lynn.lehner@temeculaca.gov.
Electronic comments on agenda items for the April 22, 2020 Planning Commission meeting may only be
submitted via email and comments via text and social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) will not be accepted.
Reading of Public Comments: The Principal Management Analyst shall read all email comments, provided that
the reading shall not exceed three (3) minutes, or such other time as the Planning Commission may provide,
consistent with the time limit for speakers at a Planning Commission meeting. The email comments submitted
shall become part of the record of the Planning Commission meeting.
Questions? Please call the Case Planner Dale West (951) 693-3918 or the Community Development Department
at (951) 694-6400.
ITEM 4
1
STAFF REPORT – PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
TO: Planning Commission Chairperson and Members of the Planning
Commission
FROM: Luke Watson, Director of Community Development
DATE OF MEETING: April 22, 2020
PREPARED BY: Sara Toma, Assistant Planner
PROJECT NAME: SB 743 Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT): CEQA Traffic Impact
Analysis Guidelines Update to include VMT Thresholds and
Guidelines
PROJECT
SUMMARY:
Long Range Project Number LR18-1506. To conform with State Law
Senate Bill (“SB”) 743 by replacing vehicular Level of Service (LOS)
with Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) transportation analysis metric
under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
CEQA: Not subject to CEQA - CEQA Guidelines § 15378(a);
Categorically exempt from CEQA - CEQA Guidelines §§ 15378(b) (5),
15308 and 15061(b) (3).
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution
recommending that the City Council adopt Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT) thresholds of significance for purposes of analyzing
transportation impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act.
BACKGROUND
In September 2013, Governor Brown signed Senate Bill (“SB”) 743 (Steinberg). This legislation
provided a shift in the focus of transportation analysis under the California Environmental Quality
Act (“CEQA”) from Level of Service (“LOS”), which measures roadway capacity and automobile
delay, to Vehicle Miles Traveled (“VMT”), which is an estimate of the amount and distance people
drive by automobile to reach a destination. The desired outcomes from this change are a reduction
in auto emissions, the creation of inter-connected transportation networks with a variety of travel
modes, and the development of land uses designed to support those networks.
As part of a combined effort, staff worked closely with Western Riverside Council of Governments
(“WRCOG”) to stay updated on current VMT guidelines and potential grant opportunities. In
2018, staff applied for and was awarded a Sustainable Communities Program grant through the
Southern California Association of Government (“SCAG”) under the Sustainable Communities
Program Grant. In 2019, the City was selected and awarded by SCAG to assist in updating the
City’s Traffic Impact Analysis (“TIA”) Guidelines to facilitate compliance with SB 743. The
2
City’s current TIA Guidelines provide a standard format and methodology for assessing potential
traffic and circulation impacts of proposed development projects, General Plan Amendments,
Specific Plans, and changes in land use zoning. The City’s TIA Guidelines use LOS based on
intersection delay as the basis to analyze impacts to intersections and roadway segments within a
specified area. The City entered into an agreement with Fehr & Peers to update the City’s TIA
Guidelines to replace LOS based measurements with VMT for CEQA analysis concerning
transportation impacts. While LOS will not be used under CEQA, a project applicant will still be
required to analyze traffic impacts under the General Plan’s Circulation Element as it relates to
infrastructure requirements.
The key differences between LOS and VMT are outlined below.
Transportation “Level of Service” (LOS) Measurement
LOS measures vehicle delay (i.e., congestion at intersections and on roadways) and is represented
as a letter grade A through F, where LOS A represents completely free flowing traffic, while LOS
F represents highly congested conditions. To calculate LOS for a project, a multi-step process is
required to identify, estimate, or obtain the following information: study intersections that may be
affected, existing traffic count and current delay data, and trips projected from a project, along
with travel mode (e.g., vehicle, transit, walking or bicycling) and direction of vehicle trip travel.
Vehicles Miles Traveled (VMT)
VMT measures the amount and distance people drive by vehicle. Typically, development at a
greater distance from other land uses and in areas without transit generate more driving than
development near other land uses with more robust transportation options. Currently, VMT is used
to help measure other CEQA impacts within the City, including air quality and greenhouse gas
emissions at a project level, and in General Plan or program-level analysis, to identify long-range
transportation impacts.
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR)
In December 2018, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (“OPR”) provided a Technical
Advisory evaluating transportation impacts under CEQA, as a service to professional planners,
land use officials, and CEQA practitioners. The purpose of the OPR document is to provide advice
and recommendations, which agencies use at their discretion in preparing environmental
documents subject to CEQA.
OPR assisted in the determination of significance, as many lead agencies rely on “thresholds of
significance.” The CEQA Guidelines define a “threshold of significance” to mean “an identifiable
quantitative, qualitative or performance level of a particular environmental effect, non-compliance
with which means the effect will normally be determined to be significant by the agency and
compliance with which means the effect normally will be determined to be less than significant.”
(CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.7, subd. (a).) Lead agencies have discretion to develop and
adopt their own thresholds, or rely on thresholds recommended by other agencies, provided that
the decision of the lead agency to adopt such thresholds is supported by substantial evidence.
3
DISCUSSION
Implementing the Requirements of SB 743 Legislation
To implement the legislation, the lead agency (the City) needs to determine an appropriate VMT
methodology, thresholds, and feasible mitigation measures. Since VMT is a new methodology to
analyze transportation impacts, and OPR’s Technical Advisory recommended that the lead agency
have discretion to develop and adopt its own thresholds, there is a need to develop appropriate
guidance for projects subject to environmental review. Furthermore, to assist lead agencies in
western Riverside County with SB 743 implementation, WRCOG, with support from SCAG,
developed implementation guidance and a VMT impact screening tool with the WRCOG SB 743
Implementation Pathway Study. The guidance is to ensure that all projects reviewed by the City
use the same data, approaches, and analytical tools.
Since SB 743 represents a significant departure from the City’s current practice of using LOS, the
City must address the following questions below, prior to taking any action:
1. Methodology – what methodology should be used to forecast projected-generated VMT
and the project’s effect on VMT under baseline and cumulative conditions, and how does
the selection of a threshold influence the methodology decision?
2. Thresholds – what threshold options are available to each jurisdiction and what substantial
evidence exists to support selecting a specific VMT threshold?
3. Mitigation – what would constitute feasible mitigation measures for a VMT impact given
the land use and transportation context of the WRCOG region?
The following is a description of the methodologies analyzed to forecast “project-generated
VMT,” criteria used to establish VMT thresholds of significance, and the identification of potential
mitigation measures that can be used to address CEQA.
1. Methodology
Baseline VMT Methodology and Data: Base Year (2012) total VMT per service population
(i.e., population plus employment), home-based VMT per capita, and home-based work VMT per
worker were calculated using outputs from SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan travel
forecasting model and the Riverside County Transportation Analysis Model (“RIVTAM”). In
addition, data from the California Household Travel Survey was used to compare model derived
estimates of home-based VMT with those based on survey observations. VMT results and
comparisons of results from different data sources were displayed graphically to aid in determining
the appropriate VMT metric and data source for calculating VMT for use in the WRCOG sub -
region.
Based on the different options analyzed, it is recommended to utilize the RIVTAM and the VMT
per service population data, as noted in the WRCOG analyses. Jurisdictions and technical experts
have been utilizing RIVTAM since 2009; there is a familiarity with the model. Furthermore, a
new version of the Riverside County Travel Demand Model (RIVTAM/RIVCOM) is being
developed and will be called Riverside County Modal (“RIVCOM”) by WRCOG and will be ready
4
for use by Fall 2020. The new version of the model will be updated and refined to include full
external trip lengths.
Tools Assessment: The capabilities of travel forecasting models, along with eleven sketch model
tools were reviewed to determine their strengths and weaknesses in generating appropriate VMT
results for SB 743 analysis and testing VMT mitigation strategies. Based on the travel forecasting
model review, it is recommended that the RIVTAM be utilized for VMT impact analysis.
2. Thresholds
Potential VMT thresholds were assessed within the context of the objectives of SB 743, legal
opinions related to the legislation, proposed CEQA Guidelines updates, and the Technical
Advisory produced by OPR. The project team, led by Fehr & Peers, identified four threshold
options for consideration by lead agency (the City).
a) Thresholds consistent with OPR’s Technical Advisory, recommending that proposed
developments generate VMT per person that is 15% below existing VMT per capita;
b) Thresholds consistent with Lead Agency air quality, greenhouse gas emissions reduction,
and energy conservation goals;
c) Thresholds consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities
Strategy future year VMT projects by jurisdiction or sub-region; and
d) Thresholds based on baseline VMT performance by jurisdiction or sub-region.
3. Mitigation
Transportation Demand Management (“TDM”) strategies and its effectiveness for reducing VMT
were reviewed and assessed for relevancy. Given the City’s suburban land use context, the
following key strategies were identified as the most appropriate.
Diversifying land use
Improving pedestrian networks
Implementing traffic calming infrastructure
Building off-street bicycle network improvements
Encouraging telecommuting and alternative work schedules
Providing ride-share programs
Due to limitations of project-by-project approaches to reducing VMT, an evaluation of larger
mitigation programs was conducted by WRCOG. The evaluation considered existing programs
such as the WRCOG Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (“TUMF”) Program and new
mitigation program concepts. While the TUMF Program funds a variety of projects including
those that would contribute to VMT reduction, the overall effect of the Program results in an
increase in VMT due to substantial roadway capacity expansion. The TUMF Program could be
modified to separate the VMT, reducing projects into a separate impact fee program based on a
VMT reduction nexus, but it could not be relied upon for VMT mitigation in its current form. New
program concepts included VMT mitigation banks and exchanges. These are innovative concepts
that have not yet been developed and tested but are being considered in areas where limited
mitigation options would otherwise exist. WRCOG is undertaking a study to l ook into the
5
feasibility of a VMT mitigation bank or exchange in order to further assist lead agencies in
implementing SB 743.
CEQA TRANSPORTATION VMT ANALYSIS GUIDELINES
Taking the above factors into consideration staff worked with Fehr & Peers to revise the City’s
Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines and include a VMT Section (CEQA Transportation
VMT Analysis Guidelines) to ensure consistency with SB 743. The draft VMT Section is
consistent with OPR's Technical Advisory Guidelines and WRCOG's SB 743 Implementation
Pathway Study.
The VMT Analysis Guideline document is organized as follows:
1. Metric and Methodology for Calculating VMT
2. VMT Analysis for Land Use Projects
3. VMT Analysis for Transportation Projects
4. VMT Reduction and Mitigation Measures
5. Cumulative VMT Impacts
The following is a short description of established VMT thresholds of significance, VMT analysis
for land use and transportation projects, mitigation, and cumulative VMT impacts. For full details,
see Attachment 1: (CEQA Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines).
1. Metric and Methodology for Calculating VMT
Transportation VMT analysis for CEQA should be conducted using the Riverside County
Transportation Analysis Model (RIVTAM). The Model outputs can be used to produce Total VMT
per Service Population and Total VMT. VMT per Service Population is established by dividing
the total VMT with at least one trip end in the City by the population plus employment of the City.
2. VMT Analysis for Land Use Projects
Screening Criteria for CEQA VMT Analysis for Land Use Projects
The requirements to prepare a detailed VMT analysis applies to all Projects except the following
types of Projects, as they will not result in significant transportation impacts:
1. Small Residential and Employment projects
2. Projects Located Near a Major Transit Stop/High Quality Transit Corridor
3. Projects Located in a VMT Efficient Area
4. Locally Serving Retail Projects
5. Locally Serving Public Facilities
6. Redevelopment Projects with Greater VMT Efficiency
7. Affordable Housing
VMT Thresholds of Significance for Land Use Projects
Projects that do not meet the above screening criteria must include a detailed evaluation of the
VMT produced by the project. Any project with a VMT/Service Population 15% below the
WRCOG baseline average VMT/Service Population can be presumed to have a less than
significant impacts.
6
3. VMT Analysis for Transportation Projects
For transportation projects, any project that results in an increase in additional motor vehicle
capacity (such as constructing a new roadway or adding additional vehicle travel lands on an
existing roadway) has the potential to increase vehicle travel, referred to as “induced vehicle
travel”. Appendix C of the VMT Analysis Guidelines contains a list of transportation projects
that, absent substantial evidence to the contrary, do not require an induced travel/VMT analysis
since they typically do not cause substantial or measurable increases in VMT.
4. VMT Reduction and Mitigation Measures
Consistent with general CEQA principles, if a project is found to have a significant impact on
VMT, the impact must be reduced by modifying the project so that the VMT is reduced to an
acceptable level (below the established thresholds of significance) and/or by imposing all feasible
mitigation measures to mitigate the VMT impact to a less than significant level. If, after imposing
all feasible mitigation measures, the project VMT levels are still above the established thresholds
of significance, the City will consider adoption of a statement of overriding considerations in
compliance with CEQA Guidelines section 15091 and 15093, as already occurs when impacts in
any area remain significant after adoption of all feasible mitigation.
5. Cumulative VMT Impacts
Since VMT is a composite metric that will continue to be generated over time, a key consideration
for cumulative scenarios is whether the rate of VMT generation gets better or worse in the long-
term. If the rate is trending down over time consistent with expectations for air pollutant and
GHGs, then the project level analysis may suffice. However, the trend direction must be supported
with substantial evidence. A project would result in a significant project -generated VMT impact
under cumulative conditions if the cumulative project-generated VMT per service population
exceeds the WRCOG baseline VMT per service population.
Measuring the “project’s effect on VMT” is necessary especially under cumulative conditions to
fully explain the project’s impact. A project effect on VMT under cumulative conditions would be
considered significant if the cumulative total VMT/service population increases under the plus
project condition compared to the no project condition.
LEGAL NOTICING REQUIREMENTS
Notice of the public hearing published in the SD Union Tribune on April 9, 2020.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), it has been determined that
the adoption of the CEQA Traffic Analysis Update VMT Thresholds and Guidelines, which is an
action consistent with Senate Bill (“SB”) 743, will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the environment, and thus the Thresholds and Guidelines are not
subject to CEQA (14 CCR § 15378(a)). In addition, the Thresholds and Guidelines are not a
“project” within the meaning of CEQA pursuant to 14 CCR § 15378(b)(5) and constitute an action
7
involving procedures for the protection of the environment, which is exempt from CEQA pursuant
to 14 CCR § 15308. Finally, if the Thresholds and Guidelines are determined to be subject to
CEQA, they are exempt therefrom because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility
that these amendments will have a significant effect on the environment. (14 CCR § 15061(b)(3).)
ATTACHMENTS: 1. CEQA Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines
2. Planning Commission Resolution
3. Exhibit A – City Council Resolution
4. Notice of Public Hearing
CEQA Transportation
VMT Analysis
Guidelines
City of Temecula
April 3, 2020
Table of Contents
Overview ........................................................................................................................................ 1
Metrics and Methodology for Calculating VMT ........................................................................ 3
VMT per Service Population .................................................................................................................................................... 3
Total VMT (Boundary Method) ............................................................................................................................................... 3
Trip Length Adjustments ........................................................................................................................................................... 3
VMT Analysis for Land Use Projects ............................................................................................ 6
Screening Criteria for CEQA VMT Analysis for Land Use Projects ............................................................................ 6
1. Small Residential and Employment Projects ........................................................................................................ 6
2. Projects Located Near a Major Transit Stop/High Quality Transit Corridor ............................................ 6
3. Projects Located in a VMT Efficient Area ............................................................................................................... 6
4. Locally Serving Retail Projects ................................................................................................................................... 7
5. Locally Serving Public Facilities ................................................................................................................................. 7
6. Redevelopment Projects with Greater VMT Efficiency ..................................................................................... 7
7. Affordable Housing ........................................................................................................................................................ 7
VMT Thresholds of Significance for Land Use Projects ................................................................................................. 7
VMT Analysis Procedures for Land Use Projects ............................................................................................................. 7
VMT Analysis for Transportation Projects .................................................................................. 9
Screening Criteria for CEQA VMT Analysis for Transportation Projects ................................................................. 9
VMT Thresholds of Significance for Transportation Projects ..................................................................................... 9
VMT Analysis Procedures for Transportation Projects .................................................................................................. 9
VMT Reduction and Mitigation Measures ................................................................................ 10
Cumulative VMT Impacts ........................................................................................................... 11
Appendices
Appendix A: Model Gateway Distances
Appendix B: VMT Screening Maps
Appendix C: Transportation Projects That Do Not Require VMT Analysis
City of Temecula CEQA Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines
4/3/2020
1
Overview
SB 743, signed by the Governor in 2013, changes the focus of transportation impact analysis in CEQA from
measuring impacts to drivers, to measuring the impact of driving. The change is being made by replacing
LOS with VMT and providing streamlined review of land use and transportation projects that will help
reduce future VMT growth. This shift in transportation impact focus is expected to better align
transportation impact analysis and mitigation outcomes with the State’s goals to reduce greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions, encourage infill development, and improve public health through more active
transportation.
In January 2019, the Natural Resources Agency finalized updates to the CEQA Guidelines including the
incorporation of SB 743 modifications. The Office of Planning and Research (OPR) published its latest
Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA to the California Natural Resources
Agency in December 2018. This Technical Advisory provides recommendations on how to evaluate
transportation impacts under SB 743. These changes include elimination of auto delay, LOS, and other
similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion as a basis for determining significant CEQA
transportation impacts. The OPR guidance recommends the use of Vehicle Miles Travelled, or VMT, as the
preferred CEQA transportation metric. To comply with the new legislation the City of Temecula has
established a VMT analysis methodology, established VMT thresholds for CEQA transportation impacts,
and identified of possible mitigation strategies. SB 743 includes the following two legislative intent
statements:
1. Ensure that the environmental impacts of traffic, such as noise, air pollution, and safety concerns,
continue to be properly addressed and mitigated through the California Environmental Quality
Act.
2. More appropriately balance the needs of congestion management with statewide goals related to
infill development, promotion of public health through active transportation, and reduction of
GHG emissions.
Since CEQA transportation analysis now requires an evaluation of a project’s potential impacts related to
VMT significance criteria, the VMT analysis will:
• Enable proposed development projects to comply with current CEQA requirements as a result of
the implementation of SB 743.
• Outline the County’s CEQA significance thresholds, screening criteria, and methodology for
conducting the transportation VMT analysis.
• Help determine if mitigation is required to offset a project’s significant VMT impacts.
• Identify VMT reduction measures and strategies to mitigate potential impacts below a level of
CEQA significance.
• Reduce the need to widen or build roads through effective use of the existing transportation
network and maximizing the use of alternative modes of travel throughout the County.
City of Temecula CEQA Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines
4/3/2020
2
VMT is a metric that accounts for the number of vehicle trips generated and the length or distance of
those trips. VMT does not directly measure traffic operations but instead is a measure of network use or
efficiency, especially if expressed as a function of population or employment (i.e. VMT per resident). VMT
tends to increase as land use density decreases and travel becomes more reliant on the use of the
automobile due to the long distances between origins and destinations. VMT can also serve as a proxy for
impacts related to energy use, air pollution emissions, GHG emissions, safety, and roadway maintenance.
The relationship between VMT and energy or emissions is based on fuel consumption. The traditional use
of VMT in environmental impact analysis is to estimate mobile air pollution emissions, GHGs, and energy
consumption.
This guidelines document is organized as follows:
1. Metrics and Methodology for Calculating VMT
2. VMT Analysis for Land Use Projects
3. VMT Analysis for Transportation Projects
4. VMT Reduction and Mitigation Measures
5. Cumulative VMT Impacts
City of Temecula CEQA Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines
4/3/2020
3
Metrics and Methodology for
Calculating VMT
Transportation VMT analysis for CEQA should be conducted using the Riverside County Transportation
Analysis Model (RIVTAM) 1. The model outputs can be used to produce Total VMT/Service Population and
Total VMT.
VMT per Service Population
VMT/Service Population is established by dividing the total VMT with at least one trip end in the City of
Temecula by the population plus employment of the City. The total VMT includes all internal VMT, internal
to external, and external to internal VMT (in other words all VMT regardless of geographic boundaries).
Since this metric combines VMT for residents and employees and reflects how accessible all land uses are
(for example, geographies with higher density, more shopping, and more jobs will have lower
VMT/Service Population) it can be used to evaluate multiple types of projects. To analyze the VMT/Service
Population for a proposed project, the project’s total VMT is divided by the project population plus
employment.
The total VMT (origin-destination method) within the City can be calculated directly from model outputs
by multiplying the origin-destination (O-D) trip matrix by the final assignment skims (O-D Method VMT).
The total VMT value should be appended to include VMT from all trips that enter or exit the San Diego
County, as explained in the Trip Length Adjustment section.
Total VMT (Boundary Method)
Total daily VMT within a given area can be measured by multiplying the daily volume on every roadway
segment by the length of every roadway segment within a given area. This is called Boundary Method
VMT. Examples of total VMT (Boundary Method) are VMT within the WRCOG region, VMT within the City
of Temecula, or VMT within the vicinity of a transportation project.
Trip Length Adjustments
Trip length adjustments for trips leaving the RIVTAM Model Area can be made by using the California
Statewide Travel Demand Model (CSTDM).
1 RIVCOM is currently under development with an anticipated completion date in the Spring/Summer of 2020. Once
finalized, RIVCOM should be utilized for all forecasting activity.
City of Temecula CEQA Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines
4/3/2020
4
Adjusting the length of trips leaving a model boundary requires appending extra distance at the model
gateway zone (or external centroid) connectors. This process results in new gateway distances that are
weighted based on the amount and location of external travel origins and destinations.
The first step of this process is to determine trip volume leaving or entering the model boundary. These
are referred to as internal-to-external (IX) and external-to-internal (XI) trips. This data can be generated
either from O-D trip matrices or by conducting a select zone analysis to track trips to the model gateways.
The volume at the gateways for this purpose should not include external-to-external (XX) through trips.
Determining the full length of trips leaving or entering a model boundary requires an OD dataset that
includes flows between the model area and the area external to the model. The California Statewide Travel
Demand Model (CSTDM) should be used to develop the OD dataset.
The next step requires determining the gateway(s) based on the RIVTAM model which trips from the OD
data source would travel through. The trip length adjustment process ultimately requires calculating the
weighted average distance beyond each model gateway. The process of calculating trip lengths external
to the RIVTAM model region for trips entering or exiting the RIVTAM model area using the CSTDM is
described below:
• Create correspondence between Study Area TAZs within RIVTAM model to the Statewide Model
TAZs.
• Add “Gate” attribute to CSTDM roadway network links and set “Gate” equal to gateway id only for
those links identified as the locations corresponding to the RIVTAM model gateways.
• Add “Gate_Dist” attribute to CSTDM roadway network links and set “Gate_Dist” equal to the link
distance for those links outside the RIVTAM model boundary. All the CSTDM roadway links inside
the RIVTAM model boundary will have a “Gate_Dist” attribute of 0.
• Run a highway skim on the CSTDM roadway network to skim the shortest travel time between
each OD pair, tracking the gateway and distance outside the RIVTAM model boundary.
• For each gateway, summarize the average distance beyond the RIVTAM model boundary
weighted by volume at each gateway.
• Tag the gateway distance from the above step using CSTDM to the gateways in the RIVTAM
model and multiply to the gateway volume from the RIVTAM model to determine the gateway
external VMT to the RIVTAM model. Make sure not to double-count any overlap distance that’s
already accounted for in the VMT calculation from the RIVTAM model.
Table 1 shows the base year (2012) weighted average distance beyond the RIVTAM model boundary for
trips passing through the San Diego County model gateway, as calculated using the methodology above.
A full list of distances for model gateway distances for the RIVTAM model can be found in Appendix A.
City of Temecula CEQA Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines
4/3/2020
5
Table 1: Average Trip Distances South of San Diego County Line
Gateway Distance Outside San Diego County (miles)
Route County IX Trips XI Trips
SR-79 San Diego 40.9 41.7
Pala Rd San Diego 19.3 20.4
I-15 San Diego 23.8 23.1
Sandia Creek Rd San Diego 6.7 6.7
De Luz Rd San Diego 4.4 4.4
Tenaja Rd San Diego 6.5 6.5
Source: Fehr & Peers.
City of Temecula CEQA Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines
4/3/2020
6
VMT Analysis for Land Use Projects
Screening Criteria for CEQA VMT Analysis for Land Use Projects
The requirements to prepare a detailed transportation VMT analysis apply to all land development
projects, except those that meet at least one of the screening criteria. A project that meets at least one of
the screening criteria below would have a less than significant VMT impact due to project characteristics
and/or location.
1. Small Residential and Employment Projects
Projects generating less than 110 daily vehicle trips (trips are based on the number of vehicle trips after
any alternative modes/location-based adjustments are applied) may be presumed to have a less than
significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary.
2. Projects Located Near a Major Transit Stop/High Quality Transit Corridor
Projects located within a half mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high-quality
transit corridor2 may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to
the contrary. This presumption may not be appropriate if the project:
• Has a Floor Area Ratio of less than 0.75
• Includes more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the project than required
by the City
• Replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income
residential units
3. Projects Located in a VMT Efficient Area
A VMT efficient area is any area with an average VMT per service population 15% below the baseline
average for the WRCOG region. Land use projects may qualify for the use of VMT efficient area screening
if the project can be reasonably expected to generate VMT per service population that is similar to the
existing land uses in the VMT efficient area. Projects located within a VMT efficient area may be presumed
to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. Screening maps for
each metric and subregion can be found in Appendix B.
2 Major transit stop: a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail
transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes
or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods. High quality transit corridor: a corridor with fixed
route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute periods.
City of Temecula CEQA Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines
4/3/2020
7
4. Locally Serving Retail Projects
Local serving retail projects less than 50,000 square feet may be presumed to have a less than significant
impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. Local serving retail generally improves the
convenience of shopping close to home and has the effect of reducing vehicle travel.
5. Locally Serving Public Facilities
Public facilities that serve the surrounding community or public facilities that are passive use may be
presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary.
6. Redevelopment Projects with Greater VMT Efficiency
A redevelopment project may be presumed to have a less than significant impact if the proposed project’s
total project VMT is less than the existing land use’s total VMT.
7. Affordable Housing
An affordable housing project may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial
evidence to the contrary.
VMT Thresholds of Significance for Land Use Projects
Projects that do not meet the above screening criteria must include a detailed evaluation of the VMT
produced by the project. Any project with a VMT/Service Population 15% below the WRCOG baseline
average VMT/Service Population can be presumed to have a less than significant impact.
VMT Analysis Procedures for Land Use Projects
For projects which meet one of the screening criteria for CEQA VMT analysis, no additional analysis is
necessary. For projects which are not screened, an evaluation of the VMT produced by the project is
necessary. To complete the analysis, the project should be evaluated using the RIVTAM Model (or
RIVCOM model once available) to evaluate the VMT/Service population using the methodology described
in the Methodology section.
If the project includes transportation demand management (TDM) measures, the reduction in VMT due to
each measure shall be calculated and can be applied to the project analysis. There are several resources
for determining the reduction in VMT due to TDM measures, such as the California Air Pollution Control
Officers Association (CAPCOA) Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures (2010) (Quantification
Report).
The VMT reductions associated with project TDM should be applied to the project VMT estimate (nsuring
that the VMT reduction is applied to the appropriate project VMT. For example, if a commute trip
reduction program is proposed for a multi-family residential project, the VMT reduction should only be
applied to the work related VMT associated with the project. If the project does not include any TDM,
then no reduction would be taken.
City of Temecula CEQA Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines
4/3/2020
8
The resulting VMT values should be compared to the significance threshold determine whether the
project results in a significant CEQA transportation impact due to VMT.
City of Temecula CEQA Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines
4/3/2020
9
VMT Analysis for Transportation
Projects
For transportation projects, any project that results in an increase in additional motor vehicle capacity
(such as constructing a new roadway or adding additional vehicle travel lanes on an existing roadway) has
the potential to increase vehicle travel, referred to as “induced vehicle travel.”
Screening Criteria for CEQA VMT Analysis for Transportation
Projects
Appendix C contains a list of transportation projects that, absent substantial evidence to the contrary, do
not require an induced travel/VMT analysis since they typically do not cause substantial or measurable
increases in VMT.
VMT Thresholds of Significance for Transportation Projects
A net increase in area total VMT indicates that the project has a significant impact
VMT Analysis Procedures for Transportation Projects
To calculate the change in area (boundary method) total VMT, the transportation project should be input
into the travel demand model. The “with project” area total VMT produced by the model run is compared
to the “no project” area total VMT. A net increase in area VMT indicates that the project has a significant
impact
City of Temecula CEQA Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines
4/3/2020
10
VMT Reduction and Mitigation
Measures
To mitigate VMT impacts, the project applicant must reduce VMT, which can be done by either reducing
the number of automobile trips generated by the project or by reducing the distance that people drive.
The following strategies are available to achieve this:
1. Modify the project’s built environment characteristics to reduce VMT generated by the project.
2. Implement TDM measures to reduce VMT generated by the project.
Strategies that reduce single occupant automobile trips or reduce travel distances are called TDM
strategies. There are several resources for determining the reduction in VMT due to TDM measures such
as the CAPCOA Quantification Report.
City of Temecula CEQA Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines
4/3/2020
11
Cumulative VMT Impacts
Since VMT is a composite metric that will continue to be generated over time, a key consideration for
cumulative scenarios is whether the rate of VMT generation gets better or worse in the long-term. If the
rate is trending down over time consistent with expectations for air pollutant and GHGs, then the project
level analysis may suffice. However, the trend direction must be supported with substantial evidence. A
project would result in a significant project-generated VMT impact under cumulative conditions if the
cumulative project-generated VMT per service population exceeds the WRCOG baseline VMT per service
population.
Measuring the ‘project’s effect on VMT’ is necessary especially under cumulative conditions to fully
explain the project’s impact. A project effect on VMT under cumulative conditions would be considered
significant if the cumulative total VMT/service population increases under the plus project condition
compared to the no project condition.
Please note that the cumulative no project shall reflect the adopted RTP/SCS; as such, if a project is
consistent with the regional RTP/SCS, then the cumulative impacts shall be considered less than
significant.
Appendix A: Model Gateway Distances
Gateway Distance Outside San Diego County (miles)
Route County IX Trips XI Trips
US-101 Santa Barbara 24.4 26.4
SR-150 Santa Barbara 1.9 1.4
SR-33 Santa Barbara 162.9 184.7
Lockwood Valley Rd Kern County 1.8 1.9
I-5 Kern County 224.2 224.8
90th Street W Kern County 26.9 19.8
60th Street W Kern County 0.0 6.1
SR-14 Kern County 30.3 29.0
Sierra Hwy Kern County 0.0 0.0
120th Street E Kern County 13.0 13.1
Mercury Blvd.
(200th St) Kern County 0.0 0.0
SR-58 Kern County 102.8 92.7
SR-395 Kern County 134.8 122.1
SR-178 Kern County 2.9 3.6
Trona Rd Inyo County 0.0 0.0
SR-127 Inyo County 38.9 37.9
Mesquite Valley Rd Inyo County 0.0 0.0
Kingston Rd Arizona 0.0 0.0
SR-15 Arizona 0.0 0.0
Nipton Rd Arizona 0.0 0.0
SR-95 Arizona 0.0 0.0
Needle Hwy Arizona 0.0 0.0
I-40 Arizona 0.0 0.0
Parker Dam Rd Arizona 0.0 0.0
SR-62 Arizona 0.0 0.0
I-10 Arizona 0.0 0.0
I-8 Mexico 0.0 0.0
SR-186 Mexico 0.0 0.0
SR-7 Mexico 0.0 0.0
SR-111 Mexico 0.0 0.0
I-8 Imperial County 67.2 63.8
SR-78 Imperial County 48.6 43.4
SR-22 Imperial County 28.1 26.1
SR-79 San Diego 40.9 41.7
Pala Rd San Diego 19.3 20.4
I-15 San Diego 23.8 23.1
Sandia Creek Rd San Diego 6.7 6.7
De Luz Rd San Diego 4.4 4.4
Tenaja Rd. San Diego 6.5 6.5
I-5 San Diego 40.2 40.3
Appendix B: VMT Screening Maps
TEMECULA
MURRIETA
W:\San Diego N Drive\Projects\2019_Projects\0333_Temecula SB 743 VMT Thresholds and Guidelines\Graphics\GIS\Temecula_SB743_VMT.mxdRIVTAM Model (2012)Daily Total VMT per Service PopulationComparison to WRCOG Regional Average
§¨¦215
§¨¦15
§¨¦15
|}þ79
|}þ79
§¨¦15
County Boundary
Riverside County
San Diego County
< -15% below WRCOG Regional Average (Screened)
0 to -15% below WRCOG Regional Average (Mitigatable)
Higher than WRCOG Regional Average (Challenge to Mitigate)! ! ! !!! !
!! ! !!!!!!City Limits
Appendix C: Transportation Projects
That Do Not Require VMT Analysis
The following complete list is provided in the OPR Technical Advisory (December 2018, Pages 20-21) for
transportation projects that “would not likely lead to a substantial or measurable increase in vehicle travel,
and therefore generally should not require an induced travel analysis:”
• Rehabilitation, maintenance, replacement, safety, and repair projects designed to improve the
condition of existing transportation assets (e.g., highways; roadways; bridges; culverts;
Transportation Management System field elements such as cameras, message signs, detection, or
signals; tunnels; transit systems; and assets that serve bicycle and pedestrian facilities) and that do
not add additional motor vehicle capacity
• Roadside safety devices or hardware installation such as median barriers and guardrails
• Roadway shoulder enhancements to provide “breakdown space,” dedicated space for use only by
transit vehicles, to provide bicycle access, or to otherwise improve safety, but which will not be
used as automobile vehicle travel lanes
• Addition of an auxiliary lane of less than one mile in length designed to improve roadway safety
• Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic lanes that are not for through traffic, such as left,
right, and U-turn pockets, two-way left turn lanes, or emergency breakdown lanes that are not
utilized as through lanes
• Addition of roadway capacity on local or collector streets provided the project also substantially
improves conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, and, if applicable, transit
• Conversion of existing general purpose lanes (including ramps) to managed lanes or transit lanes,
or changing lane management in a manner that would not substantially increase vehicle travel
• Addition of a new lane that is permanently restricted to use only by transit vehicles
• Reduction in number of through lanes
• Grade separation to separate vehicles from rail, transit, pedestrians or bicycles, or to replace a
lane in order to separate preferential vehicles (e.g., HOV, HOT, or trucks) from general vehicles
• Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic control devices, including Transit Signal Priority
(TSP) features
• Installation of traffic metering systems, detection systems, cameras, changeable message signs
and other electronics designed to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow
• Timing of signals to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow
• Installation of roundabouts or traffic circles
• Installation or reconfiguration of traffic calming devices
• Adoption of or increase in tolls
• Addition of tolled lanes, where tolls are sufficient to mitigate VMT increase
• Initiation of new transit service
• Conversion of streets from one-way to two-way operation with no net increase in number of
traffic lanes
• Removal or relocation of off-street or on-street parking spaces
• Adoption or modification of on-street parking or loading restrictions (including meters, time
limits, accessible spaces, and preferential/reserved parking permit programs)
• Addition of traffic wayfinding signage
• Rehabilitation and maintenance projects that do not add motor vehicle capacity
• Addition of new or enhanced bike or pedestrian facilities on existing streets/highways or within
existing public rights-of-way
• Addition of Class I bike paths, trails, multi-use paths, or other off-road facilities that serve non-
motorized travel
• Installation of publicly available alternative fuel/charging infrastructure
• Addition of passing lanes, truck climbing lanes, or truck brake-check lanes in rural areas that do
not increase overall vehicle capacity along the corridor
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED “A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA TO ADOPT THE CEQA TRANSPORTATION
VMT ANALYSIS GUIDELINES FOR PURPOSES OF
ANALYZING TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS UNDER THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
(“CEQA”), AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION
UNDER CEQA (LONG RANGE PLANNING PROJECT NO.
LR18-1506)”
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula
does hereby find, determine and declare that:
A. The California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (“CEQA Guidelines”)
encourage public agencies to develop and publish generally applicable “thresholds of significance”
to be used in determining the significance of a project’s environmental effects; and
B. CEQA Guidelines section 15064.7 (a) defines a threshold of significance as “an
identifiable quantitative, qualitative or performance level of a particular environmental effect, non-
compliance with which means the effect will normally be determined to be significant by the
agency and compliance with which means the effect normally will be determined to less than
significant”; and
C. CEQA Guidelines section 15064.7 (b) requires that thresholds of significance must
be adopted by ordinance, resolution, rule, or regulations, developed through a public review
process, and be supported by substantial evidence; and
D. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15064.7 (c), when adopting thresholds of
significance, a public agency may consider thresholds of significance adopted or recommended by
other public agencies provided that the decision of the agency is supported by substantial evidence;
and
E. Senate Bill 743, enacted in 2013 and codified in Public Resources Code section
21099, required changes to the CEQA Guidelines regarding the criteria for determining the
significance of transportation impacts of projects; and
F. In 2018, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (“OPR”) proposed, and
the California Natural Resources Agency certified and adopted, new CEQA Guidelines section
15064.3 that identifies vehicle miles traveled (“VMT”) – meaning the amount and distance of
automobile travel attributable to a project – as the most appropriate metric to evaluate a project’s
transportation impacts; and
G. As a result, automobile delay, as measured by “level of service” and other similar
metrics, generally no longer constitutes a significant environmental effect under CEQA; and
H. CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 goes into effect on July 1, 2020, though public
agencies may elect to be governed by this section immediately; and
I. Staff worked with Fehr & Peers to revise the City’s Traffic Impact Analysis
(“TIA”) Guidelines and include a VMT Section (CEQA Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines
(“VMT Analysis Guidelines”)) to ensure consistency with SB 743; and
J. On April 22, 2020, at a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission,
considered staff’s presentation and reviewed the recommended thresholds of significance and the
VMT Analysis Guidelines.
Section 2. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the
following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the adoption of this
resolution:
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), the Planning
Commission has been determined that the adoption of the VMT Thresholds and CEQA
Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines, which is an action consistent with Senate Bill (“SB”)
743, will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the
environment, and thus the Thresholds and VMT Analysis Guidelines are not subject to CEQA (14
CCR § 15378(a)). In addition, the Thresholds and VMT Analysis Guidelines are not a “project”
within the meaning of CEQA pursuant to 14 CCR § 15378(b)(5) and constitute an action involving
procedures for the protection of the environment, which is exempt from CEQA pursuant to 14
CCR § 15308. Finally, if the Thresholds and VMT Analysis Guidelines are determined to be
subject to CEQA, they are exempt therefrom because it can be seen with certainty that there is no
possibility that these amendments will have a significant effect on the environment. (14 CCR §
15061(b)(3).)
Section 3. Recommendation. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the
City Council of Temecula adopt the Resolution attached hereto as Exhibit “A” adopting the CEQA
Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines (which is included as Attachment A to the City Council
resolution) as part of the Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines thereby establishing the VMT
thresholds of significance for transportation impact analysis under CEQA.
Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula
Planning Commission this 22nd day of April, 2020.
Lanae Turley-Trejo, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Luke Watson
Secretary
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Luke Watson, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
the forgoing PC Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 22nd day of April,
2020, by the following vote:
AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Luke Watson
Secretary
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA TO ADOPT THE CEQA
TRANSPORTATION VMT ANALYSIS GUIDELINES FOR
PURPOSES OF ANALYZING TRANSPORTATION
IMPACTS UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT (“CEQA”), AND MAKING A FINDING OF
EXEMPTION UNDER CEQA (LONG RANGE PLANNING
PROJECT NO. LR18-1506).
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of City of Temecula does hereby
find, determine and declare that:
A. The California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (“CEQA Guidelines”)
encourage public agencies to develop and publish generally applicable “thresholds of significance”
to be used in determining the significance of a project’s environmental effects; and
B. CEQA Guidelines section 15064.7 (a) defines a thresholds of significance as “an
identifiable quantitative, qualitative or performance level of a particular environmental effect,
noncompliance with which means the effect will normally be determined to be significant by the
agency and compliance with which means the effect normally will be determined to less than
significant”; and
C. CEQA Guidelines section 15064.7 (b) requires that thresholds of significance must
be adopted by ordinance, resolution, rule, or regulations, developed through a public review
process, and be supported by substantial evidence; and
D. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15064.7 (c), when adopting thresholds of
significance, a public agency may consider thresholds of significance adopted or recommended by
other public agencies provided that the decision of the agency is supported by substantial evidence;
and
E. Senate Bill 743, enacted in 2013 and codified in Public Resources Code section
21099, required changes to the CEQA Guidelines regarding the criteria for determining the
significance of transportation impacts of projects; and
F. In 2018, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (“OPR”) proposed, and
the California Natural Resources Agency certified and adopted, new CEQA Guidelines section
15064.3 that identifies vehicle miles traveled (“VMT”) – meaning the amount and distance of
automobile travel attributable to a project – as the most appropriate metric to evaluate a project’s
transportation impacts; and
G. As a result, automobile delay, as measured by “level of service” and other similar
metrics, generally no longer constitutes a significant environmental effect under CEQA; and
H. CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 goes into effect on July 1, 2020, though pub lic
agencies may elect to be governed by this section immediately; and
I. Staff worked with Fehr & Peers to revise the City’s Traffic Impact Analysis
(“TIA”) Guidelines and include a VMT Section (CEQA Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines
(“VMT Analysis Guidelines”)) to ensure consistency with SB 743; and
J. On April 22, 2020, at a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission,
considered staff’s presentation and reviewed the recommended thresholds of significance and the
VMT Analysis Guidelines and recommended that the City Council adopt the VMT Analysis
Guidelines; and
K. On April 23, 2020, at a duly noticed public hearing, the Public Traffic Safety
Commission considered staff’s presentation and reviewed the recommended thresholds of
significance and the VMT Analysis Guidelines and recommended that the City Council adopt the
VMT Analysis Guidelines.
Section 2. Environmental Findings. The City Council hereby makes the following
environmental findings and determinations in connection with the adoption of this resolution:
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), the City Council has
been determined that the adoption of the VMT Thresholds and CEQA Transportation VMT
Analysis Guidelines, which is an action consistent with Senate Bill (“SB”) 743, will not result in
a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and thus the
thresholds and VMT Analysis Guidelines are not subject to CEQA (14 CCR § 15378(a)). In
addition, the thresholds and VMT Analysis Guidelines are not a “project” within the meaning of
CEQA pursuant to 14 CCR § 15378(b)(5) and constitute an action involving procedures for the
protection of the environment, which is exempt from CEQA pursuant to 14 CCR § 15308. Finally,
if the thresholds and VMT Analysis Guidelines are determined to be subject to CEQA, they are
exempt therefrom because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that these
amendments will have a significant effect on the environment. (14 CCR § 15061(b)(3).)
Section 3. Further Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby finds
the thresholds of significance identified in the VMT Analysis Guidelines have been developed
through a public review process and are supported by substantial evidence, as required by CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.7.
Section 4. Approval of VMT Analysis Guidelines. The City Council of the City of
Temecula hereby adopts the CEQA Transportation VMT Analysis Guidelines attached hereto as
Exhibit “A” as part of the Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines thereby establishing the VMT
thresholds of significance for transportation impact analysis under CEQA.
Section 5. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this
day of May 2020.
James “Stew” Stewart, Mayor
ATTEST:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2020- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the day of May, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Randi Johl, City Clerk
Notice of Public Hearing
A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the City of Temecula PLANNING
COMMISSION to consider the matter described below:
CASE NO: LR18-1506 APPLICANT: City of Temecula
PROPOSAL: Long Range Project Number LR18-1506 to conform with State Law Senate Bill
(“SB”) 743 by replacing vehicular Level of Service (LOS) with Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
transportation analysis metric under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend that the City Council adopt a Resolution approving Vehicle
Miles Traveled (VMT) thresholds for California Environmental Quality Act compliance related to
transportation analysis.
ENVIRONMENTAL: The City has the adoption of this Resolution is not a “project” for purposes of
CEQA, as that term is defined by Guidelines Section 15378. Specifically, this Resolution constitutes
organizational or administrative activities of City government that will not result in direct or indirect
physical changes in the environment. (Guidelines Section 15378(b) (5)). Therefore, because it is not a
“project,” this Resolution is not subject to CEQA’s requirements. Further, even if this Resolution were
deemed a “project” and therefore subject to CEQA, the Resolution would be covered by th e general rule
that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment.
(Guidelines Section 15061 (b) (3)). As an organizational or administrative activity which do not involve
any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the
environment, this Resolution does not have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment
and is therefore exempt under this general rule. Further, it can be seen with certainty that there is no
possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, and thus this
Resolution is not subject to CEQA. (Guidelines Section 15061(b) (3)).
CASE PLANNER: Sara Toma, (951) 506-5185
DATE OF HEARING: April 22, 2020 TIME OF HEARING: 6:00 p.m.
PLACE OF HEARING: This meeting is being conducted utilizing teleconferencing and electronic means
consistent with State of California Executive Order N-29-20 dated March 17,
2020, regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. The live stream of the meeting may
be viewed on television and/or online. Details can be found at temeculaca.gov/tv.
In accordance with Executive Order N-29-20, the public may only view the
meeting on television and/or online and not in the Council Chamber.
The complete agenda packet (including any supplemental materials) will be available for viewing on the City’s
website – TemeculaCA.gov after 4:00 p.m. the Friday before the Planning Commission meeting. Due to the
closure of the Library and other City Buildings and Facilities due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the complete
agenda is only viewable on the City website at https://temeculaca.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx. For more
information or have questions regarding this project, please contact Sara Toma (951) 506-5185.
Any petition for judicial review of a decision of the Planning Commission shall be filed within time required
by, and controlled by, Sections 1094.5 and 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. In any such action
or proceeding seeking judicial review of, which attacks or seeks to set aside, or void any decision of the
Planning Commission shall be limited to those issues raised at the hearing or in writte n correspondence
delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing described in this notice.
Submission of Public Comments: For those wishing to make public comments at the April 22, 2020 Planning
Commission meeting, please submit your comments by email to be read aloud at the meeting by the Principal
Management Analyst. Email comments must be submitted to Lynn Lehner at lynn.lehner@temeculaca.gov.
Electronic comments on agenda items for the April 22, 2020 Planning Commission meeting may only be
submitted via email and comments via text and social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) will not be accepted.
Reading of Public Comments: The Principal Management Analyst shall read all email comments, provided
that the reading shall not exceed three (3) minutes, or such other time as the Planning Commission may provide,
consistent with the time limit for speakers at a Planning Commission meeting. The email comments submitted
shall become part of the record of the Planning Commission meeting.
Questions? Please call the Case Planner Sara Toma at (951) 506-5185 or the Community Development
Department at (951) 694-6400.