The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About121504 PC Agenda g.. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (951) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II] AGENDA TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE DECEMBER 15, 2004-6:00 P.M. Next in Order: Resolution No. 2004-066 CALL TO ORDER Flag Salute: Commissioner Olhasso Roll Call: Chiniaeff, Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso, and Telesio 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 not 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 iW2r 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. Aaenda RECOMMENDATION: R:\PLANCOMMlAgendas\2004\ 12-15-04.doc .( 1.1 Approve the Agenda of December 15, 2004 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the Minutes of October 6, 2004 3 Director's Hearina Case Update RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Approve the Director's Hearing Case Update for November 2004 COMMISSION BUSINESS 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 November 17, 2004 4 Plannina Application No. PA04-0260, a Development Plan. submitted by AGK Group LLC, for the addition of a third floor to each of the approved buildinas 12. 17.27. 35 & 38 for a total of 20 new apartment units added to the approved 220 units for a total of 240 units, located on the southeast corner of Rancho California Road and Moraaa Road, Cheryl Kitzerow, Associate Planner. New Items 5 Plan nino Application No. PA04-0472. a Development Plan. submitted by McArdle Associates Architects. to desion and construct a 20.416 souare foot two-story office buildino on a 1.21 acre site in the Lioht Industrial Ill) zone. located at the southwest corner of Winchester Road and Diaz Road. Cheryl Kitzerow. Associate Planner. 6 Planninq Application No. PA04-0512. a Development Plan, submitted by McArdle Associates Architects. for the development of 12 corPorate office buildinqs. consistinq of one and two story buildinqs ranqinq in size from 3.725 square feet to 6.912 square feet desiqned in a campus like settinq; located on the northeast corner of Roick Drive and Via Industria. Christine Damko Assistant Planner. 7 Planninq Application No- PA04-0361 , a Development Plan. submitted by Smith Consultinq Architects. to construct an 86.175 square foot. concrete tilt-up. liqht industrial warehouse R:\PLANCOMMlAgendas\2004\ 12-15-04.doc buildinq on a 5.55 acre vacant site in the Lioht Industrial Ill) zone, located on the northeast side of Reminoton Avenue, west of Diaz Road, Christine Damko Assistant Planner. 8 Planninq Application No. PA No. PA04-0486. a Specific Plan Amendment. submitted by M-A Temeku Hills Development. LLC. to the Marqarita Villaqe Specific Plan to reduce the buildinq setback requirement from adioininq properties in Planninq Area 46. Dale West. Associate Planner. 9 Planninq Application No. PA04-0351. a Tentative Tract Map. submitted by Lennar Communities, to sub-divide 53.28 acres into 247 lots 1242 residential units), located alonq the east side of Ynez Road, north of Date Street. Matthew Harris. Associate Planner. 10 Planninq Application No. PA04-0550, a Maior Modification to a Development Plan, submitted by Brian Price. Breckenridqe Group, to allow exterior elevation chanqes and the conversion of a Coco's Restaurant to a Ruby's Diner. located at 26495 Ynez Road. .west of Ynez Road between Winchester Road and Overland Drive in the Palm Plaza Shoppinq Center, Matt Peters, Associate Planner. 11 Planninq Application Nos. PA04-0369. PA04-0370. PA04-371 and PA04-0590, submitted by Ashby USA, LLC. a General Plan Amendment is a request to amend the land use desiqnation from Open Space (OS) to Low-Medium. Residential (LM); Specific Plan Amendment to request the Fuel Modification Zone. Development Standards. Desiqn Guidelines and various descriptions of the individual Planninq Areas; Amendment to a Development Aqreement to include lanquaqe to modify the timinq of improvements and construction of a new fire station; and a Tentative Tract Map #32004 request to subdivide approximately 2.0 acres into 6 additional lots. located at 26495 Ynez Road, west of Ynez Road between Winchester Road and Overland Drive in the Palm Plaza Shoppinq Center. Dan Lonq, Associate Planner. COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: January 5, 2005 Council Chambers 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 R:\PLANCOMMlAgendas\2004\ 12-15-04.doc . . ITEM #2 . . . . MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 06, 2004 CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:00 P.M., on Wednesday, October 6, 2004, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Chainman Telesio thanked Eve Craig for the prelude music. ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Guerriero led the audience in the Flag salute. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Chiniaeff, Guerriero, and Chainman Telesio. Absent: Mathewson and Olhasso. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Dough Kerner representing Temecula Creek Inn, expressed concern with the Joint City Council/Planning Commission minutes of August 10, 2004. Mr. Kerner relayed that it is his opinion that the minutes of the workshop did not completely reflect the substance of the discussion in regard to the General Plan land use Issue discussion. For the Commission, Ms. Ubnoske clarified that what came before the Joint Workshop was the CACs recommendation; noting that it was not a Public Hearing and that it would not be appropriate for staff or the Commission to be given direction to overturn or change the CACs recommendation; and that when the recommendation come before the Planning Commission in a Public Hearing, the Commission at that time, could choose to have a difference of opinion with respect to the CACs recommendation. Ms. Ubnoske also relayed that she will bring Mr. Kerner's concerns to the City Clerk's attention. CONSENT CALEf.mAR 1 Aaenda RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Agenda of October 6, 2004 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: R:\MinutesPC\100604 2.1 Approve the Minutes of Adjourned Regular Joint City Council/Planning Commission Workshop of August 10, 2004 2.2 Approve the Minutes of August 18, 2004 . 2.3 Approve the Minutes of September 1, 2004 MOTION: Commissioner Chiniaeff moved to approve Items No. 2.2 and 2.3 and because lack of quorum, roll over Item No. 2.1. Commissioner Guerriero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner's Mathewson and Olhasso who were both absent. New Item 3 Planning Application No. PA04-0200. PA04-0201. PA04-0202. and PA04-0203. a Development Plan. submitted bv John Clement of Venture Point. to construct a neighborhood shopping center with eight commercial buildings totaling 80.524 square feet consisting of 23.553 square feet of multiple use retail space. 18.722 square feet of multiple use restaurant space. an 18.000 square foot grocery store, a 13. 217 square foot drug store. and 7.032 square feet of multiple use professional office space. In coniunction. a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide a 9.77 acre parcel into six 16) parcels. a Minor Conditional Use Permit for a drive-thru phanmacv at the proposed drug store, and a Minor Conditional Use Permit to allow for the sale of alcohol ITvpe 21 license. off-sale general) from the proposed drug store and the proposed grocery store. located at the southeast corner of Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway . Associate Planner Fisk presented a staff report (of record), noting the following: . That in May 2003, the City Council denied an application for the project site that was filed by Venture Point for Community Commercial Shopping Center design with a 38,372 square foot grocery store That the applicant has worked with staff to redesign the site to address design concerns expressed by the City Council including reduction in the size of the market to make the shopping center compatible with the with site Specific Plan and General Plan designation of Neighborhood Commercial That the City Council expressed concern with the size of the grocery store; that the loading spaces for the market were facing the residential properties on the hill; and that the scale of the overall project would need to be reduced to a pedestrian scale to better fit with the surrounding Neighborhood Commercial designation . That staff has worked with the applicant and neighboring community to achieve a variety of project enhancements that will result in a project where the neighborhood commercial scale; that the reduction in size of the market was the most essential change necessary to establishing the project as a neighborhood commercial center; and that the application is consistent with the Margarita Village Specific Plan and General Plan and General Plan designations of Neighboshood Commercial . R:\MinutesPC\100604 2 . . . . That the loading facilities will be placed in the rear of the buildings where there will be minimal activity . . That a tree-shaded plaza area with a water feature was added to create an outdoor eating area . That enhanced paving will be provided within the plaza area, such as stone veneer and enhanced pre-cast concrete on portions of the facades of building E and F . That pedestrian access will include a walkway placed along a tree-lined aisle that extends from Rancho California Road to Meadows Parkway (in front of Buildings D thru I) and a walkway leading from the plaza area to the front of Building B that is separated from the parking area; that these walkways create an environment with safe and convenient pedestrian interaction between businesses . That staff is of the opinion that there is insufficient provisions of a base r¡1aterial for the buildings throughout the site; and that staff also expressed concern regarding blank wall spaces and the visibility of delivery doors at the rear of Buildings Band C from Meadows Parkway; however, the applicant is of the opinion that there is adequate building features and screening . That staff has also expressed concern with the lack of landscaping in the front of the grocery building (Building H); and requested an outdoor seating area to provide seating for a deli planned within the grocery store; and that the applicant responded that additional landscaping and outdoor seating would severely limit the function of the grocery store . That the sale of beer, wine, and distilled spirits requires that a CUP be obtained from the Planning Commission; that Type 21 license, off-sale general is being proposed at the drug-store and the proposed grocery store . That the application is consistent with the Development Code and that the census tract is not over concentrated with off-sale licenses so Public Convenience or Necessity findings are not required . That an initial study has been prepared and indicates that the project will have potential significant impacts unless mitigation measures are included as a Condition of Approval; and that based on mitigation listed within the mitigation monitoring program for the program for the project addressing aesthetics and noise, staff would recommend adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project . That in conclusion, staff recommends that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and conforms to the Margarita Village Specific Plan (SP), the Development Code, the Citywide Design Guidelines and the Temecula subdivision; therefore, staff recommends that the Planning commission approve the proposed Development Code, Vesting Tentative Parcel Map, and Minor CUP R:\MinutesPC\100604 3 That staff has some corrections and additions as follows: 0 That page 4 of the staff report should read: 1 space/300 square feet of gross floor area versus 1 space/100; noting that the calculations for the proposed and required parking spaces is correct 0 That the Resolution for the alcohol CUP Section 2, delete verbiage: in regards to criteria for Public Convenience or Necessity. . . That staff distributed a memo to the Planning Commission requesting that a Condition of Approval be added to the Development Plan (see memo) . That the Public Works Department requested that the two Conditions of Approval be added to the Development Plan (see memo); noting that the Condition would limit the access to the parcel as shown on the Development Plan That Condition of Approval No. 31 of the Development Plan be revised to read: that prior to occupancy of the first building penmit, all perimeter landscaping must be installed . That the applicant is requesting that Condition of approval No. 44 of the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map be removed; and that because the proposed buildings do not cross property lines and the property could be. developed as proposed without subdivision, both the Planning Department and Public Works Department agree that it would be appropriate to remove the Condition of Approval. For Commissioner Chiniaeff, Mr. Fisk relayed that other pedestrian uses would be reviewed by the Planning Director as to whether or not they would be appropriate for the plaza. . Commissioner Chiniaeff queried if the City Attorney should comment. In response to Commissioner's Chiniaeff's query, Mr. Fisk noted that staff encouraged the applicant to add additional landscaping to the rear of Buildings of Band C but that the applicant is of the opinion that no changes or addition of landscaping is necessary. Via Overhead, Mr. Fisk, displayed elevations of the original proposed project. At this time, the Public Hearing was opened. Mr. John Clement, of Venture Point Development, offered the following comments: . That the applicant is satisfied with staff's Condition of Approval except for the use changes (see memo) distributed by Mr. Fisk at the Planning Commission meeting c That the proposed plaza will offer a pedestrian gathering for the public . That there are other uses that are not listed on staff's memo such as a florist and card shop and that Mr. Fisk's list is not conclusive. . R:\MinutesPC\100604 4 . . 8 Mr. Richard Sallis, attorney representing the applicant, offered the following; . That the applicant would be opposed to the additional Conditions beyond what the existing code requires as it relates to this portion of the property . That the proposed project conforms to the Specific Plan (SP) and General Plan; that there are within the uses that are allowed and would not like to further limit it. Commissioner Chiniaeff queried on what types of material would be used for the bottom portion of the buildings. For Commissioner Chiniaeff, Mr. Clement noted that the applicant will be using materials that will be harmonious to Wine Country; that there will be a blend of pre-cast materials, stone materials, and brick materials; that on the elevations there would be full height base materials on building F and wrapping around E and G. Mr. Brian Wolfe. architect for the project, offered the following comments: . That dynamic elements have been incorporated to the street elevation of Buildings B and C . That the lower 3 feet of Building Band C will be of pilaster; and that there will be a shrub hedge that will grow 3 to 4 feet tall along the building . That durable materials will be applied to the buildings . ' That column bases in front of the market will be of pre-cast; and that the wall will be protected by a concrete curb element That there will not be pre-cast materials along the entire front of the shopping store, only on the columns and pilasters where the shopping carts will be stored . That there will be architectural integrated lighting, decorative scones, and wall packs which are needed for security lighting Commissioner Guerriero queried if awnings and other materials would be incorporated on the street side of Buildings A west elevation and I north elevation, other than stucco. For Commissioner Guerriero, Mr. Wolfe responded that landscaping will be incorporated at those elevations to provide screening. Mr. John Wieneke, representing the applicant, offered the following information: . That there will be a 20 foot setback of landscaping that is very thick That the monument sign is a blockade which is made of; a soft edge meant to isolate building A entirely R:\MinutesPC\ 100604 5 . That building A is architecturally detailed and has nice looking edges; and that this will . be a non-pedes~rian area and that because of the grade difference, one would need to go out of their way to see it . For Chairman Telesio, Mr. Weineke relayed that the applicant spent a tremendous amount of time looking for a fountain that would be proportional to the center; and the amount of trees that are being proposed is what staff required; and that the applicant is of the opinion that the proposed water fountain would be the correct size for the center. For Commissioner Guerriero, Mr. Weineke relayed that precautions have been taken to prevent skateboarding. For Mr. Madden, Mr. Clement noted that the applicant would expect to begin construction in the beginning of the New Year and noted that the entire length of the project will be in 15 months; and that the applicant will be moving expeditiously as possible through the process. Mr. Tony Harris, Temecula resident noted this appreciation for the proposed center but expressed concern with the two slopes and queried on what types of tress would be added. Mr. Clement relayed that the applicant is willing to maintain the slope or let the HOA maintain it; and that the applicant will leave the decision to the HOA. Mr. John Wieneke offered the following comments: . That the declining rosemary on the slope will be removed . That the acacia shrubs will be removed and replaced with new acacia shrubs will be replaced . That liquid amber, pepper trees, and afghan pine trees will be planted That larger trees will be added at the bottom of the slope . That all landscape standards have been met That the applicant is willing to work with the HOA to satisfy any concerns of adjacent homeowners in regard to the slope That the applicant hired a specialty lighting consultant to design the lighting fixtures; and that all the lights will be directional and will be focused toward the center; and also advised that the lights will be set on timers . That construction hours will adhere to the City hours . That an emergency contact number will be posted to address any type of violation Commissioner Chiniaeff queried on the hours of trash pick-up. Ms. Ubnoske relayed that staff will ensure that the contractor will have the trash hauler pick up trash during reasonable hours. . R:\MinutesPC\ 100604 6 . . . For CommissionerChiniaeff, Mr. Wieneke noted that to date, no leases for restaurants have been signed but that the applicant has been actively marketing and currently has 18 letters of intent; and that the applicant will be encouraging a harmonious blend of tenants. For the Commission, Deputy of Public Works Parks noted that if delivery trucks are entering into the residential area, the Public Works Department will address the situation. For the Planning Commission, Mr. Markham relayed that Mr. Dodson would be available to answer any concerns in regard to air quality. Mr. Dodson noted that if smoke odors were to become a nuisance, the public would be able to address their concerns to the South coast Air Quality District, who would intern help to resolve the problem. For Commissioner Guerriero, Mr. Parks relayed that the landscape median will be completed in conjunction with the proposed project. Commissioner Chiniaeff suggested changing the language in the memo distributed by Mr. Fisk regarding the uses to read: that other pedestrian oriented uses appropriate for the plaza area if reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to occupancy, (preferably prior to leasing). For Commissioner's Chiniaeff and Guerriero, Ms. Ubnoske relayed that the applicant will need to return to the Planning Commission with a sign program. Commissioner Chiniaeff suggested that the applicant add a screen over the back doors of the buildings and that the applicant work closely with the HOA in regard to maintenance of the slope. MOTION: Commissioner Chiniaeff moved to approve the proposed project subject to the conditions listed in staff's report, including the uses listed in the memo but adding that: portions of the buildings that front the plaza area, shall be uses as detenmined to be appropriate by the Director of Planning; that all subsequent changes of uses shall be approved by the Director of Planning. Commissioner Guerriero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner's Mathewson and Olhasso who were both absent. COMMISSIONER'S REPORT No reports at this time. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT Ms. Ubnoske advised the Planning Commission that the list of qualifications for the architect position was released and that interyiews will begin November, 10,2004 and requested two Commissioners to assist in the interyiew panel. Ms. Ubnoske also noted that staff will be meeting with the staff of the upcoming hospital to discuss architectural design, and requested two Commissioners to sit in the design review. R:\MinutesPC\1006O4 7 For Ms. Ubnoske, the Planning Commissioners relayed that they will check their calendars and get back to her. ADJOURNMENT At 7:45 p.m., Chairman Telesio formally adjourned this meeting to next regular meeting to be held on Wednesdav. October 20. 2004. John Telesio Chairman Debbie Ubnoske Director of Planning R:\MinutesPC\ 100604 8 . . . . . ITEM #3 . . . TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION MEMORANDUM Planning Commission Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning December 15, 2004 Director's Hearing Case Update Planning Director's Agenda items for November 2004 November 4, 2004 Attachment: PA04-0383 A Development Plan/Product Review for eight detached single-family residential homes and two potential casitas as an optional upgrade on Lots 3 and 5, Tract No. 29133, located on the east side of Ynez Road, 707 feet south of Calla Halcon and Ynez Road. 1. Action Agenda - Blue Page 2 R:ID IRHEARIMEM0\2004\ 12-2004.doc Rick Hauser Gallery Traditions Approved . . . ATTACHMENT NO.1 ACTION AGENDA RID IRHEARIMEM 0\2004\ 12- 2OO4.doc . . . ACTION AGENDA TEMECULA PLANNING DIRECTOR'S HEARING REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 4, 2004 1 :30 PM TEMECULA CITY HALL MAIN CONFERENCE ROOM 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 CALL TO ORDER: David Hogan Principal Planner PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Principal Planner on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Principal Planner about an item not listed on the Agenda, a white "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the Principal Planner. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state vour name and address. Item No.1 Project Information: Project Number: Project Type: Project Title: Applicant: Project Description: Location: Environmental Action: Project Planner: Project Planner's e-mail address: ACTION: 1:30PM PA04-0383 Home Product Review Gallery Traditions Rick Hauser Home Product Review for Tract 29133 Lots 1-9. East side of Ynez Road, 707 feet south of Calle Halcon and Ynez Road Adopt a Notice of Exemption, Section 15162. The project is consistent with the previously adopted Negative Declaration Christine Damko christi ne .damko@cityoftemecula.org APPROVED RIDIRHEARlAgendas\2004\11-04-04 Action Agenda.doc . . ITEM #4 . . . . CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Planning Commission Cheryl Kitzerow, Associate Planner DATE: December 15, 2004 SUBJECT: Temecula Ridge Apartments Modification - Planning Application PA04-0260 On November 17, 2004 the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA 04- 0260, a Major Modification to an approved Development Plan (PA99-0317-Temecula Ridge Apartments) for the addition of a third floor to buildings 12, 17,27,35 & 38 (Building Type One) for a total of 20 new apartment units added to the approved 220 units for a total of 240 units. Minor site plan modifications are also proposed to accornmodate 10 new parking spaces. The project site is approximately 21-acres located at the southeast corner of Rancho California Road and Moraga Road. Staff determined the project does not substantially conform to the approved project and is inconsistent with the Growth Management Program Action Plan and Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan, and therefore recommended denial. However, upon receiving the staff presentation and public testimony, the Commission voted to continue the item and requested staff prepare a Resolution with findings and conditions of approval for the project, which are attached. ATTACHMENTS 1. PC Resolution No. 2004-_- Blue Page 2 Exhibit A - Draft Conditions of Approval Staff Report from August 18, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting - Blue Page 3 2. R:\D P\20O4\04-û260 Temecula Ridge Apartmenls\PC Memo 12-1S-û4.doc 1 . . . ATTACHMENT NO.1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-- R:ID P\2004104-0260 Ternecula Ridge ApartrnenlslPC Memo 12-1S-1J4.doc 2 . . . PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA04-0260, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR AN ADDITIONAL 20 UNITS AT THE APPROVED TEMECULA RIDGE APARTMENTS (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0317 - DEVELOPMENT PLAN) TO RESULT IN THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 240-UNIT, TWO AND THREE-STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX WITH A POOL, CLUBHOUSE, WORKOUT BUILDING AND TOT LOT ON APPROXIMATELY 21- ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AND MORAGA ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 944-290-011. WHEREAS, AGK Group LLC filed Planning Application No. PAO4-0260 Development Plan (the "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 public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at regular meetings, considered the Application, on November 17, 2004, and December 15, 2004, 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 aiterdueconsideration of the testimony, the Commission approved the Application subject to the conditions after finding that the project proposed in the Application conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OFTHE CITY OFTEMECULADOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.01O.F of the Temecula Municipal Code; A. The proposed Project is in conformance with the general plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the city. 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 including the Development Code, Ordinance No. 655 (Light Pollution Ordinance), and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance. The proposed use and the design of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation and zoning of Medium Density Residential (7- 12 dwelling units per acre). The project proposes a density of 11.5 which is within the range specified. R:ID NOO4\04-0260 Temeoula Ridge ApartmentsIPC DRAFf RESO & COAS 12-1S-04.docl B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare; . The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare. The types of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with the City's General Plan, Growth Management Program Action Plan, Development Code, and Landscaping Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. Access and circulation are adequate for the general public and for emergency vehicles. Sèction 3. Environmental Compliance. The project will have no significant environmental impacts and has been found to be consistent with a previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration (adopted December 12, 2000). An addendum to the previously approved Mitigated Negative Declaration has been adopted with an updated 'Traffic and Circulation" section, pursuant to Section 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act. An updated Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) forthe proposed 20 units was submitted, reviewed and accepted by the City's Traffic Engineer. The document concluded that the net impact percentage forthe additional 20 units is less than one percent (0.65%), and therefore no additional off-site improvements would be required, only the payment of standard development impact fees. All previous mitigation for the approved 220 unit project would remain unchanged. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of T emecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves the Application for the design, construction and operation of a 240-unit, two and three story apartment complex with pool, clubhouse, workout building and tot lot on approximately 21 acres, located on the south side of Rancho California Road, southeast of the intersection of Rancho California Road and Moraga Road, and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 944-290-011, subject to the project specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference. . Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of December, 2004. John Telesio, Chairman ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] . R:ID 1'\2004\04-0260 Temecula Ridge ApartmentsIPC DRAFT RESO & COAS 12-15-04.doc2 . . . STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA ) ) ss ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2004- _was duly and regularly adopted b~ the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 15t day of December, 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\D 1'\2004\04-0260 Temecu!a Ridge ApartmentsIPC DRAFfRESO & COAS !2-15-O4.doc3 . . . EXHIBIT A DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Ro\D 1'\2004\04-0260 Temecul. Ridge ApartmentslPC DRAFT RESO & COAS 12-1S-04.doc4 . . . EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA04-0260 Project Description: A Development Plan for an additional 20 units at the approved Temecula Ridge Apartments (Planning Application No. PA99-0317 - Development Plan) to result in the design, construction and operation of a 240-unit, two and three-story apartment complex with a pool, clubhouse, workout building and tot lot on approximately 21-acres located at the southeast corner of Rancho California Road and Moraga Road. Assessor's Parcel No. 944-290-011 DIF Category: MSHCP Category: Multi-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential TUMP Category: Multi-Family Residential Approval Date: December 15, 2004 Expiration Date: December 15, 2006 PLANNING DIVISION Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. 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 with a DeMinimus Finding for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) 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 2. 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 legisiative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be R:ID 1'\2004\04-0260 TemecuJa Ridge ApartmentsIPC DRAFT RESO & COAS 12-15-04.doc5 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 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. 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 Director of Planning may, upon an application being filed within thirty day prior to expiration and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to three one-year extensions of time, one year at a time. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval for Planning Application Nos. PA99-0317 and PA02-0627, unless superceded by these conditions of approval. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application No. PA99-0317. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved exhibits, contained on file with the Planning Department. . 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 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. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 10. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. An appropriate method for screening the gas meters and other externally mounted utility equipment shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. 11. 12. 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. Three (3) copies of revised Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. These plans shall conform substantially with the . 13. R:ID Pl20Q4104-û260 Temecul. Ridge ApartmentslPC DRAfT RESO & COAS 12-15-û4.d0c6 . . . approved conceptual plans, 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: a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. c. 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. Shrub plantings shall be provided continuous along the face of the parking area (between the parking and the entry drive) located to the north of Building 18 where parking has been added. Leucophyllum frutescens "Green Cloud" are recommended. Shrubs should be able to be maintained at a minimum height of 3'. d. e. 1. Prior to Building Occupancy 14. 15. 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. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. BUILDING DEPARTMENT 16. 17. 18. 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. 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 March 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 provisions of Ordinance 03-01 and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. Allstreet-ights 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. R:\D 1'\2004\04-0260 Temecula Ridge ApartmentsIPC DRAFT RESO & COAS 12-15-O4.doc7 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 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. 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. 30. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 31. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. 32. Show all building setbacks. 33. 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. 94-21, 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 . 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. R,ID P\2004I04-O260Temecula Ridge ApanmentsIPC DRAFf RESO & COAS 12-15-04.doc8 . 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 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. Any existing conditions will remain in full force and effect and be unchanged. During remodeling and/or addition construction ALL FIRE and LIFE SAFETY SYSTEMS will be maintained in working order and up to their original design and performance specifications. (CFC art.87 et al) The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all buildings perCFC Appendix liLA, Table A-III-A-1. The fire flow as set for the originally entitled project will be adequate and remain in force. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix III-B. Table A-III-B-1.. The hydrants asset for the originally entitled project will be adequate and remain in force. Special Conditions 39. . 40. 41. During remodeling and/or addition construction ALL FIRE and LIFE SAFETY SYSTEMS will be maintained in working order and up to their original design and performance specifications. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT This project shall comply with all the underlying Conditions of Approval, as modified on December 12, 2000 and the following two additional conditions. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 34KV or greater, shall be installed underground. 42. Provide additional 12' of frontage right-of-way along the east side of Rancho California Road for future street widening. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT General Conditions . 43. All previous conditions of approval (PA02-0627) for this development shall apply. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 44. The developer shall satisfy the City's parkland dedication requirement through the payment of in-lieu fees, based upon the Parkland Dedication formula in the Temecula Subdivision Ordinance for all additional units. R:ID 1'12004104-0260 Temecula Ridge ApartmentsIPC DRAfT RESO & COAS 12-15-04.doc9 45 The Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan has identified an M-1 (8 foot wide) multi-use trail (Segment 17) along the westerly and southerly portion of this parcel. A public access trail easement will be dedicated by separate document to the City. All costs associated with this easement will be paid for by the developer. 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 Date Applicant's Printed Name R:ID 1'12004\04-0260 Temecula Ridge AparnnentsIPC DRAFf RESO & COAS 12-1S-04.doclO . . . . . . ATTACHMENT NO.2 NOVEMBER 17, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT R:ID P\2004104-o260 Temecula Ridge Apartments\PC Memo 12-15-o4.doc 3 . . . Date of Meeting: STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION November 17, 2004 Title: Associate Planner Prepared by: Cheryl Kitzerow Application Type: Development Plan - Major Modification File Number PA04-0260 Project Description: Recommendation: (Check One) CECA: (Check One) A Major Modification to an approved Development Plan (PA99-0317- Temecula Ridge Apartments) for the addition of a third floor to buildings 12, 17,27,35 & 38 (Building Type One) for a total of 20 new apartment units added to the approved 220 units for a total of 240 units. Minor site plan modifications are also proposed to accommodate 10 new parking spaces. The project site is approximately 21-acres located at the southeast corner of Rancho California Road and Moraga Road, known as Assessor's Parcel No. 944-290-011. 0 Approve with Conditions ['gI Deny (No conditions attached) 0 Continue for Redesign 0 Continue to: 0 Recommend Approval with Conditions 0 Recommend Denial ~ Notice of Determination Section 15162 0 Negative Declaration 0 Mitigated Negative Declaration with Monitoring Plan DEIR R:ID 1'12004\04-0260 Temecula Ridge ApartmentsIPC STAFF REPORT.doc 1 PROJECT DATA SUMMARY . Completion Date: AGK Group, LLC October 22, 2004 Applicant: Mandatory Action Deadline Date: November 17, 2004 General Plan Designation: "M" Medium Density Residential (7 - 12 dwelling units per acre) Zoning Designation: "M" Medium Density Residential Site/Surrounding Land Use: "M" Medium Density Residential, vacant, graded and apartment building foundations under construction Site: East: "H" High Density Residential/ Woodcreek and Portofino Apartments "H" High Density and "LM" Low Medium Density ResidentiaV Mira Loma and Rancho Apartments, and single family dwellings on Levande Place "PO" Professional OfficeNacant-grading for approved Temecula Village commercial and multi-family residential project "PO" Professional Office and "H" High Density Residential/ Vacant & Summer Breeze Apartments; Rancho California Medical Plaza beyond . North: South: West: Lot Area: 20.88 acres Building Summary: Building Type One: 2-story, 3 buildings total 12, one bed/one bath units, 780SF 12, 2 bed/one bath units, 1,017/1,001 SF 12,2 bed/2 bath units, 1,106 SF Building Type One Modified: Proposed 3-story, 5 buildings total 20, one bed/one bath units, 780 SF 20, 2 bed/one bath units, 1,017/1,001 SF 40,2 bed/2 bath units, 1,106 SF (20 of these are additional proposed units) Building Type Two: 3-story, 8 buildings total 48, one bed/one bath units, 790 SF 24, 2 bed/2 bath units, 1,022 SF 24,2 bed/2 bath units, 1,014 SF Building Type Three: one and two-story, 7 buildings total 28,3 bed/2.5 baths, 1,277 SF 28, 3 bed/2.5 baths, 1,305 SF . R:ID NOO4\04-0260 Temecu!. Ridge AparunentslPC STAFF REPORT.doc 2 . . . Building Type Four - Clubhouse and Workout Room Building Type Five - 1-story, 1Q-car garage, 13 buildings total Building Type Six - 1-story, 3-car garage, 2 buildings total Building Height: Maximum: 40 feet, Proposed 37 feet Total Lot Coverage: Maximum: 35 percent, Proposed 19.7 percent Landscape Area/Coverage: 393,172 SF / 43 percent Parking Required/Provided: Uncovered: 226 required/218 proposed; Covered: 268 required/280 proposed. Total Required: 494; Total Proposed: 498 BACKGROUND SUMMARY [8] 1. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all concerns have been addressed, however, staff feels the project does not substantially conform to the approved project and is inconsistent with the Growth Management Program Action Plan and Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan. Planning Application No. PA99-0317 was received on August 11,1999, as a request to construct a 266-unit apartment project. The project was reviewed by staff and modified to include 246 units. The Planning Commission approved the project on August 18, 2000. This decision was appealed, and on October 10, 2000 the City Council heard PA99-0317 (Appeal of the Temecula Ridge Development Plan). After hearing testimony, both in support and opposition, the City Council denied PA99-0317 and directed the City Attorney to bring back Findings for Denial to the City Council meeting on October 24, 2000. At the October 24, 2000 meeting, the Council again heard additional testimony and recommended that the item be continued to allow the Council time to meet with the developer to discuss a redesign of the project. The project was redesigned as follows: . A reduction in the number of units from 246 units to 220 units; Removal of the third floor from Type 1 buildings; Reduction in the size of the recreation center to accommodate the tot lot at this location; Lowering the elevation of the site by 5 feet at the back to reduce potential view impacts. The Council ultimately approved the redesigned project on December 12, 2000. On April 13, 2004, the subject project, Planning Application No. PA04-0260, a Major Modification to a previously approved Development Plan (PA99-0317) was submitted. A DRC meeting was held on June 10, 2004 and staff informed the applicant that staff's recommendation would be denial based on the findings made for the previously approved project, and inconsistency with the General Plan Land Use Element and Growth Management Program Action Plan in terms of determining allowable density. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The approved Temecula Ridge Apartments consists of 22 separate buildings with four different models, ranging in size from 780 square feet to 1,305 square feet. Three of the building types R:ID 1'\2004104-0260 Temecula Ridge ApartmeutsIPC STAFF REPORT.doc 3 offer ground-level, fully enclosed garages, with the dwelling units either in a single level or multi- level floor plan (two-story unit). Eight of the buildings are approved as three-story units (Building Type 2). Additionally, there are separate, single or double garage structures. No carports are proposed within the project. Guest parking spaces are provided throughout the site. A portion of both the garages and guest spaces are handicapped accessible. The subject application is a proposal by AGK Group to modify Building Type One to include a third story, in order to accommodate the construction of 20 additional units. The additional units are proposed for Buildings 12 (perpendicular to southern property line), 17 (parallel to internal drive, 27 (perpendicular to Rancho California Road), 35 (parallel to Rancho California Road) and 38 (parallel to the eastern entry drive). In addition, minor site modifications are proposed to accommodate the additional parking spaces required for the additional units. Neither building location, grading, access or amenity changes are proposed. . ANALYSIS Staff has reviewed the application to add 20 units and increase the height of five buildings. Staff has determined that the proposed modifications do not substantially conform with the density and scale of development intended for this site. The project is not consistent with the Growth Management Program Action Plan density and amenity requirements, and the applicant has not provided for Multi-Use Trail Segment 17, an 8-foot trail identified in the Trails and Bikeways Master Plan to be located along the westerly and southerly portion of the project site. Consistencv with the Growth Manaaement Program Action Plan Staff has reviewed the project in accordance with the Growth Management Program Action Plan adopted by the City Council on March 21, 2000. The Action Plan directs the Planning Commission to consider approving residential projects at the lowest allowable density in each density category. However, the Plan states that the Commission may consider approving a project above the lowest density if the project provides on site or community amenities. The General Plan density range designated for the project site is 7-12 dwelling units per acre, the approved project density is 10.54 dwelling units per acre, and the proposed project density is 11.5 dwelling units per acre. The amenities provided on site include enclosed garages for all units (no carports), recreation room, workout room, tot lot, junior olympic size pool for community use and spa. In addition, the approved project provides benefits to the community by constructing traffic circulation improvements in the vicinity in conjunction with development. By providing multiple family housing, the project satisfies the need for equal housing opportunities for all existing and future residents of Temecula and assists the City in meeting its General Plan Housing Element requirements. These amenities were determined by the City Council in 2000 to support a project density of 10.54 dwelling units. The proposal for 20 additional units, which increases the density to 11.5 dwelling units per acre, does not include any additional amenities. Therefore, staff feels the additional density is not justified and would not be consistent with the Growth Management Program Action Plan requirements for additional amenities. Multi-Use Trails and Bikewavs Master Plan Based on the Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan adopted in 2002, the Temecula Community Services Department has requested the applicant to construct an 8-foot multi-use trail along the westerly and southerly portions of the project site as identified in the Master Plan. This area is currently owned by the project applicant, with a portion of the trail located within an R:\D P\2OO4\O4-026O Temecula Ridge ApartmentsIPC STAFF REPORT.doc 4 . . . . . . . easement owned by Southern California Edison where existing overhead utility lines are located. The applicant has expressed concern with the proposed trail location based on security issues for future residents, and has not addressed this requirement on the site plan. In addition, the applicant has explained that adjacent property owners and Southern California Edison may be opposed to the proposed trail location; however to date staff has not received correspondence on this issue. Staff maintains that the trail is required per the Master Plan and therefore the site plan should accommodate this trail segment. Scale of Development The proposed architecture modifications are the same as those proposed with the original project in 2000 for three-story units. The colors and materials are consistent with those previously approved. Building orientation provides visual interest and variety. Building setbacks were varied along the perimeter of the project, and the meandering spine drive also varies the streetscape within the project. Building designs have varied heights and rooflines, strong vertical and horizontal articulation, and varied and broken facades. The third story element conforms to the approved 2-story design, however staff feels the addition of five, three-story buildings would result in too large a scale of development on the subject site (which is elevated above Rancho California Road). Furthermore, staff is concerned with the impact on existing views from the adjacent single family residences to the south, and feels the additional building height will result in an adverse aesthetic impact. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION [8] 1. The project will have no significant environmental impacts and has been found to be consistent with a previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration (adopted December 12, 2000). If the proposed project is approved, an addendum with an updated "Traffic and Circulation" section would be prepared, pursuant to Section 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act. An updated Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the proposed 20 units was submitted, reviewed and accepted by the City's Traffic Engineer. The document concluded that the net impact percentage for the additional 20 units is less than one percent (0.65%), and therefore no additional off-site improvements would be required, only the payment of standard development impact fees. All previous mitigation for the approved 220 unit project would remain unchanged. CONCLUSIONIR ECOMM EN DATION Staff has determined that the project is not consistent with the Growth Management Program Action Plan and General Plan Community Design Policies. Based on the following findings, staff is recommending denial of the additional 20 units. Should the Planning Commission support the proposed project, staff recommends this item be continued to allow for the preparation of findings and conditions of approval: FINDINGS Development Plan 117.05.01 OF) R,ID 1'12004\04-0260 Temecul. Ridge ApartmentsIPC STAFF REPORTdoc 5 1. 2. The proposed Project is not in conformance with the General Plan for the City of Temecula and specifically with the density requirements of the Land Use Element of the General Plan based on the following: a. The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the Project Site as "Medium Density" which allows a range of seven to 12 dwelling units per acre. The proposed Project density is 11.5 dwelling units per acre, which is within the specified range. However: On March 21,2000, the City Council adopted the Growth Management Program Action Plan as authorized by Section II.B. of the Growth Management Public Facilities Element of the Temecula General Plan. Section 2.8.1 of the Growth Management Program Action Plan provides: "Direct the Planning Commission to consider approving residential projects at the lowest allowable density in each density category. The Commission may consider approving a project above the lowest density if the project provides onsite or community amenities." b. c. Based upon the factors set forth in the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Growth Management Program Action Plan for determining the allowable density for a site, the following factors have been considered by the Commission as justification for denial: i. The Project proposes to add a third-story element to five Type 1 buildings which would create an increase in height and bulk of the project design and negatively affect aesthetics from Rancho California Road and adjacent single family residences. Staff believes the additional building height will result in an adverse aesthetic impact on existing views from the adjacent single family residences to the south. ii. The Project proposes to increase the number of units from 220 (10.5 du/acre) to 240 (11.5 du/acre) and no additional onsite or community amenities are proposed. The Project does not have amenities sufficient to support the density being proposed. The amenities provided on-site were required in order to achieve the approved density. iii. The Multi-Use Trails and Bikes Master Plan identifies Segment 17 to run along the westerly and southerly boundary of the proposed project and this trail has not been provided for the in the project design. . The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The proposed project would have an adverse impact on the general welfare because approving the additional units without any additional amenities would result in an undesirable precedent of approving project that do not provide sufficient amenities required per the Growth Management Program Action Plan. In addition, the additional building height is incompatible with the adjacent single family residences to the south and neighborhood compatibility should be maintained in order to protect the health, safety and general welfare. R:\D P\2004\O4-026O Temeou!a Ridge ApartmeotslPC 51; AFF REPORT¿dOC . . . . . . ATTACHMENTS 1. Plan Reductions - Blue Page 8 2. PC Resolution No. 2004-- - Blue Page 9 R,\D 1'\2004\04-0260 Temecu!. Ridge ApartmentsIPC STAFF REPORT.doc 7 . . . ATTACHMENT NO.1 PLAN REDUCTIONS R:ID P\2004\O4-0260 Temecu!a Ridge ApartmentslPC STAFF REPORT.doc 8 'H'" "." TEMECULA RIDGE AP AR TMENTS~ Rancho California Road at Moraga Road 'femecula, California av OWN" 'O'G'OWCCC co~=~^'j"" ""'I"""'" """'I"""'" ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT """"'""CE'^""",""". mv Co>e..."".u. "'" """__CA"'" ""Of"""" """""""'" CMIENQ'N""NQ G"'Lcoa<',",~""" "'W"~Co",",,_."OA _.CA"'" .""m..- ,"""""".... CIURAL ENQINEERlNQ """CHR"'AN"""",""""""""".",, "..w.."""".-....'" "-,.c.,,.., """",."" ,""","',.,.., """ , '""GO """"'"" "'. -'C""""~""""'".."" eo,"""", "'""" CA """ "'"",...,,'" "","'no.."'" ""'.......-_~ ~"""",.. "~.:¡"":'r' PWM"NQ ENQIN""NQ '-"'C><AN""'~'C""'. ~""':;,~:."~ D,yunUTI" ~""CO""""G'""","Œ""æ "~¡;,~~.~'OO Æ MECHANICAL ENQIN""NQ "'""""""",L :;::"""~l1.o;; ELECTRIcALENQ'N""'Q """"..- """"'I"""" ..¡",. r .... -_.-.~._- ---- -~-._~'~ ~-_._.--_._-- "...~.-.~------~ '""."0 NO'" TEMECULA RIDGE APARTMENTS &. "'D~_~""O"~."'~-- W__oo,...~oo'm -- Æ ._.~~------ ..~...,-,-,~- "..---- =-..~~~.::-.~;=;",,::;-- ~.:~==.~="_."..- :;:=~_"~_M_- .-- -- -- :11511.'. =r ',moo,"uOHUU ~.~--~....... ~~ --,-,,-"'~_. ,_.._._-~._-- --_~_._.a.- -- ~A-- ~,,- ~..- ~.....- -. . --- ~-"'~.,,~, --,-,,--,,--_. ,_._._-~._-- -----.--.- -- ~A_- ~A- ~.,- ~ & ---,.--., '-~ ~i¡ I", ] I I ¡ I C> <J). ~ .1 ~Z l¡ ~.: «: ",,~ I ¡ ""'f' P SÞï !i ~~ ~~ ~ j . . III Z 0 N ~ . rn . rn ~-- . :II¡¡ , ¡ : II' !iI! ¡¡ ~I Q! ,I II I' ! ~ I, ¡¡!", 'I ¡I ~ Ï! !!I" ¡ I'!I ~ I! I! ! I¡ II Iii ~ II ill! !! III.! IIII ~ ~ i r. ~ i!~! .sll ~n ¡L I Ii ,. ¡'" ,'\ d ."..: ¡!i¡ ..,..= ~Ii¡ ~ill ¡I'~! ! ¡ ¡ II Iii ¡ II [I Ili!ioq.l, I 1- iM II" Ii Ii "'¡!'I" 1'1 ~ ¡I IP !I !I! 'ii .~ II !IIi hi 1,1 I1I1 ~ ~ ¡ ¡,¡ ~ í g~ ~ ~I ¡;;¡z!~ . ¡ <~ i~ ..¡ ~. ~ f' ~~ ðJ ~< ! ~oO -$-00 ~.. . . . iN IIII ,oj: 'I ~¡ii -. ~ i!i: -~ ili¡ . . fÿ--- . r-u ¡II!! 1 i ¡ "!I' 0 ", I¡'!J I¡ II 'I . 'Ii ¡ <., ~ ¡!ill! !î í¡ 1'1. ~, ,!, Ii ¡ ! ~ ¡! ¡¡!, 11 11 IIi ~ II ¡¡Ii III! U IIII ~ ~u_--_..- . ~ ~ ~BJ !g<!j ..~o ii~r i~.1 ,,«-= II ¡IiI -~ . "'"- ili¡ .- -.......-_- - - - ~'.I ~2iu :n¡ ~!~. -- ---~ : ---...........- _L___- U~ ,I~m-! T ...T= '- 'I! I it 'Ii ,Ii, ä : ~~; : ~rl' í) :' IiI! <>! iii d! r __n n_+_,-. i HI i;G; liiii ~ _n l~-~- 1 ...T= Hi m~; ¡~!;¡ ¡Uli ~ _J ~ ------------ ~ ¡ ¡j ~ . ¡ og) '. "I E2Z~¡ .. ..;"'. ~~ I ..,':> 0 ::o!2 i1 [rl-< j¡ I ",,¡.;,¡g! ::E~ ð" ~ ) ~ j Æ . ~ ~ ~ . . !~ ng g g 8 Ii ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ !P. ~U;UI I f = ~ I I I I I I -'I II' II! ~ II II . i '" ~ ¡ 8~~, ~I ~Z'" "' ~ ",.~ ! j~ ]~ ::>~ n U"':O¡ ~~d~ ~ ~ In I' ~ ~ I II II I z 0 :¡ > a .. .. ;;: 6' . = 1; 0 s. ~ 0 If ¡: It z 9 ;; .. ~ g á á g, g! I ~ ~~ HI II i! ~~ III~ ,~j I~! Î~~ 10 h 1. ¡f Ji m m ~ ] ! I I '¡¡~ 'I' - '" ~ j I Ii; ~ gtJ) ~ !2:H <: <2 "'.~ M t ~~ H "/, ì~ I W¡'j'" ¡ 'lil ~ """ ' 1- õ- &j p. ð~ jj(r~il¡¡!!1 ~I ~~ ! ::E-o: 0 ~ j 11;!Jl!)"I'i~ <J:! .!_', iI " " I~¡ Ifi I~~ I~~ . ~I~.I ~ nil ¡ I~ir 5'~ :ão ~~~ ~2 ~~ . . i~ - "'0 ! Ji ~ 9 ¡¡ ! I ; i ¡ ~ ¡ !llIIl ! . ~ :; I' I J ! I II ! Ii. ¡1 ~ lJ ¡ ~ , .. I i \. I \ 1 \ ----í ~~ ~i ê~ --,-~I VlNHO"Wa Vlna3...31 SlN3VÜI:JVdV 3ÐOII;! Vln:>3I"Bl I: Ii! Ililllllllllllmm '.~ . ~~~! ~ i ¡¡¡ :. :;¡ :;¡ I I ~ ~ '\ '\ .\- 'f. ~ ~ ' -1 III -Li1J." JIJ Tìl ! I- \, , t l ....- \.-- I~' ~. \ '.' - !d~ " ~ "¡,¡l,ll--- \ \~\.. d- m;:øj~ ,rffi ~ " . . \-- ' \ ~I, \ - \C~\\rJÎ(( of =='=,';&J!- f- \ \ t::= - ...; [. ~ ~ '. '-It .-'" ~ '--- \ \"'" t= == i, \ \ I ~~ ' '~.. ,!,~ ~) ~ \. \ E\== i I Þ I W ifttt íFHÐ ~ f- \ , :=J ,. ~ .~ ~~ æ:~ ;yÚ _ïïï"~ IJ" Iii. ~ '-. _J=:. I-- ~ I'" --- !)¡ 7:"" , \ --- .-----\1.. .'i /-'",J; ...'f..~¡¿:¡.~~' \ \-~~!\Li =!. '-~., .i: I.: ,'~ ;;~ " -== -- ~ !I<".;, \ I- '-,- - "V 'iÍ . \.---"" =" -;. - lilT!} "rrlfIT 11-- " ~~,ø"" "\o~ 1 ~ \j:J 0 riLm mm III \ ~. -- )\;)(¡¡ ~~~..~ WI] imlJ Jt:~.-. .',.'~ ---' - j t; -1i&" , ~ rr.~~ì( " :~- ~. -f;L_.. --- ~c..__._- ---'- :--"~,-~§ -------- .::::::--'\ ~ ~ -:T-- '1-1-:-1- -1 - "':'~,! l~ . - ,-- . .,--,"'-~ --.-~I -"..,,-- -~--~ __.-_0'" -~ VIN"O~rr;O Vlno3"'3.L SlN3VW,IVdV 3ÐGltI \/In::>3V131 I: ;~ 111;ltilH~ IIIIlllIIJU ~ ; . : ¡ : ! ! : ! : : : : I: ¡ ! ! ! . I 1!~H ~ 1*1 ~~:~ " ~ ~j . ¡i 4 ¡} ¡i ¡} ¡¡ ¡I II ¡i ¡I ¡I ¡I ¡i ¡I ¡I ~ !i ¡ ¡ ¡ ~ ¡ ¡ ¡ ! ¡ Ii! ~ ¡ II 'II II ,I II I II ¡ I ill ¡I II III ~!illnd¡II!!llIh¡l¡!II¡Ï,h 1000œ0@00Ð$O000œì !! 1i!11! I I!I¡!I PI i'! !¡' ~ I ¡'I I -Ii I ¡¡ 'I II ~p !-¡ I ~ I~ Ilj 2 """,Š! d ¡hll¡ Ö¡i!l!,¡:1 ¡!II II!I ','! I 'Ii!! I, I,ll I litiillii!i!I.!liI!¡nn Iii hi !II!II d! ,!~ "! "~ ¡¡: ¡j: ¡j¡ ¡j: ~ iii iii iii "I ~ I"~ I": I": ,": § ill! III! III! III! ~ '.,1 "'1 '..1 '..1 I I UI! !II! ~ nil !III I: I ml ml : 11111. 1111 ~ .., I'" I '" I'" "'.. __----rJ]~lS VÐV~O~ / /----~ I .' M'" ~ --..,,~- -~--- -,~-~.,. -~ --._el _'N"O"""O '",n03...3.1 SlN3~1~VdV 3ÐOI~ V1nc)3~31 II ~ ¡ ~~ 111:lnH¡IIIIII'I¡il.il~I,lil-~: !!i!¡¡! 11!"j¡ '.. ¡ ! . ¡ P~H ~ lÌi>ti . '<V! ~~I -~ ~~?ß ...~}b:.;::::~ ""'-""'W~'" ?"'>,,:..- >,,' ~a.,.øo'" 133">S¡" ,f! <Ii ill t- O z Q z <1: Q z ill " ill ..J ž1 ¡:: ~ ..J IL It 0 Ii- . I I I I J / ! /1 If '; It I" If . ~~--._!I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , , , , . . . . . , . , , ei e! II ,I ,I ei II II e! II ,I I! ,I Ii II j Ii I I I I I I I I I I¡ I I I , 0.0 0 ì i . , ì ' , 0., i ; ,I III I'! II II i ¡I II Iii Iii 111111 III! 1111 !i II II ¡III II II i i000œ0@000$O000œ~ . ,. .IN"O"'lV~ '\I1m3....3' SlN3~lHVdV 3ÐOIH Vlna3~31 II; t ¡ 22 111~tilHillllllII¡II!I:l!l ~; ¡ i " ! J ¡g~ I , !~o ¡ ¡ 1($1 ~~:! ): . 5! ' ~ ¡ ¡¡H!¡n¡¡I¡¡¡¡!!I¡:¡ ",!!!"""",!!"" !b um¡¡¡u¡umnu¡ !! !!!H!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ¡¡Ii¡ Í\III ¡'II 1¡llb!II¡! I II i bll!lbM, ¡¡ In 1 H ¡ Ii I: i i *$1 ooooõ>øo&@eiÐ@O0@o!9@@<H> !,!!!!!!!,!",~!¡Ib' '111'11,11111 I~ I I , . . . ... . , . o. ' II 01!nnlnOI I 0 I L I i Iii! !II !II lh þþ :~¡ :¡: It. 1t' ;¡ UI¡ IIIIIIII IIIj,lII¡ 1111 1111 !II!!IIIII ¡ "'I'" hi III ill ii' WI:: UI¡ III¡ 11'1 IIII § !!I' III' ~ '..1 '"I I : 11!111!!1 g I '" I'" \.' ¡ lilll! " ," I \ \ \ \.' I ;iI II \ d!ld Ip ¡,¡ I, \ \ \01\ Hnl ¡h!l1 /\\\ ;11111111:1 " IRH'" I¡i! nli ¡I, .¡ } ¡Ii! 111 ""-. II I ~ ,II ¡I,' n II II , ~ hi 'I; . '111' 'II ' ,Ih, . ¡I!i!i , ¡,¡¡¡¡:¡I¡ ¡' "mill'¡,' i "!lII!Ii!!:! :..E~= I '::::;'.."=',,:;-:,:;: e ~ ~_._- VINIKHIlVQ YlCO3W31 SlN3VWfifdV 3ÐOIlJ Vln:)3VBl ¡ 1 ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡¡ ¡¡¡¡¡¡Hnu¡¡¡¡¡n¡ ¡ Hili ,", ",1111".11111111""1'" 1,1, ,d¡¡111 ¡g, nnUl/nllllnllnl 5 ~; :~;I~~"""""";¡'~ I I', HI ¡1¡l11!lIlIhll !hl'lli!l!¡~!ì'..I¡¡¡ **1 OOO@1S>08&@G(j)@O0"'O<Ð",..ee IIJ, þþ!iI~IM Ii ~2 111~ti¡Hillllllll¡IJ~il ~ ~ !id. 11~~ ~ ¡ i<0i ~~~! .i .I.I.I.I.! ,¡ d 11.1.I.i.I.!.1 j I; I I I j I I I I I I! I j I . ,., , , . , , , , , ,.. . . I ¡ I II I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i 1000EÐ0@00Ð@O000EÐì hl!u !II!II ", 'S' 'i' ,0' m ;¡¡ ;¡¡;¡¡ . . iii Ii Ii Ii . lId lIb lIb lIb : 11111111 11111111 :- 5 !!I'lli' !II' III' . ~ ',.1 '..1 "'1 '..1 . ! I 11111111 I 11111111 I : I III! !II! : I!II! !II! : HI'" I'" I "" I'" . . iÍ II! II 'I ¡II II ' 'I" 1¡'li¡U, ¡,: ¡,III! 1! II 'II :I ¡d'I"I' III! ill! ¡II .1.1 !h! ~,! . . - - . \ ;:.,~ :;";;\;:;;~IVël'~ II . ,... I - .. I VINHO,J\lV~ '.,.,m3""1 IN3Vü1:1VdV 3ÐOn:l Vln:J3VBl II ~~ j o. Inlllllllllllll\n\ § ~\ !!" I I !1~H ¡ I<&) i e~:! ï ï ï ï 1 1 1 t 1 . 1 11 ¡;>,ï :¿ L> 0 -:r. L> ~ 0'- . --------------/~------L "",~ __----rBM1S VÐVMO~ / ----~I - - . I ~ "'-;,~ :;:o:~"::::¡:~IVi:!"~ II I..... \0" 1lllllllllllll\1\m §:\ . I V'NHO"'l'iO Ylm3V<3L IN3VUHVdV 3ÐOIH VlnQ3V/31 I: h I I I II !; I ; I nllll Ii Ii H øq) ¡QaT . . ::;.~ :;~~;~::;~ I \1 ëI:~ '.1 .00- I... I I 11 I' I I II I I I II I' ,I . I !Iii i I II I .~I) 1901 II ~~ ¡ o. I VIN"<>JllV" """0:>3""3" IN3Vül:JVd'v' 3ÐŒI::J Ifln::>3V31 . \ \ \ \\ ~\. ~\ r , \ , \ I I I . "è'~",..."""" ¡ ! . I ! ,~~ ! ! 1*1 ~~:\ ~~,! - - - . I ~ ,:;;.~~ :\;~;::~~;~IVël'~ III 1- ...- 1..- f I II d 1'1 I II II! ¡ I; ¡ !III ~I ¡ 11 II øm IQoT Ii I~ I VlN"C>JllV:> Vln:>3"3~ IN31'\11!Jlfdlf 3ÐOI!J Iflna31'\131 ¡ I " ¡ ¡ i!i ,~! e~~1 . . . . . ATTACHMENT NO.2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-_. R:ID P\2004\O4-O260 Temecula Ridge ApartmentslPC STAFF REPORT.doc 9 . . . PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA04-0260, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR AN ADDITIONAL 20 UNITS AT THE APPROVED TEMECULA RIDGE APARTMENTS (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0317 - DEVELOPMENT PLAN) TO RESULT IN THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 240-UNIT, TWO AND THREE-STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX WITH A POOL, CLUBHOUSE, WORKOUT BUILDING AND TOT LOT ON APPROXIMATELY 21-ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AND MORAGA ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 944-290-011. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approved Planning Application No. PA99-0317 (Development Plan) for a 246-unit two and three-story apartment complex with associated amenities (Temecula Ridge Apartments) on August 16, 2000; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Temecula appealed the Planning Commission decision and ultimately approved Planning Application No. PA99-0317 (Temecula Ridge Apartments) and adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration related thereto on December 12, 2000 for a 220-unittwo and three-story apartment complex with associated amenities; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approved Planning Application No. PA02-0267 (Extension of Time) for Temecula Ridge Apartments (PA99-0317- Development Plan) on May 7, 2003; WHEREAS, AGK Group LLC., filed Planning Application No. PA04-0260 (Modification to an approved Development Plan), 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 a regular meeting, considered the Application on November 17, 2004, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission denied the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. R:\D P\20O41O4-0260 Temecula Ridge ApartmentsIRESO denial.doc Section 2. Findinas. The Planning Commission, in denying the Application hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010F of the Temecula Development Code: A. The proposed Project is not in conformance with the General Plan for the City of Temecula and specifically with the density requirements of the Land Use Element of the General Plan based on the following: 1. The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the Project Site as "Medium Density" which allows a range of seven to 12 dwelling units per acre. The proposed Project density is 11.5 dwelling units per acre, which is within the specified range. However: 2. On March 21, 2000, the City Council adopted the Growth Management Program Action Plan as authorized by Section 11.8. of the Growth Management Public Facilities Element of the Temecula General Plan. Section 2.8.1 of the Growth Management Program Action Plan provides: "Direct the Planning Commission to consider approving residential projects at the lowest allowable density in each density category. The Commission may consider approving a project above the lowest density if the project provides onsite or community amenities." 3. Based upon the factors set forth in the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Growth Management Program Action Plan for determining the allowåble density for a site, the following factors have been considered by the Commission as justification for denial: a. The Project proposes to add a third-story element to five Type 1 buildings which would create an increase in height and bulk of the project design and negatively affect aesthetics from Rancho California Road and adjacent single family residences. Staff believes the additional building height will result in an adverse aesthetic impact on existing views from the adjacent single family residences to the south. The Project proposes to increase the number of units from 220 (10.5 du/acre) to 240 (11.5 du/acre) and no additional onsite or community amenities are proposed. The Project does not have amenities sufficient to support the density being proposed. The amenities provided on-site were required in order to achieve the approved density. The Multi-Use Trails and Bikes Master Plan identifies Segment 17 to run along the westerly and southerly boundary of the proposed project and this trail has not been provided for the in the project design. b. c. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare; The proposed project would have an adverse impact on the general welfare because approving the additional units without any additional amenities would result in an undesirable precedent of approving project that do not provide sufficient amenities required per the Growth Management Program Action Plan. In addition, the additional building height is incompatible with the adjacent single family residences to the south and neighborhood compatibility should be maintained in order to protect the health, safety and general welfare. RID P\20O41O4-0260 Temecu]. Ridge ApartmentsIRESO denial.doc . . . . . . Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The project will have no significant environmental impacts and has been found to be consistent with a previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration (adopted December 12, 2000). Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby denies Planning Application No. PA04-0260, a Modification of an approved Development Plan to add 20 units to Planning Application No. 99-0317, a previously approved Development Plan to design, construct and operate a 220-unit, two and three-story apartment complex with pool, clubhouse, workout building and tot lot on approximately 21 acres. No conditions are proposed for the denial of this project. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 17'h day of November 2004. John Telesio, Chairman ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA ) ) ss ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2004- _was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 17th day of November, 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\D P\2004\O4-0260 Temecula Ridge ApartmentsIRESO deniaJ.doc . . ITEM #5 . . . . Date of Meeting: STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION December 15, 2004 Title: Associate Planner Prepared by: Cheryl Kitzerow File Number PA04-0472 Project Description: Recommendation: (Check One) CEQA: (Check One) Application Type: Development Plan A Development Plan to construct a 20,416 square foot, two-story office building on a 1.21 acre site in the Light Industrial (LI) zone, located at 41900 Winchester Road, also known as Assessor's Parcel No. 909-310-001-1. D Approve with Conditions D Deny 0 Continue for Redesign D Continue to: ~ Recommend Approval with Conditions D Recommend Denial ~ Categorically Exempt (Class) (Class) 15332 D Notice of Determination 15162 D Negative Declaration D Mitigated Negative Declaration with Monitoring Plan DEIR R:ID P\2004104.Q472 Park Place Office BldglPC STAFF REPORT-doc I PROJECT DATA SUMMARY . Applicant: McArdle Associates Architects, Inc. Completion Date: October 25,2004 Mandatory Action Deadline Date: December 15, 2004 General Plan Designation: Business Park (BP) Zoning Designation: Light Industrial (LI) Site/Surrounding Land Use: Site: The project site is a graded pad with a temporary sales trailer currently located on site; no permanent improvements exist. North: Existing Industrial buildings in the Light Industrial zone across Winchester Road Existing Industrial buildings in the Light Industrial zone Murrieta Creek across Diaz Road Vacant lots in the Light Industrial zone South: East: West: Lot Area: 1.21 acres . Building Summary: 20,416 square foot, two-story building Building Height: 35 feet 6 inches Total Floor Area/Ratio: 39.5% Landscape Area/Coverage: 16,287 square feet /31 % Parking Required/Provided: 58 spaces required /66 spaces plus 1 loading space provided BACKGROUND SUMMARY [8] 1. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all concerns have been addressed, and the applicant concurs with the recommended Conditions of Approval. Planning Application No. PA04-0472 is a Development Plan to design and construct a 20,416 square foot office building on 1.21 acres, located at the southwest corner of Winchester Road and Diaz Road, the entry to the Wests ide Business Centre. A Development Plan application was submitted on July 14, 2004. No DRC meeting was held for the Development Plan application because a Pre-Application process was completed for this project and no significant new issues were identified during the preliminary staff review. A DRC letter was mailed to the applicant on August 12, 2004 discussing site, landscaping, architecture, and other departmental issues. On September 21, 2004 and again on October 25, 2004 the applicant resubmitted revised plans. . R:ID P\2004\O4-0472 Park Place Office BldglPC STAFF REPORT.doc 2 . . . ANALYSIS Site Plan The project conforms to the development regulations of the Light Industrial (LI) zoning district. The building setbacks exceed the minimum requirements of the Development Code and the 0.395 Floor Area Ratio is below the target ratio of 0.40 for this zoning district. The proposed 20 percent lot coverage is also below the maximum. permitted lot coverage of 40 percent. The proposed site plan provides adequate circulation for vehicles anticipated to utilize the site, as well as for emergency vehicles. Since the proposed building is an office building less than 50,000 square feet, the project requires review by the City Council per the Development Code. Architecture The proposed building is consistent with the Development Code and Design Guidelines. The proposed building will be constructed of concrete tilt-up panels. with the exterior architecture enhanced with the use of travertine, horizontal and vertical reveals and glass accents. The building design includes glass corner treatments with metal canopy overhangs along Winchester Road to simulate building entry, however the main building entrance is located along the south elevation internal to the site. The building includes various breaks in the wall planes and parapet design and height variations, which, in conjunction with landscaping, breaks up building mass from street view. Staff supports the building design since the. variation in building height and materials enhance the appearance of the buildings at a prominent corner at the entry to the business park. Landscapina The landscape plan conforms to the landscape requirements of. the Development Code and Design Guidelines. Tree and shrub placement will serve to effectively screen onsite parking areas and effectively soften building elevations. The project proposes to landscape 16,287 square feet or 31 percent of the site, which exceeds the minimum landscaping requirements in the LI (Light Industrial) zone. Included in the 31 percent coverage is a two-foot overhang area for parking along the perimeter of the site as well as the western elevation of the building, which accounts for one percent of the landscape coverage. Since the landscape area exceeds the minimum requirements of the zone, staff is comfortable with this overhang design for the parking areas. The project provides landscaping around the perimeter of the site, with a minimum 20 foot landscaped setback along Winchester and Diaz Roads, and varied landscape setbacks around the building footprint. An outdoor employee eating area is provided at the southeast corner of the building. This area is screened with a low wall and is designed with a trellis shade structure and additional landscaping. Access, Circulation and Parking Access to the proposed building will be provided from a 24-foot wide drive aisle off Winchester Road, approximately 150 feet west of the intersection of Winchester and Diaz Roads. This driveway provides access to the parking at the rear of the site as well as adequate on-site circulation. The project provides 66 parking spaces which exceeds the required 58 parking spaces. One loading space is provided in the parking area, in proximity to the building .entrance, thereby meeting the loading space requirements of Section 17.24.060 of the Development Code. Adequate motorcycle and bicycle parking are also provided on-site. R:ID P\2004104-0472 Park Place Office BldglPC STAFF REPORT.doc 3 . The Public Works Department has analyzed the projected traffic impact of the project and has determined that the impacts are consistent with the traffic volumes projected for the site by the previously approved City General Plan EIR. The Fire Department also reviewed the plan and determined that there is proper access and circulation to provide emergency seryices to the site. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ~1. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed Project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review per Section 15332, In-Fill Development Projects. The project site was determined to be located within a Multiple Species Habitat Conseryation Plan Criteria Cell (MSHCP) as well as providing potential habitat for the Burrowing Owl. Based on MSHCP criteria the applicant submitted a Habitat Acquisition and Negotiation Suryey (HANS) application and Burrowing Owl Survey on October 4, 2004. Staff reviewed the application to determine whether the proposed development complies with the MSHCP. On October 14, 2004, staff detenmined that the MSHCP Criteria does not identify conseryation on the subject site and therefore the development application could continue to be processed with a Categorical Exemption. CONC LUSION/REC OM M EN DATION Staff has determined that the proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the City's General Plan, Development Code. and all applicable ordinances, standards, guidelines, and policies. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve Development Plan PA04-0472 based upon the findings and with the attached conditions of approval. . FINDINGS Devèlopment PlanI17.05.010F) 1. 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 Business Park (BP) development in the City of Temecula General Plan. The General Plan has listed the proposed uses, including the light manufacturing, warehouse, and office, as typical uses in the Business Park designation. The Land Use Element of the General Plan requires that proposed buildings be compatible with existing buildings. The proposed office building has been designed to be compatible with the surrounding buildings currently located adjacent to the subject site. In addition, the proposal is consistent with the development regulations of the Light Industrial (LI) zoning district. 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The proposed project is consistent with the development standards outlined in the City of Temecula Development Code. The proposed architecture and site layout for the project . R:ID P\2004104-0472 P.,k Place Office BldglPC STAFF REPORT.doc 4 . . . has been reviewed utilizing the Industrial Development Performance Standards of the Development Code. The proposed project has met the performance standards in regards to circulation, architectural design and site plan design. The project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, has been found to be consistent with, all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety and welfare. ATTACHMENTS 1. Plan Reductions - Blue Page 6 2. PC Resolution No. 2004-- - Blue Page 7 Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval R:ID P\2004104-0472 Park Place Office BldglPC STAFF REPORT.doc 5 . . . ATTACHMENT NO.1 PLAN REDUCTIONS R:\D P\2004104-0472 Park Place Office BldglPC STAFF REPORT.doc 6 IS.". E.I . ISJ iii (=1 ß!1J].... ~~ = t.n ß!1J]('J (Q)t; ß!1J]O ~ . . l'il ~ I . I illi! II G I:I~~¡I!I¡IIIIIII¡~ II~I VIN~QflVJ V1nJ31'1ll DVld )~Vd ~~ Bj ~~~fli¡d M ~~m~il!! ~ o'n~~l II "'~þ' ~ ~ .. ~ ~ H - .!~a'" ¡' ... ... 'J' <; "",",. S¡'I l ~ ~~I : < U I In" a ~ ~ ~i ij. I !! hi ";. ~ ¡¡~ Imnm it! Ilil ~ ~ I It i~ hili . J!!~¡~~ ~ ~ I ~ i II I u !~~~!! lUll ~ ~~,il¡; ~ìIll nl II!!; ~~!! I! III I I: ~hl!~ n" I mM~ ;~dhmUd~ ild ¡.~ æ 1!I!hllhle~M!ul tuJ ~U~U z~ II ¡II ' ~~... . ".../. ~:;: (ì III ,', ~?~: ~ : I --~ I ,,'-> ',," I @-..-...-t..-.._:, ~'-"~'" ~¡ , ~ '.. -"'=- ~ ,/,J! . ~~ , ~,- .."~ ' -"'-- ; :2;. " 'I, v¡! " - .. - - .. Q ¡ "" ~ : -'. """ s; ¡ \ , 0 ~. ~- \,-0. :¡ ( "'-"'" I ¡i' . , "1,11 ¡¡ m_" @.0~ ~-: '1IH!b!II¡¡li'l~g Þ¿; ~Þ , 0~ I ¡g j'I!!Ii!!¡!I'!"II,!¡fiiU ..., ,~ 0 I II':I!II".I!I , i'II':P¡ ~ "'~~I ~. ~: § ¡ i!lil!¡.mm,~!H II ¡'¡/hIlMi! i @ 1!~I~¡rd:¡II'I':¡'I¡¡¡n'!'!~1 -j' -@:' ~ !1!1~lrlii!¡lllili!II'¡Ii.¡'I"!iilldll¡!II !~ I: . ¡ ,~ III ~ j,J:i,¡i;hIII11:iil!,!: LI II 1~I,m ¡ . . II' . :. -. ...,. ,.. ""." ,.",. . , ~ ,i I' !I ¡III I i'I' !¡II ! I . ¡ It I I ! I¡g II' iI¡ I t I I II I R hl !h EI ¡¡¡Hill II!P;1 '~¡ I !l1~¡¡iI'!h¡Jlì'! ,~i i Ih~IIII!III!!dl' i šie0 0 000000@@@J@J@J@<!)@ , , I - - - - I - !'II! ! > n ! > - ..! lil'lhl : !! * . ';' . . ,;" I /~::I! I~il! . !III! . <Ii 0 . \ 1. i ~ I ,I ¡! ~ijl ~' Ii '!i' -.,! - '! 1011111"'1; II.~ > 'u" t ~ :"u" t '".:I~Dôm~~~¡ II ~~~!¡¡! i i ;, ¡ II ,I ~; ~. L " . '!t¡ ¡¡ 'I I. ' " , I,'!q.~šf,,: ",.., ,. 1\1 . °11 '~I!:I .1. "L"I. ~ . "'¡Ii . ~I i!i ~ i!!¡¡ !I r.!ijl Ii II! ¡¡:V lllilil ~ ilfilli, ~ th:!~ ~m Û i - U [1 ~ I!III II ~.. .. U ~I ~ I .~ ~ B 13 13 13 13 13 13 ~ \ ~ ~ ~ ~~ Z I I ;\. ~ I, ¡ ill 0, III l~i'I! ~, B I I; e ~ . . ¡ ....., I. ~ .. I I ~ U ~ ~¡ jldi¡ .~ ~~ ¡ I 1'1 J I i , Dr ,I. e~: ¡~,! I II ~ ~! ,;]10 1j' ~!I' 1!~q.ill"lIl 1.1;, " ij'l '¡I!d I : lID ~ !~!!:,I!hll!i I!!...~. IH.I' ~Jm I~ 'I ~ I I hlf! II (1) 'I1N1IOJIlVJ '¥lro3wll DVld )fWd ¡, , 1": L'~ --.-- --..-- .---------.- ..-..- .-c .--.- ~jjj!IIIIIII~~g~~ ~ I . . . . .,.... I. . lilli, .11 ,I- ¡ ~ . II, ¡ , II,! .. : I 'If I ". 'II' I 'i e I ~ ~! Ii . Ii:; ßI:H¡ ;' ! . I: :' ¡¡ n ~ ..~- . hi I" h ¡d l~t~~9 .. . . . . . . - ! i ~ I! 'I Ii!; ~! 1\ 'I! I !' ¡ oJ !I' - II ,I il'IIIIII' I ¡II! II I eeeeeeeee ~ . ~) r ' 0 "'¡ pI!!, :,' I ~~ ß, ~, ~ ~ ~!: : ~!!i!' ~,' :.im ... ! i;:Jr, I! :1 Ii! ;. ;!II ..~!!I!J§,¡tI¡¡i!g!iii!:li U ~ ¡,tim, !lh:!~~!~ ï~O~¡I~li1111 ~:z: 8 EJ EJ EJ EJ EJ EJ ~ ð a , ., ~. I 0; J! I ¡ l¡djl;jj1 . Idhï;~I.I~j. ¡I :¡' ~!;¡ ! I. : i I li!l I ~I' I,a "i!' 'oJ! I ¡¡Iii I¡~! I II ~lIi 11:1;; H:/iiðh !~!!! m g ß ~ . "' J. ".'.1 P¡ n¡ VINIDJrNJ '¥1Iæwll DVld )I~Vd Ifill! ¡,IGI . Ifii e ig ~ \ ~ . I:I~~II!IIIIIIIII¡~~~IFJI " . .,.,., . I:. ,', ! I! I! I . ,i, õ!, . II II ! 1'1 ~ : ,I... I !. 1:" I 'PI 1 luq " I, ~ ~... II: !ì I ,I ~ 51' I jI -¡!iI'lln'g: ! il ~ h ~ ~ IiI ~ ,S"..':¡hlíl" .. . . . . . . - 1 I Ii 'I í I'~ Ir! ~ !I" :!! ~ ¡! III I !I Ii: . , E' 111111' I 111""11 . eaeeeeeee ~ I!;I , I . I i~f! U G VIN1IOIflV) V1tDJwn DVld )Wd lj~!!IIIIII¡~, ~ ~ I . I1::-T"=r--=.~i1t='~=;-i ..~ r1 I ¡-- --- -- .' J I¡ L---~ i ~, i--ÞT :;;,: ~i .....: O' .2 i 'i! lli II :¡dl ,illl !! g" "I" k~L.' ~ø . i! ÎIU~, I Î I ,dill 9 I IIlflil~illl I': ,II 'Ig 'I III'I! I'lilit ~I'IIi¡III!j:II: 11I,.'III'mll II~'II"I I" "~hi .1 ,I '" <. " < <"' . < . I:J II h 'II ~ I:! ¡.. ~ Ii.h ! I' ~¡Î¡~¡ !J! ì:!I"'!' ¡IIII h:~!fi¡IJ~'1 !I,elßd Iii! eeeeeeeee ::J ~ Q SS ~ 0 :;;,:i 0; Ô' ~i " . 11:<.. ~I!.¡..I ," j ,-, .. p! . . IH! g I I I~I! h () 't'IN1IQIJlVJ 'VIn:J3Ml DVld )Wd 4!: g ~~ ....' ~i 1:IHI!¡IIIIIIII¡ii II ~I g ~ a:: i!:~ "". ~! '" I~'A I~'J '. I I' I J II ~ ~ ¡i IS ~~ II {tr]I" ([ W- --j il H n ! I L DO III ! ~I! I' . I ihlil iJJdll f ¡II HljLq ~ i I L II !fllli I ì I ill H' iHHii! L1J~ i!tll!¡ld!lllill! III JIll I <..... - - -eeeeeeeeø @@@@8 e00eÐe .... ~ IS d ~~ ~; ..... m""",'i¡~,,:,1 : PI 1m -I~ 'I ; I I i ill! II G VlN1IOJ/1V) V1n:J3Wll DVld )I'llV d 2 :'<: ~! >-, ~I I I DO ~I 'I ~! I I "il I 'II !p¡!Hi~ I II Iii, I' ¡iIi III 1'51Iill!!!I!!¡!II'I,11 !I!III §Iir!i~.=i ~ilJ lili!!i¡¡flt!lillli!llIdIIH i :~::~m~, ~ BGÐl}] S -eeeeeeee@ @@J@J@a seeeee II¡IJIIIIIIII!II"~ I ~I :I~:IIII!I i II;~ 1.;( . . 2 ~ c:I i!:! :;" " ~I '" -11,"'1 r. . ~ 'I ~ [",--- , ~-"1 ¡, ,,- I'" ~~!I II' ¡¡ ij'! , I ;~I¡:¡h! ;11!"j ,,-a 11 .1 ~';d'¡ I - i -'I I ~ 'II. ! "! Ii ~ .- "i- I' ! it I i ~ Ii "" il >-..: . . :11 1~~Trlrr ¡¡Iii ml' ....-L: "u!~... .Ii:, ¡;Uh!! nitl ~~!!I!I"i!I-i mnMmll,1 é<l6éMMIoM.....¡, ¡hi!:, :::::;: ,W,I .'1"[1[ w;n;,¡i! .'I!I!"-I!; dn!~~H ¡¡IIi liilmUlhii / 1/ I I . . II it} 1'(, ¡ .~'{ ~ i !e ~ {'- ¡ r-V fIr ¡ . ]'ð,1 ¡ ¡ i¡ L{ ¡ " - II. { /~,¡ ¡Iii II ¡IJ ",i . I " ; Ii " , i -- f ¡æ IIII !! 11"-. I¡, .h "1! !!,¡, ilb il~¡ ,¡ ! 'I ! !I ¡ i' i'I'1 I!'I '" Ii 1 ! , '" 'II a "Ii..!! ~ Ii I~!h ¡Ii!¡ I!"~ !¡ i~!i ! 'Ii! * hi ¡Ii if!! iii, II!; .,,1 II'! ¡:I, ~ ;,1; ji¡ ;mi ~i NI !b. ;.h, ~. , ~ Î' ~ ~¡ & - :! ,'~ 1 1 i! ~r~ ! ~ ¡, "-1 , :! j'~ .1 ürJ'! ~\ . i, -", ,I ! ¡ ~i j ~i !. a ~. ~a¡ ¡ð 0 ~I i~ Ijl z < ~ e" Z ~ e" ~ ~ ... ,.,¡ g¡ ~ ..... ='~"""'" "'~~~~œ- J.:;¡SJ.IH:;¡..". ~SJ."'I:;¡=" S""",,:;¡¡,¡ ".::¡ '".'n::¡¡¡wæ~ 'Z'7IO/..¡¡~,;¡¡H::¡Nlm ;¡::;¡';'1c::1 ::¡;;:';'c::I - -_-::: ---,---"""""",=""",,,,- -.,- '---- ",..,' d d~ .~".. I ~ ~~ ~ : ~i ~ ~ . l ~ ~ ~ i it i ~~h iij.~ ~ ~ i~ ~ i ~ ~; 'I !'~~L¡' ~'¡¡ 1IBij¡~~ j§1 i ~~ad ~, I~. n : n 'h~~~U"~§ft' ¡¡Hl~1 'I~~§ ~ ~! ¡. I ' ~ , . ~ ~ i@ÜfìJ0@$000 iI ' ¡ . ~~H~HH i ~ ~ . . ; 3 ~ ~ : § 3 § ! ~ ~ : t i -3 ! ¡¡. 0 J.! ~ !~ Î ~~ ~ hh ... ~~ f n ¡ ft CI Z ill ¡¡¡ ...l . ~ ~ ~ ~ r f ~ ~ h Inn . ~ < 5 , q i~iB Î ~ ~ i ~ ~ I i bn h dr ~ ~~~.' I (J:if ~f' ~ . ~ f i U¡ iH ,ft Ii I~~. h~ £~o~ ~_--lii~L I L I I ~ u . "! ~¡ dì §iiil. ~ H J~!. ~ hi. H!:! . ~ ft ~~ ~ "~>! ~3 , §'~ ! ~!:¡¡¡~- :\1 r ~¡ !. '2 !!, .~- ì.e >~!~ 'c !i~ ~s :~, :¡¡ !.~: ~ .. ~DC. !. ""~ " '. ~; h i!- i ' '.DO ~, .~ W'¡¡- & i:i~ 3:~ á ~io; ~o :~i~ ~ t.. ~i ¡;;P~ ~5 ~=~i § a~ ~~ ..~":!~ ¡¡~ >."1 i i~ is 'DOH"~ i~:!~ ~ ~D h ¡¡g~~f ,~~ .~~: 3 ~~ ~~ a'e;o ~ð ¡¡o.¡¡ '.; H ~h.; .I~ .I~E ~~. u "D.~' ~ 0 ~o s" I\D <Q.~ ; i~ . ~~ ~I~ H~;~ ij .i3~ ~ h ¡¡" 3 ~~. ¡¡. I :!ãj ; ~~ i;~ d~.~ I~~ ; ¡~~ .,~ .~, ~~¡U it! ;~~¡j ~ ~i ~I~ ¡:w &B ' m~i i U i~!~ ¡'.!~tl :I~ ft.~.. 2 ~t .~. &~j .. ~ - ~~ ~ H -~ f ~. "h ~J~.t i.~ ~¡¡~ -~~~ '.,~¡" ~m~ ~~.!h hHf h; . r. -" ò ~~ .ji ~ h~ . .~:! ~ ¡;~ ~ hili ~~2 ;. ~ ,~2 h ><r§ H.~ R.ì ail ~ ..~ ~t .;a!.,;~'L I~i .~ 0 hÞ~'~"í!'~i ¡¡~= fi ~ ¡PI~~mUj ~n :~ ~ ~ hh5~-~I!I> h~ ~ it ~ ~~ ~i¡!a~h~ ~!j . ~~ j »~D~'D!21 ~ ~.. ~.3, gJ!U"~M~~ 5~~ ~ i!~.I. tP..'¡~'~8~ H~ '§» 2.i+~!'2h;~ gi~ ~ ~~ Hft~~!~;;~8 ~,~ ; i~ !Ii ~!hl\'s~~~ u- g.i. .! ~""G-><¡¡.r "18 . L¡ i ;!i,¡¡m.~g ~~~' f 2!~. '='~i;~8:h~ ~<~ H ~~. ii ~hSh~~~J ~:=~ { s~ ~ 1ft ~~hl~U~i ~~~~ 1 ¡q Ii mhi~ii! !§~i i i H ~q~h5Hò "! ~2'~' ~ 81 ' i~ ~1~~t!1ì:!I~QI ~dQ II ~~ i¡¡ .. f!i~2'~"U~" ~¡¡~. ~. 'a ;h~~~H.~'.t h~1 , ¡~ 'Ía I . . . ATTACHMENT NO.2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-- R:ID P\20O4\04-0472 Park Place Office BldglPC STAFF REPORTdoc 7 . . . PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-- 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. PA04-0472, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT A 20,416 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING ON 1.21 ACRES IN THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONE," LOCATED AT 41900 WINCHESTER ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 909-310-001-1. WHEREAS, McArdle Associates Architects filed Planning Application No. PA04-0472 (Development Plan Application), in a manner in accordance 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 a regular meeting, considered the Application on December 15, 2004, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended the City Council approve 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. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findinas. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the Application, hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010F of the Temecula Municipal Code: A. The proposed use is in confonmance 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 Business Park (BP) development in the City of Temecula General Plan. The General Plan has listed the proposed uses, including the light manufacturing, warehouse, and office, as typical uses in the Business Park designation. The Land Use Element of the General Plan requires that proposed bui/dings be compatible with existing bui/dings. The proposed office building has been designed to be compatible with the surrounding bui/dings currently located adjacent to the subject site. In addition, the proposal is consistent with the development regulations of the Light Industrial (LI) zoning district. KID P\2004104-0472 Pack Place Office BldglDRAFT PC RESOLUTION AND COA.doc 1 B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. . The proposed project is consistent with the development standards outlined in the City of Temecula Development Code. The proposed architecture and site layout for the project has been reviewed utilizing the Industrial Development Performance Standards of the Development Code. The proposed project has met the performance standards in regards to circulation, architectural design and site plan design. 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. The project will have no significant environmental impacts and has been found to be categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Project) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. Section 4. Conditions. The City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of the Application PA04-0472, a request to construct, operate and establish a two story, 20,416 square foot square office building with conditions of approval as set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein 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 15th day of December 2004. . John Telesio, Chainman ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] . R:ID P\2004\04-0472 Park Place Office BldglDRAFT PC RESOLUTION AND COA.doc 2 . . . STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA ) ) ss ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2004-- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 15th day of December 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:ID P\2004\O4-0472 Park Place Office BJdglDRAFT PC RESOLUTION AND COA.doc 3 . . . EXHIBIT A DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:ID P\2004104-0472 Park Place Office 81dgIDRAFT PC RESOLUTION AND COA.doc 4 . e . EXHIBIT A. CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA04-0472 Project Description: A Development Plan to construct a 20,416 square foot office building on 1.21 acres located at 41900 Winchester Road, generally located at the southwest corner of Winchester Road and Diaz Road. DIF Category: MSHCP Category: Business Park/Industrial Industrial Assessor's Parcel No.: 909-310-001-1 Approval Date: Pending City Council Determination Pending City Council Determination Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. The applicant 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 Exemption required under Public Resources 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 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 A(c)]. General Requirements 2. 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 reseryes 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. ReID P\20041O4-O472 Park Place Office BldglDRAFT PC RESOLUTION AND COA.doc 5 3. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this development plan. . 4. 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 Director of Planning may, upon an application being filed within thirty days prior to expiration, and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to three one-year extensions of time, one year at a time. 5. 6. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved site plan and elevations contained on file with the Planning Department. 7. The condition of approval specified in this resolution, to the extent specific items, materials, equipment, techniques, finishes or similar matters are specified, shall be deemed satisfied by staffs prior approval of the use or utilization of an item, material, equipment, finish or technique that City staff determines to be the substantial equivalent of that required by the condition of approval. Staff may elect to reject the request to substitute, in which case the real. party in interest may appeal. after payment of the regular cost of an appeal, the decision to the Planning Commission for its decision. Material Painted Concrete Finish and Color Bauhaus Buff Frazee #8692W . Granite Accent Travertine Accent Costa Smeralda Ivory Classic & Honed Travertine Crosscut & Ancient Tumbled Mocha Unfilled Travertine Green Reflective Glazing 8. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Director. If it is detenmined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Director 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. 9. All mechanical and roof equipment shall be fully screened from public view by being placed below the surrounding parapet wall. 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 the colored architectural elevations. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be readable on the photographic prints. 10. 11. 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:ID P\2004104-0472 Park Place Office BldglDRAFT PC RESOLUTION AND COA.doc 6 . Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 12. 13. 14. 15. . Provide the Planning Department with a copy of the underground water plans and electrical plans for verification of proper placement of transfonmer(s) and double detector check prior to final agreement with the utility companies. The applicant shall submit a photometric plan, including the parking lot to the Planning Department, which meets the requirements of the Development Code 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. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conseryation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that Ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "If at any time during excavation/construction of the site, archaeological/cultural resources, or any artifacts or other objects which reasonably appears to be evidence of cultural or archaeological resource are discovered, the property owner shall immediately advise the City of such and the City shall cause all further excavation or other disturbance of the affected area to immediately cease. The Director of Planning at his/her sole discretion may require the property to deposit a sum of money it deems reasonably necessary to allow the City to consult and/or authorize an independent, fully qualified specialist to inspect the site at no cost to the City, in order to assess the significance of the find. Upon determining that the discovery is not an archaeological/cultural resource, the Director of Planning shall notify the property owner of such determination and shall authorize the. resumption of work. Upon detenmining that the discovery is an archaeological/cultural resource, the Director of Planning shall notify the property owner that no further excavation or development may take place until a mitigation plan or other corrective measures have been approved by the Director of Planning." Prior to Issuance of Building Permit 16. 17. . A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. These plans shall confonm to the approved conceptual landscape plan, 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: a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). . Provide a minimum five foot wide planter to be installed at the perimeter of all parking areas. Curbs, walkways, etc. are not to infringe on this area. Provide an agronomic soils report with the construction landscape plans. Detail of outdoor employee eating area. This area shall include a trellis with appropriate vines to shade the outdoor employee break area, decorative furniture b. c. d. R:\D PI20041Q4-Q472 Park Place Office BldglDRAFT PC RESOLUTION AND COA.doc 7 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. e. and hardscape to match the style of the building subject to the approval of the' Planning Director. 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 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-tenm 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. . f. g. h. All utilities shall be screened from public view. Landscape construction drawings shall show and label all utilities 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. Screening of utilities is not to look like an after-thought. Plan planting beds and design around utilities. . Locate all light poles on plans and insure that there are no conflicts with trees. Proposed plantings and landscape layout at the monument sign located at the corner of Winchester Road and Diaz Road shall match existing plantings and layout at the monument sign located on the southwest corner of this same intersection. An appropriate method for screening the gas meters and other externally mounted utility equipment shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. The Planning Director shall approve the Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans. . Building plans shall indicate that all roof hatches shall be painted "International Orange". 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-inches 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. Prior to Building Occupancy 24. 25. 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. Perfonmance 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 såtisfactory to the Director of Planning, the bond shall be released upon request by the applicant. . RID P\20O41O4-O4'12 Park Place Office BldglDRAFT PC RESOLUTION AND COA.doc 8 . . . 26. è, 27. 28. Each parking space reseryed 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. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. 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. 29. 30. 31. 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. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix liLA, 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 400 GPM for a total fire flow of 1900 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 III-A) The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix III-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum of 1 hydrants, in a combination of on-site and off-site (6" x 4" x 2-21/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent 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 a 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 III-B) R,ID P\2004104-0472 Pa;k Place Office BldglDRAFT PC RESOLUTION AND COA.doc 9 32. . 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) . 33. 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) 34. 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 Ibs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) 35. 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 Ibs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. (CFC sec 902) 36. 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) 37. 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 issuance of building penmits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the wàter 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 confonm to hydrant type, location, 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) . 38. 39. 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 shaH 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 lor numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4) . 40. R:ID P\2004104-0472 Park Place Office BldglDRAFT PC RESOLUTION AND COA.doc 10 . . . 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 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 be located to the right side of the sprinkler riser door. (CFC 902.4) 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) 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 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 oiher hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau.(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) Special Conditions 47. 48. 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. 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) 49. BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT 50. 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. The City of Temecula has adopted an ordinance to collect fees for a Riverside County area wide Transportation Unifonm Mitigatiòn Fee (TUMF). Upon the adoption of this ordinance on March 31, 2003, this project will be subject to payment of these fees at the R:ID P\20041Q4-0472 Pa<k Place Office BldglDRAFT PC RESOLUTION AND COA.doc 11 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. time of building permit issuance. The fees shall be subject to the provisions of Ordinance 03-01 and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 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 alanm systems. ' Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 2001 edition of the California 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. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and penmits. Show all building setbacks. . R:ID P\20041Q4-D472 Park Place Office BldgIDRAFT PC RESOLUTION AND COA.doc 12 . . . 67. 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. 94-21, specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one-quarter mile of an occupied residence. Monday-Friday Saturday 6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Holidays 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 68. 69. 70. 71. 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. 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. All 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. 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. a. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: drive approach, storm drain facilities and sewer and domestic water systems. Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 72. 73. 74. 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. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in confonmance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. 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 R:ID P\2004104-û472 Park Place Office BldglDRAFT PC RESOLUTION A~;D COA.doc 13 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. . The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City Standards identifying stonm 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. NPDES - The project proponent shall implement construction-phase and post- construction pollution prevention measures consistent with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and City of Temecula (City) NPDES programs. Construction- phase measures shall include Best Management Practices (BMPs) consistent with the City's Grading, Erosion & Sediment Control Ordinance, the City's standard notes for Erosion and Sediment Control, and the SWRCB General Permit for Construction Activities. Post-construction measures shall be required of all Priority Development Projects as listed in the City's NPDES permit. Priority Development Projects will include a combination of structural and non-structural onsite source and treatment control BMPs to prevent contaminants from commingling with storm water and treat all unfiltered runoff year-round prior to entering a storm drain. Construction-phase and post-construction BMPs shall be designed and included into plans for submittal to, and subject to the approval of. the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Grading Penmit. The project proponent shall also provide proof of a mechanism to ensure ongoing long-term maintenance of all structural post-construction BMPs. . 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 b. Department of Public Works c. Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau 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. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conseryation 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 80. 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 obseryed: . R:\D P\20Q41Q4-û472 Park Place Office BldglDRAFT PC RESOLUTION AND COA.doc 14 . a. b. c. d. e. f. 81. 82. 83. 84. . 85. 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 T emecula Standard No. 207 A. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with City Standard No. 800. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of T emecula Standard No. 400. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. The Developer shall pay in fee for Y. median along their frontage on Diaz Road. The design and cost shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 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. 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. The Developer shall record a written offer to participate in, and waive all rights to object to the formation of an Assessment District, a Community Facilities District, or a Bridge and Major Thoroughfare Fee District for the construction of the proposed Western Bypass Corridor in accordance with the General Plan. The form of the offer shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney. 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 86. 87. 88. . 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 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. The existing improvements shalf 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:ID P\20Q41Q4-0472 Park Place Office BldglDRAFT PC RESOLUTION AND COAdoc 15 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT . The TCSD has reviewed the Development Plan for the aforementioned project and has the following Conditions of Approval: General Conditions 89. 90. 91. 92. The trash enclosures shall be large enough to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as, regular solid waste containers. 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. The Applicant shall comply with the Public Art Ordinance. All parkways, landscaping, monumentation, fencing and on site lighting shall be maintained by the property owner or maintenance association. Prior to issuance of Building Permit 93. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall provide TCSD verification' of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. OTHER AGENCIES . 94. 95. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water District's letter dated August 4, 2004, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health's letter dated July 22, 2004, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the City of Temecula Police Department's letter dated July 29, 2004, 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 Community Development Department approval. 96. Date Applicant's Signature . Applicant's Printed Name R,ID P\2004104-O472 Park Place Office BldglDRAFT PC RESOLUTION AND COA.doc 16 (@ Bancha later Bo"d orDi=loœ John E. Hoagland p,~idcnl C.abaF.Ko S" Vi" P,~idenl Stephen J. Co'o~ Ralpb IL DaUy .en R. Drake Lisa D. Hennan Miebael R. McMillan Offi"œ, Brian J. B'ady Cene,"1 M.nag" Phillip L. Forbe. Di,oclo'ofPi~nœ.T"~~,, E.P."Bob'Lemo~ Di"""',afE_ooring Pc...." R. Louck CO"tron" August 4, 2004 Cheryl Kitzerow, Project Planner City of Temecula Planning Department Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 cc._...~~-~ ',"',' ,r,.,é.,'".~ ,. 'I I " ' '0 II ~U /,', i C ::" ,!Ii !. ' Lc SUBJECT: WATER AND SEWER AVAILABILITY PARK PLACE OFFICE BUILDING PARCEL NO.1 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 21383 APN 909-310-001; PA04-0472 (MCARDLE ASSOCIATES) Dear Ms. Clary: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water and sewer service, therefore, would be available upon construction of any required on-site and/or off-site water and sewer facilities and the completion of fmancial arrangemènts betwèen RCWD and the property owner. If fITè protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees and requirements. ~:':,""';::~dmini,tnti.' Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Sernc~Ma"g" Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. C. Micbael Cowe" Beat Beat & Krieg" LLP Ce"ecoICau",el The project should be conditioned to use recycled water for landscape irrigation. Requirements for the use of recycled water are available from RCWD. If you should have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services Rep~esentative atthis,office. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT -n1~J ()/z-:-WLJ¿- I~i~ ~eye~e~llJl- ' ",,' DevelopmelltEngineering Manager 04\MM:atiO5IFCF c: Bud Jones, Engineering Project Coordinator Laurie Williams, Engineering Services Supervisor Rancbo Califomia Wak' D;atrict 42135 Wi",h~te' Road . Poot om" BodO17 . Ternocula, California 92589-9017 . {950 296-6900 . FAX (950 296-6860 '-"'c, L/ A D E~ = oolõF IENViRÖ N~OO AÎ G H EAi TH . 1m: ,re ß'; rc; il m ~ 1;;:1' iC,'j"',~,,bLLcI-",'I;i, July 22, 2004 Iii"'; 2 i,ll,' : JUL 72004 ¡JI City of Temecula Planning Dep' nt C-/ ¡ P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Attention: Cheryl Kitzerow By rl~ J RE: Plot Plan No. PA04-0472 Dear Ms. Kitzerow: Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the Plot Plan No. PA04-0472 to construct a 20,416 sq. ft. office building and has no objections. Water and sewer services should be available in this area. 1. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS THE FOLLOWING SHOULD BE REQUIRED: a) '.:WiII-serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering districts. Sincerely, ~.'- ~\¡\A.~ S~.~~~isin~ ~l 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 Agency' PO. Box 1280, Riv..-side, CA 92502-1280 . (909) 955-8982 . FAX (9091 781-9653 . 4080 Lemon St,eet, 9th Floo,. Rive>side, CA 92501 Land U" and Water Engineering' PO. Box 1206, Rive>side, CA 92502-1206 . (909) 955-8980 . FAX (909) 955-8903 . 4080 Lemon SITeet, 2nd Rom. Riv..-side, CA 92501 . . . TEMECULA POLICE DEPARTMENT Crime Prevention & Plans Unit 28410 Old Town Front Street, Suite 105, Temecula, CA 92590 (951) 695-2773 Fax: (951).506-5708 Date: July 29, 2004 PA04-0472 Project Number: Project Type: Development Plan Park Place Office Project Name: Project Description: A Development Plan to construct a 20,416 square foot office building on 1.2 acres located at the southwest comer of Diaz & Winchester Roads Applicant: Mc Ardle & Associates Case Planner: Cheryl Kitzerow The following comments pertain to Officer Safety, Public Safety and Crime Prevention measures regarding this planning project transmittal. 1. Landscaping: Applicant shall ensure all landscaping surrounding the building are kept at a height of no more than three feet (3') or below the ground floor windowsills. Plants, hedges and shrubbery should be defensible plants to deter would-be intruders from breaking into the building utilizing lower level windows. a. Applicant shall ensure all trees surrounding the building roof top be kept at a distance so as to deter roof accessibility by "would-be burglars." Trees also act as a natural ladder. Prune tree branches with at least a 6 feet clearance from the building. b. Any burms should not exceed 3' in height. c. The placement of all landscaping should be in compliance with guidelines from Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) (See conditions item #9 below). 2. Lighting: All parking lot fighting surrounding the complex should be energy-saving and minimized after hours of darkness and in compliance with the State of California Lighting Ordinance, California Government Code 8565. Furthermore, recommend all exterior fighting be in compliance with Mt. Palomar Lighting Requirements. a. Recommend all exterior doors have their own vandal resistant fixtures installed above each door. The doors should be illuminated with a minimum one (1) foot candle of light at ground level, evenly dispersed. b. . The Governors Order to address the power crisis became effective March 18, 2001. This bill calls for a substantial reduction from businesses to cut usage during non-business hours. The order, in part, states: "All Califomia retail establishments, including but not limited to shopping centers, auto malls and dealerships, shall substantially reduce maximum outdoor lighting capability during non-business hours except as necessary for the health and safety of the public, employees or property." c. "Failure to comply with this order following a warning by law enforcement officials shall be punishable as a misdemeanor with a fine not to exceed $1,000.00 in accordance with section 8565 of the California Government Code." 3. Hardware: Recommend all doors, windows, locking mechanisms, hinges, and other miscellaneous hardware is commercial or institution grade. 4. Graffiti: Any graffiti painted or marked upon the building should be removed or painted over within twenty-four (24) hours of being discovered. 5. Alarm System: Upon completion of construction, the building shall have a monitored alarm system installed and monitored 24-hours a day by a designated private alarm company, to notify the Temecula Police Department of any intrusion. All multi-tenant offices/suiteslbusinesses located within a specific building should have their own alarm system. 6. Roof Hatches: All roof hatches should be painted "Intemational Orange." . 7. Public Telephones: Any public telephones located on the exterior of the building should be placed in a welHighted, highly visible area, and installed with a 'call-out only" feature to deter loitering. This feature is not required for public telephones installed within the interior of the building. 8. Marked Parking for Disabled Vehicles: All disabled parking stalls on the premises shall be marked in accordance with section 22511.8 of the California Vehicle Code. 9. Crime Prevention through Environmental Design: The definition of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) as developed by the National Crime Prevention Institute (NCPI) at the University of Louisville as '1he proper design and effective use of the built environment can lead to reduction in the fear and incidence of crime, and an improvement in the quality of life." The primary nine CPTED strategies are: a. Provide clear border definition of controlled space. Examples of border definition may include fences, shrubbery of signs in exterior areas. Within a building, the arrangement of furniture and color definition can serye as means of identifying controlled space. b. Provide clearly marked transitional zones. Persons need to be able to identify when they are moving from public to semi-public to private space. . c. Relocation of gathering areas. Gathering areas or congregating areas . . . 10. need to be located or designated in locations where there is good surveillance and access control. d. Place safe activities in unsafe locations. Safe activities attract normal users to a location and subsequently render the location less attractive to abnormal users due to obseryation and possible interyention. e. Place unsafe activities in safe locations. Placing unsafe activities in areas of natural surveillance or controlled access will help overcome risk and make the users of the areas feel safer. f. Redesignate the use of space to provide natural barriers. Separate activities that may conflict with each other (outdoor basketball court and children's play area, for example) by distance, natural terrain or other functions to avoid such conflict. g. Improve scheduling of space. The timing in the use of space can reduce the risk for normal users and cause abnormal users to be of greater risk of suryeillance and interyention. h. Redesign space to increase the perception of natural surveillance. Abnormal users need to be aware of the risk of detection and possible intervention. Windows and clear lines-of-sight serye to provide such a perception of suryeillance. i. Overcome distance and isolation. This strategy may be accomplished through improved communications (portable two-way radios, for example) and design efficiencies, such as the location of restrooms in a public building. Crime Prevention: a. All retailing businesses shall contact the Califomia Retailers Association for their booklet on the California Retail Theft Law at: California Retailers Association 1127-11'hStreet,Suite1030,Sacramento,CA 95814 (916)443-1975. Penal Code 490.5 affords merchants the opportunity to recover their losses through a civil demand program. b. Business desiring a business security survey of their location can contact the crime prevention unit of the Temecula Police Department. c. Employee training regarding retail theft, credit card prevention, citizen's arrest procedures, personal safety, business security, shoplifting or any other related crime prevention training procedures is also available through the crime prevention unit. d. Any business that seryes or sell any type of alcoholic beverages will comply with all guidelines within the Business and Profession Codes and all other guidelines associated with the State Department of Alcohol Beverage Control. Contact the Temecula Police Department for inspections and training for both employees and owners. This includes special events held at business location where alcohol will be serviced for a fee and the event is open to the general public. . e. The Temecula Police Department affords all retailers the opportunity to participate in the "Inkless Ink Program." At a minimal cost of less than $40.00 for inkless inkpads, retailers can take a thumbprint of every customer using a personal check to pay for services. A decal is also posted on the front entry of the business-advising customers of the "Inkless Ink program in use". If the business becomes a victim of check fraud, the police department will be able to track the suspect with the thumbprint. Any questions regarding these comments shall be referred to the Temecula Police Department Crime Prevention and Plans Officer at (951) 695-2773. Lynn N. Fanene, Sr. .---_u_. . . . ITEM #6 . . . . Date of Meeting: Prepared by: STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION December 15, 2004 Christine Damko Title: Assistant Planner File Number PA04-0512 Application Type: Development Plan Project Description: Recommendation: (Check One) CEOA: (Check One) A Development Plan to construct twelve corporate office buildings totaling 50,104 square feet on a 4.39 acre vacant site in the Light Industrial (LI) zone, located at the northeast corner of Roick Drive and Via Industria. [8] Approve with Conditions 0 Deny 0 Continue for Redesign 0 Continue to: 0 Recommend Approval with Conditions 0 Recommend Denial [8] Categorically Exempt (Class) 15332 0 Negative Declaration 0 Mitigated Negative Declaration with Monitoring Plan DEIR ReID Pl2004\04-0512 WeSt Pointe Business CenterIPC STAFF REPORT-doc I PROJECT DATA SUMMARY Applicant: Ed McArdle, MAA Architects . Completion Date: August24,2004 Mandatory Action Deadline Date: December 15, 2004 General Plan Designation: Business Park (BP) Zoning Designation: Light Industrial (LI) Site/Surrounding Land Use: Site: Vacant land totaling 191,423 square feet (4.39 acres) North: South: East: West: Existing Industrial buildings and vacant property Existing industrial buildings and vacant property Existing industrial buildings Vacant land Lot Area: 4.39 acres Building Summary: 50,104 total SF building proposed . Building Height: 22 feet maximum (one story) /33 feet 10 inches maximum (two- story) Total Floor Area/Ratio 26.2% Landscape Area/Coverage 63,223 square feet (33%) Parking Required/Provided 168 spaces required /171 spaces provided BACKGROUND SUMMARY I:8.J 1. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all concerns have been addressed, and the applicant concurs with the recommended Conditions of Approval. A Pre-application was submitted on March 8, 2004. A DRC meeting was held on May 27, 2004 to discuss site, landscaping, architecture, and other departmental issues. A formal application for a Development Plan was submitted on August 24, 2004. A DRC meeting was held on September 30, 2004 to discuss the adequacy of the project submittal. At this meeting, it was determined that the applicant had a few minor corrections to address. On November 11, 2004 the applicant resubmitted. On October 12, 2004, the City Council adopted an ordinance permitting multiple freestanding office buildings in the Light Industrial (LI) zone, irregardless of square footage. Because the total building square footage exceeds 50,000 square feet, this application will not require City Council approval. . R,IO 1'\2004\04-0512 West Pointe Business CenlerIPC STAFF REPORT.doc 2 . 8 . PROJECT DESCRIPTION Planning Application No. PA04-0512 is a Development Plan to design and construct twèlve corporate office buildings totaling 50,104 square feet square on 4.39 acres in the Light Industrial (LI) zone located at the northeast corner of Roick Road and Via Industria. The twelve buildings range in size from 3,072 square feet to 6,912 square feet and are placed amongst numerous common areas, one of which includes a water feature. The common areas will also include column trellises to serye as for an employee lunch area, shading, and additional architectural detail. The proposed buildings will be constructed of various materials including a limestone veneer, brick veneer, and smooth succo painted a matte finish. Each building will incorporate the same building materials, but will be located on different areas of the buildings to provide architectural interest, while keeping a similar style. The buildings provide both parapet height variations and building articulations as required by the City's Design Guidelines. Both vision and spandrel glass windows provide a vertical and horizontal interest to the buildings. Entry canopies extending out 8 feet 8 inches, designed from composite panel materials and mounted on a metal stud framing accentuate the main entry (on both front and rear entries) on every building. Vehicle access to the proposed site will be provided from a 26-foot drive aisle off Roick Drive. This driveway will provide a clear path of travel around the buildings for adequate on-site circulation. In addition, there will be a driveway connecting the proposed development with the site adjacent (The "Edge") to the west that will add an additional entrance/departure from the site off of Via Industria. Parking wiUbe provided along the driveway for all the proposed buildings. Landscaping will be provided around the site ranging from 5 feet to 30 feet wide. ANALYSIS Site Plan The project conforms to all the development regulations of the Light Industrial (LI) zoning district. The building setbacks meet the minimum requirements of the Development Code and the 26.2% Floor Area Ratio is below the target ratio of 40% for this zoning district. The proposed 26% lot coverage is also below the maximum permitted lot coverage of 40%. The proposed site plan provides adequate circulation for vehicles anticipated to utilize the site, as well as for emergency vehicles. In addition to the adequate on site vehicle circulation, the project also encompasses an excellent onsite pedestrian circulation. There are numerous employee dining/common areas on site that are connected by meandering walkways in which each proposed building has access. There are three employee dining/common areas with column trellises shading the spaces. In the center of the site is an additional employee dining/common area with a water feature. The water feature is not only a common area, but also adds architectural interest to the site. As a Condition of Approval, the applicant will be required to submit to the Planning Department a Parcel Merger for approval prior to the issuance of grading permit (Condition 17). Architecture The proposed buildings are consistent with the Development Code and Design Guidelines and are compatible with other adjacent buildings within the business park. The proposed R:ID P\2004\04-0512 West Pointe Business CenterIPC STAFF REPORT doc 3 architecture includes smooth stucco finish with limestone and brick veneers. The colors for the buildings include natural beiges, ivory, and sand. The materials are used in different places of each building to present each building with an individual style while keeping the materials throughout the site uniform. The buildings include various breaks in the wall planes by utilizing "pop outs" and extensive glass windows (both spandrel and vision), which, in conjunction with landscaping, breaks up building mass from street view. In addition, the site features numerous common areas consisting of a columned trellis surrounded by lush landscaping. Central to the site is a water feature, which provides an additional common area and adds architectural interest from the street. . . Landscapina The landscape plan conforms to the landscape requirements of the Development Code and Design Guidelines. Tree and shrub placement will serve to effectively screen on site parking areas and effectively soften building elevations. The project proposes to landscape 63,223 square feet or 33 percent of the site, which exceeds the minimum requirement of 20 percent in the LI (Light Industrial) zone. The project provides landscaping around the perimeter of the site, with 20-foot landscaped setback along Roick Drive and Via Industria, and varied landscape setbacks around the building footprints. Access and Circulation The Public Works Department has analyzed the projected traffic impact of the project and has determined that the impacts are consistent with the traffic volumes projected for the site by the previously approved City of Temecula General Plan EIR. The Fire Department also reviewed the plan and determined that there is proper access and, circulation to provide emergency seryices to the site. . ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION 1X11. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed Project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review per Section 15332, In-Fill Development Projects. The project is consistent with the general plan and development code; the site is located on a parcel less than five acres in size within the City limits; no habitat occurs on the site for endangered, rare or threatened species; approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and the site can be adequately seryed by all required utilities and public seryices. . CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION Stàff has determined that the proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the City's General Plan, Development Code, and Design Guidelines. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the Development Plan with the attached conditions of approval. . R:ID 1'\2004\04-0512 West Pointe Business CenterIPC STAFF REPORT-doc 4 . . . FINDINGS Development PlanI17.05.010F) 1. 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 Business Park (BP) development in the City of Temecula General Plan. The General Plan has listed the proposed uses, including the light manufacturing, warehouse, and office, as typical uses in the Business Park designation. The proposed project is consistent with the use regulations outlined in the Development Code for the Light Industrial zoning district. The proposed project has been conditioned by the Building Department and Fire Prevention Bureau to comply with alJ applicable Building and Fire Codes. 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The proposed project is consistent with the development standards outlined in the City of Temecula Development Code. The proposed architecture and site layout for the project has been reviewed utilizing the Industrial Development Performance Standards of the Development Code and Design Guidelines. The proposed project has met the performance standards in regards to circulation, architectural design and site plan design. ATTACHMENTS 1. Plan Reductions - Blue Page 6 2. PC Resolution No. 2004-_- Blue Page 7 Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval R:ID 1'\2004104-0512 West Poinle Bnsiness CenterIPC STAFF REPORT.doc 5 . . . ATTACHMENT NO.1 PLAN REDUCTIONS R:ID P\2004104-0512 West Pointe Business CenterlPC STAFF REPORT.doc . 6 I!!J m I I PJWDII/ID 't>¡n:¡awal II!IJ ¡II II I III I [ 3 I r-: I I::iJJ m ~ ~31ND S53NISnll 3lNIOd 153M :~:I!d ¡~ ~ ! ' I'. 'õ ;I!' .. I mmmm¡l¡ - --} , , . , , , , .~ ¡'¡IIII's!¡!!I,'! ¡¡hI! !""H,!,¡!!!m!!'¡§¡""'!~!¡¡Ii'li' ¡'¡¡-jil ~11¡í ~ ¡ ,,1. , - I I,!" , tl..., -, . ".1- I ,.1 ¡ '" _! - , ~ mli!¡I!¡di¡;!¡l¡!¡!¡I¡¡I,!!¡¡¡I!H:.I~ ¡""'II!I¡!.I¡!II¡!!!I!!¡¡¡¡!I!'llln!M~ ¡~¡u m 1,1 IS! ~'¡!'¡l!lhiliHI¡!¡d I ¡'!!!!!!!i¡!!'¡!"¡!'!'~ß!I!I!¡!J!tqHI!!¡!~,¡!ßh!~!~ ¡!til! ~ I! !Im ¡¡¡¡!glllilf 1/1¡iimHiliH!!II!¡i!!¡! iIlM!:hillll ~lglÌl!~!ï!U~UMil¡M~~!~~¡ti ~.,.,\~ :1,.m._,tî!.,_.~!"_v-," I¡!\i'¡~' : ;.:' " '\'. ,j I \1 I . \i~. ";¡¡.."'~"". 11 ~~ ~ ... ¡ I I Zl.~ ...'1 : ¡ :5 ~ ! I 0.. t" ~- ~,~ ~¡ ¡¡¡ . . Ißml :10 .. ~ I~T¡' ¡jioo 11j ¡i) Jj¡ :.1) j. JIll 111'1'1 ,.. , - ,;¡! n ¡. ", . ',' ¡'I!! I- ;." '/ P ,1!11, ¡;Ii!!\!; ,i ¡ !II ! !II II Ii Ii i i ¡ . . IX L1l J-- z: L1l <.:> w w L1l ~ "" 111 J-- z: o' Il. J-- w 111 ;;:: IX 0 u.. :z: <I; -' Il. QJ z: Q <I; a: QJ -' <I; :::::> J-- Il. 111" <.:> :z: o. <.:> !: " Ii , ¡! I ¡ 'I ¡ ! II ¡¡¡¡I.!;!! l¡i,!,I,,1 ,il! "Iii,; ,I¡I; æ..,¡, '-'II 1,"-Ci"'11 ¡Ii ~¡¡j ¡ ,II II Ii. ~¡!!;, 'I ," ~dm IIi i. in! i!1 -- :I!! j! ~!lh in !¡¡n i!¡!i; a~!1 !III!¡¡¡ I' ,~ r4J¡ 1!/)..~ i. i;~ ~ , 1 - --;¡z ! '. ~ 'I L.'f . ¡: ; '! I 1 _~i I i, ¡ , ! I! . ~ i! -- ! II :! Ii I" I ~!)II!!:~1117~r¡Ìl!ii~~ r¡;ilj¡iljijJ¡lji¡¡ . ;>pluh..¡ul!I,llIiI '4imliUl II 111111111 IIII¡" ,I . . . I I II! ,i ~~!I q,! I ~ ~~mllnl¡ ~ ~ 0ee eee0 I ! ¡ I IIII'I! 1!!ll!ldl ~ I!II! II II II !\¡ I ~ ee~0Me0J~~~ I I II ~! I, ß I! '¡ !I! II 11"111 ':In .. ~ ! ! £ I ih!ii!l¡ ~ ! I i i ~m~~! ~~J -'1') '""""""1 ~llND SS]Nlsn9 UNIOd .ls]M ~ ~t--~ .~ -,' '. I ¡, (Ii I I!!I j!.! . . ~Im - z 0 ~ > . ~ .1 I I Ii I ,¡ ¡¡~ III! II ~ ~~ m~J~I¡ ~ ~0ee e0E>e I I I I IIII'I ! I!IIIIIIIII § II " ¡ hl¡11 !II I ~0e~~M0eMJ~ z I ~I 0 II" I ~ I II; - ~ ,I 11'1 ~ il iii II 5 " !I!iI! ! ~ g ~ £ '1¡!9c1,1 ~ ¡§; ~ kl!!imlll ! II ~¡~.~~:.!!~.. -- '!IOOJ!P!) -.pnawal ~llNÐ S9NISfl8 UNIOd .l9M 1:1~!I,I!IIIIIIIIi;l~ ~ I I,' dig!i I. !I! ~I¡ ~!! ! .~~. d h 1\ II [ ~m .ii I I I e! I ~ I I II~ 1~lj z ì2 "" 0 ~ '" z ì2 õ 0 "" !a \i~ 9; ~¡ I- II! 'I ! '¡I!¡ ¡i I., Ii ~ 9 ~ t q ¡ill I ¡ 1!1 £ ¡¡dUb! ~ , III."!" § HI pi I ~ II:!: '1'11,'1 ~ ~.!¡ ~ . ~I. ¡II' !¡ Ii! ¡! j 11 I 1i!¡llq¡ ~ "0 -¡ ¡Ii ,I ~ dill I" II ~ 0èéJ~~ . . 1:1~:I~~IIIIIII~¡;I~ ~ I 'f: III~ II! O~~!H:I¡ ~ iijj I! 1;1 ~'1!IDOOJO1 ~31Nn 5S3N15na 3lNIOd 153M . - ! I - z 0 , ~ ~ I I t;;. ~f ~i I I II! I i 11 II I H i I ~ IIi ~'JI!I h ~ eee eeee ¡ I ¡ ¡ I II' I ! ! II!I I! II II ~ I' I '. j II 'I I' III f I ~0ee0M0e~ø~~ II Ii! '! ~! 1¡li II! " " . i ~[\J~L q 1M i I ¡ !!I E I Ii! Ilii! ~ I III I! I" § ¡¡!liI II ~ II!'> '111'1 ~ ~!!¡u~¡. ~ ¡I II II 0 In iI¡ ¡¡ ~ ~ Iii ii, Ii ~. ~ I ¡II!!,I f II z! ~ III!! I II 9; III! jl , ~¡ ~ 00éJ~~ z I 01 I . ~ !I ~I'! ~ I. III! ~ !I ~p ~ !HliIH! ~ ! g; m I 'h¡¡~II! ~ I ~ ¡ i !I!!!'~!I! !l~ _w -~ . IH\1 - -- . z 0 ~ ~ I ¡ ~¡I! I i ~ I I ¡1 II '~I;~!}~~ b I I II ¡ i illl ' 1!!!¡IHdl ~ II I' Ii il ihl ~!ldidl!lll ~000000000@@@J ð ! I dl ¡ ~ II I¡¡IIII "'hip! ~ ¡: IU " ¡ ~ S ~! ~dh¡¡~'!I&' ð; ~ ß!:!U~¡h ~ I I z! i..... <.~.. "!'Woo 'enJowOl ~31ND Ss:lNISna 31NIOd J.s:lM I. I! 11111~i;l~ ~I ! ~' 1.1 ~' 'i . I I, if! ~h ~,' ! z~~ ,U~¡¡~I! r !!!! 'Ii I! ! I I! I 1'g'1 i~u , ~I¡d, ;I' ill! b iSsll - illl ~~ 'WI ~; 1111 '" ¡ "'"00 . z ~ õ 0 "" I, ..! '! h 'I¡ I¡ ¡¡ I.. Ii ~[J~l q i Í!! ! I ¡ ¡II ~ Ii, 'II !'¡ I ~ "H¡'II' § p¡li i ~ II;!: iH,'¡ ~ ;!!¡! !! ~I < 'I' 'I Ii! -¡ i- ¡II'd I !i jl!i III ~ II¡il!II!! ~ lH~~~ . Þ ~! 9; ~¡ IJ.¡ê.¡. 1m 1m . z 0 ~ I- :rJ~ ~¡ ~i - -~ -- -- . . z 0 ~ . ~ I ¡ II! ! I ;!pln,l, ~~~æ~Jllllh ~ eee @ee@ ¡ I ! I i¡ II' I I ¡¡¡¡¡lllIn ~III!IIIIIII! ~ EJEJEJEJ00EJ00@@@ I I II M I II !I¡ ¡! ! I I!! II ¡!lln! ! f 1¡lm!!l! I i i Llt.,!!;!1 ~ I I ¡I' 'iii! I - I < ~~~. !. ~.. f!WOJ!Ie) 'EIDOOJi>l )~.lND SSõlNfsnll llNfOd l.SõlM ! 1 ! ! I I i ! I:I~:III!IIIIIII ~¡;i ~ ~ I : IIII II! ~! H ~Ii I ~! I ~ I I \Iilj ~~ .... r z ~ 0< 0 ~ ,... ~~ 0; ~¡ z ~ ò 0 0< ,... ~~ 9; ~¡ ill ill! 'II! Uil . I¡II Ii II eeee Ii II! I'! 11 II; ¡ ii U Ii I ~[J~l q 1M II î !!I i !II! ¡Iii! i II II! II , * H!! It I' ~ ¡¡I!: I'I!'I' ~ ~!~¡!}~I. Ii' '¡!:!I I! ¡! ¡'iii I !¡HIII! ~ ! ¡pI !II Ii ~ !H~~~ li¡~"¡"' I Ii: 1m - z 0 ~ fij z 0 >= "< fij :I: I- ::> 0 'f! 1-, ~i -- f?JJOJ!I")'l!IOOWiIl ~llND SS:JNISna UNIOd lS:JM I ¡ Ii! ,I ~ ~ I! I~!! ! !~!m~!I~!¡b . ~ 888 @@B@ i ! ¡ I I 11'1 ! ~ ¡! I i I II §'Ip.'11I ¡¡ III-! i II i I¡ I qla!ililllll ~ 000000000@""" . I I, ~! I. 9 ¡! i! ~n I .:!!!U!q ! I !,IIIIIII ~ II ¡¡ ~ ~~:~~~ ~.. I 1 ! I --It I : I I ¡ I 1 c 1 1 1 1 1 1 , ¡' 1 I 1 , 1 1;1~:I!I!IIIIIIII~¡;i~ ~I ~IL!¡ I. I ~I\ ..! ¡Ii! .lUll ~¡I H!~ IIi t~¡~i ~~ .... r ~ ð g !c- ~i is; ~¡ z ~ 0 ~ !c- ~i 9; ~! . I¡ II!!! 11 II, Ii ¡¡ In Ii i[J~L q i Ì!! !I ¡ !!I ~ ! hI lIij¡ ~ IIi It! II' Ii Hllh II ~ n'l "I!; i ¡!hi ¡hll ~ . . .. . < ¡~!!I 11 ì! " j ¡I ~ 1'¡"'1 iI¡l! § I. .j! ¡ 11 ~ 1¡111¡'¡I¡.'¡ I! ~ i . . II b ~ 000000 . mil!.!. . 1:11111 . -- . - z 0 ~ :J: '3 0 'f! >-~ ~¡ I I Ii! , ¡ i I!' ! I ~ I ~ ~~mIIJ~11 h ~ 00e eeÐ0 I I ¡ I I 1111 ! 1!lnlih!l. ~hl!l¡IIIIB ~ 000000Ð0Ð@@@ I I I ø!! . Q II H ¡ '< . I IIi I '., G; hI Ii I , ~.: 1!l1!. ~ !fj! i I ¡h!PI!I!! ~ , =~ ¡ ~ !l!i!~n91 ~ II ~I i..... <.~.. . "!'WJ¥) ~ 1 }lllNÐ SS1NIsna llNIOd lS:JM ¡ ! ! i 1:1~:I,I!lllllllli;l~ ~ I I' !. .'" d d:1 I ... U! -I' . if ~I! .. i!,l! r:. I ta!l I! l. II ~ III ~ II B 13 13 B II I, I I ~~I~~~ Ii II! ,! !¡ Iii Ii ¡¡ I., Ii ~ ~1J~l II illI ! I ¡!II £!I¡llliÌl ~ II 11111' § q!Pi II ~ fill ¡'¡I,¡ ~ :!~¡! ~ ~I~ ~ 11! 111! 0 I! I'd ; ~ !I'li II PI ž'! ~ Ii !¡ II i !I 0 ¡ ~ hi II "II!. 51,,11.1.11111 co ~ 000000 IJ,m,' 1m ¡m '~,I - z 0 ~ ~ z 0 ~ ~ !D! ~; ~¡ -- '!'WP.I") "J'D"Wi'l ~131ND SS3NISOII UNIOd 1S3M II I I "="~~ I II or I ' ¡ I! I ill III iJ I~I'~ 1'.. Ii I- . Ii !íili~i!¡ b ~ eee eeee i , I ! I 1111 I ii¡nl!h!l ~ II I' ¡ II Jill ! I¡ I ~ 00J0M0e~~~J . I I! ~II I. ~ i! ì I ,¡Ii ¡ ,:lpH ! ! ~ I E I ¡hIPI!I § II ¡ 9!HUDHI ! I I ..... .. ~.. 1:1~:I!I!IIIIIII~i;i~~ I \,1 z~~. ~ I n I. ~: .IUI! I! . II ! III ~!i aa aa II , ~ I j~t~i 0< 0 ~ . !ž! õ; ¡¡1¡ . II II! '! II 'Ii I¡ ¡i I., Ii ~ ~ ¡;¡¡ ~ l q ¡hI ¡ I dll ~ ¡'¡¡'II¡I!I , , " z ~ II ill II' ~ §; I!! hi! 0 ~ III!: li'II!'' ~ ~ ~,!¡~ . ~i. <.J! . ¡ I' ! ~- II I ,I 0; -'. '. ¡¡1 ¡ ~ ,i!lq II § Illi II! ,I I ¡. -I-p ,I ~ 'PI!,II! ~ !H~~~ . li.¡i.¡. 1m g; . -- . z 0 . ~ ~ ¡!: :::> 0 ~. :1:; ~: ~, -- N- ~.::~¡ .1 z 0 ~ ~ I- ~! ~¡ ~¡ I I Ii! I I ~ ~ 111 ¡! I ~ II ~'IIII¡ ~ ~ 0019 01998 I I i I I I!' I ! !!n'!h!l ~hlï!1111I1I ~ 0191901919191919"""'" , I 'I d~' I, ¡'i! !, 1'1 II ! !11m!! £ '1,¡¡¡lIil! ! i ~!!!~u~! !lJ ~ 'qro;Jwa 1 U1ND S9NIsna 3lNIOdlS3M ~ I I II , ~ I I ¡ I I ~ : I ~ I [I \ I -ø ~ ' "'I I I ~ II 1:1~;III¡I¡IIIIII~i;l~ ~ I z~~ z ~ 0< 0 ê \¡:?! B¡ ¡¡1¡ z ~ 0 0 0< "'. z. 9¡ ~¡ r I' ! I, ~íi I II I ~ / II! ..¡I, .. , I g e ~ ¡i .! . ~ IÎ ¡hi II ~~H~ili ! ! I II 'I 1111 I . ~:I~~-~1111 "I llil ~ \ .\" I- Ii! 'I !, II Ii 2" ,a a i ¡;; ~ l II iM !! ; III £ I !I' '¡I III i . 'I II I II!'" ¡ I!! hili ~ lil"'I!':1 ~ ~!~¡~}~i. II I' !¡ 1-'.1 " i! ¡"ii I iil¡¡¡ili II.-I!¡,¡ ~ dill il !I! ~0ee¿~~ II. '~.~.' j j¡¡ 1m .1 z Q ~ '" ~~ -, -- ~¡ - I ' Ii! I! i ~ti~ I ~! ! M - .lgl¡ I U!eli~~!~ ø I ! ¡ ¡ II II' I ! 1!!I!1t1l ~h'¡!lII!l1I ~00~èM0e~M~ z If Q II ~ I '< ~ I, ¡I i! ! I Iii 11 ! ¡1¡lft II I ~ I ih~!lI! I , i !I!m~~! ! l~ e¡wo¡ge:¡ 'e¡roaw;>l ~H1ND S53Nlsno 3.lNIOd 153M II 1;1~!III!IIIIIIII~i¡i~ ~ I ~~ Ii! I . .... r "I ~ i! . r ! . U~!! ~! 111111 i Ii 13 13 13 B II " I II! ~ I I ï II . hi tt¡11 ~ "" a g ~ . II II! ! I, II; ¡ ¡: U II i ~ ¡;;¡ ~ l II ¡il! ! d!1 ~ I!¡ II Iii ¡ ! I"~ '!I" i I!I it II ~ li'l "I!' al':II"1 ~ ~'~¡!. ~I. z I , ' ;2 ,! I!¡ 11 0 Ii! !'I,j ~ I lilllilli ~ ~~ ~ "lid III 9' ~¡ ~ lH~~~ . II. ~¡.¡ 1m ~m . - . . -- z 0 ~ ~ , ¡ II! ,I ~ ~ 'II ~! i I ~11~m~Jlllb ~ 000 00G0 ¡ ! 'I I . 1111 . ;!jlll!h!l ~¡!llj!!PI!lill ~ 00JèM00~@J~ z I ,I' Q 'I !!' ~ II ~ i ~ i' SIP 5 ' ¡Iill II ~ 1 g ~ ~ (t,1!1<6111!! § I :r:. !'.. I !;<. ~ 'II!! I!II! ~ II 2¡¡;;~~.'!.~.. '!UJOÐJ1!)"JID"III"l ~llND SS3NIsno 3.lNIOd .lS3M II 1:1~~IIIIIIIIIIII~i;l~ ~ I ,~~ r Ie! ~ d i ~~ a ' ~ ¡ ", !II! en!; ~!I . I G ilol Ii HH ¡Ii ! I I Jj¡~~ z ~ II' ð ill! ê 'SII t alt ~ ~ . li'l §. 1111, ",¡ €eee z ~ 0 0 "" ;;... !ž~ 5; ¡¡¡I " II!!! ~! !!i II .. I,. iJ ~ 9 ~ l q ¡ ÌI! II î!ll i 1111 II ¡II ~ ,.111 'II"~ ¡ H! II It ~ lil"!"I','! B ;:!i ~ . ~!. I ill !!, ¡"I 1'1 II ¡ ! I!!III: II ~ "I il!'¡ II ~ lH~~~ I!!I¡¡.;. . I:tl¡¡¡ .1 .,. i II ! í ¡II d II iiÎmfiJlllb ~ 00e eee@ I ¡ ! Ii ¡ ill! ~ ¡! '! I I' ~I.!p,n¡ ~!!III¡!i!llii" ~ e0~èM00~~~~ I I 'I ~~! § I, II il ~ "Iii ~ !¡¡ ~I!! të! ~ I ;11~!lî! I ¡ ~ ~ ~ ~h!i!fP.!i ~ ¡ I ~ ¡ L ~~!. ~! 3.. II t:> lJ 1:1~~¡I!I~IIIII~i;l~ ~I I' !. ~~ ~ í ~!II. . ..1 !Ii! - U ! - - :dl~iI I! ¡ ~ :1 ~. HH ~Ii +' -: \? I ----- ----- I 3 ! ! , ! ',! ~ lIlt! I I 8' 0 r ~! , ,:1 ê d II .. ~!, ~j ,I~ 0; ~I tIt 'IIi !SII 1111 . ii'! 1111 ""'00 ~J!I1!) 'epDawi>1 HLNÐ SS3NISOII 31NIOd 1S3M I I 1 ! ! ! i I II I¡ II!!! !11¡d¡ ¡i 1,1 Ii ~ iEl~l q i ÍII !! ¡ 111 ~ II¡I' Ili1 "" i. I 'I 0 II II!II' 9 H! I II l¡i ~ ~ 8:1; ;¡I,; ~ ~~!~:~!~I! ð ¡\ ¡'II 0 -'.I', n: i! !. i ¡¡ :r: ~ ¡If III¡ ~! ~ I!iP' II ~ H I !il idl! it. iÈ ¡ ~ II. I! II lIí II 00@000 . . li,m, Jm ~m . 2 ~ ~ ¿s I B . \>! I ... . ~ ~! f!:j; ~¡ ~J!I') '.",...,1 ~UNn Ss:lNISnS UNIOd .ls:lM 2: ~ ~ ~ f!:j¡ ~¡ ~! c:' <:>1 " 2: ~ 8 ~ i!: " ~ ~ ,I! ~ . I' 2: ¡ 0 1;1 Ii § h II ~ . """"":'" t~ '. ~ 2: ; .. ~! "'.;, ~j -~ I " ! 4 I:I~!IIIIIIIII ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~! §j ~ ë5 2 . ~ , 0 cJ ~! , ~j rI',:,.,:".,..,:!", . .;.c,;,:: , - B ;g! OJ' i!:! 2 '" ¡~ I ! . ~; i!:! 2 ~ OJ -~~ -0 cJ ~! ~i 1"':;":',;~f.I~1 '.~;:;~' ," II I[:~J~~~]~B 'JI "'" ~ ........ - ...... ....... ............... ~ ............ ..................... ...........,.1' " . I, I I 'II Ii IiM "..J --I.' '" , c' :. j:; I~ , i: ! Ii ~ ;1 ~¡:¡ II ~;~ I' D ~ II ! d i . j ~ H HH~ Hi i I I ~ n III II III i I i~I~!!IIJ fi~~1 II "II~I!¡ i iIIlIU!I!I~h iI! I[ ~II . ~ ~ <) ~ II i" I 1"'1'.... t .~. ~.. ft , 10 I II d 1 h qL!L 'I 1"1' t t t. t 'I 'u, ,II, 'I"P' \, ~illl~I~~1 ~ y\~~1 :111'1: IIi : \-- - y.." ~~I II ! hHIII; . '-----------f---------i-------- ~~Ifcfd~ 4 @ I~,", ,101 IEJCÐ~~ '!I"""~ ........_.............._-...........""'""~........... L I I : i I': I I ! !, I \,: " /1 "- , i,,'¡\, 'è, "" ), \ . , . /:ij ",~; .-11 -_...:......-, -------~~-~~--------- r-- I "~<'i: ".",<'~'.IEJI . . II I[~~~~~_~_]nrn "....~ ........_..............._-_'It_~............,. 'I' t I 'I: II II ! I~n ! 1 ft H ¡ I~ft 21 II [ f I!I i I I' ! I~ la< ~I.I ft~d! ftä I;a~ I' .~ I~~ 112 I' III ~~ H ,if I II ~~I II~n ~II' Ii ,bi ; I II il t !~ P 1;111 II ~t !!~ il !I hlJ i I~ 111111 I ~H Ui~11 !I IIi ¡II 1111' i ~1115 i I~ 1'1 !h;' ~ I Ilh! ! II II! hilt; II! 4 ,4 -. . t ~, - ~ I II ~f~ ft§ ~ H~-dzJ¡d PI It! II 1IIIUII!! ¡II II! u if~l¡dl~1! !Ii I h I Uh ~@'i'IU i_, i ,~ I a ipi!U; Iii U; I I ; ~: Ilhj !Iul ¡il I I! I ~ ~1~IIIII~ill lills H~ ¡ iLlll,1 ~II, r'PI~1 II ~¡~hilfth I ~I i II-' ~ ~dlH fli tJ ~ II !¡;hll;I' III ~.¡I¡~ I n~; . II (II II Iftll II- H ,; - . ... . . . ATTACHMENT NO.2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-- R,ID P\2004104-0512 West Pointe Business CenterlPC STAFF REPORTdoc 7 . . . Pq RESOLUTION NO. 2004-- I A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA04-0512, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT 12 PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDINGS ON A 4.39 ACRE SITE IN THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (LI) ZONE LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ROICK ROAD AND VIA INDUSTRIA. (ASSESSORS PARCEL NOS, 909-321-004, 005, AND 006). WHEREAS, Ed McArdle, filed Planning Application No. PA04-0512(Development Plan Application), in a manner in accordance 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 a regular meeting, considered the Application on December 15, 2004, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission approved Planning Application PA04- 0512; 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. Findinas. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 176.05.010F 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 Business Park (BP) development in the City of Temecula General Plan. The General Plan has listed the proposed uses, including light manufacturing, warehouse, and office, as typical uses in the Business Park designation. The proposed project is consistent with the use regulations outlined in the Development Code for the Light Industrial zoning district. The project has been conditioned by the Building Department and Fire Prevention Bureau to comply with all applicable Building and Fire Codes. ' B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The proposed project is consistent with the development standards outlined in the City of Temecula Development Code. The proposed architecture and site layout for the project has R:ID P\2004104-0512 West Pointe Business CenlerIDraft Reso & COAs.doc 1 been reviewed utilizing the Industrial Development Performance Standards of the Development Code and Design Guidelines. The proposed project has met the performance standards in regards to circulation; architectural design and site plan design. . Section 3. Environmental Compliance. A Notice of Exemption has been prepared pursuant to Section 15332, Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects, of the California Environmental Quality Act. No further environmental review is required for the proposed project. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves the Application, a request to construct 13 office professional buildings totaling 50,104 square feet as set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein 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 15th day of December 2004. John Telesio, Chairperson ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary . [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA ) ) ss ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2004-- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 15th day of December 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary . R:\D P\2004\O4-0512 West Pointe Business Center\Oraft Aeso & COAs.doc 2 . . . EXHIBIT A DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:ID P\2004104-0512 West Po;n!e Business CenterlPC STAFF REPORTdoc 8 . . . EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA04-0512 Project Description: A Development Plan to construct 13 professional office buildings totaling 50,104 square feet on a 4.39 acre site in the Light Industrial (LI) zone located on the northeast corner of Roick Drive and Via Industria. DIF Category: MSHCP Category: Business Park/lndustrial Industrial Assessor Parcel No.'s: 909-321-001,005, and 006. Approval Date: December 15, 2004 Expiration Date: December 15, 2006 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. The applicant 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 Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code Section 211 08(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15062. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant 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 2. 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 reseryes 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. RID P\2004104-o512 West pointe Business CenterlOraft Reso & COAs.doc 3 3. 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. . 4. The Director of Planning may, upon an application being filed within thirty days prior to expiration, and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to three one-year extensions of time, one year at a time. 5. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Site Plan, Grading Plan, Building Elevations, Floor Plans, Landscape Plan, and the Color and Material Board contained on file with the Planning Department, or as amended by the conditions herein. The Site Plan must meet the following criteria prior to development of the project: a. All ground mounted utility/mechanical equipment shall not be placed in prominent locations visible to the public. This equipment shall be screened from view. 6. 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. 7. The Landscaping Plan shall be amended as follows: a. A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted for approval with the landscape construction plans, 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 carryout the detailed program. . 8. 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. 9. The condition of approval specified in this resolution, to the extent specific items, materials, equipment, techniques, finishes or similar matters are specified, shall be deemed satisfied by staffs prior approval of the use or utilization of an item, material, equipment, finish or technique that City staff determines to be the substantial equivalent of that required by the condition of approval. Staff may elect to reject the request to substitute, in which case the real party in interest may appeal, after payment of the regular cost of an appeal, the decision to the Planning Commission for its decision. Material Windows Main Body texture and color Brick Veneer LimestoneVeneer Finish & Color Guardian Pewter, 1" dual pane Sherwin Williams - SW 600- Practical Beige Endicott- Burgundy Sand Emser Tile- Travertine Ivory Classic . R:ID P\20041O4-0512 West Pointe Business CenterIDraft Reso & COAs.doc 4 . 10. 11. 12. 13. 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. This approval does not include necessary permits required for future installation of electric co-generation equipment. Such equipment will require separate permit as necessary. Comply with Rancho Water District letter dated September 7,2004, which is attached to this document and provide evidence to the Planning Department. Comply with the Eastern Information Center letter dated October 12, 2004, which is attached to this document and provide evidence to the Planning Department. Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits 14. 15. . 16. 17. 18. . The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided to the Planning Department staff, and return one signed set to the Planning Department for their files. 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. 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 the colored architectural elevations. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be readable on the photographic prints. The applicant shall submit and have approved a Certificate of Compliance with the Planning Department to legalize the parcel mergers for the property. If at any time during excavation/construction of the site, archaeological/cultural resources, or any artifacts or other objects which reasonably appears to be evidence of cultural or archaeological resource are discovered, the property owner shall immediately advise the City of such and the City shall cause all further excavation or other disturbance of the affected area to immediately cease. The Director of Planning at his/her sole discretion may require the property to deposit a sum of money it deems reasonably necessary to allow the City to consult and/or authorize an independent, fully qualified specialist to inspect the site at no cost to the City, in order to assess the significance of the find. Upon determining that the determination is not an archaeological/cultural resource, the Director of Planning shall notify the property owner of such determination and shall authorize the resumption of work. Upon determining that the discovery is an archaeologicaVcultural resource, the Director of Planning shall notify the property owner that no further.excavation or development may take place until a mitigation plan or other corrective measures have been approved by the Director of Planning. This condition shall be added as a note on the Grading Plans. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 19. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. R:\D P\2004104-0512 West Pointe Business CenterIDraft Rese & COAs.doc 5 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. The applicant shall submita detailed plan forthe employee areas/common areas. This area shall include decorative furniture and hardscape to match the style of the building subject to the approval of the Planning Director. . The applicant shall submit a parking lot lighting plan to the Planning Department, which meets the requirements of the Development Code and the Palomar Lighting Ordinance. Building plans shall indicate that all roof hatches to be painted "International Orange." 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-inches 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. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. . Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. These plans shall conform substantially to the approved Conceptual Landscape Plan, 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: a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of T emecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. c. 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). Submit an agronomic soils report with Construction Landscape Plans. 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. . d. e. f. Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits 26. 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. 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 . 27. R:ID P\2004\O4-0512 West Pointe Business CenterIDraft Reso & COAs.doc 6 . . . 28. 29. been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Director of Planning, the bond shall be released upon request by the applicant. 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 (951) 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. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 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 30. 31. 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. . 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. 32. All 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 33. 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. 34. 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:ID P\20041O4-0512 West Point. Business CenterIDraft Reso & COAs.doc 7 35. 36. 37. 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. . 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. Thestudy 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.' NPDES - The project proponent shall implement construction-phase and post-construction pollution prevention measures consistent with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and City of Temecula (City) NPDES programs. Construction-phase measures shall include Best Management Practices (BMPs) consistent with the City's Grading, Erosion & Sediment Control Ordinance, the City's standard notes for Erosion and Sediment Control, and the SWRCB General Permit for Construction Activities. Post-construction measures shall be required of all Priority Development Projects as listed in the City's NPDES permit. Priority Development Projects will include a combination of structural and non-structural onsite source and treatment control BMPs to prevent contaminants from commingling with stormwater and treat all unfiltered runoff year-round prior to entering a storm drain. Construction.phase and post-construction BMPs shall be designed and included into plans for submittal to, and subject to the approval of, the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. The project proponent shall also provide proof of a mechanisr;n to ensure ongoing long-term maintenance of all structural post-construction BMPs. . 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. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District c. Planning Department d. Department of Public Works 39. 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. 40. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements lor off-site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. 41. 42. 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. II the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. . RID P\2004\O4-0512 West Pointe Business CenterIDraft Reso & COAs.doc 8 . . . Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 43. 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: 44. a. 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. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with City Standard No. 800. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard No. 400. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. 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. b. c. d. e. f. The Developer shall construct 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: ? Improve Roick Drive (Principal Collector Highway Standards - 78' R/W) to include the installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Under grounding of proposed and existing distribution lines. b. 45. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans' standards for transition to existing street sections. 46. The Developer shall vacate and dedicate the abutters rights of access along Roick Drive and Via Industria pursuant to the new location of the driveway. 47. 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. 48. The Developer shall submit a parcel merger and approved by the Director of Public Works prior to any building permit being issued. 49. 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. 50. 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 T emecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. RID P\20041O4-0512 West Pointe Business CenterIDraft Reso & COAs.doc 9 51. 52. The Developer shall record a written offer to participate in, and waive all rights to object to the formation of an Assessment District, a Community Facilities District, or a Bridge and Major Thoroughfare Fee District for the construction of the proposed Western Bypass Corridor in accordance with the General Plan. The form of the offer shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney. The Developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County Transportation Untlorrn 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. 54. 55. 56. 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 Department of Public Works c. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and Citystandards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. 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 AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT 57. 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. 58. 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 March 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 provisions of Ordinance 03-01 ànd the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 59. 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 ~s not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. 60. 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. . R:ID P\2004'D4-Q512 West Pointe Business CenlerIDraft Reso & COAs.doc 10 . 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. . 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 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 California Building Code Appendix 29. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. 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. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. Show all building setbacks. 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. 94-21, specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one- quarter mile of an occupied residence. Monday-Friday Saturday 6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Holidays . R:ID P\2004\O4-0512 West Pointe Business CenterIDrafi Aeso & COAs.doc II COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT . General Conditions 77. 78. 79. 80. The trash enclosures shall be large enough to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as, regular solid waste containers. 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. The Applicant shall comply with the Public Art Ordinance. All parkways, landscaping, fencing and on site lighting shall be maintained by the property owner or maintenance association. Prior to issuance of Building Permit 81. 82. The developer shall provide TCSD verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. If additional street lights are to be installed on Roick Drive then prior to building permit or installation of the street lights, the developer shall submit an application, approved Edison street light plans and pay the appropriate fees to bring the streetlights into the TCSD maintenance system. ' . General Conditions 83. 84. 85. 86. The trash enclosures shall be large enough to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as, regular solid waste containers. 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. The Applicant shall comply with the Public Art Ordinance. All parkways, landscaping, fencing and on site lighting shall be maintained by the property owner or maintenance association. Prior to issuance of Building Permit 87. The developer shall provide TCSD verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. 88. If additional street lights are to be installed on Roick Drive then prior to building permit or installation of the street lights, the developer shall submit an application, approved Edison street light plans and pay the appropriate fees to bring the streetlights into the TCSD maintenance system. . R:ID P\2004\O4.0512 West Pointe Business Center\Draft Reso & COAs.doc 12 . . . FIRE DEPARTMENT 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. 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 liLA, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of de!ivering 1500 GPM at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 400 GPM for a total fire flow of 1900 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 III-A) The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix III-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) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent 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 a 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 III-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) 92. 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) 93. 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 Ibs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) 94. 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 Ibs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. (CFC sec 902) 95. 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) . 96. 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) R:ID P\2004104-0512 West Pointe Business Center\Draft Reso & COAs.doc 13 97. 98. 99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 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, 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 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 lor 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 afire 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 be located to the right side of the sprinkler riser room door. (CFC 902.4) 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) 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, 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) . R:ID P\20041O4-ÛS12 West Pointe Business CenterIDrafl Reso & COAs.doc 14 . . . Special Conditions 106. 107. 108. 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. 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. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and 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) POLICE DEPARTMENT The following comments pertain to Officer Safety, Public Safety and Crime Prevention measures regarding this planning project transmittal. 109. 110. Landscaping: Applicant shall ensure all landscaping surrounding all buildings are kept at a height of no more than three feet (3') or below the ground floor windowsills. Plants, hedges and shrubbery should be defensible plants to deter would-be intruders from breaking into the buildings utilizing lower level windows. a. Applicant shall ensure all trees surrounding all building roof tops be kept at a distance so as to deter roof accessibility by "would-be burglars." Trees also act as a natural ladder. Prune tree branches with at least a 6 feet clearance from the buildings. Any burms should not exceed 3' in height. The placement of all landscaping should be in compliance with guidelines from Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) (See conditions item #9 below). b. c. Lighting: All parking lot lighting surrounding the complex should be energy-saving and minimized after hours of darkness and in compliance with the State of California Lighting Ordinance, California Government Code 8565. Furthermore, recommend all exterior lighting be in compliance with Mt. Palomar Lighting Requirements. a. Recommend all exterior doors have their own vandal resistant fixtures installed above each door. The doors should be illuminated with a minimum one (1) foot candle of light at ground level, evenly dispersed. The Governor's Order to address the power crisis became effective March 18,2001. This bill calls for a substantial reduction from businesses to cut usage during non- business hours. The order, in part, states: "All California retail establishments, including but not limited to shopping centers, auto malls and dealerships, shall substantially reduce maximum outdoor lighting capability during non-business hours except as necessary for the health and safety of the public. employees or property." "Failure to comply with this order following a warning by law enforcement officials shall be punishable as a misdemeanor with a fine not to exceed $1,000.00 in accordance with section 8565 of the California Government Code:' b. c. R:ID P\2004\O4-0512 West Pointe Business CenterlDra« Reso & COAs.doc 15 111. 112, 113. 114. 115, 116. 117. Hardware: Recommend all doors, windows, locking mechanisms, hinges, and other miscellaneous hardware is commercial or institution grade. . Graffiti: Any graffiti painted or marked upon the buildings should be removed or painted over within twenty-four (24) hours of being discovered. Alarm System: Upon completion of construction, the buildings shall have a monitored alarm system installed and monitored 24-hours a day by a designated private alarm company, to notify the Temecula Police Department of any intrusion. All multi-tenant offices/ suites/businesses located within a specific building should have their own alarm system, Roof Hatches: All roof hatches should be painted "International Orange," Public Telephones: Any public telephones located on the exterior of the buildings should be. placed in a welHighted, highly visible area, and installed with a "call-out only" feature to deter loitering. This feature is not required for public telephones installed within the interior of the buildings. Marked Parking for Disabled Vehicles: All disabled parking stalls on the premises shall be marked in accordance with section 22511.8 of the California Vehicle Code. Crime-Free Multi-Housing Program: Recommend project manager contact the Temecula Police Department regarding pre-qualifying the units as a "Crime-free Multi-housing unit. This program involves the Police and Fire Departments. All managers must attend a mandatory training course; pass all lighting and Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) inspections dealing with landscaping. Upon completion, the complex will be granted status as being a crime-free multi-housing complex with proper signage posted at the entrance to the èomplex. Requalification is done on an annual basis. Furthermore, the definition of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) as developed by the National Crime Prevention Institute (NCPI) at the University of Louisville as "the proper design and effective use of the built environment can lead to reduction in the fear and incidence of crime, and an improvement in the quality of life." The primary nine CPTED strategies are: . a. Provide clear border definition of controlled space. Examples of border definition may include fences, shrubbery of signs in exterior areas. Within a building, the arrangement of furniture and color definition can serve as means of identifying controlled space. . Provide clearly marked transitional zones. Persons need to be able to identify when they are moving from public to semi-public to private space. Relocation of gathering areas. Gathering areas or congregating areas need to be located or designated in locations where there is good surveillance and access control. Place safe activities in unsafe locations. Safe activities attract normal users to a location and subsequently render the location less attractive to abnormal users due to observation and possible intervention. Place unsafe activities in safe locations. Placing unsafe activities in areas of natural suryeillance or controlled access will help overcome risk and make the users of the areas feel safer. . b. c. d. e. . RID P\2004\O4-0512 West Polnte Business CenterIDraft Reso & COAs.doc 16 . 118. . f. Redesignate the use of space to provide natural barriers. Separate activities that may conflict with each other (outdoor basketball court and children's play area, for example) by distance, natural terrain or other functions to avoid such conflict. Improve scheduling of space. The timing in the use of space can reduce the risk for normal users and cause abnormal users to be of greater risk of surveillance and interyention. Redesign space to increase the perception of natural suryeillance. Abnormal users need to be aware of the risk of detection and possible interyention. Windows and clear lines-of-sight serve to provide such a perception of suryeillance. Overcome distance and isolation. This strategy may be accomplished through improved communications (portable two-way radios, for example) and design efficiencies, such as the location of restrooms in a public building. g. h. Crime Prevention: a. All retailing businesses shall contact the California Retailers Association for their booklet on the California Retail Theft Law at: California Retailers Association 1127- 11th Street, Suite 1030, Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 443-1975. Penal Code 490.5 affords merchants the opportunity to recover their losses .through a civil demand program. Business desiring a business security suryey of their location can contact the crime prevention unit of the Temecula Police Department. Employee training regarding retail theft, credit card prevention, citizen's arrest procedures, personal safety, business security. shoplifting or any other related crime prevention training procedures is also available through the crime prevention unit. Any business that serves or sell any type of alcoholic beverages will comply with all guidelines within the Business and Profession Codes and all other guidelines associated with the State Department of Alcohol Beverage Control. Contact the Temecula Police Department for inspections and training for both employees and 'owners, This includes special events held at business location where alcohol will be seryiced for a fee and the event is open to the general public. The Temecula Police Department affords all retailers the opportunity to participate in the "Inklesslnk Program." At a minimal cost of less than $40.00 forinkless inkpads, retailers can take a thumbprint of every customer using a personal check to pay for services. A decal is also posted' on the front entry of the business-advising customers of the "Inkless Ink program in use". If the business becomes a victim of check fraud, the police department will be able to track the suspect with the thumbprint. b, c. d. e. 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. Date . Applicant's Signature Applicant's Printed Name R:ID P\2004\04-0512 West Pointe Business CenterlDraft Reso & COAs.doc 17 . . ITEM #7 . . . . Date of Meeting: Prepared by: STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION December 15, 2004 Christine Damko Title: Assistant Planner File Number PA04-0361 Application Type: Development Plan Project Description: Recommendation: (Check One) CECA: (Check One) A Development Plan to construct an 86,175 square foot, concrete tilt-up, light industrial warehouse building on a 5.55 acre vacant site in the Light Industrial (LI) zone, located on the north east side of Remington Avenue, west of Diaz Road. (APN: 909-370-024). ~ Approve with Conditions 0 Deny 0 Continue for Redesign 0 Continue to: 0 Recommend Approval with Conditions 0 Recommend Denial 0 Categorically Exempt (Class) 0 Negative Declaration ~ Mitigated Negative Declaration with Monitoring Plan DEIR RID 1'\2004\04-0361 Kearny Commerce CenterIPC STAFF REPORT.doc 1 PROJECT DATA SUMMARY . Applicant: Pete Bussett, Smith Consulting Architects Completion Date: May 24, 2004 Mandatory Action Deadline Date: December 15, 2004 General Plan Designation: Business Park (BP) Zoning Designation: Light Industrial (LI) Site/Surrounding Land Use: Site: Vacant land North: South: East: West: Existing Industrial buildings and vacant property Existing industrial buildings and vacant property Existing Self Storage Facility and vacant property Existing industrial buildings and vacant property Lot Area: 5.55 acres Building Summary: 86,175 SF building proposed . Building Height: 36 feet maximum (one story) Total Floor Area/Ratio 0.36 Landscape Area/Coverage 49,065 square feet (20%) Parking Required/Provided 206 spaces required /234 spaces provided BACKGROUND SUMMARY ¡:g 1. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all concerns have been addressed, and the applicant concurs with the recommended Conditions of Approval. A Development Plan application was submitted on May 24, 2004. A DRC meeting was held on June 22, 2004 to discuss site, landscaping, architecture, other departmental issues. The applicant resubmitted on July 14, 2004. A Pre-DRC staff meeting was held on August 3, 2004 to discuss the adequacy of the project submittal. At this meeting, it was determined that the applicant had adequately addressed all previous comments and a DRC meeting was not necessary. . R:ID 1'12004104-0361 Kearny Commerce CentetIPC STAFF REPORT.dnc 2 . . . PROJECT DESCRIPTION Planning Application No. PA04-0361 is a Development Plan to design and construct an 86,175 square foot industrial warehouse building on 5.55 acres in the Light Industrial (LI) zone located on the northeast side of Remington Avenue, and west of Diaz Road. The proposed one-story building will be constructed of concrete tilt-up panels finished and painted with a smooth matte finish. The building provides both parapet height variations and building articulations as required by the City's Design Guidelines. Both vision and spandrel glass windows accentuate the main building entrances. Loading areas have been provided at the rear of the building along the north west property line. In addition, roll up doors will be located on the back side of the building. These areas will not be visible from public views because of the proposed landscaping surrounding the property and the slope between the subject site and the adjacent property to the west. Access to the proposed building will be provided from a 24-foot wide drive aisle located on the southwest and southeast sides of the property, off Remington Avenue. This driveway will provide a loop around the proposed building for adequate on-site circulation. Parking will be provided along the north, south, east, and west property lines for the proposed building. Slopes along the westerly property line will be landscaped to provide screening of the parking areas and roll up doors. Landscaping will be provided around the proposed building ranging from 5-feet to 35-feet in width. An employee dining/ common area is provided along the north elevation. ANALYSIS Site Plan The project conforms to all the development regulations of the Light Industrial (LI) zoning district. The building setbacks meet the minimum requirements of the Development Code and the 0.36 Floor Area Ratio is below the target ratio of 0.40 for this zoning district. The proposed 37% lot coverage is also below the maximum permitted lot coverage of 40%. The proposed site plan provides adequate circulation for vehicles anticipated to utilize the site, as well as for emergency vehicles. A 102 foot wide by 60 foot long loading area to accommodate the. required 3 loading spaces are provided along the rear of the building, thereby meeting the loading space requirements of Section 17.24.060 of the Development Code. An active trace of the Murrieta Creek Fault lies at the southwestern property line. The County of Riverside requires that a 60 foot wide Restricted Use Zone (RUZ) from the property line be shown on the Site and Grading Plans. The Site Plan currently shows the 60 foot setback from the fault line. However, the applicant will be required to show this 60 foot RUZ from the property line on the Construction Plans and the Grading Plan as a Condition of Approval (Condition 14). Architecture The proposed building is consistent with the Development Code and Design Guidelines and is compatible with other adjacent buildings within the business park. The proposed architecture includes a painted concrete tilt-up building and the use of glass, paint color variations, and reveals. The building includes various breaks in the wall planes with the use of color variation, and accentuating the main entry to the building with "pop-outs". The pop-outs will project 3 feet from the building and an additional canopy projects another 5 feet beyond the pop-out. The pop- outs carry over to the sides of the buildings, but will be reduced to 12 inches. These, in R:ID 1'\2004\04-0361 Kearny Conunerce CenterlPe STAFF REPORT-doc 3 conjunction with landscaping effectively breaks up the building mass from street view. In addition, the side of the building will not be visible from the public view, once the vacant sites on both sides of the site are developed. Although the rear of the building along the westerly boundary has little articulation, this is acceptable to staff because the rear of these buildings will not be visible to the public once the vacant parcel behind the project site is also developed. . Landscapina The landscape plan conforms to the landscape requirements of the Development Code and Design Guidelines. The project proposes to landscape 49,065 square feet or 20 percent of the site, which meets the minimum requirement of 20 percent in the LI (Light Industrial) zone. Tree and shrub placement will serye to effectively screen onsite parking areas and effectively soften building elevations. The project provides landscaping around the perimeter of the site, with a 25 to 40-foot landscaped setback along Remington Avenue, and varied landscape setbacks around the building footprint. Slope areas along the project perimeter also meet the requirements of Section 17.08.060 of the Development Code. Acéess and Circulation The Public Works Department has analyzed the projected traffic impact of the project and has determined that the impacts are consistent with the traffic volumes projected for the site by the previously approved City of Temecula General Plan EIR. The Fire Department also reviewed the plan and determined that there is proper access and circulation to provide emergency seryices to the site. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION . ~1. An initial study has been prepared and indicates that the project will have the following potential significant environmental impacts unless mitigation measures are required and implemented. Staff recommends adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. GEOLOGY AND SOILS General Impact: Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death. Mitigation Measures: The Restricted Use Zone (RUZ) of 60 feet from the southwest property line should be plotted on the grading and development plans for this project, and the RUZ should be staked in the field when the building footprint is staked, so as to confirm the location of the building outside the RUZ. AESTHETICS General Impact: Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Mitigation Measures: Comply with Riverside County Mount Palomar Ordinance 655. All lighting shall be fully shielded, directed down and . R,\D 1'\2004\04-0361 Kearny Commerce CenterIPC STAFF REPORT.doc 4 . . 8 AIR QUALITY General Impact: Mitigation Measures: parking lot lighting shall be low pressure sodium Decorative lighting shall be shut-off by 11 :00 P.M. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a photometric plan detailing the proposed light levels for the entire project site and onto adjacent project boundaries. The applicant shall comply with the City of Temecula Development Code and Design Guidelines for lighting standards, which require minimum and maximum lighting levels in the parking lot areas, loading areas, pedestrian circulation areas, primary building entries, and lighting at project boundaries. The proposed project could potentially expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentration and could potentially create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people working in the nearby area. The applicant shall coordinate with the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) to determine if a bus turn-out or other mass transit seryices are feasible for the project site. Written authorization shall be submitted to the City of Temecula. The applicant shall submit a final landscape plan for the project site incorporating native drought-resistant vegetation, mature trees. If more than 100 days elapses from the time grading is complete and beginning of construction, the City of Temecula may require temporary landscaping to reduce the amount of dust and prevent dust and erosion. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall verify that all earth moving and large equipment are properly tuned and maintained to reduce emissions. In addition, alternative clean-fueled vehicles shall be used where feasible. Construction equipment should be selected considering emission factors and energy efficiency. Electrical and/or diesel-powered equipment should be utilized in-lieu of gasoline-powered engines. During construction and grading phases, the project site shall be watered down in the morning before grading and/or construction begins and in the evening once construction and/or grading is complete for the òay. The project site shall be watered down no less than three times. R:\D 1'\2004104-0361 Keamy Commerce CenteIIPC STAFF REPORT-doc 5 All fill being transported to and/or from the site shall be covered and the wheels and lower portion of transport trucks shall be sprayed with water to reduce soil from the trucks before they leave the construction area. . Staff has determined that the proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the City's General Plan, Development Code, and Design Guidelines. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the Development Plan with the attached conditions of approval. FINDINGS Development PlanI17.05.010F) 1. 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 Business Park (BP) development in the City of Temecula General Plan. The General Plan has listed the proposed uses, including the light manufacturing, warehouse, and office, as typical uses in the Business Park designation. The proposed project is consistent with the use regulations outlined and conditioned by the Building Department and Fire Prevention Bureau to comply with all applicable Building and Fire Codes. 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. . The proposed project is consistent with the development standards outlined in the City of Temecula Development Code. The proposed architecture and site layout for the project has been reviewed utilizing the Industrial Development Performance Standards of the Development Code. The proposed project has met the performance standards in regards to circulation, architectural design and site plan design. ATTACHMENTS 1. Plan Reductions - Blue Page 7 2. PC Resolution No. 2004-- - Blue Page 8 Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval 3. Initial Study and Mitigation Monitoring Plan - Blue Page 9 . R:\D P\2004\04-0361 Kearny Commerce Center\PC STAFF REPORT.doc 6 . . . ATTACHMENT NO.1 PLAN REDUCTIONS R:ID roO04I04-0361 Kearny Commerce CenterIPC STAFF REPORT.doc 7 . . . ~~t.!1 i~ ¡~ - i ï~ ! . ! : ¡ ¡ r ¡!! ! c: , ! I ¡~h" II ~ I ¡¡I¡.~ !II II.. ¡111!il. f ;"1;; ::: ~ . ' !I' ¡ L ii, I" ¡i Ii! 0.1, 0"" !i~!s! ¡¡,¡¡¡ ~ 1i!1 1m . II! !h I:: ¡!,i ¡¡¡ li¡I,11 ¡J m m ¡ ¡¡¡¡I'¡ ¡ ¡,¡hi ¡,¡ :;I:¡ !;¡ !,d,,!: , ¡ ¡ ,Ii ¡!;!!¡' !-'" ! ,¡II!! c '¡ 1i 8 ;n , , i i .ii Ii !¡ .1 li~.¡iI 11"'i" _,Ih!! ¡¡¡¡¡oj ¡mm ,¡m!! "".1 m 11 'II ! I ) :Ii I 1 B II II' ~¡. ¡ r.._..-"-.._..r.._..-..4~1._..~..- .t..-..l -_.1-1---1--11- . i I Iii ---~.~.-;---r---r--~.._..: i i t, I i I I ---~._.~~---~J--1 I I ~i ¡!Ii I Ii! , '~' ,! -L-~-~_-1_LJ- i i i i i -L--J----1-.--L.!- L..-..-.-..-..l..-..-..-..-..l..-..-..-..-..l..-..J , , 1 r l!ll r "- PI d'II ,11 II I. II i æ ~ .. '" w @ ~ ~ ~ U . Ii ~ ~ Ë. ; :1 ¡ :5¡ t' c: i . . . . " ø i E i! ~. ; :~!; , , . ¡ I!f! ~ 0: ~ --¡:¡¡'<::"1fJ:'~o!I,-;--' ON"""""""""'"""" """'~'" """"", 3"nl03""0"" 3dVOSONVl dfIO!I!) VlØ'lVIfl\I ;i¡HO ! ¡¡Hili ~ ! ! 1¡i¡¡Ü i ! :: mm! ¡ ; Ii I ¡¡ììm mim! , ! 'i mm! ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ I!! ! ""'" ¡HI',,¡ , ! !! 1! , , 0 '" '_m~ ðü~ -~-_...~-=;:=::..~= ~:;o: ~,Lz'~, ! ------:! "" .. V"t1O3r'I31"" """" - W - - K,...." ¡¿ ~;ID3:J 3:J1£31'rID:J AN<I\I3) ,"'""'" J j i ~ ¿ ~; 'II, ¡ i, !~~ : Ii ill I 11'1' " J I 1:1,:t i! !!II !11'!1 ~ EB "0 ! II I I' ¡ iil! ¡ I' ! ~. ,I', 1,1 I'i' , Ii I¡II 'I I, I' I~¡ II!! :¡ I !' III i¡IHi ¡'b !It ¡'I !II! II " ¡ !,i, '¡ 'II ~ii¡ ¡ . i:¡ II I IIi d! II'! ¡i,; ail I ¡ II!! I !I P ill 111111,1 I,' ,dl' i i I III ,ill I II! !I,II II!I! I~ Ii' II I. I i I', ,III; 1 'I , , . ..,.... III i¡! III ill lib a, 1" H ;.~" , . .~ . Ii ¡ i "" IH! § i! ~ Ii ð ¡i i h I ~ ! I II ¡ !:1 n t\1 ! I: j! fi\~' ¡ ~ ¡ ~!. ¡ ~¡ . ' :z ¡ :5i 0..: I , ¡ I . .1 ¡ ¡ I """ .."" I PHI! i I ¡ ¡ i ¡ ¡ I , , I I î ! . . . 'I ! ¡ " , -. ' ¡ i , h II ¡ , III @ 0 0 i , , ! . 1 I",! ~"'I' I ! I .¡ In: ! i.! Ii! Iii Ii II !~ Ii i Ii ! 1.1", i ~ !~ ¡ ¡" "," !~~ ,.,- ;, Ii Ii ,I . ~ )Ii::i:~ 11~.~m.~.T.lr.lli.i.¿.~.~1 \11..i:."....~11 ! .. :T: )¡ }~I' ~ ......... .. .... ..... '.... .... i... I.. I. ...1.. ... .... '. '.. :.. Ii ii II . .. .. I .. ... II ... ... .. '..'.. '. I . " ~i .. ! !. .. !!,' a' I ,IHTI . ...." II . ¡hiP:"i¡ ,hili! ;' " ~il¡¡¡lIì¡¡¡¡¡1 illilli .- I II I. 2i! ,¡, II. ili~1 i¡ !i~ Mi ¡'I I,., !li'I:, ,I; .. 'I" .1,11 !~ l:=rn i ! i¡ ! '¡ I, IL ¡Hi¡ iii .1 "II.. . 1 I ! I !!!I¡ i 11,11 ~:I!I¡ ~i!:illl hi[¡[ i!l!i[¡1 ~.I,.. II.! ,..! "~:! . - h I " ¡¡ i! , f i! .~ I il Ii II " i r '~4'. a ~ ~ . ->-<3 I , 3 I ! ~ ~ ZP:: ~¡:.:¡ "':¡b !ì;Z ¡:.:¡ öU Z -¡:.:¡ ~ U :c' p::P:: ö~ . ,..:¡::"i ~o ~U b:>- !ì;Z tip:: Z~ o¡:.:¡ u:O<: / / / / / / / / I \ \ \ \ ~\ \0) \ \ i c , . , ¡¡: ill! ¡ ~ i~, 4 ;¡¡ 8" H!i ~ > ~ 13 II ¡Ii ¡Ii II Ii! !ill!"! i: d ! 1]-- ; I I~ ,~ ~ Of . ~, . *1 11 d J, ~f I~ ~I . . . ATTACHMENT NO.2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-- R,\D 1'\2004104-0361 Kearny Commerce Center\PC STAFF REPORT.doc 8 . . . PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM BASED ON THE INTIAL STUDY AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIORNMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA04-0361 , A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT AN 86,175 SQUARE FOOT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON A VACANT 5.55 ACRE SITE IN THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (LI) ZONE LOCATED AT THE NORTH EAST SIDE OF REMINGTON AVENUE, WEST OF DIAZ ROAD. (ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 909-370-024). WHEREAS, Pete Bussett with Smith Consulting Architects, filed Planning Application No. PA04-0361 (Development Plan Application), in a manner in accordance 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 a regular meeting, considered the Application on December 15, 2004, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission approved the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program associated with Planning Application, PA04-0361 ; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission approved Planning Application PA04- 0361; 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. Findinas. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 176.05.010F of the Temecula Municipal Code: , A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan forTemecula 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 Business Park (BP) development in the City of T emecula General Plan. The General Plan has listed the proposed uses, including light manufacturing, warehouse, and office, as typical uses in R:\D P\2004\O4-0361 Keamy Commerce Centei\Draft Reso & COAs.doc 1 the Business Park designation. The proposed project is consistent with the use regulations outlined in the Development Code for the Light Industrial zoning district. The project has been conditioned by the Building Department and Fire Prevention Bureau to comply with all applicable Building and Fire Codes. . B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The proposed project is consistent with the development standards outlined in the City of Temecula Development Code. The proposed architecture and site layout for the project has been reviewed utilizing the Industrial Development Performance Standards of the Development Code. The proposed project has met the performance standards in regards to circulation; architectural design and site plan design. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approves and adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for PA 04-0361 in order to approve the application. ' Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves the Application, a request to construct 86,175 square foot light industrial warehouse building as set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein 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 15th day of December 2004. . . John Telesio, Chairman ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] . R:\D P\2004\O4-0361 Keamy Commerce CenterlOraft Reso & COAs.doc 2 . . . STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA ) ) ss ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2004-- was duly and regularly adopted b¥ the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 15 h day of December 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\D P12004\O4-0361 Keamy Commerce Center\Draft Reso & COAs.doc 3 . . . EXHIBIT A DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:\D P\2004\O4-0361 Keamy Commerce CenterIDraft Reso & COAs.doc 4 . . . PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM BASED ON THE INTIAL STUDY AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIORNMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA04-0361 , A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT AN 86,175 SQUARE FOOT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON A VACANT 5.55 ACRE SITE IN THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (LI) ZONE LOCATED AT THE NORTH EAST SIDE OF REMINGTON AVENUE, WEST OF DlAZ ROAD. (ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 909-370-024). WHEREAS, Pete Bussett with Smith Consulting Architects, filed Planning Application No. PAO4-0361 (Development Plan Application), in a manner in accordance 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 a regular meeting, considered the Application on December 15, 2004, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission approved the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program associated with Planning Application, PA04-0361 ; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission approved Planning Application PA04- 0361; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OFTHE CITY OFTEMECULA 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. Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 176.05.010F 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 Business Park (BP) development in the City of Temecula General Plan. The General Plan has listed the proposed uses, including light manufacturing, warehouse, and office, as typical uses in R:ID P\2004\O4-o361 Keamy Commerce CentellDraft Reso & COAs.doc 1 the Business Park designation. The proposed project is consistent with the use regulations outlined in the Development Code for the Light Industrial zoning district. The project has been conditioned by the Building Department and Fire Prevention Bureau to comply with all applicable Building and Fire Codes. . B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The proposed project is consistent with the development standards outlined in the City of Temecula Development Code. The proposed architecture and site layout for the project has been reviewed utilizing the Industrial Development Performance Standards of the Development Code. The proposed project has met the performance standards in regards to circulation; architectural design and site plan design. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approves and adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for PA 04-0361 in order to approve the application. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves the Application, a request to .construct 86,175 square foot light industrial warehouse building as set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein 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 15th day of December 2004. . John Telesio, Chairman ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] . R:\D P\2004\O4-0361 Keamy Commerce CenterlDraft Reso & COAs.doc 2 . . . STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE , CITY OF TEMECULA ) ) ss ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2004-- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 15th day of December 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\D P\2004\O4-0361 Keamy Commerce CenterIDraft Reso & COAs.doc 3 . . . EXHIBIT A DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:ID P\2004104-0361 Kearny Commerce Cente~Draft Reso & COAs.doc 4 . . . EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA04-0349 Project Description: A Development Plan to construct an 86,175 square foot, concrete industrial warehouse building on a 5.55 acre site in the Light Industrial (LI) located on the north east side of Remington Avenue, west of Diaz Road. (APN: 909- 370-024). DIF Category: Business Park/Industrial MSHCP Category: Industrial Assessor Parcel No.: 909-370-024 Approval Date: December 15, 2004 Expiration Date: December 15, 2006 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. The applicant 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 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 2. 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, adviso¡y 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\2004104-0361 Kearny Commerce CenterlDraft Reso & COAs.doc 5 3. 4. 5. 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 Director of Planning may, upon an application being filed within thirty days prior to expiration, and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to three one-year extensions of time, one year at a time. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Site Plan, Grading Plan, Building Elevations, Floor Plans, Landscape Plan, and the Color and Material Board contained on file with the Planning Department, or as amended by the conditions herein. The Site Plan must meet the following criteria prior to development of the project: a. All ground mounted utility/mechanical equipment shall not be placed in prominent locations visible to the public. This equipment shall be screened from view. 6. The Landscaping Plan shall be amended as follows: a. A note shall be added on the plans indicating that all utilities will be screened. 7. 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. . 8. The condition of approval specified in this resolution, to the extent specific items, materials, equipment, techniques, finishes or similar matters are specified, shall be deemed satisfied by staffs prior approval of the use or utilization of an item, material, equipment, finish or technique that City staff determines to be the substantial equivalent of that required by the condition of approval. Staff may elect to reject the requeßt to substitute, in which case the real party in interest may appeal, after payment of the regular cost of an appeal, the decision to the Planning Commission for its decision. Material Main Body texture and color Accent Color on building Accent Color on building Finish & Color Northern Plains, Frazee #8242W Copper Springs, Frazee #8244D Mysterious, Frazee # CWO03W 9. Any outside wall-mounted lighting shall be hooded ànd 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. 10. This approval does not include necessary permits required for future installation of electric co-generation equipment. Such equipment will require separate permit as necessary. . R:\D P\2004104.0361 Kearny Cornmerce CenterIDraft Resa & COAs.doc 6 . . . Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided to the Planning Department staff, and return one signed set to the Planning Department for their files. 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. 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 the colored architectural elevations. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be readable on the photographic prints. The applicant shall be required to show the 60 foot Restricted Use Zone (RUZ) from the property line on the Construction Plans and Grading Plans. If at any time during excavation/construction of the site, archaeological/cultural resources, or any artifacts or other objects which reasonably appears to be evidence of cultural or archaeological resource are discovered, the property owner shall immediately advise the City of such and the City shall cause all further excavation or other disturbance of the affected area to immediately cease. The Director of Planning at his/her sole discretion may require the property to deposit a sum of money it deems reasonably necessary to allow the City to consult and/or authorize an independent, fully qualified specialist to inspectthe site at no cost to the City, in order to assess the significance of the find. Upon determining that the determination is not an archaeological/cultural resource, the Director of Planning shall notify the property owner of such determination and shall authorize the resumption of work. Upon determining that the discovery is an archaeological/cultural resource, the Director of Planning shall notify the property owner that no further excavation or development may take place until a mitigation plan or other corrective measures have been approved by the Director of Planning. This condition shall be added as a note on the Grading Plans. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 16. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. The applicant shall submit a parking lot lighting plan to the Planning Department, which meets the requirements of the Development Code 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. 17. 18. Building plans shall indicate that all roof hatches to be painted "International Orange." 19. 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-inches 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. 20. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. R:\D P120041O4.0361 Kearny Commerce CenterlDraft Reso & COAs.doc 1 21. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. These plans shall conform substantially to the approved Conceptual Landscape Plan, 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: a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of T emecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. c. 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). One copy of an Agronomic Soils Report to be submitted with construction landscape plans. . 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. d. e. 1. Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits 22. 23. 24. 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. 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. 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: a. "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." R:\D P\2004104-0361 Keamy Commerce CenterlDraft Reso & COAs.doc 8 . . . . . 8 25. 26. In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in b~ue paint of at least 3 square feet in size. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 27. Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cosI!o 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 28. 29. 30. 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. 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. All 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 31. 32. 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. 33. 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. 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. 34. 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 earthquake faults, ground shaking and liquefaction. 35. 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 R:\D P\2004\O4-Q361 Keamy Commerce CenterlDra« Reso & COAs.doc 9 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 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. . NPDES - The project proponent shall implement construction-phase and post-construction pollution prevention measures consistent with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and City of Temecula (City) NPDES programfi. Construction-phase measures shall include Best Management Practices (BMPs) consistent with the City's Grading, Erosion & Sediment Control Ordinance, the City's standard notes for Erosion and Sediment Control, and the SWRCB General Permit for Construction Activities. Post-construction measures shall be required of all Priority Development Projects as listed in the City's NPDES permit. Priority Development Projects will include a combination of structural and non-structural onsite source and treatment control BMPs to prevent contaminants from commingling with storm water and treat all unfiltered runoff year-round prior to entering a storm drain. Construction-phase and post-construction BMPs shall be designed and included into plans for-submittal to, and subject to the approval of, the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. The project proponent shall also provide proof of a mechanism to ensure ongoing long-term maintenance of all structural post-construction BMPs. 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. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conseryation District c. Planning Department d. Department of Public Works 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. . Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 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. 41. 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. The site is in an area identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map as Flood Zone A. This project shall comply with Chapter 15, Section 15.12 of the City Municipal Code which may include obtaining a Letter of Map Revision from FEMA. A Flood Plain Development Permit shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 42. . RID P\2004\O4-Q361 Kearny Commerce CenterIDraft Reso & COAs.doc 10 . . . Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 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 obseryed: a. 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. Street lights 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. 401and 402. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. 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. . b. c. d. e. f. The Developer shall construct 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 Remington Avenue (Principal Collector Highway Standards - 78' R/W) to include, installation of, sidewalk, drainage facilities and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). 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. a. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to sidewalks and drive approaches, storm drain facilities, sewer and domestic water systems 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. 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. 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. 49. The Developer shall record a written offer to participate in, and waive all rights to object to the formation of an Assessment District, a Community Facilities District, or a Bridge and Major Thoroughfare Fee District for the construction of the proposed Western Bypass Corridor in accordance with the General Plan. The form of the offer shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney. R:\D P\2004104-0361 Kearny Commerce Centei\Draft Reso & COAs.doc II 50. 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 51. 52. 53. 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 Department of Public Works c. 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. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Directorof the Department of Public Works. BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT 54. 55. 56. 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. . 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 March 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 provisions of Ordinance 03-01 and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 57. 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. 58. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 59. 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) . 60. R:ID P12004\O4-Q361 Keamy Commerce CenterlDraft Reso & COAs.doc 12 . 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. . 71. 72. 73. . 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 California Building Code Appendix 29. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. 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. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. Show all building setbacks. 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. 94-21, 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 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT General Conditions 74. The trash enclosures shall be larger to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as, regular solid waste containers. 75. 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. R:ID P\2004\O4-0361 Kearny Commerce CenlerlDraft Reso & COAs.doc 13 76. 77. All parkways, landscaping, fencing and on site lighting shall be maintained by the property owner or maintenance association. . The developer shall comply with the Public Art Ordinance. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 78. 79. The developer shall provide TCSD verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. If additional streetlights are to be installed as a result of this project then prior to issuance of building permits or installation of streetlights, which ever occurs first, the developer shall complete the TCSD application process, submit the approved Edison streetlight improvement plans and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of street lighting into the TCSD maintenance program. FIRE DEPARTMENT 80. 81. 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. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix liLA, 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 1850 GPM for a total fire flow of 5850 GPM with 4 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 III-A) . The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix III-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum of 4 hydrants, in a combination of on-site and off- site (6" x 4" x 2-21/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 210 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 III-B). 83. 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) 84. 85. 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 Ibs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) . R:\D P\2004\O4-0361 Keamy Commerce CenterlDralt Reso & COAs.doc 14 . 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. . 91. 92. . 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 suriace designed for 80,000 Ibs. 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) 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 suriace 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, 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 241-4.1) 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) 93. 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 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 lor 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) 94. 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) 95. 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 be located to the right side of the lire sprinkler riser door. (CFC 902.4) R:IO P\2004104.0361 Kearny Commerce CenterlDra« Reso & COAs.doc 15 96. 97. 98. 99. 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) . 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 specifiè 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) 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 Bureauc(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) Special Conditions Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report may be required to be submitted 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. 100. 101. . 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. 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 tl'.eir 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) POLICE DEPARTMENT 102. Landscaping: Applicant shall ensure all landscaping surrounding the building are kept at a height of no more than three feet (3') or below the ground floor windowsills. Plants, hedges and shrubbery should be defensible plants to deter would-be intruders from breaking into the building utilizing lower level windows. a. Applicant should ensure all trees surrounding the building roof top be kept at a distance so as to deter roof accessibility by "would-be burglars:' Trees also act as a natural ladder. Prune tree branches with at least a 6 feet clearance from the building. Any burms should not exceed 3' in height. The placement of all landscaping should comply with guidelines from Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED). b. . c. R:\D P\2004\O4-0361 Keamy Commerce CenteNJraft Reso & COAs.doc 16 . . . 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. 108. 109. 110. 111. 112. 113. Lighting: All parking lot lighting surrounding the complex should be energy-saving and minimized after hours of darkness and in compliance with the State of California Lighting Ordinance. Furthermore. all exterior lighting must comply with Mt. Palomar Lighting Requirements. a. All exterior doors should have their own vandal resistant fixtures installed above. The doors shall be illuminated with a minimum one (1) foot candle of light at ground level. evenly dispersed. Hardware: All doors, windows. locking mechanisms, hinges, and other miscellaneous hardware shall be commercial or institution grade. Graffiti: Any graffiti painted or marked upon the building shall be removed or painted over within twenty-four (24) hours of being discovered. Notify the Temecula Police Department immediately so a report can be taken. Alarm System: Upon completion of construction, the building shall have a monitored alarm system installed and monitored 24-hours a day by a designated private alarm company, to notify the police department immediately of any intrusion. All multi-tenant office/suites/ businesses located within the building should have their own alarm system. Roof Hatches: All roof hatches shall be painted "International Orange." Public Telephones: Any public telephones located on the exterior of the building should be placed in a well-lighted. highly visible area, and installed with a "call-out only" feature to deter loitering. This feature is not required for public telephones installed within the interior of the building. Marked Parking for Disabled Vehicles: All disabled parking stalls on the premises shall be marked in accordance with section 22511.8 of the California Vehicle Code. Crime Prevention: a. All retailing businesses shall contact the California Retailers Association for their booklet on the California Retail Theft Law at: California Retailers Association 1127- 11th Street, Suite 1030, Sacramento. CA 95814, (916) 443-1975. Penal Code 490.5 affords merchants the opportunity to recover their losses through a civil demand program. Business desiring a business security survey of their location can contact the crime prevention unit of the Temecula Police Department. Employee training regarding retail theft, credit card prevention, citizen's arrest procedures. personal safety, business security, shoplifting or any other related crime prevention training procedures are also available through the crime prevention unit. Any business that seryes or sell any type of alcoholic beverages will comply with all guidelines within the Business and Profession Codes and all other guidelines associated with the State Department of Alcohol Beverage Control. Contact the Temecula Police Department for inspections and training for both employees and owners. This includes special events held at the business location where alcohol will be seryiced for a fee and the event is open to the general public. R:\D P\2004104.0361 Kearny Commerce CenlerIDraft Resa & COAs.doc 17 114. The Temecula Police Department affords all retailers the opportunity to participate in the "Inkless Ink Program." At a minimal cost of less than $40.00 for inkless inkpads, retailers can take a thumbprint of every customer using a personal check to pay for services. A decal is also posted on the front entry of the business-advising customers of the "Inkless Ink program in use". If the business becomes a victim of check fraud, the police department will be able to track the suspect with the thumbprint. OTHER AGENCIES The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health letter dated June 9, 2004, 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 Community Development Department Approval. 115. Applicant's Signature Date Applicant's Printed Name R:\O P\2004\O4-0361 Keamy Commerce CenterlDraft Reso & COAs.doc 18 . . . /A . 0 COU¡~TY OF RIVERSIDE. HEALTh SERVICES AGENCY. 0 ~ SJ DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH /f(R------- ßI.!;';::-::---:' June920O4 ~ If /"""¡i~'.......-.. ' A_"'" "'ì", '_I (, ""I/O! !J JUN - 'L~ Ii! I 1 b -.~o I'J I, City of Temecula Planning Depal1ment f!!t < <.1V4,/ ! P.O. Box 9033 ~ '- ¡ Temecula, CA 92589-9033 ~ / Attention: Christine Clary ~ RE: Plot Plan No. PAO4-O361 Dear Ms. Clary: 1. Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the Plot Plan No. PAO4-O361 to construct a 86,175 sq. ft. one story light industrial building and has no objections. Water and sewer services should be available in this area. 2. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS THE FOLLOWING SHOULD BE REQUIRED: a) "Will-serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering districts. . b) If there are to be any food establishments, (including vending machines), three complete sets of plans for each food establishment will be submitted including a fixture schedule, a finish schedule and a plumbing schedule in order to ensure compliance with the California Unifonn Retail Food Facilities Law 2. For specific reference, contactFood Facility Plan Examiners at (909) 600-6330. c) If there are to be any hazardous materials, a clearance letter from the Department of Environmental Health Hazardous Materials Management Branch (955-5055) will be required indicating that the project has been cleared for: . Underground storage tanks, Ordinance # 617.4. . Hazardous Waste Generator Services, Ordinance # 615.3. . Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with Ordinance # 651.2). . Waste reduction management. Sam Martinez. Supervising (909) 955-8980 . CNcO: TE: Any current additional requirements not covered can be applicable at time of Building Plan review for final Department of Environmental Health clearance. Doug Thompson, Hazardous Materials . nmental Health Specialist ,oeal Enforcement Agency' PO. Box 1280. Riverside, CA 92502-1280' (909) 955-8982 . FAX (9091 781-9653 . 4080 Lemon Streel. 91h Floor. Riverside. CA 92501 ,and Use and Wale< Engineering' PO. Box 1206. Riverside, CA 92502-1206' (909) 955-8980' FAX (909)955-8903 ' 4080 Lemon SI,.el. 2nd Roor, Riverside, CA 92501 . . . ATTACHMENT NO.3 INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN KID P\20041O4-0361 Keamy Conunerce CenterlPC STAFF REPORTdoc 9 City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Contact Person and Phone Number Project Location Project Sponsor's Name and Address General Plan Designation Zonin Description of Project Surrounding Land Uses and Setting Other public agencies whose approval is required . . Environmental Checklist Kearn Commerce Center CityofTemecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Christine Damko. Assistant Planner 951 694-6400 North east side of Remington Avenue, located on the west side of Diaz Road. APN: 909-370-024 Pete Bussett, Smith Consulting Architects, 12220EI Camino Real, Suite 200, San Die 0, CA 92130 Business Park (BP) RID P\20O41O4-O361 Keamy Ccmmerce Centerllnitial Study.doc 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. X' Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: x I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be re ared. 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 ro'ect ro onent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be re ared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is re uired. 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. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is re uired, but it must anal ze onl 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 im osed u on the ro osed ro'ect, nothin further is re uired. ~AÁ~)~~ I ture " //-¡f-o,( Date Christine Damko. Assistant Planner Printed name For . RID P\20041O4-0361 Keamy Commerce Centerllnitial Study.doc a. b. Issues andSu ortin Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic hi hwa ? Substantially degrade the existing visual character or uali of the site and its surroundin s? Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? x c. d. x Comments: 1. a.-c: No Impact: The proposed project is not located on or near a scenic vista; therefore, there will not be an adverse impact on a scenic vista. The project site is not located on a scenic highway. The project site is currently vacant with no structures, trees or rock outcroppings on the site. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially damage scenic resources, including trees, rock outcroppings or historic buildings. Due to the fact that the project site is vacant with no scenic vistas or resources, the project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. Ad.: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: The proposed project is currently vacant with no 'lllll!ll!!'urces of light or glare. The proposed project will introduce new generators of light and glare typically associated with light industrial development. The City of Temecula requires all new development to comply with the Riverside County Mount Palomar Ordinance 655. Ordinance 655 requires lighting to be shielded, directed down to avoid glare onto adjacent properties and emit low levels of glare into the sky. Mitigation Measures include the following: a. Comply with Riverside County Mount Palomar Ordinance 655. All lighting shall be fully shielded, directed down and parking lot lighting shall be low-pressure sodium. Decorative lighting shall be shut- off by 11:00 P.M. b. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a photometric plan detailing the proposed light levels for the entire project site and onto adjacent project boundaries. c. 'fhe applicant shall comply with the City of Temecula Development Code and Design Guidelines for lighting standards, which require minimum and maximum lighting levels in parking lot areas, loading areas, pedestrian circulation areas, primary building entries and lighting at project boundaries. . RID P\2004104-0361 Keamy Commerce Centerllnitial Study.doc 2. AGRICULTURE 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 Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: b. Issues and Su rtin Infonnation Sources Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Fanmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-a ricultural use? Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-a ricultural use? x a. c. x Comments: 2. a.-c.: No Impact: The project site is not currently in agricultural production and in the recent and historic past the site has not been used for agricultural purposes. The site is not under a Williamson Act contract nor is it zoned for agricultural uses. This property is not considered prime or unique fanmland of statewide or local importance as identified by the State Department of Conseryation 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. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project 8 R:ID P\2004104-0361 Keamy Commerce Centerllnitial Study.doc a. b. c. d. e. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the projèct: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air uali Ian? Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existin or ro'ected air uali violation? Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed uantitative thresholds for ozone recursors? Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of eo Ie? x x x x x Comments: ~.: No Impact: The proposed project will not conflict with the applicable air quality plan. The projec. t site is prised of 5.55 acres. The City of Temecula Final EIR for the General Plan takes into consideration the ntire project site as an industrial use. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. . 3. b.: No Impact: The proposed project will not violate an air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. The proposed project will emit typical emissions and dust associated with industrial construction, however, the applicant will be required to comply with air emission standards as conditioned in the General Plan EIR. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 3. c.: Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project will not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. The proposed project is not considered a significant pollutant generator per the City's General Plan EIR; however the prevailing winds can produce considerable dust and emissions into the air. The applicant is required to comply with the mitigation measures outlined in the City of Temecula EIR and as specifically discussed below. 3. d.-e.: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures: The proposed project could potentially expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentration and could potentially create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people working in the nearby area. The following Mitigation Measures shall apply: . . a. The applicant shall coordinate with the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) to determine if a bus turn- out or other mass transit seryices are feasible for the project site. Written authorization shall be submitted to the City of Temecula. b. The applicant shall submit a final landscape plan for the project site incorporating native drought- resistant vegetation, mature trees. If more than 100 days elapses from the time grading is complete R:IO P\2004104-0361 Kearny Commerce Cente~lnìtial Study.doc and beginning of construction, the City of Temecula may require temporary landscaping to reduce the amount of dust and prevent dust and erosion. c. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall verify that all earth moving and large. equipment are properly tuned and maintained to reduce emissions. In addition, alternative clean- fueled vehicles shall be used where feasible. Construction equipment should be selected considering emission factors and energy efficiency. d. Electrical and/or diesel-powered equipment should be utilized in-lieu of gasoline-powered engines. e. During construction and grading phases, the project site shall be watered down in the morning before grading and/or construction begins and in the evening once construction and/or grading is complete for the day. The project site shall be watered down no less than 3 times (not including the morning and evening water-down) during construction and/or grading activities to reduce dust. f. All fill being transported to and/or from the site shall be covered and the wheels and lower portion of transport trucks shall be sprayed with water to reduce/eliminate soil from the trucks before they leave the construction area. . . RID P\2004104-0361 Kearny Commerce Cente~lnitial Study. doc a. b. c. d. f. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project? Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or 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 Seryice? Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Seryice? . Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interru tion, or other means? Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or im ede the use of native wildlife nurse sites? Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preseryation policy or ordinance? Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conseryation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conseryation Ian? x x x x x Comments: 4. a.-f.: No Impact: The project site is void of any natural biological resources, including wetlands, riparian forests, vernal pools, and nursery sites. The project is not within a natural conseryation plan or other local regional or state conseryation plan, including area identified under the Multi-Species Habitat Conseryation Plan (MSHCP). The project site has been grubbed and disturbed for many years in order to comply with the City's weed abatement ordinance (Ord 8.16). In addition, the project site has been graded. There are some grasses on the project site, however they are not considered sensitive habitat, nor is the site a part of a wildlife corridor. In addition, the Army Corps of Engineers determined that the project is not subject to their jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and a Section 404 permit is not required. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. . R:\O P\20O4104-0361 Keamy Commerce Center\lnìtìal Study.doc 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: . b. Issues and Su run Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeolo ical resource ursuant to Section 15064.5? Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or uni ue eolo ic feature? Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? x a. x c. x d. x Comments: 5. a.: No Impact: Two Phase I suryeys "had been prepared for the underlying subdivision map. The suryey did not identify any historical resources as defined in Section 15064.5 on the project site. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project 5. b.: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures: The above mentioned Phase I suryeys did not identify any archaeological resources nor did the historical records search identify the project site as a potential site for archaeological resources pursuant to Section 15064.5. In addition, the City of Temecula General Plan (Figure 5-6) does not identify the project site as a sensitive archaeological resource area. 5. c.: No Impact: The City of Temecula Final EIR does not identify the project site as a potential site for. paleontological resources. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 5. d.: No Impact: The phase I suryey did not identify the project site as a potential site for historical resources, including human remains. No impacts are anticipated, however, mitigation monitoring shall be required as part of the mitigation monitoring program. a. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant must enter into an agreement with the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians that addresses the treatment and disposition of all cultural resources. human resources and human remains discovered on-site. b. 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. c. The applicant shall provide an on-site archaeological and paleontological monitoring during all phases of earthmoving activities. d. If sacred sites are discovered during ground disturbing activities, they shall be avoided and preseryed. . R:\D P\20O4104-0361 Keamy Commerce Centerllnitial Study.doc a. b. c. d. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: ii. iii. iv. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involvin : Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on 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 Geolo S ecial Publication 42. Stron seismic round shakin ? Seismic-related round failure, includin Ii uefaction? Landslides? Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of to soil? Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral s read in ,subsidence, Ii uefaction or colla se? Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or ro ert ? Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? x x x X X X X X Comments: 6. a. i-iv: Potentially significant impacts: A Geotechnical Investigation has been prepared for the proposed project called the "Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation, Remington Avenue II, Assessor's Parcel Number:909-370-024, Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 28657-1, Remington Avenue, City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California". The proposed project has an active trace of the Murrieta Creek fault on the southwestern property line. The project site has the potential for severe shaking in the event of a major earthquake on this or other nearby faults. The following mitigations measures from the County of Riverside shall be implemented to mitigate sections a.i. through iv: a. No additional trenching on the subject parcel is considered necessary relative to the location of active faulting. b. The Restricted Use Zone (RUZ) of 60 feet from the southwest property line should be plotted on the grading and development plans for this project, and the RUZ should be staked in the field when the building footprint is staked, so as to confirm the location of the building outside the RUZ. 6. b.: Less than Significant Impact: The project will not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. The project site is relatively flat will be developed in accordance with City standards, including National ~lIution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards, which require the implementation of erosion trol and best management practices (BMP's). The Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of emecula 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. RIO P\20O4104-0361 Keamy Commerce Centerllnitial Study.doc 6. c.: Less Than Significant Impact: The project is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or 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. A geotechnical investigation has been prepared for the. proposed project (Geocon, Inc., June 17, 2003) and has not identified any geologic unit or unstable soils that would become unstable. The project is required to comply with the recommendations in the investigation prepared by Geocon Inc., dated June 17, 2003. 6. d.: No Impact: The project is not located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property. The project is also required to comply with the Geotechnical Report prepared. 6. e.: No Impact: The project site will not utilize septic tanks. A public sewer system is available and approvals from the Department of Environmental Health for solid wastes and waste water will be required. The project will connect to the public sewer system. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. . . R:IO P\2004104-0361 Keamy Commerce Centerllnitial Study.doc 10 a. b. c. d. e. g. h. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Issues andSu ortln Information Sources Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or dis osal of hazardous materials? Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- uarter mile of an existin or roposed school? Be located on a site which is included on a list of 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 a project located within an airport land use plan 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 workin in the ro.ect area? For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or workin in the ro.ect area? Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation Ian? Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where .wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? x x x x x x x Comments: 7. a.: No Impact: The project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. The proposed project consists of light industrial uses and will not generate hazardous materials that would create a significant hazard. Typical transportation, use and disposal of wastes associated with light industrial uses are anticipated, however these are not considered potentially significant. No impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 7. b.: No Impact: The proposed project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The proposed project consists of general light industrial uses. The releases of hazardous .terials into the environment are .not anticipated as a result of the proposed project. No impact is anticipated ~ result of the proposed project. R:ID P\2V04IV4-V361 Keamy Commerce Cente~initial Study.doc 11 7. c.: Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project is not located within one mile of a school nor is anticipated to emit substantial emissions. materials or wastes that would create a significant impact. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. . 7. d.: No Impact: The project site is not located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, would not result in a significant hazard to the public or the environment. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 7. e. No Impact: The proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan or is within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. Therefore, the project will not result in a safety hazard for people residing in the work area. 7. f.: No Impact: The proposed project is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project 7. g.: No Impact: The proposed project is not located in an area and is not a portion of an emergency response or evacuation plan. Therefore the project would not impair the implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 7. h.: No Impact: The proposed project is not located in or near a wildland area that would be subject to fire hazards. The location of the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. No impact is anticipated as a result of this project. . . RID P\2004104-Q361 Keamy Commerce Cente~lnitial Study.doc 12 a. b. c. d. e. h. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge re uirements? 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 (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which ermits have been ranted? Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site 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? Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in floodin on- or off-site? Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of olluted runoff? Otherwise substantiall de rade water ualit? Place housing within a 1 OO-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation ma ? Place within a 1 OO-year flood hazard area structures which would im ede or redirect flood flows? Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Inundation b seiche. tsunami. or mudflow? x x x x X X X X X Comments: 8. a.: Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements because the proposed project is required to comply with Best Management Practices (BMP's), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulations as well as National Pollution Discharge Elimination System standards. An Army Corps of Engineers permit may be required if the project proposes the inclusion of discharge or dredged or fill material into, including any redeposit of dredged materials within "waters of the United States" and adjacent wetlands pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1972. The applicant is required to consult with the Department of the Army to determine the appropriate permits required, if any. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. . b.: No Impact: The proposed project would 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 proposed project is required to comply with local development RID P\2004104-0361 Keamy Commerce Center\lnitial Study.doc 13 standards, including lot coverage and landscaping requirements, which will allow percolation and ground water recharge. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project 8. c.: Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage. pattern of the site or area, including 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. The proposed project will include an on-site drainage plan; however it will not alter off-site drainage patterns or alter the course of a stream or river, and will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site. The project is also required to comply with Best Management Practices (BMP's), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulations as well as National Pollution Elimination Discharge System (NPEDS) standards, which addresses drainage, siltation and erosion. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 8. d.: Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site because the project will not alter the course of a stream or river. The City of Temecula Public Works Department reviews all drainage plans and determines adequate drainage facilities are in place capable of on-site drainage and that off-site drainage facilities can accommodate additional flow. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project 8. e.: Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stonm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. The project is required to comply with Best Management Practices (BMP's), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulations as well as National Pollution Elimination Discharge Elimination System standards, which address drainage and polluted runoff. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 8. f.: No Impact: The proposed project would not otherwise degrade water quality because the proposed. project is not considered a significant pollutant generator and will not include excessive fertilizer application or other similar materials that could degrade water quality. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 8. g.: No Impact: The proposed project is not a residential project and therefore will not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project 8. h.: No Impact: The proposed project is not located within a 100 year flood boundary as shown in the Final EJR for the City of Temecula General Plan.. A less than significant impact'is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 8. i.: No Impact: The proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. The proposed project is located in a Dam Inundation area for the Lake Skinner Dam. Said dam is a 43,800 acre-feet earthen dam located to the north east and a failure would result in the flooding of the Santa Gertrudis creek. In the event of a massive dam failure, there is a potential for structure loss, however this is considered a remote potential. Minor dam failure would not result in significant loss of structures or loss of life, injury or death on the project site. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 8. j.: No Impact: The proposed project is not located near a coast line which would be subject to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. . RID P\2004104-0361 Keamy Commerce Centerllnitial Study.doc 14 LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a. b. Issues and Su rtin Information Sources Ph sicall divide an established communi? Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or 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? Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conseryation plan? x c. Comments: 9. a.-c: No Impact: The proposed' project is currently zoned Light Industrial (LI) and will not divide an established community or conflict with the applicable land use plan. The long term vision of the project is light industrial uses to promote the development of attractive comprehensively planned uses that will provide the City with a sound and diverse industrial base.. The project is not subject to a habitat conseryation plan or a natural community conservation plan. The Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) does not identify the project site as a critical site subject to additional studies or review. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. . . R:ID P\2004104-0361 Kearny Cornrnerce Centerllnitial Study.doc 15 10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: b. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local eneral Ian, s ecific Ian or other land use Ian? a. x Comments: 10. a.-b.: No Impact: The proposed project is not located in an area that is known to include minerals. that are considered of value to the region and/or the state. The proposed project will not result in the loss of a locally- important mineral resource because the project site is not identified as an important site known to maintain such resources as shown in the Final EIR for the City of Temecula General Plan. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. . . RID P\20O4104-Q361 Keamy Commerce Centerllnitial Study.doc 16 b, Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other a encies? Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive round borne vibration or roundborne noise levels? A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the ro'ect? A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the ro'ect? For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip. would the project expose people residing or working in the ro'ect area to excessive noise levels? x c, x d. x e. x f. x 11. a.-c, e. f..: Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project consists of light industrial uses such as manufacturing, compounding of materials, processing, assembling, packaging, treatment or fabrication of materials, and products which require frequent truck activity or the transfer of heavy or bulky items. The General Plan allows noise levels in light industrial areas no greater than 75 CNEL. The City of Temecula General Plan and EIR have forecasted noise levels for this area to be within 75 CNEL. There may be temporary noise levels in excess of the maximum noise levels permitted in the General Plan during construciion activities and during peak hour traffic periods. However this will be temporary in nature and is associated with typical light industrial development. Hours of operation for construction activities, consistent with the City.s noise element in the General Plan will be enforced. A less than significant impact is associated due to noise levels from the airport. The French Valley Airport located on the north eastern side of the City, is a small scale airport and does not allow for large commercial jets. The airport is typically used as a small engine propeller recreation airport. There is not a private airstrip in the vicinity of the project that would potentially impact the project site. 11.d: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures: The General Plan noise element identifies the project site as an area that may include noise levels in excess of the maximum CNEL permitted in a commercial zone. The project shall be subject to the following Mitigation Measures: a, 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. RID P\2004104-0361 Kearny Cornrnerce Cente~lnitial Study,doc 17 Saturday 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sundays or Government Holidays . . . RID P\2004104-0361 Keamy Commerce Centerllnitial Study.doc 18 POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: b. rtin Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure? Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of re lacement housin elsewhere? a. x c. x Comments: 12. a.-c.: No Impact: The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The project site is a light industrial project and residential uses are not proposed. The project site is vacant and will not displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing, as the site is developed within a light industrial 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. . . RID P\2004104-0361 Keamy Commerce Centerllnitial Study.doc 19 13. PUBLIC SERVICES. a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated 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 seryice ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public seryices: . i ii Iii iv v Fire rotection? Police rotection? Schools? Parks? Other ublic facilities? x X X X X Comments: 13. a.i-v.: 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. The project will not have an impact upon, and.- will not result in a need for new or altered school facilities. The project will not cause significant numbers or. people to relocate within or to the City. The project will have a less than significant impact upon the 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 "Will Serye" letters from all of the public utilities agencies. Seryice is currently provided for the surrounding industrial development, so extending seryice to this site is possible, which would result in less than significant impact~ as a result of the project. . RID P\2004104-0361 Keamy Commerce Cenlerllnitial Study.doc 20 a. b. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facili would occur or be accelerated? Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Comments: x 14. a.: No Impact: The project is a light industrial project in a light industrial zone. The project will not displace recreationally zoned lands or remove vacant lands that are used for recreational purposes. 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 Impact: The proposed project does not include an open space or recreational aspect to the project. Furthermore, the project will not require the construction or expansion of additional recreational facilities. No impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. . . RIO P12004104-0361 Keamy Ccmmerce Centerllnitial Study.doc 21 a. b. x c. x d. x e. f. g. x x x Comments: . 15. a.-b: Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project is located on the north side of Remington Avenue, just west of Diaz Road. Diaz Road located near Remington Avenue is a "B" Level of Seryice per the General Plan EIR, which represents a range of stable flow. Freedom to select desired speeds is relatively unaffected. but the presence of others in the traffic stream begins to affect individual behavior. The General Plan EIR has listed that at complete buildout the nearby Diaz road will have 27,900 vehivle trips per day as a major four lane roadway. The proposed project is located on Remington Road, which is a local collector road. The proposed project did not require a traffic report since the proposed use will have a minor significant effect on Diaz Road and Remington Road. 15. c.: No Impact: The proposed project will not have an impact on the air traffic patterns and will not result in a substantial safety risk. No impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 15. d.: Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project does not include the extension, construction or modification of any traffic patterns that would create sharp curyes, dangerous intersections or establish incompatible uses that create a potentially significant impact. 15. e.: No Impact: The proposed project provides for adequate ingress and egress from the site. The Fire and Police Departments have reviewed the proposed project and have determined that adequate emergency access has been provided. In addition, on-site circulation has been reviewed using the emergency vehicle turning radius templates and it has been determined that on-site circulation is adequate for emergency vehicles. 15. f.: No Impact: The proposed project requires a total of 206 parking spaces. A total of 234 parking space. are provided. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. RID P\2004104-0361 Keamy Commerce Centerllnitial Study.doc 22 15. g.: No Impact: The applicant shall comply with the standards as set forth by the Riverside Transit Authority (RT A) as a Condition of Approval. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. . . . RID P\20O4104-0361 Keamy Commerce Centerllnitial Study.doc 23 a. Issues and Su rtin Infonnation Sources Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the a licable Re ional Water Qualit Control Board? Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities. the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Have sufficient water supplies available to serye the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or ex anded entitlements needed? Result in a detenmination by the wastewater treatment provider which seryes or may serye the project that it has adequate capacity to serye the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Be seryed by a landfill with sufficient penmitted capacity to accommodate the ro'ect's solid waste dis osal needs? Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and re ulations related to solid waste? b. c. d. e. f. g. Comments: x x x x x x . 16. a. b. c. e.: Less Than Significant Impact: The project wm 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. The project will require on-site storm drains to be constructed. The project may require various State and Federal Permits. The project will include the construction of underground storm drains and drainage swales in various locations within the project site. No off-site stonm drains or expansion of existing facilities is required as a result of this project. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16. d. e.: No Impact: 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 applicant will be required to provided "water available" forms from the Water District indicating water resources are available to serye to proposed project. The proposed project is also consistent with the General Plan and the General Plan Final EIR in regard to use and Policies. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16. f. g.: Less Than Significant Impact: The projèct will not result in a need for new landfill capacity. Any potential impacts resulting 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. R:ID P12004104-0361 Keamy Commerce Cente~lnitial Study.doc 24 a. b. c. Issues and Su .orti". Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality 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 community. reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California histo or rehisto ? Does the project have impacts that are individually 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 ro'ects, and the effects of robable future ro'ects? Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directl or indirectl ? x x Comments: A. a.: Less Than Significant Impacts: The project will not degrade the quality of the environment on site or ... the vicinity of the project. The developer may be required to obtain various State and Federal Permits including, Clean Water Act Section 401 permit from the U.S. Army Corps. of Engineers and clearance from the State Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). According to the City's General Plan EIR, additional traffic generated from the project will be minimal and is consistent with the future growth and development. 17. b.: Less Than Significant Impacts with Mitigation Measures: 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 light industrial area in an urban area, surrounded by industrial 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 of this site will not have a significant impact. 17. c.: Less Than Significant Impact: The project will not have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, directly or indirectly. The light industrial project will be designed and developed consistent with the Specific Plan. Development Code, and the General Plan. Mitigation Measures are required in order to reduce impact to a less than significant level. . R:ID P\2004\O4-0361 Kearny Commerce Cente~lnitial Study.doc 25 18. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering program EIR, or 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. b. Earlier anal ses used. Identif earlier anal ses and state where the are available for review. 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 b miti ation measures based on the earlier anal sis, Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which the address site-s ecific conditions for the ro'ect. c. SOURCES 1. City of Temecula General Plan. 2, City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report. 3. South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook. 4, Supplemental Geotechnical Engineering Study, EnGen, 2004. RID P\2004104-0361 Keamy Commerce Centerllnitial Study.doc 26 . . . . . . Mitigation Monitoring Program Project Description: Planning Application PA04-0361 , A Development Plan Application for the construction of an 86,175 square foot tilt up concrete light industrial building. Location: Applicant: North east side of Remington Avenue, located on the west side of Diaz Road. Pete Bussett Smith Consulting Architects 12220 EI Camino Real, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92130 GEOLOGY AND SOilS General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: AESTEHETICS General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death. The Restricted Use Zone (RUZ) of 60 feet from the southwest property line should be plotted on the grading and development plans for this project, and the RUZ should be staked in the field when the building footprint is staked, so as to confirm the location of the building outside the RUZ. Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measure as part of the building plan check review process. Prior to the issuance of a building permit. Planning Department Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Comply with Riverside County Mount Palomar Ordinance 655. All lighting shall be fully shielded, directed down and parking lot lighting shall be low pressure sodium. Decorative lighting shall be shut-off by 11 :00 P.M. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a photometric plan detailing the proposed light levels for the entire project site and onto adjacent project boundaries. R:ID P\20041O4-0361 Keamy Commerce CenterlMitigation Monitoring Program.doc 1 Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: AIR QUALITY General Impact: Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall comply with the City of Temecula Development Code and Design Guidelines for lighting standards, which require minimum and maximum lighting levels in the parking lot areas, loading areas, pedestrian circulation areas, primary building entries, and lighting at project boundaries. . Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measure as part of the building plan check review process. Prior to the issuance of a building permit. Planning Department The proposed project could potentially expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentration and could potentially create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people working in the nearby area. The applicant shall coordinate with the Riverside Transit Agency (RT A) to determine if a bus turn-out or other mass transit services are feasible for the project site. Written authorization shall be submitted to the City of Temecula. . The applicant shall submit a final landscape plan for the project site incorporating native drought-resistant vegetation, mature trees. If more than 100 days elapses from the time grading is complete and beginning of construction, the City of TemecuJa may require temporary landscaping to reduce the amount of dust and prevent dust and erosion. Prior to the issuance of a grading pennit, the applicant shall verify that all earth moving and large equipment are properly tuned and maintained to reduce emissions. In addition, alternative clean-fueled vehicles shall be used where feasible. Construction equipment should be selected considering emission factors and energy efficiency. Electrical and/or diesel-powered equipment should be utilized in-lieu of gasoline-powered engines. During construction and grading phases, the project site shall be watered down in the moming before grading and/or construction begins and in the evening once construction and/or grading is complete for the day. The project site shall be watered down no less than 3 times Inot including the moming and evening water-down) during construction and/or grading activities to reduce dust. All fill being transported tó and/or fiom the site shall be covered and the wheels and lower portion of transport trucks shall be sprayed with water to reduce/eliminate soil fiom the trucks before they leave the construction area. . R:ID P\2004104-0361 Keamy Commerce Cente~Mitigation Monitoring Program.doc 2 . . . Specific Process: Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measure as part of the building plan check review process. Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of a building permit. Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning Department R:ID P\20O41O4-0361 Keamy Commerce CenterlMitigation Monitoring Program.doc 3 . . ITEM #8 . . . . STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION Date of Meeting: December 15, 2004 Prepared by: Dale West Title: Associate Planner File Number Application Type: Minor Revision (Specific Plan) PA04-0486 Project Description: Specific Plan Amendment to reduce the building setback requirement from adjoining properties in Planning Area 46. 0 Approve with Conditions Recommendation: (Check One) 0 Deny 0 Continue for Redesign 0 Continue to: ~ Recommend Approval with Conditions 0 Recommend Denial CEQA: (Check One) 0 Categorically Exempt (Class) (Class) 0 Notice of Determination 15162 0 Negative Declaration 0 Mitigated Negative Declaration with Monitoring Plan DEIR ~ OTHER: Exempt from CEOA review pursuant to Section. 15061 (b)(3) R:IS P AI2004\04-0486 Margarita VillagelSTAFF REPORT-PC.doc PROJECT DATA SUMMARY . Applicant: M-A Temeku Hills Development, LLC Completion Date: N/A Mandatory Action Deadline Date: N/A General Plan Designation: Open Space (OS) Zoning Designation: Margarita Village Specific Plan (Public Recreation (PR)) Site/Surrounding Land Use: Site: Temeku Hills Golf Course, Clubhouse and Recreation Facilities North: South: East: West: Residential Residential Residential Residential Lot Area: N/A Total Floor Area/Ratio N/A Landscape Area/Coverage N/A Parking Required/Provided N/A BACKGROUND SUMMARY . [8J 1. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all concerns have been addressed, and the applicant concurs with staff's recommendation. ANALYSIS The Margarita Village Specific Plan (SP No. 199) was originally adopted by the Riverside County Board of Superyisors in 1986. Since this time it has been amended 5 times. In 1988 the first amendment to the Specific Plan was approved by the Board of Superyisors. Following the incorporation of the City of Temecula, the second, third, fourth and fifth amendments to the Specific Plan were approved by the City of Temecula City Council in 1996, 1997, 1998, and 2000 respectively. A sixth amendment to the Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199 is being proposed by the M- A Temeku Hills Development, LLC in anticipation of the future sale of the Temeku Hills Golf Course property which includes the Temeku Hills Clubhouse and ancillary recreation facilities (swimming pool, tennis courts and tot lot). The M-A Temeku Hills Development, LLC and the Temeku Hills Homeowners Association (HOA) have worked out an agreement that involves subdividing Lot 25 (the Temeku Hills Clubhouse and Recreation Facilities) into two parcels. . R\S P A\2004104-0486 Margarita VillagelSTAFF REPORT-PC.doc . . . first parcel (Clubhouse and parking facilities) will be jointly owned by the new owner of the golf course and the HOA. The second parcel (swimming pool, tennis courts and tot lot) will be deeded to the HOA. However, the proposed property line locations for subdividing Lot 25 would not meet the current setback requirements established in the Development Code for the PR zone. In order to allow for the transfer of ownership to the HOA, the setback requirements need to be revised to allow a "no minimum" building setback requirement from adjoining property lines within Planning Area 46 as long as the adjacent property is used solely for recreation, open space or parking purposes. Once this agreement is approved, the applicant has indicated that they intend to submit an application for a parcel map to finalize the transfer of ownership. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ~1. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed Project is exempt from CEQA review pursuant to Section 15061 (b) (3). The proposed project is an existing golf course with a clubhouse and recreation amenities surrounded by detached single family residential property. The proposed project and surrounding area is currently built out with no future plans for expansion. The proposed project is a minor revision to the Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance solely to transfer ownership of the clubhouse and recreation facility property to the Homeowner's Association. There is no possibility that the proposed project will have a significant effect on the environment and therefore it is not subject to CEQA. CONCLUSION/R ECOM M ENDA TION Planning Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA04-0486 based upon the findings and attached Conditions of Approval. FINDINGS Specific Plan Zoning District (Code Section 17.16.020 E) 1. The proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the General Plan and Development Code. The proposed amendment would not change the use of the site and is consistent with the General Plan and Development Code. The proposed revision to the property line setback is allowable under an approved Specific Plan zoning ordinance. 2. The proposed specific plan would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the city. The proposed amendment does not change the existing conditions of the site. Buildings affected by the proposed setback changes will be subject to provisions of Table 5-A of the California Building Code and therefore will not result in any detriment to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the city. 3. The subject property is physically suitable for the requested land use designations and the anticipated land use developments. R,IS P A\2004IO4-O486 Margarita VillagelSTAFF REPORT-PC.doc 4. The proposed amendment does not change the land use designations and the site is currently built to its ultimate development plans. The proposed specific plan shall ensure development of desirable character which will be compatible with existing and proposed development in the surrounding neighborhood. There is no additional proposed development with the proposed amendment and therefore is compatible with the existing surrounding neighborhood. ATTACHMENTS 1. PC Resolution No. 2004-~ - Blue Page 5 Exhibit A - Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No.6 Exhibit B - Conditions of Approval 2. CC Resolution No. 04-- - Blue Page 6 CC Ordinance No. 04- - - Blue Page 7 3. R,IS P A\2004\04-0486 Margarita ViliagelSTAFF REPORT-Pc.doc . . . . . . ATTACHMENT NO.1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2004-- R,IS P A\2004\04-0486 Margarita VillageISTAFFREPORT-PC.doc . . . PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA04- 0486 (SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.6) TO AMEND THE TEXT WITHIN THE MARGARITA VILLAGE SPECIFIC PLAN'S (SP NO. 199) DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR PLANNING AREA 46. WHEREAS, M-A Temeku Hills Development, LLC, filed Planning Application No. PA04- 0486, Specific Plan Amendment in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA04-0486 on December 15, 2004, 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; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearings and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended the City Council approve the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the public hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission approved Resolution No. 2004-_, recommending that the City Council approve PA04-0486; WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this resolution have occurred. . NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan and the Margarita Village Specific Plan Section 2. Findinqs. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of Planning Application No. PAO4-0486 hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.16.020.E of the City of Temecula Municipal Code: A. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the General Plan and Development Code. B. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the city. C. The subject property is physically suitable for the requested land use designations and the anticipated land use developments. D. The proposed specific plan shall ensure development of desirable character which will be compatible with existing and proposed development in the surrounding neighborhood. R,IS P AI2004104.0486 Marga,;'" V;JlagelDraft PC Reso & CorA-DP.doc I Section 3. Environmental Compliance. This project is exempt from CEOA review pursuant to CEOA Guidelines Section 15061 (b) (3). The proposed project is an existing golf course with a clubhouse and recreation amenities surrounded by detached single family residential property. The proposed project and surrounding area is currently built out with no future plans for expansion. The proposed project is a minor revision to the Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance solely to transfer ownership of the clubhouse and recreation facility property to the Homeowner's Association. There is no possibility that the proposed project will have a significant effect on the environment and therefore it is not subject to CEOA. Section 4. The City of Temecula Planning Commission, hereby recommends that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA04-0486, Amendment No.6 to the Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199 substantially in the form attached to this resolution as Exhibit A and subject to the Conditions of Approval contained in Exhibit B. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this - day of December 2004. Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. John Telesio, Chairman ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA ) ) ss ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2004-- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 15th day of December 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:IS P AI2004\04-0486 Margarita VillagelDraft PC Reso & CorA-DP.doc 2 . . . . . . EXHIBIT A MARGARITA VILLAGE SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 199, AMENDMENT NO.6 R:\S P A\2004104-0486 M¡u-garita VillageIDraft PC Resa & CafA-DP.doc 3 . . . I Amendment No.6 of Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199 \J. .;,.....-~....""""'.. City of Temecula October 2004 Margarita Village Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Specific Plan Amendment Rationale... ... ...... .............................,...... ... .... ..... ........Section 1 Summary of Changes.. ....... ..........,.......... ...... """""""" .......,............ ... ...... ....Section 2 SpeCific Plan Zone Ordinance............ ... .................. ......... ......., .... ... ...... ......... ...Section 3 Specific Plan No. 199: Amendment No.6 . . . . . . Specific Plan Amendment Rationale \J _...-,-~"""~ Margarita Village Specific Plan Amendment Rationale SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT RATIONALE . The applicant is requesting an Amendment to the MARGARITA VIlLAGE Specific Plan (SP No. 199) to allow for no minimum building setback requirement from adjoining property lines within Planning Area 46 if the adjacent use is recreation, open space or parking. This amendment would entail a minor revision to the Specific Plan zoning ordinance. The rationale for this amendment is to allow adjacent recreation facilities including a pool, tot lot and tennis courts to be divided into a .separate lot for dedication to the Temeku Hills Homeowners Association, as depicted in Figure 1, Clubhouse, Common Areas and Recreation Areas. The creation of an additional lot for the clubhouse and parking lot is also necessary as it will be jointly owned by the future owner of the adjacent golf course and the Temeku Hills Homeowners Association. The remaining portion of the existing lot will be owned by the future golf course owner. These actions will be accomplished through the subsequent creation of a parcel map. Due to the proximity of the recreational facilities to the golf course clubhouse, setback. requirements for Planning Area 46 must necessarily be amended to require no minimum setback from adjoining property lines. The proposed amendment will accomplish this intent more effectively than the Specific Plan ascuITently written. As a result of this amendment, the Specific Plan zoning ordinance for Planning Area 46 will be revised to require no minimum building setback from adjoining property lines if the adjacent use is recreation, open space or parking. . . Specific Plan No. 199: Amendment No.6 . . . Summary of Changes ~ ~,~,. Margarita Village I. Summary of Chan~es I. SUMMARY OF CHANGES . A. SPECIFIC PLAN The MARGARITA VILLAGE Specific Plan (SP No. 199) was adopted by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on August 26, 1986 through Resolution No. 86-355. Specific Plan Amendment No.1 was approved by the Board of Supervisors on September 6, 1988 via Resolution No. 88-471. In 1989, the City of Temecula incorporated arid assumed jurisdiction over MARGARITA VILLAGE. Since 1989, four additional amendments to the MARGARITA VILLAGE Specific Plan were recorded for a total of five previous amendments to SP No. 199. Amendment No.6 to the MARGARITA VILLAGE Specific Plan will amend the Specific Plan zoning text to allow for no minimum setback requirement from adjoining property lines within Planning Area 46. This revision will allow the adjacent recreation facilities including a pool, tot lot and tennis courts to be divided into a separate lot for dedication to the Temeku Hills Homeowner's Association. It will also allow for the creation on an additional lot for the clubhouse and parking lot, which will be jointly owned by the future golf course owner and the Temeku Hills Homeowner's Association. The following describes the minor revision to the MARGARITA VILLAGE Specific Plan that has occulTed as a result of these amendments. 1. SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE . Amendment No.6 of the MARGARITA VILLAGE Specific Plan (SP No. 199) updates text within the Specific Plan zoning ordinance to allow for no minimum setback requirement from adjacent property lines if the adjacent property is used for recreation, open space or for parking purposes. . Specific Plan No. 199: Amendment No.6 Pagel-l . . . Specific Plan Zone Ordinance .. -~"""" (2) The development standards for Planning Area 43 of Specific Plan No. 199 shall be the same as those standards identified for the M Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: A. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than four thousand five hundred (4,500) square feet. B. No lot shall have more than sixty percent (60%) of its net area covered with bwldings or structures. C. . The minimum average width of a lot shall be thirty-eight feet (38') with a minimum lot depth of sixty-five feet (65f). Minimum lot width at the required front property line shall be thirty-eight feet (38'). D. The front yard setback including garages shall be not less than ten feet (10'). E. The sum of the interior side yard setbacks shall be not less than ten feet (10'). This permits a zero lot line arrangement with a zero setback on one side yard and ten feet on the opposite side yard. Comer side yards shall not be less than ten feet (l0'). F. The rear yard shall be not less than ten feet (lOf). G. There shall be no maximum % of lot coverage reqwrement. (3) Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. qq. Planning Area 44. (1) The uses permitted in Planning Area 44 of Specific Plan No. 199 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the PR District of Chapter 17.14 of the City ofTemecula Development Code. (2) The development standards for Planning Area 44 of Specific Plan No. 199 shall be the same as those standards identified for the PR District in Section 17.14.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code. (3) Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.14 of the City of Temecula Development Code. IT. Planning Area 45. (1) The uses permitted in Planning Area 45 of Specific Plan No. 199 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the PR District of Chapter 17.14 of the City of Temecula Development Code. (2) The development standards for Planning Area 45 of Specific Plan No. 199 shall be the same as those standards identified for the PRDistrict in Section 17.14.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code. (3) Except as provided above. all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.14 of the City of Temecula Development Code. ss. Planning Area 46. (1) The uses permitted in Planning Area 46 of Specific Plan No. 199 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the PR District of Chapter 17.14 of the City of Temecula Development Code. (2) The development standards for Planning Area 46 of Specific Plan No. 199 shall be the same as those standards identified for the PR District in Section 17.14.040 of the City ofTemecula Development Code except that there shall be no minimum building setback requirement from adjoining propertv lines if the adjacent property is used solely for recreation, open space or for parking purposes. (3) Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those reqwrements identified in Chapter 17 .14 of the City of Temecula Development Code. -16- . . . . . . EXHIBIT B DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R,IS P A\2004I04-0486 Margaritl VillageIDraft PC Resa & CofA-DP.doc 4 . . . EXHIBIT B CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA04-0486 Project Description: A Specific Plan Amendment to revise the Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199 Zoning Ordinance to allow a "no minimum" building setback requirement from adjoining property lines within Planning Area 46 as long as the adjacent property is used solely for recreation, open space or parking purposes. Approval Date: December 15, 2004 Expiration Date: None PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicanVdeveloper 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 Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code Section 211 08(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15062. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicanVdeveloper 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. General Requirements 1. 2. 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. 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. 3. R:\S P A\2004104-0486 Margarita VillagelDraft PC Reso & CofA-DP.doc 5 4. All existing and future buildings shall meet fire resistive construction standards as set forth by Table 5-A of the California Building Code. BUILDING DEPARTMENT 5. Development plans must show any fire resistive wall construction based upon proximity to property lines or other buildings on the same property as per California Building Code Table 5-A. New property lines created may impact existing buildings exterior wall construction and openings. 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 Date Applicant's Printed Name R:\S P AI2004104-0486 Margarita VillagelDraft PC Reso & CofA-DP.doc 6 . . . . . . ATTACHMENT NO.2 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 04-- R:\S P A\2004104-0486 Margarita ViliagelST AFF REPORT-PC.doc . . . RESOLUTION NO. 04-- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA04-0486 (SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.6) TO AMEND THE TEXT WITHIN THE MARGARITA VILLAGE SPECIFIC PLAN'S (SP NO. 199) DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR PLANNING AREA 46, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. declare that: The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and A. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan and the Margarita Village Specific Plan; and B. M-A Temeku Hills Development, LLC, filed Planning Application No. PA04-0486, Specific Plan Amendment in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; and C. The application for the Project was processed as required by law, including the California Environmental Quality Act; and D. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on December 15, 2004 to consider the applications for the Project and environmental determination, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did, testify either in support or opposition to this matter; and E. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.2004- -, recommending approval of the Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No. 6;oand F. The City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on consider the proposed Specific Plan Amendment; and , 2004 to G. On , 2004 and , 2004, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters; and H. On , 2004, the City Council of the City of Temecula approved the Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No.6 when it adopted Resolution No. 04- R:\S P AI2004I04-O486 Margarita ViliagolCC Resoodoc " Section 2. Findinas. The City Council, in recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA04-0486 hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.16.020.E of the City of Temecula Municipal Code: A. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the General Plan and Development Code. . B. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the city. C. The subject property is physically suitable for the requested land use designations and the anticipated land use developments. D. The proposed specific plan shall ensure development of desirable character which will be compatible with existing and proposed. development in the surrounding neighborhood. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. This project is exempt from CEOA review pursuant to CEOA Guidelines Section 15061 (b) (3). The proposed project is an existing golf course with a clubhouse and recreation amenities surrounded by detached single family residential property. The proposed project and surrounding area is currently built out with no future plans for expansion. The proposed project is a minor revision to the Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance solely to transfer ownership of the clubhouse and recreation facility property to the Homeowner's Association. There is no possibility that the proposed project will have a significant effect on the environment and therefore it is not subject to CEOA. Section 4. The City of Temecula City Council hereby approves Planning Application No. PA04-0486, Amendment No.6 to the Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199 in the form attached to this resolution as Exhibit A and subject to the Conditions of Approval contained in Exhibit B. . Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula City Council this - day of - 2004. Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan Jones, CMC, City Clerk [SEAL] . R,IS P AI2004104.0486 Margarita ViliagelCC Rese.doc . . . STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA ) ) ss ) I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 2004 by the following vote of the Council: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS Susan Jones, CMC, City Clerk R:IS P A\2004104-0486 Margarita VilIagelCC Reso.doc . . . ATTACHMENT NO, 3 CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 04-- R,IS P AI2004\04-0486 Margarita VillageISTAFFREPORT-PC.doc . . . ORDINANCE NO. 04-- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO AMEND THE TEXT WITHIN THE MARGARITA VILLAGE SPECIFIC PLAN (SP NO. 199) ZONING ORDINANCE FOR PLANNING AREA 46. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the General Plan and the Margarita Village Specific Plan; and B. M-A Temeku Hills Development, LLC filed Planning Application No. PA04-0486 for a Specific Plan Amendment to amend the building setback requirements in Planning Area 46. C. review; and The application for the Project was processed and is exempt from CEQA D. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on December 15, 2004 to consider the application for the Project and CEQA determination, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter; and E. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and, due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2004-- recommending approval of a Specific Plan Amendment; and F. On , 2004 the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all persons interested in the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters; and G. On ,2004, the City Council of the City of Temecula approved the Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No.6 when it approved Ordinance No. 04-----, Section 2. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby amends the portion of the text of Planning Area 46 of Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199 Zoning Ordinance for development standards to read as follows: "(2) The development standards for Planning Area 46 of Specific Plan No. 199 shall be the same as those standards identified for the PR District in Section 17.14.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code except that there shall be no minimum building setback requirement from adjoining property lines if the adjacent property is used solely for recreation, open space or parking purposes." R:\S P A\2004104-0486 Margarita VillagelCC Ordinance SPA Draft.doc ] Section 3. Severabilitv. If any sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason 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 are 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 4. 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 5. 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. SectionS. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage; and 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 by the City Council of the City of Temecula this - day of _,2004. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor . ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] . R:\S P AI2004104-0486 Margarita VillagelCC Ordinance SPA Draft.doc 2 . . . STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA ) ) ss ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 04-- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the - day of -, 2004 and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the - day of -, 2004, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R,IS P AI2004104-0486 Margarita VillagelCC Ordinance SPA Draft.doc 3 . . ITEM #9 . . . . Date of Meeting: Prepared by: STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION December 15, 2004 MatthewC. Harris Title: Associate Planner File Number: PA04-0351 Application Type: Tentative Tract Map Project Description: Recommendation: (Check One) CEQA: (Check One) A Tentative Tract Map (32437) to subdivide 53.3 acres into 242 single family residential lots, four open space lots and a park lot. The subject property is located north of Date Street and east of Ynez Road within the Haryeston Specific Plan area. [8J Approve with Conditions D Deny D Continue for Redesign D Continue to: D Recommend Approval with Conditions D Recommend Denial D Categorically Exempt (Class) [8J Notice of Determination Exempt From Further Review (Section) 15162 D Negative Declaration D Mitigated Negative Declaration with Monitoring Plan DEIR KIT M\2004I04.0351 Harveston Phase 31ST AFF REPORT.doc PROJECT DATA SUMMARY . Applicant: Lennar Communitiés Completion Date: May 17, 2004 Mandatory Action Deadline Date: December 21,2004 (With Extension) General Plan Designation: Low Medium Residential (LM) Zoning Designation: Low Medium Residential (LM) Site/Surrounding Land Use: Site: Vacant North: South: East: West: Residential Park/Residential Residential Vacant Lot Area: 53.3 Acres, Net Total Floor Area/Ratio N/A . Landscape Area/Coverage N/A Parking Required/Provided N/A BACKGROUND SUMMARY ¡g¡ 1. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all concerns have been addressed, and the applicant concurs with the recommended Conditions of Approval. Backaround The Tentative Tract Map proposes to subdivide Planning Area 10 of the Harveston Specifc Plan. The project is generally located at the northern end of the specific plan boundary and abuts the City of Murrieta to the north and east. The project site lies east of Ynez Road and north of Date Street. Two points of access will be provided via Ynez Road on the west and North End Road on the east which is located in the City of Murrieta and currently terminates at the east end of the specific plan boundary which also seryes as the city limit boundary. The number of residential lots and corresponding lot sizes associated with Tentative Tract Map 32437 are identified below: AVERAGE LOT TRACT NUMBER OF MINIMUM LOT SIZE MAXIMUM LOT SIZE NUMBER LOTS PROPOSED SIZE PROPOSED PROPOSED 32437 242 5,130 Sa. Feet 14,451 sa: Feet 6,452 Sa. Feet . KIT Ml2004104-0351 Harveston Phase 3\STAFF REPORT.doc . . . Street "AA" which provides connection between Ynez Road and the project site will have 100- foot wide right-of-way with a seven-foot wide parkway and five-foot wide sidewalk. Streets "BB", "KK", "QQ" and "RR" will have 60-foot wide right-of-ways and the remaining streets within the tract will have 56-foot wide right-of-ways. Each of these streets will have continuous five-foot wide parkways and sidewalks. A .88 acre HOA park has also been provided within the tract in conformance with specific plan requirements. ANALYSIS Tract Desiqn Planning and Public Works staff have determined that the pròposed number, location and type of street improvements within the tract are consistent with the Harveston Specific Plan. Moreover, staff has determined that all lots within the tract are consistent with applicable minimum and average lot size, width and depth requirements. Staff believes the design and layout of the tract is both logical and efficient. The lots are configured so as to accommodate the various development standards associated with each of the home products allowed in the planning area. Each of the home products will be brought to the Planning Commission for consideration and approval at a future date. Project Densitv Section 3.0 of the Harveston Specific Plan identifies a density range of 3-5 dwelling units per acre and a dwelling unit target of 206 units within Planning Area 10. The applicant is requesting to develop 242 units onsite by transferring unused surplus units from previously approved planning areas within the specific plan boundary. Based on previously approved densities within the specific plan, staff has determined that a sufficient surplus of units currently exists to permit the 242 units onsite. Section 11.0 allows a maximum of 20% of the dwelling unit target for the planning area to be transferred. The applicant is proposing a 17.5% unit increase. Planning Area Boundary Modification As a result of the realignment of Ynez Road and final suryeying, three acres of surplus land has been identified within the Haryeston Specific Plan Boundary. The applicant is proposing to enlarge Planning Area 11 by three acres and reconfigure the boundary line between Planning Areas 10 and 11 (See Attachment 3 for existing planning area boundary configuration). Based on the proposed modifications, the western boundary of tract 32437 would now serye as the boundary line between Planning Areas 10 and 11. The City Attorney has confirmed that staff can account for the acreage discrepancy and that the Planning Area boundary adjustment can occur in association with the approval of this tract map. Section 12.6 of the Harveston Specific Plan allows for the administrative approval of minor modifications to both Planning Area acreage and configuration. Staff has required that the applicant provide revised Planning Area exhibits which shall be incorporated into. the specific plan document (See Condition of Approval No.7). ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ~1. The proposed project has been determined to be consistent with the previously approved Haryeston Environmental Impact Report and is exempt from further Environmental Review (CEQA Section 15162 subsequent fiR's and Negative Declarations). R:IT M\2004104-0351 Harveston Phase 31ST AFF REPORT.doc CONCLUSIO NIRECOM M EN D A TIO N . Staff recommends adoption of a Resolution approving the application with the following findings and attached conditions of approval. FINDINGS Tentative Tract Map (Code Section 16.09.1400) 1. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance and the City of Temecula Municipal Code; 2. 3. 4. Tentative Tract Map No. 32437 is consistent with the General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance, the Development Code, and the Municipal Code because the project has been designed in a manner that it is consistent with the General Plan, Subdivision Ordinance, Development Code, Harveston Specific Plan, and the Municipal Code. The tentative map does not propose to divide land, which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conseryation Act of 1965; The proposed property has not been used as agricultural land. Therefore, the subject project will not result in the cancellation of a Williamson Contract. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. The project consists of a 242-/ot single-family residential Tentative Tract Map on property designated for medium density residential uses, which is consistent with the General Plan, as well as, the development standards for Planning Area 10 of the Harveston Specific Plan. . The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, will not be likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. An Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring Plan were approved for the Harveston Specific Plan No. 13, which addressed environmental impacts on the site. Mitigation measures (described in the Mitigation Monitoring Program), and the Conditions of Approval for the Specific Plan have been incorporated as conditions for this application, as appropriate. The application is consistent with the project description analyzed in the EIR, and no subsequent environmental review is necessary per Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act. 5. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed and commented on by the Fire Prevention Division and the Building & Safety Division. As a result, the project will be conditioned to address their concerns. Further, provisions are made in the General Plan and the Development Code to ensure that the public health, safety and welfare are safeguarded. The project is consistent with these documents. . R,IT M\2004I04-0351 Harveston Phase 3\STAFF REPORT.doc . . . 6. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. 7. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. Prior to the construction of single- family residences the applicant will be required to submit building plans to the Building Department that comply with the Uniform Building Code, which contains requirements for energy conservation. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. AII required rights-of-way and easements have been provided on the Tentative Map. The Public Works Department and Community Services District have reviewed the proposed division of land and adequate conditions and/or modifications have been made to the Tentative Tract Map. 8. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). Per the Development Agreement approved with the Harveston Specific Plan, Quimby fees will not be required. Appropriate parkland dedication and in-lieu fees have been provided. ATTACHMENTS 1. Plan Reduction - Blue Page 6 2. PC Resolution No. 2004-- - Blue Page 7 3. Existing Planning Area Boundary Map - Blue Page 8 R;\T M\2004104-0351 Harveston Phase 31ST AFF REPORT.doc . . . ATTACHMENT NO.1 PLAN REDUCTION R:IT MI2004104-0351 Harveston Phase 3\STAFFREPORTdoc . . . . . . ATTACHMENT NO.2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-- R\T Ml2004104-0351 Harveston Phase 3\STAFF REPORTdoc . . . PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA04-0351 , TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32437 SUBDIVIDING PLANNING AREA 10 OF THE HARVESTON SPECIFIC PLAN INTO 242 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS, 4 OPEN SPACE LOTS AND ONE PARK LOT FOR LENNAR COMMUNITIES ON 53.3 VACANT ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF YNEZ ROAD AND NORTH OF DATE STREET, KNOWN AS PORTIONS OF ASSESSORS PARCEL NOS. 916-040-009 & 910-110-013. WHEREAS, Lennar Communities, filed Planning Application No. PA04-0351 (the "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 a regular meeting, considered the Application on December 15, 2004, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended 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. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findinas. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 16.09.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code: A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance and the City of Temecula Municipal Code; Tentative Tract Map No. 32437 is consistent with the General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance, the Development Code, and the Municipal Code because the project has been designed in a manner that it is consistent with the General Plan, Subdivision Ordinance, Development Code, HalVeston Specific Plan, and the Municipal Code. R:IT M\2004104-0351 Harveston Phase 31ST AFF REPORT.doc B. The tentative map does not propose to divide land, which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conseryation Act of 1965; . The proposed property has not been used as agricultural land. Therefore, the subject project will not result in the cancellation of a Williamson Contract. C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. The project consists of a 242-/ot single-family residential Tentative Tract Map on property designated for medium density residential uses, which is consistent with the General Plan, as well as, the development standards for Planning Area 10 of the Harveston Specific Plan. D. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, will not be likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. An Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring Plan were approved for the Harveston Specific Plan No. 13, which addressed environmental impacts on the site. Mitigation measures (described in the Mitigation Monitoring Program), and the Conditions of Approval for the Specific Plan have been incorporated as conditions for this application, as appropriate. The application is consistent with the project description analyzed in the EIR, and no subsequent environmental review is necessary per Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act. . E. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed and commented on by the Fire Prevention Division and the Building & Safety Division. As a result, the project will be conditioned to address their concerns. Further, provisions are made in the General Plan and the Development Code to ensure that the public health, safety and welfare are safeguarded. The project is consistent with these documents. F. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling .opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. Prior to the construction of single- family residences the applicant will be required to submit building plans to the Building Department that comply with the Uniform Building Code, which contains requirements for energy conservation. G. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. . R,IT M\20041O4-0351 Harveston Phase 3\STAFF REPORTdoc 10 . . . All required rights-of-way and easements have been provided on the Tentative Map. The Public Works Department and Community Services District have reviewed the proposed division of land and adequate conditions and/or modifications have been made to the Tentative Tract Map. H. (Quimby). The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements Per the Development Agreement approved with the Harveston Specific Plan, Quimby fees will not be required. Appropriate parkland dedication and in-lieu fees have been provided. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. An Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring Plan was approved for the Harveston Specific Plan No. 13, which addressed all the environmental impacts on the site. Mitigation measures (described in the Mitigation Monitoring Program), and the Conditions of Approval have been incorporated as conditions for this application. The application is consistent with the project description analyzed in the EIR, and no subsequent environmental review is necessary per Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act Section 4, Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves the Application, a request to subdivide a portion of Planning Area 10 of the Harveston Specific Plan into 242 residential lots and 5 open space lots to the project specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein 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 15th day of December 2004. John Telesio, Chairman ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] R:IT M\2004104-0351 HarvestoD Phase 31ST AFF REPORT.doc 11 STATE OFCALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA ) ) ss ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2004-- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 15th day of December, 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: R:IT Ml2004104-0351 Harveston Phase 31ST AFF REPORT.doc 12 Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary . . . . . . EXHIBIT A DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:IT M\2004104-0351 Harveston Phase 3\STAFF REPORT.doc 13 . . . EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA04-0351 Project Description: A Tentative Tract Map to subdivide 53.3 acres into 242 single family residential lots, four open space lots and a park lot. DIF Category: Per Development Agreement MSHCP Category: TUMF Fee: Per Development Agreement Per Development Agreement Assessor's Parcel No.: Portions 916-040-009 & 910-110-013 Approval Date: December 15, 2004 Expiration Date: December 15, 2007 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. 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 with a DeMinimus Finding for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) 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 2. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of the Temecula Subdivision Ordinance, unless modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request, if made 30 days prior to the expiration date. 3. The permittee/applicant shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless, the City and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees, and agents from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any R,ITM\2004I04-0351 Harveston Phase 3\STAFF REPORTdoc 14 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeai board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4 (Section 21000 et seq., including but not by ¡he way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167). The City shall promptly notify the permittee/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought forth within this time period. The City shall estimate the cost of the defense of the action and applicant shall deposit said amount with the City. City may require additional deposits to cover anticipated costs. City shall refund, without interest, any unused portions of the deposit once the litigation is finally concluded. Should the City fail to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, permittee/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents. Should the applicant fail to timely post the required deposit, the Director may terminate the land use approval without further notice to the applicant. . This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 13, the Haryeston Specific Plan. All development fees shall be paid in conformance with the Development Agreement that regulates this development project. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures identified within the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Harveston Specific Plan, and the approved Mitigation Monitoring Program thereof. The applicant shall provide all necessary Haryeston Specific Plan exhibits associated with the boundary modification of Planning Areas 10 & 11 for incorporation into the specific plan. . The Developer shall disclose to all home buyers that Date Street is planned to be a six (6) lane urban arterial roadway and will include a freeway interchange pursuant to the City of Temecula General Plan Circulation Element. All modifications to the phasing map after the first phase of development shall not require a Specific Plan Amendment and shall be approved administratively. 10. Further, notwithstanding any of the conditions contained herein, Developer may seek an agreement for reimbursement for any improvements or facilities that qualify for reimbursement at such time as the City of Temecula adopts an ordinance for such reimbursement pursuant to and consistent with. California Government Code Sections 66485 through 66489, inclusive, and further shall waive the same in the event of agreements, consistent with the foregoing, that require or include any or all of the terms set forth immediately above. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 11. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Division. . RW M\2004I04-0351 H:uveston Phase 31ST AFF REPORT.doc 15 . . . Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 12. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division: a. A copy of the Final Map. b. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes: This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Obseryatory recommendations, Ordinance No. 655. The Haryeston Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for this project and is on file at the City of Temecula Community Development Department - Planning Division. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's). CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. The CC&R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, exterior of all buildings and all landscaped and open areas including parkways. No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's, which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City for provisions required as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the city prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. iii. Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such dwelling unit or lot, either (1) an undivided interest in the common areas and facilities, or (2) a share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association owning the common areas and facilities. ii. c. ii. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 13. The applicant shall conduct an acoustical study to ensure acceptable interior and exterior noise standards pursuant to the General Plan noise levels for residential and commercial structures. All recommend construction techniques, improvements and/or walls recommended in the acoustical report shall be incorporated into the construction of the structures and subdivision. R:IT Ml2004104-0351 Harveston Phase 31ST AFF REPORT.doc 16 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS . General Requirements 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative map all existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained road right-of-way. 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. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation 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. The Applicant shall comply with all underlying Conditions of Approval for Haryeston Specific Plan No. 13 (PA99-0418) as approved on August 14, 2001 The Applicant shall comply with all underlying Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 29639 (PAOO-0295) as approved on August 14, 2001. Prior to Approval of the Final Map; unless other timing is indicated, the Developer shall complete the following or have plans submitted and approved, subdivision improvement agreements executed and securities posted: 19. 20. . As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the D¡weloper shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. City of Murrieta b. Rancho California Water District c. Eastern Municipal Water District d. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conseryation District e. City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau f. Planning Department g. Department of Public Works h. Riverside County Health Department i. Cable TV Franchise j. k. I. Community Seryices District General Telephone Southern California Edison Company Southern California Gas Company . m. R:IT M\20041O4-0351 Harveston Phase 3\STAFF REPORT.doc 17 . 21. . 22. . 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 Department of Public Works: a. Improve Ynez Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), raised landscaped median. Improve Street "A" (Major Highway Standards - 100' R/W) to include dedication of full-width street right-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), raised landscaped median. Improve Streets "CC", "DD", "EE", "FP', "GG", "HH", "II" and "JJ" (Modified Street Section per the Specific Plan - 56' R/W) to include dedication of full-width street right-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Improve Streets "BB", "KK", "00" and "RR" (Modified Street Section per the Specific Plan - 60' R/W) to include dedication of full-width street right-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections. b. c. d. e. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be obseryed in the design of the street improvement plans: a. Street centerline 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 Standard Nos. 207, 207A and/or 208. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in accordance with the Specific Plan Standards. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400 and 401 or as modified in the Specific Plan. Minimum centerline radii shall be in accordance with City Standard No. 113. All reverse curyes shall include a 100-foot minimum tangent section. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. All knuckles shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard No. 602. All cul-de-sac shall be constructed in accordance in City Standard No. 600. All units shall be provided with zero clearance garage doors and garage door openers if the driveway is less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. j. R:ITM\2004\04-0351 Harveston Phase 3\STAFF REPORT.doc 18 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. k. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required where adequate right-of-way does not exist for installation of the facilities. All utilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 34kv or greater, shall be installed underground. . I. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and reviewed by 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. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Ynez Road on the Final Map with the exception of one opening as delineated on the approved Tentative Tract Map. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Date Street on the Final Map with no openings as delineated on the approved Tentative Tract Map. Corner property line cut off for vehicular sight distance and installation of pedestrian facilities shall be provided at all street intersections in accordance with Riverside County Standard No. 805. All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public or other appropriate agency and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of Public Works. . Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Prior to City Council approval of the Final Map, the Develop.er shall make an application for reapportionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory agency. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Final Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with the map. 32. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements. 33. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated and noted on the final map. 34. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. . R:\T M\2004\04-0351 Harveston Phase 31ST AFF REPORT.doc 19 Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted for review and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating "drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions." Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits . 35. 36. 37. . 38. 39. 40. . As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conseryation District c. Planning Department d. Department of Public Works A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City of Temecula standards and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any grading. The plan shall incorporate adequate erosion control measures to protect the site and adjoining properties from damage due to erosion. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and .submitted to 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 preliminary pavement sections. A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. Ths study shall identify storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed off-site or on-site, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. The basis for analysis and design shall be a storm with a recurrence interval of one hundred years. NPDES - The project proponent shall implement construction-phase and post- construction pollution prevention measures consistent with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and City of Temecula (City) NPDES programs. Construction- phase measures shall include Best Management Practices (BMPs) consistent with the City's Grading, Erosion & Sediment Control Ordinance, the City's standard notes for Erosion and Sediment Control, and the SWRCB General Permit for Construction Activities. Post-construction measures shall be required of all Priority Development Projects as listed in the City's NPDES permit. Priority Development Projects will include a combination of structural and non-structural on site source and treatment control BMPs to prevent contaminants from commingling with stormwater and treat all unfiltered runoff year-round prior to entering a storm drain. Construction-phase and post- R,IT M\2004104-0351 Harveston Phase 31ST AFF REPORT-doc 20 41. 42. 43. construction BMPs shall be designed and included into plans for submittal to, and subject to the approval of, the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. The project proponent shall also provide proof of a mechanism to ensure ongoing long-term maintenance of aU structural post-construction BMPs. . 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. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conseryation 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. The Developer shall obtain letters of approval or easements for any off-site work performed on adjoining properties. The letters or easements shall be in a format as directed by the Department of Public Works. All lot drainage shall be directed to the driveway by side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 44. 45. 46. 47. 46. 49. Final Map shall be approved and recorded. . A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the California Building Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with the Development Agreement between the City and Developer dated August 28, 2001. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 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 50. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. . R:IT M\2004104-0351 Harveston Phase 3\STAFF REPORT.doc 21 . . . 51. 52. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken due to the construction operations of this project shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. FIRE DEPARTMENT 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. Any previous existing conditions for this project or any underlying map will remain in full force and effect unless superceded by more stringent requirements here. 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. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for residential land division per CFC Appendix liLA, 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 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 III-A) The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix III.B, Table A-III-B-1. Standard fire hydrants (6" x 4" x 2 1/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent 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 a 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 III-B) The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for commercial land division 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 with a 4 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 III-A) 58. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix III-B, Table A-II/-B-1. Super fire hydrants (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix III-B) RW Ml2004104-0351 Harveston Phase 31ST AFF REPORT.doc 22 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum turning radius on any cul-de-sac shall be thirty-seven (37) feet for residential and forty-five (45) feet for commercial. (CFC 902.2.2.3, CFC 902.2.2.4) . 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. Cul-de-sacs and/or intersections with planters must maintain 24 foot clear unobstructed travel width around the planters, not including parking. Hardscape areas are permissible provided that they meet the 80,000 lb. load requirements and are at road level. Private entry driveways with divider medians must be a minimum of 16 feet wide on each side unless the median is held back 30 feet from face of curb of perpendicular road. 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) This will include all internal roads, connecting roads between phases, and construction gates. All required access must be in and available prior to and during ALL construction. Phasing is approved on a separate map, and is ultimately subject to final approval in the field. 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 Ibs. 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 Ibs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. (CFC sec 902) 66. 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 I&ss than thirteen (13) feet six (6) inches. (CFC 902.2.2.1) 67. 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) 68. Prior to building construction, this development and any street within serying more than 35 homes or any commercial developments 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, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be . 69. RW MI2004104-0351 Harveston Phase 31ST AFF REPORT.doc 23 . . . 70. 71. 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) 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 firefighting personnel. (CFC 902.4) Special Conditions 72. 73. Prior to issuance of building permits, plans for structural protection from vegetation fires shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval. The measures shall include, but are not limited to, enclosing eaves, noncombustible barriers (cement or block walls), and fuel modification zones. (CFC Appendix II-A) 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. COMMUNITY SERVICES General Conditions 74. 75. 76. 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. All lots to be maintained by the HOA shall be reserved to themselves on the Final Map for maintenance purposes. All private open space lots, recreational facilities, the Arroyo Park, pedestrian access areas, monumentation and fencing shall be maintained by an established Home Owner's Association or private residential property owners. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 77. The developer shall provide TCSD verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. Prior to issuance of building permit or the installation of additional street lighting to be maintained by TCSD, which ever occurs first, the developer shall complete the TCSD application process, submit the approved Edison streetlight improvement plans and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of street lighting into the TCSD maintenance program. 78. R:\T Ml2004104-0351 Harveston Phase 31ST AFF REPORT.doc 24 Prior tò Certificate of Occupancy 79. It shall be the developer's responsibility to provide written disclosure of the existence of the TCSD and its service level rates and charges to all prospective purchasers. . 80. The developer or his assignee shall submit, in a format as directed by TCSD staff, the most current list of Assessor's Parcel Numbers assigned to the final project. 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 Date Applicant's Printed Name R:IT M\2004104-0351 Harveston Phase 31ST AFF REPORT.doc 25 . . . . . . ATTACHMENT NO.3 EXISTING PLANNING AREA BOUNDARY MAP R:IT M\2004\04-0351 Harveston Phase 31ST AFF REPORT.doc . c:" = ",." ~"..'. '. -ßP:; ~ . ~<l!d ~û . :c ~J (/)--1 ~ OJ CJ ::J .ii ¡¡: , ~ ~ .¿ .¿ .¿ e!. ~ ~ ~ [5\ ~ 1[5! ¡¡ ~ '" ..~ ~ fl!J Iii ~ I.'.~ I r:7 - E 21, i'i':: "'.£ ~¿ " 3 , ë ë ë ~ ~ . . S\ , ,d ~Ë ~u "<: 8", - ~ H E" ~; " ~~S ~~~ ¡U õi'1 ë~ : tB gJH Z-N --c ~ :;0: ~ ~ .!!,;:o """0 " j " ~ ~ <3 . ~ } ] ~I R f ~~2 . . ITEM #10 . . . . STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION Date of Meeting: December 15, 2004 Prepared by: Matthew D. Peters, AICP Associate Planner TItle: File Number Application Type: Major Modification PA04-0550 Project Description: A Major Modification to a Development Plan to allow exterior elevation changes and the conversion of a Coco's Restaurant to a Ruby's Diner at 26495 Ynez Road, APN 910-300-013 (portion). Recommendation: (Check One) D Approve with Conditions ~ Deny D Continue for Redesign D Continue to: D Recommend Approval with Conditions D Recommend Denial CEOA: (Check One) (Class) 15301 ~ Categorically Exempt (Section) 15162 D Notice of Determination D Negative Declaration D Mitigated Negative Declaration with Monitoring Plan DEIR R:\D 1'\2004104-0550 Ruby's RestaurantlSTAFF REPORT. RUBY'S.dotdoc 1 PROJECT DATA SUMMARY . Applicant: Brian W. Price, Breckenridge Group Completion Date: October 14, 2004 Mandatory Action Deadline Date: January 11, 2005 General Plan Designation: Community Commercial (CC) Zoning Designation: Community Commercial (CC) Site/Surrounding Land Use: Site: Coco' s Restaurant North: South: East: West: Retail commercial Retail commercial Mall outlot buildings (restaurants and retail) Retail commercial The following calculations are from the original site plan approved for the Palm Plaza Shopping Center. This application is for exterior facade modifications only. No changes are proposed to the landscaping or parking. . Lot Area: 40.98 acres Site Building Ratio 3.24:1 Parking Required/Provided 2,300 required / 2,430 provided BACKGROUND SUMMARY ~1. Staff has. worked with the applicant; however, the following issues have not been resolved to the satisfaction of staff: The proposed tower element and color changes do not meet the Development Code or City-Wide Design Guidelines; In other Cities, the Ruby's Corporation has shown a willingness to modify their buildings to fit the local area, rather than rely on franchise architecture designs; and . Allowing major changes to a single building within an approved center would set a bad precedent for this center, and others as well. . R,ID 1'\2004\04-0550 Ruby's RestaurantlSTAFF REPORT. RUBY'S.dot.doc 2 . . . Planning Application No. PA04-0550 is a Major Modification for exterior changes to Coco's Restaurant located in the Palm Plaza Shopping Center. The proposed changes would facilitate the conversion from Coco's Restaurant to Ruby's Diner. No changes to the building footprint, landscaping, or parking are proposed as part of this major modification. The building is owned by John Gantes, who is also the owner of Winchester Food Partners, a subsidiary of the Breckenridge Group. However, the land is leased from Kimco Realty Corporation, which owns the Palm Plaza Shopping Center. Kimco Realty provided documentation to the City stating that, "Architectural changes would be allowed subject to approval by local governing agencies." The intent of this major modification is to distinguish the building from the rest of the center. According to the applicant, the existing Coco's Restaurant is struggling financially due in part to the competitive advantage restaurants in the surrounding area have resulting from their distinctive architecture. Variations in building design were encouraged for the mall outlots across Ynez, while the subject building is part of an integrated shopping center. ANALYSIS The exterior of the Coco's Restaurant is beige and tan with blue/green and burgundy accents, and is consistent with the other buildings in the Palm Plaza Shopping Center. As part of the conversion to a Ruby's Diner, the applicant is proposing to add a tower element with a decorative steel mast over the entrance (nearly 40-feet high); paint the building white with red accents and trim; add red ceramic tiles to the base; change the fabric awnings from green/blue to red; and add surface applied radius mullions to the windows. The following sections from the City's Development Code and Design Guidelines support denial of this application. Development Code ICommercial Performance Standards) "Use a consistent design theme throughout the project. Employ complementary or consistent details, shapes, materials, and colors. In addition, consistent signage should be provided with complementary colors, lettering, placement, and materials." (Section 17.080.070, B. 6.) City-wide Desian Guidelines (Chapter 3. Commercial Desian Guidelines) "Franchise architecture is strongly discouraged. Building elevations should be designed to fit into the surrounding neighborhood. Architectural gimmicks, such as roof lights, distinctive roof shapes, large false cornices and parapets that sacrifice the integrity of a streetscape to promote a single structure should be avoided." (Section C. 3. e.) "The exterior building design, including roof style, color, materials, and architectural form and detailing, should be consistent among all buildings in a complex and on all elevations of each building to achieve design harmony and continuity within itself." (Section C. 4. b.) "Colors should be harmonious; however, color contrast is encouraged to express architectural detail. Fluorescent paints and overly bright colors should be avoided." (Section C. 6. c.) R,\D 1'\2004\04-0550 Ruby's RestaurautlSTAFF REPORT. RUBY'S.dot.doc 3 Ruby's Diners are located throughout Southern California and the building designs vary greatly. The Ruby's in Carlsbad is located in a tan building with red awnings that is less dramatic than the design proposed in Temecula. The Ruby's in Oceanside is located at the end of the pier in a Cape Cod structure that has a blue body and white trim. When asked about alternative designs, the applicant explained that they would be willing to remove the tower element, but not the building colors, tile, accents or awnings. A DRC meeting was not held since there was nothing to negotiate. Staff acknowledges that competition between restaurants in the City of Temecula is significant, and exterior changes might help this building "stand out" within the shopping center. However, staff believes the proposed building modifications do not meet the intent of the Development Code or the City-Wide Design Guidelines. Staff also believes that allowing major changes to a single building within an approved center would set a bad precedent for this center and others as well. Franchise architecture is discouraged for new construction in the City of Ternecula, and should be discouraged in this case unless the entire center adopts a similar scheme. As a result, staff does not support this application. Prior to submittal of this application, staff was asked to review the elevations and provide feedback on the proposed changes. Staff provided a letter indicating that, "Based on the City's Development Code and Design Guidelines, staff will not support any changes to the building that would cause the exterior appearance of the building to "clash" with the rest of the center. The building is within an integrated center and not on a stand-alone pad. Therefore, major color and accent changes, or a dramatic tower element will- not be supported. Staff would be able to support modifications to the sign and subtle changes to the entryway." Examples of subtle changes staff would support include a new door, lights, and some red paint (less bright than proposed) to compliment the Ruby's sign. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ¡:g1. CEQA does not require review for a denied Project. However, if the application is approved, the proposed Project will be categorically from further environmental review. (Class 1. 15301. Existing Facilities) CONCLUSIONIRECOMM EN DA TIO N The exterior changes are not consistent with the City's Development Code or Design Guidelines. Staff recommends denial of this application, or continue for redesign to incorporate elements as deemed acceptable to the Planning Commission. FINDINGS Development Plan (Code Section 17.05.010F) 1. 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. However, the proposal does not conform to the performance standards of the Development Code (Section 17.080.070, 8. 6.) or the standards of the City-Wide Design Guidelines (Sections 86, C3e, C4b, and C6c). R:ID NOO4I04-0SS0 Ruby's RestaurnntlSTAFF REPORT - RUBY'S.dot.doc 4 . . . . . . 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health. safety, and general welfare of the community. The proposed project is consistent with the development standards set forlh in the City of Temecula Development Code relative to parking, circulation, and site plan design. However, the architectural design does not conform to the Development Code (Section 17.080.070, B. 6.) or the City-Wide Design Guidelines (Sections B6, C3e, C4b, and C6c). ATTACHMENTS 1. Plan Reductions - Blue Page 6 2. PC Resolution No. 2004-- (Denial) - Blue Page 7 R:\D 1'\2004104.0550 Ruby's Restaurant\STAFF REPORT. RUBY'S.dotdoc 5 . . . ATTACHMENT NO.1 PLAN REDUCTIONS R,ID P\2004104~O550 Ruby's RestaurantlSTAFF REPORT ~ RUBY'S.dotdoc 6 " ~ i-i "-- ~ N . 0-: ; ""'0 e zZ .~ «0 c;:~ ï >-3 ~ ~~ ; <C N~ -=:~ ...q Q..g ::~ ...I. ct~ a.~ ! , j ~, ~! ..~ .~; <} ~¡ ~ ~. . .: ....-_. ~_. -_vo _.~ ~r .-- --... ~~-~ . G"";':;:;'~~ . '9'~::-:';:""~ - " Ii 11 II Ju Ii ~~ 8" ~ <> ..-. "¡ ~ ~ .¡' ¡ iT ill, ¡¡I, ¡ ! !; II ¡~ . !:id,1 I I ¡; I I 'ilil! . j I: : !! ,( ! Ipl II ! , . ¡, , , ~ ~ . . ~ ;. ~. .~~~~~~~." ~_. :.?"- '\cr ~ 9";;~;;"sSV ~o~~";~';;'.L ... . .' \, I !~ II 'I !! . ~ ~ ~ 0- < 0 rr: N w z è z 0 ~ > LU ...-J LU >- 0::: I- Z LU I- Z 0 0::: LL -\j _I ... =\1 ~ '" i£ 8 ~ ' ~ =>~ >\). -J'. '$ -..I. "~ 4. ~ '" \; ~.."... -.{\ . . ~-"' * -", -" . . . . I "0 -;!. q ~ 111 ... 0( \} n Eì <C C> a: [:¡: z è. z 0 I- :;: L.lJ ....J L.lJ >- a:: I- :z: L.lJ I- Z 0 a:: U- . . . ATTACHMENT NO.2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-, R:\D P\2004104-0550 Ruby's RestaurautlSTAFF REPORT - RUBY'S,dutdoc 7 . . . PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA04-0550, A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO AN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR EXTERIOR CHANGES TO ALLOW FOR THE CONVERSION OF A COCO'S RESTAURANT TO A RUBY'S DINER LOCATED AT 26495 YNEZ ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 910-300-013 (PORTION). WHEREAS, Brian Price filed Planning Application No. PA04-0550 (Major Modification) in a manner in accordance 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 a regular meeting, considered the Application on December 15, 2004, 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 eiiher in support or in opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission denied the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findinas. The Planning Commission, in denying the Application hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010F of the Temecula Development Code: A. The proposed Project is in conformance with the General Plan for the City of Temecula, but not 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. However, the proposal does not conform to the performance standards of the Development Code (Section 17.080.070,8.6.) or the standards of the City-Wide Design Guidelines (Sections 86, C3e, C4b, and C6c). B. The overall development of the land is not designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare; The proposed project is consistent with the development standards set forth in the City of Temecula Development Code relative to parking, circulation, and site plan design. However, the architectural design does not conform to the Development Code (Section 17.080.070, 8. 6.) or the City-Wide Design Guidelines (Sections 86, C3e, C4b, and C6c). R:ID Pl2004104-0550 Ruby's RestaunmtlRESO denial.doc Section 3. Projects. Environmental Compliance. CEOA does not require review for denied . Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby denies Planning Application No. PA04-0550 a Major Modification to an Existing Development Plan for exterior changes to allow for the conversion of a Coco's Restaurant to a Ruby's Diner at 26495 Ynez Road. No conditions are proposed for the denial of this project. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the. City of Temecula Planning Commission this 15th day of December 2004. John Telesio, Chairman ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] . STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA ) ) ss ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2004- _was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 15th day of December, 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary . R:ID 1'\2004\04-0550 Ruby's RestaurantIRESO denial.doc . ITEM #11 . . . . . Date of Meeting: Prepared by: File Number STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION December 15, 2004 . Dan Long Title: Associate Planner PA04-0369 PA04-0370 PA04-0371 PA04-0590 Application Type: Tentative Tract Map (32004) General Plan Amendment Specific Plan Amendment Amendment to Development Agreement Project Description: A General Plan Amendment to amend the Land Use Designation from Open Space (OS) to Residential, Low-Medium (LM); a Specific Plan Amendment to change the zoning designation from Open Space (OS) to. Low-Medium (LM) Residential, make modifications to the Fuel Modification Zone boundary, revise the Design Guidelines, change the zoning of PA1O from 20,000 square foot lots to 10,000 square foot lots and general clean-up items throughout the Specific Plan; a Tentative Tract Map (32004) to create an additional 6 lots in PA1A; and Amendment No.1 to the Development Agreement, which modifies the timing of improvements and construction of a new fire station. Recommendation: 0 Approve with Conditions CECA: 0 Deny 0 Continue for Redesign 0 Continue to: [8:J Recommend Approval with Conditions 0 Recommend Denial 0 Categorically Exempt (Class) [8:J Notice of Determination (Section) 15162 0 Negaiive Declaration 0 Mitigated Negative Declaration with Monitoring Plan DEIR R,IS P AI2004104~O371. Roripaugh Ranch-IISTAFF REPORTdoc PROJECT DATA SUMMARY . Applicant: Ashby USA, LLC Completion Date: May 26,2004 Zoning Designation: Specific Plan Site/Surrounding Land Use: Site: Vacant North: South: East: West: Single-Family Residences/Open Space Single-Family Residences Single-Family Residences/Open Space Single-Family ResidencesNacant BACKGROUND SUMMARY ~1. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all concerns have been addressed, and the applicant concurs with the recommended Conditions of Approval. ANALYSIS . The proposed project includes a General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment, a Tentative Tract Map and Amendment No.1 to the Development Agreement. General Plan Amendment The proposed General Plan Amendment is a request to change the Land Use Designation for Planning Area 7B (2.0 acres) from Open Space (OS) to Low-Medium Density, Residential. The current Specific Plan includes two detention basins within the panhandle (PA 7B and PA 7C), designated as Open Space. The adjacent landowner to the west has designed a storm drain system capable of directing the flow from the Roripaugh Ranch project site. As a result, the two- acre detention basin in Planning Area 7B is no longer necessary. The General Plan Amendment, if approved, would allow 6 additional lots in Planning Area 1 A. Specific Plan Amendment The proposed Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Amendment is a request to change the zoning of Planning Area 7B from Open Space to Low Medium Density Residential; change the zoning of Planning Area 10 from Low Density, Residential to Low Estate Density, Residential; modify the location and description of the Fuel Modification Zone, provide additional options to various planning areas for the product type permitted, revise the Design Guidelines to simplify the review process and address various clean-up items such as fencing and the nature trail. The applicant is requesting to change Planning Area 7B from Open Space (OS) to Low Medium Density, Residential (LM). If approved PA7B would be deleted altogether and would become part of PA1A. As noted above, PA 7B is a 2.0 acre detention basin and the proposed change would not reduce the amount of parkland or useable Open Space. The 2.0 acres of area will allow for . R:IS P A 12004104-0371, Roripaugh Ranch-lIST AFF REPORT.doc . . . an additional 6 units within PA 1A bringing to total number of units within the panhandle to 515. The applicant is also requesting a change of zoning of Planning Area 10 from Low Density, Residential (L) to Low-Estate Density, Residential (L-E). The current zoning designation, Low Density, requires a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet; a total of 11 units were anticipated. The proposed request to change the zoning to L-E would allow 10,000 square foot lots and a total of 14 lots are currently anticipated. PA 10'¡s surrounded by land designated as Open Space (OS) and Murrieta Hot Springs Road. There are not any existing residences abutting the Planning Area. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment also includes a request to modify the location and description of the Fuel Modification Zone adjacent Planning Areas 10, 14-17, and 19. The Fuel Modification Zone was initially located within City-owned Open Space habitat area. However subsequent to the adoption of the Specific Plan, state and federal resource agencies determined that the Fuel Modification Zone could not be located within the Open Space habitat area. The Fuel Modification Zone is proposed entirely within the residential planning areas (PA's 10,14-17, and 19) as shown on exhibits 4-34B-1 and 2 and 3-34C-1 and 2 (attachment 4). The initial implementation of the development standards and design guidelines within the Specific Plan has presented some difficulties. Staff has brought a total of five (5) product reviews before the Planning Commission and three of the five applications required continuances for modifications. Staff, therefore, has worked with the applicant to incorporate changes to the development standards and design guidelines in order to simplify the implementation process. The modifications are based upon the previous direction provided by the Planning Commission. This includes additional inspirational photos, a cleaner description of the required elements that are integral parts of the structure and traditional elements shall be provided as opposed to eclectic styles. Staff has worked with the applicant to incorporate these changes into the Design Guidelines. The applicant has provided additional inspirational photos, additional language for required elements and notes regarding integral elements. In addition, the applicant has provided a notè on each architectural style page directing the reader to section 4.10.3 through 4.10.3.9. These sections require further detail to featurès such as doors, windows, entries, garage doors and roof types. In addition to the above amendments to the Specific Plan, the applicant has requested language that provides flexibility in the type of potential product types permitted in Planning Areas 12,14, and 15. These planning areas will maintain the zoning designation of M2, however the amendment will alJow standard and/or clustered products as opposed to only clustered products as the current Specific Plan requires. With all of the above amendments in place, the maximum number of lots will actually be reduced from 2,015 to approximately 1,761, even with the modified zoning and product types permitted. The EIR allows for a total of 2,015 units. Other various amendments to the Specific Plan include clean-up items such as clarifications to the fencing plan, amending the nature trail to coincide with the above changes, modifying the design of the sports park (PA27) to add an additional 1.4 acres of area, and revising the various exhibits and planning area descriptions to reflect the above changes. Tentative Tract Map The applicant is requesting a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide the 2.0 acres of land currently designated as Open Space (OS) in PA7B. The OS area was initially designated as a detention basin; however it is no longer necessary due to recent off-site storm drain improvements. The Tentative Tract Map includes a total of 18 lots; while there will only be a net increase of six lots in R;\S P AI20041O4-037 I. Roripaugh Ranch-IISTAFF REPORTdoc Planning Area 1 A, the proposed changes affects adjacent lots. The proposed map would extend the existing cul-de-sac north into the areas of the deleted detention basin. Staff has reviewed the proposed map and has determined that the map is conformance with the Specific Plan and City's Subdivision Ordinance, including lot area, width and depth. . First Amendment to Development Aareement The proposed request to amenq the Development Agreement includes language that allows a total of 250 building permits to be issued in Planning Areas 1A, 2, 3, 4A and 4B provided the permanent Fire Station and secondary access are substantially under construction. A total of 515 building permits may be issued if, in addition to the Fire Station and secondary access, permanent access from Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Butterfield Stage Road, including bridges and roads are complete upon the opening of the permanent Fire Station. The current Development Agreement requires the fire station and secondary access to be complete or under substantial construction before issuance of the 108th building permit. The Fire Chief has reviewed this request and has determined that the Fire Department can adequately serye up to '250 units within the project during construction of the permanent Fire Station and secondary access. As a result of the First Amendment to the Development Agreement, Attachment 5 of the Development Agreement will be deleted as a binding document and will be replaced with Attachment 5A. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION [8J 1. The proposed project has been determined to be consistent with the previously approved (Negative Declaration) (EIR) and is exempt from further Environmental Review (CEQA Section 15162 subsequent EIR's and Negative Declarations). . CO NCLUSION/R ECOM M EN D A TIO N Staff has reviewed the proposed General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract Map (32004) and the First Amendment to the Development Agreement and has determined that the proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the goals and policies in the related General Plan Amendment and the project is consistent with the adopted and certified ÐR. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the project with the conditions of approval. FINDINGS General Plan Amendment 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the direction, goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The proposed amendment is consistent with the direction, goals and policies of the adopted General Plan because the project site is 2.0 acres and includes a tentative tract map for future development that is consistent with the surrounding developed areas. In addition, the project site is within a Specific Plan in which an EIR has been prepared, adopted, and certified and the proposed amendment is consistent with the review of the . R:IS P A\2004I04-0371. Roripaugh Ranch-llSTAFF REPORT.doc . . . EIR. 2. The proposed amendment will not have an impact on the character of the surrounding area. The proposed amendment will not have an impact on the character of the surrounding area because the project site is surrounded by urban development within City boundaries. The proposed use will remain residential and is consistent with the surrounding residential uses. Specific Plan Amendment 1. The Specific Plan amendment is consistent with the General Plan. The zone change, design guidelines, development standards and various clean-up items are consistent with the related General Plan Amendment for the City of Temecula. The site is physically suitable for the residential uses that will eventually occur in this an:ìa. Tentative Tract Map (Code Section 16.09.1400) 1. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, General Plan and the City of Temecula Municipal Code. Tentative Tract Map No. 32004 is consistent with the General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance, the Development Code, Municipal Code and the related General Plan Amendment because the project has been designed in a manner that it is consistent with the policies and standards in the General Plan, Subdivision Ordinance, Development Code, Municipal Code and related General Plan Amendment. 2. The tentative map does not propose to divide land, which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conseryation Act of 1965. The proposed land division is not land designated for conservation or agricultural use and has never been entered into any Williamson Act Contracts. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. The project consists of an 18-lot Tentative Tract Map on property designated for residential uses, which is consistent with the related General Plan Amendment, as well as, the development standards of the Specific Plan. 4. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The project site does not currently include a creek, wetlands, or habitat subject to environmental review. The project site has been disturbed and is not considered to contain critical habitat. The project consists of a Tract Map on property designated for residential uses, which is consistent with the related General Plan Amendment, as well RoIS P A\2004I04-0371. Roripaugh Ranch-l\STAFF REPORT.doc 5. as the development standards of the Specific Plan. The project has been reviewed subject to CEQA and has been determined to be exempt subject to CEQA Section 15162. An EIR has been prepared, adopted and certified for the project site and the Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the project description of the certified EIR. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. . The project has been reviewed and commented on by the Fire Safety Division and the Building Safety Division. As a result, the project will be conditioned to address their concerns. Further, provisions are made in the General Plan, Development Code and Specific Plan to ensure that the public health, safety and welfare are safeguarded. The project is consistent with these documents. 6. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. Prior to the. construction of any structures the applicant will be required to submit building plans to the Building Department that comply with the Uniform Building Code, which contains requirements for energy conservation. 7. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. . 8. All required rights-of-way and easements have been provided on the Tentative Tract Map. The Public Works Department and Community Services District have reviewed the proposed division of land and adequate conditions and/or modifications have been made to the Tentative Tract Map. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). The proposed project is within an approved Specific Plan area. The Specific Plan was designed and analyzed for a maximum of 2,()15 residential units and parkland has been dedicated using this number. The proposed project will not exceed the maximum number of units in the Specific Plan area and is therefore consistent with Quimby. ATTACHMENTS 1. Specific Plan Addendum - Blue Page 8 2. PC Resolution No. 2004-- (General Plan Amendment, Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Addendum, First Amendment to the Development Agreement and Tentative Tract Map) (32004) - Blue Page 9 CC Draft Resolution No. 05 -- (General Plan Amendment) - Blue Page 10 Exhibit A - Proposed General Plan Designation . 3. R:\S P AI2004104-0371. Roripaugh Ranch-l\STAFF REpORT.doc . . . 4. CC Draft Resolution No. 05 -_(Specific Plan Addendum) - Blue Page 11 Exhibit A - Proposed Specific Plan Addendum Exhibit B - Draft Conditions of Approval 5. CC Draft Ordinance No. 05-- (Specific Plan Zoning Standards) - Blue Page 12 Exhibit A - Proposed Zoning Standards CC Draft Ordinance No. 05- - (First Amendment to Development Agreement) - Blue Page 13 Exhibit A - Draft First Amendment to Development Agreement Exhibit B - Attachment 5A 6. 7. CC Draft Resolution No. 05-- (Tentative Tract Map 32004) - Blue Page 14 Exhibit A - Draft Conditions of Approval Exhibit B - Tentative Tract Map 32004 R:IS P A \2004\04-0371, ROOpaugh Rauch-lIST AFF REPORTdoc . . . ATTACHMENT NO.1 SPECIFIC PLAN ADDENDUM (UNDER SEPARATE COVER) R:\S P AI2004104-0371, Roripaugh Ranch-llSTAFF REPORTdoc . . . ATTACHMENT NO.2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-- GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN ADDENDUM, FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (32004) R:\S P AI2004I04-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-IISTAFF REPORTdoc . . . PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ENTITLED: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (PA04-0370) TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF PLANNING AREA 7B IN THE RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN FROM OPEN SPACE (OS) TO LOW MEDIUM, RESIDENTIAL (LM)", "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULAAPPROVING A SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT (PAO4- 0371) TO CHANGE PLANNING AREA 7B FROM OPEN SPACE (OS) TO LOW MEDIUM, RESIDENTIAL (LM), PLANNING AREA 10 FROM LOW DENSITY, RESIDENTIAL TO LOW-ESTATE, RESIDENTIAL (L-E) , AND MAKE OTHER CHANGES TO THE RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN", "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING REVISED RESIDENTIAL ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (PA04-0371) FOR THE RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN", "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OFTEMECULAAPPROVING A FIRST AMENDMENTTO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (PA04-0590) FOR THE RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN" AND "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32004 (PA04-0369), GENERALLY LOCATED NEAR THE FUTURE INTERSECTION OF MURRIETA HOT SPRINGS ROAD AND POURROY ROAD." WHEREAS, On November 26,2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted and certified an Environmental Impact Report (PA94-0076), a General Plan Amendment (PA99-0298), the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan (PA94-0075), a Change of Zone (PA94-0075), a Development Agreement (PA99-0299) and Tentative Tract Maps 29661 (PA01-0253) and 29353 (PA01-0230); WHEREAS, Ashby USA, LLC, filed Planning Application Nos. PA04-0370, General Plan Amendment; PA04-0371 , Specific Plan Amendment; PA04-0590 Amendment to a Development Agreement; and PA04-0369, Tentative Parcel Map (32004) generally located atthe intersection of Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Butterfield Stage Road, known as Tract 29353 ("project"); WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on December 15, 2004 to consider the applications for the Project and environmental review, 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; R:IS P A\20041O4-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\Oraft pc Resolution.DOC 1 .. 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. Findinas. That the Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the General Plan Amendment (PA04-0370), hereby finds the following: A. The proposed amendment is consistent with the direction, goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The proposed amendment is consistent with the direction, goals and policies of the adopted General Plan because the project site is 2.0 acres and includes a tentative tract map for future development that is consistent with the surrounding developed areas. In addition, the project site is within a specific plan in which an EIR has been prepared, adopted, and certified and the proposed amendment is coQsistent with the review of the EIR. B. The proposed amendment will not have an impact on the character of the surrounding area. The proposed amendment will not have an impact on the character of the surrounding area because the project site is surrounded by urban development within City boundaries. The proposed use will remain residential and is consistent with the surrounding residential uses. Section 3. Findinas. That the Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the Specific Plan Amendment (PA04-0371), hereby finds the following: . A. The Specific Plan amendment is consistent with the general plan. The zone change, design guidelines and development standards are consistent with the related General Plan Amendment for the City of T emecula. The site is physically suitable for the residential uses that will eventually occur in this area. Section 4. Findinas. That the Planning Commission, in recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map (PA04-0369), hereby finds as required in Section 16.09.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code. A. The propOsed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision is consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, and the City of Temecula Municipal Code. Tentative Tract Map No. 32004 is consistent with the General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance, the Development Code, Municipal Code and the related General Plan Amendment because the project has been designed in a manner that it is consistent with the policies and standards in the General Plan, Subdivision Ordinance, Development Code, Municipal Code and related General Plan Amendment. B. The tentative map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965. R:\S P A\2004104.0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\Oraft pc Resolution.OOC 2 . . . . The proposed land division is not land designated for conservation or agricultural use and has never been entered into any Williamson Act Contracts. C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. The project consists of an 18-lot Tentative Tract Map on property designated for residential uses, which is consistent with the related General Plan Amendment, as well as, the development standards of the Specific Plan. D. The design of the proposed subdivision and the proposed improvements, with appropriate conditions of approval, is not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The project site does not currently include a creek, wetlands, or habitat subject to environmental review. The project site has been disturbed and is not considered to contain critical habitat. The project consists of a Tract Map on property designated for residential uses, which is consistent with the related General Plan Amendment, as well as the development standards of the Specific Plan. The project has been reviewed subject to CEQA and has been determined to be exempt subject to CEQA Section 15162. An EIR has been prepared, adopted and certified for the project site and the Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the project description of the certified EIR. E. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed and commented on by the Fire Safety Division and the Building Safety Division. As a result, the project will be conditioned to address their concems. Further, provisions are made in the General Plan, Development Code and Specific Plan to ensure that the public health, safety and welfare are safeguarded. The project is consistent with these documents. F. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natura/ heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. Prior to the construction of any structures the applicant will be required to submit building plans to the Building Department that comply with the Uniform Building Code, which. contains requirements for energy conservation. G. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. All required rights-of-way and easements have been provided on the Tentative Tract Map. The Public Works Department and Community Services District have reviewed the proposed division of land and adequate conditions and/or modifications have been made to the Tentative Tract Map. R:\S P A\2004104-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-110raft pc Resolution.OOC 3 H. (Quimby). The subdivision is consistent with the City's Parkland dedication requirements The proposed project is within an approved specific plan area. The specific plan was designed and analyzed for a maximum of 2,015 residential units and parkland has been dedicated using this number. The proposed project will not exceed the maximum number of units in the specific plan area and is therefore consistent with Quimby. Section 5. Environmental Compliance. The proposed project is consistent with the original adopted and certified EIR (PA94-0076) for the project site. CEQA Section 15162 states that when an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless there are substantial changes not discussed or examined in the EIR. Therefore the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council make a finding, pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines that no additional environmental review is necessary. Section 6. Recommendation. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula hereby recommends that the City Council approve the General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment, Zoning Standards, First Amendment to the Development Agreement and Tentative Tract Map 32004 substantially in the form contained in Attachments 3 through 7 respectively together with any and all c;>ther necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary. Section 7. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 15'h day of December, 2004. John Telesio, Chairman ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] R:IS P A\2004\O4-Q371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\Draft pc Resolution.DOC 4 . . . . . . STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA ) ) ss ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No.2004-- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 15'h day of December 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: PLANNING.COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:IS P A12004104-0371 , Roripaugh RanCh-1lDraft PC Resolution.DOC 5 . . . ATTACHMENT NO.3 CC DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 05-- GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT RIS P A\2004I04-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-llSTAFF REPORTdoc 10 . . . CC RESOLUTION NO. 05-- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF PLANNING AREA 7B IN THE RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN FROM OPEN SPACE (OS) TO LOW MEDIUM, RESIDENTIAL (LM), LOCATED NEAR THE FUTURE INTERSECTION OF MURRIETA HOT SPRINGS ROAD AND POURROY ROAD. ~/ WHEREAS, On December 17, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted and approved Planning Application PA94-0076 (Environmental Impact Report), PA99-0298 (General Plan Amendment), PA94-0073 (Annexation), PA94-0075 (Specific Plan, Development Code Amendment, and Specific Plan Zoning Standards), PA94-0075 (Change of Zone), PA99- 0299 (Development Agreement), PA01-0253 (Tentative Tract Map 29661), and PA01-0230 (Tentative Tract Map 29353); WHEREAS, On May, 26, 2004, Ashby USA, LLC filed Planning Application No. PA04- 0370 (the "Application"), in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code, CEQA Guidelines and California State CEQA Guidelines; WHEREAS, the Application 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 the Application on December 15, 2004, 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 opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearings and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; . WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Application on , 2005, 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; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Council approved of the Application, and approved a Notice of Determination, made all required findings and determinations relative thereto after finding that the project proposed in the Application conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan as amended; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULADOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findings. That the City Council, in approving the Application, hereby. makes the following findings: R:\S P A\2004\04-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1lCC GPA Draft Resolution.doc . 1 Section 17.16.020.E 1-4 : A. The proposed amendment is consistent with the direction, goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The proposed amendment is consistent with the direction, goals and policies of the adopted General Plan because the project site is 2.0 acres and includes a tentative tract map for future development that is consistent with the surrounding developed areas. In addition, the project site is within a specific plan in which an EIR has been prepared, adopted, and cert;fied and the proposed amendment is consistent with the review of the EIR. B. The. The proposed amendment will not have an impact on the character of the surrounding area. The proposed arr¡endment will not have an impact on the character of the surrounding area because the project site is surrounded by urban development within City boundaries. The proposed use will remain residential and is consistent with the surrounding residential uses. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The proposed project is consistent with the original adopted and certified EIR (PA94-0076) for the project site. CEOA Guidelines Section 15162 states than when an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless there are substantial changes not discussed or examined in the EIR. Therefore the City Council, pursuant to Section 15162 of CEOA Guidelines finds that no additional environmental review is necessary. Section 4. General Plan Amendment. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves the Application to amend the General Plan Land Use Map from Open Space (OS) to Low Medium (LIlA) Density, Residential for Planning Area 7B of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan on property located near the future intersection of Murrieta Hot Springs Road and pourroy Road. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this - day of ~2005. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] R:\S P A\2004104-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC GPA Draft Resolution.doc 2 . . . . . . STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA ) ) ss ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 05-- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of 2005, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk R:\S P A\2004104-Q371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC GPA Draft Resolution.doc 3 . . . EXHIBIT A PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION R:IS P A\2004104-0371, Roripaugh Ranch-1lCC GPA Draft Resolution.doc 4 . 8 ¡ ..... "'" c .... ~. :;¡.: c: 'J::; ..... ~' ::tJ ~ .;; :::¡.. . . ~m~m 1 ~ ;¡~õ~~~ i 0 ~~~~Q¡¡ ø m8"~~~ . ~o3~~~ ~ ~~~~ø~ l ~~r~~3 [ §~ 3Ø~ Ii § ~~ ~ ~ g¡¡~<~r i I. I g .., ¡¡¡ c;; ;q m ¡; I I ----_J Existing General Plan Lanc!.~_~~.P:.~!2!!1!!~.!1.':; I 8 ! ..... """ ~ .:;. Ì!! ¡:: ;¡; :=-;0,.,. 4J} ::;:: ~ ?i ;::::-- . oz~~rr f . ;¡:~~~~~ . ;;¡~"C~~ 0 ~~~~~~ ~ ~o§~~;:: [ ~~~;::ø~ ~ ~~r.;~ ! 8~ ~~ïi ~ g~ ~~ If § ~ ~ r g¡¡~~~r ~ . g -n ¡¡; c: ;u m & . Proposed General Plan Lan<!.Y_~~--~~~2!!1~~ry!, I . . . ATTACHMENT NO.4 CC DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 05-- SPECIFIC PLAN ADDENDUM R:\S P A \2004\04-0371, Roripaugh Rauch-! 1ST AFF REPORT.doc 11 . . . CC RESOLUTION NO. 05-- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA04- 0371 (SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT) TO CHANGE THE ZONING OF PLANNING AREA 7B FROM OPEN SPACE (OS) TO LOW MEDIUM, RESIDENTIAL (LM), CHANGE THE ZONING OF PLANNING AREA 10 FROM LOW, RESIDENTIAL (L) TO LOW- ESTATE, RESIDENTIAL (L-E), MODIFY THE FUEL MODIFICATION ZONE BOUNDARY, ADD ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR ACCEESsORY STRUCTURES, AMEND VARIOUS PLANNING AREA DESCRIPTIONS, REVISE THE DESIGN GUIDELINES, AND MAKE OTHER MINOR CHANGES FOR THE RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN. WHEREAS, On December 17, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted and approved Planning Application PA94-0076 (Environmental Impact Report), PA99-0298 (General Plan Amendment), PA94-0073 (Annexation), PA94-0075 (Specific Plan, Development Code Amendment, and Specific Plan Zoning Standards), PA94-0075 (Change of Zone), PA99- 0299 (Development Agreement), PA01-0253 (Tentative Tract Map 29661), and PA01-0230 (Tentative Tract Map 29353); , WHEREAS, On May 26, 2004, Ashby USA, LLC filed Planning Application Nos. PA04- 0371 (the "Application"), in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code, CEOA Guidelines and California State CEOA Guidelines; , WHEREAS, the Application 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 the Application on December 15, 2004, 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 opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the cònclusion of the Commission hearings and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Application on , 2005, 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; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Council approved of the Application, approved a Notice of Determination after finding that the project proposed in the Application conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan as amended; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: 'R:\S P A\2004íO4-0371. Roripaugh Ranch.1\CC SPA Draft Resolution,doc 1 Section 1, That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. . I Section 2. Findinas. That the City Council, in approving the Application, hereby makes the following findings as required in Chapter 17.16.020.E of the Temecula Municipal Code: A. . The Specific Plan amendment is consistent with the general plan. The zone change, design guidelines and development standards are consistent with the related General Plan Amendment for the City of Temecula. The site is physically suitable for the residential, uses that will eventually occur in this area. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The proposed project is consistent with the original adopted and certified EIR (PA94-0076) for the project site. CEOA Guidelines Section 15162 states than when ,an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless there are substantial changes not discussed or examined in the EIR. Therefore the City Council, pursuant to Section 15162 of CEOA Guidelines finds t~at no additional environmental review is necessary. Section 4. SpeCific Plan. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves the Specific Plan Amendment known as the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Amendment subject to the Conditions of Approval included in Exhibit B and as shown on Exhibit A (the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Al')lendment No.1),. on property locate near the future intersection of Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Butterfield Stage Road, subject to that attached Conditions of Approval. . Section 5. Conditions. The City Council of the City of Temecula approves the Applications for all of the foregoing reasons and subject to the project specific conditions set forth on Exhibit B, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all other necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary. Section 6. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Department this - day of _2005. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] . R:\S P A\2004104-o371. Roripaugtl Ranch-1\CC SPA Draft Resolution.doc 2 . . . STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA ) ) ss ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 05-- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of 2005, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: -NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: R:\S P A\2004\O4-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC SPA Draft Resolution.doc 3 Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk . . . EXHIBIT A PROPOSED SPECIFIC PLAN ADDENDUM R:IS P A\2004104-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC SPA Draft Resolution.doc 4 . . . EXHIBIT B DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RIS P A\2004104-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1lCC SPA Draft Resolution.doc 5 . . . EXHIBIT B CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA04-0371 Project Description: An Amendment to the Roripaugh Ranch SpecificPhm Per Development Agreement DIF: TUMF: Per Development Agreement MSHCP: Per Development Agreement Approval Date: December 15, 2004 Expiration Date: December 15, 2007 PLANNING DIVISION Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. The applicanVdeveloper 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 applicanVdeveloper 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 òf condition (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)). General Requirements 2. . 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:\S P A\2004104-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1lCC SPA Oraft Resolution.doc 6 3. Approval of this Specific Plan is contingent upon and shall not become'effective nor shall it vest until a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Zone Change are approved by the City Council, and a Notice of Determination or any other environmental review under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) are approved by the City Council.. 4. The approval granted by this Resolution shall become effective upon the Effective Date of the First Amendment to the Development Agreement, as the term Effective Date is defined in the First Amendment of the Development Agreement adopted concurrently with this Resolution. In addition to the foregoing, in the event an amended Development Agreement is entered into that supercedes or alters these conditions of approval and the applicant causes a default or terminates by conduct the amended Development Agreement, then the City shall immediately consider the revocation of the approval granted by this Resolution. 5. The applicant shall provide within 30 days of approval by the City Council additional and/or replace the residential inspiration photos in the Design Guidelines to reflect a high quality, realistic development, subject to the approval of the Planning Director. Applicant's Signature Date Applicant's Printed Name R\S P A\2004104-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC SPA Draft Resolution.doc 7 . . . . . . ATTACHMENT NO.5 CC DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 05-- SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING STANDARDS KIS P A\2004I04-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1ISTAFFREPORT.doc 12 . . . CC ORDINANCE NO. 05-- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA04- 0371 (SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT) TO AMEND THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF THE RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN TO INCLUDE A LOW- ESTATE ZONE, AND ADD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, GARAGES AND ENCROACHMENTS INTO YARD AREAS. WHEREAS, On December 17, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted and approved Planning Application PA94-0076 (Environmental Impact Report), PA99-0298 (General Plan Amendment), PA94-0073 (Annexation), PA94-0075 (Specific Plan, Development Code Amendment, and Specific Plan Zoning Standards), PA94-0075 (Change of Zone), PA99- 0299 (Development Agreement), PA01-0253 (Tentative Tract Map 29661), and PA01-0230 (Tentative Tract Map 29353); WHEREAS, On May 26, 2004, Ashby USA, LLC filed Planning Application No. PA04- 0371 (the "Application"); in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code, CEOA Guidelines and California State CEOA Guidelines; WHEREAS, the Application 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 the Application on December 15, 2004, 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 opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearings and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Application on , 2005, 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; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Council approved of the Application, approved a Notice of Determination after finding that the project proposed in the Application conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan as amended; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL 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. R:IS P A\2004104-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC SPA Draft Ordinance.doc 1 Section 2. Findings. That the City Council, in approving the Application, hereby makes the following findings as required in Chapter 17.16.020.E of the Temecula Municipal Code: . Section 17.16.020.E1-4 A. The Specific Plan amendment is consistent with the general plan. The zone change, design guidelines, development standards and various clean-up items are consistent with the related General Plan Amendment for the City of Temecula. The site is physically suitable for the residential uses that will eventually occur in this area. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The proposed project is consistent with the original adopted and certified EIR (PA94-0076) for the project site. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 states than when an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been (;ertified for a project, no subsequent EIR shall. be prepared for that project unless there are substantial changes not discussed or examined in the EIR. Therefore the City Council, pursuant to Section 15162 of CEQA Guidelines finds that no additional environmental review is necessary. Section 4. Specific Plan. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves the Specific Plan Amendment known as the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Amendment No.1 as shown on Exhibit A (the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Amendment No.1, Zoning Standards), on property locate near the future intersection of Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Butterfield Stage Road, subject to that attached Conditions of Approval. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Department this~ day of_2005. . Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W.Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA . RIS P A\2004104-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC SPA Draft Ordinance.doc 2 . . . COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA ) ss ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2005-- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of 2005, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk R:IS P A\2004\O4.0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1lCC SPA Draft Ordinance.doc 3 . . . EXHIBIT A PROPOSED ZONING STANDARDS R:\S P A\2004104-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC SPA Draft Ordinance.doc 4 '. ;. ¡ . r , J 1 SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE OVERVIEW Section V of the Specific Plan Amendment Addendum coniains the Amended Specific' Plan Zoning Ordinance. Standards have been added the Low Density Estates (L-E) for Planning Area 10 and allowing single-family detached units in Planning Areas 12, 14 and 15. Table 5.1 (Schedule of Permitted Uses- Residential Districts) has been expanded to include the L-E designation. Table 5.2-1 (Accessory Structures -Setbacks) and Table 5.2-2 (Maximum Encroachments into Required Yard Areas) have been added. 5.1 PURPOSE AND INTENT The zoning for the Specific Plan area is Specific Plan Overlay. This section of the Specific Plan establishes zoning districts and land use regulations and standards that will control land use and development in the land uses identified for the Specific Plan area. These regulations amend and supersede the regulations of the Temecula Development Code. Where standards and regulations are not specified in this Specific Plan, the requirements of the Temecula Development Code shall provide the regulatory authority. This section also identifies the procedures to be used to review site plans for development projects proposed within the Specific Plan area. Special standards for residèntial development are also inclùded here. The Site Planning and Architectural Design Guidelines in Section 4.0 are intended to be used in conjunction with the zoning and development standards stated here. The following standards will serve as the primary mechanism for implementation of the land uses for the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan: These regulations provide an appropriate amount of flexibility to ~nticipate future needs and to achieve compatibility between land uses. Principal land uses for the Specific Plàn shall be as follows: ' 1. Residential Land Uses: . Low Density (L) Single-Family Detached: (PA -W, 19, 20, 21, 33A and 338) . Low Density Estates (L-E) Single-Family Detached (PA10) . Low Medium (LM) Density Single-Family Detached: (PA 1A-4B, 16 -18) . Medium (M1) Density Single-Family Detached: (PA 23 and 24) . Medium (M2) Density Single-Family Detached anI! ,'\ttaehel! ¡¡II/sterel!: (PA 12, 14-, and 15-, ~) . Medium (M2) Density Attached clustered: (PA 22 and 31) 2. Commercial: . Neighborhood Commercial: (PA 11) 3. Parks and Open Space: . Private Recreation Centers (PA 5, 30) . Private Mini-Park (PA 1B) . Parks CPA 6, 27) . Open Space Habitat (OS1): (PA 8, 9A, 9B, and 13) Flood Control (OS2): (PA +8, 7C, 25, 26, and portions of 14 and 27) Landscape Slope (OS3): (PA 7A and portion of 6) Elementary and Middle School: (PA: 28 and 29) 4. 5. Fire Station: (PA 32) Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan. Amendment No.1 37 December, 2004 SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN :ZONING ORDINANCE 5.2 -, J GENERAL PROVISIONS . This section of the development regulations states the general rules that must be observed by all development projects in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare. These regulations apply to all planning areas within the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan, unless otherwise specified. 1. Roripaugh Ranch Site Planning and Architectural Design Guidelines All ¡levelopment within the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan area is subject to the policy provisions ofthe Site Planning (Section 4.0) and Architectural Design Guidelines (Section 4.0) adopted by ordinance ofthè Temecula City Council. The Design Guidelines in conjunction with the development standards contained in this Specific Plan and those of the Temecula Development Code shall regulate development within the Specific Plan area. The Design Guidelines will be administered through the City of Temecula Planning Department. All development within the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan area shall be subject to the Development Standards in this section of the Specific Plan. 2. Code Compliance All construction and development within the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan area shall comply with applicable provisions of the Specific Plan, the Uniform Building Code and the various related mechanical, electrical, plumbing and fire codes, water ordinance, grading and excavation codes and subdivision codes, in effect in the City of Temecula at the time grading/building permits are obtained. - 3. Setback Requirements The setback requirements are as specified within the standards identified in the plan for each zoning district. If not otherwise specified, all setbacks shall be determined as the perpendicular distance from the existing or planned street right-of-way line or property line, to the foundation point ofthe closest structure. . 4. Exceptions If specific development standards have not been established or if an issue, condition or situation arises or occurs that is not clearly understandable in the Specific Plan, then those regulations and standards of the City of Temecula Development Code that are applicable for the most similar use, condition or situation shall apply as determined by the Community Development Director. 5. Enforcement Enforcement of the provisions herein shall be in the manner specified in the Temecula Municipal Code for zoning enforcement. 6. Unspecified Uses Whenever a use has not specifically been listed as being a permitted use in a particular zone classification within the Specific Plan, it shall be the duty of the Planning Director to determine if said use is: (1) consistent with the intent of the zone; and (2) compatible with other listed permitted uses. Any person aggrieved by the decision may appeal to the Planning Commission. . 38 Roripaugh Ranch SpecifIC Plan, Amendment No.1 December,2OO4 ¡. ¡ I "' :. r , J 1. i SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE 5.3 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan provides a mix of diverse housing products, including five different housing types that fall within three of the City's General Plan residential designations: Specific Plan Desiqnation L (20,Cíoo sq. ft.) Single-Family (1-2 dulac) L-E (10,000 sq. ft.) Single-Family (1-2 du/ac) LM (5,000 and 6,000) Single-Family (2-5 dulac) (Min. 5,000 sf lot size) M1 and M2 (4,000 and NA) Single-Family (7-12 du/ac) M1: Min. (standard) 4,000 sf lot size M2: Min. (clustered) 3,g99 sf let !¡ize fer EletaeheEl M2: Min. (attached) 3,000 sf lot size Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan, Amendment No" 1 Temecula General Plan Residential Desiqnation Low Density Residential Single-Family (.5-2 du/ac) Low Density Residential Single-Family (.5-2 du/ac) Low Medium Density Residential Single-Family (3-6 dulac) Medium Density Residential Single-Family (7-12 dulac) 39 December, 2004 SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE 5,3.1 DESCRIPTION OF RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (L) - PLANNING AREAS NOS. to, 19, 20, 21, 33A AND 338 . The Low Density Residential (L) zoning district is intended to' provide for the development of single- family detached homes on large lots with a unique character of development. Typical lot sizes in the Lzoningdistrictwill be a minimum of20,OOO square feet with 1 acre minimum lots along the exterior perimeter of Planning Areas 19, 20, 21, and 33A. Private equestrian use will only be allowed on lots one acre or larger adjacent to the multi-use trail in Planning Areas 19, 20, 21. Planning Area 338 shall not be developed as a part of Roripaugh Ranch. This planning area shall eventually be combined with the adjacent residential areas to the north. LOW DENSITY ESTATES RESIDENTIAL (L-E) - PLANNING AREA NO. 10 The Low Density Estates Residential (L-E) zoning district is intended to provide for the . development of single-family detached homes on large lots with a unifue character of development. Typical lot sizes in the L-E zoning district will be a minimum of 10,000 square feet. LOW MEDIUM DENSITY (LM) - PLANNING AREAS NOS.1A, 2, 3, 4A, 48,16,17 and 18 The Low Medium (LM) zoning district is intended to provide for the development of single-family homes on lots of 5,000 square feet to 6,000 square feet. Planning Areas 1, 2, 3, 4A, 48, and 16 shall have a minimum lot size of 5,000 sq. ft. Plànning Areas 17 and 18 shall have a minimum lot size of 6,000 sq. ft. MEDIUM DENSITY - STANDARD (M1) - PLANNING AREAS NOS. 23 AND 24 . The Medium (M) zoning district is intended to provide for the development of single-family homes on lots 4,000 minimum square feet. MEDIUM DENSITY - DETACHED OR CLUSTERED (M2) - PLANNING AREAS NOS. 12, 14, 15,22 AND 31 The Medium (M) zoning district is intended to provide for the development of detached or clustered single-family development on minimum lot sizes of 3,000 sq. ft. Planning Areas 12, 14 and 15 will be allowed to have the option of clustered or detached units, Planning Areas 22 and 31 shall contain clustered units. . 40 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan, Amendment No.1 December, 2004 i. .1 I ;. 1 ¡ ¡ ¡. r j J SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE 5.3.2 USE REGULATIONS The list of land uses in the following table shall be permitted in one or more of the residential zoning districts as indicated in the columns corresponding to each residential zoning district. Where indicated with a letter ~P", the use shall be a permitted use. Where indicated with a "-", the use is prohibited within the zone. Where indicated with a letter "C", the use shall be conditionally permitted subject to approval of a conditional use permit. Table 5.1 '"' Schedule of Permitted Uses - Residential Districts Description of Use L L-E LM M1 M2 Single-family detached p P P P p' Single-family attached - . - - p Single-family zero lot line . p p - - - Single-family attached greater than two units - - - - - Multiple family - - - - - Manufactured homes P P P P P Mobilehome park - - - - - Facilities for the mentally disordered, handicapped, or dependent P P P P P or neglected children (six or fewer) Facilities for the mentally disordered, handicapped. or dependent - - - or neglected childrèn (seven to twelve) Alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facility (six or P P P P P fewer) AlcoholiSm or drug abuse recovery or treatment facility (seven or - - - - more) Residential care facilities for the elderly (six or fewer) P P P P P Residential care facilities for the elderly (seven or more) - - Congregate care residential facilities for the elderly - - - - - Boarding, rooming and lodging facilities - - - Secondary dwelling units as defined by City Development Code P P P - - Granny Flat P P P - Family day care homes-small (four or fewer) P P P P P Family day care homes~arge' C C C - Day care centers C C C - - Bed and breakfast establishments - - Emergency sheiters - - - - 41 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan. Amendment No.1 Pecember,2OO4 SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE , , Description of Use L L-E LM M1 M2 Transitional housing - - - - - Nonresidential AgriculturaVopen space uses . - - - - - Religious institutions. C C C C C Utility facilities C C C C C . Educational institutions - - - - - Public libraries - - - - - Public museums and art galleries (not for profit) - - - - - Kennels and catteries - - - - - Non commercial keeping of horses P. P - - - Temporary real estate tract offices P P P P P Recreational Vehicle storage Yards - - - - - Parking for commercial uses - - - - Nonprofit clubs and lodge halls - - - - - Convalescent facilities - - - - - Gall Courses . - - - - - Home occupations P P P P P Construction Trailers' P P P P P 1 1. A CUP processed for large family day care homes is subject to Heafth and Safety Code Section 1597.46(a)(3). In accordan'è" therewith,.n".tice of the application being filed shall be mailed to surrounding property ownerswilhinoneh\Jndred feet only and the notice shall indicate that unless a request for a hearing is made by such surrounding property owner or other "affected person", the CUP will issue within twenty days of the notice. If a hearing is requested, the planning department shall schedule such hearing within thirty days of the request and the hearing shall be held within thirty days of being scheduled. Allowed only within a single-family residence. . The Planning Director shall have the discretion to waive submittal of an Administrative Deveiopment Plan if ft is determined that the construction trailer will not have an adverse impact on adjacent residences or businesses. The keeping of horses shall only be permitted in Planning Areas 1 g, 20 and 21 on lots abutting the multi-use trail. No more than two (2) horses and one (1) offspring up to six (6) months of age maybe kept on each one acre lot. All horses shall be kept in a stalVcoral (12' x 12' for each horse) located a minimum distance of fifty (50) feet from neighboring dwellings, ten (10) feet from the main dwelling on the lot and ten (10) feet from the side or rear property line. Religious institutions shall not be permitted in Planning Areas 1A, 2, 3, 4A and 48. Planning Areas 12, 14 and 15 will be allowed to have the option of clustered or detached units. Planning Areas 22 and 31 shall contain clustered units. 2. 3. 4. ¡ j 5. 6. 42 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan, Amendment No.1 December. 2004 . . . ¡. ! I :. , ¡ ¡ ¡. 1 J SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE 5.3.3 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS In the Low IL), Low Estates (L-E) Low Medium (LM) and Medium (M) Zones are as follows: Table 5.2 Development standards 0 Residential Districts Residential Development L L-E LM LM M1 M2 Standards 20,000 10,000 5,000 6,000 4,000 (Minirmnn Lot Size in Feet) Planning Area 40, 19, 20, 10 1A, 2, 3, 17 and 18 23 and 24 12,14,15, 21,33A 4A, 4B 22 and 31 and 33B and 16 Minimum gross lot area Isquare 20,000 10,000 5,000 6,000 4,000 3,000 feet) 1 acre" 0" Lots in PA 19, 20 and 21 that abut eastem and southem property boundary shall be a minimum of.1 acre. Thirty (30) foot fuel modification zone shall not be included in lot area. Lots along the western perimeter of PA 33A & 338 shall be a minimum of 1 acre. Dwelling units per net acre 1.2 dulac 1.7 dulac 5.2 dulac 4.0 dulac 6.1 dulac 10.1 dulac Minimum lot frontage at front 30ft. 25ft. 25ft 25ft. 25ft NA Dtooertv line Minimum lot frontage for a flag lot 25ft 20ft. 20ft. 20ft 20ft. NA at front property line Minimum width at required front 50ft 40ft. 40ft 40ft 40ft NA yard setback area Minimum lot width 60ft. 50ft. 40ft 40ft 40ft 40ft . The lot width for both 20.000 sq. ft lots and 1 acre lots shall be substantially the same. Minimum.lot depth ,gO ft 80ft. 80ft. 80ft. 80ft NA ...".. Minimum front yard setback 25ft 20ft. 10ft 10ft 10 ft 10 ft. . Front entry 18 ft. 18 ft. 18 ft. 18 ft. 18 ft 18 ft . Side entry garages 10 ft. 10ft. 10 ft 10 ft 10ft. 10 ft. . Lots abutting Murrieta Hot Springs between Pourroy Rd. and the MWD easement may be reduced by three (3) feet. ~œ\I'c~m corner side yard 15ft. 15ft. 15ft. 15ft. 15 ft. 15 ft. Note: Setbacks for structures located adjacent to the Fuel Modification Zones shall be determined at the Tentative Map stage, based on the criteria provided by the City Fire and Planning Departments. 43 Roripaugh Ranch SpeCif'1C Plan, Amendment No.1 Pecember, 2004 î SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE Residential Development L L-E LM LM M1 M2 Standards 20,000 10,000 5,000 6,000 (Standard) ~ (Minimwn Lot Size in Feet) 4,000 . Planning Area 40, 19, 20, 10 1,2,3, 4A, 17 and 18 23 and 24 12, 14, 15, 21,33A 48 and 16 22 and 31 and 338 "Minimum interior side yard 10ft. 10ft. 5ft. 5ft. 5ft. 3ft. setback Minimum rear yard setback 20ft. 20ft. 20ft. 20ft. 15ft., 15ft. front - Setbacks for lots abutting - - 25ft. - .. loaded Planning Area 7A along the garage southem'property line shall have a 25' minimum rear yard setback. - Lots abutting Multi-use trail in .. .. - PA 19, 20 and 21. .. Setbacks for lots abutting 50ft. 5ft. rear Murrieta Hot Springs between 50ft. loaded Pourroy Rd. and the MWD garage easement may be reduced by staff by three (3) feet. Minimum Rear Yard Setbacks - .. Peep Recessed 5ft. 5ft. 5ft. 5ft. 5ft. 5ft. - Rear Access - .. 3ft. 3ft. 3ft. 3ft. Maximum height 2 stories, 2 stories, 2 stories, 2)01; 2 ~ stories, 2 ~stories. 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet stories, 35 35 feet 35 feet feet Maximum percentage of lot SO% 50% 60% 60% 60% 60% coverage Minimum Garage Size (interior 20' x 20' 20' x 20' 20' x 20' 20' x 20' 20' x 20' 20' x 20' space) ..... . Fireplaces may project not more than two (2) leet into the side yard setback provided the width 01 the fireplace does not exceed eight (8) leet in width. Note: Setbacks for struc,tures located adjacent to the Fuel Modification Zones shall be determined at the Tentative Map stage, based on the criteria provided by the City Fire and Planning Departments. 44 Roripaugh Ranch SpecifIC Plan, Amendment No.1 December. 2004 . . . I. I j :. ì ¡ ¡ I. 1 1 SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE .5.3.4 ACCESSORY STRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The following development standards shall apply to all residential developments In all of the residential districts within the Specific Plan. In the event of a discrepancy or ambiguity of these standards, the DIrector of Planning shall have the authority to determine the appropriate standard on a case-by-<:ase basis. Side Not permitted In the actual front yard to the rear yard to the side yard setbacks In Table 17.06.040 cks In Table 17.06.040 of the Temecula Developmen the Temecula Development. Code Code Refer to the rear.yard Refer to the side yard setbacks.ln Table 17.06.040 setbacks In Table 17.06.040 of the Temecula Development of the Temecula Developmen Code Code 5 fl min. b~ ~:~ess than 151 centerline of alley II 3fl II I LJarage 20 fl 0 in. (Entrance faces street) 10 fl 0 in. (If Entrance from side not facing front yard) Storage/utility I Not permitted Enclosure ISwlmming poor" I Swimming pool Equipment ISpa 5 fl min. 3fl Not permitted Not permitted. 5fl 3fl 5 fl. 3fl 3fl 5f!. 5f!. 3fl 5f!. 5fl (10flifacomer lot). 3 fl 0 In. 5 fl min. 5 fl min. 3f!.0In. 5 fl min. 5 fl min. 15fl Must meet district standards 1. On a corner lot, accessory structures are not permitted unless otherwise noted above. 2. Accessory structures with walls must be separated from other accessory and primary structures by at least six feel 3. Second units and granny flats that are attached to the main structure shall comply with the setback and yard requirements contained in Table 5.2. 4. Not permitted In the M1 and M2 zones. Note: Setbacks for structures located adjacent to the Fuel Modification Zones shall be determined at the Tentative Map stage, based on the criteria provided by the City Fire and Planning Departments. Rortpaugh Ranch Speciroc Plan. Amendment No:1 45 December. 2004 , , l SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE 5.3.5 YARD ENCROACHMENT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The following development standards shall apply to all residential developments In all of the residential districts within the SpecifIC Plan. In the event of a discrepancy or ambiguity of these standards, the Director of Planning shall have the authority to determine the appropriate standard on a case-by-case basis. . -, j I -1 l " Item Architectural features (such as wall projections, eaves, overhangs, extensions, decorative materials and artwork). ' wning or canopy (with no vertical supports) Awning or canopy (with vertical supports measured at vertical supports). Table 5.2-2 Maximum Encroachments Into Required Yard Areas II Maximum ~~~o:;:,~ments Into I Front II Rear, 1\ \ 2~ II 2~ II Side' 'r 2ft. 4~Oln. 6~Oln. 4~Oln. 6~Oin. 3~Oin. 3~Oln. onles or stairways I 3 ~ 6 in. II, 3 ~ 6 in. windows I 2 ~ 6 in. I 2 ~ 6 in. Chimneys and air conditioning units I 2 ~ 0 In. I 2 ~ 6 In. porch II 6 ~ 0 In. I 3 ~ 0 in. Stalrwaylandlngs 1\ 6~Oln. I 6~Oln. 1. On.a corner lot, projections permitted In a front yard setback also apply to a street side yard. 2. The deck and Its railing shall not exceed the building height limit for the applicable zoning district 1\ 3~Oin. 3~6In. . Note: Setbacks for structures located adjacent to the Fuel Modification Zones shall be determined at the Tentative Map stage; based on the criteria provided by the City Fire and Planning Departments. ¡ 1 i j . 1 46 Roripaugh Ranch SpecirlC Plan, Amendment No.1 December, 2004 -, I i -I. -¡ 1 I 1 I 'r l " :. ¡ "] I J. J SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE 5.4 5.4.1 5.4.2 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (PLANNING AREA 11) DESCRIPTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL Neighborhood Commercial (Planning Area No, 11), will include a variety of different types of land uses. Uses within this planning area include smaller.scall! business activities which generally provide retail and/or convenience services for residents within Roripaugh Ranch, The following are site planning guidelines relating to Planning Area No.11, USE REGULATIONS The list of land uses in the following table shall be permitted in the neighborhood commercial zoning disbicl Where indicated with a letter "P", the use shall be a permitted use. Where indicated With a".", the use is prohib~ed within the zone, Where indicated with a letter "C", the use shaD be conditionally permitted subject to approval of a conditional use permit. . Table 5-3 Schedule of Permitted Uses - Neighborhood Commercial Center (PA-11) Description of Use NC A Adu~ business subject to Chapter 5,08 of the Temecula Municipal Code " - Aerobics/dance/gymnasticsljazzerciselmartialarts studios (less than 5,000 sq, It P Aerobics/dancelgymnasticsljazzerciselmartial arts studios (greater than 5.000 sq. It P Alcoholism or drug treatment facilities . Alcohol and drug treatment (outpatient) . Alcoholic beverage sales C Ambulance services , - Animal hosp~aVshe~er . Antique restoration . 'Antique sales (Less than 5,000 sq, fl') ,,' P Apparel and accessory shops p Appliance sales and repairs (household and small appliances) P Arcades lpinball and video games) . Art supply stores P . ' Auction houses . Aud~oriums and conference facilities C Automobile dealers (new and used) . Automobile sales (brokerage)- showroom only (new and used)-no outdoor display - Automobile repair services . Automobile rental - 47 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan, Amendment No,1 December, 2004 ., i ¡ SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION V ¡ ; -, I l Automobile painting and body shop - Automobtle service stations with aJcohoUc sales - Automotive service stations (not selling beer andlor wine) with or without an automated P car wash Automobile parts-sales C Automobtle oa changeAube services with no major repair C . B Bakery goods distribution - Bakery retail p Bakery Wholesale - Banks and financial institutions P Barber and beauty shops p .Bed .and breakfast - Bicycle (sales, rentals, services) P Billiard partor/poolhall - Binding of books and simaar publications - Blood bank P Blueprint and duplicating and copy services P Bookstores P . Building materials sales (with the exterior storage/sales areas greater than 50 percent of - total sales area) Building materials sales (with the exterior storage/sales areas greater than 50 percent of - total sales area) Butcher shop P C Cabinet shop - Cabinet shops under 20,000 sq. ft.- no outdoor storage - Camera shop (sales/minor repairs) P Candy/confectionery sales P Car wash. full service/seW service - Carpet and rug cleaning - Catering services p Clothing sales P .r I 1 l ." , I J 1 48 Roripaugh Ranch SpecifIC Plan. Amendment No.1 December, 2004 . . . 1 '. -¡ i 'r ¡ :. 1 1 ¡ J. I j SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE Coins, purchase and sales p Communications and microwave installations 1 Communications equipment sales 1 C Community care facilities C Computer sales and services p Congregate care housing for the elderly 2 C . Construction equipment sales, services or rental - Contractor's equipment, sales, service or rental Convenience market . - Costume rentals p Crematoriums - Cutiery p D Data processing equipment and systems - Day care centers p Delicatessen p Discount/department store p Distribution facility - Drug store/pharmacy p Dry cleaners p . Dry cleaning plant - , E Emergency shetter - Equipment sales and rentals (no outdoor storage) p Equipment sales and rentals (outdoor storage) - F Feed and grain sales - Financial, insurance. real estate offices p Fire and police stations p Floor covering sales p Florist shop P Food processing - 49 Roripaugh Ranch Specir", Plan, Amendment No. December. 2004 SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE ¡ ., j I Fortunetelling, spiritualism, or similar activity p Freight terminals - Fuel storage and älStribution - Funeral panolS, mortualY - Furn~ure sales (Less than 10,000.sq. fl) p Furniture transfer and storage - G Garden supplies and equipment sales and service - Gas distribution, meter and control station - General merchandise/retail stores less than 10,000 sq. fl p Glass andmirrolS, retail sales p Government offices p GroceIY store, retail p GrocelY store, wholesale - Guns and firearm sales - H . Hardware stores p Heatth and exercise club p Heatth food store p Heatth care facility p Heliport - Hobby supply shop p Home and business maintenance service - . Hospitals - Hotels/motels - I Ice cream parlor p Impound yard - Interior decorating service p J Junk or salvage yard - -) ! 1 j so Roripaugh Ranch SpecifIC Plan, Amendment No.1 Pecember.2OO4 . . . 1 i. -1 I i -, I 1 ì -¡ [ :. .! ¡ 1. ¡ j ( SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE K Kennel - L Laborat~ries, film, medical, research or testing centers - Laundromat p Laundry service (commercial) - Ubraries, museums, and galleries (private) C Uquid petroleum, sales and distribution - Uquorstores C Lithographic service - Locksmith . p M Machine shop - Machinery storage yard - Mail order business P Manufacturing of products similar to, but not limlled to the following: Custom-made product, processing, assembling, packaging, and fabrication of goods, within enclosed building (no outside storage). such as jewelry, fumiture, art objects, clothing,labor intensive manufacturing. assembling, and repair processes which do nor involve frequent truck traffic- . Compounding of materials, processing. assembling, packaging, treatment or fabrication of - materials and products which require frequent truck activity or the transfer of heavy or bulky lIems. Wholesaling, storage, and warehousing within enclosed building, freight handling, shipping, truck services and terminals, storage and wholesaling from the premises of unrefined, raw or sem~refined products requiring further processing and manufacturing, and outside storage. Uses under 20,000 sq. It. with no outside storage Massage 3 P Medical equipment sales/rental P Membership clubs. organizations, lodges C Min~storage or min~warehouse facilities - Mobilehome sales and services - . Motion picture studio - Motorcycle sales and service - Movie theaters C -- 51 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan. Amendment No.1 December, 2004 ~¡ ! SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE , i I ì " Musical and recording studio N Nightclubs/lavemslbarsldance clublteen club - Nursertes (retail) - Nursing homes/convalescent homes C 0 Office equipment supplies, sales/services P Offices, administrative or corporate headquarters with greater than 50,000 sq~ fl - Offices, professional services with less than 50,000 sq~ fl, but not lim~ed to, business law, P medical, dental, vetertnartan, chiropractic, arcMectural, engineertng, real estate, Insurance p Paint and wallpaper stores P Parcel delivery servic~~' - Parking lots and parking sÍTuctures . C Pawnshop - Personal service shops P - Pest control services Pet grooming/pet shop P Photographic studio P Plumbing supply yard (enclosed or unenclosed) - Postal distribution - Postal services P Prtnting and publishing (newspapers, pertodicals, books, etc.,) - Private'utility facilities (Regulated by the Public Utilities Commission) P Q Reserved - R Radio and broadcasting studios, offices - Radioltelevision transmitter - ¡ I i ¡ ~ ¡ I j ¡ ~I j 52 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan, Amendment No~1 December,2OO4 . . . :. -1 I I i ¡ I I r :. -1 ¡ _J ¡ I J I. J SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE Recreational vehicle parks - Recreational vehicle sales - Recreational vehicle, trailer, and boat storage within an enclosed building - Recycling collection facilities p Recycling processing facilities Religious institution, without a daycareor private school C Religious institution, with a private school C Religious institution, with a daycare C Restauran~ drive-inlfaSt food C Restaurants and other eating establishments p Restaurants with lounge or live entertainment C Rooming and boarding houses - 5 Scale, public - Schools, business and professional C Schools, private (kindergarten through Grade 12) C Scientific research and development offices and laboratories - Solid waste disposal facili1y - Sports and recreational facilities C Swap mee~ entirely inside a permanent building - Swap meet, outdoor - Swimming 'pool supplies/equipment sales ,, --;,', P T Tailor shop p Taxi or limousine service ' Tire sales - Tobacco shop p Tool and die casting - Transfer. moving and storage " Transportation terminals and stations C Truck sales/rentals/service - TVNCR repair p S3 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan, Amendment No.1 Pecembef.2004 SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE -, i ! ì U Upholstery shop V Vending machine sales and services W . Warehousing/distribution Watch repair . p Wedding chapels - Welding shop - Welding supply and service (enclosed) - y Reserved - Z Reserved - ¡ .I ¡ ., 1. Subjectto the provisions contained In Section 17.40 of the City ofTemecUIa Deveiopment Code. . 2. Subject to the provisions contained in Section 17.06.050.H of the City of Temecula Development Code. 3. Subject to the provisions contained in Section 5.22 of the City of Temecula Municipal Code. T j j 54 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan. Amendment No.1 Pecember,2OO4 . . . ! i. ¡ j -) I I I r ;. r ¡ I. SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE 5.4.3 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The following standards of development shall apply in the Neighborhood Commercial: Table 5-4 Development Standards - Neighborhood Commercial (Commercial Uses - PA 11) Minimum gross area for site ' 2 acres for common lot centers, 30,000 square feet for single lots Target floor area ratio .3 MaJrimum floor area ratio with intensity bonus as per Section 17.08.050 .50 Front yard adjacent to street - Butterfield Stage RoadlMurrieta Hot Springs Road 20 feet; structure & parking - "N and "B" Street 20 feet, structure & parking Yard adjacent to residentially zoned property 25 feet, structure & parking Accessory structure side/rear yard setback 10 teet Minimum building separation: - One story: 10 teet - Two stories: 15 teet - Three stories or more: 20 teet MaJrimum building height 50 teet MaJrimum percent ot lot coverage 30% Minimum required landscaped open space . 20% Fence, wall or hedge screening outdoor storage maJrimum height Bteet Minimum building setback separation: - Two stories: 15 teet - Three stories or more: 20 teet 55 Roripaugh Ranch SpecirlC Plan, Amendment No.1 December, 2004 ¡ SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE 1 ¡ \ PARKS AND OPEN SPACE (Planning Areas Nos,1B,5, 6, 7A,1&-, 7C, 8, 9A, 9B, 13, 27,25,26 and 30) 5.5.1 DESCRIPTION OF PARKS AND OPEN SPACE 5.5 ! Parks (P) and Open Space (OS) zoning district is intended to promote a wide range of public and private recreational uses in the community. These uses include community facilities, golf courses, health clubs, public parks and recreation areas, sports parks, or other outdoor athletic facilities and similar outdoor commercial recreational Uses. ' '¡ } 1 5.5.2 USE REGULATIONS r The list of land uses in the following table shall be permitted in one or more of the park and open space zoning district as indicated in the columns corresponding to each zoning district. Where indicated with a letter "P", the use shall be a permitted use, Where indicated with a "-", the use is prohibited within the zone. Where indicated with a letter "C", the use shall be conditionally permitted subject to approval of a conditional use permit. ,I Table 5-S Schedule of Permitted Uses - Parks and Recreational Uses Schedule of Uses P P as. 052 as, (Private) (Public) Planning Area 1B,5 6and27 8; 9A, 78-,7C, Portions and 30 9B; and 25 and of6and 13, 26 7A Agricultural Uses 0 - - 0 A1hletic Field P P - - - Bicycle paths \ P P - P P Campground 0' - 0 - - Caretakers quarters - - - Cemeteries, mausoleums and related uses - - - - - Game courts, badminton, tennis, racquetball P P - - - GoW driving range not part of a goW course - - GoW course and clubhouse P P 0 - - Government and public utility facilities C C - P P Gymnasium P P - - - Microwave antennaltower' - 0 Nature centers/exhibits - - Nurseries - - 0 - Group Picnic Facilities P P - 0 56 Roripaugh Ranch SpecifIC Plan, Amendment No.1 December, 2004 . . . ¡ i ¡ ~. r :. , " i ¡ ¡ ¡. SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE Private parks and recreation facilities P P - P P Parking areas P P - - - Public parks and recreational facilities P P - P P Recreational vehicle park - - - - - Riding stable, public or private - - - - - Shooting galleries, ranges, archery courses - - - - Single-family dwellings - - - - Tree Farms - - - - - 1. See Zoning Appendix of DeveJopment Code 17.40 for antenna information. 57 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan, Amendment No.1 Pecember,2OO4. SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE 5.5.3 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS .r I In the Parks and Open Space districts development standards are as follows: Table 5-6 Development Standards - Parks and Open Space Standards Development Standards p as . Planning Area 1B, 5, 6, 27 and 7 A, +B-,7C, 8, 31 9A, 9B, 13,25 arid 26 Minimum lotsize 10,000 sq. It - Maximum lot coverage 25% . - Maximum height 35 feet' - Floor area ratio .1 - .- Setback for parking areas and structur~ 25feet - Minimum open spacellandscaping 75% 100% 1. Excludes light poles and communication facilities. 58 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan, Amendment No.1 December, 2004 . . . , i I. -¡ I ¡ r ¡ 1 ;. i ¡ ,. i } SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE 5.6 5.6.1 5.6.2 PUBUCßN/>TITUTIONAL DI/>TRICTI> (PLANNING AREAS 28 AND 29) DEI>CRIPTION OF SCHOOL DISTRICT AND PUBUC INI>TITUTIONAL DISTRICT The purpose of this district is to facilitate the construction of an Elementary School site and Middle School site. Planning Area 28 will be developed as a Middle School site and Planning Area 29 will be developed as an Elementary School site. USE REGULATIONS Planning Areas 28 and 29 shall only be designated to be used as a Middle School site and an Elementary School site, respectively. Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan, Amendment No.1 59 Pecember,2OO4 1 t SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE -, 5.7 5.7.1 i 5,7,2 ! PUBUC INSmUTlONAL (PLANNING AREA 32) DESCRIPTION OF PUBUC INSmUTlONAL (FIRE STATION) The purpose of this district is to facilitate construction of public and quasi-public uses in appropriate areas of the city. Planning Area 32 will be developed as a fire station on a 1.5-acre site. USE REGULATIONS Planning Area 32 shall only be designated as a Fire Station. 60 Roripaugh Ranch søecirlC Plan. Amendment No.1 December. 2004 . . . ~, I I. f I ì ¡ 1 l ~1 I ¡ '. , ¡ ,. ¡ SECTION V SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE 5.8 PARKING REQUIREMENTS ~ Refer to Chapter 17.24 of the City Development Code for parking requirements. 61 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan, Amendment No~ 1 December, 2004 . . . ATTACHMENT NO.6 CC DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 05-- FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT R:\S P A \2004\04-0371, Roripaugh Ranch-lIST AFF REPORT.doc 13 . . . CC ORDINANCE NO. 05-- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND ASHBY USE, LLC FOR THE RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN, (PA04-0590) I, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS; The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and Section 1. declare that: A. On December 17, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted and approved Planning Application PA94-0076 (Environmental Impact Report), PA99-0298 (General Plan Amendment), PA94-0073 (Annexation), PA94-0075 (Specific Plan, Development Code Amendment, and Specific Plan Zoning Standards), PA94-0075 (Change of Zone), PA99-0299 (Development Agreement), PA01-0253 (Tentative Tract Map 29661), and PA01-0230 (Tentative Tract Map 29353). B. On May 26, 2004, Ashby USA, LLC filed application No. PA04-0369 (Tentative Tract Map 32004), PA04-0370 (General Plan Amendment), PA04-0371 (Specific Plan Amendment) and on November 30, 2004, Ashby USA, LLC filed application No.PA04-0590 (First Amendment to the Development Agreement), (the "Application") in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code for land use approvals for a 804.7 acre planned community located in the Northeast portion of the City near the future intersection of Butterfield Stage Road and Nicolas Road, ("Projecf'). C. Government Code Section 65864 authorizes the City to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property in order to, among other matters: ensure high quality development in accordance with comprehensive plans; provide certainty in the approval of development projects so as to avoid the waste of resources and the escalation in the cost of housing and other development to the consumer; provide assurance to the applicants for development projects that they may proceed with their projects in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations and subject to conditions of approval, in order to strengthen the public planning process and encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the private and public economic costs of development; and provide for economic assistance to Owner for the entitlements authorizing development related improvements. D. On December 15, 2004 the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed First Amendment to the Development Agreement(s) and the other land use applications for the Project at which time all persons interested in the proposed First Amendment to the Development Agreement and the Project had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on these matters. E. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Development Agreementand the Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2004- ~ recommending to the City Council that R:IS P A\2004104-0371. Roripaugh Ranch-1lCC DA Amend Draft Ordinance,doc 1 , the First Amendment to the Development Agreement be approved, subject to certain recommended conditions. F. On , 2005 the City Council of the City of Temecula held duly noticed public hearings on the proposed First Amendment to the Development Agreement(s) and the other land use applications for the Project at which time all persons interested in the proposed Development Agreement and the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. Section 2. declares that: The City Council of the City of Temecula further finds, determines and A. In consideration of the substantial public improvements and benefits to be provided by Owner and the Project, in further consideration of the implementation of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan and in order to strengthen the public financing and planning process and reduce the economic costs of development, by the First Amendment to the Development Agreement, the City intends to give Owner assurance that Owner can proceed with the development of the Project for the Term of the First Amendment to the Development Agreement pursuant to the terms .and conditions of the First Amendment to the Development Agreement and in accordance with the City's General Plan, ordinances, policies, rules and regulations existing as set forth in the First Amendment to the Development Agreement. In reliance on the City's covenants in the First Amendment to the Development Agreement concerning the development of the Property, Owner has and will in the future incur substantial costs in site preparation and the construction and installation of major infrastructure and facilities in order to make the Project feasible. B. The First Amendment to the Development Agreement and the Existing Project Approvals, as defined in the First Amendment to the Development Agreement, implement the goals and policies of the City's General Plan, and the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan, provide balanced and diversified land uses, and impose appropriate standards and requirements with respect to land development and usage in order to maintain the overall quality of life and the environment within the City. C. The City has engaged in extensive studies and review of the potential impacts of the Project as well as the various potential benefits to the City by the development of the Project and concluded that the Project is in the best interests of and is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the City. D. The First Amendment to the Development Agreement is consistent with the City's General Plan, and each Element thereof, and the City's Growth Management Action Plan, and constitutes a present valid exercise of the City's police power. E. The First Amendment to the Development Agreement is being entered into pursuant to and in compliance with the requirements of Government Code Section 65867. F. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. Section 3. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves an agreement entitled "The First Amendment to the Development Agreement by and Between the City of Temecula and Ashby USA, LLC." and authorizes the Mayor to execute said agreement attached hereto as Attachment A. RIS P A\2004104-0371, Roripaugh Ranch.1lCC DA Amend Draft Ordinance.doc 2 . . . . Section 4. If any sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason 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 it would have passed this ordinance and each sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that anyone or more sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. SectionS. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same or a summary thereof to be published and posted in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this - day of -, 2005. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor .ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk . [SEAL] 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. 05-- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the - day of -, 2005 and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the - day of -, 2005, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk . R:\S P A\2004\04-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC DA Amend Draft Ordinance.doc . 3 . . . EXHIBIT A DRAFT FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT R:IS P A\2004104-0371. Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC DA Amend Draft Ordinance.doc 4 THIS ITEM WILL BE SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER . . . EXHIBIT B ATTACHMENT 5A R:IS P A\2004\04-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC DA Amend Draft Ordinance.doc 5 THIS ITEM WILL BE SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER . . . ATTACHMENT NO.7 CC DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 05-- TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (32004) RIS P AI2004104-0371, Roripaugh Ranch-1ISTAFF REPORT.doc 14 . . . CC RESOLUTION NO. 05-- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA04- 0369 (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32004) TO CREATE 6 ADDITIONAL LOTS AND MODIFY A TOTAL OF 18 LOTS IN PLANING AREA 1A, LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF MURRIETA HOT SPRINGS ROAD AND POURROYROAD. WHEREAS, On December 17, 2002, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted and approved Planning Application PA94-0076 (Environmental Impact Report), PA99-0298 (General Plan Amendment), PA94-0073 (Annexation), PA94-0075 (Specific Plan, Development Code Amendment, and Specific Plan Zoning Standards), PA94-0075 (Change of Zone), PA99- 0299 (Development Agreement), PA01-0253 (Tentative Tract Map 29661), and PA01-0230 (Tentative Tract Map 29353); WHEREAS, Ashby USA, LLC filed Planning Application Nos. PA04-0369 (the "Application"), in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code, CEQA Guidelines and California State CEQA Guidelines; WHEREAS, the Application 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 the Application on December 15, 2004, 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 opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearings and after due consideration of the testimony. the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Application on , 2005, 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; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Council approved of the Application, and approved a Notice of Determination, made all required findings and determinations relative thereto after finding that the project proposed in the Application conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan as amended; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL 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. Findings. That the City Council, in approving the Application, hereby makes the following findings as required in Chapter 17.16 of the Temecula lv1unicipal Code: R:IS P A\2004\04-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC TPM Draft Resolution.doc 1 A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, General Plan and the City of Temecula Municipal Code. . Tentative Tract Map No. 32004 is consistent with the General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance, the. Development Code, Municipal Code and the related General Plan Amendment because the project has been designed in a manner that it is consistent with the policies and standards in the General Plan, Subdivision Ordinance, Development Code, Municipal Code and related General Plan Amendment. B. The tentative map does not propose to divide land, which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conseryation Act of 1965. The proposed land division is not land designated for conservation or agricultural use and has never been entered into any Williamson Act Contracts. . C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. The project consists of an 18-lot Tentative Tract Map on property designated for residential uses, which is consistent with the related General Plan Amendment, as well as, the development standards of the Specific Plan. D. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. . The project site does not currently include a creek, wetlands, or habitat subject to environmental review. The project site has been disturbed and is not considered to contain critical habitat. The project consists of a Tract Map on property designated for residential uses, which is consistent with the related General Plan Amendment, as well as the development standards of the Specific Plan. The project has been reviewed subject to CEQA and has been determined to be exempt subject to CEQA Section 15162. An EIR has been prepared, adopted and certified for the project site and the Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the project description of the certified EIR. E. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed and commented on by the Fire Safety Division and the Building Safety Division. As a result, the project will be conditioned to address their concerns. Further, provisions are made in the General Plan, Development Code and Specific Plan to ensure that the public health, safety and welfare are safeguarded. The project is consistent with these documents. F. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. Prior to the construction of any structures the applicant will be required to submit building plans to the Building . R:IS P A\2004104-o371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC TPM Draft Resolution.doc 2 . . . Department that comply with the Uniform Building Code, which contains requirements for energy conservation. G. The design of-the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. All required rights-of-way and easements have been provided on the Tentative Tract Map. The Public Works Department and Community Services District have reviewed the proposed division of land and adequate conditions and/or modifications have been made to the Tentative Tract Map. H. (Quimby). The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements The proposed project is within an approved specific plan area. The specific plan was designed and analyzed for a maximum of 2,015 residential units and parkland has been dedicated using this number. The proposed project will not exceed the maximum number of units in the specific plan area and is therefore consistent with Quimby. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The proposed project is consistent with the original adopted and certified EIR (PA94-0076) for the project site. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 states than when an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless there are substantial changes not discussed or examined in the EIR. Therefore the City Council, pursuant to Section 15162 of CEQA Guidelines finds that no additional environmental review is necessary. Section 4. Approval. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves PA04-0369 , Tentative Tract Map 32004 to create an additional 6 lots and modify a total of 18 lots in Planning Area 1 A, on property located near the future intersection of Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Pourroy Road. Section 5. Conditions. The City Council of the City of Temecula approves the Applications for all of the foregoing reasons and subject to the project specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all other necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary. Section 6. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula Planning Department this ~ day of _-2005. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] R:IS P A\2004\04-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC TPM Draft Resolution.doc , 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA ) ) ss ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2005-- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of 2005, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk R:IS P A\2004\04-0371, Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC TPM Draft Resolution.doc . 4 . . . . . . EXHIBIT A DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32004 R:IS P A\2004104-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1lCC TPM Draft Resoiution.doc 5 . . . EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA04-0369 Project Description: A Tentative Tract Map (TTM 32004) to subdivide 2.0 acres into 6 new parcels and modify a total of 18 lots in Planning Area 1A of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan. DIF: TUMF: Per Development Agreement Per Development Agreement MSHCP: Per Development Agreement Approval Date: ,2005 Expiration Date: ,2008 PLANNING DIVISION Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. 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 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 2. 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 R:IS P A\2004104-0371, Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC TPM Draft Resolution.doc 6 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 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. . The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request, if made 60 days prior to the expiration date. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures identified within the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan, and the approved Mitigation Monitoring Program thereof. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be subject to the Roripaugh Ranch Development Agreement (PA99-0299) and any subsequent Amendments to the Development Agreement (PA04-0590). The Nature Walk shall include enhanced landscaping adjacent to lot 19 to screen the Nature Walk from the Nicolas Valley, subject to the approval of the Planning Director. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Director. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Director 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. . . 8. The Applicant shall comply with all underlying Conditions of Approval for Roripaugh Specific Plan No. 11 (PA94-0075) as approved on November 26, 2002. The Applicant shall comply with all underlying Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 29353(PA01-0230) as approved on November 26,2002. 9. 10. The Applicant shall comply with all underlying Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 29661 ( PA01-0253) as approved on November 26,2002. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 11. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. 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. 12. Prior to the City approval of the grading plans or any other plans requiring MWD clearance that may impact their property and easement; the developer is responsible to provide the City with MWD's clearance for the said plans. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 13. . 14. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Department: R:\S P A\2004\O4-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC TPM Draft Resolution.doc 7 . a. b. c. . . A copy of the Final Map. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes: This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Obseryatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Obseryatory recommendations, Ordinance No. 655. The Roripaugh Ranch Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for this project and is on file at the City of Temecula Community Development Department - Planning Division. An EIR was prepared for the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan and is on file at the City of Temecula Planning Department. . iv. Lot 19 shall be designated as permanent open space. An Owners Association shall be established and the applicant shall submit a copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) that address the following: i. CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. The CC&R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, exterior of all buildings and all landscaped and open areas including parkways. No lot or unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of ,such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City for provisions required as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the city prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually agreeable features of the development. . Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance. repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City for provisions required as Conditions of Approval. ii. iii. ii. iii. R:\S P A\2004104-0371, Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC TPM Draft Resolution.doc 8 15. 16. 17. iv. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the city prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such dwelling unit or lot, either (1) an undivided interest in the common areas and facilities, or (2) a share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association owning the common areas and facilities. The CC&Rs shall include 19 as a common area to be maintained by the Homeowners Association. . v. Prior to the recordation of the final map, the precise location of paseos shall be determined consistent with the Specific Plan requirements. Prior to the City approval of the improvement plans, the final map, or any other plans requiring MWD clearance that may impact their property and easement, the developer is responsible to provide the City with MWD's clearance for the said plans. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the landscape plans for the parkways, medians, and slope and fuel modification areas directly adjacent to roadways shall be submitted and approved. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a product review and/or a product placement application for all development within Tract Map 32004. As required, three (3) copies of construction landscape plans that include irrigation, hardscaping, the location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be submitted and be accompanied by the following items: a. 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). Complete screening of all ground-mounted equipment from the view of the public from streets and adjacent property. . b. c. d. Prior to issuance of any residential building permits all walls and fence plans other than the privacy fences for individual residential lots shall be submitted and approved. Prior. to issuance of any residential building permits typical front yard landscaping and construction landscape plans for Model Home Complexes for each phase of development shall be submitted and approved. The applicant shall file and receive approval of a Development Plan for all the residential products. . R:\S P A\2004\04-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC TPM Praft Resolution.doc 9 . . . 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. All components of the project shall be completed as identified in the Specific Plan or the Conditions of Approval. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Planning, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings within private common areas for a period of one year, in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Community Development Department - Planning Division for one year from the completion of the landscaping. 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. Privacy Wall and Fence Plans for individual lots in each phase of development consistent with the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan. Precise Grading Plans consistent with the approved rough grading plans including'all structural setback measurements shall be submitted and approved. Roof-mounted mechaniéal equipment shall not be permitted within the subdivision; however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shalf be permitted with Planning Director approval. LotsA through 14 of Tract Map 32004 shall have a minimum rear yard setback of 25' Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits If deemed necessary by the Director òf Planning, the applicant shall provide additional landscaping to effectively screen various components of the project. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall be 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. Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots shall be completed for inspection prior to issuance of each occupancy permit (excluding model home complex structures). All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. ' PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT The Department of Public Works recommends the following Conditions of Approval for this project. Unless stated otherwise, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any Government Agency. ' General Requirements 33. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative map all existing and proposed easements, traveled, ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. R:IS P A\2004104-0371. Roripaugh Ranch-1lCC TPM Draft Resolution.doc 10 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained road right-of-way. 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. All improvement and 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. The Applicant shall comply with all underlying...Conditions of Approval for Roripaugh Specific Plan No. 11 (PA94-0075) as approved on November 26, 2002. The Applicant shall comply with all underlying Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 29353(PA01-0230) as approved on November 26,2002. The Applicant shall comply with all underlying Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 29661 ( PA01-0253) as approved on November 26,2002. Prior to Approval of the Final Tract Map, unless other timing is indicated, the Developer shall complete the following or have plans submitted and approved, subdivision improvement agreements executed and securities posted: 40. 41. 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. City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau d. Planning Department e. Department of Public Works f. Community SeryicesDistrict T~e 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 Department of Public Works: a. Improve private street, Skyline Drive, (Specific Plan Private Street Standards - 47' R/E with 4.5-foot wide public utility easements on both sides of street beyond road easement or a approved by the Director of Public Works) to include installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections. b. R:\5 P A\2004\04.0371. Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC TPM Oraft Resolution.doc 11 . . . . 42. . 43. 44. 45. . Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of the street improvement plans: a. Street centerline 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 Standard No. 207, 207A, and/or 208. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in accordance with City Standard No. 800. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400. b. c. d. f. g. h. j. k. e. Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries to ensure adequate continuity of design with adjoining properties. Minimum centerline radii shall be in accordance with City Standard No. 113. All reverse curyes shall include a 100-foot minimum tangent section. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. All knuckles shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard No. 602. All cul-de-sac shall be constructed in accordance in City Standard No. 600. All units shall be provided with zero clearance garage doors and garage door openers if the driveway is less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance i3.nd visibility. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required where adequate right-of-way does not exist for installation of the facilities. All utilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. i. I. m. n. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and reviewed by 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. Corner property line cut off for vehicular sight distance and installation of pedestrian facilities shall be provided at all street intersections in accordance with Riverside County Standard No. 805. All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public ór other appropriate agency and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of Public Works. R:IS P A\2004104-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC TPM Draft Resolution.doc 12 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Prior to City Council approval of the Parcel Map\Final Map, the Developer shall make an application for reapportionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory agency. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. . An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Final Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with the map. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submittal of the Final Map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal -report obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisaL All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. . The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated and noted on the final map. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to approval of the Final Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted .for review and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the final map. A no,te shall be added to the final map stating "drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions." . R:\S P A\2004104-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC TPM Draft Resolution.doc 13 . Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 56. 57. 58. 59. . 60. 61. . As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. Planning Department b. Department of Public Works c. Community Services District A Rough Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City of Temecula standards and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any grading. The plan shall incorporate adequate erosion control measures to protect the site and adjoining properties from damage due to erosion. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and submitted to 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 preliminary pavement sections. A Geotechnical Report shall be prepared by a registered engineer or engineering geologist and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address special study zones and identify any geotechnical hazards for the site including location of faults and potential for liquefaction. The report shall include recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identify storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed off-site or on-site, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. The basis for analysis and design shall be a storm with a recurrence interyal of one hundred years. NPDES - The project proponent shall implement construction-phase and post- construction pollution prevention measures consistent with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and City of Temecula (City) NPDES programs. Construction- phase measures shall include Best Management Practices (BMPs) consistent with the City's Grading, Erosion & Sediment Control Ordinance, the City's standard notes for Erosion and Sediment Control, and the SWRCB General Permit for Construction Activities. Post-construction measures shall be required of all Priority Development Projects as listed in the City's NPDES permit. Priority Development Projects will include a combination of structural and non-structural onsite source and treatment control BMPs to prevent contaminants from commingling with stormwater and treat all unfiltered runoff yearcround prior to entering a storm drain. Construction-phase and post-construction BMPs shall be designed and included into plans for submittal to, and subject to the approval of, the City Engineer prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. The project R:IS P A\2004\O4-Q371. Roripaugh Ranch-1lCC TPM Draft Resolution.doc 14 proponent shall also provide proof of a mechanism to ensure ongoing long-term maintenance of all structural post-construction BMPs. . 62. 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. 63. A flood mitigation charge shall 'be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conseryation 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. 64. The Developer shall obtain letters of approval or easements for any off-site work performed on adjoining properties. The letters or easements shall be in a format as directed by the Department of Public Works. 65. All lot drainage shall be directed to the driveway by side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 66. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, Final Map 32004 shall be approved and recorded. 67. The Developer shall vacate and dedicate the abutters rights of access along Skyline . Drive pursuant to the new location of the driveway. . 68. A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 69. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the California Building Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. 70. 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. 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. ' 71. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 72. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: . R:IS P A\2004104-0371. Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC TPM Oraft Resolution.doc 15 . . . 73. 74. 75. a. Rancho California Water District Eastern Municipal Water District Department of Public Works b. o. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or bro~en due to the construction operations of this project shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 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. 76. 77. 78. 79. Any previous existing conditions for this project or any underlying map will remain in full force and effect unless superceded by more stringent requirements here. 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. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for residential land division per CFC Appendix liLA, 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 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 III-A) The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix IILB, Table A-III-B-1. Standard fire hydrants (6" x 4" x 21/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent 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 a 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 III-B) - 80. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for commercial land division 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 with a 4 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic lire R:\S P A\2004104-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1lCC TPM Oraft Resolution.doc 16 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 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 III-A) . . The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix III-B, Table A-III-B-1. Super fire hydrants (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix III-B) 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. Cul-de-sacs and/or intersections with planters must maintain 24 foot clear unobstructed travel width around the planters, not including parking. Hardscape areas are permissible provided that they meet the 80,000 lb. load requirements and are at road level. Private entry driveways with divider medians must be a minimum of 16 feet wide on each side unless the median is held back 30 feet from face of curb of perpendicular road. 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) This will include all internal roads, connecting roads between phases, and construction gates; All required access must be in and available prior to and during ALL construction. Phasing is approved on a separate map, and is ultimately subject to final approval in the field. 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 Ibs. G\f\N. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) . 87. 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 Ibs. G\f\N with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. (CFCsec 902) 88. 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) 89. 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) . R:\S P A\2004104-Q371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC TPM Draft Resolution.doc 17 . . . 90. 91. 92. 93. Prior to building construction, this development and any street within serving more than 35 homes or any commercial developments 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, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. After the plans are signed by the local water company. ~he 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) 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 firefighting personnel. (CFC 902.4) Special Conditions 94. 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. COMMUNTIY SERVICES DEPARTMENT General Requirements 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. All landscape areas, open space, trails, signage, fences. walls and private gated areas shall be maintained by the HOA, private maintenance association or property owner. Lot 19 shall be owned and maintained by the Homeowner's Association (HOA). The developer is entitled to receive a credit against the park and recreation component of the City's Development Impact Fee (DIF) pursuant to the Development Agreement. All residential street lighting will be maintained by the Home Owner's Association (HOA). The developer shall contact the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of the construction debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul construction debris. Prior to Approval of the Final Map: 100. A public access and trail easement on Lot 19 shall be dedicated and reseryed to themselves. R:\S P A\2004\04-0371. Roripaugh Ranch-1lCC TPM Draft Resolution.doc 18 Prior to Issuance of Building Permits: 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. . The developer shall provide TCSD verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste haulér for disposal of construction debris. The private mini-park (Tract Map No. 29661 Lot 6) shall be completed to the satis1action of the Community Seryices Director prior to the issuance of the 100'h overall residential building permit in all Tracts of 29661 and 32004. The park portion of the private recreation center (Tract Map No. 29661 Lot 523) shall be completed to the satis1action of the Community Seryices Director prior to the issuance of the 250lh overall residential building permit in all Tracts of 29661 and 32004. The building and the pool portion of the private recreation center (Tract Map No. 29661 Lot 523) shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Community Seryices Director prior to the issuance of the 3501h overall residential building permit in all Tracts of 29661 and 32004. . The 5.1 acre neighborhood park (Tract Map No. 29661 Lot 518) shall be improved, including the completion of the 90-day maintenance period, and the conveyance accepted by the City Council prior to the issuance of the 400lh overall residential building permit for all Tracts of 29661 and 32004. The paseo (Tract Map No. 29661 Lot 519) and the trail connecting Tract Map No. 29661 Lot 519 and Lot 518 (Neighborhood Park) shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Community Seryices Director prior to the issuance of the 400lh overall residential building permit in all Tracts of 29661 and 32004. The "Nature Walk" and adjacent landscape areas (Tract Map No. 29661 Lot 520) shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Community Seryices Director prior to the issuance of the 400lh overall residential building permit in all Tracts of 29661 and 32004. . Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy: 108. 109. Prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy within each phase map, the developer shall submit the most current list of Assessor's Parcel Numbers assigned to the final project. It shall be the developer's responsibility to provide written disclosure of the existence of TCSD and its service level rates and charges to all prospective purchasers. OUTSIDE AGENCIES 110. 111. 112. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated June 10, 2004 from the Rancho California Water District. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated June 10, 2004 from the Department of Environmental Health. . The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated June 22, 2004 from the United Stated Department of the Army Corps of Engineers. . R:IS P A\2004104-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC TPM Draft Resolution.doc 19 . . . 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 Date Applicant's Printed Name R:IS P A\2004104-o371. Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC TPM Draft Resolution.doc 20 (@ BanchD later &n"'om""",, John E. Hoagland P,~ident CühaF.Ko S,. Vi" P~ident Stephen J. Co'ona Ralph IL Daily Ben R.llinke Li,. D. He=~ John V. Rossi om"", B,inn J. B<ady G"e"ù MoMg., Phillip L. Fo'¡"" Di""",oCFiMn~fu~u,,, E.P. "Boh" LomoM Di_,oCEngine"ing Pen-yR.Lonek Controll" Linda M. F,ego," Di,tri" S""dary/Admini,"nti" Sern= Monag., C. Mjehael Cowett Be" Best & Kriager LLP Cenenl Con",el June 10,2004 /ß)1t@!tO OJ f!!/J J UN Itffj 1 52004 8Y~ Dan Long, Associate Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 SUBJECT: WATER AND SEWER AVAILABILITY TENTATIVE TRACT NO" 32004 RORIP AUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN APN 957-340-048 PLANNING APPLICATION NO, P A04.0369 Dear Mr. Long: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is not located within the boundaries ofRanchoCaHfornia Water District (RCWD), Water and sewer service, therefore, would have to be provided by another agency, such as Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD). If you should have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at this office. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT IYJ¡)JJ¡., fYL... i- f {,d~ael G. Meye~:te/'ll~ , Dev.elopment Engineering Manager O41MM:at064\FCF Raneho CaJifo=ia Water Dintriet 42135Winch",..,Rond" p"tQffi,,&x9Q17" Tem"ub,Cnlifo=",92589-9Q17" (909)296-6900 0 FAX(909)296.¡;g¡;o ~. ~ 0 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE. HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY 0 ~ DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH . IIJJÌJ:Ä¡,..c..,.. IIf'" ' f//¡ JÚ,'l 1/ .'~ . v íV I ,(- ~"/;2 &y, ",?oo{ /...!.'~~ ~é' June 10, 2004 City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 ATIN: Dan Long RE: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32004 (100 LOTS) Dear Mr. Long: 1. The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed Tentative Tract Map 32004 and recommends: . A water system shall be installed in accardance with plans and specificatians as appraved by the water company and the Environmental Health Department. Pennanent prints of the plans of the water system shall be submitted in triplicate; with a minimum scale nat less than ane inch equals 200 feet, alang with the original drawing to. the Caunty Surveyor's Office. The prints shall shaw the internal pipe diameter, locatian of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and jaint specificatians, and the size of the main at the junctian of the new system to the existing system. The plans shall comply in all respects with Div. 5, Part I, Chapter.7 of the Califamia Health and Safety Code, Califarnia Administrative Code, Title 11, Chapter 16, and General Order No.. 103 af the Public Utilities Cammission of the State of Califarnia, when applicable. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and water campany with the follawing certificatian: "1 certify that the design af the water system in Tentative Tract Map 32004 is in accordance with the water system expansian plans of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that the water services, starage, and distributian system will be adequate to. provide water service to .such "Tentative Tract Map". This certification daes not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to such Tentative Tract Map at any specific quantities, flows or pressures far fire protection or any ather purpose. A respansible afficial of the water campany shall sign this certification. The plans must be submitted to. the Cauntv Survevor's Office to review at least two. weeks PRIOR to. the request far the recordatian of the final map. 2. This Department has no written statement from Eastern Municipal Water District agreeing to. serve domestic water to each and every lat in the subdivisian on demand providing satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the sub divider. It will be necessary far financial arrangements to. be made PRIOR to. the recordation of the final map. a . Local En"'cement Agency' ro. B., 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' EO, Box 1206, Riverside, CA 92502.1206 . (909) 955.8980 . FAX {909} 955.8903 . 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor, Riverside, CA 92501 Page Two Attn: Dan Long June 10, 2004 . 3. This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed in accordance with plans and specifications as approved by the District, the County Surveyor's Office and the Health Department. Pennanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the original drawing, to the County Surveyor's Office. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint specifications and the size of the sewers at the junction of the new system to the existing system. A single plat indicating location of sewer lines and waterlines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be singed by a registered engineer and the sewer district with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the sewèr system in Tentative Tract Map 32004 is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that the waste disposal . system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed Tentative Tract Map". The plans must be submitted to the County Surveyor's Office to review at least two weeks PRIOR to the request for the recordation of the final map. 2. This Department has no written statement from Eastern Municipal Water District agreeing to serve sewer service to each and every lot in the subdivision. It .will be necessary for financial arrangements to be made PRIOR to the recordation of the final map. . Sincerely, Environmental Health Specialist . DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.OBOX532711 LOS ANGELES. CAUFORNIA 90053-2325 REPLYTO ATTENTION OF, Jllle 22, 2004 Office of the Chief -Regulatory Branch City of Temecula Planning Department Attention: Dan Long P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Dear Mr. Long: . It has come to our attention that you plan to construct six additional lots into Planning Area 1A of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan near Skunk Hollow in the city of Temecula, Riverside COlllty, California. This activity may require a U.s. Army Corps of Engineers permit. A Corps of Engineers permit is required f<ir 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 structures; 2. mecharuzed landc1earing, 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. -2- . Enclosed you will find a permit application form and a pamphlet that describes our regulatory program. IT you have any questions, please contact me at (213) 452-3418. Please refer to this letter and 20040134ü-CLM in your reply. Sincerely, Ç:iLri-rt Project Manager Enclosures . . . EXHIBIT B . TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32004 (UNDER SEPARATE COVER) . R:IS P A\2004\04-0371 , Roripaugh Ranch-1\CC TPM Draft Resolution.doc 21 CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Planning Commissioners Dan Long, Associate Planner Y ¿ December 10, 2004 - DATE: SUBJECT: First Amendment to the Development Agreement for the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan. Planning Commissioners, Attached is a copy of the draft First Amendment to the Development Agreement for the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan. These exhibits are part of Attachment No.6 (CC Draft Ordinance No. 05- (First Amendment to Development Agreement), Exhibits A and B that were not included into your agenda packet. R:\S P A \2004\04-0371, Roripaugh Ranch-1lMemo to Pc.doc , , RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CaliforÍ1ia 92589-9033 Attn: City Clerk Exempt from recording fees pUIsuant to Gov!. Code Sectiou 27383 (Space above for recorder's use) FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND ASHBY USA. LLC (RORIPAUGH RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN) This First Amendment to Development Agreement is made and entered into as of January 11, 2005, by and between the CITY OF TEMECULA, a California municipal corporation ("City"), ASHBY USA, LLC, a California limited liability company, DAVIDSON = RORIP AUGH RANCH 122, LC, SHEA HOMES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, RORIAP AUGH RANCH 100, LP: GRIFFIN COMMUNITIES, RORIPAUGH RANCH 1, LP MEEKER COMMUNITIES, KB HOME COASTAL, AND CONTINENTAL RESIDENTIAL, INC. (collectively "OWNER") pursuant to the authority of Section 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code and Article XI, Section 2 ofthe California Constitution. Pursuant to said authority and in consideration of the mutual covenants set forth in this First Amendment, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1, Recitals. This First Amendment is made with respect to the following purposes and facts which the parties agree to be true and correct: a. The Development Agreement between the City of Temecula and Ashby USA, LLC (also known as the "Preannexation and Development Agreement") was approved by the Ordinance of the City Council on December 17, 2002 and recorded on 799862.2 12/9/04 January 9, 2003 as Document No. 2003-018567 in the Official Records of the County of Riverside ("Development Agreement"). b. The real property which is subject to the Development Agreement and this First Amendment is generally known as the Roripaugh Ranch Project and is specifically described in Exhibit A to this First Amendment and incorporated herein as though set forth in full ("Property"), c, On October 21,2004, the City and the Developer entered into that certain "First Operating Memorandum to the Recorded Development Agreement between the City of Temecula and Ashby USA (Roripaugh Ranch Project)" pursuant to Section 3.55 ofthe Development Agreement ("First Operating Agreement"). The First Operating Agreement was recorded as Document No, 2004-- in the Official Records of the County of Riverside on October -' 2004. The First Operating Memorandum provides for additional funding for the construction of the permanent fire station described in Section. Accordingly, an amendment to the Development Agreement is required in order to increase the number of homes that can be built during construction ofthe permanent fire station. d. On September 23, 2003, the CITY and Ashby USA LLC entered into that certain "Agreement to Defer Completion of Conditions of Approval Until After Recordation of Final Map for Tract No. 29353-2 (Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan)" ("Deferral Agreement"). The Deferral Agreement was recorded as Document No. 2003- 744646 in the Official Records ofthe County of Riverside on September 24,2003. Said Deferral Agreement provides for the deferral of certain obligations with respect to the development ofthe Property. e. Portions of the Property have been sold to merchant builders who have taken their properties subject to the rights and obligations of the Development Agreement. The merchant builders are: Davidson = Roripaugh Ranch 122, LC; Shea Homes Limited Partnership; Roripaugh Ranch 100, LP: Griffin Communities; Roripaugh Ranch I, LP Meeker Communities; KB Home Coastal; and Continental Residential, Inc. ("Merchant Builders"), The Merchant Builders have by separate agreement, to which the CITY is not a party, designated Ashby USA LLC as the OWNERS agent to complete the public improvements required by the Development Agreement and the Conditions of Approval of the Land Use Entitlements for the Project. f. Section 4.1.6 of the Development Agreement provides that only 107 building permits for residential units may be issued for Planning Areas 1 A, 2, and 3 until the permanent fire station which will serve the Project ("Fire Station") is constructed but that the Fire Chief of the City of Temecula may, in his sole discretion, issue up to 258 total residential units on Planning Areas lA, 2, 3, 4A and 4B so long as the permanent fire station, is substantially under construction, The Fire Chief has determined that the Fire Department can adequately serve up to 515 units within the Project during the construction ofthe permanent Fire Station provided that the transportation improvements required for issuance of the 258th building permit, as described in Attachment 5A to the Development Agreement are completed. 799862.2 12/9/04 2 g. The parties also desire to adjust the schedule for the issuance of building permits based upon the completion of certain transportation improvements. The adjustments reflect the further study and refinement of the impacts on the transportation infrastructure of the development and more accurately mitigate the traffic impacts based on the pace of development. h. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on December 15, 2004 and by Resolution No, 04-- recommended to the City Council that this First Amendment be approved. i. On January 11, 2005, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Negative Declaration and the proposed First Amendment. Ordinance No, 05-- introduced on January 11,2005 and adopted on January 25, 2005 approved this First Amendment. 2. Section 4,1.6, Fire Service Improvements, ofthe Development Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: "4.1.6 Fire Service Improvements. The following shall satisfy OWNER's obligations regarding this component. "a. Conveyance of Land, On or before the thirtieth (30th) calendar day after the Annexation Date of this Agreement, OWNER accomplish the following: "1. Fee simple title shall be conveyed to CITY, free and clear of all liens and matters of record; "2. OWNER shall provide CITY a CLTA insurance policy insuring CITY's title to the Station Site in an amount equal to the fair market value of the Station Site. "3. The parcel shall have not less than one and one-half (1.5) acre of flat land usable for development as a CITY fire station. In no event shall the site be in excess of three (3) gross acres. "4. CITY acknowledges that as of the date of the First Amendment to the Development Agreement, the OWNER has conveyed the fire station property to the CITY as required by subsections a.I to a.3. "b. Grading. Prior to the issuance of the first (1 st ) building permit, OWNER shall rough grade the parcel. Grading of the fire station site will require the approval of grading and improvement plans and the issuance of permits for property located in the County of Riverside. The CITY agrees to use its best efforts to obtain a Joint Powers Agreement with the County of Riverside to accomplish these and other Project Improvements, if necessary. 799862.2 12/9/04 3 "c. Construction. Pursuant to Section 4.1.3.1 OWNER shall tender the sum of Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00) and CITY shall accept the money from OWNER for the purpose of CITY's design and construction of a Fire Station and acquisition of title to a fire truck of CITY's sole selection. CITY acknowledges that as ofthe date of the First Amendment to the Development Agreement, OWNER has transferred the $2 million to the CITY pursuant to this subsection, "d, Issuanc¿ of 515 Building Permits. "1. As of the date of the First Amendment to the Development Agreement: (1) OWNER has paid to the City the sum of $2 million pursuant to Section 4,1.5 c. of this Agreement; (2) OWNER has paid the additional sum of $1.1 million to the City for the construction of the permanent fire station pursuant to Section 1 of the First Operating Memorandum; (3) CITY has approved plans and specifications for the permanent fire station; (4) City has let a contract for construction of the permanent fire station; and (5) the permanent fire station is under construction. "2. Up to one hundred seven (107) building permits in Planning Areas lA, 2 and 3 may be issued upon a finding by the City Manager that all other requirements of the Development Agreement and Conditions of Approval of the Land Use Entitlements of the Project for the issuance of 107 building permits have been fulfilled. "3. Up to a maximum of two hundred fifty seven (257) residential building permits total for the Project to be issued within Planning Areas lA, 2, 3, 4A, and 4B upon a finding by the City Manager that: (1) the permanent fire station is substantially under construction; and (2) all other requirements of the Development Agreement and Conditions of Approval ofthe Land Use Entitlements ofthe Project for the issuance of the building permits have been fulfilled. "4. Up to a maximum of five hundred fifteen (515) residential building permits for Planning Areas lA, 2, 3, 4A and 4B shall be issued upon a finding by the City Manager that: (1) the permanent fire station is substantially under construction; (2) the transportation improvments required to be installed prior to issuance of the 258th building permit as described in Attachment 5A are completed; (3) permanent access on Murietta Hot Springs Road and Butterfield Stage Road, including the bridges on said roads, will be completed upon the opening of the permanent fire station; and (4) all other requirements ofthe Development Agreement and Conditions of Approval of the Land Use Entitlements ofthe Project for the issuance ofthe building permits have been fulfilled. 799862.2 12/9/04 4 "e. Fire Station Construction Street Improvements, OWNER shall, subject to final review and Acceptance by CITY, construct the street improvements adjacent to the Fire Station in conformance with the conditions set forth in Attachment 5A to this Agreement and subject to the CITY's approved street improvement plans for the public street(s) which are immediately adjacent to the Fire Station. OWNER shall commence and complete the street improvements, including but not limited to, asphalt concrete travel lanes, concrete curb and gutter, sidewalk per Specific Plan and right-of-way landscaping as required by CITY. The improvements described in this Section shall be completed not less than thirty (30) calendar days prior to the date the CITY will place the Fire Station in full operation, Owner hereby grants a license to the City over or through its property adjacent to the Fire Station for the purposes of allowing access to the Fire Station for construction and operation of the Fire Station which license shall terminate upon the acceptance ofthe streets adjacent to the Fire Station into the City-maintained street system. City and Owner may fulfill the access requirement by entering into a separate license agreement with specific details of the rights and obligations of the parties. "f. Release. Upon the funding of the public finance district or other financing mechanism and CITY's ability to utilize such monies for construction of a permanent fire station as described in Section 4.1.6, and the Acceptance of title to the site, then OWNER's further obligations to pay the Fire component ofthe DIF will be credited by CITY, and CITY shall not impose restrictions on building permit issuance based upon nonpayment of the Fire component of the DIF. "g. Limitation on Participation. The OWNER agrees to not participate in the design or construction of the Fire Station, even if it is funded by a public financing district. However, to ensure architectural compatibility with future development, CITY agrees to allow OWNER's architect to coordinate with the architect hired by CITY for the sole purpose of providing input into the architectural themes of the exterior to the fire station." 3. Attachment 5 is hereby deleted from the Agreement and in its place "Attachment 5A" is substituted in full. "Attachment 5A" is attached hereto as Exhibit B and by this reference incorporated herein as though set forth in full. To the extent the terms of Attachment 5A conflicts with Condition 76 of City Council Resolution No. 01- 113 (approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 29353) or Condition 58 of City Council Resolution No. 02-114 (approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 29661), the provisions of Attachment 5A shall apply and supercede any conflicting provision of said conditions. To the extent a requirement of said Conditions 76 or 58 is not also covered in Attachment 5A, then said requirement shall remain in full force and effect notwithstanding the adoption of this First Amendment to the Development Agreement. The requirements of this Attachment 5A pertain only to required transportation improvements. OWNER 799862.2 12/9/04 5 acknowledges and agrees that other requirements ofthe Development Agreement, the Specific Plan, and the conditions of approval of the land use approvals require certain other improvements, including park and recreation improvements and fire service improvements, and compliance with the applicable building codes, to be completed prior to issuance of certain building permits, OWNER agrees that nothing contained in Attachment 5A is intended to nor shall be construed to waive any other applicable federal, state or local requirements for the issuance of building permits. 4. Except as specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions ofthe Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 5, This First Amendment contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof, all prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, concerning the subject matter hereof, except for the First Operating Memorandum and the Deferral Agreement, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. 799862.2 12/9/04 6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Covenant as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation Mayor Attest: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson City Attorney 799862.2 12/9/04 7 799862.2 12/9/04 ASHBY USA, LLC, a California limited liability company By: Ashby Development Co., Inc., its Managing Partner By: Justin K. Ashby President By: USA Investment Partners, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, its member By: USA Commercial Mortgage Company, a Nevada corporation, its non-Member Manager. By: Joseph D. Milanowski President 8 DAVIDSON = RORIP AUGH RANCH 122, LC Name: Title: Name: Title: SHEA HOMES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP Name: Title: Name: Title: RORIAPAUGH RANCH 100, LP: GRIFFIN COMMUNITIES Name: Title: 799862.2 12/9/04 9 Name: Title: RORIPAUGH RANCH 1, LP MEEKER COMMUNITIES Name: Title: Name: Title: KB HOME COASTAL Name: Title: Name: Title: CONTINENTAL RESIDENTIAL, INc. 799862.2 12/9/04 10 Name: Title: Name: Title: 799862.2 12/9/04 11 799862.2 12/9/04 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY 12 '. RORIPAUGBRANCBPROJECT 1 ~etes and Bounds description of the North one-half of the North one-half of Section 20 of TIS, R2W, S.B.M. Be¡lnnlng at the Northeast comer ofsald Section 20, thence along the easterly line of said Section 20 South 00 34' 31"W 1319.80 feet to tbéNorth Sixteenth comertbereof; Thence along the Southerly line of the North one-half of the North one-half of said Section 20 North 88"36'41" West, a distance of 5229.85 feet to the North Sixteenth COI'Der thereof; Thence along the weSt line of said Section 20 North 00"26' 13" West, a distance of 1319.23 feet to the Northwest comer thereof; Thence along the Northerly line of said Section 20 South 88°31'05" Bast, a distance of 5233.02 feet to the Pointof Ðe¡lDDing, containing an area of 158.45 acres, more or less. This description is for ehhibit pwposes only. The true legal description is: The North one-baJf of the North ol»-haJf of Section 20, Township 7 South, Range 2 West, San Bemardino Base and Meridian. County of Riverside, State of C8IJfomia, according to the Official Plat thereof. ,:. RORIPAUGB RANCH PROmCl' .. M~tes and Bounds description of Section 21 of TIS, R2W, S.B;M. Bepnning at the Northeast comer of said Section 21, thence along the easterly line of said Section 21 South 0° 59' IS" West 2664.97 feet to the East quarter section corner; thence continuing along said easterly line South 0° 21' 34" West 2636,07 feet to the Southeast comer of said Séction 21; thence along the Southerly line of said section North 89° 39' 13" West 5282.88 feet to the Southwest comer of said section; thence.along the westerly line of said section North 0° 33' 47" East 3809.86 feet to the North sixteenth corner of said section; thence continuing along said westerly line North 0"34' 31" Bast 1319.80 feet to the Northwest section comer; thence along the northerly liDe of said section North 88° 29' 3r' East S296.39feet to the J>oint ofÐeginnlng, containing an area of e2.2 acres. more or less. . This description is for exlu'bit purposes only. Thé true legal description is: Section 21. ToVDSbip 7 South, Range 2 West, San Bernardino Base and M!'ridian. County of Ri"elSÍde. State of Ca1üOIDÍa, according to the Official Plat thereof. RORIPAUGR RANCH PROJECI' 3 Metes and Bounds description of a portion of Section 20 of 175, R2W, S.B.M. Commencing at the Nortb sixteen1b corner of Secti01l20, Townsbip 7 South, Range 2 West, SaD Bemantino Base and Meridian, being the Northeast comer of that certain. parcel designated u "Not, Part" as shown by Parcel Map on file in Book I. of Pan:cl Maps, pages 44 through 46, tbcreof. Records of the Count)' of Riverside, California; thence ,Iwgthe easterly UnGofsaid Seçdon 20Soutb 0"33'47" W, adiS1ance of~74.t3 feet to the Tnle Point of Beginning; Thence North 8~'58" W~ a distance or 929.81 feet rnorcor less to tho Easterly line of rhe land çonvcyed to the Metropolitan Watcr District of Soutbern California by deed RÇOnlcd AprIl 24. 1968 as instrUment No. 3m4. Official Records of said County; Thence along said Easterly line North 12°32'09" East, a distance of 762.69 feet; Thence on a fme parallel with the SovIb line of safd parcel designated as "Not a PaJt" South 89"25'58" East. a distançe of 771.65 feet to the True Point of Beginning. containing an area of 14.57 acrœ, more or less. This descriptlon Is for exhibit purposes only. EXHIBIT B ATTACHMENT SA (REVISED JANUARY 11, 2005) Transportation Improvements 799862.2 12/9/04 13 Attachment SA (Revised January 11,2005) ON-SITE AND OFF-SITE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS The following shall be used to construct the transportation improvements included in this Attachment: (a) All proposed road improvements shall include associated flood control, storm drain, water, and sewer lines; (b) All references to bridges shall mean hydro-arch bridges or other bridge designs as approved by the City Engineer; (c) Full-width improvements shall consist of the complete street and landscape improvements within the right-of-way; (d) Half-width improvements shall consist of the construction of the street improvements from curb to the raised landscaped median, the full-width raised landscaped median, where applicable, and a 14' travel lane adjacent to the median on the unimproved half; (e) On center improvements shall mean a, A 38' paved width improvement consisting of two 14' travel lanes and a 10' turn lane, or b. A 40' paved width improvement consisting of two 14' travel lanes and a 12' turn lane. PHASE I (Planning Areas 1-48, 6, and 32 of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan) Onsite Prior to issuance of the 258th building permit or as otherwise specified in the Development Agreement, the following improvements shall be completed: 1. Butterfield Stage Road. Construct half-width improvements from Murrieta Hot Springs Road to the south project boundary at Planning Area 32, including construction of two full-width bridges within and over Santa Gertrudis Creek and Long Valley Wash. Butterfield Stage Road Dedicate full-width right-of-way from the northern project boundary to Murrieta Hot Springs Road. 2, 802012.2 December 9, 2004 3. 4. 5. 6, 7. 8. 9, 10, Attachment 5A (Revised January 11,2005) Murrieta Hot Springs Road. Construct full-width improvements from east of Pourroy Road at the northern project boundary to the MWD pipeline property, Murrieta Hot Springs Road. Construct half-width improvements from the MWD pipeline property to Butterfield Stage Road. Nicolas Road. Offer a dedication for a 11O' right-of-way from Butterfield Stage Road to the west project boundary. Nicolas Road -Construct northerly half-width plus 10 feet from Butterfield Stage Road to the western project boundary. South Loop Road. Construct southerly half-width in front of fire station (Planning Area 32), "A" Street. Construct full-width from Murrieta Hot Springs Road to Butterfield Stage Road, "B" Street .Construct full-width improvements from Nicolas Road to "A" Street. North Loop Road Construct a full-width bridge over and within Santa Gertrudis Creek and connect the bridge to Butterfield Stage Road with full width improvements. 11. Construct the following traffic signals and related intersection improvements: a. Traffic signal at the intersection of Pourroy Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road. b, Traffic signals may be required, as warranted, at the two other project entrances from Murrieta Hot Springs Road located to the east and west of the Pourroy Road main project entrance. Offsite Prior to the issuance of the 1st building permit, the following transportation improvements shall be completed: 1. The Developer shall contribute an undetermined percentage of the total construction costs for traffic signals for the lane improvements at Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Alta Murrieta in the City of Murrieta including improvements to be specified, The developer shall provide the City of Temecula with a letter from 802012.2 December 9, 2004 2 Attachment SA (Revised January 11,2005) the City of Murrieta stating that a fair share contribution to identified improvements at this intersection has been made. The Developer shall contribute 5.8% of the total construction costs for the traffic signal and additional improvements identified as: southbound left turn lane, southbound right turn lane, eastbound through lane, eastbound right turn lane, westbound through lane, and westbound free right turn lane at 1-215 Freeway (Southbound Ramps) at Murrieta Hot Springs Road, Prior to the issuance of the 258th building permit or as otherwise specified in the Development Agreement, the following transportation improvements shall be completed: 2, 3. Nicolas Road .Construct 40' width on center improvements from the western project boundary to 450' east of the existing Nicolas Road/Calle Girasol intersection. PHASE 2 (Planning Areas 10, 11, 12, 14- 24, 27 -31, 33A, and 338 of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan) Prior to the issuance of the 258th building permit in Phase 1 any building permit in Phase 2, the following Onsite and Offsite transportation improvements must be completed: ensile 1. Butterfield Stage Road Construct remaining half-width improvements from Murrieta Hot Springs Road to the south project boundary at Planning Area 32, including construction of two full-width bridges within and over Santa Gertrudis Creek and Long Valley Wash, not completed in the Phase 1 work. Murrieta Hot Springs Road Construct remaining half-width improvements from the MWD pipeline property to Butterfield Stage Road. 2, 3, North Loop Road Construct full-width improvements from the bridge structure at North Loop Road/Santa Gertrudis Creek crossing to the Long Valley Wash Bridge structure at South Loop Road. South Loop Road Construct the full width bridge structure crossing Long Valley Wash and construct full width street improvements from this bridge to Butterfield Stage Road, 4. 802012.2 December 9. 2004 3 Attachment SA (Revised January 11,2005) 5, Nicolas Road .Construct remaining improvements from Butterfield Stage Road to western project boundary, The developer shall construct the following traffic signals and related intersection improvements: 6. a, Murrieta Hot Springs Road at Butterfield Stage Road, b, Nicolas Road at Butterfield Stage Road. c, Calle Chapos at Butterfield Stage Road. Offsite Butterfield Stage Road Construct full width improvements from the southern project boundary at Planning Area 32 to Rancho California Road excluding any existing improvements, 2. Nicolas Road. Construct 40' width improvements from 450 feet east of the existing Nicolas Road/Calle Girasol intersection to Liefer Road including the full width bridge structure over Santa Gertrudis Creek, 3. Calle Girasol and the Nicolas Road / Calle Girasol intersection -Realign existing Calle Girasol to its ultimate intersection with Nicolas Road including right-of-way acquisition. 4. Calle ChaposConstruct 38' width on center improvements from Butterfield Stage Road to the existing paved terminus at Walcott Lane, Winchester Road at Nicolas Road traffic signal to be constructed with the following ultimate lane configurations: 5, a. Northbound Winchester: 2 Left Turn Lanes, 4 Through Lanes, I Free Right Turn Lane. b. Southbound Winchester: 2 Left Turn Lanes, 4 Through Lanes, I Right Turn Lane, c, Eastbound Nicolas Road: I Left Turn Lane, I Through Lane, I Right Turn Lane. d. Westbound Nicolas Road: 3 Left Turn Lanes, 1 Through Lane, 1 Right Turn Lane. 802012.2 December 9,2004 4 Attachment SA (Revised January 11,2005) 6, These improvements are in addition to the existing improvements and lane configurations and shall supplement not replace existing turning movements. Butterfield Stage Road at Rancho California Road traffic signal with the ultimate lane configurations of: a, Northbound BSR: 1 Left Turn Lane, 2 Through Lanes Southbound BSR: 1 Left Turn Lane, 2 Through Lanes b. c. Eastbound RCR: 2 Left Turn Lanes, 2 Through Lanes Westbound RCA: 1 Left Turn Lane, 2 Through Lanes d, These improvements are in addition to the existing improvements and lane configurations and shall supplement not replace existing turning movements, (City has agreed to use an expected $2,7 million grant to assist in the construction of this segment) 7. The Developer shall contribute 11.1 % of the total construction costs for traffic signals and northbound through lane, southbound through lane, and westbound through lane improvements at Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Winchester Road, 8, The Developer shall contribute 12.4% of the total construction costs for traffic signal and northbound shared left-through lane, eastbound through lane, and westbound through lane for Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Margarita Road. OTHER CONDITIONS TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS The requirements of this Attachment 5A pertain only to required transportation improvements. Other requirements of the Development Agreement, the Specific Plan, and the conditions of approval of the land use approvals require certain other improvements, including park and recreation improvements and fire service improvements, and compliance with the applicable building codes, to be completed prior to issuance of certain building permits. Nothing contained in this Attachment 5A is intended to nor shall be construed to waive any other requirements for the issuance of building permits. 802012.2 December 9, 2004 5