The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10-022 PC Resolution a - PC RESOLUTION NO. 10-22 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 946 SQUARE FOOT DRIVE-THRU CAR WASH AT THE EXISTING ARCO AM/PM GAS STATION LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WINCHESTER AND NICOLAS ROADS, ADDRESSED AS 40212 WINCHESTER ROAD (APN 920-100-048)" Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On August 4, 2009, Mr. Gregory Hann filed Planning Application No. PA09-0246, Specific Plan Amendment and on September 22, 2009 Planning Application Nos. PA09-0287, Conditional Use Permit and PA09-0288, Development Plan. in �a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. On November 3, 2010, the Planning Commission recommended approval � of Planning Application Nos. PA09-0246, Specific Plan Amendment; PA09-0287, Conditional Use Permit; and PA09-0288 Development Plan 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 November 3, 2010, 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 recommended approval of Planning Application Nos. PA09-0246, Specific Plan Amendment; PA09-0287, Conditional Use Permit; and PA09- 0288 Development Plan with a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program subject to and based upon the findings set forth thereunder. F. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of Planning Application No's PA09-0287, Conditional Use Permit and PA09-0288, Development Plan A. Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA), City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the approval of the Specific Plan Amendment Application, as described in the Initial Study ("the Project"). Based upon the findings contained in that study, City staff determined that there was no substantial evidence that the Project could have a significant effect on the environment and a(Mitigated) Negative Declaration was prepared. B. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration as required by law. The public comment period commenced on October 12, 2010, and expired on November 1, 2010. Copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Planning, located at City Hall 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. C. No written comments were received prior to the public hearing and a response to all the comments made therein was prepared, submitted to the Planning Commission and incorporated into the administrative record of the proceedings. D. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the November 3, 2010 public hearing, and based on the whole record before it finds that: (1) the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; (2) there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment; and (3) the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the ' independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. E. Based on the findings set forth in the Resolution, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project. Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 3rd day of November 2010. _ �� Carl Carey hairman ATTEST: Patrick Richardson, Secretary , ,� �.. - .. �. �.�S.�AL] '^-�:. . , .�, , __ , , . . _ � ', " . ..., '' � - .', : " �� STATF'OF G�'�i.IFORNIA ) � � GOUNTY U��F,-�:�IVERSIDE )ss '��,.(:I�'1( OF�T�MECULA ) I, Patrick Richardson, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 10-22 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 3rd day of November 2010, by the following vote: AYES: 5 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Carey, Guerriero, Harter, Kight, Telesio NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS None ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS None ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS None Patrick Richardson, Secretary EXHIBIT A INITIAL STUDY City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Project Title Roripaugh Estates Specific Plan Amendment, Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for a Drive Through Car Wash at ARCO AM/PM Lead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula � P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Contact Person and Phone Number Matt Peters 951 694-6408 Project Location The project site is located at the southeast corner of Winchester Road and Nicolas Road in the City of Temecula, addressed as 40212 Winchester Road Pro'ect S onsor's Name and Address Gre o Hann, 41891 Kalmia St., Murrieta CA 92562 General Plan Desi nation Nei hborhood Commercial NC Zonin S ecific Plan 1, Rori au h Estates S ecific Plan Description of Project PA09-0246 - A Specific Plan Amendment (text only) to change the permitted uses/development standards for Planning Area 10 of the Roripaugh Estates Specific Plan to the standards of the Neighborhood Commercial zoning district with the addition to conditionally permit automobile service stations with or without an automated car wash. Projeet proponent proposes future car wash at the existing Arco AM/PM PA09-0287 - A Conditional Use Permit to allow for the operation of a 946 square foot drive-thru car wash at the existing Arco AM/PM gas station PA09-0288 - A Development Plan to construct a 946 square foot drive-thru car wash at the existin Arco AM/PM as station Surrounding Land Uses and Setting The project site is developed with an Arco AM/PM fueling station and associated convenience market. The site is surrounded by development on all sides. � North — Across Nicolas Road, Rancho Temecula Town Center Shopping Center (Roripaugh Estates Specific Plan) South — Jack-in-the-Box drive through fast food restaurant and office building (Roripaugh Estates Specific Plan) East — Across Winchester Road, Chaparral High School (Community Commercial zoning/Public Institutional Facilities land use) West — Chaparral Village Shopping Center (Roripaugh Estates S ecific Plan ' Other public agencies whose approval None is re uired � ; i' `'``' "�; ` `�� ' 7 �--1. �� --- -- ., i�� t `—a �,� n�i�/ �',� , \ :�'! / ' �i� � � � � �r . : �� 1-�; i ' �� -- � �� 1 d'� � � � � �� ' ' '"' �,�;� _ _ J��' � �, °b � � �r=�=-lll�zrr - J'+� �� :� � �'� �\� �6�� i P; � ` � P ��P ' �' 6 f '� r ,,, �:�_�� J -N��bSA T �1�,'�'' ,�1 ',' ,; , � � �� r ]� •�� .�,; � �, `� ^- 1 � i ' ` \ � � �;o - — -" � � `�y�. / j� r'.� ) ) �` ��J i'�., ;' '''�� r r r l��":, . �'v� p I i 1`�r.J -- _�1 / r �Q+�` ��, ; � d 1 �`% � ��b � � 1 � 4 '�U j_ � IrI �'Q r�1� I .��i ¢ i .� ' ' _. _�� Pbj� �1 ,� 1 ' Hdy J� '`I J x� - T` - — ti _ ��d, ; . �� ,,rt-1 �r��T- ,., , , �., ,�� q �-,� �-- =-�.� �� ` .� •, I.�� r �� I �'� ,� �s � \ � \ \ / b �y 1 ,� �-= T I I ;�',��;� ,��;=`_�-^ aef \� _.��,� � � �'� \ ! f ��S. I- Y -_ _ Qy��,!"7r�1J�I`�1; i •��''r. � I� \'��i o ' ' \ �� ti \ - _ _� � �'�„ro,' Q �. Q �"' ' i �'yp y�� ,. �v - - . ;'�y' � r � > I ..�� -��1�� y f� ' o lj r: � � '^-�:' i� ' � � - ,j r / ` biy �/, �^`�.��1J�3N.ni'- -. �' � � � + '� � � I1 �� / ��S. � i j f�� aeR':= �� % �E � :�'__ -�,/� r ' t � ��+ \\�,• i � �� -- --�, 1 r' r �..r _` {-.`�_ --- - . �. � �� i� / i; '-- ---�'l' �,�� ;.c3'�' o i i 1 ' r -' - � - ' � _.._.._-�---'"_- � - �\`'�. ,, , ' �,` �.`� , f 7 � y � /. i� o r �. �ti � �? i i �` v ~�`� 1 r �� \� �� / � - _ _ - _.�—.._� � �' 7 � � 1 �...QP , / "�___-' l -- -_::-.:,-__ ---__ __ J` ,•''� v' �� j a� f fi ' _ _ ___ --�--�. ` __' '- /' i 7 � lv - - - - � --- _ I i `��. ( r ' ! � � � � _ _ - w _ -- L-, _ i '� j "e�-' f � ,``��.,�. '1 '` - �� --- - _ `-�_ `- _ ---- , i , � e -,,, ' /� � .,� , _ t ;� _ - ; � , t ;� � , � � �,.: __ ~-�°`� � _ -- - ---- _ -- --- ___,�i� � ;' ',� � ,��', �.� � ��' d ��1` _ ,_ � , � o '',..,�\ ��b i � ' --------- ---- ---- - - '- , ``` � � r ? �� p��G�''�� . �'° � � I \ ,' � _'r,, '- g0 � v� \�' S � t�� \ ( � ��_ _ � t � 1 , lj _' _ 1S3Nµ./M`-- -- - -- - � ! � � � J � i � (� I f J ' ,' '��\�'"` �\ � i % � �P! � 1,`': �� y �,-1 N i \'�'�� j l f �,% ;��, ,,� i '', ' �o ? � ' � \ ' �t� - - ° �?�i / �\..� ,r , , � ,-. � :� a r ; � \,, o ' � J ^ b,Mbr�� smnwu� r \ � / �` � 1 �J d � `��.' ��` r i f /� \ � �'�� . I i , ; , � .. � lr . � �� ,+; �,� �' \ ti \ = % \ ,` � �Ni - / ��J •�� ;�'' / V - / ' \ ?�rr1 s ; � �. � � z r � t \�` -.`� �� ,. � '�� r m � ( / d "p� �' `�" �, �,0 - �� `�o�o. ~�� /�� f � � t '1 � F t � > �,., f _ 1 � 1 } � E pR- m r � �. � / � � �� d � � � \ � / � * 4 �� {,_ Q � ',1 tt ,� :��! 1' �`'��.,� ,� "`�/ "V ��// r / '� \ • y �) J � t \ � �.!\ � 60\ t' � ��/ \~ � � �� .�� , � � / J / � � • , �.�� ' �`� J `' � = /' / �. � \ J � �!L�� i , \ .. . _ to _ -( i . \G � GS � ��\ �� ` � M � ��—` � -_ ��.._� � � �'`�/– r � �.. ,/�. �� - -�_ _ — ea .siav�avw - -� -_-- r \ �1 � � � _ _ - - _ .-' '� ��, � " — - - -- i \ Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a"Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Mineral Resources A riculture Resources X Noise Air Qualit Po ulation and Housin Biolo ical Resources Public Services X Cultural Resources Recreation Geolo and Soils Trans ortation/Traffic X Hazards and Hazardous Materials Utilities and Service S stems Greenhouse Gas Emissions Mandato Findin s of Si nificance H drolo and Water Qualit None Land Use and Plannin Determination (To be completed by the lead agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be re ared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by X the ro'ect ro onent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be re ared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is re uired. I find that the proposed project MAY have a"potentially significant impact" or "potentially sigriificant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is re uired, but it must anal ze onl the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are im osed u on the ro osed ro'ect, nothin further is re uired. Signature Date Printed Name For 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Infortnation Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No � Im act Inco orated Im act Im act a Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? x b Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not x limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic hi hwa ? c Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality x of the site and its surroundin s? d Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would x adversel affect da or ni httime views in the area? Comments: 1.a. No Impact: There are no designated scenic vistas affected by the project. The Community Design Element of the City of Temecula's General Plan identifies important scenic viewsheds to ensure that all new public and private development projects will not obstruct the public views of scenic resources. According to the General Plan exhibit on page CD-5, the subject property has not been identified as a viewshed, nor is the project located in close proximity to an identified viewshed. Therefore, no scenic vistas or identified viewsheds will be affected by the proposed drive-through car wash at the existing fueling station. 1.b. No Impact: The�project site is not located on a scenic highway. No trees, rock outcroppings or historic buildings will be affected by the proposed project. The project site is flat and fully developed. As addressed above in section 1.a. and according to the General Plan, the project site contains no scenic vistas or viewsheds. There are no historical buildings that exist on site and no tree resources that would be impacted on the property, therefore no impact is anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. 1.c. Less than Significant Impact: The site has been disturbed and is developed. Planning staff has reviewed the proposed Specific Plan Amendment, Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit, and has determined that the project will not degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site or its surroundings given the intensity of surrounding development. The project is consistent with the existing visual character in this area of the City. The project will not degrade the existing character of the community or the immediately surrounding areas, as the proposed drive-through will be located at the rear of the property and will be architecturally compatible with the existing convenience market on-site. A less than significant impact is anticipated. 1.d. Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project will create minimal new sources of substantial light or glare that may adversely affect the day or nighttime views within the project area. � The project will include the construction of a new 946 square foot drive-through car wash. The construction of this commercial use will introduce new sources of light and glare typically associated with new development; however the City of Temecula requires all new development to comply with the Palomar Lighting Ordinance (Ordinance 655). Ordinance 655 requires that all lighting be shielded and directed downward to avoid glare on adjacent properties, and ensure low levels of glare in the sky. Lighting issues will be addressed, during the building plan check and inspection process, prior to the issuance of any building permits for the new building. Therefore, since the project will be required to be in compliance with Ordinance 655, it will not adversely affect the day or nighttime views or create substantial light or glare, resulting in a less than significant impact. 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: Potentially � Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Inco orated Im act Im act a Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of x Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-a ricultural use? b Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a x Williamson Act contract? c Involve other changes in the existing environment which, x due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-a ricultural use? Comments: 2.a; c. No Impact: The project site is not currently in agricultural production and will not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance to a non-agricultural use. This property is not considered Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, pursuant the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Pragram of the California Resources Agency or the City of Temecula's General Plan. Therefore, there are no impacts related to this issue. i 2.b. No Impact: The project site does not have an agricultural zoning designation by the City of Temecula, and the site is not regulated by a Williamson Act contract. Consequently, there are no impacts related to this issue. 3. AIR QUALITY. Where .available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Incor orated Im act Im act a Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air ualit lan? X b Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existin or ro'ected air ualit violation? X c Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed uantitative thresholds for ozone recursors ? X d Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? X e Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of eo le? X Comments: A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted with the City's General Plan EIR for City-wide Air Quality impacts, primarily from mobile sources. 3.a.-c.: Less then Significant Impact: The project site is located within the Temecula Planning Area which is surrounded by mountains to the west, east and south. The project site is located within the southernmost portion of the South Coast Air Quality Basin. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has jurisdiction over stationary source air quality emissions and issues within the South Coast Air Quality Basin. The proposed project will not conflict with any applicable air quality plans nor violate air quality or pollution standards. The City of Temecula General Plan EIR states that air pollutant levels in the basin regularly exceed State and Federal air quality standards. Development forecast for the region will generate increased emission levels from construction, transportation, and stationary sources. Cumulative impacts will be partially reduced by the implementation and achievement of emissions levels identified in the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan and air quality components within the County of Riverside General Plan and General Plans of other local jurisdictions. However combined emissions from Temecula and other developed areas within the basin are expected to continue to exceed State and Federal standards. The applicant contacted Gordon Mize from SCAQMD and was directed to complete an URBEMIS Report. The report concluded that there will not be a significant change in emissions due to the addition of the car wash. The implementation of the goals and policies of the General Plan, and the continued implementation of the associated mitigation measures adopted with the General Plan EIR, will result in a less than significant impact as a result of this project. 3.d. Less Than Significant Impact: Sensitive receptors include the very young, elderly, and persons suffering from illness and are normally associated with locations such as schools, daycare facilities, convalescent care facilities, medical facilities, and residential areas. Sensitive Receptors as shown on page AQ-7, Figure AQ-2 "Sensitive Receptors," within the Air Quality and Land Use Element of the City of Temecula General Plan are located across Winchester Road from the project site (Chaparral High School). All development projects are subject to the implementation of BMP's. Any potential nuisance during construction can be minimized by the combination of mandatory control programs (Best Management Practices, BMP's) as required in the project-related SWPPP (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan) and by SCAQMD (South Coast Air Quality Management District), some of which are listed below: Construction BMP's • Use of Best Available Control Measures pursuant to Air Quality Management District guidelines for PM-10 and for diesel equipment exhaust; and during all grading activities • Water all active construction areas three times daily • Cover all haul trucks or wet down dirt maintaining at least two feet of freeboard • Pave or apply water four times daily to all unpaved parking or staging areas • Reduce speed on unpaved areas of the project site to less than 15 miles per hour • Sweep or wash any site access points within 30 minutes of any visible dirt deposition on any public roadway • Cover or water twice daily any on-site stockpiles of debris, dirt or other dusty material • Suspend all operations on any unpaved surface if winds exceed 25 miles per hour •. Hydroseed or otherwise stabilize any cleared area which is to remain inactive for more than 96 hours after clearing is completed • 90-day low-NOx Tune up for all off-road equipment • Trucks and heavy equipment shall idle no more than five minutes • Park construction vehicles off traveled roadways • Wash or sweep access points daily • Sandbag construction sites for erosion control • Limit lane closures to off-peak traveled roadways With the required BMPs specified above, no SCAQMD emission threshold will be exceeded during construction or operation of the proposed project. Thus, the air quality impacts from the project are anticipated to be less than significant. 3.e. Less than Significant Impact: Future construction associated with the development of the project will not create any considerably objectionable odors that will affect a substantial number of people in the surrounding community. In considering the scope of the project and the fact that construction activities will occur on a temporary basis, the impact is anticipated to be less than significant. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project? Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Inco orated Im act Im act a Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or X through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat X or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected X wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interru tion, or other means? d Interfere substantially with the movement of any native X resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or im ede the use of native wildlife nurse sites? e Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting X biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat X Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation lan? Comments: 4.a-f. No Impact: The proposed project consists of a 946 square foot drive-thru car wash attached to an existing Arco Service Station. The car wash addition will be attached to the existing building and developed on previously graded and paved land surrounded by commercial and residential development. The proposed project does not interfere with any local or State conservation plans or policies. The project is not in an MSHCP Criteria cell and does not contain any riparian habitat, federally protected wetlands, or native species. R:Wgenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310�Arco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 8 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Incor orated Im act Im act a Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? X b Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeolo ical resource ursuant to Section 15064.5? X c Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or uni ue eolo ic feature? X d Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? X Comments: 5.a-c. Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation incorporated: The project site consists of an existing automobile service station (2,800 square foot convenience store) and 12 fueling stations. Development of the 946 square foot drive-thru car wash is to be attached to the Arco Service Station and occur on previously graded and currently paved land. The City of Temecula General Plan does not identify the subject parcel as a sensitive archeological resource area; however the subject parcel is identified as being in a highly sensitive paleontological area. The University of California, Riverside's Eastern Information Center (EIC) has reviewed the proposal and confirmed that a Phase 1 cultural study identified no cultural resources and further study is not recommended. The project will be conditioned that if, during construction, cultural resources are encountered, work should be halted or diverted in the immediate area while a qualified archaeologist evaluates the finds and makes recommendations. The likelihood of encountering any cultural resources is low. However, there is potential, as with any project involving earth moving activities, to uncover unknown subsurface cultural resources. Therefore, mitigation has been provided below: Mitigation Measure CultRes 1: The Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians shall be contacted to develop a management plan for any resources that may be unearthed, to afford the Band an opportunity to monitor ground-disturbing activities and to participate in the decisions regarding collection and curation of any such resources. If any cultural resources are exposed during initial grading and ground disturbance activities the City will be contacted, and a qualified archaeologist will evaluate the resources. If any resources are discovered, the archaeologist shall prepare a final report regarding the resources in accordance with standard archaeological management requirements. Mitigation Measure Cu/tRes 2: If any human remains are encountered during initial grading activities, all ground disturbing activities in the vicinity of the discovery will be terminated immediately and the County Coroner's office will be contacted to manage such remains. R:Wgenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 9 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant . Mitigation Significant No Im act Incor orated Im act Im act a Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, includin the risk of loss, in'u , or death involvin : x i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geolo S ecial Publication 42. x ii. Stron seismic round shakin ? x iii. Seismic-related round failure, includin li uefaction? x iv. Landslides? X b Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of to soil? x c Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that . would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral s readin , subsidence, li uefaction or colla se? x d Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or ro ert ? x e Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? X Comments: 6.a.i.,ii, iii, c. and d. Less than Significant Impact: The subject property is not located on a fault line or fault zone. Soil liquefaction is caused by the loss of soil strength, which is a result of increased pore water . pressures related to significant seismic activity. This phenomenon occurs primarily in loose to somewhat dense cohesion-less soils, which are located within a groundwater zone. When seismic shaking occurs a rearrangement of the soil particles take place, putting them into a denser condition, which results in the localized settlement, sand boils and/or flow failures. The subject property is located in a seismically active area, as is the majority of southern California. The project has been reviewed and conditioned by the Building and Safety Department to be constructed to the standards of the Uniform Building and Safety Code (UBSC). 6.a.iv. Less than Significant Impact: Landslide hazard areas are generally considered to exist when substantial slopes are located on or immediately adjacent to a subject property. There are no substantial slopes located within or near the project site that could potentially create a hazard associated with landslides. The potential for landslides to occur at the site is considered less than significant. 6.b. Less than significant impact: The site may be susceptible to soil erosion during the short-term construction activities. Short-term erosion effects during the construction phase of the project would be prevented through implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which is required in accordance with the Countywide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Activities Permit. The SWPPP includes standard construction methods such as sandbags, silt fencing, and temporary detention basins to control on-site and off-site erosion. R:Wgenda Manager S�RE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 10 Therefore, with implementation of an approved SWPPP, impacts resulting from erosion during construction would be less than significant. 6.e. No impact: The project will not require the use of septic tanks or other wastewater disposal systems. C R:�Agenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 11 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Incor orated Im act Im act a Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? X b Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? X c Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existin or ro osed school? X d Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a si nificant hazard to the ublic or the environment? X e For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result � in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the ro'ect area? X f For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or workin in the ro'ect area? X g Impair implementation of �or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation lan? ' X h Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where ' wildlands are adjacent to urbanized� areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? X Comments: 7.a-d, g, h. Less than Significant Impact: The project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials and the project area is not known to contain any hazardous soils or other hazardous materials onsite. The project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The project will not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. The project is not located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. The project would not impair the implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving wild land fires, including where wild lands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wild lands. R:Wgenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 12 7.e. Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated: The City's GIS mapping system identifies the project area as being located within the French Valley Airport Influence Area. Specifically, the , project is located in Zone E, Other Airport Environs Zone, which is the least restrictive of all the zones. The project is subject to review and comment by the Riverside Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). The City of Temecula will require the project to be reviewed and conditioned by ALUC prior to issuance of any permits. As previously provided for other projects in Zone E in the City of Temecula, the following standard mitigation measures will be required: Mitigation Measure Haz 1: The project shall be reviewed and conditioned by ALUC prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits. Mitigation' Measure Haz 2: The following uses shall be prohibited: Any use which would direct steady light or flashing light of red, white, green, or amber colors associated with airport operations toward an air.craft engaged in an initial straight climb following takeoff or toward and aircraft engaged in a straight final approach toward a landing at an airport, other than an FAA approved navigational signal light or visual approach slope indicator. Any use which would cause sunlight to be reflected towards an aircraft engaged in an initial straight climb following takeoff or towards an aircraft engaged in a straight final approach towards a landing at an airport. Any use which would generate smoke or water vapor or which would attract large concentrations of birds, or which may otherwise affect safe air navigation within the area. Any use which would generate electrical interference that may be detrimental to the operation of aircraft and/or aircraft instrumentation. Any outdoor lighting that is installed shall be hooded or shielded so as to prevent either the spillage of lumens or reflection into the sky. The attached notice shall be provided to all potential purchasers and tenants of the property and shall be recorded as a deed notice: "This property is presently located in the vicinity of an airport, within what is known as an airport influence area. For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to airport operations (for example: noise, vibration, or odors). Individual sensitivities to those annoyances can vary from person to person. You may wish to consider what airport annoyances, if any, are associated with the property before you complete your purchase and determine whether they are acceptable to you. Business and Profession Code 11010 12 (A)." 7 f. No Impact: The project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. The project will not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area as a result of the private airfield. No impact is anticipated. R:�Agenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 13 . 8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Incor orated Im act Im act a Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or X indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? � b Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted X for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse ases? Comments: 8.a.b. Less Than Significant Impact: At this time there are no adopted statewide guidelines for greenhouse gas emission (GHG) impacts, but this is being addressed through the provisions of Senate Bill 97 (SB 97). For the proposed project, the project would be considered to have a significant impact if the project would be in conflict with the AB 32 State goals for reducing GHG emissions and have. Staff assumes that AB 32 will be successful in reducing GHG emissions and reducing the cumulative GHG emissions statewide by 2020. It is not anticipated that the project could have a major impact (either positively or negatively) on the global concentration of GHG. GHG impacts are considered to be exclusively cumulative impacts; there are no non-cumulative greenhouse gas emission impacts from a climate change perspective (CAPCOA, 2008). The proposed project would contribute to global climate change as a result of emissions of GHGs, primarily CO2, emitted by construction activities. However, the project will not conflict with the CARB's thirty-nine (39) recommended actions in California's AB 32 Climate Change Scoping Plan. The project will also not exceed the SCAQMD GHG screening threshold (3,000 metric tons CO2e/yr). In addition, the City of Temecula does not have any plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. The project is expected to have a less than significant impact with regard to greenhouse gas emissions. R:Wgenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 14 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Incor orated Im act Im act a Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade water ualit ? X b Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which X ermits have been ranted ? c Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in X substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surFace runoff in a manner which would result in flooding X on- or off-site? e Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted X runoff? f Re uire the re aration of a ro'ect-s ecific WQMP? X g Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Ma or other flood hazard delineation ma ? X h Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would im ede or redirect flood flows? X I Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? X Inundation b seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X Comments: 9.a. Less than Significant Impact: The project will not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The project is required to comply with all current soil erosion and national pollutant discharge elimination system standards in effect at the time of grading permit issuance. As a condition of approval for this project the developer will be required to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) permit from the State Water Quality Resources Control Board. A less than significant impact is anticipated. 9.b. Less than Significant Impact: The project will not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for R:Wgenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 15 which permits have been granted) because the project is anticipated to use 514 gallons per day according to the Department of Environmental Health. A less than significant impact is anticipated. 9.c-e. Less than Significani Impact: A Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) was reviewed and approved for this project. In addition, any erosion and siltation issues will be controlled to a less than significant level of impact by implementing best management practices (BMP's) during construction and earthmoving activities, as related to the potential for erosion or siltation on or off-site. In addition, the adequacy of the capacity of existing downstream drainage facilities shall be verified and any upgrading or upsizing of those facilities, as required, will be incorporated as part of the project. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. 9.f. No Impact: The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements established by the State of California. However, the project is required to prepare a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) pursuant to the Municipal Separate Storm-Sewer permit (MS4 permit) issued by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. The WQMP was submitted on September 22, 2009 and conceptually accepted by the Public Works Department. The water quality control measures identified in the WQMP have either been incorporated into the design of the project or will be added to the project with specific conditions of approval and are expected to eliminate potential adverse impacts to receiving waters. No impact is anticipated. . 9.g-h. No Impact: According to the City's General Plan the project will not involve the placement of residences or structures in a 100 year floodplain hazard area. The project is not within an area identified on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) maps for flooding. No significant flood hazards are expected to occur from developing the project site as proposed, therefore no impact is anticipated. � 9.i. Less Than Significant: The subject property is located within a dam inundation area per the City's General Plan. However, the proposed project consists of a 946 square foot drive-thru car wash attached to an existing Arco Gas Station. The car wash is not a habitable structure and does not contain critical or essential facilities, therefore a less than significant impact is anticipated. 9.j. No Impact: Due to the project area's distance from the ocean and higher elevation, there is no potential for a tsunami. The project area is not located near a large surface water body and there is no potential for inundation by seiche or mudflow due to the topography of the site. R:Wgenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 16 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Inco orated Im act Im act a Ph sicall divide an established communit ? x b Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental x effect? c Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or X natural community conservation plan? Comments: 10.a. No Impact: The addition of a 946 square foot drive-thru car was to an existing automobile service station at the corner of Winchester and Nicolas Roads will not divide an established community. 10.b. No Impact: The project requires a Specific Plan Amendment to identify the drive-thru car wash as a. Conditional Use and requires a Conditional Use Permit to be approved with a Development Plan. Thus, the approval process necessary for entitlement and construction requires the City to make consistency findings that avoid conflicts between any applicable plans, policies or regulations. This project also requires an Initial Study per CEQA and any impacts must be identified and mitigation must be incorporated. Without the appropriate approvals there will be no project. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. 10.c. No Impact: The project would not conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan (see discussion under "Biological Resources") R;Wgenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 17 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Incor orated Im act Im act a Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral X � resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important , X mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local eneral lan, s ecific lan or other land use lan? Comments: 11.a/b. No Impact: According to the California Geological Survey, no known mineral resources exist in the City of Temecula. This project is not anticipated to result in the loss of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region or to the residences of the State, or locally important. According to the General Plan, the State Division of Mines and Geology has prepared a mineral resources report entitled, Mineral Land Classification of the Temescal Valley Area, Riverside County, California, Special Report 165, which evaluated mineral deposits within the Temecula Planning Area. According to the State Geologist, the Temecula Planning Area was classified as a Mineral Resources Zone-3a (MRZ-3a), which determined that the area contains sedimentary deposits which have the potential to supply sand and gravel for concrete and crushed stone for aggregate, however these areas are not considered to contain mineral resources of significant economic value. No impact is anticipated. R:Wgenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 18 12. NOISE. Would the project result in: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Incor orated Im act Im act a Exposure of persons to or generation of. noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other a encies? X b Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive roundborne vibration or roundborne noise levels? X c A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the ro'ect? X d A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the ro'ect? X e For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project X area to excessive noise levels? � f For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the ro'ect area to excessive noise levels? X Comments: 12.a.- d. Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated: The project is anticipated to have noise impacts during construction and as a result of the construction and operation of the automated drive-thru car wash. The following mitigation measures are required as identified in the Noise Impact Analysis prepared by A.J. Koltavary/Civil and Environmental Engineers: Mifigation Measure Noise 1: Construction will be limited in the hours of 7 am and 7 pm Monday through Friday for any on-site or off-site work within 500 feet of any residential unit. Construction outside of these hours may be approved through a development permit based on a site-specific construction noise mitigation plan and a finding by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement that the construction noise mitigation plan is adequate to prevent noise disturbance of affected residential areas. Mitigation Measure Noise 2: � The contractor shall use "new technology" power construction equipment with sfate-of-the-art noise shielding and muffling devices. All internal combustion engines used on the project site shall be equipped with adequate mufflers and shall be in good mechanical condition to minimize noise created by faulty or poor maintained engines or other componenfs. Mitigation Measure Noise 3: A 6' masonry wall shall be constructed from the end of the car wash to 50' feet beyond the entry and exit. R:Wgenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 19 12.e. and f. Less than Significant Impact: The project is located within the French Valley Comprehensive Land Use Plan issued by the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission. The plan divides the area surrounding the airport into six zones. Many of these zones prohibit the development of highly noise-sensitive outdoor nonresidential uses. According to this plan, the project is located in Zone E. This zone does not include the prohibition of highly noise-sensitive nonresidential uses. The French Valley airport is the only airstrip located in the vicinity of the project site. The project is not located within the French Valley Airport Noise Contours exhibit provided on page N-13 of the City of Temecula General Plan. A less than significant impact is anticipated. R:�P,genda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items\2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 20 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Inco orated Im act Im act a Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of X roads or other infrastructure ? b Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, X necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the X construction of re lacement housin elsewhere? Comments: 13.a.- c: No Impact: The project does not include a residential component or involve the displacement of any existing housing, nor does the project consist of the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The construction of a 946 square foot drive-thru car wash is not expected to have any impacts on the City's population and housing. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:Wgenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 21 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and SuppoRing Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Incor orated Im act Im act a Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other erformance ob'ectives for an of the ublic services: Fire rotection? x � Police rotection? x Schools? x Parks? x Other ublic facilities? x Comments: 14.a.-e: Less than Significant Impact: This addition of a 946 square foot drive-thru car wash will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered fire, police, recreation or other public facilities. The project will incrementally increase the need for some public services. However, the increase is expected to a very small and so as not to impact the , City's budget process. As a result, the project will have a less than significant impact upon the � need for new or altered public facilities. The project will not have an impact upon, and will not result in the need for new or altered public facilities. The Rancho California Water District and Eastern Municipal Water District have been made aware of this project. Sewer and water is currently provided to the subject property so service to the car wash addition is possible. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:Wgenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 22 15. RECREATION. Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act• Incor orated Im act Im act a Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood � and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? X b Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which mi ht have an adverse h sical effect on the environment? x Comments: 15.a. Less Than Significant Impact: The construction of a 946 square foot drive-thru car wash is an incidental use to the automobile service station and is not expected to increase the use of any neighborhood or regional parks. The traffic analysis indicates that the minor increases in traffic will not be noticeable to the average driver and are thus considered to be insignificant. 15.b. No Impact: The project will not include or require the construction or expansion of additional recreational facilities. No new construction of recreational facilities and no expansion of existing recreational facilities are proposed as a part of this project, therefore no impacts are anticipated. R:Wgenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 23 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Incor orated Im act Im act a Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ration on roads, or con estion at intersections ? x b Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management a enc for desi nated roads or hi hwa s? x c Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results ' in substantial safety risks? x d Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., x sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses e. ., farm e ui ment ? e Result in inade uate emer enc access? x f Result in inade uate arkin ca acit ? x g Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting x alternative trans ortation e. ., bus turnouts, bic cle racks ? Comments: 16.a. Less than Significant Impact: The project will create a less than significant increase in traffic volume in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. As stated in the Traffic Analysis completed by Darnell and Associates, Inc., "Based on trip generation rates published by the ITE, increases in traffic will not be noticeable to the average driver and are thus considered to be insignificant." 16.b. Less than Significant Impact: The project will not exceed, either individually or cumulatively, the level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways, as the project includes the construction of a 946 drive-through car wash at a developed site. Current level of service standards are anticipated to be maintained as consistent with the General Plan. A less than significant impact is anticipated. 16.c. Less then Significant Impact: The project site and associated roadways will be improved pursuant to Public Works standards and requirements. No significant change in air traffic patterns, traffic levels or locations that result in a substantial safety risk is anticipated as a result of this project; therefore a less than significant impact is anticipated. 16.d. Less than Significant Impact: The project has been reviewed by Public Works, Planning, Fire and the Building and Safety Departments and will not involve a substantial increase in hazards due to design or incompatible uses. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project. 16.e. Less than Significant Impact: This project has been reviewed and conditioned by the Fire Prevention Bureau to ensure that all access to the site meets all applicable standards and requirements. Safe and adequate emergency access will be ensured, as all streets and driveways will be required to be R:�Agenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310�Arco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 24 improved to meet all applicable all City standards for width, grade and length. A less than significant impact is associated as a result of this project. 16.f. No Impact: The project has been reviewed to ensure that sufficient parking is being provided consistent with the development code's requirements for commercial development, including gas stations and car washes. Therefore, the proposed project will not result in inadequate parking facilities. No Impact is anticipated. 16.g. No Impact: The project does not include the addition of alternative transportation methods; The project does not conflict with any adopted plans, policies or programs in regards to alternative transportation. All dedications and/or easements will be required to be provided where necessary. No impact is anticipated a result of this project. R:Wgenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 25 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Incor orated Im act Im act a Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the X a licable Re ional Water Qualit Control Board? b Require or result in the construction of new water or X wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c Require or result in the construction of new storm water X drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project X from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or ex anded entitlements needed? e Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment X provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the projecYs projected demand in addition to the rovider's existin commitments? f Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to X accommodate the ro'ect's solid waste dis osal needs? g Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X re ulations related to solid waste? Comments: 17.a,b,e. Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project will not exceed applicable wastewater treatment requirements, require the construction of new treatment facilities, nor affect the capacity of treatment providers. The project will meet all Regional Water Quality Control Board standards. The Riverside County Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the proposal and indicated that sanitary sewer and potable water are available in this area. The sewer purveyor will be required to condition the car was so that the collection pits serving the recycled water will no overflow. An interceptor designed to the standards of the purveyor at time of building permit issuance will be required for the proposed car wash. 17.c. Less than Significant Impact: It is not anticipated that the project will not create a significant amount of storm water to require or result in the expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. A Water Quality Management was prepared and the project has been reviewed and conditioned by the City's WQMP Engineer. Considering the limited scope of the project, and the required Conditions of Approval, the project is anticipated to have a less then significant impact. 17.d. No Impact: The project will not have a significant impact on the water supply for the area. No new or expanded facilities are anticipated to be constructed as a result of the proposed project. 17.f. No Impact: The proposed project is not anticipated to create a significant amount of solid wastes. The project will be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs. R:Wgenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 26 17.g. No Impact: The project will comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. No impacts are anticipated for the proposed project. R:Wgenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission �tems�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 27 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Su ortin Infortnation Sources Im act Incor orated' Im act Im act a Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range X , of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or rehisto ? b Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of robable future ro'ects ? X c Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directl or indirectl ? X Comments: 18.a. Less than Significant Impact: No sensitive, threatened or endangered wildlife or plant species are expected to occur at the project site because of a lack of suitable habitat. Because the project site is located in a primarily urban environment supporting few native vegetation communities, and is paved and landscaped, the potential for sensitive species to use the site is very low. 18.b. Less than Significant Impact: The project does not have, either individually or cumulatively, a significant adverse impact on the environment. The project has been designed to avoid any significant impacts to the area individually and cumulatively, and has been conditioned to avoid these impacts. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 18.c. Less than Significant Impact: The project will not have significant environmental impacts that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, because the project site is zoned for commercial use. All building and structures that will be built on site shall be required be in compliance with the California Uniform Building Code, and Conditions of Approval have been incorporated and the project has been designed to protect the public health, safety and welfare and to avoid any impacts to other persons directly and/or indirectly. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 19. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets. a Earlier anal ses used. Identi earlier anal ses and state where the are available for review. R:Wgenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 28 b Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed b miti ation measures based on the earlier anal sis. c Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which the address site-s ecific conditions for the ro'ect. 19.a.b.c. The sources below were used to prepare this Initial Study. They are available for review at the City of Temecula Planning Department located at 43200 Business Park Drive in Temecula. The Geographic Information Map Sets are available online at www.cityoftemecula.orq Mitigation measures were included in the Noise, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and Cultural resources sections of this Initial Study. SOURCES 1. City of Temecula General Plan 2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report 3. City of Temecula GIS 4. South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook 5. Empire Design Group, Inc. URBEMIS Report 6. Darnell and Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis Letter 7. A.J. Koltavary / Civil and Environmental Engineers N,oise Impact Analysis R:Wgenda Manager SIRE\Planning Commission Items�2010\110310Wrco Gas Station\16Exhibit A Initial Study.doc 29 Mitigation Monitoring Program ARCO AM/PM Car Wash SPA/CUP/DP Planning Application Nos. PA09-0246, PA09-0287, PA09-0288 CULTURAL RESOURCES General Impact: Directly or indirectly destroying any unique paleontological or archaeological resources. Mitigation Measures The Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians shall be contacted to develop a management plan for any resources that may be unearthed, to afford the Band an opportunity to monitor ground-disturbing activities and to participate in the decisions regarding collection and curation of any such resources. If any cultural resources are exposed during initial grading and ground disturbance activities the City will be contacted, and a qualified archaeologist will evaluate the resources. If any resources are discovered, the � archaeologist shall prepare a final report regarding the resources in accordance with standard archaeological management requirements. If any human remains are encountered during initial grading activities, all ground � disturbing activities in the vicinity of the discovery will be terminated immediately and the County Coroner's office will be contacted to manage such remains. Specific Process: Planning staff will verify compliance with the above mitigation measure as part of the grading plan check review process. Mitigation Milestone: Prior to issuance of a grading permit/during grading activity. Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning and Public Works Departments HAZARDS General Impact: Directly or indirectly exposing people or structures to potential adverse effects from being located within Zone E of the French Valley Airport Influence Area. Mitigation Measure: The project shall be reviewed and conditioned by ALUC prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits. The following uses shall be prohibited: • Any use which would direct steady light or flashing light of red, white, green, or amber colors associated with airport operations toward an aircraft , engaged in an initial straight climb following takeoff or toward and aircraft engaged in a straight final approach toward a landing at an airport, other than ( an FAA approved navigational signal light or visual approach slope indicator. ' • Any use which would cause sunlight to be reflected towards an aircraft engaged in an initial straight climb following takeoff or towards an aircraft engaged in a straight final approach towards a landing at an airport. • Any use which would generate smoke or water vapor or which would attract large concentrations of birds, or which may otherwise affect safe air navigation within the area. � • Any use which would generate electrical interference that may be detrimental to the operation of aircraft and/or aircraft instrumentation. • Any outdoor lighting that is installed shall be hooded or shielded so as to prevent either the spillage of lumens or reflection into the sky. The attached notice shall be provided to all potential purchasers and tenants of the property and shall be recorded as a notice: � •"This property is presently located in the vicinity of � an airport, within what is known as an airport influence area. For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to airport operations (for example: noise, vibration, or odors). Individual sensitivities to those annoyances can vary from person to person. You may wish to consider what airport annoyances, if any, are associated with the property before you complete your purchase and determine whether they are acceptable to you. Business and Profession Code 11010 12 (A)." Specific Process: Planning staff will verify compliance with the aboye mitigation measure as part of the building and grading plan check review process. Mitigation Milestone: Prior to issuance of a building or grading permit. Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning Department NOISE General Impact: Directly or indirectly exposing people to excessive noise levels during construction and operations Mitigation Measure: Construction will be limited in the hours of 7 am and 7 pm Monday through Friday for any on-site or off-site work within 500 feet of any residential unit. Construction outside of these hours may be approved through a development permit based on a site-specific construction noise mitigation plan and a finding by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement that the construction noise mitigation plan is adequate to prevent noise disturbance of affected residential areas. The contractor shall use "new technology" power construction equipment with state-of-the-art noise shielding and muffling devices. All internal combustion engines used on the project site shall be equipped with adequate mufflers and shall be in good mechanical condition to minimize noise created by faulty or poor maintained engines or other components. A 6' masonry wall shall be constructed from the end of the car wash to 50' feet beyond the entry and exit. Specific Process: Public Works Department will monitor construction activity and equipment. Planning Department will ensure construction of sound wall. Mitigation Milestone: Prior to issuance of� a grading permit and during grading/construction activity. Responsible Monitoring Party: Public Works and Planning Departments NOISE General Impact: Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project on a short-term basis Mitigation Measure: Mitigation Measure NOISE-1: All construction equipment shall be properly maintained with operating mufflers and air intake silencers, no less effective than those originally installed by the manufacturer. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Mitigation Measure NOISE-2: As required by the City of Temecula Municipal Code (Section 8.32.020), the developer shall require that all construction equipment activities are restricted to occur only between the hours of 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. weekdays and Saturdays. Construction activities shall not occur on Sundays or Holidays. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Mitigation Measure NOISE-3: Noise levels of all construction activities will not exceed 86 dB measured at 50 feet. Specific Process: Public Works inspectors will verify compliance during construction Mitigation Milestone: During construction Responsible Monitoring Party: Public Works Department EXHIBIT C i DRAFT CC RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 946-SQUARE FOOT DRIVE-THRU CAR WASH AT � THE EXISTING ARCO AM/PM GAS STATION LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WINCHESTER AND NICOLAS ROADS, ADDRESSED AS 40212 WINCHESTER ROAD (APN 920-100-048) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: . Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On August 4, 2009, Mr. Gregory Hann filed Planning Application No. PA09-0246, Specific Plan Amendment and on September 22, 2009 Planning Application Nos. PA09-0287, Conditional Use Permit and PA09-0288, Development Plan. in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. On November 3, 2010, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Planning Application Nos. PA09-0246, Specific Plan Amendment; PA09-0287, Conditional Use Permit; and PA09-0288 Development Plan C. The Project was processed, including but not limited to all public notices, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code § 21000, et seq. and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, 14. Cal. Code Regs. § 15000 et seq. (collectively referred to as "CEQA") D. Pursuant to CEQA, the City is the lead agency for the Project because it is the public agency with the authority and principal responsibility for app.roving the Project. � E. On November 3, 2010, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, the Planning Commission considered the Project and any comments received prior to or at the public hearing on November 3, 2010, at which time the City staff presented its report, and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to the Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration. F. The Planning Commission reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the November 3, 2010 public hearing, and based on the whole record before it finds 1 that: (1) the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; (2) there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment; and (3) Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. G. Based on the findings set forth in the Resolution, the City Council hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project. , 2 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this day of , 2010. Jeff Comerchero, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [S EAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 10- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City .of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the day of , 2010, by the . following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC Gity Clerk 3