The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About022008 PC Agenda .. .. 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 February 20, 2008 - 6:00 P.M. ******** Next in Order: Resolution No. 2008-09 CALL TO ORDER Flag Salute: Commissioner Chiniaeff RollCall: Carey, Chiniaeff, Guerriero, Harter, 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 prior to the Commission addressing that item. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless Members of the Planning Commission request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Minutes of January 9, 2008 1.2 Approve the Minutes of January 16, 2008 R:IPLANCOMM'Agendas\2008\022008.doc 2 .Director's Hearino Case Update RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the Director's Hearing Case Update for January COMMISSION 1:l1.'~INESS 3 Exparte Communications CONSENT CALENDAR 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. Any person dissatisfied with any decision of the Planning Commission may file an appeal of the Commission's decision. Said appeal must be filed within 15 calendar days after service of written notice of the decision, must be filed on the appropriate Planning Department application and must be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. New Items 4 Plannino Application No. PA07-0275, an Extension of Time application. submitted bv John Clement. for a previouslv aooroved Vestino Tentative Parcel Mao (Number 32229\ on 12.1 acres. located at 31891 Rancho California Road penerallv located on the southeast corner of Meadows Parkwav and Rancho California Road. Eric Jones. Junior Planner. 5 Plan nino Aoolication No. PA07-0325. a Minor Modification. submitted bv Dave Wakefield. to amend Condition of Aooroval number 11 of the Final Conditions of Approval for the Creekside Center Develooment Plan. located at 41785 Nicole Lane. Katie Le Comte. Assistant Planner. 6 Plannino Application No. PA06-0356. a reouest of the Plannino Commission to find conformitv with the General Plan of the Citv of Temecula. submitted bv Abbott Vascular. for a proposed conditional vacation of portions of Ynez Road north of Motor Car Parkwav.. Patrick Richardson. Princioal Planner~ COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Wednesday, March 5, 2008, 6:00 p.m., Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:IPLANCOMM'Agendas\2008\022008.doc 2 ITEM #1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 9, 2008 CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:01 p.m., on Wednesday, January 9, 2008, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Harter led the audience in the Flag salute ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Commissioners: Carey, Chiniaeff, Guerriero, Harter, and Telesio None PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Minutes of December 5, 2007. MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve the Consent Calendar. Commissioner Harter seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Chiniaeff who abstained. COMMISSION BUSINESS 2 Elect a new Chair and Vice Chair MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to appoint Commissioner Telesio to serve as Chairman and Commissioner Harter to serve as Vice-Chairman for Calendar Year 2008. Commissioner Carey seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS New Items 3 Plannino Application Nos. PA07-0198. a General Plan Amendment: PA07-0199: Zone Chanoe: PA07 -0200: Develooment Plan: PA07 -0202. Conditional Use Permit: PA07 -0201: Tentative Parcel Mao: submitted bv Universal Health Services of Rancho Sprinos. Inc.. to include the followino oroposals: Recommend that the Citv Council certifv and adopt a Supplemental Environmental Imoact Report and findinos pursuant to the California Environmental Qualitv Act. statement of overridino considerations. and mitioation monitorino. and reportino orooram. Recommend that the Citv Council approve the associated Plannino. R\MinutesPCI010908 Applications: The General Plan Amendment is a reouest to eliminate the Z2 overlav area from the General Plan. which currentlv limits the heiqht of buildinos alonq Hiohwav 79 to lwQ stories. The Zone Chanqe is a reouest to chanoe the zonino from Professional Office and DePortola Road Planned Development Overlav (PDO-8) to Temecula Hospital Planned Develooment Overlav (PDO-9). The oroposed PDO-9 allows a heioht of uo to 115 feet for 30% of roof areas for the hospital bed towers. The Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit are reouests to construct approximatelv 565.260 souare feet of hospital. medical office. cancer center and fitness rehabilitation center on 35.31 acres. The Tentative Parcel Map is a reouest to consolidate ei~ht lots into one parcel. The proposed proiect is located north of Temecula Parkwav (Hiohwav 79 South). south of De Portola Road and approximatelv 700 feet west of Maroarita Road In response to Commissioner Chiniaeff's query, Senior Planner Papp advised that no written correspondence was received by the Pechanga Tribe. Due to a conflict of interest, Commissioner Chiniaeff recused himself from the dais. By way of PowerPoint Presentation, Senior Planner Papp highlighted on the following aspects of staff's recommendation: . Project Description . Planning Applications . Project Processing History . Court Ruling . Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR) . Existing General Plan . Zone Change (Planned Development Overlay) . Land Use and Zoning . Conditional Use Permits . Development Plan . Site Plan . Development Plan Phasing . Development Plan Traffic Circulation . Traffic/Circulation Access . Landscaping . Tentative Parcel Map . Environmental Impact Report (EIR) . Supplemental Environmental Impact Report MTBE Plume . Supplemental Environmental Impact Report Construction Noise Impact . Supplemental Environmental Impact Report Siren Noise . Supplemental Environmental Impact Report Traffic . Supplemental Environmental Impact Report Future Traffic Condition . Alternative Site Not Considered . Environmentally Superior Alternative . Environmentallmpacl Report Processing . Staff Recommendation Senior Planner Papp also requested the following modifications: . Deletion of Condition of Approval Nos. 68 - 71 (Conditional Use Permit) . Delete verbiage: and construct the access to Dartolo Road (PA07-0200, Development Plan) . Modify verbiage: DP Condition No. 78 to 94, (Landscaping) R:\MinutesPC\010908 2 In response to Commissioner Guerriero's question with respect to the process from this point on should the Planning Commission recommend approval of the project, Senior Planner Papp stated that should the City Council approve staff recommendation, the City Attorney's office would need to file a brief with the court stating that the City has complied with the court's order. If the court concurs, this should be the end of the legal challenge unless an appeal is filed. With respect to siren noises, Senior Planner Papp advised that the City would not have the purview to impose that an ambulance service turn off its sirens until they enter onto the hospital property. At this time, the public hearing was opened but due to no speakers, it was closed. MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve staff recommendation. Commissioner Harter seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exceotion of Commissioner Chiniaeff who abstained. COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS A. Commissioner Guerriero thanked Commissioner Chiniaeff for serving as Chairman for Calendar Year 2007 and wished everyone a Happy New Year. Commissioner Guerriero queried on the possibility of replacing paperwork agenda packets onto CD with laptop. In response to Commissioner Guerriero's request, Director of Planning Ubnoske noted that she will explore his request. B. Commissioner Carey queried on the status of the water park project. For Commissioner Carey, Principal Planner Richardson noted that the project will be brought forward to the Planning Commission in the near future. C. Commissioner Telesio queried on ex-parte communications, and requested that this item be added to a future Planning Commission meeting for discussion. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT No reports at this time. ADJOURNMENT At 6:50 pm, Chairman Telesio formally adjourned to Januarv 16. 2008 at 6:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. John Telesio Chairman Debbie Ubnoske Director of Planning R:\MinutesPCI010908 3 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 16, 2008 CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:00 p.m., on Wednesday, January 16, 2008, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Carey led the audience in the Flag salute ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Commissioners: Carey, Chiniaeff, Guerriero, Harter, and Telesio None PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. 1 Director's Hearino Case Update RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Director's Hearing Case Update for November and December, 2007. MOTION: Commissioner Chiniaeff moved to approve staff recommendation. Commissioner Guerriero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous aooroval. COMMISSION BUSINESS 2 Plannino Application Nos. PA07-0299 and PA07-0300. Develooment Plan aoolications for the review and approval (business item - no public hearino) of uodated mall entrances (PA07-0299) and architectural elevations for the retail and restaurant buildinas. landscape/hardscaoe and liohtino (PA07-0300\. pursuant to a Condition of Approval of a previouslv aooroved Develooment Plan (PA06-0293) Associate Planner Peters provided PowerPoint Presentation (as per staff report) and highlighted on the following: . Background . Location . Site Plan Overview . Updated Mall Entries . New Logo and Design Theme . Main Street Architecture . Landscape . Hardscape . Lighting R\MinutesPCI011608 At this time, the public hearing was opened and due to no speakers, it was closed. MOTION: Commissioner Chiniaeff moved to approve staff recommendation. Commissioner Guerriero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous aooroval. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS New Items 3 Plannino Aoolication No. PA07-0286. a Maior Modification application. submitted bv Forest Citv Development COrPoration. to construct an additional parkino level (deck) at the west [)arkino structure at the Promenade Mall expansion in addition to proposed modifications to the floor plans and elevations of the west parkino structure to accommodate trash service and as well as a site plan modification for a bus turnout located between Macv's and Edwards Cinema. bound bv Ynez Road. Winchester Road. Maroarita Road and Overland Road Associate Planner Kitzerow provided the Planning Commission with a PowerPoint Presentation, highlighting on the following: . Project Description . Location . Original Proposal . Approved West Parking Structure . Proposed Modification Elevation . Site Plan Modification . Environmental Determination Associate Planner Kitzerow added that written correspondence was received by the owner of Johnny Carino's, On the Border and Ruby's Diner, in opposition to the proposed project. In response to Commissioner Chiniaeff's question, regarding why an additional level of parking is being proposed, Associate Planner Kitzerow stated that due to the success of the mall, the applicant would be in favor of adding additional parking at this time instead of later to avoid the impact of future construction. At this time, the public hearing was opened. A. Mr. Kenneth Lee, representing Forest City, thanked staff for their efforts and noted that he would be in favor of moving the project forward. At this time, the public hearing was closed. MOTION: Commissioner Chiniaeff moved to approve staff recommendation. Commissioner Guerriero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous aooroval. 4 Plan nino Aoolication No. PA07-0316. a Maior Modification aoplication. submitted bv Forest Citv Development Corooration. to provide for vehicular and pedestrian enhancements to the Rino Road at the Promenade Mall. and site modifications to include additional traffic sionals. all-wav stoos. access reconfiouration. modified strioino and sionaoe. enhanced oedestrian crossinos. and aisle closures with associated landscaoe modifications bound bv Ynez Road. Winchester Road. Maroarita Road and Overland Roaq R\MinutesPCI01 1608 2 Deputy Director of Public Works York highlighted on the following: . Project Description . Background . Ring-Road Enhancements, Phase 1 improvements . Ring-Road Enhancements, Phase 2 improvements With respect to the Environmental Determination, Associate Planner Kilzerow provided a brief report. Thanking staff and Forest City for a great project, Commissioner Guerriero indicated his approval of the proposed project. For Commissioner Harter, Associate Planner Kilzerow noted that the driveway to Bel Vellaggio was approved administratively, and advised that the owners of the Power Center would be in full agreement of staff recommendation. In response to Commissioner Carey's query, Mr. Lee advised that the start date for Phase 1 is scheduled for April, 2008 to be completed September, 2008. Commissioner Carey relayed his concern with the lack of Stop signage on the ring-road. MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve staff recommendation. Commissioner Chiniaeff seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous aDoroval. COMMISSIONER REPORTS No report at this time. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director of Planning Ubnoske noted that staff is currently working to ad the ex-parte communications item to the February 20, 2008, Planning Commission agenda. Ms. Ubnoske also noted that there will be large projects coming to Planning Commission such as Old Town Visioning, Water Park, and Mercedes project. With respect to compensation for subcommittee meetings for Planning Commissioners, Assistant City Manager Johnson stated that he will explore the issue and get back to the Commission. ADJOURNMENT At 6:30 pm, Chairman Telesio formally adjourned to Februarv 200 2008 at 6:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. John Telesio Chairman Debbie Ubnoske Director of Planning R\MinutesPC\011608 3 ITEM #2 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION MEMORANDUM Planning Commission Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning February 20, 2008 Director's Hearing Case Update Planning Director's Agenda items for January 2008. Date January 3, 2008 Attachment: Case No. PA)7-0314 Proposal A Minor Conditional Use Permit to upgrade an existing Type-41 ABC license to a Type-47 ABC license which authorizes the sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits at The Bank of Mexican Food, located at 28465 Old Town Front Street 1. Action Agenda - Blue Page 2 R:\Directors HearingIMEM0\2008\02-20-2008 Applicant Craig Puma Action APPROVED R:\Directors Hearing\MEM0\2008\02-20-200B ATTACHMENT NO.1 ACTION AGENDA 2 ACTION AGENDA TEMECULA PLANNING DIRECTOR'S HEARING REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 3, 2008 1 :30 p.m. TEMECULA CITY HALL MAIN CONFERENCE ROOM 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 CALL TO ORDER: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning 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 your name and address. Item No.1 1 :30 p.m. Project Number: Project Type: Project Title: Applicant: Project Description: PA07-0314 Minor Conditional Use Permit The Bank of Mexican Food MCUP Craig Puma A Minor Conditional Use Permit to upgrade an existing Type-41 ABC license to a Type-47 ABC license which authorizes the sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits 28465 Old Town Front Street CEQA Section 15301; Class 1, Existing Facilities Katie Le Comte APPROVED Location: Environmental Action: Project Planner: ACTION: P"\Planning\Oirectors-Hearing\2008\01-03-2008 Action Agenda.doc ITEM #3 EXPARTE COMMUNICA TIONS ITEM #4 CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Eric Jones, Junior Planner DATE: February 20, 2008 SUBJECT: Planning Application No. PA07-0275, the first Extension of Time for a previously approved Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (32229), on 12.1 acres, generally located on the southeast corner of Meadows Parkway and Rancho California Road at31891 Rancho California Road BACKGROUND SUMMARY Planning Application No. PA07-0275, submitted by John Clement of Venture Point Real Estate Group, is a request for the first Extension of Time for a previously approved Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (32229), Planning Application No. PA04-0201, approved by the Planning Commission on October 6, 2004. The applicant would like to request an Extension of Time in order to complete the processing of documents related to taxes and legal reviews. Planning Application No. PA04-0201 was approved by the Planning Commission as part of a series of applications related to Planning Application No. PA04-0200, a Development Plan to construct an 80,677 square foot commercial center consisting of seven buildings on 9.77 acres located at the southeast corner of Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway. The related applications for the project included Planning Application Numbers PA04-0202, a Minor Conditional Use Permit to establish a drive-through pharmacy pick-up window; and, PA04-0203, a Minor Conditional Use Permit for the sale of alcohol from a market and drug store. It should be noted that this project has already been constructed. Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 32229 conforms to the Margarita Village Specific Plan and the City's Development Code (Neighborhood Commercial), the Subdivision Ordinance, and the Subdivision Map Act. The lots created meet the minimum lot size, lot depth and street frontage pursuant to the Margarita Village Specific Plan, which requires this planning area to follow the development standards contained within the Development Code for Neighborhood Commercial (NC) as described in Section 17.08.040.8. The minimum lot size allowed for Neighborhood Commercial is 30,000 square feet net. Parcels 1 through 6 will range in size from 1.25 acres (54,450 square feet) to 2.02 acres (87,991.20 square feet) net. Pursuant to Section 17.05.010.H of the Development Code, the applicant filed for an Extension of Time on September 24,2007, prior to the expiration date of October 6,2007. No changes to the originally approved Vesting Tentative Parcel Map are being proposed as part of this extension of time application. G;\Planning\2007\PA07 -0275 Meadows Village EOT\Planning\MEMO to Planning Commission.doc 1 LEGAL NOTICE REQUIREMENTS Notice of the public hearing was published in The Californian on February 9, 2007 and mailed to the property owners within the required 600-foot radius. RECOMMENDATION Staff has determined that the proposed Extension of Time, 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 approve the Extension of Time based upon the findings and with the attached Conditions of Approval. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map - Blue Page 3 2. Vesting Tentative Parcel Map - Blue Page 4 3. PC Resolution 08-_ - Blue Page 5 4. Planning Commission Staff Report dated October 6, 2004 - Blue Page 6 5. Notice of Public Hearing - Blue Page 7 G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0275 Meadows Village EOT\Planning\MEMO to Planning Commission.doc 2 ATTACHMENT NO.1 VICINITY MAP G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0275 Meadows Village EOT\Planning\MEMO to Planning Commission.doc 3 '1\ \ - ~ " /. .--/ / I j , ( I I I I I --h - Id:r-.~( - ~ . \ (i -l. I 1 \ ./ ATTACHMENT NO.2 VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP (32229) G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0275 Meadows Village EOT\Planning\MEMO to Planning Commission.doc 4 < h ,1 ~l' I ;~ !i !ill J ~ I n ij~ ~~ ' I:!! .~~!illl!'. ~::" ~ . "~ ! i ;i; ,~~;ql ~ ~~i~~! 1:~ .-< , I ~,! Uli:i . . 0.... i ~R i= I in; Jilil H: s! !!! H~~' ~ ;~ .~~, j,~.m!mil'I!!d ~ll I ~~ ~<Y~' ,i11 ,. ' ~u' ~<(O! -3 ~ :~... ~a:C- ,~ I . I - ~ < b. 8w'" I "",. ~~:.! . :i>o i ! i~'to: 5 ~H ~ ace;;' I . ~~3"; (3 ;', ."<( ~v I ,'<""w z" ~ ~~ ;:;; !ii.!!! I ~mn 8 "0 5c> !i il!!.li!~~~ i,' . II ~ A !~ " "llIdllll ~1I11, I U lid L";i > ig,,^~ !?!U ~ is ~ ~wo(~ .! ~~~H ';'1;"", ! ii, 'I' ~ ~ 1 .. '0 . ~s~, ~ 1!~ . ~ r!i il : ~g, , ~ ~ ;.~B!" ~~ae~~<> !l:'~"'~ ~;~~~~~ ,~~~a:s!'&!5 6g~i ~ ~ r~;: ~ ~ - ~ ,. < ~, . F , ~~ ,< 0' ~ " " . ! [\ ,) u . Z ~.; e ~~ '. U ~i .b ., " ~ . , ~ .! . l:l '!: I ~p; >' o"-:~ i ~~~! ~ ~a~! IE <( ';,' '<!:i ~ ~ ~ . J . . . " ATTACHMENT NO.3 PC RESOLUTION 08-_ G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0275 Meadows Village EOT\Planning\MEMO to Planning Commission.doc 5 PC RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA07-0275, THE FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME FOR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP (32229), GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT 31891 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD (ASSESOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 954-030-002, 954-030- 003) Section 1. Procedural Findinas. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On October 6, 2004, Planning Commission approved Planning Application No. PA04-0201, a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map. B. On September 24, 2007, John Clement of Venture Point Development filed Planning Application No. PA07-0275, an Extension of Time, in a manner in accord with the City of Ternecula General Plan and Development Code. C. The application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the tirne and manner prescribed by State and local law. D. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on February 20, 2008, 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. E. At the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. PA07-0275 subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder. F. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findinas. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby finds, determines and declares that: Mandatorv Findinos for Aooroval/Section 16.18.120 A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, any applicable specific plan and the City of Temecula Municipal Code; Each lot will conform to the minimum lot size requirement of the Neighborhood Commercial zoning district and will have reciprocal access across other parcels G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0275 Meadows Village EOT\Planning\PC RESOLUTION WITH NEG DEe OR NOD.doc I created on the same site. The original Conditions of Approval will ensure that an Owners' Association maintains the common-use facilities such as parking, sidewalks, and landscaping. In addition, no changes to the map are proposed for the Extension of Time. 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, or the land is subject to a Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will not be too srnallto sustain their agricultural use; The proposed land division is not land designated for conservation or agricultural use. C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the Tentative Map; Based on the adopted Negative Declaration for the original Planning Application (PA04-0201), which was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, it has been determined that the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development being proposed. Furthermore, the project is consistent with the General Plan, as well as the development standards for the Neighborhood Commercial zoning designation. In addition, no changes are proposed for the Extension of Time. D. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with Conditions of Approval, are either: 1) not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; or 2) an Environmental Impact Report has been prepared and a finding has been rnade, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a); 3) finding that specific economic, social, or other consideration make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental irnpacl report; No changes to the original Planning Application (PA04-0201) are proposed. The application will remain consistent with the adopted Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan and is not likely to cause significant environmental damage. E. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems; Planning Application No. PA07-0275 has been reviewed by the Fire Prevention Department, the Public Works Department and the Building and Safety Department. Furthermore, provisions are made in the General Plan and the Development Code to ensure that the public health, safety and welfare are safeguarded. The project remains consistent with these documents. G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0275 Meadows Village EOT\Planning\PC RESOLUTION WITH NEG DEe OR NOD.doc 2 F. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible; The original project conditions comply with the Uniform Building Code, which contains requirements for energy conservation. G. The design of the subdivision and the type of irnprovements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public will be provided; All required rights-of-way and easements have been provided on the Tentative Map. The City has reviewed these easements and has found no potential conflicts. H. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quirnby); This map is for non-residential use and will not be subject to Quimby fees. Section 3. Environmental Findinos. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval for the Meadows Village Vesting Tentative Map Extension of Time: A. The Planning Commission previously reviewed and adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the October 6, 2004 public hearing, and based on the whole record before it found that: (1) the (Mitigated) Negative Declaration was prepared in cornpliance with CEQA; (2) there was no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment; and (3) (Mitigated) Negative Declaration reflected the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. No changes are proposed for the Extension of Time that will require these findings to be modified. Section 4. Conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approves Planning Application No. PA07-0275, an Extension of Time Application to complete the recordation of a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map. The project address is 31891 Rancho California Road and is generally located on the southeast corner of Meadows Parkway and Rancho California Road, subject to the Conditions of Approval set forth in Planning Application PA04-0201. This approval shall remain valid until October 6, 2008. No changes are proposed to the originally approved Planning Application (PA04-0201). G:\Planlllllg\2007\PA07.0275 Meadows Village EOT\Planning\PC RESOLUTION WITH NEG DEe OR NOD.doc 3 Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Ternecula Planning Comrnission this 20th day of February 2008. John Telesio, Chairman ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 08- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 20th day of February 2008, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary G:\Planning\2007\PA07 fJ275 Meadows Village EOT\Planning\PC RESOLUTION WITH NEG DEe OR NOD.doc 4 ATTACHMENT NO.4 OCTOBER 6, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0275 Meadows Village EOT\Planning\MEMO to Planning Commission.doc 6 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION Date of Meeting: October 6,2004 Prepared by: Stuart Fisk Title: Associate Planner File Numbers: PA04-0200 PA04-0201 PA04-0202 PA04-0203 Application Types: Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Parcel Map, Minor Conditional Use Permit (Drive Thru), and Minor Conditional Use Permit (Alcohol Sales; Type 21 license, off-sale general) Project Description: A Development Plan to construct a neighborhood shopping center with eight commercial buildings totaling 80,524 square feet; comprised 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. A Vesting Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide a 9.77 acre parcel into six (6) parcels with a minimum lot size of 1.25 acres. A Minor Conditional Use Permit for a pharmacy drive thru at the proposed drug store and a Minor Conditional Use Permit to allow for the sale of alcohol (Type 21 license, off-sale general) from the proposed drug store and the proposed grocery store. The project site is located at the southeast corner of Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway, known as Assessor Parcel No. 954-030-001. Recommendation: (Check One) ~ Approve with Conditions o Deny o Continue for Redesign o Continue to: o Recommend Approval with Conditions o Recommend Denial CEQA: (Check One) o Categorically Exempt o Negative Declaration ~ Mitigated Negative Declaration with Monitoring Plan Class: DEIR R:\D P\2004\04-0200 Meadows Village\StafTReport.doc PROJECT DATA SUMMARY Applicant: Venture Point; John Clement Completion Date: March 22, 2004 Mandatory Action Deadline Date: October 6, 2004 General Plan Designation: NeiQhborhood Commercial (NC) Zoning Designation: MarQarita VillaQe Specific Plan (SP-3l SitelSurrounding Land Use: Site: Vacant North: South: East: West: SinQle Family Residential SinQle Family Residential SinQle Family Residential SinQle Family Residential Lot Area: 9.77 acres Total Floor Area/Ratio 0.19 Landscape ArealCoverage 115,653 SQ. ft./27.1% Parking Required/Provided 335 Spaces Required (Entire Center)/376 Provided (Entire Center) 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. ~ 2. The attached 'Project Review Worksheet' (Attachment A) has been completed and staff has determined that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, City- wide Design Guidelines, the Margarita Village Specific Plan and the Development Code. In May of 2003 the City Council denied a Specific Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit application for the project site that was filed by Venture Point for a community commercial shopping center design with a 48,372 square foot grocery store. The applicant has since worked with staff to redesign the site to address design concerns expressed by the City Council, including a reduction in the size of the market to make the shopping center compatible with the Specific Plan and General Plan designation of Neighborhood Commercial for the site. The applicant submitted new applications on March 22, 2004 to request a Development Plan to allow for the construction of a total of 80,524 square feet of neighborhood commercial shopping R\D P\2004\04-0200 Meadows ViIlage\Slaff Report.doc 2 center space, a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide the parcel into six (6) parcels, a Minor Conditional Use Permit for a drive thru pharmacy at the proposed drug store, and a Minor Conditional use permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages (Type 21 license, off-sale general) from the proposed drug store and grocery store on 9.77 acres located at the southeast corner of Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway. A Community Meeting was held on June 3, 2004 to present the revised plans to the neighboring community and to allow community members to ask questions and offer comments to staff and the applicant regarding the proposed project. There appeared to be general community support of the proposed project at this meeting. ANALYSIS Development Plan Staff has worked with the applicant and neighboring community to achieve a variety of project enhancements that will result in a project with a neighborhood commercial scale. The reduction in the size of the market was the most essential change necessary to establish the project as a neighborhood commercial center. Additionally, the site plan was revised to add and enhance pedestrian walkways between buildings and through the parking area. This was done to create a center that will better serve residents walking to the site and to better serve patrons who will visit the center for more than a single purpose. Loading facilities for the market have been relocated to the side of Building H to reduce noise and visual impacts to surrounding residential properties. Buildings have been designed to minimize the visibility of rooftop equipment from surrounding residential properties and the project has been conditioned to fully screen rooftop equipment and the back sides of parapet walls from the public right-of-way. Site Desion The application is consistent with the Margarita Village Specific Plan and General Plan designations of Neighborhood Commercial. The buildings meet the minimum setback requirements of the Specific Plan and Development Code and the proposed lot coverage of 19% is well below the maximum allowed lot coverage of 25%. A tree shaded plaza area with a water feature has been added to create an outdoor eating area. Enhanced paving is provided within the plaza area, and stone veneer and enhanced pre-cast concrete on portions of the fayades of Building E and F are also provided to enhance the plaza area. The arrangement of buildings on the site provides for good vehicular and pedestrian circulation throughout the site. The arrangement of buildings also minimizes impacts to surrounding residential properties by placing the rear of the buildings, where there will be minimal activity, adjacent to the residential properties and by placing loading facilities at the sides of buildings to further minimize impacts. Pedestrian access includes 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. These walkways create an environment with safe and convenient pedestrian interaction between businesses. Vehicular access to the site will be taken from two ingress/egress driveways along Rancho California Road and two ingress/egress driveways along Meadows Parkway. The Fire R:\D P\2004\04-Q200 Meadows Village\StaffReport.doc 3 Department has reviewed the site plan and determined that there is proper access and circulation to provide emergency services. Parkino. For shopping centers with over 25,000 square feet of gross floor area, the Development Code requires 1 space/300 square feet of gross floor area. In addition, when restaurant areas occupy more than 15 percent of the total shopping area gross floor area, 1 space/100 square feet of gross restaurant floor area is required. Based on the proposed uses, staff has determined that 335 parking spaces are required to serve the entire center. A total of 376 spaces will be provided. Should the future building uses change, the proposed size or intensity of use must conform to parking requirements per the Development Code with available onsite parking. The project has been conditioned to record reciprocal parking and access easements between the proposed parcels within the center. Architecture The architectural style of the buildings is consistent with the Margarita Village Specific Plan and General Plan criteria by offering distinctive styling, accenting and articulation. The buildings are designed to be compatible with each other and the surrounding single family homes. The plaza area and fountain integrate with the architectural style and provide a unique gathering place in a peaceful setting. Staff has expressed concerns to the applicant regarding what staff believes to be an insufficient provision of a base material for the buildings throughout the site. Staff has also expressed concerns to the applicant regarding blank wall spaces and the visibility of delivery doors at the rear of Buildings Band C from Meadows Parkway. However, the applicant believes that adequate building features and screening have been provided and he will address these issues at the public hearing. Landscapino Staff expressed concerns to the applicant regarding the lack of landscaping at the front of the grocery store (Building H) and requested an outdoor seating area to provide seating for a deli planned within the grocery store. The applicant responded that additional landscaping and outdoor seating would severely limit the function of the grocery store. Therefore, the applicant will address these issues at the public hearing. As requested by City Council members, landscaping has been introduced into the center to mirror the County's landscape plan for the wine country. With the exception of staff's concern regarding the lack of landscaping at the front of the grocery store (Building H), staff and the City's consulting landscape architect support the proposed landscape plan. The landscape plan is otherwise consistent with the landscape requirements of the Margarita Village Specific Plan, Development Code and Design Guidelines. Tree and shrub placement will serve to effectively screen on site parking areas and effectively soften building elevations. The landscaping also serves to tie the site together in that the landscaping along Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway will provide strong visual identification of the street frontage associated with the project. The project proposes to landscape 115,653 square feet or approximately 27.1 % of the site, which exceeds the minimum requirement of 25% for Neighborhood Commercial sites. The R:\D P\2004\04-0200 Meadows ViIlage\Staff Report.doc 4 landscape plan conforms to the landscape requirements of the Margarita Village Specific Plan and the Design Guidelines. Tree and shrub placement around the perimeter of the site will define the project area as will the selective use of accent trees and shrubs throughout the site. The centralized plaza and its amenities, along with the interconnection of the buildings through the use of pedestrian walkways that are separated from parking areas, serve to tie the project together. Varying landscape setbacks are provided along Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway, with a minimum depth of 21 feet along Rancho California Road and a minimum depth of 25 feet along Meadows Parkway. A varying landscape setback between the buildings on site and residential properties has a minimum depth of 40 feet. Proposed trees include Silk Tree, Carob, Italian Cypress, Bronze Loquat, Crape Myrtle, Sweet Gum, Fruitless Olive, Allepo Pine, Stone Pine, London Plane, Fern Pine, Lombardy Poplar, and Idaho Locust trees. Proposed shrubs and vines include Abelia, Redolens Acacia, Lily of the Nile, San Diego Red Bougainvillea, Boxwood, Spanish Lavender, Myoporum, Lilyturf, Wheeler's Dwarf Pittosporum, Firethorn, Ballerina Indian Hawthorn, Springtime Indian Hawthorn, Rosemary, Mexican Sage, and Chinese Wisteria. Conditional Use Permits Drive-Thru Pursuant to Section 17.10 of the Development Code, a Minor Conditional Use Permit is required to operate the proposed drive-thru at the drug store (Building A). The proposed drive-thru will provide additional convenience to the community and is consistent with the General Plan (Neighborhood Commercial), zoning designation (Margarita Village Specific Plan), and underlying zoning (Neighborhood Commercial) as well as the standards within the Development Code. Staff has conditioned the project that prior to any use allowed by this permit, the drive thru shall be fully screened, including any landscaping necessary to provide full screening of vehicles within the drive-thru lane and at the pharmacy pick-up window from the public right-of- way (Condition of Approval No.6). Alcohol Sales The sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits requires that a conditional use permit be obtained from the Planning Commission. A Type 21 license (off-sale general) is being proposed at the drug store (Building A) and the proposed grocery store (Building H). The application conforms to Section 17.10 of the Development Code, which requires that any business offering the sale of alcoholic beverages shall be no closer than 500 feet from any public park, religious institution or school. Staff has verified through the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control that the project site is within Census Tract 0432.21. One (1) off-sale license currently exists in the tract and ten (10) are allowed before it is considered "over-concentrated". Since this census tract is not over- concentrated with off-sale licenses, Public Convenience or Necessity Findings are not required. Vesting Tentative Parcel Map The Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 32229 conforms to the Margarita Village Specific Plan and the City's Development Code (Neighborhood Commercial), the Subdivision Ordinance, and the Subdivision Map Act. The lots created meet the minimum lot size, lot depth and street frontage pursuant to the Margarita Village Specific Plan, which requires this planning area to follow the R:\D P\2004\04-0200 Meadows Village\StaffReport.doc 5 development standards contained within the Development Code for Neighborhood Commercial (NC) as described in Section 17.08.040.B. The minimum lot size allowed for Neighborhood Commercial is 30,000 square feet net. Parcels 1 through 6 will range in size from 1.25 acres (54,450 square feet) to 2.02 acres (87,991.20 square feet) net. According to the Subdivision Ordinance, the vesting map would confer a vested right to proceed with the development of the Meadows Village project in substantial compliance with the ordinances, policies and standards in effect at the time the vesting tentative map is deemed complete or conditionally approved. As required by Chapter 16.18.080 of the Temecula Subdivision Ordinance, the applicant has provided details on the height, size, location, architectural elevations, and schematic plans and materials boards for the proposed buildings as a part of the proposed Development Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION l3J 1. An Initial Study has been prepared and indicates that the project will have potential significant environmental impacts unless mitigation measures are included as conditions of approval. Based on the following mitigations, staff recommends adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. IMPACT 1. Aesthetics - Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. 2. Noise - A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project and 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 agencies. CONCLUSIONIRECOMMENDATION MITIGATION 1. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall be required to screen all loading areas and roof mounted mechanical equipment from view of the adjacent residences and public right-of-ways. This screening shall be accomplished through the utilization of architectural elements such as walls, parapets, tiled mansard roof elements, or other screening if reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning. 2. All loading areas adjacent to sensitive receptors shall be screened with sound walls to mitigate the noise generated by delivery trucks. A seven (7) foot high parapet wall shall be provided to block the line of site from the rear yards of the adjacent homes to the exposed roof and ventilation systems of the buildings on site. Staff has determined that the project is consistent with the General Plan and conforms to the Margarita Village Specific Plan, the Development Code, the City-Wide Design Guidelines and the Temecula Subdivision Ordinance. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the proposed Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Parcel Map, and Minor Conditional Use Permits subject to the attached conditions of approval. Staff also recommends adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. R:\D P\2004\04-0200 Meadows Village\Staff Report.doc 6 FINDINGS Develooment Plan (Code Section 17.05.010.F) 1. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other City ordinances. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan land use policies for Neighborhood Commercial (NC) development in the City of Temecula General Plan. The proposal is also consistent with the Margarita Village Specific Plan, which requires this planning area to follow the development standards contained within the Development Code for Neighborhood Commercial (NC) as described in Section 17.08.040.8. The proposed commercial buildings and uses are typical land uses found in the Neighborhood Commercial land use designation within the General Plan. The Land Use Element of the General Plan requires that proposed buildings be compatible with existing buildings. The proposed commercial buildings have been designed to be compatible with the surrounding residential buildings currently located adjacent to the proposed site. 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The project has been conditioned to conform to the Uniform Building Code, and prior to occupancy, City staff will inspect all construction. The site design will provide adequate emergency access in the case of a need for emergency response to the site. Conditional Use Permit (Drive Thru) (Code Section 17.040.010.E) 1. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan (Neighborhood Commercial), zoning designation (Margarita Village Specific Plan), and underlying zoning (Neighborhood Commercial) as well as the standards within the Development Code. The site is therefore properly planned and zoned and found to be physically suitable for the proposed use. 2. The proposed minor conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed minor conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures. The proposed project will provide additional convenience for the community and is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures. The site has been designed to place the proposed drive-thru as far from the surrounding residential property as feasible and includes walls and landscaping to screen the use from public view. The proposed use is designed to blend with the proposed building and surrounding buildings on site and therefore will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures. 3. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping and other development features prescribed in this development code and required by the R:\D P\2004\04-0200 Meadows Village\StafT Report.doc 7 Planning Commission or Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. The proposed drug store and other buildings on site will adequately provide all improvements including yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer area, landscaping and all other features as required in the Development Code and by Planning Commission in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. 4. The nature of the proposed minor conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The nature of the proposed use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare to the community and the use will provide an additional convenience to the community. Provisions are made in the General Plan and the Development Code to ensure that the public health, safety and welfare are safeguarded. The project has been conditioned to meet all applicable requirements and is consistent with these documents. 5. That the decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a conditional use permit be based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council on appeal. The project has been reviewed, as a whole, in reference to all applicable codes and ordinances before the Planning Commission. Conditional Use Permit (Alcohol Sales) (Code Section 17.040.010.E) 1. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan (Neighborhood Commercial) and zoning designation (Margarita Village Specific Plan), and underlying zoning (Neighborhood Commercial) as well as the standards within the Development Code. The project is not less than 500 feet from a religious institution, school or a public park. 2. The proposed minor conditional use is compatible with the nature. condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed minor conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures. The proposed project is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures. The proposed project will also provide additional convenience for the community and will allow the business at the project site to be competitive with other similar businesses selling beer, wine and distilled spirits in the vicinity of the project site. 3. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping and other development features prescribed in this development code and required by the Planning Commission or Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. R:\D P\2Q04\Q4..()200 Meadows Village\Staff Report.doc 8 The proposed commercial buildings at the site will adequately provide all improvements including yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer area, landscaping and all other features as required in the Development Code and by Planning Commission in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. 4. The nature of the proposed minor conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The nature of the proposed use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare to the community because the project will provide an additional convenience to the community, which will reduce vehic/e trips. Furthermore, the site is consistent with the city policies regarding separation of sensitive uses and the City Police Department has provided conditions of approval for the project and concurs with the request for the sale of alcoholic products at the project site. 5. That the decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a conditional use permit be based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council on appeal. The project has been reviewed, as a whole, in reference to all applicable codes and ordinances before the Planning Commission. Vestino Tentative Parcel MaD (Code Section 16.18.1201 1. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, any applicable specific plan and the City of Temecula Municipal Code. Each lot will conform to the minimum lot size requirement of the Neighborhood Commercial zoning district and will have reciprocal access across other parcels created on the same site. Conditions of approval will ensure that an Owner's Association maintains the common-use facilities such as parking, sidewalks, and landscaping. 2. 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, or the land is subject to a Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will not be too small to sustain their agricultural use. The proposed land division is not land designated for conservation or agricultural use. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. Based on the adopted Negative Declaration, which was prepared in accordance with the Califomia Environmental Quality Act, it has been determined that the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development being proposed. Furthermore, the project is consistent with the General Plan, as well as the development standards for the Neighborhood Commercial zoning designation. 4. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, are either 1) Not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; or 2) An environmental R;\D P\2004\04-0200 Meadow!> Village\StaffReport.doc 9 impact report has been prepared and a finding has been made, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) (3), finding that specific economic, social, or other consideration make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. The application is consistent with the adopted Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan and is not likely to cause significant environmental damage. 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 Safety Department, the Public Works Department and the Building and Safety Department. As a result, the project has been conditioned to address their concerns. Furthermore, 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. 6. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. The project has been conditioned to 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, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public will be provided. All required rights-of-way and easements have been provided on the Tentative Map. The City has reviewed these easements and has found no potential conflicts. 8. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). This map is for non-residential use and will not be subject to Quimby fees. ATTACHMENTS 1. Plan Reductions - Blue Page 12 2. Project Review Worksheet - Blue Page 13 3. PC Resolution No. 2004_ (Development Plan) - Blue Page 14 Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval 4. PC Resolution No. 2004_ (Minor Conditional Use Permit; Drive Thru) - Blue Page 15 Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval R:\D P\2004\04.0200 Meadows Village\StaffReport.doc 10 5. PC Resolution No. 2004_ (Minor Conditional Use Permit; Alcohol Sales) - Blue Page 16 Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval 6. PC Resolution No. 2004_ (Vesting Tentative Parcel Map) - Blue Page 17 Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval 7. Initial Study and Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 18 R\D P\2004\04-0200 Meadows ViIlage\StaffReport.doc II ATTACHMENT NO.6 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-051 VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP R:\D P\2004\04-0200 Meadows Village\StafTReport.doc 17 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2004-051 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA04-0201, A VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP TO SUBDIVIDE A 9.77 ACRE PARCEL INTO SIX (6) COMMERCIAL PARCELS WITH A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 1.25 ACRES, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AND MEADOWS PARKWAY, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 954-030-001. WHEREAS, John Clement, representing Venture Point, filed Planning Application No. PA04-0201, 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 October 6, 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 approved Planning Application PA04-0201 subject to conditions of approval after finding that the project proposed in Planning Application No. PA04-0201 conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; 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 16.18.120 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, any applicable specific plan and the City of Temecula Municipal Code. Each lot will conform to the minimum lot size requirement of the Neighborhood Commercial zoning district and will have reciprocal access across other parcels created on the same site. Conditions of approval will ensure that an Owner's Association maintains the common-use facilities such as parking, sidewalks, and landscaping. 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, or the land is subject to a Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will not be too small to sustain their agricultural use. R:\VTPM\2004\04..Q201 TPM 32229 Meadows Village\ANAL Reso and COAs - VTPM.doc 1 The proposed land division is not land designated for conselVation or agricultural use. C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. Based on the adopted Negative Declaration, which was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, it has been determined that the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development being proposed. Furthermore, the project is consistent with the General Plan, as well as the development standards for the Neighborhood Commercial zoning designation. D. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, are either 1) Not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; or 2) An environmental impact report has been prepared and a finding has been made, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) (3), finding that specific economic, social, or other consideration make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. The application is consistent with the adopted Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan and is not likely to cause significant environmental damage. 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 Department, the Public Works Department and the Building and Safety Department. As a result, the project has been conditioned to address their concerns. Furthermore, 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 project has been conditioned to comply with the Uniform Building Code, which contains requirements for energy conselVation. 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, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public will be provided. All required rights-of-way and easements have been provided on the Tentative Map. The City has reviewed these easements and has found no potential conflicts. H. (Quimby). The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements This map is for non-residential use and will not be subject to Quimby fees. Section 3. Environmental Comoliance. Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan based on the Initial Study for Planning Application Nos. PA04- R:\VTPM\2004\04-0201 TPM 32229 Meadows Village\FINAL Reso and COAs - VTPM.doc 2 0200, PA-4-0201, PA04-0202 and PA04-0203, which was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves Planning Application No. PA04-0201 (Vesting Tentative Parcel Map) to subdivide a 9.77 acre parcel into six (6) commercial parcels 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 6th day of October 2004. John Telesio, Chairman ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 2004-051 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 6th day of October, 2004, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 3 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff, Guerriero, Telesio NOES: o PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 2 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Mathewson, Olhasso ABSTAIN: o PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\VTPM\2004\04-020l TPM 32229 Meadows Village\FINAL Reso and COAs - VTPM.doc 3 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:\VTPM\2004\04-0201 TPM 32229 Meadows Village\FINAL Reso and COAs - VTPM.doc 4 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA04-0201 Project Description: A Vesting Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide a 9.77 acre parcel into six (6) commercial parcels with a minimum lot size of 1.25 acres, located at the southeast corner of Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway, known as Assessors Parcel .No. 954-030-001. DIF Category: MSHCP Category: Service Commercial Commercial Assessor's Parcel No.: 954-030-001 Approval Date: October 6, 2004 Expiration Date: October 6, 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 De Minimus 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 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. 3. 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 R:\VTPM\2004\04-0201 TPM 32229 Meadows Village\FINAL Reso and COAs - VTPM.doc 5 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. 4. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Program and conditions set forth. 5. The applicant shall sign two copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided by the Planning Department and return one signed copy to the Planning Department for their files. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 6. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Department and Public Works Department. 7. 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. 8. If at any time during excavation/construction of the site, archaeological/cultural resources, or any artifacts or other objects which reasonably appear 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 owner 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 determining that the discovery is an archaeological/cultural resource, the Director of Planning shall notify the property owner that no further excavation or development rnay take place until a mitigation plan or other corrective measures have been approved by the Director of Planning. This condition of approval shall be placed on the grading plan as a note prior to issuance of a grading permit. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 9. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Department: a. A copy of the Final Map. b. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes: R:\VTPM\2004\04-0201 TPM 32229 Meadows Village\FlNAL Reso and COAs - VTPM.doc 6 i. This property is located within thirty miles (30) of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations, Ordinance No. 655. ii. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for this project and is on file at the City of Temecula Planning Department. iii. This property is located within an area identified by the City of Temecula General Plan as being a sensitive area with regards to paleontological resources. c. 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, identify and include methods of maintaining all landscape areas, drive aisles, parking areas and other common areas. ii. 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. iii. Every owner of a unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such 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. 10. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Department a copy of a recorded Reciprocal Use Agreement, which provides for cross-lot access and parking across all lots. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT General Requirements 11. 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:\VTPM\2004\04-0201 TPM 32229 Meadows Village\FINAL Reso and COAs - VTPM.doc 7 12. 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. 13. 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. 14. 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. 15. The westerly driveway on Rancho California Road will be restricted to right-in/right-out movements. 16. The easterly driveway on Rancho California Road will be restricted to right-in/right- out/left-in movements. 17. The northerly driveway on Meadows Parkway will be restricted to right-inlright-out movements. Prior to Approval of the Parcel 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: 18. 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. Rancho California Water District c. Eastern Municipal Water District d. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District e. City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau f. Planning Department g. Riverside County Health Department h. Cable TV Franchise i. Community Services District j. Verizon k. Department of Public Works I. Southern California Edison Company m. Southern California Gas Company 19. 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: R:\VTPM\2004\04-o201 TPM 32229 Meadows Village\FINAL Reso and COAs - VTPM.doc 8 a. Improve Rancho California Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' R1W) to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), and a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median. i. The left turn pocket onto Meadows Parkway shall be 10 feet wide and 300 feet long at a minimum. ii. The raised landscape median shall have an opening onto the easterly driveway. The left turn pocket shall be 10 feet wide and 200 feet long at a minimum. iii. The right turn lane into the westerly driveway shall be 12 feet wide and 150 feet long at a minimum. b. Improve Meadows Parkway (Major Highway Standards - 100' R1W) to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), and a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median. i. The left turn pocket onto Rancho California Road shall be 10 feet wide and 250 feet long at a minimum. ii. The raised landscape median shall have an opening onto the southerly driveway. The left turn pocket shall be 10 feet wide and 150 feet long at a minimum. c. Modify the existing traffic signal at the intersection of Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway. 20. 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. b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard No. 207A. c. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in accordance with City Standard No. 800, 801, 802 and 803. d. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400 and 401. e. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. f. 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. g. 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. h. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground R:\VTPM\2004\04-0201 TPM 32229 Meadows ViUage\FINAL Reso and COAs - VTPM.doc 9 21. 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. 22. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Rancho California Road on the Parcel Map with the exception of two openings as delineated on the approved Tentative Parcel Map. 23. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Meadows Parkway on the Parcel Map with the exception of two openings as delineated on the approved Tentative Parcel Map. 24. 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. 25. 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. 26. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. 27. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Parcel Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with the map. 28. 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. 29. 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 Parcel 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. 30. 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. 31. Bus bays will be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by the Department of Public Works. 32. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated and noted on the final map. 33. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. R:\VTPM\2004\04-0201 TPM 32229 Meadows Village\FINAL Resa and COAs - VTPM.doc 10 34. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to approval of the Parcel Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. 35. 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 36. 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 Conservation District c. Planning Department d. Department of Public Works 37. 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. 38. 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. 39. 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 interval of one hundred years. 40. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. 41. 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:\VTPM\2004\04-0201 TPM 32229 Meadows Village\FlNAL Reso and COAs - VTPM.doc 11 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. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 43. 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. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 44. 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. 45. 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. 46. 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. 47. 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 Certificates of Occupancy 48. 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 49. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. 50. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 51. 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. R:\VTPM\2004\04-0201 TPM 32229 Meadows VilIage\FINAL Reso and COAs ~ VTPM.doc 12 FIRE DEPARTMENT 52. 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. 53. 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. 54. 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) 55. 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) 56. Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum turning radius on any cul-de-sac shall be forty-five (45) feet. (CFC 902.2.2.3, CFC 902.2.2.4) 57. All locations where structures are built shall maintain 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). NO CHANGES TO DRIVEWAYS, CURBS, OR OTHER MEANS OF ACCESS WILL BE ALLOWED THAT EFFECT FIRE LANES OR FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS ROADS. 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) 58. Fire Department vehicle access roads shall maintain 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) 59. This development shall maintain two (2) points of access, via all-weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1) 60. 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) R:\VTPM\2Q04\04-020J TPM 32229 Meadows Village\FlNAL Reso and COAs - VTPM.doc 13 61. An agreement for the maintenance and repair of any and all existing underground Fire Department Water Systems, including all fire sprinkler supplies and all fire hydrants and supplies will be in place as a condition of this division to maintain available water in perpetuity. 62. 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. COMMUNTY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 63. The Parcel Map shall dedicate an eight (8) foot wide public access easement for the multi-use trail over proposed lots 1, 5 and 6 outside of the right of way along Rancho California Road. The easement shall align with the existing trail on the east side of the project. OUTSIDE AGENCIES 64. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter from the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District dated April 29, 2004. 65. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter from Rancho Water dated April 7, 2004. 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:\VTPM\2004\04.020l TPM 32229 Meadows VillagelFINAL Rew and COAs - VTPM.doc 14 . 1995 MARKET STREET RIVERSIDE, CA 92501 909.955.1200 909.788.9965 FAX WARREN D. WILLIAMS ieneraJ Manager-Chief Engineer 51180.1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT City ofT emecula Planning Department Post Office Box 9033 I Temecula, California 92589-9033 Attention: ':',UAIU ('51-<.. I PM 3222-'t (PA04-0L.Ot) The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in incorporated cities. The District also does not plan check city land use cases, or provide State Division of Real Estate letters or other flood hazard reP9rts for such cases. Disllict comments/recommendations for such cases are normally ~mited to items of specific Interest i to the Dlsllict including Disllict Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood control and drainage facilities which could be considered a logical component or extension of a master plan system, and .District Area Drainage plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition, information of a general nalure is provided. Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: The Disllict has not reviewed the proposed project in detail and the following checked comments do not in any way constitute or imply District approval or endorsement of the proposed project with respect to flood hazard, public health and safety or any olh~r such issue: This project would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of regional,nterest proposed. ...L- This project involves District Master Plan facilities. The Disllict will accept ownerShip of such facilities on written request of too City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required fo); District.acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required.E....O'"^~C~".N~ tt;.....,f" ttJ"- LDN~ VALL"! f1,}ASI<-CHAN,..et.. F"-"'M rvlU'.....'OfA GR€t...I<DP. . _ This Pfoject propos~s channels, storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter. or other facilities that could be conSidered regional In nature and/or a I~ical extension of the adopted ' Master Drainage Plan. The District would consider accepting ownership 01 sucn laCUlhes on wnnen requesi of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District Plan check and inspection will be reqUired for Dis~ct acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required. L This project is located within the limits of the District's M.1lA..Jf..A ('_Rf.f.Klr~""€C>>Lf\ VAUEV,Area Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been adopted: apPlicable lees/snoUlo De paiD oy cashier's check or money order only 10 lI\e Flood Control District prior 10 issuance of building or grading permits whichever comes first. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of issuance of the.actual permit. : GENERALlNFORMATION! . This project may require a Natiooal Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDESI permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. elearance for grading, recordation, or other final approval Should not be given until the City has determined that the project has been granted a permit or is shown to be exempt. It this project involves a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mapp.ed ftood plain, then the Cilv should require lI\e applicant to provide all studies, calCulations, plans and other Information re'luired to meel FEMA re'luirements, and should turlher require that the applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) prior to grading, recordation or other final approval of the project, and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior to occupancy. If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain is impacted by this project, the City should require the aDPIicant to obtain a Section 1601I1603:Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Game and a Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or written correspondence from these agencies indicating the project is _.._"'~; from lhesil reqUIrements, A Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certilication may be required from the local Califomla Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of tfte Corps 404 perm.t. : ~f\H tfJ[.R.OI<(.IIM tNT PC/ll11 r $I1ALl.. BE. OeH""'fi-~ fOI<- ANI WOR.l<... Wen,,^! (He '])ISfR,(.-r R'G". Of WA1 Oft.. W'fl~ ])/ t>"f~Ic.r rP,OLI7/f!;S. c: Very truly yours, _/?.r; -4 ARTURO DtAl Senior Civil Engineer Date:~// ffl ~PV Sk.'1 @ Bancho Water BoardofDirectcrs John E. HOllelood President ClIaba F. Ko Sr. VitePresidenl Stephen J. Corona Ralph H. Dlllly Ben R. DTake Lisa D. Herman John V. Rossi OlTicers: Brian J. Brady Geoen.lManager PhiUlp L Fol"bes Director ofFil1o'l1lee--Treasu~r E.P. "Bob' Lemons Director of Engineering Kenneth C. Dealy Director of Operations & Mllint.enallce Perry R. Louck CClnlr"U"1" Unda N. Fregoso Diatncts.e.:utaryfAdministrati'l'e ServioesMapager C. Miebael Cowett Best Beat & Krieger u..P General Counul l April 7, 2004 l~i:~: ~:,~,,~Wi , ~ !W~(~ ~-,c ~. UU AP? ;~<,~: :JI ~J Stuart Fisk, Project Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 By_ '--- ::.:.-----.--- ~ SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 32229 APN 954-030-001 PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA04-0201 MEADOWS VILLAGE Dear Mr. Fisk: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner and the construction of all required water facilities. If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees and requirements. Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. If you should have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at this office. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT ~(S~. Steve Brannon, P.E. Development Engineering Manager M'lSB:atll1\FCF .. ... .___.... ., ._._.,_ _.,..". n.......__.....'__'__' ____ RanchO CaliforIl1a Water District '<')1'10; W'...~l,G"". l>~~~ . 0_. nn:__ l>__ ""... . 'l'____n>_ "'~1'~__'_ ....."".. <'In'" _ 'n'.."......""'^. PAV I~'?QR.~AAA , . . . ATTACHMENT NO.5 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING G:\Planning\2007\PA07~0275 Meadows Village EOT\Planning\MEMO to Planning Commission.doc 7 Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Environmental: Case Planner: Place of Hearing: Date of Hearing: Time of Hearing: Notice of Public Hearing A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the City of Temecula PLANNING COMMISSION to consider the matter described below: Planning Application No. PA07-0275 John Clement The project address is 31891 Rancho California Road and is generally located on the south east corner of Meadows Parkway and Rancho California Road The first Extension of Time application for a previously approved Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (No. 32229), on 12.1 acres In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Planning Commission previously reviewed and adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the October 6, 2004 public hearing, and based on the whole record before it found that: (1) the (Mitigated) Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; (2) there was no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment; and (3) (Mitigated) Negative Declaration reflected the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. No changes are proposed for the Extension of Time that will require these findings to be modified. Eric Jones City of Temecula, Council Chambers 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590 February 20, 2008 6:00 p.m. Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before the hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or opposition to the approval of the project at the time of hearing. If you challenge the project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. The proposed project application may be viewed at the Temecula Planning Department, 43200 Business Park Drive, Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. Questions concerning the project may be addressed to the case planner at the City of Temecula Planning Department, (951) 694-6400. - . '.'- ~;\, >",; "., c,~:< - .'-' '--",..., ,,',',",'." ---J Project Site I, " ~-.:.- ,..F'.... .,;" Q :':: ",::'0 r.;..;: ITEM #5 DATE OF MEETING: PREPARED BY: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: RECOMMENDATION: CEQA: STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION Februarv 20, 2008 Katie Le Comte TITLE: Assistant Planner Planning Application No. PA07-0325, a Minor Modification to amend Condition of Approval No. 11 of the Final Conditions of Approval for the Creekside Centre Development Plan (Planning Application No. PA04-0525) which restricts the maximum number of restaurant square footage to 10,100 square feet in the Creekside Centre shopping center located at 41785 Nicole Lane [8J Approve with Conditions o Deny D Continue for Redesign D Continue to: D Recommend Approval with Conditions D Recommend Denial [8J Categorically Exempt (Section) (Class) 15301 1, Existinq Facilities D Notice of Determination (Section) D Negative Declaration D Mitigated Negative Declaration with Monitoring Plan DEIR G:\Planning\2007\PA07~0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\PC STAFF REPORT.doc 1 PROJECT DATA SUMMARY Name of Applicant: Mr. Dave Wakefield Date of Completion: February 20, 2008 Mandatory Action Deadline Date: February 20, 2008 General Plan Designation: Community Commercial Zoning Designation: Community Commercial Site/Surrounding Land Use: Site: ExistinQ 26,470 shoppinq center North: South: East: West: Costco Wholesale; Temecula Regional Centre Specific Plan (SP-7) Abbott Vascular; LiQht Industrial (L1) MarQarita CrossinQs Shoppinq Center; Community Commercial (CC) Overland Center ShoppinQ Center: Community Commercial (CC) Lot Area: N/A Total Floor Area/Ratio: N/A Landscape Area/Coverage: N/A Parking Required/Provided: 178 existing regular parking spaces 5 existing motorcycle spaces '= 2 parking credits 180 spaces total BACKGROUND SUMMARY The Development Plan for Creekside Centre (PA04-0525) was approved by the Planning Commission on March 30, 2005. Creekside Centre currently consists of two single-story in-line retail buildings totaling 26,470 square feet. Additionally, 10,000 square feet of restaurant space was anticipated for the two vacant pads located on the north side of the project site. A Condition of Approval was added at the March 30th Planning Commission meeting, which limited the allowable restaurant square footage to 10,100. The purpose of this condition was to ensure that the existing parking spaces would be able to accommodate the future restaurant uses in conjunction with the retail uses. However, it also presumed that the parking for the shopping center would be calculated using the stand-alone parking ratios for retail and restaurant uses, instead of the Development Code parking requirements for a shopping center. Since the approval of PA04-0525, the owner of the shopping center has leased a 4,050 square foot in-line retail suite to Frankie's Steak and Seafood Restaurant. The suite that Frankie's currently occupies was previously anticipated for a retail use. Presently, due to the 10,100 square foot restaurant maximum that was placed on the project as a Condition of Approval, a combined total of 6,050 square feet would be permitted to be built on the two vacant restaurant pads. The applicant is requesting to increase the 10,100 square foot maximum for restaurant space to 13,810 square feet to allow for two restaurants (Ruby Tuesday and Panera Bread) to G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\PC STAFF REPORT.doc 2 occupy the vacant restaurant pads. The Development Plan for Ruby Tuesday is currently being reviewed by staff. This restaurant is proposed to be 5,660 square feel. The Development Plan application for Panera Bread has not yet been accepted for review, however it is anticipated that the restaurant will be 4,100 square feel. Per the original Development Plan approval for Creekside Center, 189 parking spaces were anticipated to be constructed on the site. However, due to a number of physical site modifications, which include the addition of a trash enclosure, the shopping center no longer has 189 parking spaces. Additionally, three parking spaces are proposed to be removed to accommodate the future location of the trash enclosure for Ruby Tuesday. Once Ruby Tuesday is approved, 180 parking spaces will exist on the project site. ANALYSIS Previously, the parking for this project was calculated separately for each use as consistent with the stand alone retail and restaurant parking requirements outlined in the Development Code. The following parking ratios were used: 1 space/300 square feet of gross floor area for Retail Building A and Building B, and 1 space/100 square feet of gross floor area for the anticipated Restaurant uses. This required a total of 189 parking spaces to be provided. As indicated above, the Development Code has off-street parking requirements for stand alone restaurants, which requires 1 space/100 square feet of gross floor area of restaurant space. However, the Development Code also has a separate parking calculation for restaurants that are part of a shopping center. When a restaurant is part of a shopping center, the Development Code allows for the first 15% of restaurant space within the shopping center to be calculated at 1 space/300 square feet of gross floor area; and any restaurant space that exceeds the first 15% is then parked at the ratio of 1 space/100 square feet of gross floor area. The Development Code parking requirements for a shopping center differs from that of a stand alone restaurant because it is anticipated that there would be shared parking opportunities at varied times during the day due to the mix of retail and restaurant uses that exists within the shopping center. The applicant has provided documentation which indicates that due to the mix of retail and restaurant uses in the shopping center, and the variation between peak hours for these uses, that the Development Code Parking requirements for a shopping center are appropriate. The shopping center parking standards read as follows: I Land Use I I Restaurants -Dine In I Shopping Center (25,000 SF GFA or 1 space/300 SF GFA with the greater) additions: Reouired Number of Parkinq Spaces I I I I following 1 space/100 SF of GFA; with a minimum of 10 in all cases Restaurant areas occupying greater than 1 space/1 00 SF GFA 15% of total shoppinq center GFA G:\Planning\2007\PA07~0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\PC STAFF REPORT.doc 3 Based upon the Development Code parking ratios for a shopping center the parking requirements for Creekside Centre are as follows: I Land Use Existing Retail I Frankie's Restaurant Ruby Tuesday: (Proposed total) (15% of total shopping center- 36,570 per previous approval): Remaining restaurant: I Future Panera Bread I TOTAL CREEKSIDE SHOPPING CENTER Square Footage Parking Ratio Spaces Required 22,420 sq. fl. (Total approved retail square footage minus square footage that is occupied by Frankie's) 4,050 sq. fl. 1 space/300 sq. fl. 75 spaces 1 space/100 sq. fl. 41 spaces 5,660 sq. fl. 5,486 sq. fl. 1 space/300 sq. ft. 18 spaces 174 sq. fl. 1 space/1 00 sq. fl. 2 spaces 4,100 sq. fl. 11100 sq. fl. 41 spaces 36,230 sq. fl. 177 spaces TOTAL Based upon the Development Code parking calculations for a shopping center, Creekside Centre will require 177 parking spaces to accommodate the existing retail buildings, Frankie's Restaurant and the two new future restaurants. One hundred and eighty spaces are anticipated to exist on the project site once Ruby Tuesday is approved. According to the Development Code parking calculations for a shopping center, 180 spaces will be able to accommodate the anticipated parking demand of the entire shopping center. The applicant has provided a parking study which further analyzed the shared peak parking demand between the mix of retail and restaurant uses within Creekside Centre. The Parking Study utilizes the Urban Land Institute Shared Parking Methodology. This methodology is a multi-step process which first establishes the stand-alone peak parking requirements for each use, in this case retail and restaurant. The methodology then applies a percentage to the peak requirement for each use, for each hour of the day between the hours of 6 a.m. and midnight to determine the parking demand for each use and to analyze how the parking demand varies throughout the course of the day. According to the parking analysis, the mix of uses and tenants is well-suited for sharing the existing parking supply. Furthermore, the three restaurants have different peak operating hours, which also differ from the peak retail parking demand. Frankie's Steak and Seafood Restaurant opens at 5:00 p.m. daily for dinner only; therefore, there is no parking demand for this use between the hours of 12:00 p.m. and 1 :00 p.m. when the parking demand for the other uses are at their peak. Additionally, during breakfast hours only Panera Bread is open; during G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\PC STAFF REPORT. doc 4 lunch only Panera Bread and Ruby Tuesday is open; and while all three restaurants are open during dinner hours it is anticipated that Panera Bread will experience lighter dinner business due to the nature of their operations. The Parking Analysis concluded that the projected peak parking demand for the shopping center will occur at 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and at 6:00 p.m. on weekends. During the peak time during the weekdays. the projected parking demand is 151 spaces for both the retail and restaurant uses in the shopping center. During the peak time on the weekends, the projected parking demand is 141 spaces. LEGAL NOTICING REQUIREMENTS Notice of the public hearing was published in the Californian on February 9, 2008 and mailed to the property owners within the required 600-foot radius. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed Project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review (Section 15301, Class 1, Existing Facilities). CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDA TION Staff requests that the Planning Commission consider the information contained within the parking analysis and consider the opportunity for shared parking between the retail and restaurant uses. Based upon the premise that there would be shared parking at varied times of the day due to the mix of retail and restaurant uses that exists within the shopping center staff recommends that the Planning Commission allow for the parking requirements for Creekside Centre to be calculated per the Development Code requirements for a shopping center. FINDINGS Development Code 17.05.030. E - Modification to an approved Development Plan 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 project being analyzed is an existing use, Creekside Centre shopping center, and at the time of approval it was determined that the use is consistent with the General Plan and all other applicable requirement of State law and City ordinances. This modification to the originally approved Development Plan consists of a request to modify a Condition of Approval which relates to the maximum amount of restaurant space allowed within the existing shopping center, based upon the number of existing parking spaces within the shopping center. The proposed modification is consistent with the General Plan and with all applicable requirements of State law and other ordinances of the City, including Development Code Section 17.28 which outlines the off-street parking requirements for a shopping center. The originally approved uses within the shopping center are not being changed or modified as a result of this project. G:\Plannlng\2007\PA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\PC STAFF REPORTdoc 5 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare. The original development plan to construct the two retaif buifdings totaling 26,470 square feet, along with two restaurants on the vacant pads located on the northernmost portion of the site is consistent with the Community Commercial land use designation contained in the General Plan. When the original Development Plan was approved, it was determined that the retaif center had been properly planned, designed and was physically suitable for the type and density of commercial development proposed. It was also determined that the project was also consistent with ather applicable requirements of State law and local ordinances, including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and fire and building codes. No physical changes are being proposed as a part of the modification to the original Development Plan, therefore the protection of the public health, safety and welfare is anticipated to continue to be protected and promoted. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map - Blue Page 7 2. Creekside Centre Parking Analysis - Blue Page 8 3. Summary of Tenants in Creekside Centre - Blue Page 9 4. PC Resolution 08-_ - Blue Page 10 Exhibit A - Draft Conditions of Approval 5. Final Conditions of Approval for PA04-0525 - Blue Page 11 6. Correspondence from Applicant - Blue Page 12 7. Notice of Public Hearing - Blue Page 13 G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\PC STAFF REPORT. doc 6 ATTACHMENT NO.1 VICINITY MAP G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\PJanning\PC STAFF REPORT.doc 7 / / "- ./ / "- <"-, )/" ',,- ' ", ,"// ,/ ;1 ;/ " //--- / " i /i ~ I /1.../ ./ ' ' YI '''~~</'> j r /~,......../ I ill / "" / :E - // 1 "- Cl / I i / )1 '-J . . - /~., ~/ / ~ //' ;y _____ PROMENI'NlI'I-\.. \..OOP \<\Y / ~ /" / ::/// "-"-,,- ',,- '" /) .,/ //< ~ '. '1>0 ",,~A '" "''-'k ,<"11L ,,;~ '\ , " / ,; " :> " ", '", ~ /.- ) /. ./ ~J// 'y./' ", '. \ , , \. , OVERIoAN&OR' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ -t, ~ i \ , \ \ \. II / / ./' \ \ \ , \ / / / / ;{ o &.i 110 ... 510 - ~~ .,NICOlo",IoN' " /d ,(. ~'i'~ _ . if'.J' L ATTACHMENT NO.2 CREEKSIDE CENTRE PARKING ANALYSIS G:\Planning\2007\PA07.0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\PC STAFF REPORT.doc 8 Parking Analysis for Creekside Centre Retail Development In the City of Temecula Prepared for: Davcon Investments, LLC January 2008 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. PARKING ANALYSIS FOR THE CREEKSIDE CENTRE RETAIL DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA Prepared for: Davcon Investments, LLC 42389 Winchester Road, Suite B Temecula, CA 92590-4810 Prepared by: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 765 The City Drive Suite 400 Orange, California 92868 January 2008 PARKING ANALYSIS FOR THE CREEKSIDE CENTRE RETAIL DEVEI"OPMENT IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............ ....................................................................................... ................................................ I PROJECT UNDERST ANDING................................................................................................................................ I PARKING REQUIRED PER CITY CODE .............................................................................................................. 4 ULl SHARED PARKING METHODOLOGY .........................................................................................................5 CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................................................................... 9 LIST OF FIGURES FlGURE 1 h VICINITY MAP................................................................................................................................... 2 FlGURE 2 - PROJECT SITE PLAN ........................................................................................................................ 3 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 - SUMMARY OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED LAND USES............................................................. 4 TABLE 2 - CITY OF TEMECULA PARKING CODE............................................................................................4 TABLE 3 - PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR TIIE CREEKSIDE CENTRE ........................................................ 5 TABLE 4 - SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS (WEEKDAY) .................................................................................7 TABLE 5 - SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS (WEEKEND).................................................................................. 8 APPENDICES Appendix A City ofTemecula Parking Requirements PARKING ANALYSIS FOR THE CREEKSIDE CENTRE RETAIL DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA INTRODUCTION This report presents the parking analysis for the existing Creekside Centre retail/restaurant development. At the time the Creekside Centre was approved by the Planning Commission, the conditions of approval limited restaurant uses at the site to 10,100 square feet. The owner of the center is considering the addition of two new restaurant uses on the currently vacant pad located at the north end of the project site. With the two new restaurants, the total restaurant use square footage at Creekside Centre will be 13,810 square feet, consisting of an existing Frankie's Restaurant (4,050 square feet), the future Ruby Tuesday Restaurant (5,660 square feet) and a proposed Panera Bread Company (4,100 square feet). This report will analyze whether the on-site parking supply will be able to accommodate 22,420 square feet of retail uses and 13,810 square feet of restaurant uses. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING Creekside Centre occupies approximately 6.27 acres located on Overland Road in the City of Temecula. The development currently consists of two single-story retail buildings with 14 separate units totaling 26,470 square feet. The site contains a pad intended for additional retail/restaurant USes. Approximately half of the units are leased and occupied. Currently, the only restaurant tenant at Creekside Centre is Frankie's Steak and Seafood, which occupies 4,050 square feet at the west end of the project site. Frankie's is only open for dinner, starting at 5pm. The project site currently provides 178 regular parking spaces, including 9 handicap accessible spaces. The site also provides 5 motorcycle parking spaces. City Code allows credit for the provision of motorcycle spaces towards fulfilling the off-street parking requirement at the rate of two motorcycle spaces for one vehicle space. Therefore, an additional two spaces are counted towards the total on-site parking supply; bringing the total to 180 parking spaces. The original approval anticipated 10,000 square feet of restaurant space plus 26,470 square feet of retail space. However, the Planning Commission later increased the maximum restaurant space to 10,100 square feet for an approved total shopping center of36,570 square feet. Figure 1 shows the project vicinity map. Figure 2 shows the project site plan. The proposed project being analyzed in this report is the addition of two new restaurants on the vacant pad located at the north end of the project site: Ruby Tuesday and Panera Bread Company. Ruby Tuesday is a national chain family-style restaurant. The future Ruby Tuesday restaurant would occupy 5,660 square feet and is scheduled to open from 10:00 AM to 11:00 PM daily for lunch and dinner. Panera Bread Company is a bakery/restaurant serving fresh breads, croissants, muffins, gourmet soups and salads. The proposed Panera restaurant would occupy 4,100 square feet and would open at 5:00 AM or 6:00 AM and close at 9:00 PM. The majority of sales for Panera occurs at breakfast and lunch. Consequently, the three restaurant uses would not have the same peak operating hours. During breakfast hours, only Panera is open; during lunch only Panera and Ruby Tuesday's are open; and while all three restaurants are open for dinner, Panera typically experiences relatively light dinner business. Table 1 presents the existing and proposed land uses at the project site. Parking Analysis for Creekside Centre in the City ofTemecula -1- January 2008 - - ~ I - " ~ J S J ~ "0 C\~ '" B\ 0 ;;; ~o\ r !" . >;, 1 <;, '" '" ~ "7(. ~o ~ /0 ~~<- ~ C) ~ ""<Y <?/(- ~o :":z Ov 01-: 0" 'iY - .", 01- 0, '1 "If o "0 /0 0' ,<,,01' 1'0 ( @\ z ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ b 7 0 .. ~ . ~ ~ ~ l S .....~ . 1 ~~ ~ :;- 0 ~ 5- " " {[~ ~ ~ - z - " ~ .~Cv OVERLAND DRIVe: ;-::.PROf"ERTYt8E "-.\ --11~ 1\ ="_, rr 5.660'$0. , 0 (~ ~ J '" -' o Q Z 10 :It rplOf"€M'f' ~ :~.. " 'I: o ' o 0\ .m.... Q~~~~;: <;ITF PI.&! (j) IIORJIi . # r-- .~ -- ~ , , Table 1 Summary ofExistiug aud Proposed Land Uses Land Use Existing Retail (Bldg A) Existing Retail (Bldg B) Existing Frankie's Restaurant Existing Total Future Ruby Tuesday Restaurant Proposed Panera Bread Proposed Total PARKING REQUIRED PER CITY CODE Square Footage 13,235 9,185 4,050 26,470 5,660 4,100 36,230 The City of Temecula Municipal Code specifies the off-street parking space requirements for each land use in the City. Applicable city parking codes are Restaurant - Dine in, and Shopping Center with 25,000 square feet gross floor area or greater. The Code also specifies parking requirements for restaurant floor areas within a shopping center. Applicable parking requirements of the Temecula Municipal Code for this project are shown on Table 2. A copy of the City's parking requirement is included in Appendix A. Table 2 City of Temecula Parking Code Land Use Restaurants - Dine In Shopping center (25,000 SF-GF A Or greater) Restaurant areas occupying greater than 15 percent of total shopping area GF A Required Number of Spaces I space/IOO SF-GFA, with a minimum of 10 spaces in all cases. I space/300 SF-GF A with the following additions: 1 space/IOO SF-GFA The Code has a parking requirement for stand alone restaurants that are not a part of a shopping center. The Code also has a rate for restaurants that are a part of a shopping center. It allows for up to 15% of a shopping center's total gross floor area to be restaurants before requiring additional parking requirement for any additional restaurant space. Creekside Centre has bee approved for a total square footage of 36,570 square feef. The Code allows 5,486 square feet (15%) of restaurant space within the shopping center to be parked at the rate of I space per 300 square feet. The project is proposing a total of 13,810 square feet ofrestaurant space, which means the remaining 8,324 square feet of restaurant space is subject to the parking requirement of restaurant use of 1 space per 100 square feet. The parking requirements for the Creekside Centre, including the approved and proposed new restaurants, per the City of Temecula Municipal Code are presented on Table 3. Parking Analysis for Creekside Centre in the Clty ofTemecula -4- January 2008 Table 3 Parking Requirement for the Creekside Centre Based on City Code Land Use Square Footage Parking Code Spaces Required i Existing Retail Shopping Center 22,420 I space/3oo sq.ft. 75 i, Existing Frankie's Restaurant 4,050 I space/IOO sq.ft. 41 Ruby Tuesday (15% of total shopping center) 5,486 I space/300 sq.ft 18 Remaining restaurant 174 I spacell 00 sq .ft. 2 I Proposed Panera Bread 4,100 1 spacelloo sq.ft. 41 . TOTAL CREEKSIDE CENTRE 36,230 177 Based on City Code, Creekside Centre is forecast to require 177 on-site parking stalls, after the addition of the two new restaurants. Creekside Centre provides 180 on-site parking spaces, which will be adequate to accommodate the anticipated parking demand of the entire shopping center, including the two new restaurants. City Code also requires parking spaces dedicated for the handicapped per the requirements of the State of Califomia and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The handicap accessible spaces requirement count toward fulfilling the overall off-street parking requirement. For parking areas with between 151 - 200 total parking spaces, the Code requires 6 handicap accessible spaces. Creekside Centre meets this requirement by providing 9 handicap accessible spaces. ULISHAREDP~NGMETHODOLOGY The ULl Shared Parking methodology is a multi-step process that, first, establishes the stand-alone peak parking requirements for each component use (ie: retail, office, restaurant, and residential uses). The methodology then applies a percentage to the peak requirement for each use, for each hour of the day between the hours of 6:00 AM and midnight, reflecting the fact that the parking demand for each use varies throughout the course of the day. Shared parking synergies exist between different uses whose peak operating times are at different times of the day. The most dramatic example of complementary uses for shared parking purposes are office and theater. When the office parking demand is at 100% (at 10:00 AM and 11:00 AM on a weekday), the theater parking demand is at 0%, according to the ULI publication, Table 25. Conversely, when the theater parking demand is at 100% (from 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM on a weekend), the office has virtually no parking demand. These two uses, then, can share all or a portion of the same parking supply without detriment to the other, rather than each providing their own distinct and complete parking supply. The ULI study also identifies monthly variations in parking demand for each use for each month of the year. Parking demand for retail uses peaks in the month of December, during the Christmas season, and is at 75% or less from January through October. Theater, on the other hand, is at its peak during the summer months of June and July, and at 50% in the months of November and December. Parking Analysis for Creekside Centre in the City of Temecula -5 - January 2008 Each of these factors is incorporated into the shared parking analysis shown on Tables 4 and 5. Applying these factors to a particular mix of integrated land uses yields a projected peak parking requirement, at a particular time of day (weekday and weekend) and season. In theory, the total parking demand for that mix of uses will not exceed that projected peak, due to the interrelationships and benefits of shared parking synergies. Percentages of peak parking demand have been modified from original ULI rates to correspond with the operating hours of on-site restaurants to forecast a more realistic parking demand. As shown on Tables 4 and 5, Creekside Centre's mix of uses and tenants is well-suited for sharing the existing parking supply. The three restaurants have different peak operating hours that are also different from the retail peak parking demand. Frankie's Restaurant opens at 5:00 PM daily for dinner only therefore it has no parking demand at 12:00 Noon -1 :00 PM when the parking demand for the other uses peak at those hours. Conversely, while parking demand for Frankie's Restaurant is at its highest from 7:00 - 9:00 PM, demand from Panera and Ruby Tuesday is expected to drop to 80%-60%. The shared parking analysis shows that with the proposed mixture of retail and restaurant uses, and the shared parking synergies that exist between them, the projected peak parking demand would be 151 spaces at 7:00 PM on a weekday, and 141 spaces at 6:00 PM on the weekend. Parking Analysis for Creekside Centre in the City ofTemecula -6- January 2008 SI"'UOn!f'3 p1ll:h!l'\ld p:>n!4S- op!S>I;O:I13\S!"'rvlr....\'''lll:tJ''I''I~:lOJJ~t~.l\0.ld.1\:::4 , " L9 iel ." '" '" '" .,. 001 101 m ---al Oil " " " " II '}'VLOL WdOO:L %8'1'1 -] "1!....j'I"!4"1Cl '":US I~""d ""1".:1 " 9t '" '" 'DNIX'llVd Q3'lIVHSOl 3J10lN:lWl.S(Uav DNDl1iVd :QNVW3Q DNDnIVd a31SruavNn QN"f'yt3aDNIXlIVd)IV3d0'3J.:mrmld , " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " ,. , , , I o o "l!U1lll",,-I"!(J ~IPno.l ~'l"lt OOi'~ ""'S 0'0'" U\'6 HtE\ ~hlOO.!l~J~"bS UO!I~tdWO:l )O~fOJd ~rn~~w~.l ~IU~) IP\rll"iU) o , " " " " " " " II , . " " " " " " " " " " II o o o o o "'!.:I""-.lU!(J '."PIUUJ '''!IS!)':J lIJ~UlId IJnl":! 'S~n.L,('1n'l1"'"IlI:1 1,~!1I&I:I!><!ls!l'3 'l'FIS:P'I\I~'x3 Ylplal1"I1~'x3 IS(1IP!511lu:l :ounns :PlfD.ld I I o I . " " " " " " " " " " " " ,. U"l~ \lIPI\l 1!llll:lllI!lIll'.![ o I"PIt 'V1plI 1!'I'.,u!U1"3 0"30 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " %0 '" %U """ ... "". "". %>L %,~ %" ."", "'" %001 ~.o6 %'8 %,.1. """ %OS %(t ~ ....'''''-"'0 pllJll"DUld .~, '" 001 001 001 " ,. IOotl6t11 IJf\O'{ 8up'tJ:ldo I,Mlm,,",, 1[')" <OJ ~ltnrp' u~ ""'It '{'111M 'pUJa I~Id pYI ',(lpnn,L Mlltll .',:I11l1lIJ:I JOj td~~xlllu!ll'd P""'tS 11f1 uO ~nq pwlUlIp JO ~I1U1:),l:od ,(lmoH liON %01 %0' '.4H ~,09 %0' %0' ""DI %,.1. ,.-",.. %n "'" %0' %001 .., "SO %0' ",4SI %0 "" 41!W',j/'l'!~ bP"'\L~q"lI tJ"III.:IIU!U!""'1l:I 001 001 OC'I , ,. ...1.1'0 '" ^UWI.:i!'I!-IIIIC A.ptllll^qnll ~lIInj'JM!a!'lIRlf 1lN"VW30 DNDrtIYdAYO'>I3:lh\ 1I0:l (SOOt. UCI!l!P3 puO;l~) 1YflNYW DN.DrWd a3'lIVHS rm:llll 1I3d '1(.{I'uvlluP!J'd~lIqs "'"lq'~ 001'" I ,," ~(RU1:L^l!-Ill!O "1Y1.01. ~ P"~U ,nuvd -..JL ~.In.!l 0(~'9( ,," I I I I I '.'-"""'1 ',>f'lII'~A 11IPlll IU!fS!13 1!1~"'IIIP;] A.YO.!lO 1:1008 A.1I aIllYW:JQ.!IO 3f)Yllll:J'::)lhU OO"J 00'1 06"0 060 00'1 00'\ %01 %0' %08 "S6 "S6 "S6 %0' ."" "IoS6 %001 "S6 "SO I!"I~B uf1'UI~IIIIUl! ~q""oaY",4S1 00'1 06"0 00'1 " nn SIn's ,," \fI~'d nflIUUIIIJI"\I Ilql"ollY%SI 'M! "Ml: Y.St "SO %001 'ol101 "001 "SO "SL '~I %II j ".J.Il:I "1AIOUIIIJRlI lJ"III,:fI"!,,!.,,,'lI "1'I"_IIY",45\ ^ ya lIO 1I110H AS aNYW3Q DNDIlJYd O:J.U:lfOll<l ornr "1'V1.01. "'ll %0 M .. %0 ~.S9 %H %" '" %0 %0 %0 %0 "I M " 01 osn ,,. ~U!:IJII!4U~a 1,.PltlUlI IU!II!I['] %0 %01 %01 %0' "" "S6 %S6 "SO %06 '''''' "S6 %00' %S6 ~.S8 ,,<9 V.S( "" '" "I l!"I"B It nn !i&1"6 '" 1!"1Il! IIJPJa 1!.P1(IIJ!IIIQ: %0 ..1 "'" %0' "'" "S6 "SO ~.S6 .006 %06 "S6 .ol101 %S6 "SO "SO "" V.SI '" %, ~.PB 'V1P18 1l'11lI1u!1IP'i 001 060 00'1 .. tt(("( Ht"(l "" IfllIlI YJPIII Il"lill1u!fSPi WVoo:tl 1'tdOO'1I l'IlclQO'OI ""'lII>6 VUl0ln NdOl), \'\IdO(}'9 \'\IdOO'," I'VdOO:" Ndoo:t WdOll'l: YoIdOO:l~ WdOO"l:l I W'VOO:II N"f'OO'OI WYOO,!> WYOln WYOO'L WVOO:SJ .\VallO iWU JOP'.!Il'IlI:>SPS .MIm.!lplll-M/uP'M JOlnllJl,JID.:>IIIaLll.' DXlIdQ,O'ilI ':u VlI DNDIlIYd :AJ.llNYllO :.uNO " 'IS"'ii""iiNYI :XS01aIS)l33lI:l It~'1>011!P;jpuZ9u!"fl1ld~'lS'''P'llp(Il:>\S!''\~,)OP~''f'Il'')~1-~IO.Ld1.nl W0Zl6r.11 %IOZ or :ONI)f'llYd CE'lrVHS <ll3flO It-/3WJ.Sruav ONI:>nlVd Ul 'QNVYEO ONDfllYd Cl3lSruOVI-ln unall iulllJ:ldO S,1ua.mlllllalll~JOJ p;lmfpl ~;IA~ ll':l!IlNl WdOO:9 .. '" :~'ia!)NDnlVd )lY'id a:1J.:)'ilO'lld 'pnlg'R.I;U'ld pur '.tllpAnJ. .(qn'll 'l,;>!lIurJ:l lty Jd:m;; '!UllP'.t palIIjS rm 110 p;nq p111ft11;PJO ;8l\ungd ^lJTlO}{ ;;toN " ------0--- 0 0 " 0 %0 '%$ %0 "" '00 %0 ^-m-oo:tl " 0 , " , '" %SI "" %06 "" "" YWOO:lI " " " " "" "" "" "" "" .... WdOG'OI sir " " " " %0' %0' "'" "" %0' %0' NdOD-~ '" Lt " " ot " "" "" "" %00' "" "" NdOO:I '" " " " " " ',0' %0' %SL "I> %SL "\L 1'Ul000L '" " " " " " ..., 'M)L "'" .... %0' %0' l'UOQ" '" " " " " " ..., "'" "" "" ..., "'" i'ldOG'~ ot, " , 'I " " " "" Y... '''' ..., "" "" I'1ldOO'. '" " , " , " .. %0' .... %001 %51 %001 %001 I'UlOO'( '" Lt I " 0 " .. "" %59 '.001 %0 'MlOI %001 I'ldoo:e otl " , " 0 " " "SO "SO "" ... ."'" %06 i'\IdOCH L" " , " 0 " " YoOOl %001 "'. ... "'. "'. "dOO:lI " " , " 0 ot " %0' '00' "" "0 "..9 %.9 WVOO:ll " " , 0 " " "" "" "" "0 "'" "" WYOO'OI " " I " ',0' "" "" 'M) "'" "" )ll).oo'(j " " 0 . %SV Y..l "'I ... .001 "" l'lVoo:a " 01 0 , %H' '" %. '" '" '" WYOO'L 0 0 0 "" ... '" '" "I ..1 moo:, ,v~o~ AI!""J{U!-HKI Al!WUJ{U!",u!<I I!.~ ;"!IJ"!"'"U!<I 1!11~ I!.~ ..llw.ll"l.....!Q AI!l"IJi"!":>IIMJ Irl~ ""!.!IJ1I!"""!O 1!'I''lI 1!'l'I'lI AVIIJO 1"""8 I~;U'O A'PI",,~.tq"ll "tlIU'~"~Alf '.''''u".;I 1111'19. V 'PIli p...9....u.o A.pn..~Aq..lI .nlU......IAlf I,""","J ...~ Y'''''' ,~u ....l..J ....lnJlu!I'!.\IQl( '1<l.MOJfV%SI 'U~] 1!'1'l1IuII$!I] 1!'\lgla!I"I"J: ;'nlnJ UTl.InJI"!u!l_g ~q"""'UV%iI IUP'll] 1!,j;lu:I"!1$!"J: 1!'I"II'IIjJ'I'3 A 'a40110.08A8 Ava.JOl1RO tMI aNVW:JO DIoIDflIVd a&O:UOl1d aNVWIa..tO '1DV~N1.:)ll1d '- '011'.11 \~aoms= OH'9( 1.V~O~ 030 00'1 001 001 on 001 001 001'1> Ij~'d;~lIln:f 001 00'1 001 001 00'1 00" Jou'..tpn"A\lA,Ip.A\ 099'. 'Rn.L^qn~;lJmn:l. 001 00'1 001 00'1 00'1 00' JOU'''JlIIIA.:)J!SUUJ. oso'. ;,;!l\IJ:l.iu!If!X3 LLI " , " ,. " .. ~JnId Q.Q;!IlI .111'6 SllplSlllPlI xg 01 01 (({"( 01 H(-( HH'( :UVll :;JNDIlfYd HZ'(] V llPIS11l1;lI 'xg OU"g( oon trLI"O !lIWS o.n S91"6 HHI :lUlJ.NYIlO OIblOO..t...nbs OI'n'p!S'IOII.I.:) m '" '" '" '" ;s> '" :UNIl ~1!WI:l.1'l!';U!O ^l!w':ifIl!-aU!O 1!1."'1I OIU!:IIU!-;U'O -~'U' 1!'I~ :J:Sn aNYl UO!I'ldwo;)1~OIfo1d :0!"U0I3S 1.V~O.L pn~8 ....~Ulld A.8pnnJ.^qn'ij unluu",lOl:I '.'I~u",.;I a.Pl& yapl& 'In>>wOl~'''I~.:)lp!'ll;a.J.:) :p;r~d ~nln.:l ..nln.i'''!U!.lIIl11 .lq....ol!VYo" 111>>'11'3 ~'1"'1l1u!111"J: U"PlI'''P'11J :3sn '3mS"iR.:) - - UNYH30 ON.nnr;d lIN3)1:Bh\ lIOJ (.OOZ' UO!I!P3 puo>>s) lYf1NYN ONDrIIVd anrYHS nJ1 gIU"li'id C!'^I,uy3UI''1.lId paJll{S !;~lq'~ CONCLUSIONS The Creekside Centre retail development currently has a parking supply of 180 parking spaces, including 9 handicap accessible spaces. The center currently consists of two single-story buildings totaling 26,470 square feet. The owner of the center is considering the addition of two new restaurant uses at the currently vacant pad located at the north end of the project site. With the two new restaurants, the total square footage at Creekside Centre would be 36,230 square feet, including 13,810 square feet of restaurant use. This study has found that with the two new restaurant uses, the existing parking supply of 180 stalls will be adequate to accommodate the forecasted parking demand of 177 parking stalls. No parking shortages are anticipated at the Creekside Centre. Furthermore, shared parking analysis shows that the peak parking demand anticipated at the proposed project site would be 151 spaces on the weekday and 141 on the weekend. Parking Analysis for Creekside Centre in the City of Temecula -9- Jaouary 2008 Appendix A City of Temecula Parking Requirements 17.24.040 Parking requirements. Temecula Municipal Code Up Previous Next Main Hie IT ZONING. Ctl~pterJ7.24.QFf~SJREEIY&RKJ:NG ANP~QADING 17.24.040 Parkinq requirements. Page lof6 Search Print I&. CodeAlert: This item has been affected by !l?~t5.. Please refer to the ~Qll~ler!:QJ:g!mmc:eJ.Jst for the most I current provisions. A. Required Spaces. Table 17.24.040 specifies the number of off-street parking spaces required for specific uses. The requirement for a use not specifically mentioned shall be the same as for a specified use which has similar traffic-generating characteristics. The Director of Planning shall determine what constitutes similar traffic-generating characteristics. B. Fractional Spaces. If the calculation of required parking spaces results in a fractional number, that number shall be rounded to the nearest whole number with 0.5 rounded up to the next whole number. C. Calculation of Floor Area. The gross floor area for the purpose of calculating parking requirements shaIl include: the total horizontal area of all floors in a building measured at the exterior walls, less the area devoted to hallways, atriums, stailWays, interior parking areas or ramps, electrical and mechanical rooms, elevator shafts and exterior balconies. I I Description orUse I Residential Uses I Single-family residence I Duplex, triplexes Multiple-family residential-3 or fewer bedrooms (12 or less units) Table 17.24.040 Parking Spaces Required I Required Number or Spaces Multiple-family residential-13 or more units Second unit Granny flat Mobilehome park I Senior citizens housing complex/congregate care Assembly Uses Church, chapel, religious facility, cemetel)', mortuary /2 enclosed spaces 2 covered spaces/unit, plus 1 guest space/4 units 2-5 units: 2 covered spaces/unit, plus 2 guest spaces 6-12 units: 2 covered spaces/unit plus 3 guest spaces I covered parking space plus 0.5 uncovered parking space for I bedroom (or less) units I covered parking space plus I uncovered parking space for 2 bedroom units 2 covered parking spaces and 0.5 uncovered parking space for three bedroom (or more) units plus I guest space/6 units, with a minimum of 4 guest spaces II covered parking space for 2 bedroom units or less, I 2 covered parking spaces for 3 bedroom units or more I uncovered parking space I I covered space/trailer site, plus I guest spacel2 I trailer sites 0.5 covered space/unit plus I uncovered space per 5 I units for guest parking I II space/3 fIXed seats, and I space135 SF of assembly I http://www.Qcode.usfcodes/temeculalview.php?topic=17-17 24-17 24 040&frames=off 11114/2007 17.24.040 Parking requirements. I I Cinemas ! Performance theater I Uni~ll-halls, lodges, clubs I Automotive Uses I Service and repair Car wash I Car washing facility-self service i Commercial Uses-Retail aud Service Furniture stores, bulk goods, floor covering, home improvement General retail with less than 25,000 SF-GF A I General retail with 25,000 SF or greater Holels and motels Laundromat Planl nurseries Outdoor sales, including lumberyards, car sales, salvage yards I Restaurants I Dine-in I F asl food Shopping center (25,000 SF-GFA or greater) Cinemas in shopping centers Restaurant areas occupying greater than IS percent of Iota 1 shopping area GFA I Ed ucatiooal Facilities Day care, nursery school Elemenlary and junior high school I High school College or university Trade school, business school, adult education Page 2 of6 area where there are no fixed seats I space/3 seats, plus 5 spaces for employees 1 space/4 fixed seats -- -- I space per 33 SF of gross assembly floor area 4 spaces/service bay Equivalent of 5 spaces120 feet of internal washing capacity Spaces may be provided in open paved area for drying cars Equivalent of2.5 spaces/wash bay. Spaces may be provided in open paved area for drying I space/500 SF of GF A I space/300 SF-GF A See shopping center I space/guest room plus I space/1O rooms for guests and 2 spaces for resident manager I space/3 washing machines I space/500 SF indoor GF A, plus 1 spacell ,000 SF gross outdoor retail area I space/I,OOO SF gross outdoor sales area, plus 1 space/300 SF of indoor sales area I spaceflOO SF-GF A, with a minimum of 10 spaces in all cases 11 space175 SF-GFA, with a minimum of 10 spaces in all cases II space/300 SF-GF A with the following additions: I I I space/5 seats I spacellOO GFA I spacel2 employees, plus I spacel5 children, based on facility capacity 1.5 spaces/classroom, plus I space/5 fixed seats in auditorium, gymnasium or similar public assembly facility (35 SF = 5 fixed seats) 8 spaces/classroom I space/employee, plus 4 spaces/IO students based on maximum classroom capacity 2 spaces/3 people based on maximum number of students and staff, or I space/35 SF of instruction GFA http://www.Qcode.usIcodes/temecula/view.php?topic=17-17 24-17 24 040&frames=off 11114/2007 17.24.040 Parking requirements. I Libraries, museums, art galleries I Health Care Facilities Convalescent hospital, rest home, sanitarium I Hospitals (providing acute care, clinical, surgical, I teaching, research and office services) I Medical center (providing acute care, clinical, surgical, teaching, research and office services) I Medical and dental offices Veterinary office I Industrial Uses I Research and development (R&D) General manufacturing and processing uses (not including buildings used exclusively for warehouse purposes use) Warehouses used exclusively for storage Self-storage/mini-storage warehouse facilities I Office Uses I Business and professional I Financial services (banks, savings and loans, credit unions) I Recreation Uses I Aerobics/dance/gymnastics/jazzercise/martial arts I Arcades, bingo halls I Basketball or volleyball court I Batting cages I Billiards/poolhalls I Bowling alley I Dancehalls I Driving range I Go If course-regulations and pitch and putt Miniature golf Swimming pool-commercial I Skating rink-ice or roller I Tennis courts Page 3 of6 I space/300 SF-GFA I space/2 beds, plus if employee residence facilities are provided onsite, additional parking in accordance with applicable residential requirements I space/3 patient beds I space/3 patient beds I spacel300 SF-GFA I space1300 SF-GF A I space/350 SF-GF A I space/400 SF of manufacturing or industrial, plus 1 space/300 SF of office use, plus 1 space/I,OOO SF of warehouse area 1 space/I,OOO SF of warehouse area, plus I space/300 SF of office use 1 space for every 200 storage units (a minimum of 4 spaces including the handicap space), and 2 covered parking spaces if a m;mager's residential unit is provided I space/300 SF-GF A I space/300 SF-GF A 1 space per 200 SF ofGFA I space1250 SF-GF A 8 spaces per court, with other uses calculated separately 2 spaces per cage, with other uses calculated separately 2 spaces per table 3 spaces/lane, with restaurant uses calculated separately I space/7 gross SF dance floor area I space/tee, with other uses calculated separately 6 spaceslhole, with other uses calculated separately I space/ZOO SF gross recreation floor area 1.5 spaceslhole, with other uses calculated separately 1 space/I,OOO SF gross recreation area, with other uses calculated separately 1 space/I,OOO SF oflot area, plus 1 space12 employees 3 spaces/court, with other uses calculated separately http://www.qcode.us!codesltemeculalview.php?topic~ 17 -17 24-17 24 040&frames=off 1111 412007 17.24.040 Parking requirements. Page 4 of6 D. Parking for the Handicapped. I. Parking for handicapped persons shall be provided pursuant to the requirements of the state of California and the American Disabilities Act. Handicapped spaces required by this section shall count toward fulfilling the off-street parking requirements. In the event the state requirements are amended, the new requirements shall apply in place ofthe requirements of this section. 2. Residential uses shall provide parking spaces designated for the handicapped at the rate of one space for each dwelling unit that is designated for the handicapped. 3. Other uses shall conform to the following requirements: Total Number of Parking Spaces Provided 1-25 26-50 51-75 76-100 !O1-150 151-200 201-300 301--400 401-500 501-1,000 over 1,001 Handicapped Spaces Required 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2 percent of total 20 plus I fureach 100 additional parking spaces over 100 4. Handicapped Stall Size. Each parking space designated for use by the handicapped shall consist of a rectangular area not less than fourteen feet wide by nineteen feet long, and shall be located in an area not exceeding two percent slope. All spaces shall be located near or convenient to a level or ramped entrance, not exceeding a five percent slope, to the facility served by the parking space. Parking spaces for the handicapped shall be signed and restricted for use by the bandicapped only. E. Compact Car Parking. Compact car parking spaces shall not be allowed. F. Bicycle Parking Facilities. I. Bicycle Parking Classifications. Bicycle parking facilities shall be classified as follows: a. Class I, an enclosed box with a locking door, typically called a bicycle locker, where a single bicyclist has access to a bicycle storage compartment. b. Class II, a stationary bicycle rack designed to secure the frame and both wheels of the bicycle, where the bicyclist supplies only a padlock. c. Class III, a stationary bicycle rack, typically a cement slab or vertical metal bar, where the bicyclist supplies a padlock and chain or cable to secure the bicycle to the stationary object. 2. Minimum Bicycle Parking Requirements. a. Bicycle parking facilities shall he provided as follows: Bicycle Spaces Provided for Bicycle Parkin!: Facilities Class. http://www.qcode.us/codes/temeculalview.php?topic=17-17 24-17 24 040&frames=off 1l/14/2007 17.24.040 Parking requirements. I Use I All commercial and service uses not otherwise listed Dinner restaurants, cocktail lounges Industrial Retail Page 5 of6 Employees & Visitors I bicycle space for every 20 vehicle spaces required I bicycle space for every 40 vehicle spaces required I bicycle space for every 20 vehicle spaces required I bicycle space for every 20 vehicle spaces required Parkin!: Facility Class Class llockers or Class II racks Class llockers or Class II racks Class llockers or Class II racks Class llockers or Class II racks b. Where bicycle parking is required, the minimum number of bicycle spaces to be provided shall be two employee bicycle spaces and two patron or visitor spaces. c. Where the application of the above table results in the requirement for a fraction of a bicycle parking space, the fraction shall be rounded to the nearest whole number with .5 rounded up to the next whole number. d. Where the application of the above table results in the requirement of fewer than six employee spaces, Class II racks need not be placed within an enclosed lockable area. 3. Design Standards. Bicycle parking facilities shall be installed in a manner which allows adequate spacing for access to the bicycle and the locking device when the facilities are occupied. General space allowances shall include a two-foot width and a six-foot length per bicycle and a five-foot maneuvering space behind the bicycle. The facilities shall be located on a hard, dust-free surface, preferably asphalt or concrete slab. Bicycle parking facilities for visitors shall be located at convenient locations near the main entrance to the use. Bike racks should be located so as to not create an obstruction to pedestrian movement. 4. Exemptions. Requests for exemptions from bicycle parking requirements shall be made in writing to the director of planning. a. Exemptions from bicycle parking requirements shall be submitted and processed concurrently with the project application. b. Exemptions may be granted depending upon the location of the bicycle parking with respect to the urban area, the nature and hours of operation of the proposed use, the accessibility of the site by bicycle at present and in the future. 5. Credit for Provisions of Bicycle Parking Spaces. Bicycle parking spaces shall be counted as fulfilling the off-street parking requirements at the rate of three bicycle spaces for one vehicle space. Up to six bicycle parking spaces in addition to the minimum requirement may be provided to reduce off-street parking requirements. G. Motorcycle Spaces. I. Facilities with over twenty-five vehicle parking spaces shall provide a minimum of one motorcycle parking space, plus one space for each additional twenty-five required parking spaces. After the initial one hundred parking spaces, one additional motorcycle parking space for each additional one hundred required spaces shall also be provided. 2. Credit for Provisions of Motorcycle Parking Spaces. Motorcycle parking spaces shall be counted as fulfilling the off-street parking requirements at the rate of two motorcycle spaces for one vehicle space. Up to eight motorcycle parking spaces in addition to the minimum may be provided to reduce off-street parking requirements. http://www.qcode.uslcodesltemecula/view.php?topic=17-17 24-17 24 040&frames=off 11/14n007 17.24.040 Parking requirements. Page 6 of6 3. Motorcycle parking spaces shall have a minimum dimension of at least four feet in width and seven feet in length and shall be accessed by a drive aisle at least eight feet in width. (Ord. 06-06 ~~ 6(1), 6(J); Ord. 0]-14 ~~ 1,2 (part); Ord. 99-24 ~ 5(0); Ord. 98-14 ~ 8; Ord. 98-02 ~ 2 (partXA), (B); Ord. 97-17 ~ 9(A); Ord. 95-]6 ~ 2 (part)) http://www.Qcode.us/codes/temecula/view.php?topic=17-17 24-17 24 040&frames=off 11/14/2007 ATTACHMENT NO.3 SUMMARY OF TENANTS G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\PC STAFF REPORT.doc 9 Summarv of Tenants - Creekside Center Existing Retail Uses: Anela Apothecary First Financial Bank Dinner Studio Kaps Hat Apparel Aiyu Sportswear Modern Nails Kuts 4 Kids Kromatic Hair Salon Collette Boutique Existing Restaurant: Frankie's Steak and Seafood Proposed/Future Restaurants: Ruby Tuesday Panera Bread ATTACHMENT NO.4 PC RESOLUTION 08-_ G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\PC STAFF REPORT. doc 10 PC RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA07-0325, A MINOR MODIFICATION TO AMEND CONDITION OF APPROVAL NO. 11 OF THE CREEKSIDE CENTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL (PA04-0525) WHICH RESTRICTS THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF RESTAURANT SQUARE FOOTAGE TO 10,100 SQUARE FEET IN THE CREEKSIDE CENTRE SHOPPING CENTER LOCATED AT 41785 NICOLE LANE (APN: 921-810-032). Section 1. Procedural Findinas. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On March 5, 2005, Planning Commission approved Planning Application No. PA04-0525, a Development Plan for Creekside Centre. B. On November 19, 2007, Mr. Dave Wakefield filed Planning Application No. PA07-0325, a Minor Modification, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. C. The Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. D. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on February 20, 2008, 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 rnatter. E. At the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. PA07-0325 subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder. F. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findinas. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby finds, deterrnines and declares that: Development Code 17.05.030. E. - Modification to an approved Development Plan A. The proposed use is in conforrnance with the General Plan for Ternecula and with all applicable requirelT!ents of State law and other ordinance of the City; The project being analyzed is an existing use, Creekside Centre shopping center, and at the time of approval it was determined that the use is consistent with the General Plan and all other applicable requirement of State law and City G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\PC RESOLUTION NO.doc ordinances. This modification to the originally approved Development Plan consists of a request to modify a Condition of Approval which relates to the maximum amount of restaurant space allowed within the existing shopping center, based upon the number of existing parking spaces within the shopping center. The proposed modification is consistent with the General Plan and with all applicable requirements of State law and other ordinances of the City, including Development Code Section 17.28 which outlines the off-street parking requirements for a shopping center. The originally approved uses within the shopping center are not being changed or modified as a result of this project. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; The original Development Plan to construct the two retail buildings totaling 26,470 square feet, along with two restaurants on the vacant pads located on the northernmost portion of the site is consistent with the Community Commercial land use designation contained in the General Plan. When the original Development Plan was approved it was determined that the retail center had been properly planned, designed and was physically suitable for the type and density of commercial development proposed. It was also determined that the project was also consistent with other applicable requirements of State law and local ordinances, including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and fire and building codes. No physical changes are being proposed as a part of the modification to the original development plan, therefore the protection of the public health, safety and welfare is anticipated to continue to be protected and promoted. Section 3. Environmental Findinqs. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Minor Modification application: A. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review (Section 15301, Class 1: Existing Facilities); The shopping center and parking lot currently exist. The scope of the project does not include any physical site modification, and no construction will occur as a result of this project. No modifications will be made the parking area. Since the shopping center and related parking area currently exist, it has been determined that this project is categorically exempt from further environmental review. Section 4. Conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approves Planning Application No. PA07-0325, a Minor Modification to amend Condition of Approval No. 11 of the Creekside Centre Development Plan approval (PA04-0525) which restricts the maximum number of restaurant square footage to 10,100 square feet in the Creekside Centre shopping center located at 41785 Nicole G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\PC RESOLUTION NO.doc Lane (APN: 921-810-032), subject to the Conditions of Approval set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 20th day of February 2008. John Telesio, Chairman ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 08- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 20th day of February 2008, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\PC RESOLUTION NO.doc EXHIBIT A DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SCANNED: G DRIVE: PERMITS PLUS: INITIALS: PLANNER: G:\Planning\2007\PA07~0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\DRAFT COA's.doc 1 Le Comte Of TE1\1€ ~~ C& 0'" ~~ ~... .~ :@ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ 1989 ~~ 1QONS. NEW Oyyo"l- ACCEPTANCE OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL I, Dave Wakefield, understand that Planning Application No. PA07-0325 has been approved with Conditions of Approval which are set forth in Exhibit A. I have read the Conditions of Approval contained in PC Resolution No. 08- _ and understand them. Through signing this ACCEPTANCE OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, I agree and commit to the City of Temecula that I will implement and abide by the Conditions of Approval, including any indemnification requirernents imposed by those conditions. SIGNA TURE DATE G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\DRAFT COA's.doc 2 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA07-0325 Project Description: A Minor Modification to amend Condition of Approval No. 11 of the Final Conditions of Approval for the Creekside Center Development Plan (PA04-0525) which restricts the maximum number of restaurant square footage to 10,100 square feet in the Creekside Centre shopping center located at 41785 Nicole Lane Assessor's Parcel No. 921-810-032 MSHCP Category: DIF Category: TUMF Category: Commercial Retail Commercial Retail Approval Date: February 20, 2008 February 20, 2010 Expiration Date: WITHIN FORTY-EIGHT (48) HOURS OF THE APPROVAL OF THIS PROJECT Planning Department 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 Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 211 08(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 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 G:\Planning\2007\PA07-G325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\ORAFT COA's.doc 3 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. 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. 5. 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. 6. The approved landscape construction drawings for Creekside Centre shall be revised to include enhanced landscaping, decorative features and monumentalion improvements at the southwest corner of Overland Drive and Nicole Lane. The revisions shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of building permits for the restaurant(s) located at the northeast corner of the site and shall be fully installed prior to issuance of restaurant(s) final occupancy. 7. Site amenities to include tables and chairs shall be provided within the "Retail Plaza" area prior to occupancy of abutting tenant spaces. The type and design of the furniture shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. 8. Trash enclosures shall be provided to house all trash receptacles utilized on the site. 9. All downspouts shall be internalized. 10. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved site plan and elevations contained on file with the Planning Department. ~1. ~assj on existing onsito parl~:~; :1'3622, 2 ~::::::~:.:~ :If 10,1 00 &:jt:2~2 'eet of gross floor C~::::: '.vithin the cent:~ ~~:::~~ bo utilized f::~ ~:::~:ll:~:::~~ :'::::::. (Added by Planning Commission on Marsh 30, 2005). Based upon the existing onsite parking spaces, and the off-street Development Code parking requirements for a shopping center, a maximum of 13,810 of gross floor area within the shopping center shall be utilized for restaurant uses. (As amended by Planning Commission on February 20, 2008). 12, The conditions of approval specified in this resolution, to the extent specific items, materials, equipment, techniques, finishes or similar matters are specified, shall be deemed satisfied by 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 Color Stucco' ICI "Manilla Tan" #551 G:\Planning\2007\PA07 -0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\DRAFT COA's.doc 4 Stucco: Stucco: Roofing: Metal Canopies: Stone Base: Aluminum Storefront: Glass: ICI "Taupewood" #372 ICI "Onionskin Tan" #421 AEP-Span Metal Standing Seam "Agean Copper" Same as Roofing Ledgestone Timely White #CC301 Clear 13. 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. 14. 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. 15. The applicant shall review and sign the Acceptance of Conditions of Approval document that will be provided by the Planning Department staff and return the document with an original signature to the Planning Department. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 16. Provide the Planning Department with a copy of the underground water plans and electrical plans for verification of proper placement of transformer(s) and double detector check prior to final agreement with the utility companies. 17. 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. 18. 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 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." G:\Planning\2007\PA07 -0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\DRAFT COA's.doc 5 Prior to Issuance of Building Permit 19. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. 20. A comprehensive shopping center sign program shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. 21. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. These plans shall conform 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. In addition, the plans shall show the following a. Street landscaping is existing and shall remain on Overland Drive and Nicole Lane. New plantings on the project shall coordinate and be compatible with these existing plantings. The existing landscape shall be refurbished as necessary. b. Plantings shall be revised at the southeast corner of Building B, as approved by the Planning Director, to insure that the rear of the building is effectively screened from Nicole Lane. (Revised by the Planning Commission on March 30, 2005) c. Slope banks 5' or greater in vertical height with slopes greater than or equal to 3:1 shall be landscaped at a minimum with an appropriate ground cover, one 15 gallon or larger size tree per 600 square feet of slope area, and one 1 gallon or larger shrub for each 100 square feet of slope area. Slope banks in excess of 10' in vertical height with slopes greater than or equal to 2:1 shall also be provided with one 5 gallon or larger tree per 1,000 square feet of slope area in addition to the above requirements. d. One landscape planter shall be provided per 10 parking spaces. The finger planting width shall be a minimum of 5' wide with the length equal to the adjoining parking space. The planter shall contain a minimum one tree with surrounding groundcover, shrubs or both. e. Areas proposed for future development at the north end of the project site shall be temporarily tufted, seeded and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control as approved by the Director of Planning. 22. The landscape construction plans shall be accompanied by the following items: a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). b. 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. c. Provide an agronomic soils report with the construction landscape plans. d. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. e. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). f. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with approved plan). g. 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 G:\Planning\2007\PA07 -0325 Creekside Cenlre Minor MOD\Planning\DRAFT COA's.doc 6 maintenance program shall be provided to the landscape maintenance contractor who shall be responsible to carry out the detailed program. 23. 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. 24. Building plans shall indicate that all roof hatches shall be painted "International Orange". 25. 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 26. Prior to the release of occupancy, or any use allowed by this permit, the applicant shall be required to screen all loading areas and roof mounted mechanical equipment from view of the adjacent public right-of-ways. If upon final inspection it is determined that any mechanical equipment, roof equipment or backs of building parapet walls are visible from any portion of the public right-of-way adjacent to the project site, the developer shall provide screening by constructing a sloping tile covered mansard roof element or other screening if reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning. 27. 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. 28. 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 a period of 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. 29. 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 G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\DRAFT COA's.doc 7 disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 951 696-3000." 30. 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. 31. All site improvements including but not limited to parking areas and striping shall be installed prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. 32. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 33. A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site flat work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way. 34. 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. 35. 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. 36. If Nicole Lane remains a private street, the southerly driveway will be approved as shown on the approved site plan. 37. If Nicole Lane is to be dedicated as a public street, the southerly driveway shall be eliminated as shown on the approved site plan as the "Alternative Driveway" detail. Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 38. 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. 39. 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. 40. 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. 41. The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and G:\Planning\2007\PA07 -0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\DRAFT COA's.doc 8 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. 42. 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 mechanism to ensure ongoing long-term maintenance of all structural post-construction BMPs. 43. 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 44. 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. 45. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 46. 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. 47. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier's check or money order. prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 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 observed: a. Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. G:\Planning\2007\PA07 -0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOO\Planning\DRAFT COA's.doc 9 b. Driveway(s) shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A. c. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard No. 400. d. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. 49. 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, drive approaches, and street lights. b. Storm drain facilities c. Sewer and domestic water systems 50. 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. 51. 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. 52. The Developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.08. Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 53. 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 54. 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. 55. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. FIRE PREVENTION 56. 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. G:\Ptanning\2007\PA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Ptanning\ORAFT COA's.doc 10 57. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project. a water system capable of delivering 1500 GPM at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a total fire flow of 2350 GPM with a 2 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2. Appendix III-A) 58. 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 2-2 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) 59. 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) 60. 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) 61. 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) 62. 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) 63. 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) 64. 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) 65. 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 G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\DRAFT COA's.doc 11 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) 66. 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) 67. 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) 68. 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) 69. 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) 70. 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 main entrance door. (CFC 902.4) 71. 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) 72. 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. 73. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developer/applicant shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the storage of combustible liquids, flammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) Soecial Conditions 74. 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. G:\Planntl1g\2007\PA07 -0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\DRAFT COA's.doc 12 75. 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) 76. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the City; should any quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E) BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT 77. 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. 78. 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. 79. 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. 80. A receipt or clearance letter from the T emecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. 81. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 82. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 83. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 84. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. 85. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. 86. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. 87. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 2001 edition of the California Building Code Appendix 29. G:\Planning\2007\PA07.0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\DRAFT COA's.doc 13 88. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior to permit issuance. 89. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 90. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. 91. Provide precise grading plan at plan check submittal to check accessibility for persons with disabilities. 92. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 93. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. 94. Show all building setbacks. 95. Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours of construction, shown below, as allowed by the City ofTemecula 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 96. The trash enclosures shall be larger to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as, regular solid waste containers. 97. Any damage done to the existing Class II bike lanes on Overland will be repaired to the satisfaction of Public Works. 98. 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. 99. All parkways. interior landscaping, fencing and on site lighting shall be maintained by the property owner or maintenance association. 100. Applicant shall comply with the Public Art Ordinance. Prior to Issuance of the First Building Permit 101. The developer shall provide TCSD verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. G:\Planning\2007\PA07 -0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\PJanning\DRAFT COA's.doc 14 OUTSIDE AGENCIES 101. The developer shall comply with the attached correspondence from Rancho California Water District dated October 12, 2004. 102. The developer shall comply with the attached correspondence from Riverside County Flood Control District dated November 1, 2004. G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOO\Planning\ORAFT COA's.doc 15 , @ Rancho later Boaw. or Directors John E. Hoagland President Csaba F. Ko Sr. Vice President Stephen J. Corona Ralph H. Daily Ren R. Drake Lisa D. Herman Michael R. McMillan Officers: BrianJ.Bndy General Manager Phillip L. Forbes Director Qf Finance-Treasllfi1r E.P. "Bob~ Lemons Director <If Engineering Perry R. Louck Controller Linda M. Fregoso District Secretary/Administrative Services Manager C. Michael Cowett Relit Best & Krieger LLP Crl!neralCounsel no October 12,2004 ~1Gl1<n llJ I<-~ Ui OCT 1 -12004 ]11 L.J Matthew Harris, Project Planner City of Temecula Planning Department Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 IBy SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY, OVERLAND II COMMERCIAL PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 30107, APN 921-810-025 PA04-0525 [DAVCON] Dear Mr. Harris: Please be advised tbat the above Teferenced pr~perty is located within the: boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service, therefore, would be available upon construction of any required on-site and/or off-site water facilities and the completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees and requirements. Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. This project has the potential to become a commercial condominium development, with individual building owners and an owners' association maintaining the common property and private water, fire protection, and landscape irrigation facilities. RCWD requires that the City ofTemecula include a Reciprocal Easement and Maintenance Agreement for these on-site private water facilities as a condition of approval for the project. In addition to this agreement, RCWD would require individual water meters for each condominium unit. If you have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at this office. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT ?!1~?!1;P! Development Engineering Manager 04\MM:mc037\FCF c: Laurie Williams, Engineering Services Supervisor Bud Jones, Engineering Project Coordinator Raocho Callfonna Wate.. District 42135 Wincheskr Road . Post Office Box 9017 . Teme<:ula. California 92589.9017 . (951129G-6900 . FAX '951) 296-6860 , / WARREN D. WILLIAMS General Maoager.OliefEngineer ')0 '>0 1995 MARKET STREET RIVERSIDE, CA 92501 951.955.1200 951.788.9965 FAX SIlSQ.I City of Temecula Planning Department Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, Califomia 92589-9033 Attention: ...........,-n;.J ~s. RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRTW~ ~ fE 0 ill IT: ~I Ju NOV 0 4 2004 J ladies and Gentlemen: Re: ?AOLj-(~- The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in inw, ~V, oled cities. The District also does not plan check city land use cases, or provide State Division of Real Estate letters or other flood hazard reports for such cases. District comments/recommendations for such cases are normally limited to items of specific interest to the District including District Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood control and drainage facilities which could be consi<fered a logical component or extension of a master plan system, and District Area Drainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In aMmon, information of a general nature is provided. The District has not reviewed the rropoSed project in detail and the following checked comments do not in any way constitute or imply District approva or endorsement of the proposed project WIth respect to flood hazard, public health and safety or any other such Issue: No comment. L This project would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of regional Interest proposed. . This project involves District Master Plan facilities. The District will accept ownership of such facilities on written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and ins~on will be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be reqUIred. This pro~ ~,v~woes channels, storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter, or other facilities that could be consIdered regional in nature and/or a logical extension of the adopted Master Drainage Plan. The District would consider accellting ownership or sucn laCtllUeS on wnlten request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection WIll be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required. ~ This project is located within the limits of the District's MAll"1"-\ e.-1'oo ~ - ..""-'e~u- J",us-y Area Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been adoptea; apphcaDle lees snoulo De paiD oy casnlers check or money order only to the FloOd Control District prior to issuance of building or grading permits, whichever comes first. Fees to be paid should be at the rate In effect at the time of issuance of the actual permit. GENERAL INFORMATION This project may re<luire a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Clearance for grading, recoraation, or other final approval should not be given until the City has determined that the project has been granted a permit or IS shown to be exempt. If this projeet involves a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMAl mapped flood plain, then the City should require tile applicant to prOvide all studies calculations, -plans and other Information required to meel FEMA requirements, and should further require that the applicant obtain a Conditional letter of Map Revision ICLOMR) prior to grading, recordation or other final approval of the project, and a letter of Map Revision (lOMR) prior 0 occupancy. If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain is impacted by this prol'eet, the City should require the applicant to obtain a Section 1601/1603 Agreement from the California Departmen of Fish ana Game and a Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or written correspondence from these agencies indicating the project is exempt from these requirements. A Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification may be required from the local California Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of the Corps 404 permit. Very truly yours, ~~ ARTURO DiAl Senior Civil Engineer Date: /VOl/. /. d2r.:7,?/4 , c: Transportation and land Management Agency Attn: Greg Neal AM" ATTACHMENT NO.5 FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA04-0525 G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Planning\PC STAFF REPORT.doc 11 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA04-0525 Project Description: A Development Plan to construct two-single story retail building totaling 26,470 square feet within the Creekside Centre shopping Plaza located at the southwest corner of Overland Drive and Nicole Lane Assessor's Parcel No. 921-810-025 MSHCP Category: DIF Category: TUMF Category: Commercial Retail Commercial Retail Expiration Date: March 30, 2005 March 30, 2007 Approval Date: 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 Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 211 08(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 legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate R\D P\20Q4\04-0525 Overland II\Final Conditions of Approval.doc 1 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. 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. 5. 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. 6. The approved landscape construction drawings for Creekside Centre shall be revised to include enhanced landscaping, decorative features and monumentation improvements at the southwest corner of Overland Drive and Nicole Lane. The revisions shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of building permits for the restaurant(s) located at the northeast corner of the site and shall be fully installed prior to issuance of restaurant(s) final occupancy. 7. Site amenities to include tables and chairs shall be provided within the "Retail Plaza" area prior to occupancy of abutting tenant spaces. The type and design of the furniture shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. 8. Trash enclosures shall be provided to house all trash receptacles utilized on the site. 9. All downspouts shall be internalized. 10. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved site plan and elevations contained on file with the Planning Department. 11. Based on existing onsite parking spaces, a maximum of 10,100 square-feet of gross floor area within the center shall be utilized for restaurant uses. (Added by Planning Commission on March 30, 2005) 12. The conditions of approval specified in this resolution, to the extent specific items, materials, equipment, techniques, finishes or similar matters are specified, shall be deemed satisfied by 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 Color Stucco: ICI "Manilla Tan" #551 Stucco: ICI "Taupewood" #372 Stucco: ICI "Onionskin Tan" #421 Roofing: AEP-Span Metal Standing Seam "Agean Copper" R:\D P\2004\04-0525 Overland II\Final Conditions of Approval.doc 2 Metal Canopies: Stone Base: Aluminum Storefront: Glass: Same as Roofing Ledgestone Timely White #CC301 Clear 13. 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. 14. 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. 15. The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided by the Planning Department staff, and return one signed set to the Planning Department for their files. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 16. Provide the Planning Department with a copy of the underground water plans and electrical plans for verification of proper placement of transformer( s) and double detector check prior to final agreement with the utility companies. 17. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 824 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. 18. 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 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." Prior to Issuance of Building Permit R\D P\2004\04-0525 Overland II\Flnal Conditions of Approval.doc 3 19. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. 20. A comprehensive shopping center sign program shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. 21. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. These plans shall conform 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. In addition, the plans shall show the following a. Street landscaping is existing and shall remain on Overland Drive and Nicole Lane. New plantings on the project shall coordinate and be compatible with these existing plantings. The existing landscape shall be refurbished as necessary. b. Pfantings shall be revised at the southeast corner of Building B, as approved by the Planning Director, to insure that the rear of the building is effectively screened from Nicole Lane. (Revised by the Planning Commission on March 30, 2005) c. Slope banks 5' or greater in vertical height with slopes greater than or equal to 3:1 shall be landscaped at a minimum with an appropriate ground cover, one 15 gallon or larger size tree per 600 square feet of slope area, and one 1 gallon or larger shrub for each 100 square feet of slope area. Slope banks in excess of 10' in vertical height with slopes greater than or equal to 2:1 shall also be provided with one 5 gallon or larger tree per 1,000 square feet of slope area in addition to the above requirements. d. One landscape planter shall be provided per 10 parking spaces. The finger planting width shall be a minimum of 5' wide with the length equal to the adjoining parking space. The planter shall contain a minimum one tree with surrounding groundcover, shrubs or both. e. Areas proposed for future development at the north end of the project site shall be temporarily tufted, seeded and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control as approved by the Director of Planning. 22. The landscape construction plans shall be accompanied by the following items: a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). b. 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. c. Provide an agronomic soils report with the construction landscape plans. d. One (1) copy ofthe approved grading plan. e. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). f. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with approved plan). g. 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 R\D P\2004\04-0525 Overland II\Final Conditions of Approval.doc 4 maintenance program shall be provided to the landscape maintenance contractor who shall be responsible to carry out the detailed program. 23. 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. 24. Building plans shall indicate that all roof hatches shall be painted "International Orange". 25. 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 26. Prior to the release of occupancy, or any use allowed by this permit, the applicant shall be required to screen all loading areas and roof mounted mechanical equipment from view of the adjacent public right-of-ways. If upon final inspection it is determined that any mechanical equipment, roof equipment or backs of building parapet walls are visible from any portion of the public right-of-way adjacent to the project site, the developer shall provide screening by constructing a sloping tile covered mansard roof element or other screening if reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning. 27. 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. 28. 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 a period of 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. 29. 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 R:\D P\2004\04-0525 Overland Il\Final Conditions of Approval.doc 5 disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 951 696-3000." 30. 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. 31. All site improvements including but not limited to parking areas and striping shall be installed prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. 32. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 33. A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site flat work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way. 34. An Encroachment Permil shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. 35. 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. 36. If Nicole Lane remains a private street, the southerly driveway will be approved as shown on the approved site plan. 37. If Nicole Lane is to be dedicated as a public street, the southerly driveway shall be eliminated as shown on the approved site plan as the "Alternative Driveway" detail. Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 38. 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. 39. 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. 40. 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. 41. The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and R:\D P\2004\04-0525 Overland lI\Final Conditions of Approval.doc 6 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. 42. 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 mechanism to ensure ongoing long-term maintenance of all structural post-construction BMPs. 43. 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 44. 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. 45. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 46. 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. 47. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier's check or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 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 observed: a. Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. R\D P\2004\04-0525 Over1and lI\Final Conditions of Approval.doc 7 b. Driveway(s) shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A. c. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard No. 400. d. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. 49. 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, drive approaches. and street lights. b. Storm drain facilities c. Sewer and domestic water systems 50. 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. 51. 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. 52. The Developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.08. Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 53. 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 54. 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. 55. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. FIRE DEPARTMENT 56. 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 ICBC). California Fire Code (CFC). and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. R\D P\2004\04-0525 Overland II\Final Conditions of ApprovaLdoc 8 57. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project. a water system capable of delivering 1500 GPM at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a total fire flow of 2350 GPM with a 2 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix III-AI 58. 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 2-2 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(sl 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) 59. As required by the California Fire Code. when any portion of the facility is in excess of 1 50 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) 60. 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) 61. 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) 62. 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 ofthe 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) 63. 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) 64. 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) 65. 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 R:\D P\2004\04-0525 Overland II\Final Conditions of Approval.doc 9 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) 66. 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) 67. 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) 68. 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) 69. 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. ICFC Article 10) 70. 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 main entrance door. (CFC 902.4) 71. 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) 72. 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. 73. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developer/applicant shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the storage of combustible liquids, flammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) R:\D P\20Q4\04-0525 Ovenand II\Final Conditions of Approval.doc 10 Soecial Conditions 74. 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. 75. 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 oftheir 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) 76. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the City; should any quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E) BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT 77. 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. 78. 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. 79. 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. 80. 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. 81. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 82. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 83. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 84. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. R:\D P\2004\04-0525 Overland II\Final Conditions of Approval.doc 11 85. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. 86. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. 87. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 2001 edition of the California Building Code Appendix 29. 88. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior to permit issuance. 89. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 90. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. 91. Provide precise grading plan at plan check submittal to check accessibility for persons with disabilities. 92. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 93. Trash enclosures. patio covers, light standards, and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. 94. Show all building setbacks. 95. 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. S~turday 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Holidays COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT General Conditions 96. The trash enclosures shall be larger to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as, regular solid waste containers. 97. Any damage done to the existing Class II bike lanes on Overland will be repaired to the satisfaction of Public Works. 98. 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. 99. All parkways, interior landscaping, fencing and on site lighting shall be maintained by the R\D P\2004\04-0525 Ovenand II\Final Conditions of Approval.doc 12 property owner or maintenance association. 100. Applicant shall comply with the Public Art Ordinance. Prior to Issuance of the First Building Permit 101. The developer shall provide TCSD verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. OUTSIDE AGENCIES 101. The developer shall comply with the attached correspondence from Rancho California Water District dated October 12, 2004. 102. The developer shall comply with the attached correspondence from Riverside County Flood Control District dated November 1, 2004. 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:\D P\2004\04-0525 Over1and II\Final Conditions of Approval.doc 13 ~ @ Bancho later Board of Directors JQho. E. Hoagland President es.ba F. Ko Sr. VirePresident Stepben J. Corona Ralph H. Daily Belli R. Drake Lisa D. Herman Michael R. McMillan Officers: BrianJ. B...ady Geuerlll Manager Phillip L. Forbes Directar ofFinance-TrellS~l" E.P. "Bob" LettlODS Director of Engineering Perry R. Louck Controller Linda M.. Fregoso District Secretlll"Y/Adminwtrativc Services Manager C. Michael Cowett Be>.t Best & Krieger LLP General Counsel 00 October 12, 2004 00 ~V fe (Cj IE li W ~ ~ lm OCT 1 4 2004 Jj Matthew Harris, Project Planner City of Temecula Planning Department Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 _By. SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY, OVERLAND II COMMERCIAL PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 30107, APN 921-810-025 PA04-0525 [DAVCONI Dear Mr. Harris: Please be advised that the abcvereferenced pr~perty is located within ~hp, boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service, therefore, would be available upon construction of any required on-site and/or off-site water facilities and the completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees and requirements. Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. This project has the potential to become a commercial condominium development, with individual building owners and an owners' association maintaining the common property and private water, fire protection, and landscape irrigation facilities. RCWD requires that the City of Temecula include a Reciprocal Easement and Maintenance Agreement for these on-site private water facilities as a condition of approval for the project. In addition to this agreement, RCWD would requite individual water meters for each condominium unit. If you have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at this office. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT 7J1~,~l!l~ Development Engineering Manager 04\MM:mc037\FCF c: Laurie Williams, Engineering Services Supervisor Bud Jones, Engineering Project Coordinator Rancho California Water District 42135 Winches~r Iw..d . Post Office Box 9017 . Temecu1a, CalifQrnia 92589-9017 . (951) 296-6900 . FAX (951) 296-6860 \ J WARREN D. WILLIAMS General Manager-ChiefEngineet" ')0 ')0 1995 MARKET STREET RIVERSIDE, CA 92501 951.955.1200 951.788.9965 FAX 51180.1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DlSTR I ~~ R 1fn11 1'2, n ill R l City ofTemecula U I~ I', It U ~ l1 Planning Department Post Office Box 9033 I n I NO V (, 4 2004 Temecula, Califomia 92589-9033 UU v J Attention: tv.....-nv.J ~5;. Ladies and GenUemen: Re: PAOl./ - ( ~ --:- The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in incorporated cities. The District also does not plan check ci!}l land use cases, or provide state Division of Real Estate letters or other flood hazard r~ for such cases. District comments/recommendations for such cases are normally limited to items of s~ific interest to the District Including District Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood control and drainage facilities which could be consiaered a logical ~,,,~w..ent or extension of a master Plan sy.stem, and District Area Urainage Plan fees (development ...;"~~~on fees). In addition, information of a general nature is provided. The District has not reviewed the proposed project in detail and the following checked comments do not in any way constitute or imply District approva or~, ,Jw, .amant of the proposed project With respect to flood hazard, public health and safety or any other such Issue: No comment. ~ This project would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of regional Interest proposed. This project Involves District Master Plan facilities. The District will accept ownership of such facilities on written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required. This P!'oject proposes channels, storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter, or other facilities that could be considered regional in nature and/or a logical extension of the adopted Master Drainage Plan. The District would consider accellting ownership 01 sucn laClllUes on wnuen request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection WIll be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required. ~ This project is located within the limits of the District's \.W.ffl~ ~ - .......eGL\.\JI. J"U$'f Area Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been adopteo; apPIlCaole lees snOUld be palo oy casnlers check or money order only to the FloOd Control District prior to issuance of building or grading permits, whichever comes first. Fees to be paid should be at the rate In effect at the time of issuance of the actual pennit. GENERAL INFORMATIOM This project may require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) pennit from the Slate Water Resources Control Board. Clearance for gradingJ recoraation, or other final approval should not be given until the City has determined that the project has been granteo a permit or IS shown to be exempt. If this project Involves a Federal Emergengy Management Agency (FEMA) map~ flood plain, then the City should require lf1e applicant to provide all studies calculations, b1ans and other Infonnation re(Julred to meel FEMA requirements, and should further re(Juire that ihe applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision ICLOMR) prior to grading, recordation or other final approval of the project, and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior 0 occupancy. If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain is impacted by this pro!'eet, the City should require the applicant to obtain a Section 1601/1603 Agreement from the Califomia Departmen of Fish and Game and a Clean Water Act Section 404 Pennit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or written correspondence from these agencies indicating the project is exempt from these requirements. A Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Qualitv Certification may be requirea from the local Cali10mia Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of the Corps 404 permit. Very truly yours, . ~~ ARTURO DIAZ Senior Civil Engineer Date: /VOfl /. c4:/&?4 c: Transportation and Land Management Agency Alln: Greg Neal f>.-..J... ATTACHMENT NO.6 CORRESPONDENCE FROM APPLICANT G:\Planning\2007\PA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MOo\Planning\PC STAFF REPORT.doc 12 RAWLINGS CONSULTING January 30, 2008 Katie LeComte Assistant Planner City of Temecula RE: Panera Bread Company Dear Ms. LeComte: Panera Bread Company is proposing to open a store at the Creekside Center located at Nicole and Overland. They are currently proposing a store in which the final size is predicated on the Code and the amending of the current conditions of approval for Creekside. Since the store size has not been finalized, Panera has not yet done any interior layouts. But, in speaking with Matt Scobbie, Senior Development Project Manager for Panera Bread Company, he has indicated that a store in the 4,000 to 5,000 square foot range would typically be built out to provide seating from 80 to 175 customers. Panera has selected the Creekside Center location due to its proximity to Abbott campus. Abbott has approximately 3,000 to 5,000 employees on their campus during the day shift and Panera is anticipating a great deal of walk-in traffic. Also, due to the fact that there stores sell a lot of bakery items and coffee, the average stay of the patrons is much shorter than with a sit down restaurant. Sincerely, Steve Rawlings 24630 Washington Avenue, Suite 202 Murrieta, CA 92562 Phone (951) 696-7080 Fax (951) 696-7011 Email: SE.Rawlings@Verizon.net ATTACHMENT NO.7 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING G:\Planning\2007\PA07-G325 Creekside Centre Minor MOD\Ptanning\PC STAFF REPORT. doc 13 Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Environmental: Case Planner: Place of Hearing: Date of Hearing: Time of Hearing: Notice of Public Hearing A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the City of Temecula PLANNING COMMISSION to consider the matter described below: Planning Application No. PA07-0325 Mr. Dave Wakefield 41785 Nicole Lane Planning Application No. PA07 -0325, a Minor Modification to amend Condition of Approval No. 11 of the Final Conditions of Approval for the Creekside Center Development Plan (PA04-0525) which restricts the maximum number of restaurant square footage to 10,100 square feet in the Creekside Centre shopping center located at 41785 Nicole Lane In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed project is exempt from further environmental review and a Notice of Exemption will be adopted in compliance with CEQA Section 15301, Class 1; existing facilities Katie Le Comte, Assistant Planner City of Temecula, Council Chambers 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590 February 20, 2008 6:00 p.m. Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before the hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or opposition to the approval of the project at the time of hearing. If you challenge the project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. The proposed project application may be viewed at the Temecula Planning Department, 43200 Business Park Drive, Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. Questions concerning the project may be addressed to the case planner at the City of Temecula Planning Department, (951) 694-6400. \ /'i t' "'-r~ ,':J --... ! ~ , Project Site I c- l- IlIOO'1 LII Q a ... IiIlO u"" .... G:IPlanningI2007IPA07-0325 Creekside Centre Minor MODlPlanningINOPH-PC.doc ITEM #6 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF MEETING: February 20, 2008 PREPARED BY: Patrick Richardson TITLE: Principal Planner PROJECT DESCRIPTION: General Plan Conformity of Proposed Conditional Vacation of Portions of Ynez Road Related to the Abbott Pedestrian Bridge (Planning Application Number PA06-0356) BACKGROUND On October 22, 2002, the City of Temecula and Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., now known as Abbott Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. ("ACS"), entered into a Development Agreement for the development of approximately 27 acres of real property in the vicinity of Ynez Road, Motor Car Parkway, Margarita Road and Solana Way ("Development Agreement"). The Development Agreement was approved by the City Council on February 7, 2003. The City Council determined that the provisions of the Development Agreement are consistent with the City's General Plan. Section 2.13 of the Development Agreement provides for the construction by ACS of a private pedestrian bridge across Ynez Road in order to accommodate traffic and to minimize the interruption of vehicular traffic on Ynez Road due to the existing surface pedestrian crossingSection 2.13.3 of the Development Agreement further provides that the City shall convey to ACS sufficient real property interests and shall carry out necessary vacation proceedings in order to accommodate the bridge. ACS has proceeded with development and construction of the pedestrian bridge. Consistent with Section 2.13.3 of the Development Agreement, ACS has requested the City to conduct vacation proceedings under California STREETS AND HIGHWAY CODES Sections 8320, et seq. for the vacation of certain portions of Ynez Road in the vicinity of Motor Car Parkway. ACS owns the underlying fee interest in Ynez Road. Vacation of a portion of the airspace above the road and on and under the surface of a small portion of the median will formally allow the bridge and allow ACS to obtain satisfactory title insurance. ANALYSIS Pursuant to Street and Highways Code Section 8310 et seq., the City may vacate its interest in public streets or portions of public streets if the City finds that such vacation conforms to the General Plan and that the subject streets or portions of streets are no longer necessary for present or prospective public use. The hearing before the Planning Commission only concerns the first of those findings regarding conformity with the General Plan. On October 16, 2002, following a duly noticed and conducted public hearing, the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula adopted PC Resolution No. 2002-044, recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance entitled, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Temecula Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration For, and Approving the Development Agreement With, Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., a R:\PRichardson\AbbottStVacation.DOC Subsidiary of Guidant Corporation (Planning Application Number PA02-0217)." In adopting PC Resolution Number 2002-044, the Planning Commission made the following findings: . The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula General Plan in that the Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for industrial, commercial and residential component. . The Development Agreement complies with the goals and objectives of the Circulation Element of the General Plan and the traffic impacts of the development over the period of the Development Agreement will be substantially mitigated by the mitigation measures and Conditions of Approval imposed. . The project subject to the Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for the zoning district in which the Property subject to the Development Agreement is located, and that this Development Agreement is consistent with good planning practices by providing for the opportunity to develop the Property consistent with the General Plan. . The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City. . The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof. . The benefits that will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from this legislation and this Development Agreement are expansion of an important local employer and could bring additional employment opportunities to local residents. . The potentially significant impacts to the environment from the project will be mitigated to a level of insignificance based upon the identified mitigation measures. The portions of Ynez Road that ACS has requested the City to vacate are described in Exhibits "A" through "D" to PC Resolution 08-_, and consist of vacation of certain air space rights for pedestrian bridge purposes and vacation of certain rights for the pedestrian bridge footings. These vacations will not impact the public's use of the existing Ynez street right-of-way. The vacation is also subject to the Conditions of Approval attached as Exhibit "E" to PC Resolution Number 08-_. As indicated above, the Planning Commission made the above findings regarding the Development Agreement's conformity with the General Plan in October 2002. The potential vacation of portions of Ynez Road was considered as an integral part of Section 2.13 of the Development Agreement. Each of the subject portions of Ynez Road described in Exhibits "A" through "D" to PC Resolution 08- will not impact the public's use of the existing Ynez Road. Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, staff recommends that the Planning Commission find pursuant to Government Code Section 65402 and Street and Highways Code Section 8133 that the conditional vacation of portions of Ynez Road described in Exhibits "A" through "D" to PC Resolution 08-_ conforms to the City's General Plan. Upon receiving a report from the Planning Commission regarding whether the proposed vacation conforms to the R:\PRichardson\AbbottStVacation.DOC " General Plan, the City Council will hold a public hearing on the remaining issues, which are solely within the discretion of the City Council. LEGAL NOTICING REQUIREMENTS Notice of public hearing was published in the Californian on February 9, 2008 and mailed to the property owners within the 600-foot radius. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission adopt PC Resolution No. 08-_finding the proposed conditional vacation of portions of Ynez Road conforms to the General Plan of the City of Temecula and directing that this finding be forwarded to the City Council. ATTACHMENTS 1. PC Resolution No. 08-_ - Blue Page 4 Exhibit A - Legal Description Exhibit B - Parcel 1 Plot Map Exhibit C - Parcel 2 Plot Map Exhibit D - Parcel 3 Plot Map Exhibit E - Draft Conditions of Approval 2. Notice of Public Hearing - Blue Page 5 R:\PRichardson\/\ bbouStV acation. DOC J R:\PRichardson\AbbottStYacation.DOC ATTACHMENT NO.1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 08-_ 4 PC RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL VACATION OF PORTIONS OF YNEZ ROAD CONFORMS TO THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA Section 1. Procedural Findinas. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and resolve as follows: A. On October 22, 2002, the City of Temecula and Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., now known as Abbott Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. ("ACS"), entered into that certain Development Agreement for the development of approximately 27 acres of real property in the vicinity of Ynez Road, Motor Car Parkway, Margarita Road and Solana Way ("Development Agreement"). The Development Agreement was approved by the City Council by its adoption of Ordinance No. 02-10 and was recorded on February 7, 2003 as Document Number 2003-092775 of Official Records of the County of Riverside. The City Council determined that the provisions of the Development Agreement are consistent with the City's General Plan. B. On October 16, 2002, following a duly noticed and conducted public hearing, the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula adopted PC Resolution No. 2002-044, recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance Entitled, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Temecula Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration For, and Approving the Development Agreement With, Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., A Subsidiary of Guidant Corporation (Planning Application Number PA02-0217)". In adopting PC Resolution Number 2002-044, the Planning Commission made the following findings: 1. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula General Plan in that the Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for industrial, commercial and residential component. 2. The Development Agreement complies with the goals and objectives of the Circulation Element of the General Plan and the traffic impacts of the development over the period of the Development Agreement will be substantially mitigated by the mitigation measures and Conditions of Approval imposed. 3. The project subject to the Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for the zoning district in which the Property subject to the Development Agreement is located, and that this Development Agreement is consistent with good planning practices by providing for the opportunity to develop the Property consistent with the General Plan. R:\PRichardson\AbbottStVacationRes.DOC 1 4. The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City. 5. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof. 6. The benefits that will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from this legislation and this Development Agreement are expansion of an important local employer and could bring additional employment opportunities to local residents. 7. The potentially significant impacts to the environment from the project will be mitigated to a level of insignificance based upon the identified mitigation measures. C. Section 2.13 of the Development Agreement provides that in order to accommodate traffic and to minimize the interruption of vehicular traffic on Ynez Road due to the existing surface pedestrian crossing, the parties wish to provide for the construction by ACS of a private pedestrian bridge across Ynez Road. Section 2.13.3 of the Development Agreement further provides that the City shall convey to ACS sufficient real property interests and shall carry out necessary vacation proceedings in order to accommodate the bridge. The terms and conditions of the Development Agreement and the Council's authority to act in connection therewith were validated by judgment of the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Riverside, entered on August 15, 2003, in Case Number RIC 387405. D. ACS has determined to proceed with development and construction of the pedestrian bridge. Consistent with Section 2.13.3 of the Development Agreement, ACS has requested the City to conduct vacation proceedings under California STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE Sections 8320, et seq. for the vacation of certain portions of Ynez Road in the vicinity of Motor Car Parkway. The purpose of the proposed vacation is to facilitate the construction of the private pedestrian bridge across Ynez Road that will join ACS facilities on either side of such road. ACS owns the underlying fee interest in Ynez Road. Vacation of a portion of the airspace above the road and on and under the surface of a small portion of the median will allow ACS to construct the bridge and obtain satisfactory title insurance. E. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65402 and Street and Highways Code Section 8133, the Planning Commission held a duly-noticed public hearing regarding the conformity of the proposed vacation to the General Plan. Section 2. Further Findinas. After receiving evidence, both written and aral, regarding the proposed conditional vacation of portions of Ynez Road described in Exhibits "A" through "D" hereto, including PC Resolution No. 2002-044 and Section 2.13 of the Development Agreement, and the staff report regarding the proposed conditional R "\PRichardson\AbbottStVacationRes. DOC 2 vacation, the Planning Commission hereby finds in accordance with Government Code Section 65402 that the conditional vacation of the portions of Ynez Road described in Exhibits "A" through "0" is in conformance with the General Plan of the City of Temecula based on the findings set forth above in Section 1.B. of this Resolution and for the reasons set forth in the staff report, which is incorporated herein by this reference. Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 20th day of February 2008. John Telesio, Chairman ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 08- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 20th day of February 2008, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\PRichardson\AbbottStVacationRes.DOC 3 R:\PRichardson\AbbottStVacationRes.OOC 4 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 1 FOR STREET V ACA nON OF AIR SPACE RIGHTS FOR PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE PURPOSES A VOLUME OF AIRSPACE OVER THAT PORTION OF TRACT NO. 3334 RECORDED IN BOOK 54 OF MAPS AT PAGES 25 - 30 AND THAT PORTION OF THE GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC ROAD AND DRAINAGE PURPOSES, RECORDED FEBRUARY 9, 1993 AS DOCUMENT NO. 50724 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, IN THE OFFICES OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA LYING BELOW AN ELEVATION OF 1089.00 FEET AND ABOVE AN ELEVATION OF 1071.50 FEET PER THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY BENCH MARK DESIGNATED AS "T-46-81 RESET 1997", HAVING AN ELEVATION OF 1097.163, ESTABLISHED ON JUNE 12, 1997, ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS AND MORE CLEARLY SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "B" ATIACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF: COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD (134.00 FEET WIDE) AND MOTOR CAR PARKWAY (60.00 FEET WIDE PRIVATE ROAD AND UTILITIES EASEMENT) AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP 23354 RECORDED IN BOOK 152 OF PARCEL MAPS AT PAGES 74 - 76 IN THE OFFICES OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID YNEZ ROAD NORTH 10012'45" WEST A DISTANCE OF 64.87 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE OF YNEZ ROAD SOUTH 79047'54" WEST A DISTANCE OF 67.00 FEET TO THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAID YNEZ ROAD AS SHOWN ON SAID DOCUMENT NO. 50724; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY NORTH 10012'45" WEST A DISTANCE OF 13.50 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY NORTH 79047'54" EAST A DISTANCE OF 134.00 FEET TO THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAID YNEZ ROAD AS SHOWN ON THE GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC ROAD AND DRAINAGE PURPOSES, RECORDED FEBRUARY 9, 1993 AS DOCUMENT NO. 50718 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, IN THE OFFICES OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY SOUTH 10012'45" EAST A DISTANCE OF 13.50 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY SOUTH 79047'54" WEST A DISTANCE OF 67.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 2 FOR STREET VACATION OF AIR SPACE RIGHTS FOR PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE PIER A VOLUME OF AIRSPACE OVER THAT PORTION OF LOT "H" OF TRACT NO. 3334, RECORDED IN BOOK 54 OF MAPS AT PAGES 25 - 30 IN THE OFFICES OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA LYING BELOW AN ELEVATION OF 1071.50 FEET AND ABOVE AN ELEVATION OF 1053.00 FEET PER THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY BENCH MARK DESIGNATED AS "T-46- 81 RESET 1997", HAVING AN ELEVATION OF 1097.163, ESTABLISHED ON JUNE 12, 1997, ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, THE TOP OF SAID PORTION BEING RECTANGULAR AND THE BOTTOM OF SAID PORTION BEING CIRCULAR, THE SIDES OF SAID PORTION BEING IN A STRAIGHT LINE BETWEEN THE TOP AND BOTTOM EDGES BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS AND MORE CLEARLY SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "c" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF: BOTTOM DESCRIPTION (at elevation 1053.00): COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND MOTOR CAR PARKWAY AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 23354 RECORDED IN BOOK 152 OF PARCEL MAPS AT PAGES 74 -76 IN THE OFFICES OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID YNEZ ROAD NORTH 10012'45" WEST A DISTANCE OF 71.87 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE NORTH 79047'15" EAST A DISTANCE OF 6.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, SAID POINT OF BEGINNING BEING THE CENTER OF A 3.00 FOOT RADIUS EASEMENT. TOP DESCRIPTION (at elevation 1071.50): COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND MOTOR CAR PARKWAY AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 23354 RECORDED IN BOOK 152 OF PARCEL MAPS AT PAGES 74 -76 IN THE OFFICES OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID YNEZ ROAD NORTH 10012'45" WEST A DISTANCE OF 65.12 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE OF YNEZ ROAD NORTH 79047'15" EAST A DISTANCE OF 2.50 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 79047'54" EAST A DISTANCE OF 7.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH WOI2'06" WEST A DISTANCE OF 13.00 FEET; 2 THENCE SOUTH 79047'54" WEST A DISTANCE OF 7.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 10012'06" EAST A DISTANCE OF 13.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 3 FOR STREET VACATION OF RIGHTS FOR PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE FOOTING A VOLUME OF SPACE UNDER THAT PORTION OF LOT "H" OF TRACT NO. 3334, RECORDED IN BOOK 54 OF MAPS AT PAGES 25 - 30 IN THE OFFICES OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA LYING BELOW AN ELEVATION OF 1053.00 FEET AND ABOVE AN ELEVATION OF 953.00 FEET PER THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY BENCH MARK DESIGNATED AS "T-46-81 RESET 1997", HAVING AN ELEVATION OF 1097.163, ESTABLISHED ON JUNE 12, 1997, ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS AND MORE CLEARLY SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "D" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF: COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND MOTOR CAR PARKWAY AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 23354 RECORDED IN BOOK 152 OF PARCEL MAPS AT PAGES 74 - 76 IN THE OFFICES OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID YNEZ ROAD NORTH 10012'45" WEST A DISTANCE OF 71.87 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE NORTH 79047'15" EAST A DISTANCE OF 6.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, SAID POINT OF BEGINNING BEING THE CENTER OF A 3.00 FOOT RADIUS EASEMENT. f -, '" :.;\ i - - -.', 1 ", 'Y'l', \ \ !..' I '..,.. .., .. ,\ i ~{ ..~~/i'_\! ~\ 1 ~~, ' , ' I; ~~ ~. . I' -. ~ ,.... I ..,...... ~J.,., "." _ , ;' "'..<~. ~ -.,., , ' "- . /-' , 3 R:\PRicl1ardsQolAbbottStVacationRes.DOC 5 EXHIBIT B PARCEL 1 PLOT MAP , 67.00 'w \ \" 67.00' . 579'47'54 "'" \579'47'54 W \~ \\,.= \ \ \ m{/E:gv~/~ - ~ ~ \ \ \ ~ \: ~ \ \ g\~ \\ ~ \ tj \~- _ --t-\ - MOTOR CAR CRANT or EAsrAlEIv'T PER \ \ P ARKW A Y ooc. NO. 50724 REC. 2/.9/.93 e4,":J \.AND J1~ \ \ PaWT or ca/(,VENCElfCiVT of>.ll W. "'C~ \ ~ Ird \:It~ r ~ Michael D. Levin ~ '" ~ ",,-f, \ ~~~. Exp. 6-30-09 ~ ~ \ \ ~~ M;.~ \ ~~ \\. <1,p \ \ ~ \ \ ~ ~K~,_ EXHIBIT "B" PAm'R 1 \ / oEo/cAlFl\ANo \cctplllJ~\ \('-l \ PER 1.18 52/25-30 \ , ~~ 00 --1 I- 6- \ , 44.00' ---- \ \ \#.00 \ SCALF /"=JO' \ \ 23.00'1 , 50.00 \ \ ~ -... <::> ~ ~ ~ -... s... ~- EKCEl. ElIfJDEERIMi -I#J STATF PlACE EStlJVJJIJlt CA ~ I'IDC (768) 7/5-8JJB o JO 60 CRANT or EASEI.IENT PER Ooc. NO. 50718 REC. 2/.9/93 , 17.00 OEO/CAlllJ ANO ACCEPlFO PER PI.IB 152/7-I-71J ~~ ~~~~~ jJ~!J~"",1J '&; ~~~ .~~~ JJ SI072'45T 13.50' " ~ "'-- - - -Jf- /111-10:1- ; 'lJAlF R\PRichardson\AbbottStVacationRes.DOC 6 ATTACHMENT NO. C PARCEL 2 PLOT MAP oz 01 o 8f1ll-S1L (fI9O 3DfrI ~ 11.7 'a/HIJ,tDSJ .J.JY7d 31 Y1S 1/;1 !ImB3VI!NJ Wt'J lNJJf3:JN3JfJrOJ..IO IN/Od ~ A'llvtiI~!!L - ~ ~ HOLOYl t 371>'$ 0.1 .iON \ ~ ~3i11 :J/H13IYOS/ I ~ oor~OJ ~" f'l(}J.JOB . "" ~ ~ R ,OI=,,137~:JS ~ Ie) ~ 'i) lQ: ~~ ~\~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ on/Ol _ ... ~ ~ ~ ..:c--- JOJ "'" <::> "" 01 ~ ~ '9" - "" -4 <:. ...1 ~ ~ \ N -J1- ~:;;<)~ ~ dOl .?N/NM<?38 ~ .fO lNlOd .JfJlJ1 --- --- ,Og,? 3.gI,LMLN ,00'['1 J,9O,?1.0IS ,otJ'9 J,~UMLN /----- ------ ,otJ;{ 3.;UMtN ------ --- ---- _----- ,oon M,,9O,?/.OIN ,oor=H II'(lLf 08 9N,wN.<936' .J/J lNlOd 3fJlJ1 ,oq!_ AVUMLS-- --- ---- \ (, uJiJ,d \ 1181HX3 \ -- ~ tr~M' ~~to ~ Q:'<"fi ~~u to t.'~~~~ ~ 0 cc~cc R:\PRichardson\AbbottStVacationRes.DOC 7 EXHIBIT D PARCEL 3 PLOT MAP EXHIBIT "0" \ PAJN:Y:l .J \ \ .~~ ~~~~~ g n~~~"~~ ~ 'J)M\~ .~~~.!J __- --- --- -- --- \ --- "----------;;;;;;;;~-~::: --\;---- --- -- --- ~ -- -- ------- ------------ lRlIE POINT OF 8EC/NN/NG --- -- --- \ \ ~ ~\ ~~<5 ~ ti, . \~ ';U% 0\- ';I> tj\ ~ MOTO~ ~ V-- ~ }JARKWAY ~ PO/NT OF COMMENCEMENT ~ ~~- ~ IV' ''''' ~~ ~ ""'" ~~ ~~ M:-~ = ~~ ~ 8,p ~ ~ -j{- SCALE !"=/O' QCEL EMilltEERIMi #8 STArr Pl..ACE ESCDVJJIm. CA .saJ:?9 I'IOC (761/) 715-81/8 o /0 20 EXHIBIT E DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:\PRichardson\AbbottStVacationRes.OOC 8 EXHIBIT E DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:\PRichardson\AbbotStVacation COAs.doc SCANNED: G DRIVE: PERMITS PLUS: INITIALS: PLANNER: Richardson 't ~ 'O~1J 1989 ~~ 'lJto/Vs . NEW oyyo<f' ACCEPTANCE OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL I, (print name) understand that Planning Application No. PA06-0356 has been approved with Conditions of Approval which are set forth in Exhibit E. I have read the Conditions of Approval contained in PC Resolution No. 08- and understand them. Through signing this ACCEPTANCE OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, I agree and commit to the City of Temecula that I will implement and abide by the Conditions of Approval, including any indemnification requirements imposed by those conditions. S/GNA TURE DATE R:\PRichardson\AbbotStVacation COAs.doc 2 EXHIBIT E CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA06-0356 Project Description: General Plan Conformity of Proposed Conditional Vacation of Portions of Ynez Road Related to the Abbott Pedestrian Bridge Assessor's Parcel No. 921-680-023 and 921-720-015 MSHCP Category: DIF Category: N/A N/A TUMF Category: N/A Approval Date: February 20, 2008 Expiration Date: N/A 1. ACS shall have the exclusive use of the pedestrian bridge, and shall have the right to restrict access to authorized persons. ACS shall own the bridge, and City shall have no ownership interest therein. 2. ACS shall indemnify City as to the construction and operation of the bridge, consistent with the terms of an operating memorandum under Section 6.2 of the Development Agreement in a form mutually agreeable to the City and ACS and in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney. 3. ACS shall be responsible for all costs for design and construction of the bridge (including relocation of utilities, as necessary). 4. ACS shall protect any public utilities in the vicinity of the vacation area during construction of the piers, bridge abutments and similar supporting structures. Any damage to existing utilities shall be repaired or reconstructed, and any necessary temporary or permanent relocation shall be conducted, in a manner satisfactory to the affected utility at Abbott's sole cost and expense. 5. The vacation shall not impede Fire Department access to the pedestrian bridge or its appurtenant structures. 6. ACS shall be responsible for all costs for maintenance of the bridge and for removal upon cessation of use. 7. The City of Temecula reserves a power of termination as set forth in this Condition of Approval: R:\PRichardson\AbbotStVacation CQAs.doc 3 a. After a period of 53 years of continuous non-use of the pedestrian bridge constructed in the vacation area, the City may (but is not required to) take the steps set forth in this condition, within the time allowed by law. As used here, "continuous non-use" means that the pedestrian bridge has not been used to access or provide utility or other services to the real property on either end of the bridge during the period in question. b. If the City determines that there have been 53 years of continuous non-use and wishes to proceed under this condition, it shall provide ACS with written notice of its determination and an opportunity to cure the alleged non-use. If ACS is no longer the record owner of the property on each side of the bridge at that time, the City shall provide notice to the then-record owner(s). Such notice shall provide ACS 90-day period within which to make use of the bridge. Notice shall be given, and days hereunder shall be counted, in the manner set forth in the Development Agreement. c. If the City determines that ACS has not made reasonably frequent use of the bridge within the 90-day period, the City Council shall consider the matter at a public meeting, and shall provide written notice to ACS (or the then-current owner(s)) at least 30 days in advance of such consideration. If at the conclusion of its consideration the City Council determines that (a) there has been a three- year period of continuous non-use, and (b) that no reasonably frequent use was made during the 90-day cure period, then the Council may adopt a resolution authorizing the exercise of the City's power of termination. d. The provisions of Development Agreement Section 12, Judicial Review, shall apply to the exercise or attempted exercise of the City's power of termination hereunder, or as to any other dispute under these Conditions of Approval, including (without limitation) resolution of claims through a general reference in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure Sections 638 through 645.1 or any successor statutes, and the right of the prevailing party to attorneys' fees and costs. In any reference or proceeding, the City shall have the burden of proof to demonstrate the fact of continuous non-use of the pedestrian bridge. 8. Nothing in this Resolution or Conditions of Approval shall affect the City's jurisdiction to take appropriate action to abate a public nuisance for disrepair of the bridge or for any other matter, as authorized by applicable law. 9. To the extent permitted by law, the provisions of this Resolution, including these Conditions of Approval, shall constitute covenants that shall run with the land for the benefit thereof, and the benefits and burdens of this Resolution and conditions of approval shall bind and inure to the benefit of the City and ACS and their respective successors in interest. As used in these conditions of approval, "ACS" shall mean the owner(s) of the real property on either end of the bridge, adjacent to Ynez Road. If such property is at any time under the ownership of more than one person, then the obligations of such owners hereunder shall be joint and several. Condition 2 (as to execution of the required operating memorandum) shall be completed prior to recordation. The remaining conditions are long-term in nature and shall apply beyond recordation. R:\PRichardson\AbbotStVacation COAs.doc 4 R:\PRichardson\AbbottStVacation.DOC ATTACHMENT NO.2 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 5 .'" "I' "'''l,C~ ,. ..? 1f.~, - ' ~~.'-' ," ..'~~ .J 1: ",',. -..... ,.~:!'H ;'..; ,\,~~;::j:;::::~ ~:':i:.~;~I_\ 1,/ (' ;1'I~(.'i;'iiii,.tlV'C:: ,.,~,,,,,-, Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Environmental: Case Planner: Place of Hearing: Date of Hearing: Time of Hearing: Notice of Public Hearing A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the City of Temecula PLANNING COMMISSION to consider the matter described below: Planning Application No. PA06-0356 Abbott Vascular Located on Ynez Road, north of Motor Car Parkway Request of the Planning Commission to find conformity with the General Plan of the City of Temecula for a proposed conditional vacation of portions of Ynez Road In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed project is exempt from further environmental review and a Notice of Determination will be issued in compliance with CEQA Section 15162 - Subsequent Negative Declaration. The project is consistent with the previously approved Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Development Agreement between the City and Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. Patrick Richardson, Principal Planner City of Temecula, Council Chambers 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590 February 20, 2008 6:00 p.m. Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before the hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or opposition to the approval of the project at the time of hearing. If you challenge the project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. The proposed project application may be viewed at the Temecula Planning Department, 43200 Business Park Drive, Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. Questions concerning the project may be addressed to the case planner at the City of Temecula Planning Department, (951) 694-6400. y ~ l)w;:"UNo-Oll< '. L '-.-"'"u.li VI / ~./ .,.J"t< ' .~~ - G:\Planning\2006\PA06-0356 Abbott Pedestrian Bridge DP\Planning\NOPH-PC-Air Space Easement.doc