Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
052103 PC Agenda
n comp ~nce with the Americans with Disabilities Act if you need'special assistance to participate in this meeting, p ease 'contact the office of the City Clerk (909) 694-6444.' Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements'to ensure accessibility to that meet ng [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II]'~ AGENDA TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE May 21, 2003 - 6:00 P.M. Next in Order: Resolution: No. 2003-031 CALL TO ORDER Flag Salute: Commissioner Guerriero Roll Call: Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso, TelesiO and Chiniaeff PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Commission on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Commission about an item no.._~t on the Agenda, a salmon colored "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the Commission Secretary. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Commission Secretary prior to the Commission addressing that item. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers. CONSENT CALENDAR NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC 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 Aqenda RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Agenda of May 21,2003 R:\PLANCOMM'~Agendas~2003',05-21-03.doc : 1 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the Minutes of April 23, 2003 COMMISSION BUSINESS 3 City of Temecula Capital Improvement Proqram (CIP) 2004-2008 RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Receive and File PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 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 hearing. If you challenge any of the projects in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondences delivered to the Commission Secretary at, or prior to, the public hearing. Continued from May 7, 2003 4 Planninq Application No.'s PA02-0605 a Development Plan for the desiqn and construction of a 9.24-acre commercial center which includes two proposed retail buildin.qs totalin.q 20,500 square feet and three conceptual future retail buildinq pads, PA02-0606 a Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for the desi.qr~ and construction of a 4,000 square foot restaurant buildin.q with a drive-thru, on Pad "G" of a 9.24-acre commercial center within Temecula Re.qional Center, PA02-0607 a Development Plan for the desiqn and construction of a 5,514 square foot restaurant, on pad "F' of a 9.24-acre commercial center within the Temecula Reqional Center located on the northwest corner of North General Kearny and Marqarita Roads in the Temecula Re.qional Center (aka Power Center II) {APN 910-130-087 thru -090, -092, & -096), Thomas Thomsley, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No.'s PA02-0605, PA02-0606, and PA02-0607 (Development Plan) based on the Determination of Consistency with a project for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was previously certified pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 - Subsequent EIR's and Negative Declarations; R:~PLANCOMM'~gendas'~.003~05-21-03.do~ 2 4.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- 4.3 Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02~0605 A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A 9.24 ACRE COMMERCIAL CENTER WHICH INCLUDES TWO PROPOSED RETAIL BUILDINGS TOTALING 20,500 SQUARE FEET AND THREE CONCEPTUAL FUTURE RETAIL BUILDING PADS LOCATED WITHIN THE TEMECULA REGIONAL CENTER ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY ROAD AND MARGARITA ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.'S 910-130-087, 088, 089, 090, 092, AND 096. a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0606 A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT BUILDING WITH A DRIVE-THRU, AT A 9.24 ACRE COMMERCIAL CENTER WITHIN THE TEMECULA REGIONAL CENTER, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY ROAD AND MARGARITA ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 910:130-092. 414 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-.__ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0607 - A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION* OF A 5,514 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT, AT A 9.24 ACRE COMMERCIAL CENTER WITHIN THE TEMECULA REGIONAL CENTER, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY ROAD AND MARGARITA ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO, 910-130-096. R:~PLANCOMM\Agendas~2003\05-21-03.doc 3 New Items 5 Planning Application No. PA02-0612: A Zonin.q Amendment to adopt section 17.22.180 of the Temecula Municipal Code and amend the official Zoning Map of the City of Temecula from Public Institutional (PI) to Planned Development Overlay (PDO-7), PA01-0653: A Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for a master plan and design guidelines for the development of Christian school facilities, athletic fields, and facilities, a residential area, and approve phase A-1 of the master plan located on the north side of Pauba Road, south of Rancho Vista Road and east of Temecula Valley Hi.qh School, APN: 955-02-002, Dan Long, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- 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 ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, FOR THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN," GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 5.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- 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 THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FROM PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL (PI) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO-7), AND ADOPT SECTION 17.22.180 INCLUDING THE PDO TEXT AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS," GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 R:~P LANCOMM~,gendas~2003~05-21-03.doc 4 6 5.3 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO, 2003- 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 APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0653, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL COMPLEX, ATHLETIC FIELDS AND RELATED FACILITIES, AND FUTURE RESIDENTIAL AREA FOR UP TO 26 RESIDENTS ON A 94 ACRE SITE," GENERALLY LOCATED BE'FWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 5.4 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- 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 APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0653, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR PHASE A-1 OF THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN TO INCLUDE A TWO STORY HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 38,358 SQUARE FEET AND AN APPROXIMATELY 9,728 SQUARE FOOT ONE STORY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BUILDING," GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 Planninq Application No. PA03-0109 Development Code amendment to require the standards for secondary dwellinq units be approved administratively located Citywide, David Ho.qan, Principal Planner RECOMMENDATION: R:',P LAN COM M',Agendas~003~05-21-03.doc 5 6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY THE PROCEDURES FOR APPROVING SECONDARY DWELLING UNITS AND CLARIFY THE PROCEDURES FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS (PLANNING APPLICATION PA03-0110)" COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next meeting: June 4, 2003 - Council Chambers 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590 R:~P LANCOMM',Agendas',2003~,05-21-03.do~ 6 ITEM #2 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 23, 2003 CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:01 P.M., on Wednesday, April 23, 2003, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Flag salute by Commissioner Olhasso. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Mathewson, Olhasso, Telesio, and Chairman Chiniaeff. Absent: Guerriero and Olhasso. PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Aqenda RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Agenda of April 23, 2003. In response to Director of Planning Ubnoske's request, the Commission move Item No. 4 as the first item on the agenda. For Chairman Chiniaeff, it was noted that the Ex Parte communications Item would be discussed at the end of the agenda. 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the Minutes of April 9, 2003 unanimously agreed to R:\PLANCOMM\MIN UTES~003\042303.doc 1 MOTION: Chairman Chiniaeff moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-2. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Mathewson and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioners Olhasso and Guerriero who abstained. COMMISSION BUSINESS Ex Parte Communications - to be discussed after Item No. 7; see page 13. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 3 Planninq Application No. PA02-0334 To desiqn, construct, and operate a 27,706 square foot two-story office buildinq located on Jefferson Avenue and north of Via Montezuma (Continued from April 9, 2003) RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA02-0334 pursuant to Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act; 3.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0334, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A 27,706 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING ON 1.67 VACANT ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED ON JEFFERSON AVENUE AND NORTH OF VIA MONTEZUMA KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 921-400-037 (To be discussed after Item No.4; see pages 3 - 5.) Aqenda Item No. 4 discussed out of order 4 Planning Application No. PA02-0652 A Vesting Tentative Pamel Map located on the south side of Rancho California Road, west of Cosmio Road and east of the Rancho California Road / Moraqa Intersection RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Adopt a Determination of Consistency exemption for Planning Application No. PA02-0652 (Vesting Tentative Parcel Map) pursuant to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act; 4.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: R :',P LAN C OM k~VilN UTES",2003~042303.doc 2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-018 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0652, AN EIGHT LOT VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, WEST OF COSMIC ROAD AND EAST OF THE MORAGA ROAD INTERSECTION OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD KNOWN ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. (S). 944-920-012, 013, 014 Principal Planner Hazen gave an overview of the staff report (as per agenda material), noting the following: That the application is an eight-lot vesting parcel map on a previously approved site with commercial and offices along the frontage of Rancho California Road with multiple- family residences toward the rear of the lot; · That the site design has been approved and that the vesting map would be solely to parcel this site off; That the tract will conform with the Subdivision Ordinance and the Subdivision Map Act and will conform with the Zoning Ordinance for Professional Office (PO) and multiple- family residential; That staff could make the findings of approval and would recommend that the Commission approve this application and find that it is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). At this time, the public hearing was opened. Representing the applicant, Mr. Larry Markham, 41635 Enterprise Circle North, of MJW Property Group, noted that he would concur with staff's report as well as the conditions of approval and advised that he was available for questions. The public hearing was closed at this time. MOTION: Commissioner Telesio moved to approve staff's recommendation. The motion was seconded by Commissioner OIhasso with the exception of Commissioner Guerriero who opposed. R:'~P LANCOMM~MIN UTES~2003~042303.doc 3 (Returning to agenda Item No. 3) 3 Planninq Application No. PA02-0334 to desiqn, construct, and operate a 27,706 square foot two-story office buildinq located on Jefferson Avenue and north of Via Montezuma Continued from April 9, 2003) RECOMMENDATIOI~: 3.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA02-0334 pursuant to Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act (California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)); 3.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-017 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0334, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A 27,706 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING ON 1.67 VACANT ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED ON JEFFERSON AVENUE AND NORTH OF VIA MONTEZUMA KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 921-400-037 Associate Planner Rush reviewed the staff report (as per agenda material), highlighting the following: · That the proposed application would be for a two-story office building located on Jefferson Avenue and north of Via Montezuma; · That the floor area ratio (FAR) for the Community Commemial (CC) Zoning District would be .30; · That the applicant has proposed a FAR of .38 which would exceed the target FAR for the Community Commercial (CC); That staff would support the proposed .08 increase due to the exceptional architecture and landscaping design amenities which would exceed the Development Code standards; · That the entire building will be surrounded by landscaping except for the areas designated as entry points to the building; · That staff has determined that the proposed building architecture will provide exceptional architecture and will meet the set Development Code criteria; · That the building will be a welcomed addition to the surrounding area; R:~P LAN C OMtvAMIN UTES~2003~042303.d cc 4 That staff would recommend that the Planning Commission approve the project with the notice of exemption per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), In response to Chairman Chiniaeff's query regarding the Wildomar Fault, Associated Planner Rush relayed the following: · That initial trenching was completed and that a geological report was submitted to staff; · That evidence of faulting was observed in the northern portion of the trench; that the most prominent feature was located approximately 75 feet from the north end; and that the fault was oriented in a northwesterly direction with a dip of approximately 74 degrees to the southwest; and that mapping also indicated a vertical offset of approximately five feet with a southwest side down. Planning Director Ubnoske noted the following: · That staff has reviewed the seismic report prior to this meeting; · That trenching has been completed; · That there were no recommendations in the seismic report relative to setbacks; · That if anything were discovered after the submittal of the detailed rating plan, staff would impose mitigation measures; · That staff did not see anything in the report that specified a distance from the fault line. Senior Engineer Alegria noted the following: · That condition #32 will require a Geological Report which would evaluate the seismic situation which must be approved by the County Geologist prior to issuance of a grading permit. At this time, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Marty Smith, the applicant, 41750 Winchester Road, Suite J, noted the following: · That the property was trenched prior to the acquisition of the property and Was subsequently trenched by the applicant prior to closing; · That the geotechnical report satisfied the applicant's concerns and was satisfactory to ensure the proposed construction. Ms. Joan Sparkman, 27710 Jefferson Avenue, spoke in favor of the project, noting that the tWo-story office building would be an exceptional benefit to the City. The public hearing was closed at this time. R:\PLANCOMM~MINUTES~2003\042303.doc 5 MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve staff's recommendation. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Mathewson and voice vote reflected unanimous decision. (Returning to the re.qular a.qenda order) Planning Application No. PA02-0620 To construct, establish and operate an 8,100 square foot multi-tenant retail building on 1.01 acres located within the Bel Villa.qio shoppinq center, west of Margarita Road, 470 linear feet south of the Mall Access Road and North General Kearney Road intersection RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Adopt a Determination of Consistency exemption for Planning Application No. PA02- 0620 (Development Plan) pursuant to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act; 5.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-019 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0620, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE AN 8,100 SQUARE FOOT MULTI-TENANT RETAIL BUILDING ON 1.01 ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF MARGARITA ROAD, 470 LINEAR FEET SOUTH OF THE MALL ACCESS ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY ROAD INTERSECTION AND ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 921-090-063, 071,072 AND 078 Principal Planner Hazen provided an overview of the staff report (as per agenda material), noting the lollowing: That the Planning Commission had not originally approved the design for Building C; · That the applicant has proposed to construct an 8,100 square foot multi-tenant retail building (Building C) on an existing pad within the Bel Villagio Shopping Center; · That the proposed architecture, materials, colors, and canopy treatment are consistent with the architecture design of the Bel Villagio Shopping Center. By way of overhead, Principal Planner Hazen gave an illustration of the Plaza and described its site location and proximity to another pedestrian plaza, noting the following: That in order to encourage the use of the pedestrian plaza, staff and the applicant have agreed that future uses for Building C will be targeted toward promoting such use, advising that legally the City may not bind the applicant to this action but that there would be a mutual understanding of staff's objective; · That the applicant was present and available to address a sample board, reflecting its consistency with the existing color choices. R:~P LAN COM M~MI NUTES',2003',042303.doc 6 In response to Commissioner Guerriero's query regarding the offsets on the backside of the building, Principal Planner Hazen relayed that for Building C, staff was able to successfully acquire more articulation, insets, color treatments, and more decorative door lights. In response to Commissioner Mathewson's query regarding window treatments on an earlier phase, Principal Planner Hazen advised that the applicant will be pursuing the direction of the Commission; that the applicant has bonded to guarantee those improvements; and that although at the time, no site plan has proposed for this particular building, it will be consistent with the overall master sign plan for Bel Villagio Center. At this time, the public hearing was opened. Representing the applicant, Ms. Vandana Kelkar of MCA Architects, Inc., noted the following: · That the applicant has relayed concurrence with the staff report (as per agenda material); · That subject to the approval of staff, the applicant requested the following revisions: That under General Requirements (page 11) Item No. 12 Dunn Edwards Paint #DE127 "Ennis Brook" be deleted; o That under Prior to Buildin,q Occupancy (page 12) Item No. 19 be deleted; o That under Buildinq and Safety (page 15) Item No. 46 be deleted; That as per the request of Senior Planner Naaseh-Shahry, the applicant has submitted an application for bonding. Director of Planning Ubnoske noted that a bonding application was not necessary but that a bond would ensure that if the lintels were not installed, that the City would have the necessary funds to install the required improvements. Principal Planner Hazen noted that the applicant has made amendments to the originally proposed use of lintels which were initially deemed unacceptable by the Commission. Chairman Chiniaeff relayed his recollection that the old lintels would be replaced with new lintels. In response to Commissioner Mathewson's query regarding tenants of this building, Ms. Kelkar reiterated that the ideal users would be food users and restaurant users but noted that the applicant would not be able to commit to such use. Mr. Jeff A. Ostromel, 555 Double Eagle Court, San Diego, of Schultz & Associates, relayed that prominent food serving establishments are being pursued for Building C. Commissioner OIhasso queried whether staff has had any conversations with the Redevelopment Agency/City Council with regard to attracting a prominent food establishment for this building. Commissioner Telesio reiterated the intent to locate prominent tenants in this building. R:\PLANCOMM'JvllNUTES~2003',042303.doc 7 The public hearing was closed at this time. MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve Item No. 5. Commissioner Olhasso seconded the motion, amendin,q Condition No. 12 to delete Dunn Edwards Paint #DE127 "Ennis Brook" and deletin,q Condition No. 19 (applicant shall paint a 3-foot x 3-foot section of the building for Planning Department inspection prior to commencing painting of the building) and Condition No, 46 (submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution, etc.) The motion reflected unanimous approval. 6 Plannin,q Application No. PA02-0460 To construct a mu t -tenant industrial buildin.q totalin.q 17,350 square feet on a .99-acre parcel located on the south side of Winchester Road approximately 850 feet west of Diaz Road RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA02-0460 (Development Plan) pursuant to Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act; 6.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-020 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0460, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT A MULTI-TENANT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING TOTALING 17,350 SQUARE FEET. THE SITE IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF WINCHESTER ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 850 FEET WEST OF DIAZ ROAD, ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 909-310-007 Associate Planner Long reviewed the staff report (as per agenda material) and noted the following: · That staff has reviewed the project and has determined that the project will be consistent with the Development Code and the General Plan; · That a 20-foot front building setback from the street will meet the setback standards; · That the project site will be accessed from a single driveway off Winchester Road and will provide onsite turn around for emergency vehicles; · That the project has determined to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines; That staff has determined that the proposed industrial building will be consistent with the City's Design Guidelines and Development Code and, therefore, staff would recommend approval of the Development Plan with the exception of Condition No. 20 - applicant shall submit a letter from the adjacent property owner to the east agreeing to provide a wrought iron gate between the buildings. An easement shall be recorded and submitted to staff for review. R:~PLAN C OMIVI~MIN UTE S~2003~042303.doc 8 At this time, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Andrew Kwellberg, 5838 Edison Place, Carlsbad noted that he was available for questions. The public hearing was closed at this time. MOTION: Commissioner Olhasso moved to approve staff's recommendation with the deletion of Condition No. 20 (as noted above). The motion was seconded by Commissioner Telesio and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. Planninq Application No. PA02-0698 To construct, establish and operate an apartment complex consistinq of 21 multi-family residential buildinqs, one mixed-use buildin.q and a leasin.q center totalinq 426,922 square feet and an exception to the development standards to reduce the onsite parkinq requirements by 31 spaces located on the northwest corner of Marqarita Road and Harveston Way RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Adopt a Determination of Consistency exemption for Planning Application No. PA02-0698 (Development Plan) pursuant to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act; 7.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-021 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0698, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE AN APARTMENT COMPLEX CONSISTING OF 300 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS ON A 16.5 ACRE SITE WITHIN THE HARVESTON SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY. THE SITE IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF MARGARITA ROAD AND HARVESTON WAY ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NOS. 916- 176-026,046, 047, 048, 049, 050 Associated Planner Harris gave an overview of staff's report (as per agenda material) noting the following: That the site will be located within Planning Area 6 of the Harveston Specific Plan (SP) at the northwest comer of Margarita Road and Harveston Way which will be the main entrance into Harveston Specific Plan (SP) area; · That the units will range in size from 766 square feet to 1,764 square feet and will range from 98-1 bedroom units, 158-2 bedroom units, and 44-3 bedroom units. Site Plan · That six of the apartment buildings will directly front onto abutting streets; · That Building D will incorporate live-work units with limited retail/commercial space on the ground floor and residential uses above; R:\PLANCOMM'tMIN UTES~O03~O42303.doc 9 · That three of the six buildings will be located within the mixed-use Overlay Zone along Village Road within Harveston's commercial village; That in addition, the single-story leasing center will also front along Village Road and will include a commercial business center offering copying, faxing, and other business services to the general public as well as tenants; · That the 15 remaining residential buildings will be interspersed across the site and accessed within the interior of the property; · That the project site will be accessed via two 24-foot wide driveways located on the side street off Village Road and Anchor Road; · That a network of 24-foot wide drive aisles will provide access within the interior of the site; · That a mix of active and open space amenities will be interspersed throughout the site including an outdoor swimming pool, tot lot, b.b.q, nodes, and gazebo; · That the Harveston Lake will be located within walking distance of the project site which will serve as an additional amenity; · That the residing tenants will be allowed to use the HOA recreation center located within walking distance. Consistency with Specific Plan · That staff has determined that the project will be consistent with the Specific Plan (SP) density requirements; · That this project will be a High Density Residential (HI) designation on this site; That in addition, staff is of the opinion that the Site Plan will be consistent with all the Specific Plan (SP) Development standards with regard to setbacks, recreation area, and open space with the exception of the onsite parking requirements which will be as follows; That the Specific Plan (SP) requires two covered spaces per unit plus one guest space per two units; That the Specific Plan (SP) requires 750 parking spaces; however, the City's Development Code requires 573 parking spaces for the same amount of apartments; That the applicant has proposed 719 spaces (31 space parking reduction) for this facility; That as per the Specific Plan (SP), the Commission may approve an exception if it were determined that public health and safety are not compromised; R~PLANCOMM~IINUTES~2003~042303.doc 10 · That staff is of the opinion that the 750-space Specific Plan (SP) requirement would be excessive considering the Development Code requires less; · That staff is of the opinion that reducing the number of spaces by 31 will not result in a public health and safety concern. Therefore, staff would recommend that the Commission approve the parking reduction request. Architecture · That there are four different apartment type buildings on site; that each building has a different architecture style; · That three of the four buildings will incorporate a garage unit at the rear of the buildings; that 178 garages are being proposed along with 404 carports; · That there are no specific requirements that all the units shall have enclosed garages; · That the Specific Plan (SP) addresses covered parking spaces; · That the building architecture within the complex will emulate an "Americana" style, which will be consistent with surrounding style within the Harveston Village; That the buildings will range from two to three stories and will incorporate a variety of offsets and pop-outs along with varying rooflines that will serve to break up the mass of each building and provide interest; · That a mixture of stucco and lap sliding will be utilized along the decorative columns, along with architectural details and a decorative tower element. Landscapin~ That landscaping will be incorporated between the buildings and parking areas; that 14 different varieties of trees are being proposed; that landscaping will be utilized around the perimeter of the complex as well as the vicinity of the active and passive amenities; that there will be accent trees at focal points on the property; That staff is of the opinion that the Landscaping Plan will conform to the landscaping requirements of the Harveston Specific Plan (SP), Development Code, and Design Guidelines. Environmental Determination That staff has reviewed the proposed project and determined that no new significant environmental effects have occurred since an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was previously adopted in 2001; That the EIR was certified with the adoption of the Harveston Specific Plan (SP) which envisioned the construction of a 300-unit, multi-family apartment complex on the project site; R:\PLANCOMM~MINUTES~003\042303.doc 11 · Tha.t mitigation measures associated with the EIR have been incorporated into the conditions of approval for the proposed project; That staff has determined that the proposed use for a 300-unit, multi-family apartment complex, mixed-use building, and associated leasing center are consistent with the Harveston Specific Plan (SP), City's Design Guidelines, and Development Code. Therefore, staff would recommend approval of the apartment complex along with the parking reduction subject to the 82 conditions listed in Exhibit A. In response to Commissioner Guerriero's query regarding the composite roof materials, Associate Planner Harris noted the following: · That architecture composition shingle roofing will be proposed and that there will be different colored roofs on different buildings. For Commissioner Mathewson's with regard to the Parking Code, Associate Planner Harris reviewed, as the Development Plan, the parking requirements and noted that the Specific Plan would require two covered spaces per unit plus one guest space per two units and that, as per the City's Development Code, 573 parking spaces are required. In response to Chairman Chiniaeff's query regarding the size of the swimming pool, Associate Planner Harris informed the Commissioners that the apartment complex pool along with the main pool would be adequate to handle all the tenants and there the applicant would have to adhere to set criteria through the Health Department. In response to Commissioner Telesio's comment with regard to Building D, Associate Planner Harris relayed the following: · That Building D will incorporate live/work units with limited retail/commercial space on the ground floor and residential users above; · That Building D will not solely be allocated for retail/commercial space; · That Building D will be marketed by the need of the public; · That on-street parking will be utilized by the retail/commercial spaces. For Commissioner Olhasso's concern with regard to the live/work units, Associate Planner Harris noted that there will be four live/work units; that these units will incorporate fiber optics when available; and that conference rooms will be available in the leasing center and will be accessible to the tenants. At this time, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Jim Moxham, representing Lennar, 8520 Tech Way, Suite No. 130, San Diego, noted the following: R:\p LAN CO MIV~MIN UTES~2003~:)42303.doc 12 · That the live/work units will be given occupancy priority; that these units will not be filled with residents unless a unit has been empty for six months; · That these units have been designed so that an individual may directly access the retail use; that the live portion of these units would have separate access; · That the retail/live work units would have separate restrooms; · That a Business Center in the Recreation Room will provide three computers and workstations for residents who require these services. In response to Commissioner Telesio's query regarding live/work units, Mr. Moxham clarified that the apartments may not be subleased. Further addressing the project, Mr. Guy Farris of TTGY Group, 17992 Mitchell Street South, representing the applicant, noted the following: · That 14 of the 21 buildings will have attached garages; · That a considerable amount of one-, two-, and three-story town homes are being proposed; · That the architecture style will be colonial style; · That, as per the Specific Plan, a composition roof has been proposed; · That the swimming pool area will have club house which will include a large recreation room as well as a kitchen which will be available to residents as well as tenants in the live/work units; · That a business center has been proposed; · That a fitness center, designed to front Village Road, has been proposed; · That although there are no specific requirements as to the size of the pool, there are requirements as to the number of restrooms relative to the size of the pool; · That a large decking space will be provided; · That outdoor fire places will be provided; · That certain lenders impose specific requirements per square footage per person. In response to Commissioner OIhasso's query regarding high speed Intemet and carports, Mr. Bill Storm of Lennar Communities noted that at this time, high speed Internet is not yet available to this area. For Commissioner OIhasso, Mr. Eric L. Heffner of Western National Properties advised that because high speed internet is not yet available to this area, wireless or cable may be accessed; that the carports will be located within the project and will not be visible from the R:\PLANCOMM\MINUTES~2003\042303.doc 13 exterior roadways; that the carports will have a pitched and hip roof and, therefore, will provide a spacious atmosphere. Mr. Hanna,'; of Sitescapes also noted that the proposed pool will be 35' x 60' (2,100 square feet); that the Health Department requires one restroom per 30 square feet of pool; and that shade areas, misters, and outdoor fireplaces will be provided. Relaying her delight with the elevations and design of Building D, Commissioner Olhasso noted that the color scheme for Building B would appear to be monochromatic and suggested more of a contrast be proposed; and that additional efforts should be undertaken with regard to Building A, noting that its appearance may as well appear monochromatic. In response to Commissioner Olhasso, Mr. Eric L. Heffner of Western National Properties offered to submit other color schemes and relayed his need to be as historically authentic to the architectural style as possible. Commissioner Guerriero relayed his preference for additional landscaping in the alleyways. The public hearing was closed at this time. MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve staff's recommendation. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Mathewson and voice vote reflected unanimous decision. COMMISSION BUSINESS Assistant City Attorney Curley discussed Ex Parte Communications with the Commission, informing the Commissioners that from a legal standpoint, the Commission may collectively adopt a policy, prohibiting Ex Pare Communications, and noted that he would draft a document that would legally bind the Commission from engaging in Ex Parte Communications. COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS A. Commissioner Guerriero remarked on the National Convention he had attended in Denver, Colorado, noting that next year's convention will be held in Washington, D.C. B. Commissioner Mathewson commented on the location of a building sign in the first phase of the Bel Villagio Shopping Center. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT A. Director of Planning Ubnoske noted that Assistant Planner Preisendanz has resigned from his position w with the City and that two offers have been made to fill that position. ADJOURNMENT R:'~P LANC OM M~MIN UT E S~OO3',O42303.doc 14 Chairman Chiniaeff formally adjourned this meeting to the next regular meetin.q to be held on Wednesday, May 7, 2003 at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, and Temecula. Dennis W. Chiniaeff, Chairman Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning R:\PLANCOMM~MINUTES~003\042303.doc 15 ITEM #3 STAFF REPORT- PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION May 21,2003 2004-2008 Capital Improvement Program Prepared By: David Hogan, Principal Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff recommends that: The Planning Commission review the proposed Capital Improvement Program and provide comments to the City Council on the consistency of the 2004 - 2008 Capital Improvement Program with the adopted General Plan. BACKGROUND Section 65403 (c) of State Planning and Zoning Law requires that the Planning Commission review and provide comments to the City Council concerning the conformity of the proposed Capital Improvement Program with the adopted General Plan. The role ofthe Planning Commission is to review the proposed projects and determine if the projects are consistent with the City General Plan. While the timing may be of interest to the Commission, and the Council is interested in the Commission's thoughts, the primary issue for the Planning Commission is whether or not the project as proposed is consistent with the General Plan. DISCUSSION: The City Departments have been meeting over the last few months to finalize the 2004-2008 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The CIP covers the funding and timing for major capital and construction projects throughout the City. The priority categories for CIP projects are as follows: Priority I: The project is urgent and must be completed as soon as feasible. Failure to address the project may impact the health, safety, or welfare of the community; or have a significant impact on the financial well being of the City. The project must be initiated or financial opportunity losses may result. Priority I1: The project is important and addressing it is necessary. The project impacts safety, law enfomement, health, welfare, economic base, and\or quality of life. Priority II1: The project will enhance the quality of life and will provide a benefit to the community. Completion of the project will improve the community by providing cultural, recreational, an~or aesthetic value. Priority IV: The project will be an improvement to the community, but does not necessarily need to be completed within a five-year capital improvement program time frame. This category may include projects that may need to be initiated in the subsequent CIP cycles. R:~STAFFRPT~CIP Review 2003 PC.doc Attachmenl: 1. 2004-2008 Capital Improvement Program - Blue Page 3 R:'~STAFFRPT~CIP Review 2003 PC.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 1 DRAFT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (SEE SEPARATE ATTACHMENT) R:~STAFFRPT~CtP Review 2003 PC,doc ITEM #4 CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: Subject: Planning Commissioners Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Director May 21,2003 PA02-0605 (Power Center II) a Development Plan for the design and construction of a 9.24-acre commercial center with 20,500 square feet of retail space. PA02-0606 (Krispy Kreme) a Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for a 4,000 square foot restaurant building with a drive-thru. PA02-0607 (Islands Restaurant) a Development Plan for a 5,514 square foot restaurant. PREPARED BY: BACKGROUND: Thomas Thornsley, Associate Planner These projects were reviewed as a workshop item at the May 7, 2003, Planning Commission Meeting due to improper noticing. Based on the Commissioner's discussion of this project, the applicant has chosen to start revising their plans to make most of the changes outlined in the conditions of approval. However, plans could not be revised and provided to staff for review prior to the delivery date of the staff report. The plans accompanying the staff report are the plans previously provided for review. Plans will be resubmitted next week and will not be available early enough for staff to complete a thorough review prior to the Public Hearing. Attachments 1. Staff Report R:'~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center II,PC memo 5-21-03.doc ! A'FI'ACHMENT NO. 1 STAFF REPORT R:~) P~2002~)2-0605 Power Center II,PC memo 5-21-03.doc 2 STAFF REPORT- PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION May 21,2003 Planning Application Nos. PA02-0605 (Development Plan) PA02-0606 (Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan) PA02-0607 (Development Plan) Prepared By: Thomas Thornsley, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends the Planning Commission: ADOPT a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No.'s PA02-0605. PA02- 0606, and PA02-0607 (Development Plan) based on the Determination of Consistency with a project for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was previously certified pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 - Subsequent EIR's and Negative Declarations. 2. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0605 A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A 9.24 ACRE COMMERCIAL CENTER WHICH INCLUDES TWO PROPOSED .RETAIL BUILDINGS TOTALING 20,500 SQUARE FEET AND THREE CONCEPTUAL FUTURE RETAIL BUILDING PADS LOCATED WITHIN THE TEMECULA REGIONAL CENTER ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY ROAD AND MARGARITA ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.'S 910- 130-087, 088, 089, 090, 092, AND 096. PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0606 A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT BUILDING WITH A DRIVE-THRU, AT A 9.24 ACRE COMMERCIAL CENTER WITHIN THE TEMECULA REGIONAL CENTER, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY ROAD AND MARGARITA ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 910-130-092. R:~D P~002~02-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-.__ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0607 - A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A 5,514 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT, AT A 9.24 ACRE COMMERCIAL CENTER WITHIN THE TEMECULA REGIONAL CENTER, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY ROAD AND MARGARITA ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 910-130-096. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANTS: Jack Tarr, Diversified Investment Co., 30240 Rancho Viejo Road, Ste B, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 Lewis Jackson, Islands Restaurant, 740 Lomas Santa Fe Dr., Ste 210, Solana Beach, CA 92075 PROPOSAL: PA02-0605 a Development Plan for the design and construction of a 9.24-acre commemial center which includes two proposed retail buildings totaling 20,500 square feet and three conceptual future retail building pads located within the Temecula Regional Center on the northwest corner of North General Kearney Road and Margarita Road, know as assessor pamel no.'s 910-130-087, 088, 089, 090, 092, and 096. PA02-0606 a Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for the design and construction of a 4,000 square foot restaurant building with a drive-thru, at a 9.24-acre commercial center within the Temecula Regional Center located on the northwest corner of North General Kearney Road and Margarita Road, known as assessor parcel no. 910-130-092. PA02-0607 a Development Plan for the design and construction of a 5,514 square foot restaurant, at a 9.24-acre commercial center within the Temecula Regional Center located on the northwest corner of North General Kearney Road and Margarita Road, know as assessor parcel no. 910- 130-096. LOCATION: On the northwest corner of North General Kearny and Margarita Roads in the Temecula Regional Center (aka Power Center 11) (APN 910-130-087 thru -090, -092, & -096). GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: CC (Community Commercial) EXISTING ZONING: SP-7 (Specific Plan-7 Temecula Regional Center) R:~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 2 SURROUNDING ZONING: North: South: East: West: SP-7 (Specific Plan-7 Temecula Regional Center) CC (Community Commercial) LM (Medium Low Density Residential) and H (High Density Residential) SP-7 (Specific Plan-7 Temecula Regional Center) EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Power Center South: Retail Center- Bel Villagio East: Single family detached homes and apartments, West: Promenade Mall PROJECT STATISTICS Total Gross/Net Area: Building Areas: Shop A (general retail) Shop B (general retail) Pad C (future) Pad D (future) Pad E (future) Pad F (Islands Restaurant) Pad G (Krisp¥ Kreme) Total Building Area: Paving: Hardscape: Landscape Area: 402,494 square feet 8,800 square feet 11,700 square feet 4,190 square feet 6,562 square feet 8,281 square feet 5,514 square feet 4,000 square feet 49,047 square feet 246,063 square feet 16,780 square feet 90,604 square feet 9.24 acres 12.2% 61.1% 4.2% 22.5% BACKGROUND This site had been previously designed and approved as part of the Power Center under PA97- 0406. At that time the project was divided into two phases. Phase 1 was completed in 2000 and Phase 2, would have consisted of 105,000 square feet of future retail floor area. These applications represent Phase II of the Power Center. The current property owner submitted a new proposal to the Planning Department on November 7, 2002. A Development Review Committee meeting was held on December 12, 2002. At that time site design and architectural changes were requested. Follow up meetings were held in February and March as staff worked with the applicant to integrate information and design elements into the revised plans for consistency with the Regional Center Specific Plan and the City's Design Guidelines. With the applicant's second resubmittal on April 2, 2003, staff determined that several original items of concern were not being addressed. The applicant did not wish to address staff's concerns and requested that the project be set for hearing. R:~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Development Plan The applicant is requesting approval for the development of a 9.4-acre site with seven developable pad sites. Four of those pads are proposed for development at this time, while three are shown conceptually to complete the master site plan. Two of the pads (A and B) are for two retail buildings with a total of 20,500 square feet of floor space. The plan also includes the development of Pads "F" and "G' for Islands Restaurant (5,514 square feet) and Krispy Kreme Donuts (4,000 square feet) respectfully. The three remaining undeveloped pad areas have conceptually shown that they can support approximately 19,000 square feet of restaurant space based on the provided parking. Site Plan/Circulation The project site is rectangular in shape and is bounded by Margarita Road, North General Kearny Road, the Mall Ring Road and the entry drive between the Mall Ring Road to Margarita Road. There are four vehicular and two pedestrian access points into the site around the perimeter. Near the middle of Margarita Road is a right-in, right-out driveway. Other vehicular access is taken from the Mall Ring Road and two others are taken from the Mall Entry Road. One point of pedestrian access is taken directly from the Mall Entry Road to Pad F and a second pedestrian access enters the site along the Margarita Road entry aisle, taking pedestrians to the center of the site where the walkway splits in three directions to leading to the other pad sites. The majority of the parking for the site is internal with the buildings placed along the street frontages and in the corners of the site. The first sites to de~/elop will be those along the Margarita Road frontage. The corner of the site at Margarita and North General Kearny Roads will accommodate two multi-tenant retail buildings, Shops "A" and "B", in an "L" shape configuration. Heading north on the site, across the Margarita - Road entrance, is Pad "G' being developed as a Krispy Kreme drive thru. Further north, in the northeast corner of the site, is Pad "F" for the Islands Restaurant. The three undeveloped pads are located along the Mall Ring Road. Future development on these pads will require Planning Commission approval. Architecture Shops A and B appear to be a blend of Mediterranean Country and Craftsman style architecture. The buildings offer sufficient relief through amhitectural elements such as recessed windows, eave overhangs, columns, towers, and trellises. The buildings are finished in beige and tan shades of smooth and heavy dash stucco. Stone veneer is used on the base of the accent columns, while the trellis columns will be round pre-cast concrete. Concrete shake style roofing will be used on the tower elements and the mansard roof overhands. The connecting point between the two buildings iS a central tower feature over a breezeway linking the front plaza to a plaza behind the buildings near the street. Pad "F" is Islands Restaurant, which is designed with elements typical of older oceanfront buildings. Entry to the restaurant is through a two-story octagon tower mounted on the southwest comer of the building. Although, the building is boxy by design, relief elements in the midsection of each elevation project the wall and roof planes off the fascia enhancing the windowed areas of the building. Two styles of plaster finishing will be used on the exterior in tan and dark beige. A smooth finish will be used on the base while a textured exterior plaster will be used above. The pitched roof will be flat concrete tile. Wrapping around and screening the roof equipment will be a rough sawn board and bat siding wall designed into the building above the mansuard roof. R:\D P'2002~02-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 4 Krispy Kreme, located on Pad "G", is proposing a corporate prototype that reflects the retro style of their facilities from the 1930 and 1940's. The building is a basic rectangle with accent relief columns and cornicing. The walls will be finished in an off-white sand finish stucco with rustic stacked stone veneer utilized around the lower three-foot base of the building and extending to the top of the doors at the entries. A steel frame canopy extends out from the building along two-thirds of the east and west elevations and across the entire front of the building. Outside the front (north elevation) of the building will be a patio for tables and chairs covered by a wooden trellis. Parking The site was designed to accommodate the known tenants and future tenants. Four sites have specific uses planned for them and offer sufficient parking to meet their needs. The three pad sites not being developed at this time have been considered at their most intense use (restaurant at 1:100 square feet). Although the building square footages for Pads "C - E" appear to be precise, this is only for illustrative purposes. Based on those estimated square footages, parking allocations have been established and included in the overall formulation of the project's parking needs. Shown below is the breakdown of the parking by building pad and the known or likely use. Per the applicant's proposal, the site exceeds its parking needs by 75 spaces, which gives the site an overall parking ratio of 1:116 square feet, or 8.6 spaces per 1000 square feet 0f gross floor area. Parking Required: Pad A (general retail) Pad B (general retail) Pad C (speculative) Pad D (speculative) . Pad E (speculative) Pad F (restaurant) Pad G (restaurant) Total Parking Required: Parking Provided: 8,800 square feet/(1:200) 11,700 square feet/(1:200) 4,190 square feet/(1 .'100) 6,562 square feet/(1:100) 8,281 square feet/(1:100) 5,514 square feet/(1:100) 4,000 square feet/(1:100) 49,072 square feet/(1:141 ) 49,072 square feet/(1:116) 44 spaces 59 spaces 42 spaces 66 spaces 83 spaces 55 spaces 41 spaces 349 spaces 424 spaces Landscaping Substantial landscaping is proposed around the perimeter of the site and throughout the parking lot. The plaza area in front of Shops "A" and "B' consists of three diamond planters next to the parking spaces and vines on the two trellises. At Krispy Kreme there are planters on both sides of the main entrance planted with the greundcover Myoporum. The drive-thru will be screened from the street with a mix of shrubs and trees. Around the front of the Islands Restaurant will be planters with shrubs and ground covers. The entry to this facility is further complemented with a small plaza/waiting area flanked on two sides with trees, shrubs, and groundcover. Along the street frontages are a mix of trees, shrubs, ground covers, and entry elements that are intended to compliment the site. Entry elements are provided at two of the three entrances to the site. Signs A sign program has been prepared for this project that proposes freestanding monument signs for the stand-alone tenants and two multi-tenant signs to promote tenants not visible from the street frontages on which the signs are placed. Based on the plan there would be three freestanding signs on Margarita Road and four along the Mall Ring Road. The retail buildings have devised a program that allocated sign area at one foot per lineal foot of tenant frontage with letter height limited to two feet. Signs for Krispy Kreme and Islands Restaurant are each designed for the unique character of these users and offer character to the facilities. R:~D P~002~)2-0605 Power Center II'~Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 5 Conditional Use Permit A Conditional Use Permit is required to operate the Krispy Kreme drive thru as required by the Specific Plan. The building pad sits below the street grade making the drive-thru visible from the street. The placement of the building has the narrow front of the building facing Margarita Road with the drive-thru side of the building adjacent to the entry aisle accessing the site from Margarita Road. ANALYSIS The applicant requested that the applications be scheduled for hearing, despite the fact that staff still had outstanding concerns. In order to support the application PA02-0605, staff has prepared conditions requiring modifications to the plans. Conditions No. 6, 9, 11, and 13 provide the necessary revisions in order to make the findings for approval. The applicant consents to all of the conditions except for the following: Remove a sufficient number of parking stalls in front of all the buildings to allow for the installation of enhancing elements such as decorative paving, landscaping, and pedestrian amenities in as effort create entry statements to each facility. (Pg. 17, 6.a.) None of the buildings offer an open and inviting access to the storefrents from the parking lots. The applicant had been requested to remove the parking in front of each building to create an open view of the buildings and allowing the enhancements to become the focal point of the building with the use of decorative paving and additional landscaping. Working with the applicant, staff agreed to allow some parking to remain along the front of the building, but requested the removal of some parking to enhance the entries and plazas. On the latest plans, no storefront parking had been removed nor have landscaping areas been added. Staff has visited other projects and facilities and found that open access to storefronts is effective in facilitating pedestrian-scale plazas. The overall site has 75 more parking spaces then are required. Staff has conditioned the project to remove parking and enhance the storefront entries. · Additional planters shall be designed into the plaza fronting Pads A & B to enhance and soften the hardscape and building walls. Some of these planters shall be raised to serve as pedestrian friendly seating areas. (Pg. 17, 6.b.) Staff has concerns with the site's lack of landscaping near the buildings, in the plazas, or its need to enhance the buildings' entry points as stipulated in the Citywide Design Guidelines. The Guidelines state that, "Landscaping should be provided around building to frame them and separate them from the surrounding pavements." The only landscaping provided near or adjacent to the buildings are four trees in diamond planters (half in the plaza, half in the parking stalls), vines on the two trellises, and several potted plants not yet defined. Staff has conditioned the project to provide additional landscaping near the Shops "A" and "B". · Athreefoothighretainingwallshallbeinstalledbehindthe32footlandscapedevelopment zone along Margarita Road along the parking lot between Pads F & G. The area between this wall and the back of sidewall shall be bermed to raise the streetscape landscaping to aid in screening the parking lot. (Pg. 18, 6.m.) The Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan and the Citywide Design Guidelines encourage the placement of buildings toward the street to avoid a street view that looks at wide-open expanses of parking. However, when parking near a street frontage cannot be avoided, the Specific Plan (Pg. IV-37) states that, "Parking areas shall be screened from view from public streets by means of landscaping and/or grading." Figure 18 in the Specific Plans illustrates the use of three-foot high R:~D P~002~0;.~-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 6 hedgerows and/or berm at parking areas. Between Pads "F" and "G" the street grade is 4 to 5 feet above the parking lot. Without modification, the site grading provides a right-of-way (R.O.W.) with a 6-foot sidewalk and 6 feet of street grade planting area, which is designated for trees and turf. From the R-O-W, the 20-foot landscape setback area slopes down to the parking lot with a hedgerow well below street grade rendering it ineffective as a screening method. With the installation of the requested retaining wall, the landscape zone can be raised to within two feet versus 5 feet of the street grade. By placing the screen wall at the back of the landscape zone, there is the opportunity to further raise the planting area with mounding and bring a hedgerow up to a more effective screening level. · A more direct ADA path shall be provided from Margarita Road to Pads "A", "B'; and "G". (Pg. 17, 6.f.) · The ADA path through the center of the site shall be connected to the Ring Road upon completion of tho first phase of development. (Pg. 17, 6.g.) Staff believes that a greater effort can be made to provide additional convenient access points from the Bel Villaggio site to Shops "A and B' and to Krispy Kreme. Staff has conditioned the project to provide access to these areas and pedestrian access to the Ring Road in Phase I of the site's development. With the implementation of the preceding conditions, as well as all of the others, as conditions of approval upon this project, staff can make the findings that the project is consistent with the Regional Center Specific Plan, the Development Code, and the Design Guidelines for the City. Signs The project proposes standardized signs for the retail shops as well as, consistent design for the monument signs and the multi-tenant identification signs. The only major concern is the proposed placement of three signs in close proximity (two within 80 feet) to one another along Margarita Road. Staff, with the applicant's concurrence, is conditioning that the multi-tenant sign be placed somewhere south of the Margarita Road entrance. The retail-building criteria allocates sign area at one foot per lineal foot of tenant frontage with letter height limited to two feet, which is not overwhelming for wall signs mounted on building elevations adjacent to a street. Krispy Kreme and Islands Restaurant are proposing signs that may appear large because of their logo design, but the signs are consistent given their placement on the building elevations. Conditional Use Permit The Kdspy Kreme drive-thru has the potential to be visible from Margarita Road and the project's main entry. The building's placement puts the long side of the drive-thru along the entry aisle and the ~xit near Margarita Road. Since the building pad sits below the street grade, the drive-thru will be more visible from the street. A retaining wall is being installed along the drive-thru near the Margarita Road entrance to raise the landscape area to allow for more plant screening material to be installed at street grade. Due to the grade change, internal to the site from the Margarita entry, the entrance of the drive-thru will be above the grade of the drive aisle. The project is being conditioned to better screen the drive-thru in this area to aid in screening the vehicles and to block headlights. Additionally, the drive-thru offers adequate stacking distance behind the pick-up window. Therefore, staff has determined that the required findings to approve the Conditional Use Permit can be made with the conditions of approval added for the project. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION R:~D P~2002~02-O605 Power Center II,Staff reporl PC 5-7-03.doc 7 A supplemental traffic study was required and reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineer. The supplemental report was found to be adequate and confirmed that the proposed development would be consistent with the allowable peak hour traffic volumes approved for the Specific Plan. This project is within the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan No. 77 for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified. The project is consistent with the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan No. 77 land uses, which anticipated retail, restaurant, office, hotel, and residential uses and no other environmental factors have changed since the certification of the EIR. Therefore, the proposed project is eligible for a CEQA exemption pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15162 applies when an EIR has been certified or negative, declaration adopted for a project. No subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless there are substantial changes not discussed or examined in the EIR, GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY The project is consistent with the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan 77, Community Commercial (CC) land use designations of the Temecula General Plan and the Development Code. Upon approval of the Development Plan as conditioned, the project will meet all of the guidelines and standards for commercial development prescribed by the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan No. 77, Development Code, and Design Guidelines. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS The project as conditioned is consistent with applicable City policies, standards and guidelines. We believe it is compatible with the nature and quality of surrounding development, and will represent an attractive, functional and economic addition to the City's commercial and employment base. FINDINGS - DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PA02-0605; PA02-0606; PA02-0607) 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. The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for Community Commercial (CC) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development standards for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan (SP- 7) and the City of Temecula Development Code. The site is thereforeproperlyplannedandzonedand found to be physically suitable for commercial retail and restaurant uses. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The architecture proposed forthe office is consistent with the Architectural requirements as stated in the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan (SP-7) and Design Guidelines and the Commercial Performance Standards of the Development Code. The project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, can be 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. R;',D P~002~2-0605 Power Center it\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 8 FINDINGS - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (PA02-0606) The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. The proposed conditional use permit is consistent with the underlying site plan for this project, the City of Temecula General Plan and the applicable sections of the Development Code, and the Municipal Code. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures. The proposed conditional use permit, with conditions, is consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan and the applicable sections of the Development Code, and the Municipal Code. The site for the proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer area, landscaping and other development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning Commission or Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. The proposed conditional use meets the zoning requirements for integration into the surrounding commercial developments. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the community. Provisions are made in the General Plan, the Regional Center Specific Plan, and the Development Code to ensure that the public health, safety, and welfare are safeguarded withtheoperationofthedrive-thrufacilities. Theprojectisconsistentwiththesedocuments and will be conditioned to meet all applicable requirements. The decision to conditionally approve the conditional use permit is based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council. The project has been completely reviewed, as a whole, in reference to all applicable codes and ordinances before the Planning Commission. R:~D P~002~02-0605 Power Center II',Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 9 Attachments PC Resolution No. 2003- - Blue Page 11 Exhibit A Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 15 PC Resolution No. 2003- - Blue Page 11 Exhibit A Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 15 o PC Resolution No. 2003- - Blue Page 47 Exhibit A Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 51 Exhibits - Blue Page 63 P^02-0605 A Vicinity Map B Zoning Map C General Plan D Site Plan E-1 Elevations E-2 Elevations F Landscape Plan PA02-0606 D Enlarged Site Plan E-1 Elevations E-2 Elevations PA02-0607 D Enlarged Site Plan E-1 Elevations E-2 Elevations R:~D P~2002~2:-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 10 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- PA02-0605 DEVELOPMENT PLAN R:~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-O3.doc 11 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0605 A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A 9.24 ACRE COMMERCIAL CENTER WHICH INCLUDES TWO PROPOSED RETAIL BUILDINGS TOTALING 20,500 SQUARE FEET AND THREE CONCEPTUAL FUTURE RETAIL BUILDING PADS LOCATED WITHIN THE TEMECULA REGIONAL CENTER ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY ROAD AND MARGARITA ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.'S 910- 130-087, 088, 089, 090, 092, AND 096. WHEREAS, Jack Tarr, Diversified Investment Co., filed Planning Application No. PA02- 0605, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA02-0605 was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA02-0605 on May 21,2003, at duly noticed public hearings 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; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. PA02-0605; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated Section 2. Findinqs. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No. 02-0605 hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code: 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. The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for Community Commercial (CC) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development standards for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan (SP- 7) and the City of Temecula Development Code. The site is therefore properly planned andzoned and found to be physically suitable for commercial retail and restaurant uses. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. R:'~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center II'~Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 12 The architecture proposed for the office is consistent with the Architectural requirements as stared in the Temecu/a Regional Center Specific Plan (SP-7) and Design Guidelines and the Commercial Performance Standards of the Development Code. The project has been rew'ewed for, and as conditioned, can be 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. 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 in and around the site. 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 Compliance A Notice of Determination for Planning Application No. 02-0605 was made per the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15162. This section applies when an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been certified or negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless there ' are substantial changes not discussed or examined in the EIR. Section 4. Conditions That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves Planning Application No. PA02~0605, a Development Plan to design, and construct a commercial center (Power Center II) with multiple pad sites for separate development and two single story multi-tenant buildings totaling 20,500 square feet on a 9.24 acre lot on the northwest corner of North General Kearney Road and Margarita Road, and known as Assessor Pamel Nos. 910-130-087 thru -090, -092, & -096. The Conditions of Approval are contained in Exhibit A. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 21 st day of May 2003. A"FI'EST: Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary {SEAL} R:~D P~002~2-0605 Power Center II'tStaff report PC 5-7-03.doc 13 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2003-.__ was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21st day of May 2003, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 14 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PA02-0605 DEVELOPMENT PLAN R:~D P~2002\02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 15 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA02-0605 (Development Plan) Project Description: A Development Plan for the design, construction and operation of a commercial center (Power Center II) with seven pad sites for separate development and two single story multi-tenant buildings totaling 20,500 square feet on a 9.24-acre lot, on the west side of Margarita Road just north of the northwest corner of North General Kearney Road and Margarita Road. DIF Category: $2.00 per square foot (pursuant to the Development Agreement for the Promenade Mall Project PA96-0333) Assessor Parcel No.: 910-130-087 thru -090, -092, & -096 Approval Date: Expiration Date: May 21,2003 May 21,2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Sixty-Four Dollars ($64.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15062. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Department the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirements The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection 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 R:~D P~2.002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 16 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. This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan. The applicant shall comply with the Conditions of Approval for Planning Application No. 97- 0118 (Promenade Mall) and the Conditions of Approval for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan unless superceded by these Conditions of Approval. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "D" (Site Plan), contained on file with the Planning Department. Additionally, within 30 days following final approval, and prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit 5 sets of revised plans addressing the following: fo Remove a sufficient number of parking stalls in front of all the buildings to allow for the installation of enhancing elements such as decorative paving, landscaping, and pedestrian amenities in as effort create entry statements to each facility. Additional planters shall be designed into the plaza fronting Pads A & B to enhance and soften the hardscape and building walls. Some of these planters shall be raised to serve as pedestrian friendly seating areas. Enhance the paving at the entries with the sunray pattern as previously shown, or an alternative decorative paving as approved by the Director of Planning. Landscape planters utilized to house fire or utility equipment shall be enlarged to accommodate the intended landscaping. The sidewalk down the center of the parking row leading to Pad E shall be shifted so that it is adjacent to a curb face, which will avoid splitting this landscape area into two narrow planters. This path of travel shall continue straight across the drive aisle to Pad E. A more direct ADA path shall be provided from Margarita Road to Pads "A", "B", and The ADA path through the center of the site shall be connected to the Ring Road upon completion of the first phase of development. Work limit areas shall be adjusted to lie behind all perimeter streetscape areas and to the top of all slopes shown on the grading plans or as finished on the site. All site plotting within the work limit areas are considered conceptual. Any development within these areas will be subject to separate review by the Planning Commission. The access into the Pad G drive-thru shall be shifted or otherwise modified to better accommodate the right turn access from the parallel drive aisle. R:~D P~002V32!-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03,doc 17 The west driveway off the Mall Entry Drive shall be realigned with the internal drive aisle so as to better serve vehicular traffic flow and avoid head-on conflicts. A landscape planter shall be installed along the north side of the trash enclosure in the parking lot north of Shop B. A three foot high retaining wall shall be installed behind the 32 foot landscape development zone along Margarita Road along the parking lot between Pads F & G. The area between this wall and the back of sidewall shall be bermed to raise the streetscape landscaping to aid in screening the parking lot. A planter shall be installed between the Pad G service area wall and the bike rack. The diamond plantem shall have a minimum inside clearance of five feet (5'). The parking of delivery vehicles shall not be permitted on site along the Margarita Road frontage. There shall be no storage or parking of delivery vehicles within this project site as per the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan (Sec IV.C.10. 1 .). The retaining wall between Pad C and the mall Ring Road shall be removed from all plans. The design of the "decorative paved concrete" shall be subject to review and approval by Planning prior issuance of building permit All ground mounted utility/mechanical equipment shall not be placed in prominent locations visible to the public. This equipment shall be screened from view. Per the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan and the Design Guidelines, the double detector check assembly must be installed underground. Provide the Planning Department with a copy of the underground water plans and electrical plans for verification of proper placement of the transformer and the double detector check prior to final agreement with the utility companies. Parking lot lights shall be of a type consistent with the standards used throughout the Mall, which have been a dark bronze, round tapered pole with a mounded height of twenty (20) feet. The site lighting plan shall be approved by the Planning Department prior to installation. Any outside wall-mounted lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. Details of these lights shall be submitted to the Planning Department during plan check for review pdor to installation. The installation of wall pack style light shall not be used along the street side elevation. Building elevations shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits "E-1 and E-2" (Building Elevations), contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Department. Within 30 days following final approval, and prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit 5 sets of revised plans addressing the following: A heavier enhanced stucco or other building material shall be utilized around the base of shops A & B where smooth stucco is now proposed. The externally mounted utility rooms on the outside of Shops "A' and "B" shall be internalized. R:~D P~002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff repot1 PC 5-7-03.doc 18 10. 11. Show and label all utilities on the site and landscape plans and provide appropriate screening and enlarge planter areas when necessary to achieve the required screening. Provide a 3' clear zone around fire check detectors as required by the Fire Department before installing the screen. Please group utilities together in order to reduce intrusion. Screening of utilities is not to look like an after-thought. All mechanical and roof-mounted equipment shall be hidden by building elements that were designed for that purpose as an integral part of the building. When determined to be necessary by the Director of Planning, the parapet will be raised to provide for this screening. The construction plans shall indicate the application of painted rooftop addressing plotted on a 9-inch grid pattern with 45-inch tall numerals spaced 9-inch apart. The numerals shall be painted with a standard 9-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. The modified Landscaping Plan shall conform to the approved Exhibit"G" (Landscape Plan). Within 30 days following final approval, and prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit 5 sets of revised plans addressing the following: Streetscape design consistency and entries that offer a definable statement shall be integrated into the plans as required by the specific plan. All four entries should have a consistent design. The comer landscaping at both ends of the project frontage along the Mall Ring Road shall utilize a consistent design that maintains tud across the required depth of the streetscape to maintain open views around the corners. Those areas along the internal streetscape that are required to be planted in turf shall not have a grade in excess of 4:1. The landscape plan shall be amended to show turf planting for 15 feet behind the sidewalk along North General Kearny Road and 10 feet behind the sidewalk along the Mall Ring Road. The Holly Oaks along North General Kearny Road shall be maintained in place and California Peppers shall be installed along the Mall Ring Road. The landscape plan must be revised to remove all conceptual landscaping within the areas of the undeveloped pads with the exception of the perimeter landscaping along the street frontages. Perimeter landscaping shall be installed around the entire site with the completion of the first phase of development. This perimeter landscaping shall include all streetscape areas and slopes visible from the surrounding roadway. The landscape plan shall identify the erosion control plant materials to be installed on all portions of the site reserved for future development. The landscaping planters on the west elevation of the Pad G building shall include shrubs and small trees. As per the Citywide Design Guidelines, 36" box trees shall be utilized to created focal points, define entries and otherwise offer variation to the overall landscaping design. The mix of trees shall be as follow: 20% at 36 inch box, 30% at 24 inch box, and 50% at 15 gallon. R;~;) P~2002~02-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 19 12. 13. 14. A concrete mow curb shall be installed between turf and shrub areas. Modifications recommended in the letter dated April 19, 2003 bythe City's landscape architect, for the landscape plan's consistency with the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan, shall be completed prior to the submittal of construction landscape plan. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Planning. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Director of Planning shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest. The Grading Plan shall conform to the revised Conceptual Grading Plan. Within 30 days following final approval, and prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit 5 sets of revised plans addressing the following: The grading plan shall be amended to show all required turf planting areas at no more than a 4:1 maximum slope within the 15 feet planting area behind the sidewalk along North General Kearny Road, the 10 feet behind the sidewalk along the Mall Ring Road, and the 10 feet behind the sidewalk along the Mall Access Drive. The grading plan shall be revised to show finish grade contour lines on one-foot increments for verification of slope grades throughout the site and to determine where grading conflicts will occur between building pads, landscaping, and existing grades. Per the Regional Center Specific Plan, all retaining walls shall be limited to three (3) feet in height. No walls are permitted within the areas reserved for Streetscape landscaping. The colors and materials for this project shall substantially conform to the following list of approved colors and materials and with the Color and Material Board (Exhibit H) contained on file with the Planning Department. Any deviation from the approved colors and materials shall require approval of the Director of Planning. Material Windows, doors Wall face Wall face and cornices Wall face Wall base Tower Wails Metal louver awning Wall columns Trellises columns Trellises and rafters Roofing Finish & Color Anodized aluminum storefront - clear glazing fine sand float stucco-BM 2161-40 Antique Rose fine sand float stucco-BM 2173-70 Woodland Snow fine sand float stucco-BM 2153-60 Rich Cream heavy dash stucco-BM 2161-50 Yellow Squash fine sand float stucco-BM 2172-40 Raspberry Parfait BM AC-19 Homestead Green Valley El Dorado Rustic Stone Veneer - Sequoia Rustic Ledge CDI - ST8 W030 split - Oatmeal Wood - California Rustic Concrete roof tiles Eagle Roofing Tile 5087 - gray/brown range R:~D P~?.002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff reporl PC 5-7-03.doc 20 Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits 15. Th(; applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided by the Planning Department staff, and return one signed set to the Planning Department for their files. 16. ThE: applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that Ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. 17. The applicant shall revise Exhibits "D, E, F, G, and H", (Site Plan, Elevations, Landscape, Grading Plan, Color and Material Board) to reflect the final Conditions of Approval and submit five (5) full size copies prior to the submittal of any plans for plan check. 18. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Department for permanent filing two (2) 8u X 10" glossy photographic color prints of the approved Color and Materials Board and of the colored version of approved Exhibit "H", the colored amhitectural elevations to the Planning Department for their files. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be readable on the photographic prints. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 19. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. 20. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. These plans shall conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "F", or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover page shall identify the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be accompanied by the following items: Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted for approval, which details the proper maintenance of all proposed plant materials to assure proper growth and landscape development for the long-term esthetics of the property. The approved maintenance program shall be provided to the landscape maintenance contractor who shall be responsible to carry out the detailed program. Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits 21. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. R:',D P',2.002\0~'!~0605 P~ower Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 21 22. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Planning, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings, in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan shall be filed with the Planning Department for one year from final certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Director of Planning, the bond shall be released upon request by the applicant. 23. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently affixed reflectorized sign constructed of pomelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height of 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off- street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, cleady and conspicuously stating the following: "Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 909 696-3000." In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least 3 square feet in size. 24. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 25. Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any Government Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site plan all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. General Requirements 23. A Grading Permit for a precise grading, including all on-site flat work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way. 24. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works pdor to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. 25. All improvement plans, grading plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars. 26. The driveway on Margarita Road shall be restricted to right-in/right-out movements. R:'~D P~2.002~02-0605 Power Center Ii,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 22 Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 27. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private properly. 28. ThE, Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. 29. A Soil Report shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and submitted to the Director of the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. 30. A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address special study zones and the geological conditions of the site, and shall provide recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. 31. The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect the properties and mitigate any impacts. 32. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. 33. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a= Planning Department Department of Public Works 34. The Developer shall comply with all constraints, which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 35. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 36. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier's check or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. R:'~D P',2002~2-0605 Power Center ll'~Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 23 Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 37. Precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. The following design criteria shall be observed: Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be'constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400. 401 and 402. 38. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public works. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: pavement, sidewalk, and drive approaches. 39. The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 40. The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the adjacent property. 41. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. 42. The Developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.08. Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 43. All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and city standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. 44. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Rancho California Water District Eastern Municipal Water District Department of Public Works 45. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. R:~) P~2002~02-0605 Power Center Ii,Staff report PC 5-7-03.dcc 24 BUILDING & SAFETY DEPARTMENT 46. All ,:~esign components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2001 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2001 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy Code, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and the Temecula Municipal Code. 47. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. 48. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. 49. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 50. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 51. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 52. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. 53. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be m accordance with the provisions of the 2001 edition of the California Building Code Appendix 29. 54. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior to permit issuance. 55. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 56. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. 57. Provide precise grading plan at plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility. 58. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 59. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. 60. Show all building setbacks. R:~D P~,2002~)?.-0605 Power Center Ii,Staff report PC 5-7-O3.doc 25 61. Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours of construction, shown below, as allowed by the City of Temecula Ordinance No. 0-90-04, specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one- quarter mile of an occupied residence. Monday-Friday 6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. Saturday 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Holidays FIRE DEPARTMENT 62. 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 fome at the time of building, plan submittal. 63. Within 30 days of approval and prior to any building permits being issued, the applicant must provide to the fire prevention bureau a revised site plan, floor plan and other drawings and documents to address all corrections listed on previous correction letters, acceptable to the Chief. 64. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 3000 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 1850 GPM for a total fire flow of 5850 GPM with a 3 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) 65. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum of 3 hydrants, in a combination of on-site and off- site (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access reads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 400 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 225 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to an hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2,903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B). 66. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. For this project on site fire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2) 67. If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection pdor to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2) 68. Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for 80,000 lbs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) R:~,D F~2002~02-0605 Power Center Ii~,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 26 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access reads shall be an all weather surface designed for 80,000 lbs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. (CFC sec 902) Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13) feel six (6) inches. (CFC 902.2.2.1) The gradient for fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC 902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14) Prior to building construction, dead end road ways and streets in excess of one hundred and fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4) Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all- weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1) Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block; and conform to hydrant type, location, and spacing and minimum fire flow standards. After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1 ) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, approved numbers or addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and industrial buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall have a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single-family residences and multi-family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4) Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9) Pric. r to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10) R:'~D P"2002',02-0605 Power Center Il'Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 27 79. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (8) feet in height and in a location as approved on the final site and floor plans. (CFC 902.4) 80. Prior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating Fire Lanes with appropriate lane painting and or signs. 81. Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department access doors and Fire department access roads. Buildings housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions California Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81) 82. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developer/applicant shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the storage of combustible liquids, flammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau.(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) Special Conditions 83. Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report may be required to be submitted and to the Fire Prevention Bureau. This report shall address, but not be limited to, all fire and life safety measures per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, NFPA - 13, 24, 72 and 231-C. 84. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final a simple plot plan and a simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format must be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention for approval. 85. If there are changes to underlying maps then pdor to map recordation the applicant shall submit to the Fire Prevention Bureau a georectified (pursuant to Riverside County standards) digital version of the map including parcel and street centerline information. The electronic file will be provided in an ESRI Arclnfo/ArcView compatible format and projected in a State Plane NAD 83 (California Zone VI) coordinate system. The Bureau must accept the data as to completeness, accuracy and format prior to satisfaction of this condition. 86. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code permit. These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105) 87. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E) R:~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7~)3.doc 28 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT General Conditions 89. The trash enclosures shall be large enough to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as, regular solid waste containers. 90. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul construction debris. 91. All parkways, landscaping, on-site lighting and fencing shall be maintained by the property owner or maintenance association. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 92. The developer shall provide TCSD verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. OTHER AGENCIES 93. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water District's transmittal dated November 18, 2002, a copy of which is attached. 94. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health transmittal dated November 18, 2002, a copy of which is attached. By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, undemtand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject to Planning Commission approval. Applicant's Signature Name printed Date R:~D P'2.002',o2q3605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 29 November 18, 2002 Thomas Thomsley, Case Planne~0~/ City of Temecula Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY FOR PARCELS NO. 9, NO. 10, NO. 11, NO. 12, AND NO. 13 OF PARCEL MAP 28530-2; APNS 910-130-087 THROUGH 910-130-090; 910-130-092 AND 910-130-096; PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0605 Dear Mr. Thomsley: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees and requirements. Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. This project has the potential to become a commercial condominium site with individual building owners, and a homeowners' association maintaining the common property and private water and fire protection facilities. As a condition of the project, RCWD requires that the City include a Reciprocal Easement and Maintenance Agreement for these on-site private water facilities. If you have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at this office. Sincerely, RANCHO CAI.1FORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E. Development Engineering Manager 02~SB:mc i 02~012-T6kFCF Laurie Williams, Engineering Services Supervisor Bud Jones, Senior Engineering Technician cOUNTy OF RIVERSIDE · HEALTI SERVICES AGENCY November 18, 2002 City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Attention: Thomas Thornsley RE: Plot Phm No. PA02-0605 Dear Mr. Thomsley: The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the Plot Plan No. PA02-0605 commercial site for multiple building pads to build retail and restaurants and we have no objections. Sanitary sewer and water services are available in this area. 2. PRIOR TO ANY BUILDING PLAN CHECK APPROVAL for Environmental Health clearance, the following items are required: a) "Will-serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies. Three complete sets of plans for each food establishment (to include vending machines) will be submitled, including a fixture schedule, a finish schedule, and a plumbing schedule in order to ensure compliance with the California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific reference, please contact Food Facility Plan examiners at (909) 600-6330). Sincerely, ~M~e~v:ronmental Health Specialist (909) 955-8980 NOTE: Any current additional requirements not covered can be applicable at time of Building Plan review for final Department of Environmental Health clearance. Local Enforcement Asency * PO. Box 1280, Rivemide, CA 92502-1280 * (909) 955-8982 ~ FAX (909) 781-9653 * 4080 Lemon Stxeet, 9th Floor, Riverside, CA 92501 Land Use and Water Engineering * PO. Box 1206, Riverside, CA 92502-1206 * {909) 955-8980 * FAX (909) 955-8903 * 4080 Lemon Stxeet, 2nd Floor, Riverside, CA 92501 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PC RESOLUTION 2003- PA02-0606 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT R:~D P~2002\02-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 30 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-.__ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CRY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0606 - A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT BUILDING WITH A DRIVE-THRU, ATA 9.24 ACRE COMMERCIAL CENTER WITHIN THE TEMECULA REGIONAL CENTER, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY ROAD AND MARGARITA ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 910-130-092. WHEREAS, Jack Tarr, Diversified Investment Co., filed Planning Application No. PA02- 0606, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA02-0606 was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA02-0606 on May 21,2003, at duly noticed public hearings 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; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. pA02-0606; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated Section 2. Findinqs - Development Plan. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No. 02-0606 hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code: 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. The proposal for a drive-thru restaurant is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for Community Commercial (CC) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development standards for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan (SP-7) and the City of Temecula Development Code. The site is therefore properly planned and zoned and found to be physically suitable for commercial retail and restaurant uses. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The architecture proposed for the restaurant is consistent with the Amhitectural requirements as stated in the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan (SP-7) and Design R:~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 31 Guidelines and the Commercial Performance Standards of the Development Code. The preject has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, can be 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, sar'ety and we/fare. Section 3. Findinqs - Condition Use Permit. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No. 02-0606 hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.04.010E of the Temecula Municipal Code: A. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. The proposed conditional use permit is consistent with the underlying site plan for this project, the City of Temecula General Plan and the applicable sections of the Development Code, and the Municipal Code. B. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures. The proposed conditional use permit, with conditions, is consistent with the City of Temecula Genera/Plan and the applicable sections of the Development Code, and the Municipal Code. C. The site for the proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer area, landscaping and other development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning Commission or Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. The proposed conditional use meets the zoning requirements for integration into the surrounding commercial developments. D. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the community. Provisions are made in the General P/an, the Regional Center Specific Plan, and the Development Code to ensure that the public health, safety, and we/fare are safeguarded with the operation of the drive-thru facilities. The project is consistent with these documents and will be conditioned to meet all applicable requirements. E. The decision to conditionally approve the conditional use permit is based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council. The project has been completely reviewed, as a whole, in reference to all applicable codes and ordinances before the Planning Commission. Section 4. Environmental Compliance. A Notice of Determination for Planning Application No. 02-0606 was made per the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15162. This section applies when an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been certified or negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless there are substantial changes not discussed or examined in the EIR. R:~D P~002~02-0605 Power Center Il\Staff reporl PC 5-7-03,doc 32 Section 5. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves Planning Application No. PA02-0606, a Conditional Use Permit for the design and construction of a 4,000 square foot restaurant building with a drive-thru, at a 9.24-acre commercial center within Temecula Regional Center located on the northwest comer of North General Kearney Road and Margarita Road, known as assessor parcel no. 910-130-092. The Conditions of Approval are contained in Exhibit A. Section 6. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 21st day of May 2003. ATTEST: Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary {SEAL} STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certity that PC Resolution No. 2003- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21s day of May 2003, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:'~D P',2002~)2-0605 Power Center I~Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 33 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PA02-0606 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN R:'~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 34 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OFAPPROVAL Planning Application No. PA02-0606 (Conditional Use Permit; Development Plan) Project Description: Conditional Use Permit for the design and construction of a 4,000 square foot restaurant building with a drive- thru, at a 9.24-acre commercial center within Temecula Regional Center located on the northwest corner of North General Kearney Road and Margarita Road, known as assessor parcel no. 910-130-092. DIF Category: $2.00 per square foot (pursuant to the Development Agreement for the Promenade Mall Project PA96-0333) Assessor Parcel No.: 910-130-092 Approval Date: Expiration Date: May 21, 2003 May 21, 2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Sixty-Four Dollars ($64.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15062. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Department the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirements The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection 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. R:~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center IILStaff report PC 5-7-03.doc 35 This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. ThE, applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan. The applicant shall comply with the Conditions of Approval for Planning Application No. 97- 0118 (Promenade Mall) and the Conditions of Approval for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan unless superceded by these Conditions of Approval. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "D" (Site Plan) under PA02-0605, contained on file with the Planning Department. Additionally, within 30 days following final approval, and prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit 5 sets of revised plans addressing the following: ao co The parking of delivery vehicles shall not be permitted on site along the Margarita Road frontage. There shall be no storage or parking of delivery vehicles within this project site as per the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan (Sec IV.C.10.1 .), except within the two designated spaces near the rear of the building. The exact design and finish of the "decorative concrete" shall be subject to reviewed and approved by Planning prior issuance of building permit. All ground mounted utility/mechanical equipment shall not be placed in prominent locations visible to the public. This equipment shall be screened from view. Per the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan, the double detector check assembly must be installed underground. Provide the Planning Department with a copy of the underground water plans and electrical plans for verification of proper placement of the transformer and the double detector check prior to final agreement with the utility companies. Parking lot lights shall be of a type consistent with the standards used throughout the Mall, which have been a dark bronze, round tapered pole with a mounded height of twenty (20) feet. The site lighting plan shall be approved by the Planning Department prior to installation. Any outside wall-mounted lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. Details of these lights shall be submitted to the Planning Department during plan check for review prior to installation. The installation of wall pack style light shall not be used along the street side elevation. Building elevations shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits "E-1 and E-2" (Building Elevations), contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning. Additionally, within 30 days following final approval, and prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit 5 sets of revised plans addressing the following: a. The screen wall along the upper portion of the raised parapet, of the building on Pad G, shall be finish consistent to the adjacent walls and shall include stucco and cornice treatments. R:'~D P',2002~02-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 36 The spandrel glass windows on the east and west elevations, of the building on Pad G, shall match the framing style of the windows used throughout the facility. The spandrel glass shall not be black or otherwise dark glass, which creates a negative space appearance to the building. Alternatively, these windows could be used for some sort of display relevant to the business. All mechanical and roof-mounted equipment shall be hidden by building elements that were designed for that purpose as an integral part of the building. When determined to be necessary by the Director of Planning, the parapet will be raised to provide for this screening. 10. The Landscaping Plan shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "F' (Landscape Plan) under PA02-0605, contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning. Additionally, within 30 days following final approval, and prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit 5 sets of revised plans addressing the following: 11. a. The landscaping planters on the west elevation of the Pad G building shall include shrubs and small trees. b. Modifications recommended in the letter dated April 19, 2003 by the City's landscape amhitect, for the landscape plan's consistency with the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan, shall be completed pdor to the submittal of construction landscape plan. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Planning. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Director of Planning shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest. 12. The colors and materials for this project shall substantially conform to the following list of · approved colors and materials and with the Color and Material Board contained on file with the Planning Department. Any deviation from the approved colors and materials shall require approval of the Director of Planning. Material Windows, doors Wall cornices Wall face Wall base Metal awning Trellises columns Trellises Finish & Color Anodized aluminum storefront - clear glazing sand float stucco-BM 2161-50 Yellow Squash sand float stucco-BM 2153-60 Rich Cream Valley El Dorado Rustic Stone Veneer - Sequoia Rustic Ledge Aluminum Wood and Stone Veneer - Sequoia Rustic Ledge BM 2161-50 Yellow Squash Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits 13. The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided by the Planning Department staff, and return one signed set to the Planning Department for their files. R:~D P~2002',02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03,doc 37 14. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that Ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. 15. The applicant shall revise Exhibits "D, E, F and G", (Site Plan, Elevations, Landscape Plan, Color and Material Board) to reflect the final Conditions of Approval and submit five (5) full size copies prior to the submittal of any plans for plan check. 16. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Department for permanent filing two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of the approved Color and Materials Board and of the colored version of approved Exhibit "H", the colored amhitectural elevations to the Planning Department for their files. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be readable on the photographic prints. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 17. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. 18. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. These plans shall conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "F', or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover page shall identify the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be accompanied by the following items: Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted for approval, which details the proper maintenance of all proposed plant materials to assure proper growth and landscape development for the long-term esthetics of the property. The approved maintenance program shall be provided to the landscape maintenance contractor who shall be responsible to carry out the detailed program. Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits 19. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. 20. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Planning, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings, in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan shall be filed with the Planning Department for one year from final certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Director of Planning, the bond shall be released upon request by the applicant. R:'~D P~002',0'-;-0605 Power Center II',Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 38 21. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently affixed reflectorized sign constructed of pomelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the intedor end of the parking space at a minimum height of 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off- street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, cleady and conspicuously stating the following: "Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 909 696-3000." In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least 3 square feet in size. 22. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 23. Unless otherwise noted, ail conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any Government Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site plan all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. General Requirements 24. A Grading Permit for precise grading, including all on-site flat work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way. 25. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. 26. Grading plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars. Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 27. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private property. 28. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. R:~D P~002',02-0605 Power Center IAStaff report PC 5-7-03.doc 39 29. A Soil Report shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and submitted to the Director of the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. 30. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elirnination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resoumes Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. 31. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board Planning Department Department of Public Works 32. The Developer shall comply with all constraints, which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject properly. 33. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 34. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. 35. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier's check or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 36. Precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of Temecula Standards subject approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. The following design criteria shall be observed: Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400. 401and 402. 37. The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 38. The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the adjacent property. R:~D P~002~02:-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 40 39. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. 40. The Developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.08. Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 41. All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. 42. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: ao Rancho California Water District Eastern Municipal Water District Department of Public Works 43. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works, BUILDING & SAFETY DEPARTMENT 44. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2001 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2001 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy Code, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and the Temecula Municipal Code. 45. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. 46. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. 47. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 48. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 49. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 50. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. R:",D P~002\02-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 41 51. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. 52. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. 53. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 2001 edition of the California Building Code Appendix 29. 54. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior to permit issuance. 55. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 56. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. 57. Provide precise grading plan at plan check submittal to check accessibility for persons with disabilities. 58. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 59. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. 60. Show all building setbacks. 61. Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours of construction, shown below, as allowed by the City of Temecula Ordinance No. 0-90-04, specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one- quarter mile of an occupied residence. Monday-Friday 6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. Saturday 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Holidays FIRE DEPARTMENT 62. 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. 63. Within 30 days of approval and prior to any building permits being issued, the applicant must provide to the fire prevention bureau a revised site plan, floor plan and other drawings and documents to address all corrections listed on previous correction letters, acceptable to the Chief. R:~D P~2002~;.)-0605 Power Center Il'Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 42 64. 65. 66. 67. 68, 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 1500 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a total fire flow of 2350 GPM with a 2-hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum of I hydrant, in a combination of on-site and off- site (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 500 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 250 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access read(s) frontage to an hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix ill-B). As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. For this project on site fire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2) If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection prior to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2) Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for 80,000 lbs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface designed for 80,000 lbs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. (CFC sec 902) Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13) feet six (6) inches. (CFC 902.2.2.1) The gradient for fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC 902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14) Prior to building construction, dead end road ways and streets in excess of one hundred and fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4) Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all- weather surface roads, as approved bythe Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1) R:~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 43 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block; and conform to hydrsnt type, location, and spacing and minimum fire flow standards. After the local water company signs the plans, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, approved numbers or addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and industrial buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall give a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single-family residences and multi-family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4) Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9) Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10) Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and in a location as approved on the final site and floor plans. (CFC 902.4) Prior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating Fire Lanes with appropriate lane painting and or signs. Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, drsft curtains, Fire Department access doors and Fire department access roads. Buildings housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions California Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81 ) R:~D P~2002~02:-0605 Power Center I~Staff ~eporl PC 5-7-03.doc 44 82. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developer/applicant shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the storage of combustible liquids, flammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau.(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) Special Conditions 83. Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report may be required to be submitted and to the Fire Prevention Bureau. This report shall address, but not be limited to, all fire and life safety measures per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, NFPA- 13, 24, 72 and 231-C. 84. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final a simple plot plan and a simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format must be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention for approval. 85. If there are changes to underlying maps then prior to map recordation the applicant shall submit to the Fire Prevention Bureau a georectified (pursuant to Riverside County standards) digital version of the map including parcel and street centerline information. The electronic file will be provided in an ESRI Arclnfo/ArcView compatible format and projected in a State Plane NAD 83 (California Zone VI) coordinate system. The Bureau must accept the data as to completeness, accuracy and format prior to satisfaction of this condition. 86. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code permit. These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105) 87. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E) COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT General Conditions 88. The trash enclosures shall be large enough to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as, regular solid waste containers. 89. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul construction debris. 90. All parkways, landscaping, on-site lighting and fencing shall be maintained by the property owner or maintenance association. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 91. The developer shall provide TCSD verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. R:'~D P~?.002~2-0605 Power Center Ii, Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 45 OTHER AGENCIES 92. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health transmittal dated November 18, 2002, a copy of which is altached. By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject to Planning Commission approval. Applicant's Signature Name printed Date R;~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 46 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE · HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY November 18, 2002 City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Attention: Thomas Thornsley RE: Plot Plan No. PA02-0607 Dear Mr. Thornsley: 1. The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the Plot Plan No. PA02-0607 Islands Restaurant and we have no objections. Sanitary sewer and water services are available in this area. 2. PRIOR TO ANY BUILDING PLAN CHECK APPROVAL for Environmental Health clearance, the following items are required: a) "Will-serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies. b) Three complete sets of plans for each food establishment (to include vending machines) will be submitted, including a fixture schedule, a finish schedule, and a plumbing schedule in order to ensure compliance with the California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific reference, please contact Food Facility Plan examiners at (909) 600-6330). Sincerely, ~nmental Health Specialist (909) 955-8980 NOTE: Any current additional requirements not covered can be applicable at time of Building Plan review for final Department of Environmental Health clearance. Local Ent,~,~gment Agency/* PO, Box 1280, Riverside, CA 92502-1280 * (909) 955-8982 * FAX (909) 781-965,3 * 4080 Lemon Street, 9ih Hoor, Riverside, CA 92501 Land Use and Water Engineerln§ * BO. Box 1206, Riverside, CA 92502-1206 * (909) 955-8980 * FAX (909) 955-89(B * 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor, Riverside, CA 92501 A'I-rACHMENT NO. 3 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- PA02-0607 DEVELOPMENT PLAN R:~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 47 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0607 A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A 5,514 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT, ATA 9.24 ACRE COMMERCIAL CENTER WITHIN THE TEMECULA REGIONAL CENTER, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY ROAD AND MARGARITA ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 919-130-096. WHEREAS, Lewis Jackson, Islands Restaurant, filed Planning Application No. PA02-0607, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA02-0607 was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the time and manner proscribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA02-0607 on May 21,2003, at duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interosted persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. PA02-0607; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findin,qs. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No. 02-0607 hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code: 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. The proposal for a restaurant is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for Community Commercial (CC) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development standards for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan (SP-7) and the City of Temecula Development Code. The site is therefore properlyplanned and zoned and found to be physically suitable for commercial retail and restaurant uses. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The architecture proposed for the restaurant is consistent with the Architectural requirements as stated in the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan (SP-7) and Design Guidelines and the Commercial Performance Standards of the Development Code. The project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, can be found to be consistent with, all R:'~D P~2002~2-0605 Power Center II',,Staff repo~l PC 5-7-03.doc 48 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. Section3. Environmental Compliance. A Notice of Determination for Planning Application No. PA02-0607 was made per the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15162. This section applies when an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been certified or negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless thero are substantial changes not discussed or examined in the EIR. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves Planning Application No. PA02-0607, a Development Plan for the design, construction and operation of a 5,514 square foot restaurant, at a 9.24 acre commercial center within the Temecula Regional Center, on a 9.24 acro lot on the northwest corner of North General Kearney Road and Margarita Road, and known as Assessor Pamel No. 910-130-096. The Conditions of Approval are contained in Exhibit A. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 21 st day of May 2003. ATTEST: Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary {SEAL} FI:'~) P~2002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03,doc 49 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2003-. was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the st City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21 day of May 2003, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:~D P~2002\02-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 50 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PA02-0607 DEVELOPMENT PLAN R:~D P',2002~02-0605 Power Center II'~Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 51 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA02-0607 (Development Plan) Project Description: The design, construction and operation of a 5,514 square foot restaurant, at a 9.24-acre commercial center within the Temecula Regional Center, on a 9.24-acre lot on the northwest corner of North General Kearney Road and Margarita Road. DIF Category: $2.00 per square foot (pursuant to the Development Agreement for the Promenade Mall Project PA96-0333) Assessor Parcel No.: 910-130-096 Approval Date: May 21, 2003 Expiration Date: May 21, 2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Sixty-Four Dollars ($64.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15062. If within said forty-eight (48) hour pedod the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Department the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirements The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection 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. R:'J3 P~2002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03,doc 52 o 10. 11. 12. This' approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan. The applicant shall comply with the Conditions of Approval for Planning Application No. 97- 0118 (Promenade Mall) and the Conditions of Approval for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan unless superceded by these Conditions of Approval. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "D" (Site Plan) under PA02-0605, contained on file with the Planning Department. Additionally, within 30 days following final approval, and prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit 5 sets of revised plans. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "D" (Site Plan), contained on file with the Planning Department, and as amended under PA02- 0605. Parking lot lights shall be of a type consistent with the standards used throughout the Mall, which have been a dark bronze, round tapered pole with a mounded height of twenty (20) feet. The site lighting plan shall be approved by the Planning Department pdor to installation. Any outside wall-mounted lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining propen'y or public rights-of-way. Details of these lights shall be submitted to the Planning Department during plan check for review pdor to installation. The installation of walt pack style light shall not be used along the street side elevation. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "D" (Site Plan) under PA02-0605, contained on file with the Planning Department. Additionally, within 30 days following final approval, and prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit 5 sets of revised plans addressing the following: Building elevations shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits "E-1 and E-2" (Building Elevations), contained on file with the Planning Department as amended by these changes: a= All mechanical and roof-mounted equipment shall be hidden by building elements that were designed for that purpose as an integral part of the building. When determined to be necessary by the Director of Planning, the parapet will be raised to provide for this screening. The Landscaping Plan shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "F" (Landscape Plan) under PA02-0605, contained on file with the Planning Department. Additionally, within 30 days following final approval, and prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit 5 sets of revised plans. R:',D 1:~2002~:_>-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 53 13. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Planning. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Director of Planning shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest. 14. The colors and materials for this project shall substantially conform to the following list of approved colors and materials and with the Color and Material Board contained on file with the Planning Department. Any deviation from the approved colors and materials shall require approval of the Director of Planning. Material Windows, doors Wall face Wall base Wall stonework Canvas awnings Finish & Color Wood with Olympic Stain #716 ~ semi transparent stain Textured exterior stucco-SW 1109, Tan Smooth texture stucco, SW 1103- Dark Biege Valley El Dorado Rustic Stone Veneer - Sequoia Rustic Ledge Sunbrella #8602, 8610, Wood Siding Resawn cedar board and batten siding, Olympic Stain #911 - Feather Gray Roofing Flat concrete roof tile Roofing (tower element) Corrugated metal roof, factory finish - Galvanized Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits 15. The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided by the Planning Department staff, and return one signed set to the Planning Department for their files. 16. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that Ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. 17. The applicant shall revise Exhibits "D, E, F and G", (Site Plan, Elevations, Landscape Plan, Color and Material Board) to reflect the final Conditions of Approval and submit five (5) full size copies prior to the submittal of any plans for plan check. 18. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Department for permanent filing two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of the approved Color and Materials Board and of the colored version of approved Exhibit"H", the colored architectural elevations to the Planning Department for their files. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be readable on the photographic prints. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 19. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. 20. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. These plans shall conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "F", or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover page shall identify the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be accompanied by the following items: R:~D P~2002~D2~605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03,doc 54 Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted for approval, which details the proper maintenance of all proposed plant materials to assure proper growth and landscape development for the long-term esthetics of the property. The approved maintenance program shall be provided to the landscape maintenance contractor who shall be responsible to carry out the detailed program. Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits 21. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. 22. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Planning, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings, in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan shall be filed with the Planning Department for one year from final certificate of occupancy. Affer that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Director of Planning, the bond shall be released upon request by the applicant. 23. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently affixed reflectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height of 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off- street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously stating the following: "Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 909 696-3000." In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least 3 square feet in size. 24. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. R;~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center II'~Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 55 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 26. Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any Government Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site plan all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. General Requirements 27. A Grading Permit for precise grading, including all on-site flat work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way. 28. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. 29. Grading plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars. Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 30. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private property. 31. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. 32. A Soil Report shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and submitted to the Director of the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. 33. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resoumes Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. 34. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board Planning Department Department of Public Works 35. The Developer shall comply with all constraints, which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. R:~D P~002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5~7-03,doc 56 36. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 37. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. 38. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Riw,~rside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier's check or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 39. Precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of Temecula Standards subject approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. The following design criteria shall be observed: Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400. 401and 402. 40. The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 41. The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the adjacent property. 42. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. 43. The Developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.08. Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 44. All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. 45. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Rancho California Water District Eastern Municipal Water District Department of Public Works R:',D P~2002~2-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 57 46. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. BUILDING & SAFETY DEPARTMENT 47. 48. 49. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2001 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2001 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy Code, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and the Temecula Municipal Code. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 2001 edition of the Califomia Building Code Appendix 29. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior to permit issuance. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. Provide precise grading plan at plan check submittal to check accessibility for persons with disabilities. R:",D P~002~02-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 58 61. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 62. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. 63. Show all building setbacks. 64. Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours of construction, shown below, as allowed by the City of Temecula Ordinance No. 0-90-04, specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one- quarter mile of an occupied residence. Monday-Friday 6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. Saturday 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Holidays FIRE DEPARTMENT 62. 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. 63. Within 30 days of approval and prior to any building permits being issued, the applicant must provide to the fire prevention bureau a revised site plan, floor plan and other drawings and documents to address all corrections listed on previous correction letters, acceptable to the Chief. 64. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 1500 G PM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a total fire flow of 2350 GPM with a 2-hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) 65. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum of 1 hydrant, in a combination of on-site and off- site (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 500 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 250 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to an hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B). 66. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. For this project on site fire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2) R:~D P~2002~0:.~-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 59 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection pdor to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2) Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for 80,000 lbs. GVVV. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) Prior to building final, all locations where structures ars to be built shall have approved Fire Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface designed for 80,000 lbs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. (CFC sec 902) Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13) feet six (6) inches. (CFC 902.2.2.1) The gradient for fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC 902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14) Prior to building construction, dead end road ways and streets in excess of one hundred and fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4) Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all- weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1) Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block; and conform to hydrant type, location, and spacing and minimum fire flow standards. After the plans ars signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, approved numbers or addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and industrial buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall have a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single-family residences and multi-family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4) R:'~D P~002~2-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 6O 77. Pdor to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system. Fire, sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9) 78. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10) 79. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and in a location as approved on the final site and floor plans. (CFC 902.4) 80. Prior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating Fire Lanes with appropriate lane painting and or signs. 81. Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department access doors and Fire department access roads. Buildings housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions California Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81) 82. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developer/applicant shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the storage of combustible liquids, flammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) Special Conditions 83. Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report may be required to be submitted and to the Fire Prevention Bureau. This report shall address, but not be limited to, all fire and life safety measures per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, NFPA - 13, 24, 72 and 231-C. 84. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final a simple plot plan and a simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format must be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention for approval. 85. If there are changes to underlying maps then prior to map recordation the applicant shall submit to the Fire Prevention Bureau a georectified (pursuant to Riverside County standards) digital version of the map including parcel and street centerline information. The electronic file will be provided in a ESRI Arclnfo/ArcView compatible format and projected in a State Plane NAD 83 (California Zone VI) coordinate system. The Bureau must accept the data as to completeness, accuracy and format prior to satisfaction of this condition. R:~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 61 86. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code permit. These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105) 87. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Matedal Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any quantities used or. stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E) COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT General Conditions 89. The trash enclosures shall be large enough to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as, regular solid waste containers. 90. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul construction debris. 91. All parkways, landscaping, on-site lighting and fencing shall be maintained by the property owner or maintenance association. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 92. The developer shall provide TCSD verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. OTHER AGENCIES 93. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health transmittal dated November 18, 2002, a copy of which is attached. By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject to Planning Commission approval. Applicant's Signature Name printed Date R:'~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 62 F1 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE · HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY November 18, 2002 NOV 2 0 2002 City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Attention: Thomas Thornsley RE: Plot Plan No. PA02-0606 Dear Mr. Thornsley: 1. The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the Plot Plan No. PA02-0606 Krispy Kreme Donuts and we have no objections. Sanitary sewer and water services are be available in this area. 2. PRIOR TO ANY BUILDING PLAN CI:IECK APPROVAL for Environmental Health clearance, the following items are required: a) "Will-serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies. b) Three complete sets of plans for each food establishment (to include vending machines) will be submitted, including a fixture schedule, a finish schedule, and a plumbing schedule in order to ensure compliance with the California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific reference, please contact Food Facility Plan examiners at (909) 600-6330). Sincerely, ~U~e ntal Health (909) 955-8980 NOTE: Specialist Any current additional requirements not covered can be applicable at time of Building Plan review for final Department of Environmental Health clearance. Local Enforcement Agency · RO. Box 1280, Riverside, CA 92502-1280 · (909) 955-8982 · FAX (909) 781-9653 · 4080 Lemon Street. 9th Floor. Riverside, CA 92501 Land Use and Water Engineering · RO. Box 1206, Riverside. CA 92502-1206 · {909) 955-8980 · FAX (909) 955-8903 · 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor. Riverside, CA 92501 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 EXHIBITS R:~ P~2002~2-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 63 CITY OFTEMECULA 'SI~E Mai PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0605 (Development Plan) EXHIBIT A PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 VICINITY MAP R:~O P~002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 64 CITY OFTEMECULA EXHIBIT B ZONING MAP EXHIBIT C DESIGNATION -CC (.Co _mmunity Commercial) PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0605 (Development Plan) PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 GENERALPLAN R:~D P~002~02-0605 Popover Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03,doc 65 CITY OF TEMECULA KEY MaP THE PROMENADE MALL SPECIFIC PLAN RESIDENTIAl. SPECFIC PLAN COMMERCIAL PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0605 (Development Plan) EXHIBIT D PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 SITE PLAN R:~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03,doc 66 CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0605 (Development Plan) EXHIBIT E-1 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21,2003 ELEVATION R:~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 67 CITY OF TEMECULA 11 O PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0605 (Development Plan) PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 ELEVATION R:~D P~002\02-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 68 CITY OF TEMECULA N© FLOOR ~PROX. SCALE 1/15"=1'-0" *5ZE BI. OW-Up FOR BUI~ING DiMEKSIONS ELEVATION(~ PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0605 (Development Plan) EXHIBIT E-3 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 R:~D P~2002~02-0605 Pcwer Center TI,Staff report PC 5-7~)3.doc 69 CITY OF TEMECULA ,C©NCEF~7'UAL LANDgCAF~E PLAN PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0605 (Development Plan) EXHIBIT F-1 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21,2003 LANDSCAPE PLAN R:~,D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 70 CITY OF TEMECULA .,000 SF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0605 (Development Plan) EXHIBIT F-2 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 LANSCAPE PLAZA DETAIL R:~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center [,~Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 71 CITY OFTEMECULA PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0606 (Condition Use Permit) EXHIBIT D PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 ENLARGED S~E PLAN R:~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center I~\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 72 CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0606 (Condition Use Permit) EXHIBIT E-1 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 ELEVATIONI R:~D P~002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 73 CiTY OF TEMECULA I PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0606 (Condition Use Permit) EXHIBIT E-2 ELEVATION PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21,2003 R:~D P~2002~2-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 74 CITY OFTEMECULA SE'CBACK 3Z SETBACK LANDSCAPING LANDSCAPING // / -- CONCRETE WALK (TYP.) CONCRETE RNISH ./ - 86' H. PATIO WALL PATIO HEALER 0'YP.) // PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0607 (Development Plan) EXHIBIT D PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 ENLARGED SITE PLAN R:~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 75 CITY OFTEMECULA WEST ELEVA-IqON SOUTH ELEVATION PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0607 (Development Plan) -'-1 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21,2003 ELEVATION R:~D P~2002~02-0605 Power Center Il\Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 76 CITY OF TEMECULA I EAST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0607 (Development Plan) EXHIBIT E-2 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 ELEVATION R:~D P~002~2-0605 Power Center II,Staff report PC 5-7-03.doc 77 ITEM #5 STAFF REPORT- PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION May 21,2003 Planning Application No(s). PA01-0653 and PA02-0612 Prepared By: Dan Long, Associate Planner Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- 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 ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, FOR THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN," GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- 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 THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FROM PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL (PI) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO-7), AND ADOPT SECTION 17.22.180 INCLUDING THE PDO TEXT AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS," GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 R:~P D O\2002\02-0612 Linfleld~Staff Report PC-l.doc I 3. Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- 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 APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0653, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL COMPLEX, ATHLETIC FIELDS AND RELATED FACILITIES, AND FUTURE RESIDENTIAL AREA FOR UP TO 26 RESIDENTS ON A 94 ACRE SITE," GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 4. Adopt a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- 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 APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0653, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR PHASE A-1 OF THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN TO INCLUDE A TWO STORY HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 38,358 SQUARE FEET AND AN APPROXIMATELY 9,728 SQUARE FOOT ONE STORY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BUILDING," GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Linfield Christian School PROPOSAL: PA02-0612: A Zoning Amendment to adopt section 17.22.180 of the Temecula Municipal Code and amend the official Zoning Map of the City of Temecula from Public Institutional (PI) to Planned Development Overlay (PDO-7). PA01-0653: A Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for a master plan and design guidelines for the development of Christian school facilities, athletic fields, and facilities, a residential area, and approve phase A-1 of the master plan. R:~P D 0~20~2\024)612 Linfi~ld~taff Report PC-l.doc 2 LOCATION: North side of Pauba Road, south of Rancho Vista Road and East of Temecula Valley High School, APN: 955-02-002 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Public Institutional (PI) EXISTING ZONING: Public Institutional (PI) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: Low Medium Density Residential (LM) South: Low Medium Density Residential Institutional (PI) East: Very Low Density Residential (VL) West: Public Institutional (PI) (LM)/Public EXISTING LAND USE: Private School and athletic facilities SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Single-Family Homes South: Single-Family Homes/Public Elementary School East: Single-Family Homes West: Public High School BACKGROUND On December 26, 2001, the applicant applied for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Development Plan (DP). Due to a request to include a residential component into the project, which is not permitted in the PI zone, staff advised the applicant that a Planned Development Overlay (PDO) would also be required. On March 28, 2002, the applicant applied for Minor Conditional Use Permit (PA02-0155) to move forward with needed on-site improvements, including relocating the main entry to line up with Via Rami, improving existing on-site parking lots including landscaping, play fields and improving Pauba Road. The Planning Director approved the Minor Conditional Use Permit on June 20, 2002. On April 11,2002, a community meeting was held to discuss the Linfield School Master Plan project. The majority of concerns expressed at this meeting were regarding the golf college and traffic generated from both projects. On November 12, 2002, the applicant submitted a formal application for a PDO. On December 12, 2002 the applications for a Zone Change from PI to PDO, a CUP, and DP was deemed complete and a development review committee (DRC) meeting was held to discus the various issues. The primary issues discussed at the DRC included the following: The need for design guidelines to address planning areas 2 (residential) and 3 (golf college lease area) and how they should reflect the primary campus to establish a campus atmosphere. 2. The use matrix to reflect the PI zone, except where necessary. 3. The maximum residential density for planning area 2 must be addressed. 4. Landscape standards. 5. Access point(s) for planning area 2. R:h° D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 3 6. A multi-use trail located on the western portion of the lot per the City's Master Trails Plan. Environmental studies/plans required, including a lighting plan, archaeology study, drainage, biology studies and; 8. Additional exhibits to be included in the master plan such as a fencing plan. On February 21,2003, the applicant resubmitted the Master Plan document, PDO and the additional requested exhibits with revisions. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Linfield School is an existing private school providing elementary and secondary education. The preposed project includes a Zone Change from Public Institutional (PI) to a Planned Development Overlay (PDO), a Conditional Use Permit for a Master Plan, and a Development Plan to implement Phase A-1 of the Master Plan. The PDO is the requested zoning designation and includes a text establishing permitted uses and development standards for new development within the PDO. Planned Development Overlay The purpose for a zone change from PI to a PDO is to provide flexibility of permitted uses and to establish a mixed-use project site. The PDO text includes a matrix of the uses allowed and the development standards for the PDO zone. The applicant is proposing to permit student and/or faculty residences within the project. Since the existing PI zoning does not allow for residential uses, the zone change to a PDO was required to provide for this flexibility. The PDO establishes four planning "sub" areas within the project site. Planning Area lA includes the primary high school, junior high school, administrative offices, recreational fields and facilities, maintenance facilities and two residences. Planning Area 1B includes the existing elementary school and it's proposed expansion, recreation fields and a proposed preschool and kindergarten facility. Planning Area 2 includes a maximum of 26 student/faculty residences and Planning Area 3 includes the land lease area for the previously approved golf college facility. Table 2.2.2 in the Master Plan includes a list of buildings proposed for development, existing buildings to remain, and buildings to be removed. Each area is identified in the PDO text and includes a list of principally permitted and conditional uses allowed in each "sub" area. The PDO text also includes supplemental development standards for all development proposed in the project site. The development standards establish specific requirements for new development within the project site in the following areas: a. Setbacks b. Building Height c, Building Materials d. Parking e. Landscaping and Fencing Conditional Use Permit The Conditional Use Permit request is to allow the applicant to establish the proposed uses and site layout as outlined in the Master Plan. The Master Plan includes a blueprint for the future development of the Linfield Christian School site including a conceptual site layout and Design RSP D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 4 Guidelines. The long term plan includes the following components; new high school buildings, administrative office building, library/media center, dining hall, outdoor amphitheatre, fine arts auditorium, middle school expansion, elementary school expansion and multi-purpose room, new kindergarten and pre-school building, and various new athletic fields and courts, including a new gymnasium and pool. In addition, the Master Plan includes an area intended for a student/faculty residential area (Planning Area 2), which could result in a maximum of 26 residences. A table is provided below to summarize all new buildings and facilities to occur within the project site. Following is a summary of the new facilities included in the Master Plan site: Facility Description Square footage High School Classroom Building 38,358 SF Administration Building 9,728 SF Classroom Building 21,120 SF Library/Media Center Building 16,456 SF Dining Hall 20,612 SF Outdoor Amphitheatre 7,500 SF Fine Arts Auditorium 6,654 SF Middle School Classroom Building 11,243 SF Elementary Classroom Building 3,600 SF Elementary Multi-purpose room and library 5,500 S.F. Pre-School and Kindergarten Building 19,000 S.F. Junior Varsity Field N/A Middle School Soccer Field N/A Football/Track Stadium N/A Tennis Courts 6 Courts Outdoor Ball Courts 3 Courts Middle School Student Store, P.E. Lockers, & 10,198 S.F. Covered Courts Gymnasium and Pool 28,114 S.F. Misc. Sports Accessory Buildings 15,000 S.F. Maintenance Building 6,000 S.F. Superihtendent Residence & out Building 3,500 S.F. (Relocated) Caretaker Residence (Relocated) 2,000 S.F. Faculty/Student Housing, 26 units Max. Ave. 1,700 S.F. Max. 44,200 S.F. Development Plan (Phase A-l) The applicant is proposing a Development Plan for the first phase (A-l) of the project. Phase A-1 includes the construction of a 38,358 square foot, two-story high school building and a 9,728 square foot single story administrative office building. They are located on the north side of the lake and on the interior of the loop road. The buildings are connected by an overhead arcade, which will include a scripture message, decorative cornice and columns at various intervals. Each of the buildings includes a painted stucco material for the base, red window and doorframes, decorative cornice at the roof with metal roofing at various locations. The administrative building includes a stone base at select location on each side of the building. Both buildings utilize arcades and vertical tower elements with overhangs to signify the main entrance of the building as required in the design guidelines. Each building has long distinct rooflines that vary in height in order to reduce the scale of the buildings. In addition to the two buildings, the development plan for phase A-1 includes an R:kP D O'x2002~02-0612 LinfieldXStaff Report PC-l.doc 5 enhanced student entryway, plazas, gazebo, seating areas, and a portion of the walkway that will eventually lead around the lake. A landscape plan has been submitted as a part of the development plan application. The landscaping for area A-1 includes the area between the high school building and the loop road, down to the lake and up to approximately 25 feet to the area east of the administration and high school building, as well as a portion along the path of the lake. Landscaping is concentrated around the base of each building and at walkways. Some of the species proposed include Honey Locust, London Plane Tree, California Pepper, Crape Myrtle, Carmel Creeper, India Hawthorn and Hop seed Bush. Parking for the first phase will be provided by an existing parking which will be enhanced by improved circulation, additional spaces and landscaping. Environmental Review An Initial Study was prepared for the project site and has identified potentially significant environmental impacts as a result of the proposed project. The proposed Mitigation Measures reduces the impacts to less than significant levels. Therefore a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and is proposed for adoption along with the Mitigation Monitoring Program. The following technical reports were submitted and used to complete the environmental analysis: a. Traffic Impact Analysis Report The Linfield School Master Plan, (Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, December 7, 2001) b. Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum Linfield School Master Plan (Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, February 5, 2003) c. Preliminary Hydrology/Hydraulic Study of Linfield Christian School (KWC Engineers, Inc., December 12, 2001) A General Biological Resource Survey and Jurisdiction Delineation on APN#955-02- 002, The Linfield School Project, (L&L Environmental, Inc., August, 2001) Final Reports for APN#955-02-002, The Linfield School Project (L&L Environmental, Inc., August 24, 2001 ) f. Results of a Focused Raptor Nesting Survey for APN#955-02-002, The Linfield School Project (L&L Environmental, Inc., March 21,2002) g. Requested Focused Surveys for the Linfield Christian School (L&L Environmental, Inc., February 19, 2003) h. A Phase I Archaeological Survey Reportation The Linfield Christian School Expansion Site, APN #955-02-002 (L & L Environmental, Inc., February 11,2003) ANALYSIS Planned Development Overlay Residential Component The proposed zone change from Public Institutional (PI) to a Planned Development Overlay (PDO) is consistent with the General Plan designation. The General Plan designation for the project site is Public Institutional (PI). The primary use of the project site will continue as a private school. The main reason for the zone change is to allow residences on the site, which is not allowed in the PI zone. A maximum of 26 residences are proposed in Planning Area 2 and two residences are R:~P D O',2002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.d0c 6 proposed as part of Planning Area 1. Staff supports the residential portion of the site since it's intended specifically for students and/or faculty use. The individual residences will remain under the ownership of the school and will not be sold or subdivided. By providing on-site housing for students/faculty, there will be fewer vehicle trips, which will reduce vehicle trips on public streets. The applicant has submitted a traffic report and addendum analyzing the potential impacts of the residences and has determined the level of service will not be impacted by the addition of residences and no additional mitigation measures are required. Planninq Areas In addition, the PDO document establishes four Planning Areas. Planning Area lA includes the primary high school, junior high school, administrative offices, recreational fields and facilities, maintenance facilities and two residences. Planning Area lB includes the existing elementary school to be expanded, recreation fields and a proposed preschool and kindergarten facility. Planning Area 2 includes the faculty/residential housing and Planning Area 3 includes the area for the previously approved golf college facility. Permitted Uses Staff has reviewed the proposed PDO text, including the proposed uses and the development standards. The table below summarizes the uses deleted from the PI zone and the uses added to the PDO: Uses Included in Pi, Deleted from PDO New Uses Included in PDO, Not Included in PI Cemetery 30nference Center Sanitarium 3onstruction Trailer (Temp.) Children's Home Food Service for campus and events Detention Center Golf Course Drug Abuse and Recovery Center Golf College Group Homes Maintenance Facility Memberships, clubs, lodges, non-profit :ommun!ty user Modular Classrooms Residential Care for Elderly Radio Broadcasting studio Rest homes Recording studio Residential, single family attached or duplex housing for school faculty Residential, single family detached, school superintendent, or dean's home, caretaker home accessory to private school use) Residential, multiple family housing for school faculty Residential, student dorms R:~P D O~002\02-0612 IJnfield~Staff Relx~ PC-l.doc 7 Some of the uses proposed in the PDO vary from the uses listed under the PI zoning, however the preposecl uses are consistent with the intent of the general plan because they are either consistent with the 'types of uses in the PI zone, or they are secondary uses to the primary use of the school. Development Standards The PDO text includes the necessary information required for a PDO under section 17.22 of the Development Code. The text includes development standards required for new development within the project site. Where the PDO is silent, the Development Code will apply. The PDO development standards differ from the Development Code in the following three areas: ']'he number of parking spaces for the project is not consistent with the Development Code requirements. The total number of required parking spaces for the project is 860. The applicant is proposing a total of 808 parking spaces. The applicant is requesting a reduction in the number of required parking spaces to allow for the flexibility of shared parking for special events and assembly uses within the elementary multi-purpose room, amphitheatre and fine arts building. The total number of parking spaces required for the pre-school, kindergarten, elementary school, middle school, high school, administretive office building and maintenance facility is a total of 582 parking spaces. The special event and assembly facilities, which include the elementary multipurpose building, amphitheatre and fine arts building requires an additional 278 parking spaces. Since these facilities will not be used at the same time as the primary school facilities, staff has determined that this reduction in parking is acceptable. The development standards for landscaping on the project site refer to Development Code, with the exception of landscape planters, which are only required at the end of parking rows. Staff is supportive of the proposed changes because the project is for the private use of students and faculty, they are primarily located internal to the project site with the exception of the parking lots located at the kindergarten facility and football/track stadium and the elimination of landscaping islands provides for better security in the parking lot areas. The development standards in the PI zone do not contain a maximum height requirement. Therefore, the development standards in the PDO establishes a maximum building height of 2 stories or 45 feet for Planning Area 1. Architectural elements are permitted to project an additional 10 feet above the maximum height. The height requirement for residential structures is two stories, or a maximum of thirty (30) feet in height. Staff believes that the proposed height standards are appropriate for the project site. Conditional Use Permit The Conditional Use Permit is a request to approve a Master Plan document. The Master Plan document includes a site layout with intended uses for each Planning Area and Design Guidelines. The proposed uses in the Master Plan are consistent with the objectives of the Planned Development Overlay and Public Institutional zone, because the primary use of the site will remain an educational facility, including the residential portions of the site intended for students/faculty housing. Master Plan The Master Plan describes the long-term plan for the project site. Each phase will require an administrative development plan to ensure the proposed development is consistent with the Master Plan and Design Guidelines. R:~P D O~2002\02-0612 Liufield~Staff Report PC-I .doc 8 Circulation and Access The access and circulation of the project includes an internal circulation pattern established under the previously approved minor CUP (PA 02-0155), however the Master Plan identifies additional access points and circulation patterns (figure 2.5 of Master Plan). The minor CUP also permitted the applicant to improve the loop road and provide additional parking along the loop road and improve existing parking lots. Additional access from Pauba Road includes an access point for Planning Area 2, which was required to line up with Via Cerda and an access point east of the main entrance for the proposed pro-school and kindergarten building. The kindergarten and pro-school access point will be limited to right in and right out turning only. The applicant will provide additional detail of these access points upon a request to develop these respective areas. A secondary access point is provided from Rancho Vista Road on the northern portion of the project site. This access point will connect into the loop road and includes additional parking lots. This access point is intended for special events that may warrant a secondary access point and as an emergency access point if needed. All existing access points, including those previously approved for the golf college located in planning area 3 and those used for the elementary school will remain as they currently exist. Compatibility The Master Plan conforms to City standards and ensures that the project is designed in a manner to reduce the impacts to surrounding residential areas. The Master Plan site layout is designed to concentrate the primary uses of the school on the interior of the site surrounded by open space and athletic fields. The majority of recreation fields and courts are located on the western portion of the site, which is bordered by Temecula Valley High School. There aro two baseball fields (one of which will include lighting) and an elementary play field located on the southern portion of the project site, which is bordered by Pauba Road, single-family residences and Paloma Elementary School to the south. Staff has determined that the noise impacts will not be significant because there is an elevation change between the uses ranging from 1-foot to approximately 35 feet in height and approximately 130-foot separation between the uses. The separation includes a 90-95 public right- of-way, a 20-foot landscaped slope on the residential side and a 20-foot setback from the propert7 line for the project site. In addition, the project includes a Condition of Approval that all outdoor events and public gatherings must be completed prior to 10:00 P.M. A lighting plan has been submitted and reviewed by staff to ensure lighting and glare will be reduced to a less than significant level and is consistent with the Mount Palomar lighting Ordinance 655. Mosco lighting is proposed for the athletic fields and courts. The City routinely uses this type of lighting system because it significantly reduces light glare and spillage. There aro two recreation fields located on the eastern portion of the site, which will be used by the middle school campus. Elementary students will use this recreation area during daytime hours only. Lighting is not proposed for these fields. Staff believes these fields will not have significant impacts because they are intended for daytime use only. A student drop off area is proposed along the eastern property line, which is a concern for noise and lighting impacts upon neighbors. Staff has included a Condition of Approval for the Master Plan document and Design Guidelines to include language that requires student-loading areas adjacent to residences to provide enhanced landscaping to include shrubs and trees. The applicant will be required to show how landscaping in these areas is enhanced and buffers the area from the residences in comparison the other areas on the project site. In addition, Conditions of Approval are included to revise the lighting plan to reduce light and glare spilling onto the adjacent residences by relocating various light fixtures. R:~P D O~2002\02-0612 IJnfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 9 Desi.qn Guidelines Section 3.0 of the Master Plan document establishes Design Guidelines and Landscape Guidelines for the project site. The Design and Landscape Guidelines provide a defined parameter of building materials and design concepts permitted for future development. Many of the elements required in the Design and Landscape Guidelines are similar to those found in the City Wide Design Guidelines, however specific guidelines for educational facilities are not included in the City Wide Design Guidelines. The proposed Design Guidelines are specifically for a campus facility. A common design theme will be implemented by the following techniques: a. One and two story buildings with long roof lines to reduce building scale, b. Building orientation to provide open space plazas, courtyards and view corridors, c. Take advantage of the natural setting such as the lake and stream features, d. Building entry points will be enhanced via vertical elements and accent materials. e. Entry nodes at vehicle entry locations and special paving at key intersections, f. Pedestrian entry nodes to transition vehicular points into campus plazas and courtyards. g. Monument signage at the main entrance on Pauba Road h. Window and door types to consider lighting and seasons for placement and orientation, i. Building entry features are required to be enhanced to show importance, j. Skylights and clearstory elements for interior lighting, k. Building materials to include wood, concrete block or metal (for maintenance buildings), I. Built up flat roofs and pitched roofs of composite shingles, tile or metal, m. Finished materials such as stone, or pre-cast concrete, n. Entry canopies and vertical columns for amades o. Surface treatments (see color and material board) p. Bollard lighting at walkways q. Decorative pole lighting at courtyards, plazas and waikways, and A fencing and wall plan has been provided by the applicant (exhibit 3.3.5). Fencing types include, chain link, wrought iron, painted wood, or split faced block. The chain link fencing on the east and west sides of the project site will remain. The fencing on the eastern portion of the site will include additional shrubs and trees to soften the view from the adjacent residences, primarily at student drop-off locations. In other locations along Pauba Road, the chain link fencing will be used in combination with wrought iron and screened by plantings and vines. Screen walls will be provided where screening is necessary such as the maintenance buildings. Development Plan The development plan includes phase A-1 of the Maser Plan for a 38,358 square foot, two-story high school building and a 9,728 square foot single story administrative office building. Staff has reviewed the proposed development plan and has determined the proposed project is consistent with the PDO development standards and Master Plan and Design Guidelines because the location of the proposed use is consistent with the Master Plan and includes amhitecture elements as required in the design guidelines such as vertical elements, distinct roof lines, plazas, courtyards, outdoor seating, amades and columns. The landscape plan and species proposed are consistent with the conceptual landscape plan within the Master Plan. Environmental Determination Staff prepared an Initial study and determined that the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment with regards to biological resources, cultural resources, noise and traffic unless mitigated. Staff has determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan as summarized below, will satisfactorily comply with the regulations of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Any impacts will be mitigated to levels less than significant with implementation of the mitigation measures. The Linfield School Master Plan Environmental Im )act/Mitigation Summary Responsible Impact Mitigation Measures Time Frame Party Biological Resources Potential The project developer shall acquire the Prior to the Department removal of necessary permits from federal and issuance of a of Public California state agencies, including U.S. Army grading permit Works and gnatcatcher, Corps of Engineers, Regional Water the Planning Quino Quality Control Board, U.S. Fish and Department checkerspot Wildlife Service and California butterfly, and Department Fish and Game Stephen's kangaroo rat habitat An environmental resource area has Upon approval of Planning Development of been set aside for preservation and will the Mast Plan Department land containing not be developed and PDO riparian document and woodlands Zone Change Development of The project developer shall acquire the Prior to issuance Department land containing necessary permits from federal and of a grading of Public wetlands as state agencies, including U.S. Army permit Works and identified by Corps of Engineers, Regional Water the Planning state and Quality Control Board, U.S. Fish and Department federal Wildlife Service and California regulations Department Fish and Game Noise Exposure of All outdoor events and public gatherings Planning staff will Planning persons to or must be complete prior to 10:00 P.M. verify compliance Department generation of on an on-going and Code noise levels in basis via Code Enforcement excess of Enforcement standards R:~P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 11 Impact Mitigation Measures Time Frame Responsible Party established in the local general plan or noise ordinance Cultural Resources Potentially During initial grading and ground Prior to the Department cause a disturbance activities, a qualified cultural issuance of a of Public substantial resources monitor shall be present and building permit Works and adverse shall have the authority to stop and Planning change in the redirect ground disturbance activities to Department signific;~nce of evaluate the significance of any cultural an resources exposed. archaeological resource 3ursuant to Section 1506.5 Could directly During all grading activities, unless Prior to the Department or indirectly determined unnecessary by the monitor, ~ssuance of a of Public destroy a a qualified paleontological monitor shall grading permit Works and unique be present and shall have the authority Planning ~aleontolgical to stop and redirect grading activities to Department resource or site evaluate the significance of any or unique paleontolgical resources exposed during geological the grading activity. feature Transportation Improve Pauba Road (Secondary Prior to the Public Works Highway Standards - 88' R/VV) to issuance of the and Planning include dedication of half-width street first building Department right-of-way, installation of half-width )ermit street improvements 720' west of Linfield Way to the West Boundary, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Improve Rancho Vista Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street Potential to right-of-way, installation of half-width increase the street improvements along the North overall traffic Boundary frontage, paving, curb and volume and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage congestion at facilities, signing and striping, utilities key (including but not limited to water and intersections sewer). Responsible Impact Mitigation Measures Time Frame Party Improve Green Tree Road (Local Road Standards - 60' R/VV) to include dedication of half-width street right-of- way, installation of half-width street improvement from Margarita Road to the North Boundary, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street light, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Future traffic studies may be required to determine the precise timing of each Mitigation Measure if the City determines it is necessary. A school zone and striping plan, per Caltrans standards, shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer for the school site within this project and included in the street improvements for this project. Design shall also include and warrant analysis for a flashing , yellow beacon and if warrants are met, shall be installed by the developer. Payment of Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program FINDINGS Staff has made the following findings of approval, which are reflected in the attached resolutions: Zoning Amendment Staff has reviewed the proposed zoning amendment and recommends the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the City Council to approve a zone change from Public Institutional (PI) to Planned Development Overlay (PDO-7) for the project site. To recommend approval of the Zone Change, the following findings must be made: The proposed Zone Change is consistent with the land use designation in which the use is located, as shown on the Land Use Map. The proposed change of zone is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Temecula because the primary uses will not change and the proposed residential portion of the project has been determined to be a secondary use supporting the primary uses. R:~P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield\Staff Report PC-l.doc 13 'l'he proposed use is in conformance with the goals, policies, programs and guidelines of the elements of the General Plan. ]"he proposed change of zone conforms to the General Plan and will remain compatible with the surrounding land uses as there is existing institutional uses to the south and west of the project site and residential to the north, east and south of the subject site. Therefore, the proposed amendment will result in compatible development, which is a goal of the General Plan. Conditional Use Permit 7'he proposed project is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, because the proposed PDO meets the purpose and intent of a conditional use permit as defined in Section 17.04.010A of the Development Code, The nature of the proposed conditional use will not be detrimental to the general welfare of the community, because the proposed PDO is consistent with the land uses surrounding the project site, which includes residential and educational facilities. The applicant has submitted traffic reports and staff has concluded that the 26 additional residences will not have a negative impact, therefore additional improvements will not be required. The proposed conditional use permit is compatible with the nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures, because the proposed uses are similar or function similar to the surrounding uses in the immediate area, which include schools and single-family residences. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in this development code and required by the planning commission or council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood, because the project site maintains vast amounts of open space and is designed to compliment the natural environmental setting, while establishing clearly defined areas of education and recreation uses with the use of landscaping and fencing. In addition, if approved, the project will maintain its own set of development standards to be approved and adopted by the City Council, which will govern parking standards, loading areas, fences, walls, buffer areas and landscaping. Development Plan 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 because the project includes a PDO, which allows for a flexibility in uses and development standards and it has been determined that the development plan application is consistent with the General Plan, PDO, state law and all applicable city ordinances. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare because the project provides enhanced opportunities for student facilities and the project has been designed in compliance with the overall master plan, which provides public improvements to protect the public health, safety and general welfare of the persons in the area. R:~D O~20ff2\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc CONCLUSION ! RECOMMENDATION Staff has determined that the project as proposed is consistent with the General Plan. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, an Ordinance approve the Zone Change Amendment, a Resolution approving a Conditional Use Permit and a Resolution approving a Development Plan for phase A-I. R:\P D O\2002\02-0612 Hnfield\Staff Report PC-l.doc 15 Attachments 1. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program PC Resolution - Blue Page 17 2. Z. oning Map Amendment PC Resolution - Blue Page 20 3. Conditional Use Permit PC Resolution - Blue Page 23 Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 27 4. Development Plan PC Resolution - Blue Page 32 Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 35 5, Exhibits - Blue Page 49 A. Vicinity Map B. General Plan Map C. Existing Zoning Map D, Master Site Plan E. Master Landscape Plan F. Site Plan Phase A-1 G. High School 1st Floor Plan H. High School 2r~ Floor Plan I. Administration Floor Plan J. High School Elevation (Al) K. Administration Elevation (A2) L. Phase A-1 Landscape Plan Initial Study - Blue Page 61 7. 8. 9. lvlitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 62 PDO-7 Document- Blue Page 63 blaster Plan Design Guidelines - Blue Page 64 R:~P D O\21K,2\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 1 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PC RESOLUTION R:~P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfi¢Id~Staff Report PC-l.doc 17 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- 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 ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, FOR THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN," GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 WHEREAS, The Linfield Christian School, filed Planning Application No. PA01-0653 and PA02-0612, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code and an initial study was prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines; WHEREAS, a Mitigation Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program was prepared including, in the time and manner prescribed by State, local law and CEQA Guidelines; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at regular meetings, considered Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program on May21,2003, at duly noticed public hearings 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; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program as attached Exhibit "A" subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated Section 2. Environmental Compliance Recommend Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan based on the Initial Study, which was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072. R:~ D O~2002\02-0612 LinfielthStaff Report PC-l.doc 18 .C;ection 3. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 21 st day of May 2003. ATTEST: Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certity that PC Resolution No. 2003- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the st City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof heed on the 21 day of May, 2003, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 19 ATFACHMENT NO. 2 ZONING AMENDMENT PC RESOLUTION RSP D OL2002\02-0612 Linfield\Staff Report PC-l.doc 20 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- 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 THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FROM PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL (PI) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO-7), AND ADOPT SECTION 17.22.180 INCLUDING THE PDO TEXT AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS," GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 WHEREAS, The Linfield Christian School, filed Planning Application No. 02-0612 Zoning Map Amendment, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at regular meetings, considered the Application on May 21,2003, at duly noticed public hearings 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; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended City Council approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated Section 2. Findinqs. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No. 02-0612 (Planned Development Overlay) hereby makes the following findings: A. The proposal, as conditioned, is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for (PI) Public Institutional of the City General Plan. B. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of the residential and educational development proposed. R:~P D O~2002\02-0612 IAnfield~S~aff Report PC-l.doc 21 C:. The proposed Planned Development Overlay Zoning District is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because the project will not approve any specific on-the-ground development and future development will require additional and appropriate review Section 2. Environmental Compliance. An environmental initial study has been prepared for Planning Application No. PA02-0612 in accordance with California Environmental Quality ,Act. As a result, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the City Council adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for this Planning Application (PA02-0612) Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 21 st day of May 2003. ATTEST: Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie U bnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2003- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular ~eeting thereof held on the 21st day of May, 2003, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:~xP D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-I .dec 22 ATFACHMENT NO. 3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PC RESOLUTION R:~P D O',2002X02-0612 Linfield\Staff Report PC-t.doc 23 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- 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 APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0653, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL COMPLEX, ATHLETIC FIELDS AND RELATED FACILITIES, AND FUTURE RESIDENTIAL AREA FOR UP TO 26 RESIDENTS ON A 94 ACRE SITE," GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 WHEREAS, The Linfield Christian School, filed Planning Application No. PA01-0653 Master Conditional Use Permit, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at regular meetings, considered Planning Application No 01-0553 on May 21,2003, at duly noticed public hearings 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; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended City Council approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated Section 2. Findinqs. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the Application hereby makes the following findings: A. The proposed project is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, because the proposed PDO meets the purpose and intent of a conditional use permit as defined in Section 17.04.010A of the development code B. The nature of the proposed conditional use will not be detrimental to the general welfare of the community, because the proposed PDO is consistent with the land uses surrounding the project site, which includes residential and educational facilities. The applicant has submitted traffic reports and staff have concluded that the additional residences will not result in a negative impact. R:~ D O~2002\024)612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 24 C. The proposed conditional use permit is compatible with the nature, condition, and developrnent of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures, because the proposed uses are similar or function similar to the surrounding uses in the immediate area, which include schools and single- family residences D. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in this development code and required by the planning commission or council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood, because the project site maintains vast amounts of open space and is designed to compliment the natural environmental setting, while establishing clearly defined areas of education and recreation uses with the use of landscaping and fencing. In addition, if approved, the project will maintain its own set of development standards to be approved and adopted by the City Council which will govern parking standards, loading areas, fences, walls, buffer areas and landscaping. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. Recommend Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan based on the Initial Study, which was prepared pursuant to CEQ^ Guidelines Section 15072. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally recommends approval of the Application(s) according to the specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated heroin by this reference together with any and all necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 21 st day of May 2003. ATTEST: Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] RSP D O~0{12\02-0612 Linfield',Staff Report PC-l.doc 25 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2003-__ was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21st day of May, 2003, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 0 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:~ D O~2002\02-0612 Hnfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 26 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:\P D O\2002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 27 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA01-0653 (Conditional Use Permit) Project Description: A Conditional Use Permit to establish future educational, recreational, institutional, and residential facilities on 93.77 acres and to adopt a Master Plan and Design Guidelines Assessor's Parcel NO.: 955-02-002 Approval Date: May 21,2003 Expiration Date: May 20, 2005 PLANNING DIVISION Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand Three Hundred Twenty-Eight Dollars ($1,328.00) which includes the One Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty Dollar ($1,250.00) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Sixty Four Dollars ($64.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resoumes Code Section 21108(a) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. if within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirements The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection 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. All these conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this conditional use permit. R:~P D OL2002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 28 ']"he applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application NO, PA01-0653 and PA02-0612). A follow-up raptor survey shall be prepared and submitted to staff for review as recommended in the raptor nesting survey, prepared by L & L Environmental Inc., dated March 21, 2002. Said survey shall take place during the raptor-breeding season as recommended by a qualified biologist. The applicant shall comply with their Statement of Operations and Master Plan Document dated February 21,2003, on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division, unless superceded by these conditions of approval. This Conditional Use Permit may be revoked pursuant to Section 17.03.080 of the City's Development Code. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this Conditional Use Permit. The Applicant shall submit ten (10) copies of the Amended Master Plan and Design Guidelines document to the Planning Department within 30 days of the approval date. The following revisions are required: a. The Master Plan shall be revised to eliminate the word Master for Master Conditional Use Permit in all locations of the Master Plan and Design Guidelines. b. Section 2.4.8 on page 16 of the Master Plan and Design Guidelines shall be revised to read as follows: "Based upon the available net acreage of the site and building design, a maximum of 26 residences may be developed within Planning Area 2." c. A section shall be added requiring Planning Area 2 to provide a direct access path intended for vehicular and/or pedestrians to the main campus facility. d. Language indicating that only those trees existing immediately adjacent to parking lots shall be included in the required count of parking lot trees. e, The bottom line of the front cover sheet of the Master Plan document to read: For Conditional Use Permit PA01-0653. f. The Design Guidelines shall include specific language that student drop-off zones adjacent to residential zones are to be enhanced by the landscaping of shrubs and trees. g. All exhibits within the Master Plan shall be revised to be consistent with each other, as shown on exhibit 2.2.B. h. Table 3.4.3 shall be revised to indicate the use of Mosco lighting for recreation fields and courts. i. Section 3.2.2 shall be revised to include stucco finish as a permitted finish. j. Section 3.3.5 shali be revised to include vinyl fencing as a type of fencing permitted. k, The fencing plan. Figure 3.3.5 must be revised to accurately reflect the type of fencing existing and proposed, including height and type and provide separate symbols for each type of fencing. R:~P D O\20~2\02-0612 Linfickl\Staff Report PC-I,doc 29 10. Language indicating that mitigation and landscaping for the drainage course located along the western portion of the project site will be required and determined by the California Department of Fish and Game as part of the 1603 permit should be included into the Master Plan text. The area immediately south east of the lake should be identified as habitat area and planted with native habitat to support this issue. This should be clearly labeled on the exhibits in the Master Plan and included in the text document. Delete Cortaderia selioana from Table 3.3.6 unless sterile varieties are used. Delete Schinus terebinthifolius from Table 3.3.6, as it is not zoned for the Temecula area. Language indicating wall vines and additional appropriate trees shall be provided along retaining walls. q. Add the following language into the Master Plan and Design Guidelines: Structures existing on the Linfield Christian School campus as of the date of adoption of this ordinance shall be considered "grandfathered" in regard to any new development standards, setbacks, and design guidelines adopted subsequent to the original construction date of these facilities. All new development occurring in PDO-7 shall be in substantial conformance with the Linfield Christian School Master Plan Design Guidelines approved in conjunction with Conditional Use Permit # PA01-0653. Future Development in Planning Area 2 shall be consistent with the design theme, materials, and color palette established for the main campus in Planning Area lA, as set forth in the Master CUP and Design Guidelines for the Linfield Christian School. In Planning Area 3, the design and architecture shall be consistent with the currently approved plans for the Golf College Training Facility. In the event this use is not established, future development in Planning Area 3 shall conform to the Design Guidelines established for Planning Area lA in the Master CUP for the Linfield Christian School. Buildings constructed with pre-finished metal panels and set on a permanent foundation are permissible for maintenance and storage buildings within Planning Area 1. Said buildings shall be treated with rust-proof, powder coated paints, and shall be consistent with the main color theme established for the campus. Chain link fencing located at property boundaries adjacent to residential uses shall incorporate vines or screening hedges to provide greater privacy. Installation of screening plant materials along existing fences shall be provided in conjunction with the Development Plan approval for the affected Development Sub-Area, as shown in the Master CUP for the Linfield Christian School. The lighting plan shall be revised and submitted to staff to verify consistency with the Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance 655. Lighting proposed adjacent to residential lots shall be setback twice the distance of the height of the fixture up to 25 feet. All lighting shall be fully shielded and directed down and reduce glare onto adjacent parcels. R:~P D O~200'2\02-0612 Linfi¢ld~taff Report PC-l.doc 30 11. All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this Development Plan. FIRE DEPARTMENT The following are the Fire Department Conditions of Approval for this project. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau. 12. 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. 13. '['he Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 4000 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a total fire flow of 4850 GPM with a 4-hour duration. The required fire flow for each building may vary and may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) COMMUNITY SERVICES 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit additional residential units will be subject to Quimby in- lieu fees calculated in accordance with Temecula's Subdivision Ordinance 16.33 and will be due prior to the issuance of any building permits for these new dwellings. By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval. Applicant's Signature Name printed Date R:~P D O'x20f~2\ff2-0612 LinfielchStaff Report PC-l.doc ATI'ACHMENT NO. 4 DEVELOPMENT PLAN PC RESOLUTION R:~P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l,doc 32 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- 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 APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0653, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR PHASE A-1 OF THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN TO INCLUDE A TWO STORY HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 38,358 SQUARE FEET AND AN APPROXIMATELY 9,728 SQUARE FOOT ONE STORY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BUILDING," GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002 WHEREAS, The Linfield Christian School, filed Planning Application No. 01-0653 Development Plan Application, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at regular meetings, considered the Application on May 21,2003, at duly noticed public hearings 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; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended City Council approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated Section 2. Findinqs. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the Application hereby makes the following findings: 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 because the project includes a PDO, which allows for a flexibility in uses and development standards and it has been determined that the development plan application is consistent with the general plan, PDO, state law and all applicable city ordinances. R:~ D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 33 B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare because the project provides enhanced opportunities for student facilities and the project has been designed in compliance with the overall master plan, which provides public improvements to protect the public health, safety and general welfare of the persons in the area. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. Recommend Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan based on the Initial Study, which was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072. Section 4. Approval. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve the Resolution for Planning Application No. PA01-0653 (Development Plan), substantially in the form contained in Exhibit "D." Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 21st day of May 2003. ATTEST: Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2003- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the C~ty of T~.mecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21 day of May, 2003, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:~P D Ok20(r2~02-0612 LiufieldkStaff Report PC-l.doc 34 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:~P D O~2002\024)612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 35 EXHIBIT A CITY OFTEMECULA CONDITIONS OFAPPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA02-0653 (Development Plan) Project Description: A Development Plan application for Phase A-1 of the Linfield School Master Plan, an approximately 38,358 square foot, two story high school building and an approximately 9,728 square foot single story administrative office building. DIF Category: Public Institutional (Educational) Assessor's Parcel No.: 955-02-002 Approval Date: May 21, 2003 Expiration Date: May 21, 2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One thousand three hundred and fourteen dollars ($1314.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resoumes Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty- eight (48) hour period the applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirements The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection 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. R:~P D 0~2002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 36 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits "E" (Site Plan), contained on file with the Planning Department. Landscaping shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit"N" (Conceptual Landscape Plan). Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Planning. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Director of Planning shall have the authority to require the property owner to bdng the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest. The applicant shall screen all roof mounted mechanical equipment from view of the adjacent residences, utilizing architectural elements as a screening method. Ground cover shall be used to fill in all shrub beds and all landscape areas below trees. Ground covers and spacing shall be as approved by the planning Director. Species and varieties of all shrubs and trees used shall be as approved by the Planning Director. Schinus molle trees shall be used as street trees along interior streets unless otherwise approved by the Planning Director. Provide a minimum 5' width planting area at the ends of all parking rows. The planter length is to be equal to the adjoining parking space. The planter is to contain a minimum of one tree, shrubs and ground covers. Provide a minimum of one broad canopy type tree per 4 parking spaces. Plants shall be provided at sizes to meet minimum City of Temecula Development Code and City-Wide Design Guideline requirements and recommendations. All utilities shall be screened from view. Show and label all utilities on landscape plans and provide appropriate screening. Provide a 3' clear zone around fire check detectors as required by the Fire Department before starting the screen. Group utilities together in order to reduce intrusion. Substitute shrubs shall be provided for Lantana and Carissa as they are not zoned for the Temecula area, Wall vines and additional appropriate trees shall be provided along the segmental retaining wall located to the north and west of the Phase 1 classroom building as approved by the Planning Director. R:~P D O'0.002\02-0612 Linfield~taff Report PC-l.doc 37 16. Areas proposed for development in another phase occurring not within six months of the completion of the previous phase shall be temporarily tufted, seeded and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control as approved by the Planning Director. 17. The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided by the Planning Department staff, and return one signed set to the Planning Department for their files. 18. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application NO. PA01-0653 and PA02-0612). Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 19. The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and return one signed set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files. 20. The applicant shall submit a revised parking lot lighting plan to the Planning Department, which meets the requirements of the Development Code, Master Plan and the Palomar Lighting Ordinance. The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely impact the growth potential of the parking lot trees and not to impact neighbors. 21. A copy of the Grading Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. 22. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that Ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 23. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. 24. An appropriate method for screening the gas meters and other externally mounted utility equipment shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. 25. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. 26. The construction plans shall indicate the application of painted rooftop addressing plotted on a 9-inch grid pattern with 45-inch tall numerals spaced 9-inch apart. The numerals shall be painted with a standard 9-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. 27. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. These plans shall conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "F", or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The plans shall be accompanied by the following items: Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. R:~P D O~2002\024)612 LinfieldXSmff Report PC-l.doc 38 Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with approved plan). A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted for approval, which details the proper maintenance of all proposed plant materials to assure proper growth and landscape development for the long-term esthetics of the property. The approved maintenance program shall be provided to the landscape maintenance contractor who shall be responsible to carry out the detailed program. Prior to Building Occupancy 28. The property owner shall fully install all required landscaping and irrigation, and submit a landscape maintenance bond in a form and amount approved by the Planning Department for a period of one-year from the date of the first occupancy permit. 29. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. 30. The construction plans shall indicate the application of painted rooftop addressing plotted on a 9-inch grid pattern with 45-inch tall numerals spaced 9-inch apart. The numerals shall be painted with a standard 9-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 or monument sign closest to the street. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any Government Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site plan all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. General Requirements 31. A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site flat work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way. 32. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. 33. All improvement plans, grading plans, shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars. 34. The Developer shall construct public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate R:~ D O~20~2\02-0612 Linfield~aff Report PC-l.doc 39 Storm drain facilities Sewer and domestic water systems Under grounding of proposed utility distribution lines 35. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil or Traffic Engineer and reviewed by the Director of the Department of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 36. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include ail necessary erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private property. 37. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. 38. A Soil Report shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and submitted to the Director of the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. 39. The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream facilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to' make required improvements, shall be provided by the Developer. 40. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. 41. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Planning Department c. Department of Public Works 42. The Developer shall comply with all constraints, which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 43. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department R:h° D OL2002\02-0612 Linfield\Staff Report PC-l.dcc 40 and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 44. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. 45. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Rivemide County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier's check or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 46. A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The reportshall address special study zones and the geological conditions of the site, and shall provide recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. Prior to Issuance of the 1st Building Permit 47. 48. The Developer shall design and guarantee construction of the following public improvements to City of Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of the Department of Public Works: a. Improve Pauba Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements from 720' east of Linfield Way to the West Boundary of the site, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). This work can be phased with phase I being completed with the relocation of the entry road. Phase 2 would be the roadway in front of the elementary school and completed with Certificate of Occupancy of any new buildings located east of Linfield Way on Pauba Road or within 5 years, whichever occurs first. Phase 3 would include the remaining improvements adjacent to Planning Area 2 (Future Faculty Housing) to the west boundary of the site and would be completed with the first building permit within Planning Area 2 or within 10 years, whichever occurs first. b. Improve Rancho Vista Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements along the North Boundary frontage, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). These improvements may be deferred until a driveway connection is made to Rancho Vista Road or Phase 3, whichever occurs first. c. Improve Green Tree Road (Local Road Standards - 60' PAN) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvement from Margarita Road to the North Boundary, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street light, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). These improvements may be deferred until Phase 2 improvements are required. Improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. ']'he following design criteria shall be observed: R:~P D O~20[Y2\02-0612 Linfielff~Staff Report PC-l.doc 41 a. Flow line grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A. Streetlights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with City Standard No. 800, 801,802 and 803. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400, 401, and 402. e. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries. f. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. go Public Street improvement plans shall include plan and profile showing existing topography, utilities, proposed centerline, top of curb and flow line grades. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. 49. The proposed driveway shown as "emergency/secondary gated ingress-egress" off of Rancho Vista Road should be re-aligned to match the existing street's location across the street (i.e. Via El Greco) and/or show how the driveway's access will be restricted (i.e. restrict movement via median, etc.) 50. All proposed storm drain systems shown onsite shall be privately maintained. 51. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. 52. The Developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.08. Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 53. All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. 54. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. Rancho California Water District b. Eastern Municipal Water District c. Department of Public Works 55. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. RAP D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC- 1 .doc 42 56. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, all public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City Standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 57. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul construction debris. 58. Streetlights on the private interior streets will be maintained by the property owner. 59. All perimeter walls, entry monumentation, parkways, landscaping, pedestrian accesses, private recreational amenities and open space shall be maintained by the property owner. 60. Street improvements will include Class II bike lanes on Pauba and Rancho Vista Roads. Any damage caused to the existing Class II bike lanes on Pauba and Rancho Vista Roads as a result of construction shall be repaired or replaced, as determined by Public Works. 61. Developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure area. 62. An irrevocable Offer to Dedicate in fee shall be provided to the City of Temecula for the area which includes the MWD easement along the westerly boundary for a future multi-use trail as identified in the Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan. The offer to dedicate shall be provided not later than six months following the approval date of the project. The offer shall remain until the City either accepts the offer or expressly relinquishes the offer. BUILDING DEPARTMENT 63. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2001 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2001 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy Code, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and the Temecula Municipal Code. 64. The City of Temecula has adopted an ordinance to collect fees for a Riverside County area wide Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). Upon the adoption of this ordinance on Mamh 31,2003, this project will be subject to payment of these fees at the time of building permit issuance. The fees shall be subject to the previsions of Ordinance 03-01 and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 65. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All straetlights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. 66. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. 67. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 68. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 69. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 70. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building(s). 71. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry of the building(s). 72. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. 73. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 2001 edition of the California Building Code Appendix 29. 74. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior to permit issuance. 75. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 76. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. 77. Provide precise grading plan at plan check submittal to check accessibility for persons with disabilities. 78. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 79. Trash enclosures, patio covem, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. 80. Show all building setbacks. 81. Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours of construction, shown below, as allowed by the City of Temecula Ordinance No. 0-90-04, specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one- quarter mile of an occupied residence. Monday-Friday 6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. Saturday 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Holidays FIRE DEPARTMENT 82. 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. R:',P D O~2002\02-0612 Liafield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 44 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 4000 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a total fire flow of 4850 GPM with a 4-hour duration. The required fire flow for each building may vary and may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum of hydrants for each building will be set at time of water plan submission, but the complex overall shall provide on-site hydrants (6" x 4" x 2- 2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system and they shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, at each intemection and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access read(s) frontage to an hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B). As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. For this project on site fire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2) If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection prior to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2) Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for 80,000 lbs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface designed for 80,000 lbs. GV~N with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. (CFC sec 902) Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not [ess than twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13) feet six (6) inches. (CFC 902.2.2.1) The gradient for fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC 902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14) All traffic-calming devices that could impede or slow emergency vehicle access are prohibited, except those expressly approved by the fire prevention bureau individually on a case-by-case basis when they maintain the required travel widths and radii. R:kP D O~2\024)612 IJnfieldkStaff Report PC-l.doc 45 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. 100. Prior to building construction, dead end roadways and streets in excess of one hundred and fifty (150) feet, which have not been completed, shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4) Prior to any building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all-weather surface roads, as approved bythe Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1) Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block; and conform to hydrant type, location, and spacing and minimum fire flow standards. After the local water company signs the plans, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, approved numbers or addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and industrial buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall gave a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single-family residences and multi-family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4) Pdor to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a directory display monument sign shall be required for this school facility. The complex shall have an illuminated diagrammatic layout of the complex, which indicates the name of the complex, all streets, building identification, unit numbers, and fire hydrant locations within the complex. Location of the sign and design specifications shall be submitted to and be approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior to installation. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system in each building. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9) Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station in each building, and linked together as approved. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10) Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, one or more "Knox-Box" shall be installed as approved. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be located to the right side of the main entrance door. (CFC 902.4) R:~P D O~2002\ff2-0612 Linfi¢ld~Staff Report PC-l.doc 46 101. 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 902.4) 102. F'rior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating Fire Lanes with appropriate lane painting and or signs. 103. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developedapplicant shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the storage of combustible liquids, flammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau.(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) Special Conditions 104. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final a simple plot plan and a simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format must be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention for approval. This shall be provided for each building prior to final or C of O on THAT BUILDING. 105. If there are changes to underlying maps then prior to map recordation the applicant shall submit to the Fire Prevention Bureau a georectified (pursuant to Riverside County standards) digital version of the map including parcel and street centerline information. The electronic file will be provided in an ESRI Arclnfo/ArcView compatible format and projected in a State Plane NAD 83 (California Zone VI) coordinate system. The Bureau must accept the data as to completeness, accuracy and format prior to satisfaction of this condition. 106. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code permit. These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105) 107. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E) OUTSIDE AGENCIES 108. The applicant shall consult with the Riverside Transit Agency regarding the attached letters dated December 5, 2002 and April 28, 2003 from the Riverside Transit Agency. 109. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated December 4, 2002 from the Rancho California Water District. 110. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated January 25, 2002 from the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health. 111. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated February 11,2002 from the U.S. Department of the Army. R:\P D O',2002\024)612 Linfield\Staff Report PC-I.doc 47 112. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated March 18, 2002 from the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval. Applicant's Signature Name printed Date R:~ D OX2002\02-0612 IAnfieldXStaff Report 1<2-1.doe 48 Riverside Transit Agency 1825 Third Street P.O. Box 59968 Rivereide, C^ 92517-1968 Phone: (909) 565-5000 Fax: (909) 565-5001 April 28, 2003 Mr. Dan Long, Case Planner Planning Dept. City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 SUBJECT: P01-0653 and PA02-0612 - Linfield Christian Schools expansion - Comments from RTA Dear Mr: Long: Thank you for providing a copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the proposed expansion of the Linfield Christian Schools complex between Pauba and Rancho Vista Roads. RTA Alternate Bus Route 24 presently serves both the north and south perimeters of this property and the agency plans additional service in the area starting later this year. A copy of RTA Planning's internal Development Review Memo is enclosed. Based on the limited information available to RTA, the agency believes the presence of additional and significant tram sit amenities would be appropriate to install at this site in connection with the project, despite the claims of the project's proponents in the MND. The scope of the expansion and the greater intensity of use at Linfield proposed in the MND suggest the time has come for a more integrated and comprehensive site design along one of Linfield's street frontages that accommodates all vehicle traffic, especially buses. A mini transit-center incorporating a turnout, student drop-off, employees, delivery, etc could be addressed in a revised MND or other documents. For the present, however, to encourage and enhance future transit use in this vicinity, RTA conti- nues to recommend the site plan be revised at the appropriate time to show the following features: A paved, lighted, and ADA-compliant transit bus turnout with related amenities should be installed along Pauba Road near the primary site entrance. The bus stop at this turnout should incorporate a paved passenger waiting area and space for the agency, or others, to eventually install a passenger-waiting bench as ridership at this site increases. If you need further clarification or I can be of further assistance, please call me at (909) 565-5164 or contact me online at mmccoyC, riversidetransit.com. Sincerely, APR 2 0 2003 F:\data\Planning\MikeM~Word\Dev Review~Temecula~003\Linfield Schl - RTA Ltrh Riverside l~ansit Agency April 28, 2003 PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW To: From: Subject: Anne Palatino, Director of Planning Michael McCoy, Senior Planner ~ City of Temecula, Non-residential project, Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration for Linfield Sphools Master CUP/Development plan: Expansion and related amenities Bus routes involved: Adjacent to weekday alternate portion of Route 24. There is potential for additional future transit in this area Summary: The developer, Linfieid Christian Schools, is grouping planning cases under a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) to modify its 77-acre site for school and athletic facilities expansion. RTA staff found the documents sent for our review to be inadequate in two respects: First, the project proponents do not provide even a rough estimate anywhere in the MND of the anticipated increase in the number of students, forcing the agency to "take a shot in the dark" in trying to respond to future transit needs in this area of Temecula. The expansion must be substantial, if it requires "26 residential units" (Comment t4.b) for out-of area students and new employees. Second, no standard site plan details were provided with the packet from the City, making it difficult to provide meaningful comments to the Lead Agency regarding infrastructure issues. The site is adjacent to Pauba and Rancho Vista Roads, which are currently served by RTA Route 24. The School expansion will substantially affect the intensity of use at the site. Existing bus service is generally adequate but RTA anticipates future bus passen- get growth, simply because the expanded facilities will attract a larger student base. Further, Temecula's bus service will be reconfigured in 2004, including plans for additional service in this area. Because the Negative Declaration insists current and future demand for bus service will be minimal, the School believes that bus turnouts are unnecessary (Comment 15.g.) RTA will express to the project proponents and the City that the agency continues to recom- mend at least one turnout or a conveniently accessible, designated off-street stopping area at the site. Perhaps those elements should be integrated into a more comprehen- sive site plan element that better accommodates student drop-offs, public transit and other significant traffic impacts disclosed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. INITIAL REVIEW INFORMATION - Review completed date: April 28, 2003 Documents received at RTA: April 25, 2003; Reply-by Date: May 27, 2003; Planning Commission Agenda Date: Pending; City Council/Bd of Supervisors Agenda Date: Unknown at present; Thomas Guide Map pg and grid: 959, D-6; F:\data~Planning\MikeM~Word\Dev Review\Temecula~003\Linfieid Schl .doc Case Numbers: PA02-0612, relates to CUP -0653, and past cases PA01-0653, Master CUP/Development Plan PA02-0612, Zoning amendment for a Planned Development Overlay PA00-0139, Zoning amendment for change Public Institutional to Planned Development Overlay Case Planner: Mr. Dan Long, Associate Planner Applicant: Linfield Christian School, of Temecula RTA PLANNING FOLLOW-UP: Standard "Acceptable" letter to jurisdiction without comments Standard "Acceptable" letter to jurisdiction with compliments or positive advisories Letter with comments advising project modifications re transit issues Verbal conversation with Case Planner and appropriate letter follow-up Letter sent'. Date: File name: F:\data\Planhing~MikeM\Word\Dev Review\Temecula~003\Linfield Schl - RTA Ltrhd.doc SECOND REVIEW: THIRD REVIEW: Review materials placed in archive files: Date: ~/.~--~ // F:\data\Planning\MikeM',Word\Dev Review\Temecula~003\Linfield Schl .doc DEC 0 8 2002 Riverside Transit Agency 1825 Third Street P.O. Box 59968 Riverside, CA 92517-1968 Phone: (909) 565-5000 Fax: (909) 565-5001 December 5. 2002 Mr. Dan Long, Case Planner Planning Dept. City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 SUBJECT: P02-0612- Linfield Christian Schools site modifications - Comments from RTA Dear Mr: Long: Thank you for faxing me the site plan for proposed modifications to the Linfield Christian Schools complex between Pauba and Rancho Vista Roads, enabling us to review the development plans. RTA Alternate Bus Route 24 presently serves both north and south perimeters of this property along those roads. Our review of the project site plan and current RTA records indicates transit-friendly amenities are generally sufficient relative to the bus patronage generated by the Linfield site. However, to encourage and enhance greater future transit use in this vicinity, RTA advises the site plan be revised at a future time to include the following transit features, if practical: A paved, lighted, and ADA-compliant transit bus turnout with related amenities should be installed along Pauba Road just east of the primary site entrance. The bus stop at this turnout should incorporate a paved passenger waiting area and space for the agency to eventually install a passenger bench if transit ridership at this site increases. If you need further clarification or I can be of further assistance, please call me at (909) 565-5164 or contact me online at mmccoy~riversidetransit.com. Sincerely, Michael McCoy Senior Planner F:\data\Planning\MikeM\Word\Dev Review\Temecula\Linfield Sch - RTA Ltrhd,doc December 4, 2002 Dan Long, Case Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY A PORTION OF MAP BOOK 13, PAGE 601 APN 955-020-002 PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0612 LIb/FIELD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Dear Mr. Long: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner and the construction of all required on- site and off-site water facilities. If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees and requirements. Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. Reclaimed water service is available to this property and its use will be required of the developer. RCWD has discussed this requirement with the developer. If you should have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at this office. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E. Development Engineering Manager 02~SB:at306~F012~T6~FCF Craig Elitharp, Water Operations Manager Andrew Webster, Planning and Capital Projects Manager Laurie Williams, Engineering Services Supervisor Bud Jones, Senior Engineering Technician g C©0NTY OF RIVERSIDE · HEAIh,i SERVICES AGENCY FI DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH January 25, 2002 City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 · Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Attention: Thomas K. Thomsley RE: Linfield Christian School Master Plan PA01-0653 Dear Mr. Thomsley: Our records indicate that this project is currently on septic tank systems. The exhibit submitted does not indicate the location of the septic tank systems in relation to the proposed additions. The following wouldbe required for any conditions to be set by this Department: 1. A revised exhibit depicting the location of all existing septic tank systems. An updated "will-serve" letter for water availability from the appropriate water district. If sanitary sewer is available, then a "will-serve" letter from that sewering district. If septic tank systems are to be utilized for the proposed additions, updated soils percolation testing maybe required as well as clearance for the Califomia Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please call me at (909_)_955_-.8980._ Sincerely, Supervising Environmental Health Specialist Local Enforcement Agency · RO. Box 1280, Riverside, CA 92502-1280 · (9091 955-8982 · FAX {909) 781-9653 · 4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor. Riverside, CA 92501 Land Use and Water Engineering · RO. Box 1206, Riverside, CA 92502 1206 · (909) 955 8980 ' FAX (909} 955-8903 · 4080 Lemon Skeet, 2nd Floor, Riverside, CA 92501 REPLY TO A'[TENTION OF: Office of the Chief Regulatory Branch DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O BOX 532711 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90053-2325 February l], 2002 City of Temecula Planning Department Attention: Thomas K. Thomsley P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Dear Mr. Thornsley: It has come to our attention Linfield Christian School plans to expand existing school facilities in Temecula, Riverside County, California. This activity may require a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit. Corps of Engineers pemut ~s reqmred for the discharge of dredged or fill material into, including any redeposit of dredged material within, "waters of the United States" and adjacent wetlands pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1972. Examples include, but are not limited to, 1. creating fills for residential or commercial development, placing bank protection, temporary or permanent stockpiling of excavated material, building road crossings, backfilling for utility line crossings and constructing outfall structures, dams, levees, groins, weirs, or other st-cuctures; 2. mechanized landclearing, grading which involves filling low areas or land leveling, ditching, channelizing and other excavation activities that would have the effect of destroying or degrading waters of the United States; 3. allowing runoff or overflow from a contained land or water disposal area to re-enter a water of the United States; 4. placing pilings when such placement has or would have the effect of a discharge of fill material. Enclosed you will find a permit application form and a pamphlet that describes our regulatory program. If you have any questions, please contact me at (213) 452-3414. Please refer to this letter and 200200516-DPS in your reply. Sincerelv. __ Daniel P. Swenson Proiect Manager VERS/DE, CA 925 909/955-1200 909/788-9965 FAX RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT City of Temecula Planning Department Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Attention: .,~.~O~a.c Iff-...'-~O¢.~;J~~ .,, Ladies and Gentlemen: The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in incorporated cities. The District also does not plan check city land use cases, or provide State Division of Real Estate letters other flood hazard reports for such cases Die,ct corn . or · . ... . ..mentskecommendations for such cases are normally limited to items of specific interest to the District mdudmg D~stfict Master Drainage Plan facilities, other re ional flood control and drainage fac ties which could be considered a logical component-or extension of a master ~)~n s stem, and District Area Dra nage Plan fees (development mitigation fees), rn addition, information of a general nSn~/~re is provided. The Distdct has not reviewed the proposed project in detail and the following checked comments do not in any way constitute or imply D stdct approval or endorsement of the proposed project with respect to flood hazard, public hea th and safety or any other such issue: V"" This prgiect would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of regional interest proposed. .. This project involves District Ma.,.s. ter Plan facilities. The District will acce t ownership of such facilities on written request of the City. Faci ties must be constructed to District standards, and District lan check ~Pu~re~O.n will be required for Distdct acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administratiPvle fees wil~b~ This project proposes channe s, storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter, or other facilities that could be considered regional in nature and/or a Iogica extension of the adopted ~Mfa~teerc~a~in~agcei~iPti~easn~rnu~ss~bDeisc~ncts~J~c~edc~nsni~[~~e~p .o, s.u .ch ,ac?es on wntten request · - - . ~., ,,, ,-,,?u,~ ~,~nuarus, an9 UlSiric! lan check · ' be required for Dlstnct acceptance. Plan check, ir~spectJon and admmistrativ~l~ees will.~:)ear~dq iu?rS~.L~°n will D~rraiS project is located within the limits of the District's · t,/~t~'Y'{,~l-~. .-- .,-_ _ t,' _ ina e PI ' ' · ' ' - '-' · ~:== ~'- Area cho~ g~- _~.n~,f. or~E_hi.c_h_,d..ra, ma.~ge f._e. es .hg. ve .been.adopted; applicable tees should be Oaid bY c~shiet's ~l~,~c~e~/,...,,_,~,~ ~u~, 9,y ~o. m,e ~'~ .O~.O .[;o.nt.r.oI UlS~Ct pdor to issuance of buildin or', radifil u~ cumes r~rs[ t-ees [o De palo snoulo De a* the ,'.~*,- ~,- ~#-.-. -, ,,-- ,. - -g g . g. pe ts~ GENERAL INFORMATION This project may require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Clearance for grading, recordation or other final approval§hould not be given until the City has determined that the project has been granted a perm t or is shown to be exempt. If this project invo vas a Federal Emergenf;y Management Agency (FEMA) mapped flood plain, then the Ci should require the applicant to provide all studies, calculations, plans and o[her information required to me~ FEMA requirements, and should further require that the applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revis on CLOMR) prior to grading, recordation or ether final approval bf the project, and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMRI prior to occupancy. If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain is impacted by this project, the City should require the a licant to obtain a Section 1601/1603 Agreement from the Califomia Department of F sh and Game and a Clean PV~ater Act Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or wdtten correspondence from thee da!,Ca ..ng t..h22 ,e_c_t , .zxe. mp!f[o .m..the.se_req.urrements. A Cle..an Water Act Section 401 Water Qualitv ~er~ec~n~Inens y u,~ ~'.,lu.uu uom [ne lOCal L;allromla h:eglonal Water Quality Control Board nor to ISSU ........ permit P ' ' ance of tbe Corps c; .~.~...~Very,truly yours STUART E MCKIBBIN Senior Civil Engineer Date: ~' 16 -' Z-aP2-~ ATTACHMENT NO. 5 EXHIBITS RSP D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield\Staff Report PC-l.doc 49 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.- PA01-0653 and PA02-0612 EXHIBIT - A PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 VICINITY MAP R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-1 ,doc 5O CITY OF TEMECULA EXHIBIT B - GENERAL PLAN MAP DESIGNATION - (PI) Public Institutional EXHIBIT C - ZONING MAP DESIGNATION - PDO-7 CASE NO. - PA01-0653 and PA02-0612 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 R:~P D O~2002~)2-0612 Linfleld~Staff Report PC-l.doc 51 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA01-0653 AND PA02-0612 EXHIBIT- D PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21,2003 MASTER PLAN SITE PLAN R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield\Staff Repo~ PC-1 .doc 52 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA01-0653 AND PA02o0612 EXHIBIT - E PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21,2003 MASTER LANDSCAPE R;~P D O~2002~02-0612 Linfietd~Staff Repod PC-1 .doc 53 CITY OF TEMECULA ZONE PI-~SE ! CLASSt~OOM ADMINISTt~RON CASE NO.- PA01-0653 AND PA02-0612 EXHIBIT - F PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21,2003 SiTE PLAN PHASE A-1 R:\P [30~002\02-0612 Linf[eld~Staff Report PC-l.doc 54 CITY OF TEMECULA I Ir CASE NO.- PA01-0653 AND PA02-0612 EXHIBIT - G PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 HIGH SCHOOL IsT FLOOR R:'~P O O",2002',D2q36*12 Linfieto'~Staff Report PC-l,doc 55 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.- PA01-0653 AND PA02-0612 EXHIBIT - H PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 HIGH SCHOOL 2No FLOOR PLAN R:'~P D O~002~2-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.-- PA01-0653 AND PA02-0612 EXHIBIT - I PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21,2003 ADMINISTRATION FLOOR R:~P D O~2002~02~617. Linfield~St~ff Report PC-1 .doc CITY OFTEMECULA _==.L .... L .... JJlJ J I J-IHHI/ J-IHHi LIHHII ' ' '~._..=__. L~.=..~_ ~--~=_-. --- CASE NO.- PA01-0653 AND PA02-0612 EXHIBIT - J PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 HIGH SCHOOL ELEVATION R:'~P D O~002~D2-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-1 .doc 58 CITY OFTEMECULA CASE NO.- PA01-0653 AND PA02-0612 EXHIBIT - K PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- May 21, 2003 ADMINISTRATION R:~P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield\Staff Report PC-1 .doc CITY OF TEMECULA LOADING ZONE CASE NO. - PA01-0653 AND PA02-0612 EXHIBIT- L PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 21, 2003 PHASE A-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN R:~P O O~002\02-0612 Linfield~Staff Report PC-l.doc 6O ATTACHMENT NO. 6 INITIAL STUDY R:~P D O~2002~02-0612 Linfie[d\Staff Report PC-1 .doc 61 City of Temecula Planning Department Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration PROJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: PA01-0653 Master CUP/Development Plan PA02-0612 Zoning Amendment for a Planned Development Overlay (PDO-7) The Linfield Christian School, 31950 Pauba Road, Temecula, CA 92593 31950 Pauba Road; north side of Pauba Road, south side of Rancho Vista Road, west of Meadows Parkway and east of Margarita Road, Assessor's Parcel Numbers 955-02-002. PA01-0653 proposes a (Master) Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan application. The Master CUP application applies to the overall project and phasing. In addition, the Master CUP establishes design guidelines and provides a "blueprint" for future site layout. The overall proposal includes 120,374 square feet of new high school facilities, 11,243 square feet of new middle school facilities, 9,100 square feet of new elementary school facilities, 19,000 square feet of new kindergarten and pre-school facilities, one new junior varsity baseball field, one new middle school soccer field, one new football/track stadium, 6 new tennis courts, 3 new outdoor ball courts, 10,189 square feet of middle school lockers, courts and student store, 28,114 square foot gymnasium and pool, and 15,000 square feet of various sports and accessory structures. The project also includes a sensitive resource area proposed for preservation. The development plan proposal is for the design of phase A-1 as outlined in the Master CUP document. The Master CUP establishes the overall site into 3 planning areas. Area lA is broken down into various phases beginning with phase A-1 (High School) to phase F-2 (Superintendent/Caretaker housing). PA00-0139 proposes a Zoning Amendment from Public Institutional to a Planned Development Overlay (PDO-7) which will allow for a mix of uses on 93.77 acres including educational, recreational, institutional and residential facilities. The City of Temecula intends to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project described above. Based upon the information contained in the attached Initial Environmental Study and pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); it has been determined that this project as proposed, revised or mitigated will not have a significant impact upon the environment. As a result, the Planning Commission intends to recommend that approval to City Council to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project. The mitigation measures required to reduce or mitigate the impacts of this project on the environment are included in the project design, conditions of approval and/or the Mitigation Monitoring Program which is attached to this notice will be included as part of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project. R:~P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~ofice of Intent. doc The Comment Period for this proposed Negative Declaration is April 28, 2003 to May 27, 2003. Written comments and responses to this notice should be addressed to the contact person listed below at the following address: City of Temecula, PoO. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033. City Hall is located at 43200 Business Park Drive. The public notice of the intent to adopt this Mitigated Negative Declaration is provided through: X The Local Newspaper. ~ Posting the Site. ~ Notice to Adjacent Property Owners. If you need additional information or have any questions concerning this project, please contact (Name and Title)at (909) 694-~6_4.00. Prepared by' · ~;~ Dan Lonq, Associate Planner . (Signature" (Name and Title) R:'xP D O~2002\~.~0612 LinfieldxNofice of Intent.doc 2 ect Site Vicinity Map R:~P D O~2002\024)612 Linfiel~aNoQce of Intent.doc 3 City of Temecula Planning Department Agency Distribution List PROJECT: Planning Application No. PA01-0653 Master CUP/Development Plan Planning Application No. PA02-0612 Zoning Amendment for a Planned Development Overlay (PDO-7) DISTRIBUTION DATE: April 28, 2003 CASE PLANNER: Dan Long CITY OF TEMECULA: Building & Safety ..................................... (X) Fire Department ...................................... (X) Police Department ................................... ( ) Parks & Recreation (TCSD) .................... (X) Planning, Advance .................................. ( ) Public Works ........................................... (X) ........ () STATE: Caltrans ................................................... (X) Fish & Game ........................................... (X) Mines & Geology ..................................... ( ) Regional Water Quality Control Bd ......... (X) State Clearinghouse ................................ (X) State Clearinghouse (15 Copies) ............ (X) Water Resoumes .................................... ( ) FEDERAL: Army Corps of Engineers ........................ (X) Fish and Wildlife Service ......................... (X) ........ () REGIONAL: Air Quality Management District .............. (X) Western Riverside COG .......................... ( ) ...... () CiTY OF MURRIETA: Planning .................................................. ( ) R:~P D O~2002\024)612 Linfield~loticc of lntent~doc RIVERSIDE COUNTY: Clerk and Recorder's Office .................... (X) Airport Land Use Commission ................ ( ) Engineer .................................................. ( ) Flood Control .......................................... (X) Health Department .................................. (X) Parks and Recreation ............................. ( ) Planning Department .............................. ( ) Habitat Conservation Agency (RCHCA).. (X) Riverside Transit Agency ........................ (X) ...... () UTILITY: Eastern Municipal Water District ............. (X) Inland Valley Cablevision ........................ (X) Rancho CA Water District, Will Serve ..... (X) Southern California Gas .......................... (X) Southern California Edison ..................... (X) Temecula Valley School District .............. (X) Metropolitan Water District ...................... (X) OTHER: Pechanga Indian Reservation ................. (X) Eastern Information Center ..................... (X) Local Agency Formation Comm .............. ( ) RCTC ..................................................... ( ) Homeowners' Association ........................... ( ) City of Temecula Plannia De artment of Completion SCH # Project Title: Planning Applications Nos. PA02-0612 a Zone Change/Planned Contact Person: Dan Long Development Overlay and PA01-0653 is a Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan Title: Associate Planner Lead Agency: City of Temecula Street Address: 43200 Business Park Drive Phone: (909) 694-6400 City: Temecula, CA Zip: 92590 Project Location Within 2 miles City of Temecala, Riverside County State Hwy #: Interstate 15, Highway 79 Cross Streets: Lcated between Ranch Airports: n/a Vosta Road and Pauba Road, west of Waterways: n/a Meadows Parkway and approximately Railways: None 1000 feet east of Margarita Road Schools: Paloma Elementary, Sparkman Elementary, Temecula Valley High School, Margarita Middle School, Temecula Elementary School, Vail Elementary Assessor's Parcel No.: 955-02-002 School Total Acres: 94 CEQA Document Type [ ]NOP IX]Negative Declaration [ ]Supplement EIR [ ]EIR (Prior SCH #). [ ]Early Consultation [ ]DrafiEIR [ ]SubsequentElR [ ]Other Local Action Type [ ]General Plan Update [ ]Specific Plan [X]Rezone [ ]Annexation ~ [ ]General Plan Amendment [ ]Master Plan [ ]Prezone [ ]Redevelopment [ ]General Plan Element [ ]Planned Unit Development IX]Use Permits [ ]Coastal Permit [ ]Community Plan [X]Site Plan/Plot Plan [ ]Subdivision of Land [ ]City Development Project [ ]Other Development Type [X]Residuntial: Units 26 Acres 9.81 [ ]Water Facilities: Type_ MGD [ ]Office: Sq.ft. Acres.__ Employees [ ]Transportation Type [ ]Commercial: Sq.ft. Acres_ Employees [ ]Mining: Mineral. [ ]Industrial: Sq.ft. Acres Employees [ ]Power: Type [X]Educational:_private school, athletic fields/facilities [ ]Waste Treatment: Type. [ ]Recreational: [ ]Hazardous Waste: Type. IX]Other: Planned Development Overlay, school, athletic facilities with secondary student/faculty housing Project Issues Discussed in Document [ ]Aesthetic/Visual [ ]Flood Plain/Flooding [ ]Schools/Universities [ ]Water Quality [ ]Agricultural Land [ ]Forest Land/Fire Hazard [ ]Septic Systems [ ]Water supply/groundwater [ ]Air Quality [ ]Geologic/Seismic [ ]Sewer Capacity [X]Wetland/Riparian [X]Archeological/Historical [ ]Minerals [ ]Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grad IX]Wildlife [ ]Coastal Zone IX]Noise [ ]Solid Waste [ ]Growth Inducing [ ]Drainage/Absorption [ ]Population/HousingBalances[ ]Toxic/Hazardous [ ]Land Use [ ]Economic/Jobs [ ]Public Services/Facilities [X]Traffic/Circulation [X]Cumulative Effects [ ]Fiscal [ ]Recreation/Parks [ ]Ve[etation [ ]Other: Li~at & Glare Present Land Use: Private school and athletic fields Current Zoning: Public Institutional (Pi) General Plan Use: Public Institutional (Pi) · Project Description: PA02-0612 is a Planned Development Overlay (PDO-7) proposal to modify the land use standards to allow for a mix of uses on 93.77 acres including educational, recreational, institutional and residential facilities. R:~P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~aN OTICE OF COMPLETION.doc PA01-0653 is a (Master) Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan application. The Master CUP application applies to the overall project and phasing. In addition, the Master CUP establishes design guidelines and provides a "blueprint" for future site layout. The overall proposal includes 120,374 square feet of new high school facilities, 11,243 square feet of new middle school facilities, 9,100 square feet of new elementary school facilities, 19,000 square feet of new kindergarten and pre-school facilities, one new junior varsity baseball field, one new middle school soccer field, one new football/track stadium, 6 new tennis courts, 3 new outdoor ball courts, 10,189 square feet of middle school lockers, courts and student store, 28,114 square foot gynmasium and pool, and 15,000 square feet of various sports and accessory structures. The project also includes a sensitive resource area proposed for preservation. The development plan proposal is for the design of phase A- 1 as outlined in the Master CUP document. The Master CUP establishes the overall site into 3 planning areas. Area lA is broken down into various phases beginning with phase A-I (High School) to phase F-2 (Superintendent/Caretaker housing). Mail to: State Clearinghouse, 1400 Tenth Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 4454)613 R:~P D 0~2002\02-0612 [infieldkNOT1CE OF COMPLETION.doc REVIEWING AGENCIES CHECKLIST KEY S=Document sent by lead agency X=Document sent by SCH T=Suggested distribution __ Resources Agency __ Boating/Waterways Coastal Commission __ Coastal Conservancy Colorado River Board T Conservation Fish and Game __ Forestry T Office of Historic Preservation Parks and Recreation Reclamation __ S.F. Bay Conservation & Development Commission Water Resources (DWR) Business, Transportation, & Housing Aeronautics __ California Highway Patrol Caltrans District No. 8 __ Department of Transportation Planning (Headquarters) __ Housing & Community Development Other State & Consumer Services General Services __ OLA (Schools) Environmental Affairs Air Resources Board __ APCD/AQMI) California Waste Management Board T SWRCB: Clean Water Grants SWRCB: Delta Unit T SWRCB: Water Quality __ SWRCB: Water Rights _T_T Regional WQCB # 9 ( Youth & Adult Corrections Corrections Independent Commissions & Offices __ Energy Commission T____ Native American Heritage Commission Public Utilities Commission __ Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy State Land Commission __ Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Food & Agriculture Health & Welfare Health Services Public Review Period (to be filled in by lead agency) Starting Date April 28, 2003 Ending Date May 27, 2003 Date 23, 2003 Lead Agency (Complete if Applicable): City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Contact: Dan Long Phone (909) 694-6400 Applicant Linfield Christian School Address 31950 Pauba Road Temecula, CA !}2591 Phone (909) 676-8111 For SCH Use Only: Date Received at SCH Date Review Starts Date to Agencies Date to SCH Clearance Date Notes: R:~P D O~2002\024)612 Linfield~NOTICE OF COMPLETION.doc City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 ~ Environmental Checklist Project Title Linfield Christian School Master Plan Lead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Contact Person and Phone Number Dan Lon[~, Associate Planner (909) 694-6400 Project Location 31950 Pauba Road. Located between Pauba Road and Rancho Vista Road, east of Margarita Road and west of Meadows Parkway (Assessors Parcel No. 955-02-002) Project Sponsor's Name and Address Linfield Christian School, 31950 Pauba Road, Temecula, CA 92592 General Plan Desi~lnation Public Institutional (PI) Zoning Public Institutional (PI) Description of Project PA02-0612 is a Planned Development Overlay (PDO-7) proposal to modify the land use standards to allow for a mix of uses on 93.77 acres including educational, recreational, institutional and residential facilities. PA01-0653 is a (Master) Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan application. The Master CUP application applies to the overall project and phasing. In addition, the Master CUP establishes design guidelines and provides a "blueprint" for future site layout. The overall proposal includes 120,374 square feet of new high school facilities, 11,243 square feet of new middle school facilities, 9,100 ) feet of school facilities, 19,000 feet of square new elementary square new kindergarten and pre-school facilities, one new junior varsity baseball field, one new middle school soccer field, one new football/track stadium, 6 new tennis courts, 3 new outdoor ball courts, 10,189 square feet of middle school lockers, courts and student store, 28,114 square foot gymnasium and pool, and 15,000 square feet of various sports and accessory structures. The project also includes a sensitive resource area proposed for preservation. The development plan proposal is for the design of phase A-1 as outlined in the Master CUP document. The Master CUP establishes the overall site into 3 planning areas. Area lA is broken down into various phases beginning with phase A-1 (High School) to phase F-2 (Superintendent/Caretaker housing). Surrounding Land Uses and Setting North: Low-Medium Density Residential (single-family residences) East: Very Low Density Residential (single-family residences & vacant lots) South: Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan/Low Medium Residential (single-family residences/Paloma Elementary School) West: Public Institutional (Temecula Valley High School) Other public agencies whose approval California Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, ~_ required United States Fish and Wildlife Service, San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board R:~P D O~2002\02-0612 LJnfier~nitial study-l.doc 1 Vicinity Map R:~P D O~002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-1 .dcc Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Mineral Resources Agricultural Resources Population and Housing X Noise Air Quality Population and Housing X Biological Resoumes, Water Public Services Cultural Resources Recreation Geologic Problems X Transportation/Traffic Hazards and Hazardous Materials Utilities and Service Systems Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use Planning None Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant impact on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared ~X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are' imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature April 24, 2003 Date Dan Lonq, Associate Planner name City of Temecula For R:~P D 0~002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-l.doc 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Less Than '~ Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation SignificantNO Issues and supporling In fon'nation Sources Impact lnco~orated~ Impact Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not X limited 1:o, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or X quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which X would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comments: 1.a. No ImpacL The existing property has not been identified as a scenic vista in the City of Temecula's General Plan. 1 .b. No ImpacL Rancho Vista Road and Pauba Road are not designated as scenic resoumes nor is the site within the view of a state scenic highway. As a consequence, no significant impact to scenic resources will result from the proposed project or future development of the site. 1 .c. No Impact. The general character of the site will be maintained through site design and by maintaining an abundance of the existing landscaping and mature trees. Additional trees and landscaping have been proposed to maintain the rural character and blend with the existing site. The design of the site has been proposed which maintains the rural components of the site, including landscaping, pond, open space and athletic fields. 1 .d. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will introduce new lighting in the area that could impact adjacent residences and Mount Palomar observatory unless mitigated. Conditions of approval have been implemented which require the athletic field lighting to have limited hours of operation (10:00 PM) and all security and parking lot lighting will be conditioned to comply with Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance. 2. Agricultural Resources. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: Le~ Thah · ~otent[a[ly SignJticant With , EeSs Than Signiticant Mitigation ~ig0ificant NO' Issues andSupporling Information Sources , Impact ~ , Incorporated ~ Impact Impact a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland X of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Conflict with the existing zoning for agricultural use, or a X Wiliiamson Act contract? ~ c. Involve other changes in the existing environment, which due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? R:\P D O~2002~02-0612 Linfield~initial study-1 .doc _ AESTHETICS. Would the project: Less Than Potentially significant With Less Than .... Sig~fi~nt~ ,; ~,ig~q, , ,,:Significant, ~ · I i~sdes a~d SuP~tin~ rnf0rm~ti0h S0urCes impact ~. ,ih~6~p~ratei:l, ~, ,', i~n~p~t' '1~ ~~ a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not X limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or X quali~ of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which X would adversely affect day or nigh~ime views in the area? Comments: 1 .a. No Impact. The existing property has not been identified as a scenic vista in the City of Temecula's General Plan. 1 .b. No Impact. Rancho Vista Road and Pauba Road are not designated as scenic resources nor is the site within the view of a state scenic highway. As a consequence, no significant impact to scenic resources will result from the proposed project or future development of the site. 1 .c. No Impact. The general character of the site will be maintained through site design and by maintaining an abundance of the existing landscaping and mature trees. Additional trees and landscaping have been proposed to maintain the rural character and blend with the existing site. The design of the site has been proposed which maintains the rural components of the site, including landscaping, on-site pond, open space and athletic fields. 1 .d. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will introduce new lighting in the area that could impact adjacent residences and Mount Palomar observatory unless mitigated. Conditions of approval have been implemented which require the athletic field lighting to have limited hours of operation (10:00 PM) and all security and parking lot lighting will be conditioned to comply with Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance. 2. Agricultural Resources. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: ~ ~ ~ ~,~e~lly ' ' ~'"'" Issues and Supp~rting lnf~rm~tion SoUrCes ~ ~ i~p~d , * , n~omted ........... :~ ~..i~pa~, ~;Impa~'"'~ a. Conve~ Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland X of Statewide Impo~ance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resoumes Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Conflict with the existing zoning for agricultural use, or a X ~ Williamson Act contract? . Involve other changes in the existing environment, which X due to their location or nature, could result in convemion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~nitial study-I .doc Comments: 2a.-c. No Impact. The project site is not currently in agricultural production and in the historic past the ~ has not been used for agricultural purposes. The site is not under a Wiiliamson Act contract nor~ zoned for agricultural uses. This property is not considered prime or unique farmland of statewid~ local importance as identified by the State Department of Conservation and the City of Temecula General Plan. In addition, the project will not involve changes in the existing environment, which would result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. Therefore, there is no significant impact related to this issue. 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: '~ Potentially signifio~i~ With/ 'L&~s ~, · / ;Sig0ifi~ap~tMtiga~0n : 'Sg~ifb~t ' NP ' · IssUes a~ SupPing Inf0~ati0n S0u~s ~ -~ I~a~ ~ora*' ~" ~ ,, ~'~;mpa~' Im~a~ a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable X air quali~ plan? b. Violate any air quali~ standard or contribute substantially X to an existing or projected air quality violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any X criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- aQainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant X ~ concentrations? e. Create obj~tionable odors affecting a substantial number X of people? Comments: 3.a, No Impact. The proposed project will not conflict with the air quality plan. The land use and proposed density are consistent with the City's general plan air quality element because the use is consistent with the general plan land use designation and the 26 residential units proposed are considered secondary to the primary use because the residential units are proposed only for students and/or faculty of the school. 3.b.c. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigations. The project will not create an unreasonable amount of vehicle trips per day than already existing for the site and will not produce additional air pollution than currently existing for the site because the site will continue to be primarily used as a school facility with secondary uses. The project is not identified as a major source of air pollution. Temporary impacts due to construction of the site may be expected, however the impacts are not considered significant and conditions of approval have been incorporated that will mitigate these temporary impacts. 3.d. Less Than Significant Impact. As proposed the project will not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrators. The proposed project will fall below the significance levels established by SCAQMD for construction and operational emissions. As a consequence a less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project. 3.e. No Impact. Typical construction odors may be present during construction activities, however these impacts are considered temporary and will not contribute significant long-term impacts. No objectionable odors are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. R:\P D 0~002\02-0612 Linfield~nitial study-l.doc REQUIRED MITIGATION MEASURE/CONDITION OF APPROVAL The project will be required to provide a water truck to continuously "water down" the graded areas to reduce the amount of dust from excavation. In addition, all heavy equipment must be regularly maintained to reduce emissions. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: Less,Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Signilicant NO Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or X through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat X or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected X wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological ~ interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native X resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? !e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting X biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? If. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat X Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Comments: 48, Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The General Plan does not designate the project site as a potentially sensitive habitat site, however a current biological survey of the site (A General Biological Resources Survey and Jurisdictional Delineation on APN # 955-002-002, The Linfield School Project, L & L Environmental, Inc., August, 2001) has identified the project site as potentially environmentally sensitive habitat areas for the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (QCB), southwestern willow flycatcher and least Bell's vireo. In addition a follow-up focused raptor survey was recommended. A follow-up study has been completed for the QBC (Focused Survey For The Quino Checkerspot Butterfly on APN # 955-002-002, The Linfield School, L & L Environmental, Inc., June 2002), however the results indicated that it is unlikely that QBC individuals or a QBC breeding population currently utilize the subject property. In a follow up letter from L & L Environmental, Inc., dated February 19, 2003, it was determined that further studies are not necessary for least Bell's vireo and southwestern willow flycatcher since the area determined to provide habitat for these species lies within a resource area to be preserved. A follow-up focused raptor survey has been complete (Results R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfielc~initial study-l.doc .0. 4. e.f. of a focused raptor nesting survey for APN # 955-002-002, The Linfield Project, L & L Environmental, Inc., Mamh 21, 2002) and has determined that while a single raptor nest was observed on the project it was determined to be abandoned or currently unoccupied. The report recommends a follow-up site visit is necessary to determine if the nest has become occupied. As a mitigation measure and conditio~I approval, the applicant, prior to issuance of a grading permit shall perform a follow-up site visit B~II' qualified biologist to determine if the nest has become occupied by a raptor. In addition, the riparian trees and riparian habitat and associated drainages are regulated under state and federal permits which are required for this project. The biological survey (August 2001) submitted for the project as mentioned above has identified on-site wetlands as defined by the Clean Water Act and the necessary permits are required prior to commencement of various construction on the project site. The necessary studies have been completed for the project site, as well as focused follow-up studies and have determined that no significant impacts will occur as a result of the proposed development. Mitigation Measures have been applied. Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The project site contains a mixed riparian habitat within the project site that falls within the state jurisdictional area. A significant amount of the mixed riparian area will be preserved as a result of the proposed project or it is in a currently developed area, but will be maintained as an open space area. As a part of the proposed project, a resource area has been set aside for preservation on the project site. This area will remain undeveloped and is designated as a sensitive resource area. Mitigation Measures have been applied. Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The project site contains wetland areas on the project site. There are a total of 2.85 acres of streambeds or wetlands per the definition of the State criteria for judicial streambeds and .57 acres that meet the federal criteria for Waters of the United States. Approximately 1.09 acres of state streambeds, 1.81 acres of state wetlands and .83 acres of federal wetlands will be impacted by the project as currently proposed. The remaining wetland and streambed acreage will be maintained as open space and will be identified as such on the master plan. Mitigation Measures have been applied. Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site includes woodlands, streambeds and wetlands. The study (^ General Biological Resources Survey Jurisdictional Delineation on APN # 955-002-002, The Linfield School Project, L & L Environmental, Inc., August, 2001) identified three fish species of special status, however no habitat occurs on the site for any fish species. No special status mammals were noted during the biological survey. The project site does not contain a significant open grassland area, habitat for the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat, listed as Threatened, Endangered or a candidate for listing. The project site is, however, within the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Plan for this species. Seventeen bird species were observed on the project site, including several special status raptors. A follow-up study has been complete and found a single raptor nest was identified, however it was either abandoned or unoccupied at the time the study was performed. Additionally, the study area includes riparian habitat and drainages that are regulated under state and federal jurisdiction. State and Federal permits are required for this project. Two amphibian species (western toad and pacific tree frog) were observed on the project site. No reptiles were observed on the project site, however no species known to be Endangered, Threatened or on a candidate list are expected to be found on the site. Habitat for Quino checkerspot buttedly is very poor. A focused study was complete and found that while the site does support Quino checkerspot larval host plant resources, no adult, ova, larvae or pupae were detected during the six week study and it is unlikely that Quino checkerspot butterfly individuals or a breeding population currently utilize the project site. Since no Endangered, Threatened or species on the candidate list were observed on the project site, the impacts are less than significant, however Mitigation Measures have been applied for areas under state and federal jurisdiction. No Impact. The project site is located within the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat Fee Area. The project will be conditioned to comply with provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation), which requires payment of the Stephens Kangaroo Rat fee. This will suitable h'npact mitigation. R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfielc~initial study-l.doc REQUIRED MITIGATION MEASURES 1. The project is required to apply for and obtain the necessary state and federal permits, including a section 401 permit, 1603 streambed alteration agreement, and a Corps Nationwide 39 permit as recommended in the Biological resoume survey by L & L Environmental Inc. (August, 2001, August 24, 2001, Mamh 2002, and June 2002). 2. The project has established a resoume area that will be preserved and will not be developed. The resource area shall remain in its current state unless development is proposed in the resoume area, which will be subject to additional environmental review and a public hearing. 3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a follow-up site visit from a qualified biologist shall be conducted to determine if the raptor nest has been occupied. A report with recommendations shall be provided prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 4. The proper habitat conservation and Stephens Kangaroo Rat fee shall be paid prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: .... ~ ~ P0tent!.ally S~gnjf!ca~ W! h .... ~ ~ Sig~t :~. f/~ ~!.~Mifigalion;~ ~~S~h ~t~ ~ N~ a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? ~. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological X resource or site or unique geologic feature? d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred X outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: 5.a. Less than Significant Impact With Mitigations Incorporated. The subject site does not meet the criteria of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act. In addition the City of Temecula General Plan and associated EIR does not identify the site as a historical resource area. The General Plan has identified the project site as a highly sensitive site for paleontological resource area. An archaeological and paleontological survey (A Phase I Archaeological and Paleontological Survey Report on the Linfield Christian School Expansion Site, APN # 955-002- 002, L & L Environmental, Inc., February 11, 2003) has been complete for the project site. The results of the records search indicated that there are no previously recorded archaeological sites within the subject parcel. The report did recognize that an important lithologic deposit underlies the ground surface area of the project site and has the potential for yielding scientifically significant specimens. Mitigations have been recommended including paleontological and archaeological monitoring during all earthmoving activities of the site. 5.b-d. Less Than Significant Impact. A phase I archaeological and paleontological study (A Phase I Archaeological and Paleontological Survey Report on the Linfield Christian School Expansion Site, APN # 955-002-002, L & L Environmental, Inc., February 11, 2003) was completed for the project site. According to the study, while there were no materials identified during the field survey, the study concluded there is a Iow probability that prehistoric or historic resources will be impacted by continued development of the project site. Additionally, neither the City of Temecula General Plan Environmental Impact Report nor the City's General Plan identifies this project site as an area of significant cultural resources. The project will include conditions of approval to provide a paleontologist and an archaeologist or representative monitor present during all earthmoving phases with the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of fossils. R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~in~tial study-l.doc REQUIRED MITIGATION MEASURES/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. 'rhe applicant shall comply with all the mitigations measures as recommended in the phase I archaeological and paleontological survey, prepared by L & L Environmental, Inc., di February 11, 2003. 2. "['he applicant shall provide an on-site archaeological and paleontological monitoring during all phases of earthmoving activities as recommended in the Phase I archaeological report by L & L Environmental, Inc. (February 2003). 3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant must enter into an agreement with the Pechanga Band that addresses the treatment and disposition of all cultural resources and human resources and human remains discovered on-site. 4. Prior to the completion of the project a phase II, and if warranted a phase III survey shall be performed. 5. The landowner agrees to relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including archaeological artifacts found on the project site, to the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians for proper treatment and disposition. 6. All sacred sites within the project area are to be avoided and preserved. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project? Less 'Fh~n. Potentially Signirmant With Less Than Signiticant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impa~t Impact a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial X~. adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on X the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic.ground shaking? X iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? X iv) Landslides?' X b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is Unstable, or X that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B X of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of X septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems !where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: Less Than Significant Impact. . The project site is not within any known fault zones as recog~ the City of Temecula General Plan. The nearest known fault to the project site is the Wildomar Fault zone, and is located approximately 1-2 miles to the west. According to the General Plan EIR (GPEIR), the City of Temecula is in Ground shaking Zone II, which will experience moderate to intense ground R:'tP D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~Jnitial study-1 .doc the City of Temecula is in Ground shaking Zone II, which will experience moderate to intense ground shaking in the event of a major regional earthquake. Any potential significant impacts will be mitigated through building construction, which is consistent with the Uniform Building Code standards. In addition, the project will be conditioned to provide a soils report prior to grading and recommendations contained in said report are followed during construction. 6.b. No Impact, The project will not expose people to landslides or mudflows. The Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Temecula General Plan has not identified any known landslides or mudslides located on the site or proximate to the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 6.c.d.e. No Impact. Potential impacts will be mitigated by the building construction, which requires new construction to comply with the Uniform Building Code standards. A soils report shall be required as part of the development and shall contain recommendations for the compaction of the soil which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure (including liquefaction), erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill and expansive soils. Erosion control techniques will be included as a condition of approval for development projects at the site. Potential unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill will be mitigated through the use of proper compaction of the soils and landscaping. 6.d. Less Than Significant Impact. Any potential significant impacts will be mitigated through building construction, consistent with the Uniform Building Code standards. Further, the project will be conditioned to provide soil reports prior to grading and recommendations contained in this report are complied with during construction. The soil reports will also contain recommendations for the compaction of the soil, which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure, liquefaction, subsidence and expansive soils. 6.e. No Impact. Additional septic sewage disposal systems are not proposed for this project. The project will be connected to the existing public sewer system in' Pauba Road; therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or X acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of X hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? ~. For project located within an airport land use plan X a or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? R:~P D 0~2002\02-0612 Linfield~Jnitial study-l.doc f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would X the prciect result in a safety hazard for people residing or workin(~ area? g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an -- -~ adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, X injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: 7.a-h No Impact, The project will not create a significant impact in the creation of any health hazard, potential health hazard, risk of explosion, release of hazardous substances and it is not located near, nor is it a site on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 that would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public or private airstrip. The project will take access from maintained public streets and will therefore not impede emergency response or evacuation plans. The project will not create a fire hazard in an area with flammable brush, grass, or trees. While there are existing trees and brush on the site, the site is not considered a wild land area subject to significant risk of loss due to fire. The project will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable health laws during the plan check stage. No permits will be issued unless the project is found to be consistent with all applicable laws. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: ~* Issues a~ Supping Info~afion,Sour~s ? ~l~a~ * a. Violate any water quaii~ standards or waste discharge X requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or intedere X substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not suppo~ existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pa~ern of the site X or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage paEern of the site X or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of sudace runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off-site? e. Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the X capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Othe~ise substantially degrade water quali~? X R:~P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-l.doc g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as X mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood ~ Insurance Rate other flood hazard delineation Map or map? h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures, X which would impede or redirect flood flows? i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, X injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X Comments: 8.a. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The project is required to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. By complying with the NPDES requirements, any potential impacts can be mitigated to a level that is less than significant. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project. 8.b.f. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. The project will not have an affect on the quantity and quality of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability. Further, construction on the site will not be at depths sufficient to have a significant impact on ground waters or aquifer volume. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project. 8.c.d. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site, however it would not result in substantial erosion or siltation and/or flooding on- or off-site. Some changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns and the rate and amount of surface runoff is expected whenever development occurs on previously permeable ground. Much of the proposed project will maintain its permeable surface, such as athletic fields and open space. Previously permeable ground will be rendered impervious by construction of structures, accompanying hardscape and driveways. While absorption rates and surface runoff will change, potential impacts shall be mitigated through site design. Drainage conveyances are required for the project to safely and adequately handle runoff that is created. As conditioned, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on the existing facilities. 8.e. Less Than Significant Impact. The project is not anticipated to create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems, or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. The project is conditioned to accommodate the drainage created as a result of the development of the subject site. In addition, the project is conditioned so that the drainage will not impact surrounding properties. A less than significant impact is associated with this project. 8.g. No Impact. This project represents a development plan for a public institutional use within an area zoned for public institutional uses. Some residential uses are permitted uses and may be developed in the future, however the project site is not located within a flood plain or an area prone to flooding as identified on the FEMA maps. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. No Impact. The project will have no impact on people or property to water related hazards such as flooding because the project site is located outside of the 100-year floodway as identified in the City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (Figure 7-3) and the Flood Insurance Rate Map Community-Panel Number 0607420005B and 0607420010B. No potential for exposure to R:\P D O~002~02-0612 Linfield~initial study-l.doc significant flood hazards will occur from developing the project site as proposed. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. No Impact. The project site is not subject to inundation by sieche, tsunami, or mudflow, as thai. events are not known to happen in this region. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.~ll 9. Land Use arid Planning. Would the project: Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues arid Supporting information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Physically divide an established community? X b. Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or X regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or X natural community conservation plan? Comments: 9.a. No Impact, The project will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community. The property to the west is a public high school, which provides many of the same amenities as the proposed project. On the south and north side of the street are single-family residences. To the east of the project site are Iow-density residences with various vacant lots. The development of this site, as proposed, will be consistent with the intended use of the property compatible with the surrounding properties. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 9.b. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not conflict with the General Plan designation, environmental plans or policies adopted be agencies with jurisdiction over the project. The project includes a zone change to PDO-7, which allows for flexibility in the uses permitted. The primary use of the area will remain institutional, as a private school and administrative offices. The associated uses permitted within the PDO are secondary uses to the primary institutional uses and/or they are as allowed under the public institutional zoning and general plan designation. Impacts from all General Plan land use designations were analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan. A subsequent traffic study has been prepared by the applicant to address the potential impacts from the residential area proposed by the applicant. Implementation of PDO-7 and the development of Linfield Christian School do not appear to have the potential to conflict with any agency plans or policies that have been adopted in order to avoid or mitigate an environmental effect. Agencies with jurisdiction within the City commented on the scope of the analysis contained in the EIR and how the land uses would impact their particular agency. Mitigation measures approved for the EIR, such as development impact fees, will be applied to this project where necessary. Further, all agencies with jurisdiction over the project are also being given the opportunity to comment on this project, and is anticipated the appropriate comments will be received as to how this project relates to their specific environmental plans and/or policies. Significant portions of the project site have been previously disturbed and used for educational and recreational purposes and services are currently in place for the proposed project. With the mitigation measures in place there will be less than significant impacts on adopted environmental plans or policies 9.c. No Impact. The proposed project will not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. The site is not within any applicable habitat conservation natural community conservation plan. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this proj R:\P D O~2002~02-0612 Linfie~d~initial study-1 .doc 10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Pqt~ntially signiii~t~ith ~' I:ess~Than i "'''~ SIg~ifib~nt Mitigation S!~ific~n~ a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral X resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important X mineral resoume recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Comments: 10.a.b. No Impact. The project will not result in the loss of available, known mineral resources or in the loss of an available, locally important mineral resoume recovery site. The State Geologist has classified the City of Temecula a classification of MRZ-3a, containing areas of sedimentary deposits, which have the potential for supplying sand and gravel for concrete and crushed stone for aggregate. However, it has been determined that this area contains no deposits of significant economic value based upon available data in a report entitled Mineral Land Classification of the Temescal Valley Area, Riverside County, California, Special Report 165, prepared in accordance with the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) of 1975. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 11. NOISE. Would the project result in: : ~ Issues a~ Sup~ng {nfo~ation Sour~s~ ~ ,~;; ~/~¥ ~; ~ ~= ;:~ I~ ]~ ~. ~ ~; ~ ~ ~ >; ; a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in X excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of pemons to or generation of excessive X gmundborne vibration or gmundborne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels X in the project vicinity above levels existing without the projem? d. A substantial tempora~ or periodic increase in ambient X noise levels in the project vicini~ above levels existing without the project? e. For a project located within an airpo~ land use plan or, X where such a plan has not been adopted, within ~o miles of a public airpoA or public use airpo~, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would X the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? ~11omments: .a Less Than Significant With Mitigation Measures. The proposed project is located on an approximately 94-acre (Minus 23-acre land lease area) site directly adjacent to single-family residences and an existing public high school. The City of Temecula's General Plan has identified residents as sensitive receptors. A 65 CNEL has been adopted as the maximum exterior noise level R:~P D O~002\02-0612 LinfieldUnitial study-l.doc acceptable for sensitive receptors. The CNEL is an average equivalent A-weighted sound level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of five decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and after addition of ten decibels to sound levels in the night before 7:00 a.m. and after 10:00 p.m. The proposed site and residences are separated by a 90 to 95 foot right-of-way, includi street, a 20 foot landscape slope on the residential side and a 20 foot setback on the PDO-7 grade elevations varying from 1-foot to greater than 35 feet and a combination of solid and wrought iron fencing. Noise levels as measured from an adjacent similar facility (Temecula Valley High School, 59.3 measured and 61.2 adjusted) do not exceed the 65 dBA CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level) as noted for the existing residential homes and as adopted in the Noise Element of the General Plan. The addition of a new ball field should not increase the noise dba above the maximum 65 dba allowed since sporting events are not expected to occur beyond 10:00 PM. Other athletic courts and fields are proposed, however they are no less than 180 feet from the right-of-way and are separated by slopes and riparian and woodland area to be maintained. The following mitigation measures will be implemented. REQUIRED MITIGATION MEASURES 1. All outdoor events and public gatherings must cease from 10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M. 11 .b. Less Than Significant Impact. The uses proposed by the project are not activities that would expose persons to, or generate excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels. Although there will be an increase in ground-borne vibration and noise during grading and construction, these will be of a temporary and short in duration. Due to the limited nature of this exposure and by maintaining compliance with the City Noise Ordinance there will be a less than significant impacts. 11 .c.d. Less Than Significant Impact. The project may result in temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels during construction and thereafter. Construction machinery is capable of producing noise in the range of 100+ DBA at 100 feet, which is considered annoying. However, this source of noise from construction of the project will be of short duration and therefore would not be considered significant. Furthermore, the project will comply with City ordinances regulating the hour~j~rl~ construction activity from 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 P.M. Monday through Friday and 7:00 A.M. to 3:60 P.~ Saturdays. Construction will not be permitted on Sundays and nationally recognized holidays. A less than significant impact is anticipated at this time. 11 .e.f. No Impact. This project is not within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, therefore, student, teachers and other persons within the area will not be exposed to excessive noise levels generated by an airport. Consequently no impact is anticipated as a result of this project. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: ~S~h~n · ~ P0ten§a~ly sIgr]iflcant With Less~h~h ~ Significant Mitiga~3r~ S!gnificant NO IssuesandSuppOrlinglnformationSources ~ · Impact. · InCO~3rated Impact~ : iml~act.. a, Induce substantial population growth in an area, either X directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, X necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the X construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: 12.a.b.c. No Impact. The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The project site is the expansion of an existing educational facility surrounded by single-family residences R:\P D O~002~02-0612 LinfieldUnitial study-l.doc 15 and other public schools. The project will not displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing, as the site is developed within a public institutional zone. The project will neither displace housing nor people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered Government services in any of the following areas: Less Than , Potentia!ly Significant.With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact. a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical X impacts associates with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: b. Fire protection? X c. Police protection? X d. Schools? X e. Parks? X f. Other public facilities? X ~1C3omments: .a.b.c.e. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered fire, police, recreation or other public facilities. The project will incrementally increase the need for some services. However, the project will contribute its fair share through City Development Impact Fees to be used to provide public facilities. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. 13.d. No Impact. The project will not have an impact upon, or will not result in a need for new or altered school facilities. The project will not cause significant numbers of people to relocate within or to the City. No impacts are anticipated. 13.f. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered public facilities. The Rancho California Water District and the Riverside Department of Environmental Health have been made aware of this project. A condition of approval has been placed on this project that will require the proponent to obtain '~/ill Serve" letters from all of the public utilities agencies. Service is currently provided for the surrounding residential development, so extending service to this site is possible, which would result in less than significant impacts as a result of the project. 14. RECREATION. Would the project: ,Issuesand Su din InformatlonSources : ,; , o. ~ ', '-~ , ¢~'~i~,~ ~x I~oq~or~{~:l~ ?: > ~ a. Would the project increase the use of existing X neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? R:\P D 0~2002\02-0612 Linfiel~initial study-l.doc Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities I which might have an adverse physical effect on the I environment? Comments: 14.a. No Impact, The project is an educational project with open space and athletic facilities. The anticipated need to increase the neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities as a result of this project is not anticipated. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 14.b. No ImpacL The project includes the potential to include a maximum of 26 residential units in addition to the two existing units which will be replaced and relocated on-site. All residential units are intended to provide housing for students and/or employees of the school. Since these residential units are secondary uses to the school and there is not a substantial number of residential units proposed, no impacts are anticipated for recreational facilities. 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: · · LessThar~,,,~ ~ ~ ' ' ~ Issues a~'S~p~ng Info~atio~ ~U~S a. Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in X relation to the existing traffic load and capaci~ of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capaci~ ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections? b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of X se~ice standard established by the coun~ congestion management agency for designated muds or highways? c. Result in a change in air traffic pa~erns, including either X an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safe~ risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature X (e.g., sharp cu~es or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? X f. Result in inadequate parking capaci~? X g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs X suppoding alternative transpo~ation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Comments: 15.a-c. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigations Incorporated. The project site is currently zoned Public Institutional, which is also the land use assumed in the City's Circulation Element of the General Plan. According to the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by the traffic-engineering firm Linscott Law & Greenspan, the proposed project will decrease the level of service (LOS) for AM/PM peak hour tr~Jl~ from D to E. However, the required mitigation measures should improve the LOS to D oncel~ mitigation measures are constructed. With mitigation measures in place, the project is consistent with General Plan goals and polices of maintaining a Level of Service "D" or better at all intersections within the City during peak hours. The proposed project is not anticipated to cause significant impacts to the R:\P D O~002~02-0612 Llnfield~nitial study-l.doc existing traffic system within the City of Temecula. Additionally, the City's Traffic Engineer reviewed the cumulative impacts during the approval process and has determined that the project's traffic impacts warrant no further study or mitigations beyond those recommended by the traffic analysis. The following Mitigation Measures will be implemented: Mitigation Measures: 1. Restripe the southbound approach of Margarita Road to provide an additional southbound left turn lane (dual southbound left turn lanes) at the intersection of Pauba Road and Margarita Road. 2. Provide a traffic signal at the realigned intersection of Via Rami/Linfield Way @ Pauba Road. 3. Improve Pauba Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements 720' west of Linfield Way to the West Boundary, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). 4. Improve Rancho Vista Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements along the North Boundary frontage, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). 5. Improve Green Tree Road (Local Road Standards - 60' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvement from Margarita Road to the North Boundary, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street light, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). 6. Future traffic studies may be required to determine the precise timing of each Mitigation Measure if the City determines it is necessary. 7. A school zone and striping plan, per Caltrans standards, shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer for the school site within this project and included in the street improvements for this project. Design shall also include a warrant analysis for a flashing yellow beacon and if warrants are met, shall be installed by developer. 8. Payment of the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). 15.d-g. No Impact. The proposed development of this property will not result in a change in air traffic patterns by increasing the traffic levels in the vicinity. The site is not within the French Valley Airport's flight overlay district. The design of the project will not pose a threat to the health, safety, and welfare of the people utilizing the roads in the vicinity of the project because there are no sharp curves or dangerous intersections proposed. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 15.e. No Impact. The project will not result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses. The project, as designed, complies with current City standards and has adequate emergency access. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 15.f. No Impact. The proposed development complies with the City's Development Code parking requirements for public institutional uses. Many of the uses, such as athletic fields will only be used during off-peak hours and therefore shared parking will be utilized. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 15.g. No Impact. The proposed project does not propose to provide public transportation or a public transportation turnout. Since the proposed project is a private school, it is not anticipated that a significant need for public transportation will occur. The project as proposed does not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. Because the project does not propose to significantly increase its employee base, alternative transportation programs specifically designed for this project are not necessary. The project will be required to provide bicycle racks at a rate of 1 rack per 20 required parking space per the Development Code. R:\P D O~2002~02-0612 Linfield~inJtial study-l.d~c 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: LeS~ Than ~ Potentially Significant with Less Than " significant Mitigation Significant Issues and Supporting information Sources Impact I~orporated Impact Impact a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the X applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or X wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water X drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the X project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment X provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to X accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X regulations related to solid waste? ~ Comments: 16.a.b.e. Less Than Significant Impact, The project will not exceed wastewater treatment requirements, require the construction of new treatment facilities, nor affect the capacity of treatment providers. The project will have an incremental effect upon existing systems. Since the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16.c. Less Than Significant impact. The project will require on-site storm drains to be constructed. The project ~vill require various State and Federal Permits. The project will include the construction of underground storm drains and drainage swales in various location within the project site. No off-site storm drains or expansion of existing facilities are required as a result of this project. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District has reviewed the proposed plan and has determined that the proposed project would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16.d. Less Than Significant ImpacL The project will not significantly impact existing water supplies nor require expanded water entitlements. The project will have an incremental effect upon existing systems. While the project will have an incremental impact upon existing systems, the Rancho California Water District has provided '~vater available" letters to the City indicating water resources are available to serve to proposed project, provided the applicant signs an Agency Agreement with the Water District, The proposed project is also consistent with the General Plan and the General Plan Final EIR in regards to use and policies. Since the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16.f.g. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not result in a need for new landfill capacity. potential impacts from solid waste created by this development can be mitigated through participation in ~ Source Reduction and Recycling Programs, which are implemented by the City. Less than significant ~ impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. ~;~P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield\initial study-1 .doc 19 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. ~ ~ Less Than ~ P0teniia!ly Signific~nt With Less Than S gnificant ~ ~!~!gFi~o~l S ~nj~[~c~ ~ nt N? ~' ~ ; ~'lmpa~ ' ~* 1~6t~ted~ ~ ~ ~ · ssuesandSup~n~ no~a onSources ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ mpa~ ~ ~;; a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality X of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal communi~, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate impo~ant examples of the major periods of California histo~ or prehisto~? b, Does the project have impacts that are individually X limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effe~s of probable future proje~s? c. Does the project have environmental effects, which will X cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: 17.a. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated.. The project has the potential to degrade the quality of the environment on site or in the vicinity of the project. The site includes natural drainage courses and areas identified as riparian woodland. Environmental studies have been completed and have identified an area to be set aside a resoume area. The developer is required to obtain various State and Federal Permits including, a Section 1602 permit from the Department of Fish and Game, Clean Water Act Section 401 permit from the U.S. Army Corps. of Engineers and clearance from the Department of Fish and Wildlife for various biological concerns on the project site. A cultural resources monitor is required to be present on the project site during all earthmoving activities. A traffic analysis has complete and was reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineer to identify traffic calming devices and mitigation measures to maintain an acceptable level of service as required in the General Plan. 17.b, Less Than Significant Impact. The individual effects from the project are less than significant with Mitigation Measures incorporated into the project. The project will not have a cumulative effect on the environment since the project site is an isolated area, surrounded by development. All cumulative effects for the various land uses of the subject site as well as the surrounding developments were analyzed in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report. With the mitigation measures in place, the project will be consistent with the General Plan and Development Code, the cumulative impacts related to the future development will not have a significant impact. 17.c. No Impact. The project will not have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, directly or indirectly. The institutional facility will be designed and developed consistent with the Development Code, PDO, and the General Plan. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. ~8. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, r other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets. a. I Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. R:\P D O~2002~02-0612 Linfie~d~nitial study-l.doc 20 b. Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporati describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document ~ the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. Comments: 18.a. There were no earlier analyses specifically related to this project site. 18.b. 18.c. The City's General Plan and Final Environment Impact Report and a number of special studies (listed under Sources) were used as a referenced soume in preparing this Initial Study There were no earlier impacts, which affected this project. The mitigation measures are addressed in the Initial Study, R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Unfield~initial study-1 .doc SOURCES 1. City of Temecula General Plan, adopted November 9, 1993. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, adopted July 2, 1993 3. Linfield Christian School Master Plan and Design Guidelines, dated February 21,2003 4. Preliminary Hydrology/Hydraulic Study of Linfield Christian School, Kenneth W. Crawford, Jr. dated December 12, 2001. 5. Traffic Impact Analysis Report, Linfield Christian School Master Plan, Linscott Law & Greenspan, dated December 7, 2001 6. Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum, Linfield Christian School Master Plan, Linscott Law & Greenspan, dated February 5, 2003 7. A General Biological Resources Survey And Jurisdictional Delineation on APN #955-002-002, The Linfield School Project, L & L Environmental, Inc., dated August, 2001 8. Results of A Focused Raptor Nesting Survey For APN # 955-002-002, L & L Environmental, Inc., The Linfield School Project, dated March 21,2002. 9. Focused Survey For The Quino Checkerspot Butterfly ON APN # 955-002-002, The Linfield School, L & L Environmental, Inc., dated June, 2002. 10. A Phase I Archaeological And Paleontological Survey Report on The Linfield Christian School Expansion Site, APN # 955-002-002, L & L Environmental, Inc., dated February 11, 2003 R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield~initial study-1 .doc ATTACHMENT NO. 7 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Lirrfiel~Staff Report PC-1 .doc Mitigation Monitoring Program Project Description: Planning Application PA01-0653 Master CUP Planning Application PA02-06t 2 Planned Development Overlay Location: Applicant: South side of Rancho Vista Road, north of Pauba Road, east of Margarita Road and west of Meadows Parkway, 31950 Pauba Road, (APN: 955-020-002). Linfield Christian School 31950 Pauba Road Temecula, CA 92515 General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Air Quality A temporary impact of offensive odors and additional dust due to the operation of heavy equipment during construction phases of the project. The project is required to provide a water truck to continuously "water down" the graded areas to reduce the amount of dust from excavation. In addition, all heavy equipment must be regularly maintained to reduce emissions. Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measure as part of on-going field verification and inspections. On-going during all grading activities Building Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Biological Resources Development of land that potentially supports habitat for the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly and California Gnatcatcher and raptors. The project will be required to acquire the necessary permits from federal and state agencies including U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game. Specific Process: Planning and Public Works staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measure prior to the issuance of a grading permit, R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfieldffvlitigation Monitoring Program.doc 1 Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Prior to the issuance of grading permit. Planning Department and Public Works Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Biological Resources Development of land containing riparian woodlands An environmental resource area has been set preservation and will not developed. aside for Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party As a part of the Master CUP, the plan designates the sensitive dparian woodland as a resource area not to be developed. Upon approval of the Master CUP and PDO Planning Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Biological Resources Development of land containing wetlands as identified by state and federal regulations The project will be required to acquire the necessary permits from federal and state agencies including U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game. Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measures as part of the building plan check and grading permit review process. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Planning Department and Public Works Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Noise Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance. All outdoor events and public gatherings must be complete prior to 10:00 P.M. R:~P D O~002~32-0612 Linfield~vlitigation Monitoring Program.doc 2 Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measures via Code Enforcement. Ongoing Planning Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Cultural Resources Cause a substantive adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, including archaeological and/or paleontological resources. A qualified archaeologist shall develop a mitigation plan and a discovery clause/treatment plan, which includes mitigation monitoring to be implemented during all earthmoving phases of the project. The Planning Department and Building Department, in conjunction with the Luiseno Band will ensure monitors are provided during all earthmoving phases of the project. On-going during all earthmoving phases of the project Planning Department, Building Department, and Luiseno Band General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Cultural Resources Cause a substantive adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, including archaeological and/or paleontological resources. A qualified archaeologist retained by the developer and approved by the City of Temecula shall review the approved project. The archaeologist shall conduct a pre-construction work recommendation plan and participate in a pre-construction meeting with the development staff and construction operators to ensure an understanding of the mitigation measures requires during construction. The Developer will retain a monitor(s) and conduct the required meetings with the Building Division and the Luiseno Band to ensure a plan is developed and an understanding is reached for monitoring. Prior to issuance of a grading permit R:\P D O~2002\02-0612 Linfield'Wlitigafion Monitoring Program.doc 3 Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning Department, Building Department, and Luiseno Band General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Cultural Resources Cause a substantive adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, including archaeological and/or paleontological resources. A final report must be prepared by the archaeologist for submission to the project proponent, the Eastern information Center and the City of Temecula. The report must describe the parcel history, summarize field and laboratory methods used, and include any testing or special analysis information conducted to support findings. The developer is responsible for acquiring an archaeologist to prepare a final report and submit the findings to the appropriate agencies. Prior to project completion Planning Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Cultural Resources Cause a substantive adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, including archaeological and/or paleontological resources. A qualified vertebrate paleontologist retained by the developer and approved by the City of Temecula will develop a storage agreement with the LACM Vertebrae Paleontology Section, San Bernardino County Museum, or another acceptable museum repository to allow for the permanent storage and maintenance of any fossil remains recovered in the project area as a result of the monitoring program, and for the archiving of associated specimen data and corresponding geologic and geographic site data at the museum repository. The developer is responsible for retaining the required personnel and providing an agreement document to the City of Temecula for review. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit R:~P D O~002\02-0612 Linfleld~Vlitigation Monitoring Program.doc 4 Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Cultural Resources Cause a substantive adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, including archaeological and/or paleontological resources. The developer shall retain a qualified paleontologist and develop a mitigation plan and a discovery clause/treatment plan that when implemented during earthmoving activities will allow for the recovery and subsequent treatment of any fossil remains and associated specimen and site data uncovered by these activities. The developer is responsible for acquiring a paleontologist to prepare a mitigation plan and submit to the City of Temecula for review Prior to issuance of a grading permit Planning Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Cultural Resources Cause a substantive adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, including archaeological and/or paleontological resources. The qualified paleontologist and/or a paleontologist construction monitor (both are required if a separate monitor will be provided) will attend a pro-construction meeting to explain the monitoring program to grading contractor staff and to develop procedures and lines of communication to be implemented if fossil remains are uncovered by earthmoving activities, particularly when or if a monitor may not be on-site. The developer is responsible for acquiring a paleontologist and/or paleontologist monitor and schedule a pre-construction meetir~g along with City of Temecula staff. Prior to issuance of a grading permit Planning Department and Building Department R:\P D O~002\02-0612 Linfleld'~vlitigation Monitoring Program.doc 5 General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Cultural Resources Cause a substantive adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, including archaeological and/or paleontological resources. Paleontologic monitoring of all earthmoving activities on a full-time basis. The supervising paleontologist shall have the authority to reduce monitoring once he/she determines the probability of encountering fossils has dropped below an acceptable level. A written letter must be provided to City of Temecula staff prior to the monitor reducing his/her monitoring duties. The developer is responsible for acquiring a qualified paleontologist monitor on-site at all times until it is determined unnecessary and approved by City of Temecula staff. Prior to issuance of a grading permit Planning Department and Building Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Cultural Resources Cause a substantive adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, including archaeological and/or paleontological resources. A final report must be prepared by the paleontologist for submission to the project proponent, the County of Riverside, and the City of Temecula following accessioning of the Linfield Christian School fossil collection into the museum repository fossil collection. The report must describe the geology and stratigraphy parcel, summarize field and laboratory methods used, include faunal list, and an inventory of catalogued fossil specimens, evaluate the scientific importance of the specimens and discuss the relationship of any newly recorded fossil site in the parcel to relevant fossil sites previously recorded from the fossil-bearing rock unit in the parcel vicinity and from correlative rock units in other regions. The developer is responsible for acquiring a paleontologist to prepare a final report and submit the findings to the appropriate agencies. Prior to project completion Planning Department R:~P D O~002~02-0612 Linfield',~.litigation Monitoring Program,doc 6 General Impact: intersections Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Transportation Increase in overall traffic volume and congestion at key Improve Pauba Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements from 720' east of Linfield Way to the West Boundary of the site, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Public Works and Planning staff will require each improvement prior to issuance of the first building permit This work can be phased with phase 1 being completed with the relocation of the entry read. Phase 2 of the improvements would be the roadway in front of the elementary school and completed with Certificate of Occupancy of any new buildings east of Linfield Way, on Pauba Road or within 5 years, whichever occurs first. Phase 3 would include the remaining improvements adjacent to Planning Area 2 (Future Faculty Housing) to the west boundary of the site and would be completed with the first building permit within Planning Area 2 or within 10 years, whichever occurs first. Responsible Monitoring Party Public Works and Planning Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Transportation Increase in overall traffic volume and congestion at keY intersections Improve Rancho Vista Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements along the North Boundary frontage, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party Public Works and Planning staff will require each improvement prior to issuance of the first building permit These improvements may be deferred until a driveway connection is made to Ranch Vista Road or phase 3 of the improvements, whichever occurs first. Public Works and Planning Department R:~P D O~002~02-0612 Linfield~vlitigation Monitoring Program.doc 7 Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party Transportation Improve Green Tree Road (Local Road Standards - 60' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvement from Margarita Road to the North Boundary, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street light, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Public Works and Planning staff will require each improvement prior to issuance of the first building permit These improvements may be deferred until a driveway connection is made to Rancho Vista Road or Phase 3 improvements, whichever occurs first. Public Works and Planning Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Transportation Increase in overall traffic volume and congestion at key intersections A traffic study may be required to determine the precise timing of each Mitigation Measure if the City determines it is necessary. Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party Public Works and Planning staff will require each improvement prior to issuance of the first building permit Prior to issuance of a grading permit. Public Works and Planning Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Transportation Increase in overall traffic volume and congestion at key intersections A school zone and stdping plan, per Caltrans standards, shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer for the school site within this project and included in the street improvements for this project. Design shall also include a warrant analysis for a flashing P,:',P D O',2.002',02~0612 Linfield'~titigation Monitodng Program.doc 8 yellow beacon and if warrants are met, shall be installed by developer. Payment of Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program. Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party Public Works and Planning staff will require each improvement prior to issuance of the first building permit Prior to issuance of first building permit. Public Works and Planning Department R:~ D O~2002\02-0612 Linfieldffvlitigation Monitoring Program.doc 9 ATTACHMENT NO. 8 PDO-7 DOCUMENT R:'~P D O~002~02-0612 Linfietd~Staff Report PC-l.doc PROPOSED Linfield Christian School Planned Development Overlay District (PDO-7) Submitted to the City of Temecula By: Linfield Christian School 31950 Pauba Road Temecula, CA. 92515 Contacts: Karen Raftery (909} 676-8111 ext 1450 Deanna Elliano (909) 264-1060 Revised: MAY 5~ 2003 LINFIEL!D CHRISTIAN SCHOOL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT · 17.22.'180 Title Sections 17.22.180 through 17.22.188 shall be known as "PDO-7' (Linfield Christian School Planned Development Overlay District). 17.22.'18'1 Purpose and Intent The Linfield Christian School Planned Development Overlay District (PDO-7) is intended to create a unique mixed-use area within the city, blending educational, recreational, institutional and residential facilities in a comprehensive master plan that builds upon the existing campus development. PDO-7 allows for the introduction of compatible housing opportunities within the conventional zoning district and sen/es to implement the objectives of the Land Use and Housing Elements of the General Plan. Supplemental development standards have been provided to recognize the transition between the existing campus facilities and the new development areas, to promote compatibility with the surrounding land uses, and to insure the long term design quality of the Linfield Christian School PDO District. 17.22.t84 Relationship with the Development Code and City,vide Design Guidelines The List of permitted, conditionally permitted, and prohibited uses for the Linfield Christian School Planned Development Overlay District is contained in Table 17.22.186.B. Except as modified by the provisions of Section 17.22.188, the following rules and regulations shall apply to all planning applications in this area. 1. Where this PDO is silent, the development standards of the Public Institutional (PI) district in the Development Code shall apply (Section 17.12). The development standards in the Development Code that would apply to the Medium Density Residential District, and are in effect at the time an application is deemed complete, for any proposed residential housing to be located in Planning Area 2 of PDO-7. The maximum number of residences to be developed in Planning Area 2 is 26. 3. The Master Plan and Design Guidelines approved as a part of the Linfield Christian School Master Plan shall apply to all components of this PDO. R: ~P D 012002~02-0612 LinfieldlPDO text. doc05~14~2003 - I - t7.22.t86 Use Regulations The list of permitted land uses for the Linfield Christian School Planned Development Overlay District is contained in Table 17.22.186. B. PDO-7 contains three different Planning Areas as shown in Exhibit 17.22.186.A. The three Planning Areas are identified as follows: Planning Area 1: Educational/Institutional: identified as (El) in Table 17.22.186.B. Planning Area 1 is further separated into two sub-areas: Planning Area lA is the main Linfield Christian School Campus, and Planning Area lB is the existing Elementary School Campus. · Planning Area 2: Educational/Residential: identified as (ER) in Table 17.22.186.B; and, · Planning Area 3: Public/Institutional: identified as (PI) in Table 17.22.186.B. Where indicated with the letter "P' the use shall be a permitted use. A letter "C' indicates the use shall be conditionally permitted, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. Where indicated with a "-", the use is prohibited within the Planning Area. Description of Use A Area 1A &l B (El) Area 2 (ER) Area 3 (PI) Art Gallery P P P Auditorium P C C B Reserved C Christmas tree lots P P P C C C C Churches, Temples, religious institutions Colleges and Universities Communications and microwave installations (1) Community Health Clinics C C C Community Center P C P Conference Center P P P C C C C C C P P P C P Congregate care housing Congregate living health facility Construction trailer (temporary) Convalescent homes P D Day care center P P P Day care health center P P E Reserved R: IP D 012002102-0612 LinfieldlPDO text. doc05/14/2003 2 Food services (for campus and special events) P P P G Garages, public parking C C Go f courses C P Golf college or sports training facility C P Government offices P P Government services P P Group home H Helipad or heliport C C Hospital C C I Reserved J Reserved K Reserved L Library P P P M Maintenance facility (accessory to primary use P C P only) Modular classrooms (used as interim classroom P P space) Museum P P P N Reserved O Reserved P Parks and recreation areas P P P Performing arts, theaters and places of public P C assembly Police/sheriff station P C Post office P Public utilities C C C Q Reserved R Radio and broadcasting studios P P Recording studios P P Relig!0us facilities C C C Residential - single family detached, school P P P superintendent or dean's home, caretaker home, (accessory to private school use only) R:~P D 012002~02-0612 LinfielcgPDO text. doc05~14~2003 3 Residential- single-family attached or duplex P housing for school faculty Residential- multiple family housing for school P faculty Residential-senior housing C C Residential- student dorms C C C S Schools, public (elementary, jr. high, high school) P P P Schools, private P C C Skilled nursing facility C C C Sports and recreation facilities P P P T Trade or vocational schools C C C U Utility offices and service yards C C C V Reserved W Reserved X Reserved Y Reserved Z Reserved NOTES: (1) Subject to Section 17.40 of the Temecula Municipal Code. Legend: P= Permitted by right in the district C= Permitted by Conditional Use Permit in the dist~ct . = Use is prohibited in the district (El) = Educational/Institutional: Planning Areas lA and lB (ER) = Educational/Residential: Planning Area 2 (PI) = Public//nstitutional: Planning Area 3 R: IP D 012002102-0612 Linfiel~PDO text. doc05/14/2003 4 LINFIELD CHRISTIAN SCHOOL PLANNING AREA MAP Rancho Vista Road Pauba Road Green Tree Lane LEGEND: Planning Area IA 56.89 acres Planning Area lB 4.78 acres Planning Area 2 9.81 acres Planning Area 3 22.29 acres Educational/Institutional (El) Educational/Institutional (El) Educational/Residential (ER) Public/Institutional (PI) EXHIBIT 17.22.186.A R:IP D 012002102-0612 LinfieldlPDO text. doc05/14~2003 5 17.22.188 Supplemental Development Standards Permitted and conditionally permitted uses within PDO-7 shall comply with the development standards of the underlying Public/Institutional zoning district except as modified or augmented by the standards contained in this section. A. General All new development occurring within Planning Areas lA and lB shall be in substantial conformance with the Linfield Christian School Master Plan, provided that modifications of up to 20% of the estimated square footage of the individual or combined structures may be approved by the Planning Director. Minor modifications to the site location or number of new facilities may also be approved by the Planning Director. Major modifications to the overall scale, intensity or intended land uses within the Planning Areas shall be referred to the Planning Commission for approval. All new development deemed to be in compliance with the Linfield Master Plan and Design Guidelines shall be subject to the Administrative Review process, pursuant to Section 17.05.020 of the Temecula Development Code. Development proposals for faculty housing units within Planning Area 2 of PDO-7 shall be subject to the development standards of the Medium Density Residential (M) zoning district, and will require review and approval of a Development Plan by the Planning Commission. The maximum number of residences to be developed in Planning Area 2 is 26. B. Setbacks Landscape setbacks along the Pauba Road and Rancho Vista Road street frontages shall be an average of twenty (20) feet, except for Planning Area lB which shall be a minimum of five (5) feet, due to the presence of the existing Elementary School parking lot. The overall average front setback along either roadway shall be no les than 20 feet. 2. Sidewalks, pedestrian paths, paving, driveways and wrought iron or chain link fencing are permitted to be located within the landscaped setback area. C. Building Height Structures within Planning Area 1 shall not exceed two stories, or forty-five (45) feet in height. Architectural projections such as mansards, towers and other design elements shall be permitted to extend an additional ten (10) feet above the height of the building. Structures designed as split-level in order to accommodate the existing site grades are permitted up to a height of sixty (60) feet as measured from the lowest grade. Any structures over forty five (45) feet in height shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from the nearest property line, and a minimum of 250 feet from the property line of any single-family residential structure. R: IP D 0~2002102-0612 LinfieldlP DO text. doc05~14~2003 6 2. Single family residential and multi-family residential structures shall not exceed two stories, or a maximum of thirty (30) feet in height. D. Parking Parking requirements for assembly facilities within Planning Area 1 shall be considered as shared parking in conjunction with the standard spaces required under the Development Code for school parking. This determination applies to those assembly or special event facilities primarily used by the student population and faculty during the school day, or those facilities conducting events after school or in the evening hours when regular school parking is available. In order to provide sufficient onsite parking in the case of a special event on campus, and to prevent potential overflow parking on surrounding public streets, temporary, special event parking may be provided on designated outdoor play courts in Planning Area 1. Such temporary parking areas shall be clearly identified, and cease operation at the conclusion of the special event. E. Landscaping and Fencing f. Landscaping within parking lot areas shall be consistent with Section 17.24.050.H of the Temecula Development Code, with the following exceptions: Landscaped planters shall not be required within the interior of parking lots except for at the ends of each row of parking spaces, due to the need to insure clear visibility in parking areas for campus security purposes. Required trees within the parking lot area shall be limited to the islands at the end of the parking rows, and within the landscaped areas at the perimeter of the parking lot. Trees shall be minimum fifteen-gallon containers, and may be spaced in a liner fashion around the perimeter or clustered. Trees shall be provided at a ratio of 1 tree for every 4 required parking spaces. Due to the extensive amount of existing mature trees within the District, and the internal nature of the parking lots within the landscaped setting, existing trees immediately adjacent to parking lots shall be included in the required count of parking lot trees. c. Parking lot landscaping standards shall only apply to new or substantially redeveloped parking lot areas within the District. Fencing for school facilities and outdoor recreation areas shall be exempt from the fence height requirements of Section 17.12.050 of the Public/Institutional District of the Temecula Development Code. Acceptable fencing materials include finished wrought iron or tubular steel, chain link, vinyl and decorative masonry. R.'[P D 0~2002~02-0612 Linfiela~PDO text. doc05~14~2003 7 ATTACHMENT NO. 8 MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN GUIDELINES (SEE UNDER SEPARATE COVER) R:~' D O~002\02-0612 L[nfield\Staff Report PC*l.doc 64 ITEM #6 STAFF REPORT- PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION May21,2003 Planning Application No. PA03-0110 (DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT - Secondary Dwelling Units) Prepared by: David Hogan, Principal Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY THE PROCEDURES FOR APPROVING SECONDARY DWELLING UNITS AND CLARIFY THE PROCEDURES FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS (PLANNING APPLICATION PA03-0110)" BACKGROUND The Legislature amended State Law last year to require local governments to make the approval of secondary dwelling units ministerial, non-use permit approvals. Assembly Bill 1866 also required local jurisdictions to amend their local ordinances by July 1,2003. The purpose of this amendment is to comply with the requirements of AB 1866. The proposed code amendment adds a line, to Development Code Table 17.03.010 - Approval Authority, which indicates that secondary dwelling units will be approved administratively without a public hearing. In addition to specifying that no discretionary approval will be required, staff has also reorganized the provisions to make them clearer and easier to understand. These changes were not substantive and did not modify any of other existing requirements. A copy of the proposed ordinance is included in Attachment No. 2. The current provisions are included in Attachment No. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The project is the modification of local standards to conform to the requirements of State Law. Section 21080.17 of the Public Resources Code exempts the adoption of local ordinances to implement the provisions of Sections 65852.1 and 65852.2. These sections regulate the review and approval of secondary dwelling units. As a result, the adoption of this ordinance is exempt from the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act. Attachments: 1. PC Resolution - Blue Page 2 Exhibit A - Proposed Ordinance - Blue Page 5 2. Current Secondary Dwelling Unit Standards - Blue Page 9 R:\Ordinances\Second Unit 2~staff report pc.doc 1 ATrACHMENT NO. 1 PROPOSED PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- R:\Ordinances\Second Unit 2~staff report pc.doc 2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY THE PROCEDURES FOR APPROVING SECONDARY DWELLING UNITS AND CLARIFY THE PROCEDURES FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS (PLANNING APPLICATION PA03-0110)" WHEREAS, on November 9, 1993, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted the General Plan; and WHEREAS, on January 25, 1995, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted the City's Development Code; and WHEREAS, the State Legislature approved and the governor signed Assembly Bill 1866 into law modifying how local governments review and approve applications for secondary dwelling units; and WHEREAS, the Legislature amended State Law requiring local governments to modify the local standards second dwelling units to conform to the requirements of Assembly Bill 1866; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment on May 21, 2003, 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; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Approval. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending the requirements for secondary dwelling units substantially in the form attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. Section 2. Environmental Compliance. The project is the modification of local standards to conform to the requirements of State Law regarding secondary dwelling units. Section 21080.17 of the Public Resoumes Code exempts the adoption of local ordinances to implement the provisions of Sections 65852.1 and 65852.2 regulating the construction of secondary dwelling units. As a result, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council make a determination that the adoption of this ordinance is exempt from the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act. R:\Ordinances\Second Unit 2~staff report pc.doc 3 Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commissien this 21st day of May 2003, ATTEST: Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie U bnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2003- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21st day of May, 2003, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\Ordinances~Second Unit 2~staff report pc.doc 4 EXHIBIT A PROPOSED ORDINANCE R:\Ordinances\Second Unit 2~staff report pc.doc 5 ORDINANCE NO. 03- AN ORDINANCE OF THE crrY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY THE PROCEDURES FOR APPROVING SECONDARY DWELLING UNITS AND CLARIFY THE PROCEDURES FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS (PLANNING APPLICATION PA03-0110) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby amends Table 17.03.010 of the Temecula Municipal Code to as follows. A. Add the line for Secondary Dwelling Units to the Table. Secondary dwelling unit X4 B. Add Footnote Number 4 to read as follows: "4. State law requires the administrative consideration of secondary dwelling units. These applications can not be promoted to the planning commission or city council for approval." Section 2. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby amends Section 17.05.020.B to read as follows: '~Nhen Required. Administrative review is permitted for applications for minor exceptions, temporary uses, secondary dwelling units, and for minor modifications to approved development plans and conditional use permits that were previously approved pursuant to Chapter 17.05." Section 3. The City Council hereby amends Section 17.06.050.L to read as follows: "Secondary Dwelling Units. Secondary dwelling units are permitted in all residential zoning districts where there is an existing owner-occupied single-family detached dwelling. In accordance with state law, a secondary unit shall be considered a residential use and shall not be considered to exceed the allowable density for the lot upon which it is permitted. Upon receipt of a complete application for a second unit, the director of planning shall process the application if the secondary dwelling unit meets the following requirements: A secondary dwelling unit shall have a floor area between four hundred (400) and one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet. The secondary dwelling shall be compatible with the design of the primary dwelling and the surrounding neighborhood in terms of height, bulk and mass, landscaping, and architectural materials. The secondary dwelling unit shall be provided with off-street parking in accordance with the off-street parking standards in Chapter 17.24. R:\Ordinances~Second Unit 2~staff report pc.doc 6 4. The application for the second unit permit must be signed by the owner of the parcel of land and the primary dwelling. A secondary dwelling unit shall not be sold, but may be rented. The property owner must occupy either the primary residence or the secondary dwelling unit." Section 4. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby amends Section 17.34 by adding a definition of secondary dwelling unit to read as follows: '"'Secondary dwelling unit" means an additional complete dwelling unit on a lot with an existing single family residence that provides independent living facilities for one or more persons." Section 5. Severability. If any sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any roason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this Ordinance aro severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance. Section 6. Environmental Compliance. Section 21080.17 of the Public Resoumes Code exempts the adoption of local ordinances to implement the provisions of Sections 65852.1 and 65852.2 regulating the construction of secondary dwelling units. As a result, the City Council hereby determines that the adoption of this ordinance is exempt from the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act. Section 7. Notice of Adoption. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law. Section 8. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause copies of this Ordinance to be posted in three designated posting places. Section 9. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage; end within fifteen (15) days after its passage, together with the names of the City Council members voting thereon, it shall be published in a newspaper published and circulated in said City. PASSED, ,APPROVED AND ADOPTED this __th day of ,2003. Jeffrey E. Stone, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:\Ordinances~Second Unit 2~staff repod pc.doc 7 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 03- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the._th day of ,2003 and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the th day of 2003, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:\Ordinances¥Second Unit 2~st~ff report pc,doc 8 ATFACHMENT NO. 2 CURRENT DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS R:\Ordinances~Second Unit 2~staff repod pc.doc 9 CURRENT DEVELOPMENTCODEREQUIREMENTS Excerpts from Section 17.06.050.L "Secondary Dwelling Units. In accordance with state law, a second dwelling unit shall be considered a residential use and shall not be considered to exceed the allowable density for the lot upon which it is permitted. A secondary dwelling unit shall require a development plan and shall meet the following requirements: Secondary dwelling units may be permitted in all residential zoning districts where there is an existing owner-occupied single-family detached dwelling. The property owner must occupy either the primary residence or the secondary dwelling unit. 2. A second unit shall not be sold, but may be rented. An attached second unit on a residential lot shall have a floor area between four hundred and one thousand two hundred square feet. A detached second unit on a residential lot shall have a floor area between four hundred and one thousand two hundred square feet. The application for the second unit must be signed by the owner of the parcel of land and the primary dwelling. The secondary unit shall be compatible with the design of the primary dwelling and the surrounding neighborhood in terms of height, bulk and mass, landscaping, and architectural materials. The secondary dwelling unit shall be provided with off-street parking in accordance with the off-street parking standards in Chapter 17.24." R:\Ordinances\Second Unit 2~taff report pc.doc 10