Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
120711 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]. TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 41000 MAIN STREET DECEMBER 7, 2011 — 6:00 PM PRELUDE MUSIC: CALL TO ORDER: Flag Salute: Roll Call: PUBLIC COMMENTS Earlene Bundy Commissioner Kight Carey, Guerriero, Harter, Kight, and Telesio Next in Order: Resolution: 11-62 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 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-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.. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Minutes of November 16, 2011 1 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. 2 Planning Application Nos. PA10-0317 and PA10-0318, a Minor Conditional Use Permit for Mountain View Community Church to operate in a Service Commercial (SC) zone and occupy approximately 101,619 square feet of an existing building, and a Minor Modification to make facade changes to an existing building, located at 29201 Ynez Road, Matt Peters RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA10-0317, A MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR MOUNTAIN VIEW COMMUNITY CHURCH TO OPERATE IN A SERVICE COMMERCIAL (SC) ZONE AND OCCUPY APPROXIMATELY 101,600 SQUARE FEET OF AN EXISTING BUILDING LOCATED AT 29201 YNEZ ROAD (APN 910-281-001) 2.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA10-0318, A MINOR MODIFICATION FOR MOUNTAIN VIEW COMMUNITY CHURCH TO MAKE FACADE CHANGES TO AN EXISTING BUILDING LOCATED AT 29201 YNEZ ROAD (APN 910-281-001) REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONERS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Planning Commission, Wednesday, December 21, 2011, 6:00 PM City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. 2 NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC - The agenda packet (including staff reports) will be available for viewing at City Hall's Planning Department Public Counter located at 41000 Main Street and at the Temecula Library located at 30600 Pauba Road during normal business hours. Additionally, any supplemental material distributed to a majority of the Commissioners regarding any item on the Agenda, after the posting of the Agenda, will be available for public review at the locations indicated above. The packet will be available for viewing the Friday before the Planning Commission meeting after 4:00 p.m. You may also access the packet the Friday before the meeting after 4:00 p.m. on the City's website at www. citvoftemecuIa.ord. 3 ACTION MINUTES TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 41000 MAIN STREET NOVEMBER 16, 2011 — 6:00 PM PRELUDE MUSIC: CALL TO ORDER: Flag Salute: Roll Call: ABSENT: Earlene Bundy Commissioner Harter Carey, Guerriero, Harter, Kight, and Telesio GUERRIERO, KIGHT CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Next in Order: Resolution: 11-56 Approve the Minutes of October 19, 2011 APPROVED 3-0-2-0; MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HARTER, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TELESIO; VOTE REFLECTED APPROVAL; GUERRIERO, KIGHT ABSENT 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. 2 Planning Application No. PA11-0200, a Major Modification to the approved Home Product Review/Architectural Plans (PA10-0021) for the build -out of 64 Tots in Harveston's Barrington community with six architectural plans, each having four elevations, ranging in size from 2,320 to 3,464 square feet, located at the northeast corner of Ynez Road and Date Street, Cheryl Kitzerow APPROVED 3-0-2-0; MOTION BY COMMISSIONER TELESIO, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HARTER; VOTE REFLECTED APPROVAL; GUERRIERO, KIGHT ABSENT 1 RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 11-56 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA11-0200, A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO PA10-0021, THE APPROVED HOME PRODUCT REVIEW/ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR THE BUILD -OUT OF 41 LOTS IN HARVESTON'S BARRINGTON COMMUNITY CONSISTING OF 6 NEW ARCHITECTURAL PLANS WITH FOUR ELEVATIONS EACH AND ONE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ARCHITECTURAL PLAN WITH THREE ELEVATIONS, RANGING IN SIZE FROM 2,034 TO 3,464 SQUARE FEET, PLOTTED USING A "PICK -A -HOME" SALES APPROACH, GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF YNEZ ROAD AND DATE STREET (TRACTS 32437 AND 32437-2) Paul E. Macario, Temecula resident, addressed the Planning Commission 3 Planning Application Nos. PA10-0145, PA10-0146, PA10-0147 and PA10-0148, a Tentative Tract Map (No. 36295) to subdivide 25 acres into 45 single-family cluster lots, a Residential Home Product Review for 45 lots, a Zoning Map and text change from Very Low (VL) density residential to a Planned Development Overlay (PDO), and a General Plan Land Use map change from Very Low (VL) density residential to Low (L) density residential, located west of Butterfield State Road, east of Walcott Lane, north of La Serena Way and south of Calle Chapos, Matt Peters APPROVED 3-0-2-0; MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HARTER, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TELESIO; VOTE REFLECTED APPROVAL; GUERRIERO, KIGHT ABSENT RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 11-57 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA10- 0148, AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN TO CHANGE THE LAND USE PLAN MAP FROM VERY LOW (VL) DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO LOW (L) DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" (APNS 957-170-032 THROUGH -036) 3.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 11-58 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA10- 2 0147, AN AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR A ZONING MAP AND TEXT CHANGE FROM VERY LOW (VL) DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO) BASED ON THE STANDARDS OF THE LOW (L) DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION WITH PROVISIONS FOR A CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT" (APNS 957-170-032 THROUGH -036) 3.3 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 11-59 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA10- 0145, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 36295 TO SUBDIVIDE 25 GROSS ACRES INTO 45 LOTS AND ASSOCIATED OPEN SPACE LOCATED EAST OF WALCOTT LANE AND WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD APPROXIMATELY 1,500 FEET NORTH OF LA SERENA WAY AND 1,100 FEET SOUTH OF CALLE CHAPOS" (APNS 957-170-032 THROUGH -036) 3.4 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 11-60 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA10- 0146, A HOME PRODUCT REVIEW APPLICATION FOR WALCOTT ESTATES LOCATED EAST OF WALCOTT LANE AND WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD APPROXIMATELY 1,500 FEET NORTH OF LA SERENA WAY AND 1,100 FEET SOUTH OF CALLE CHAPOS" (APNS 957-170-032 THROUGH -036) 3.5 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 11-61 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 A ZONE CHANGE AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM VL - VERY LOW DENSITY TO L -LOW DENSITY WITH A PDO; A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO SUBDIVIDE 25 ACRES INTO 45 LOTS; AND A HOME PRODUCT REVIEW APPLICATION LOCATED EAST OF WALCOTT LANE AND WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 1,500 FEET NORTH OF LA SERENA WAY AND 1,100 FEET SOUTH OF CALLE CHAPOS" (APNS 957-170-032 THROUGH -036) 3 Ed Krinsky, Temecula resident, addressed the Planning Commission Raymond Lota, Temecula resident, addressed the Planning Commission REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONERS PLANNING DIRECTOR REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Wednesday, December 7, 2011, 6:00 PM City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. Pat Kight Chairman 4 Patrick Richardson Director of Planning and Redevelopment DATE OF MEETING: PREPARED BY: PROJECT SUMMARY: RECOMMENDATION: CEQA: STAFF REPORT— PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION December 7, 2011 Matt Peters, AICP, Case Planner Planning Application No. PA10-0317, a Minor Conditional Use Permit for Mountain View Community Church to operate in a Service Commercial (SC) zone and occupy approximately 101,600 square feet of an existing building located at 29201 Ynez Road Planning Application No. PA10-0318, a Minor Modification for Mountain View Community Church to make facade changes to an existing building located at 29201 Ynez Road Approve with Conditions Mitigated Negative Declaration with Mitigation Monitoring Plan PROJECT DATA SUMMARY Name of Applicant: General Plan Designation: Zoning Designation: Existing Conditions/ Land Use: Site: North: South: East: West: Lot Area: Christopher Francis, Logos Architecture SC -Service Commercial SC -Service Commercial Existing Light Industrial Building and Parking Lot in SC Zone Approximately 15 acres of vacant land zoned SC Santa Gertrudis Creek Channel zoned OS -C Businesses and offices zoned SC 1-15 Freeway Total Floor Area/Ratio: Landscape Area/Coverage: Parking Required/Provided: Existinq/Proposed Min/Max Allowable or Required 320,166 SF or 7.35 40,000 SF Gross Ac. 0.36 existing 29.1 % Coverage 211 Spaces 1 0.30 20% 210 BACKGROUND SUMMARY Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all concerns have been addressed, and the applicant concurs with the recommended Conditions of Approval. ANALYSIS Conditional Use Permit The project is located at 29201 Ynez Road just north of the Winchester and Ynez Roads intersection. Access to the site is taken from a "full turn" access driveway just south of the street signal at County Center Drive. The project involves a Minor Conditional Use Permit for Mountain View Community Church to operate in an existing building, which is located on a fully developed site. The church is proposing to occupy approximately 101,600 square feet of an existing 115,560 square foot building. The property is zoned SC -Service Commercial. The Church is proposing to utilize the building for office and administrative purposes (up to 40 employees and volunteers) Monday through Friday with evening adult classes (up to 30 students) and choir practice (up to 150 singers). Saturdays will include up to 400 people for afternoon worship and day/evening theater performances. Sunday worship services will accommodate up to 450 people during 3 service times: 7:45 — 9:00 a.mm; 10:00 — 11:30 a,m,; and 12:00 — 1:30 p.m. The Church will include a banquet hall for weddings, funeral and outside functions, which are typically used on Thursday, Friday or Saturday. Parking for the site is based on 1 space per 35 square feet of assembly area. The ultimate buildout of the Church will include a 7,348 square foot worship space, which will require 210 spaces where 211 are provided even after 3 spaces are removed as part of the right-of-way acquisition for the French Valley Interchange improvements. On December 14, 2010, the City of Temecula approved a Temporary Use Permit (TUP) allowing Mountain View Community Church to operate at the proposed site under more limited hours of operation during the week and only two worship sessions on Sunday. The TUP approval also included a condition that the applicants obtain a Conditional Use Permit based on the ultimate interior buildout and use of the Church. During this time, a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was prepared in order to examine the traffic generation and intersection impacts of the Church. The TIA determined the project will have impacts at the Winchester Road and 1-15 northbound on and off ramps during the weekend (Sunday) peak hour occurring during the project's mid-day Church service. In addition, the project will impact the intersection of Ynez Road and Date Street during the weekday afternoon (PM) peak hour. As a result, the project shall participate in the funding of its' Fair Share allocation for eventual striping improvements to mitigate cumulative impacts (Exiting — Plus Project — Plus Approved Project) totaling $2,615.40. Over time, tenant improvements will be made as the Church grows and transitions from the Temporary Use Permit approvals to the eventual buildout of an expanded worship space, classrooms and banquet hall facilities under the Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Staff will review all Tenant Improvements (TI's) to ensure consistency with the floor plan approved under the CUP. 2 Minor Modification The project will involve facade improvements to the existing building. These changes include the addition of red sandstone veneer accent walls, four (4) new glass rollup doors (to replace existing), six (6) twelve -inch (12") diameter painted steel columns with steel tension rods over the office and worship hall entrances, and a fifty foot (50') stainless steel or anodized aluminum cross. These changes will help identify the building as a Church and provide an update to this light industrial building located in a SC -Service Commercial zone. LEGAL NOTICING REQUIREMENTS Notice of the public hearing was published in the Californian on November 11, 2011 and mailed to the property owners within the required 600 -foot radius. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Staff has reviewed the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and based on an initial study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project. A summary of the mitigation is included below. Traffic and Transportation General Impact: Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths and mass transit. Summary of Mitigation: Based on impacts identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Minagar and Associates, the Project shall participate in the funding of its' Fair Share allocation for restriping at the 1-15 northbound ramp and restriping at the intersection of Ynez Road and Date Street. FINDINGS Conditional Use Permit, Development Code Section 17.04.10.E. 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. As conditioned, the proposed use is consistent with all requirements in the City of Temecula Development Code. In addition, the project is in conformance with the all the requirements of the General Plan and with all applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the City. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect uses, buildings or structures. 3 The proposed Church is to be located in an existing building surrounded by office, public/institutional or educational buildings. The Church has operated under a Temporary Use Permit since December 14, 2010 without incident or complaints. The project is designed to have negligible impact on surrounding uses. The site for the 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 the Development Code and required by the Planning Commission or City Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. The proposed conditional use is to be located in an existing building on a fully developed site that already accommodates required yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other features described in the Development Code. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The proposed Church has been reviewed and conditioned by Building and Safety, Fire Prevention, and the Police Department to ensure the conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community, and the proposed project is consistent with the requirements outlined in the Development Code, and Building and Fire Codes, which contain provisions to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the community. 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 decision to conditionally approve the use is based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission. Minor Modification, Development Code Section 17.05.010 F The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The proposed facade modifications have been reviewed for consistency with the Development Code, Citywide Design Guidelines and General Plan to ensure the project is in compliance with the General Plan and all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The project is consistent with all applicable building, development and fire codes, which include provisions to safeguard the health, safety, and general welfare of the community. 4 ATTACHMENTS Aerial Map Plan Reductions Resolution - Conditional Use Permit Exhibit A - Draft Conditions of Approval Resolution - Minor Modification (Facade Changes) Exhibit A - Draft Conditions of Approval Initial Study Mitigation Monitoring Program Notice of Public Hearing 5 City of Temecula PA 10-0317, PA 10-0318 0 250 500 Feet This map was made by the City of Temecula Geographic Information System The map is derived from base data produced by the Riverside County Assessor's Department and the Transportation and Land Management Agency of Riverside County The City of Temecula assumes no warranty or legal responsibility for the information contained on this map. Data and information represented on this map are subject to update and modification. The Geographic Information System and other sources should be queried for the most current information. This map is not for reprint or resale. Mountain View Community Church Proposed Parking Remediation 13 -Jun -11 Current Worship Service Times (2 service times) Congregation Avg. monthly Passengers:Car Ratio Parking Spaces Needed First Service 8:OOam-9:30am 343 1.6:1 214 Second Service 11:30am-1:00pm 474 2.2:1 215 Total Attending Congregation Count 817 2.2:1 Proposed Worship Service Times (3 service times) First Service 7:45am-9:00am 340 Second: Service 10:OOam-11:30am 450 ThirdService 12:00pm-1:30pm 45Q Total. Attending Congregation Count 1240 1.6:1 2.2:1 2.2:1 213 205 205 FACILITY USAGE/FUNCTION SCHEDULE LOCATION / FUNCTION SUN /PEOPLE Cl MON / PEOPLE C3 TUE / PEOPLE C' WED / PEOPLE CI THU / PEOPLE Cl FRI / PEOPLE C SAT / PEOPLE Cl CAPACITY 311.Worship Center (Permanent area) / Church 500 25 200 30 10 729 300.Worship (Temporary area) / Banquet Hall 380 380 380 407 509-519 Adult Classes 150 20 30 20 40 216 503-505 Adult Classes / Workshop 150 30 30 30 30 30 216 210.Theater / Performing Arts 150 150 150 285 400.Children's Area / Sunday 125 30 210 113. Caf6 60 30 30 30 168 119. Bookstore 15 20 23 216-221 Youth 100 10 50 238 Administration 43 43 43 43 43 43 65 311. For Sunday 500 church attendance that up to three times a day. For Wednesday that is Bib e Study. Thursday is choir rehersal in the eyeing. Monday and Saturday dance rehersal. 300. Banquet Hall is used for weddings, funerals, and outside functions with the tipical days of usage being Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday evening. 1 509-519 The adult classes are conducted on Sunday between services the 150 people are inclusive of the total 500 that attend first service. All other days are in the evening. 503-505 Adult Classes / Workshop is during the day.I 1 I I I I 210 The theater is for perfomances that will be held periodically on Thursday, Friday, or Saturday, or it could be inclusive, some day performances, some evening. 400 Childrens area is on Sunday for worship, and on Wednesday for Bible Study. r a 113. The Caf6 will have most of their attendance on Sunday out of the same 500 people, these are not additional people for Sunday. During the week would most likely be during lunch hour. 119. Bookstore is used on Sundays and possibly on Saturdays, of the 15 on Sunday the people are inclusive of the total 500 that attend first and second service. 216-221 Youth area is for Worship on Sundays, mostly to be used on Wednesday and Saturdays for games and videos. Administration is Monday thru Friday only. I I I I OPEN LOT 2NVN0: SC VOD use x R •A • SITE DATA 010 1111•001 COM WAWA: ITREITAOOREK L1 Oa 0l ICR►TDN 110011101.'00010 DIMDNATTEN: ..+■ALILMORWLLIDi man. IMO OM PROPOIEDLAND OM VOTALWOGS AMA: TOMO. AREA: TOTAL BMW. ARM LoCOWROE 0.10.0003 ARRA, PMKC ARA: LANOSCMEA: ...At. RMaD 1•vACEIERMIFaAesEMTLr AA. Ma. ITAEDIIAnaI T,w2nTf•2toRIAEa•' MACEk2MSPACEI •LOd1 AREA RATIO: DGEY.ARCV... CAT=MACUR RVROfCOKITANC 01 MR OBER RR. RIRwttElu� PAK AIMTk lAwRas MAIM WWII or /uLowa unmwRvtl'DRA 9.0.281.021 24201 YNFZ AOAD ENEIXRAC.00N0I4WM1 YMCLL n d t'MEIl W A A1.411 14671. COWIN0, MOW. CA RC sower ...c. SC.SERWDE EO1Itcaw SERVICE COWERfYLNFI0311103 WM. NDUSTRW MAW. PA C1M10VIRYIK 3320I6AIF 236AD z?e WIEI 602 AC '16601SE PAR: OM m••= 001.12..kamDLV•-• al 01. St OL020V tux N.A. LLi91Q 21]0 zgePAEEs�" ,PA�RRE.B 71102,'.1: 0.M 2.1,•,E TYPE V0 8%540.00EDAT 45 GM 10600 sF ns 1FmIN UF2zM11E1 x -v. •A.•A21L'A7F.... — __T_( < — — — 4.....• r• I T`S .•••. ITl TI ill ..^- •- . ,I filW ) I 1 11 Ij) I ill' `����/ ill • 111 —' • .— . • It I to `yll��' • 1�I 1' I�"-• fd \f�/ >f1! /1 1 1 • ` ;.. I {TMWBF.Mq�iO�LEO COUNTY CENTER % 44 .~ . \ •:1444i tOtNG: LANo L3E: W •I ,� :III, i l �c < 'l ' • /. • id TI.�A 4 i 22:7 Lr t 73 e (-`f% ..i .x yt• �• ...Mt' �ibli1.A e.f =,e / -ii . •` O Cw7��\tal\�"1 \ • U-1.11.111 111111115-- 1 ; �, s "-;': '} pu i "' �I�I .� _ I tOyb � gen•ce : • .Ra II ems . T. ; ALEEI C WATER 0A2 101.00.1000 CABLETFLEYINDN WAN/ RE M.) ROU 1I RNcasaNw EDRL•1 RAwcaaym,15•WAM2 SCU : :P1;N1;RSar:µ, �tME`.EdKAiI ERREC •••' � �•jr `r ��rr��a �-Ist r' °y %7" --I :. __ _ A • SANTA 117000 2021NO: ',MUM iI _.. . ;' _ - -r _ _ .�, rT � .. GERTRUDIS CREEK CONTROL CORRtMI OSC ORNLIACE •00.012 4AT101i 1 _ 1 LEGEND • P;A.NGtCo, LMP . OUIDDUIPEDISUIUAIWLLKWAY • OLCTpCVI!RLR y MAUI AITI .tO T I II r -© PMI*AMOCO Van 'A LaE DERMtnl.ut CONAICTKA, MF ILMI ^•++11 1/10111110 LOGOS' DESIGN COLLABORATIVE MCIIIICTMI NTDNRI RMA.. /Se MO311.111.11.11i A••••W1•102. MIT 111M.4•. TOG% MIAMI •01 SITE PLAN MASTERPLAN 46•1{1.0 Y'• SHEET INDEX •_ Hr.... if ..,.-......• 111. �::.. ; : DEMO LEGEND: NOTES: ..10 01.N.,•x 1t•/W.COISOW a,ww AI. °WOs,Vw>on00.CO,.•YMOWn.• ..,,,wa.,.«w.. r..o.<a u,w.e.v..,s..... ........»..s_ n..w e. Vn.•...ow.eY<.C. 0 -o.....c ., p w.'<I""'c'O, p .00..0..,0.... EXIT CALCULATION SYMBOL IOlRM.t = =AI=4 0. 111 I M , i j al rc I I Ind ,z---. •• CCOM ear Kl,.,.. {�.0•10(41,..• NO•16.A.,05,4 wwkun wtr... GENERAL NOTES Mvtt nR!t-•rte • 't'u „'=„"•1 ----1 ] 0!.1—;=1 2 L 1 nms ..:.t,.:..: . vp,.co-n„roM.� / ..cqw., i�•..•A".�c.".4'.0. • mem....... em... tom M.....0000•' �.: �"ae ww ...........70 . .....m0../........11........ sw.r., •ii,HM•^N�,O •'o!.../........tM , ...../../..... 1.4 c�•••r•to •P,a.,.:.i..0.0.0 ".':.... . ActTM;; . Y....-...•.,.... w,..<a:WI woOlIC.,00 1� d:°ww'ro�.cac, ,'cpn .. m.„ .uo....o4..r.c.«,......,o , :A IS AMA.mc tiw.,.... oe.....ow.�m+.•.a.,. nwu.r..a...<. s'«.c,� <:trcM .,e... ...••• ............. ... CAS .. I. ,•ra•s Qoo-«wco�m.. r.Ma•auxn. �. _ .e 1........ /Meat............".C. Wit Mm. so PM. /.1.1.10......113111.41.0./...... H""..A moi...". 1 1 L� I 6'1 di), ic IiD Y t1:) It]//�/ r Y I' 1 r� A Nt ./-._ V 111[SI _._. . _._.— Y t \.. ' ... •i'�i":.'•J•... A j 11 III. Orl 1•.• I • Q •• •e/d//A •3 C •}.—• — TTT J:” .., ----•—'—'—'—' i '— •—•—•— • 4. M ,. -'�..../,......,::T.:-;;-:, ' .-..'”1.--41.--. --.—C) E IS t is•,=.. . [� fc:nra%' `fp't::::� �~ ... .:;-;®...: rdta �1 �,; % f �! // CCl•lRBk[ ! 1I < Fi' " ....:s ...� }'$.;;♦:: �� e"a _ a; xc .: _.— - _.__._-� ,, -•-c•--r.:..... •V"-.0 .-3•._.._. ._.�._._.}0_0_0_0 E '"' U•r•G• 131, t i 1 1 . 1tn11wo �� h y;. � ' �i...\\ i ((`7f1 ret?/t{1i1 :l `c.• �it . •1 1 lid :.ti• � �ta��`, ...\ �� `\\t •:11,.l1�i t1'.�:�� �i••. ® r r xx 0• txx Tap Taj{'k°� sig /VAT CURB OCC TLY PIED aEkann i -'— •—'---. mmi6m, ,:1e�.e _ .. .. t nt • Tedi ix.tt rrrrrna� -� -- fEr --� --- .. ,' . ? ---- �_._._.—•� —a •-'�•—•---•'----0 »r.r ! i un t Pn tun tutl r utn r u uttttut rlrr • ® ' -. ' e� S;i;.':'• y Mitt' (y rl }riir nrr} _ • }x-. •y. - ! s „•;. 1 lttr ; ttnl iflllf 0 MR', in }7}t) t iIltb. thft777tt n Ittttl} )•�.,,,��q ® Ilrn t w t1a Q `.— 5 - W • • • t11117 t tf tt(t �.. ZM�_RlR� ®IRBI Cpl RYG 1 ^ r .... •tluilII MnniMi. — ntx 1 T11........../.......'O''wn'ww.v�y ¢ tfitn Ai Pe =19 U 26112 j ra,.. u....... � ... (N c.r t�U1 � � o..w •1''� ® :: :�' :n a :: :...... r 6,,,.. 'i.e.. till W D onx< 1 ,. .. <1,01 .4.. , wvu .••�•.�"'ie................6i•"" uea.ea................" ew .... .a..cl.zx • .�•.. •i OPTIC! l S,-��,+M/� 4 ;yea T :� ��LL m .... r 1-1 OM D .71��Rri« ,W1 TT33 p.x[ •—'—'—'— r V 1 j ..�,�7r� ^•� �. • ,t 1011 i : �i _ W `}�1��� •fr �'� 'b -."a• �,'I�• all �,• - :531T01:1111 4 •F ='1) • r i ���� •e'% nI111MGUEl .'_ i._._._._._ ._ I _0_0_0_0_._.— _. 1 eS}Iii Of) DEMO/NEW FLOOR PLAN I SCALE: 1/16". 1'-0" I 1 LOGOS ARCHIIECWRE Mt 02. .n wen 0201 vo:uellw.a MOUNTAIN VIEW COMMUNITY CHURCH WMAI M1 41. COMPOSITION IST FLOOR PLAN A- 1.0 LOGOS ARCIEIECNRE — saarrtrovra ISITOCIOSO NAMING M. MC. SIMI SURER ,11_14.).•451.11,1.5362 MOUNTAIN VIEW COMMUNITY CHURCH 26201 YNEZ ROAD TEMECULA. CA 92591 t1103 Maw 'COMPOSITION 2ND FLOOR PLAN ---74-1.1 2 3 u DEMO LEGEND: NOTES: •����• .�M...-�-�� IQ .a. oun-or. RanY.o EMI CALCULATIONSYMBOL O!C 3WT Mole M. I i{ .Qseo Rr w..1•0•121......1 ! 1 ! / 1 1- I lel Lel �� O L[1 B lu) 110 (11 (12 113 (N Y 7 Y Y 11S Y 11 1 1 ! % e !i li I I ._ 1 i _ -.----_- -•---._._._.. 4._._._._._.� 1‘1.1 ® 11111 I I I ! ! / ,, II ! .I ! ► �I,o <�; I 1. 41 ! i i jj tz . ._._._._._ ! _ - ___ ._.—. _—L ' ° —.—•—•—•--� ° ._._._._. 1 •_.a I . 1 ! ci 1 I 1 I o. 'a u v a a OCILY CLIED I 1 ! 1 1 1___ _ _._._._._ rin°.I»m ��i:l1:Ta it ,..r.„.... 1 i I I i ran1 ! I ! I �a i ', iptat 0:x ro 1 I!et E 1 1 ! ttts; I i1 a zi I I ! t t ! i— I 40 —74 . i iiiiiilN. III.i..Alll1 ._._. 1 1 —! 1 1 I I I I I IIMil DEMO/NEW 2N0 FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/16"= 1•-0" I I LOGOS ARCIEIECNRE — saarrtrovra ISITOCIOSO NAMING M. MC. SIMI SURER ,11_14.).•451.11,1.5362 MOUNTAIN VIEW COMMUNITY CHURCH 26201 YNEZ ROAD TEMECULA. CA 92591 t1103 Maw 'COMPOSITION 2ND FLOOR PLAN ---74-1.1 2 3 u NOTES: 1 MOUNTAIN VIEW COMMUNITY CHURCH :g g5 26201 YNEZ ROAD /1/i 0 TEMECULA, CA 92591 13 wwurr.. 0 .....•,• ••,o.,.....•• . CI 1.111001., 01OICNG 0 0 C. 0 0 0 (114 ©- �° f0 n.,...suwne....•.....r• WA_ i�� EMII P f3 b "ii Mil If ..•zsa WEST ELEVATION 1 SCALE: I/16'= I• -O 14 fl :zY"` 0 :/.`.: • -(1110 Df00 0 O O O O• (1 (:) 7 7 I 0 0 . _111111111- Ell ----01!,.•...11iI - 0 r..7,....- Iif111111 ,�}J 11 EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/16 • 1'-0'IIMI U 1111111 NMI MI C.6 r z ® O 0 aawaw .1F4,9um MI _� -S] .fl U 0 p {T 0 l7 a 0 u 0 ,p o fJ T r•LTyo • ilii IT MI- swim llirlIMMI MI NM ..1111 I 1 o ��77 f -11111g11111-1" 11 n::.nm•nn rr .e .. ^^li' IUII1'1",Il��, I IN.�I1rc..-111, 1 r� E� im o_L s�r�F imi SOUTH (FRONT) ELEVATION 'SCALE: 1/16 =1'-0. 2 O� RE 1.00 *--E•1•49 MOM OM 1 N 2S • f ri W. ga 0• 1 1 n fT 0 • 04InAD •O 49 ■ ■ Cl 1 1 11 - •v�y Mal EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1 g-- ^ A-9.0 - - NORTH ELEVATION ISCALE: I/16=1•-0' 1 1 �,Ij1�1111!ll�tlll�lll�!il�illl) I�j121R1� 11111 111 IIIII1111111I1111JIIIJ1111 � n*I IiIiIs II I(�fTIT`'"T'rrj�ll 11Ti'T11 11 li Ili .Iii,,. 1111111 1 I' �I! I`1111�1!I�1 11 1i►1 ' iTi--111,11Tj I ill ; I! I IiTT'T�i TTi 111111 1 MOUNTAIN VIEW COMMUNITY CHURCH- 26201 YNEZ ROAD, TEMECULA, CA PC RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA10-0317, A MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR MOUNTAIN VIEW COMMUNITY CHURCH TO OPERATE IN A SERVICE COMMERCIAL (SC) ZONE AND OCCUPY APPROXIMATELY 101,600 SQUARE FEET OF AN EXISTING BUILDING LOCATED AT 29201 YNEZ ROAD (APN 910-281-001) Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On October 28, 2010, Mr. Christopher Francis filed Planning Application No. PA10-0317, Conditional Use Permit Application in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. The Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. C. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on December 7, 2011, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. D. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission approved Planning Application No. PA10-0317 subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder. E. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby finds, determines and declares that: Conditional Use Permit, Development Code Section 17.04.10.E. A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City; As conditioned, the proposed use is consistent with all requirements in the City of Temecula Development Code. In addition, the project is in conformance with the all the requirements of the General Plan and with all applicable requirements of state taw and other ordinances of the City. B. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect uses, buildings or structures; The proposed Church is to be located in an existing building surrounded by office, public/institutional or educational buildings. The Church has operated under a Temporary Use Permit since December 14, 2010 without incident or complaints. The project is designed to have negligible impact on surrounding uses. C. The site for the proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning Commission or City Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood; The proposed conditional use is to be located in an existing building on a fully developed site that already accommodates required yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other features described in the Development Code. D. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community; The proposed Church has been reviewed and conditioned by Building and Safety, Fire Prevention, and the Police Department to ensure the conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community, and the proposed project is consistent with the requirements outlined in the Development Code, and Building and Fire Codes, which contain provisions to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the community. E. 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 decision to conditionally approve the use is based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Conditional Use Permit Application, PA10-0317, a Minor Conditional Use Permit for Mountain View Community Church to operate in a Service Commercial (SC) zone and occupy approximately 101,600 square feet of an existing building located at 29201 Ynez Road. A. Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA), City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the approval of the Conditional Use Permit 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 November 14, 2011, and expired on December 5, 2011. Copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Planning, located at City Hall, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590. C. written comment(s) 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 December 7, 2011 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 4. Conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approves Planning Application No. PA10-0317, a Minor Conditional Use Permit 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 7th day of December 2011. Pat Kight, Chairman ATTEST: Patrick Richardson, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Patrick Richardson, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 11- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 7th day of December 2011, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS Patrick Richardson, Secretary EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA10-0317 Project Description: Assessor's Parcel No.: MSHCP Category: DIF Category: TUMF Category: Quimby Category: Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within 48 Hours of the Approval of This Project A Minor Conditional Use Permit for Mountain View Community Church to operate in a Service Commercial (SC) zone and occupy approximately 101,619 square feet of an existing building located at 29201 Ynez Road 910-281-001 NA — Existing Building on Fully Developed Parcel (No Grading) NA — Existing Building NA — Existing Building NA — Existing Commercial Building on Fully Developed Parcel December 7, 2011 December 7, 2013 PL -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 Two Thousand One Hundred and Eight Dollars ($2,108.00) which includes the Two Thousand Forty -Four Dollar ($2,044.00) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Sixty -Four Dollar ($64.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said 48-hour period the applicant/ developer has riot delivered to the Planning Department the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void due to failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirements PL -2. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves the right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. PL -3. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to this Conditional Use Permit. PL -4. The approval of this Conditional Use Permit shall be used within two years of the approval date; or the approval shall become null and void. If commencement of the Conditional Use Permit has not occurred within two years of the approval date an extension of time application may be filed consistent with all Development Code requirements. PL -5. The Director of Planning may, upon an application being filed within 30 days prior to expiration, and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to 3 one-year extensions of time, one year at a time. PL -6. The applicant shall comply with their Statement of Operations dated May 27, 2011, on file with the Planning Department, unless superseded by these Conditions of Approval. PL -7. This Conditional Use Permit may be revoked pursuant to Section 17.03.080 of the City's Development Code. PL -8. The City, its Planning Director, Planning Commission, and City Council retain and reserve the right and jurisdiction to review and modify this Conditional Use Permit (including the Conditions of Approval) based on changed circumstances. Changed circumstances include, but are not limited to, the modification of business, a change in scope, emphasis, size of nature of the business, and the expansion, alteration, reconfiguration or change of use. The reservation of right to review any Conditional Use Permit granted or approved or conditionally approved hereunder by the City, its Planning Director, Planning Commission and City Council is in addition to, and not in - lieu of, the right of the City, its Planning Director, Planning Commission, and City Council to review, revoke or modify any Conditional Use Permit approved or conditionally approved hereunder for any violations of the conditions imposed on such Conditional Use Permit or for the maintenance of any nuisance condition or other code violation thereon. PL -9. The Church operations shall be consistent with the project description and impacts described in the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) prepared for the "project" per CEQA. As identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis Report for Mountain View Community Church dated September 21, 2011 and included as mitigation, the Developer shall provide a total fair share contribution in the amount of $2.615.40 PL -10. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. FIRE PREVENTION General Requirements F-1. 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. F-2. During remodeling and/or addition construction, all fire and life safety systems will be maintained in working order and up to their original design and performance specifications. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) F-3. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of sprinkler plans must be submitted by the installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. These plans must be submitted prior to the issuance of building permit. F-4. Fire alarm plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of alarm plans must be submitted by the installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. The fire alarm system is required to have a dedicated circuit from the house panel. These plans must be submitted prior to the issuance of building permit. Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy F-5. Hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers (blue dots per Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-6. New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Commercial buildings shall have a minimum of 12 -inch numbers with suite numbers being a minimum of six inches in size. All suites shall have a minimum of six- inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors (CFC Chapter 5 and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-7. A "Knox -Box" shall be provided. The Knox -Box shall be installed a minimum of six feet in height and be located to the right side of the fire riser sprinkler room (CFC Chapter 5). F-8. 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 (CFC Chapter 5). POLICE DEPARTMENT General Requirements PD -1. Applicant shall ensure all landscaping surrounding the proposed equipment structure and slim line poles is kept at a height of no more than three feet from ground level. Plants, hedges and shrubbery shall be defensible plants to deter would-be intruders from breaking into the structure utilizing lower level entry ways. PD -2. Applicant shall ensure any trees surrounding the structure rooftop be kept at a distance to deter roof accessibility by "would-be burglars." Since trees also act as a natural ladder, the branches must be pruned to have a six-foot clearance from the structure. PD -3. Berms shall not exceed three feet in height. PD -4. The placement of all landscaping should be in compliance with guidelines from Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED). PD -5. All exterior lighting to the structure must be in compliance with Riverside County Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance 655, low pressure sodium lighting preferred. PD -6. All exterior doors shall have vandal resistant light fixtures installed above the door. The doors shall be illuminated with a minimum one -foot candle illumination at ground level, evenly dispersed. PD -7. All lighting affixed to the buildings shall be wall mount light fixtures to provide sufficient lighting during hours of darkness. PD -8. Applicant shall comply with the Governor's order to address the power crisis. This order became effective March 18, 2001 calling for a substantial reduction from businesses to cut usage during non -business hours. The order, in part, states, "All California retail establishments, including but not limited to, shopping centers, auto malls and dealerships, shall substantially reduce maximum outdoor lighting capability during non- business hours except as necessary for the health and safety of the public, employees or property." Failure to comply with this order following a warning by law enforcement officials shall be punishable as a misdemeanor with a fine not to exceed $1000 in accordance with Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations. PD -9. All doors, windows, locking mechanisms, hinges, and other miscellaneous hardware shall be commercial or institution grade. PD -10. Any graffiti painted or marked upon the structure should be removed or painted over within twenty-four (24) hours of being discovered. Report all crimes to the Temecula Police 24-hour dispatch center at 951 -696 -HELP. PD -11. Any roof hatches shall be painted "International Orange." PD -12. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) as developed by the National Crime Prevention Institute (NCPI) supports the concept that"the proper design and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in the fear and incidence of crime and an improvement in the quality of life." The nine primary strategies that support this concept are included below: a. Provide clear border definition of controlled space. Examples of border definition may include fences, shrubbery or signs in exterior areas. Within a building, the arrangement of furniture and color definition can serve as a means of identifying controlled space. b. Provide clearly marked transitional zones. Persons need to be able to identify when they are moving from public to semi-public to private space. c. Gathering or congregating areas to be located or designated in locations where there is good surveillance and access control. d. Place safe activities in unsafe locations. Safe activities attract normal users to a location and subsequently render the location less attractive to abnormal users due to observation and possible intervention. e. Place unsafe activities in safe locations. Placing unsafe activities in areas of natural surveillance or controlled access will help overcome risk and make the users of the areas feel safer. f. Redesign the use of space to provide natural barriers. Separate activities that may conflict with each other (outdoor basketball court and children's play area, for example) by distance, natural terrain or other functions to avoid such conflict. Improve scheduling of space. The timing in the use of space can reduce the risk for normal users and cause abnormal users to be of greater risk of surveillance and intervention. g. h. Redesign space to increase the perception of natural surveillance. Abnormal users need to be aware of the risk of detection and possible intervention. Windows and clean lines -of sight serve to provide such a perception of surveillance. i. Overcome distance and isolation. This strategy may be accomplished through improved communications (portable two-way radios, for example) and design efficiencies, such as the location of restrooms in a public building. PD -13. Business desiring a business security survey of their location can contact the Crime Prevention and Plans Unit of the Temecula Police Department. PD -14. Any questions regarding these conditions should be directed to the Temecula Police Department Crime Prevention and Plans Unit at (951) 695-2773. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT General Requirements PW -1. Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the developer at no cost to any Government Agency. It is understood that the developer correctly shows on the site plan all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. PW -2. The project is located along the City of Temecula Capital Improvement Project No. PW02-11 (French Valley Interchange project). a. The project includes demolishing the existing wall and a new retaining wall will be constructed to accommodate the project. During the construction of the new retaining wall, the City will require a temporary construction easement from the property Owner. b. If the project requires any right-of-way documents, the documents will be prepared by the City for the property Owner. These documents may include a permanent easement for the retaining wall footing and maintenance. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit PW -3. As recommended in the Traffic Impact Analysis Report for Mountain View Community Church dated September 21, 2011, the Developer shall provide a total fair share contribution in the amount of $2.615.40 for the project's fair share for costs associated with restriping Winchester Road at the intersection of Winchester and the northbound 1- 15 on ramp amounts to $81.24. In addition, the project's fair share for costs associated with Existing Plus Project plus Approved Projects (Cumulative) at the intersection of Ynez Road and Date Street amounts to $2,534.16. PC RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA10-0318, A MINOR MODIFICATION FOR MOUNTAIN VIEW COMMUNITY CHURCH TO MAKE FACADE CHANGES TO AN EXISTING BUILDING LOCATED AT 29201 YNEZ ROAD (APN 910-281-001) Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On October 28, 2010, Mr. Christopher Francis filed Planning Application No. PA10-0318, Minor Modification Application in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. The Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. C. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on December 7, 2011, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. D. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission approved Planning Application No. PA10-0318 subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder. E. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby finds, determines and declares that: Minor Modification, Development Code Section 17.05.010 F A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City; The proposed fa9ade modifications have been reviewed for consistency with the Development Code, Citywide Design Guidelines and General Plan to ensure the project is in compliance with the General Plan and all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare; The project is consistent with all applicable building, development and fire codes, which include provisions to safeguard the health, safety, and general welfare of the community. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Minor Modification Application, PA10-0318, a Minor Modification for Mountain View Community Church to make facade changes to an existing building located at 29201 Ynez Road. A. Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the approval of the Minor Modification 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 November 14, 2011, and expired on December 5, 2011. Copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Planning, located at City Hall, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590. C. written comment(s) 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 December 7, 2011 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 4. Conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approves Planning Application No. PA10-0318, a Minor Modification 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 7th day of December 2011. Pat Kight, Chairman ATTEST: Patrick Richardson, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Patrick Richardson, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 11- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 7th day of December 2011, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS Patrick Richardson, Secretary EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA10-0318 Project Description: Assessor's Parcel No.: MSHCP Category: DIF Category: TUMF Category: Quimby Category: Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within 48 Hours of the Approval of This Project A Minor Modification for Mountain View Community Church to make facade changes to an existing building located at 29201 Ynez Road 910-281-001 NA — Existing Building on Fully Developed Parcel (No Grading) NA — Existing Building NA — Existing Building NA — Existing Commercial Building on Fully Developed Parcel December 7, 2011 December 7, 2013 PL -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 Two Thousand One Hundred and Eight Dollars ($2,108.00) which includes the Two Thousand Forty -Four Dollar ($2,044.00) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Sixty -Four Dollar ($64.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said 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 due to failure of condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirements PL -2. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves the right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. PL -3. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to this Minor Modification. PL -4. The approval of this Minor Modification shall be used within two years of the approval date; or the approval shall become null and void. If commencement of the Conditional Use Permit has not occurred within two years of the approval date an extension of time application may be filed consistent with all Development Code requirements. PL -5. The Director of Planning may, upon an application being filed within 30 days prior to expiration, and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to 3 one-year extensions of time, one year at a time. PL -6. The City, its Planning Director, Planning Commission, and City Council retain and reserve the right and jurisdiction to review and modify this Conditional Use Permit (including the Conditions of Approval) based on changed circumstances. Changed circumstances include, but are not limited to, the modification of business, a change in scope, emphasis, size of nature of the business, and the expansion, alteration, reconfiguration or change of use. The reservation of right to review any Conditional Use Permit granted or approved or conditionally approved hereunder by the City, its Planning Director, Planning Commission and City Council is in addition to, and not in - lieu of, the right of the City, its Planning Director, Planning Commission, and City Council to review, revoke or modify any Conditional Use Permit approved or conditionally approved hereunder for any violations of the conditions imposed on such Conditional Use Permit or for the maintenance of any nuisance condition or other code violation thereon. PL -7. The Minor Modification (facade changes) shall be consistent with the stamped approved elevations, material sample board and site plan contained on file in the Planning Department, Planning Application No. PA10-0318. PL -8. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. FIRE PREVENTION General Requirements F-1. 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. F-2. During remodeling and/or addition construction, all fire and life safety systems will be maintained in working order and up to their original design and performance specifications. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) F-3. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of sprinkler plans must be submitted by the installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. These plans must be submitted prior to the issuance of building permit. F-4. Fire alarm plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of alarm plans must be submitted by the installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. The fire alarm system is required to have a dedicated circuit from the house panel. These plans must be submitted prior to the issuance of building permit. Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy F-5. Hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers (blue dots per Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-6. New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Commercial buildings shall have a minimum of 12 -inch numbers with suite numbers being a minimum of six inches in size. All suites shall have a minimum of six- inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors (CFC Chapter 5 and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-7. A "Knox -Box" shall be provided. The Knox -Box shall be installed a minimum of six feet in height and be located to the right side of the fire riser sprinkler room (CFC Chapter 5). F-8. 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 (CFC Chapter 5). POLICE DEPARTMENT General Requirements PD -1. Applicant shall ensure all landscaping surrounding the proposed equipment structure and slim line poles is kept at a height of no more than three feet from ground level. Plants, hedges and shrubbery shall be defensible plants to deter would-be intruders from breaking into the structure utilizing lower level entry ways. PD -2. Applicant shall ensure any trees surrounding the structure rooftop be kept at a distance to deter roof accessibility by "would-be burglars." Since trees also act as a natural ladder, the branches must be pruned to have a six-foot clearance from the structure. PD -3. Berms shall not exceed three feet in height. PD -4. The placement of all landscaping should be in compliance with guidelines from Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED). PD -5. All exterior lighting to the structure must be in compliance with Riverside County Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance 655, low pressure sodium lighting preferred. PD -6. All exterior doors shall have vandal resistant light fixtures installed above the door. The doors shall be illuminated with a minimum one -foot candle illumination at ground level, evenly dispersed. PD -7. All lighting affixed to the buildings shall be wall mount light fixtures to provide sufficient lighting during hours of darkness. PD -8. Applicant shall comply with the Governor's order to address the power crisis. This order became effective March 18, 2001 calling for a substantial reduction from businesses to cut usage during non -business hours. The order, in part, states, "All California retail establishments, including but not limited to, shopping centers, auto malls and dealerships, shall substantially reduce maximum outdoor lighting capability during non- business hours except as necessary for the health and safety of the public, employees or property." Failure to comply with this order following a warning by law enforcement officials shall be punishable as a misdemeanor with a fine not to exceed $1000 in accordance with Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations. PD -9. All doors, windows, locking mechanisms, hinges, and other miscellaneous hardware shall be commercial or institution grade. PD -10. Any graffiti painted or marked upon the structure should be removed or painted over within twenty-four (24) hours of being discovered. Report all crimes to the Temecula Police 24-hour dispatch center at 951 -696 -HELP. PD -11. Any roof hatches shall be painted "International Orange." PD -12. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) as developed by the National Crime Prevention Institute (NCPI) supports the concept that "the proper design and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in the fear and incidence of crime and an improvement in the quality of life." The nine primary strategies that support this concept are included below: a. Provide clear border definition of controlled space. Examples of border definition may include fences, shrubbery or signs in exterior areas. Within a building, the arrangement of furniture and color definition can serve as a means of identifying controlled space. b. Provide clearly marked transitional zones. Persons need to be able to identify when they are moving from public to semi-public to private space. c. Gathering or congregating areas to be located or designated in locations where there is good surveillance and access control. d. Place safe activities in unsafe locations. Safe activities attract normal users to a location and subsequently render the location less attractive to abnormal users due to observation and possible intervention. e. Place unsafe activities in safe locations. Placing unsafe activities in areas of natural surveillance or controlled access will help overcome risk and make the users of the areas feel safer. f. Redesign the use of space to provide natural barriers. Separate activities that may conflict with each other (outdoor basketball court and children's play area, for example) by distance, natural terrain or other functions to avoid such conflict. g. Improve scheduling of space. The timing in the use of space can reduce the risk for normal users and cause abnormal users to be of greater risk of surveillance and intervention. h. Redesign space to increase the perception of natural surveillance. Abnormal users need to be aware of the risk of detection and possible intervention. Windows and clean lines -of sight serve to provide such a perception of surveillance. i. Overcome distance and isolation. This strategy may be accomplished through improved communications (portable two-way radios, for example) and design efficiencies, such as the location of restrooms in a public building. PD -13. Business desiring a business security survey of their location can contact the Crime Prevention and Plans Unit of the Temecula Police Department. PD -14. Any questions regarding these conditions should be directed to the Temecula Police Department Crime Prevention and Plans Unit at (951) 695-2773. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT General Requirements PW -1. Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the developer at no cost to any Government Agency. It is understood that the developer correctly shows on the site plan all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. PW -2. The project is located along the City of Temecula Capital Improvement Project No. PW02-11 (French Valley Interchange project). a. The project includes demolishing the existing wall and a new retaining wall will be constructed to accommodate the project. During the construction of the new retaining wall, the City will require a temporary construction easement from the property Owner. b. If the project requires any right-of-way documents, the documents will be prepared by the City for the property Owner. These documents may include a permanent easement for the retaining wall footing and maintenance. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit PW -3. As recommended in the Traffic Impact Analysis Report for Mountain View Community Church dated September 21, 2011, the Developer shall provide a total fair share contribution in the amount of $2.615.40 for the project's fair share for costs associated with restriping Winchester Road at the intersection of Winchester and the northbound 1- 15 on ramp amounts to $81.24. In addition, the project's fair share for costs associated with Existing Plus Project plus Approved Projects (Cumulative) at the intersection of Ynez Road and Date Street amounts to $2,534.16. City of Temecula Community Development Planning Division Notice of Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration PROJECT: PA10-0317 and PA10-0318 APPLICANT: Christopher Francis, Logos Design Collaborative LOCATION: 29210 Ynez Road, City of Temecula, County of Riverside DESCRIPTION: A Minor Conditional Use Permit and Minor Modification (facade improvements) for Mountain View Community Church to operate in a Service Commercial (SC) zone and occupy approximately 101,619 square feet of an existing building (APN 910-281-001) The City of Temecula intends to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project described above. Based upon the information contained in the attached Initial Environmental Study and pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); it has been determined that this project as proposed, revised or mitigated will not have a significant impact upon the environment. As a result, the Planning Commission intends to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project. The mitigation measures required to reduce or mitigate the impacts of this project on the environment are included in the project design and/or the Mitigation Monitoring Program and will be included as part of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project. The Comment Period for this proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is November 14, 2011 to December 5, 2011. Written comments and responses to this notice should be addressed to the contact person listed below at the following address: City of Temecula, P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033. City Hall is located at 41000 Main Street. The public notice of the intent to adopt this Mitigated Negative Declaration is provided through: ®The Local Newspaper ®Posting the Site ®Notice to Adjacent Property Owners If you need additional information or have any questions concerning this project, please contact Matthew D. Peters, AICP at (951) 694-6408. Prepared by: paCiT/ D , 450G.1ac+c_ P(kvivVAr (11'./11) (Signature) (Title) City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Project Title Mountain View Community Church — Planning Application No.'s PA10-0317, Conditional Use Permit and PA10-0318, Minor Modification (facade changes) Lead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Contact Person and Phone Number Matthew D. Peters, AICP (951) 694-6408 26201 Ynez Road, Temecula, CA 92591 (APN 910-281-001) Christopher Francis, Logos Design Collaborative 250 E. Rincon Street, Suite 103 Corona, CA 92879 Project Location Project Sponsor's Name and Address General Plan Designation Service Commercial (SC) Zoning Service Commercial (SC) A Minor Conditional Use Permit for Mountain View Community Description of Project Church to operate in an existing building, which is located on a fully developed site — no grading or site plan changes are proposed. The church is proposing to occupy approximately 101,600 square feet of an existing 115,556 square foot building. The property is zoned Service Commercial (SC). In summary, the Church is proposing to utilize the building for office and administration purposes (up to 40 employees and volunteers) Monday through Friday with evening adult classes (up to 30 students) and choir practices (up to 150 singers). Saturdays will include up to 400 people for afternoon worship and day/evening theater performances. Sunday worship services will accommodate up to 450 people during 3 service times: 7:45-9:00 am; 10:00-11:30 am; and 12:00-1:30 pm. The Church will include a banquet hall for weddings, funerals and outside functions, which are typically used on Thursday, Friday or Saturday. The project will involve a Minor Modification for minor facade changes to the existing building (no grading or site plan changes are proposed) including the addition of red sandstone veneer accent walls, four (4) new glass rollup doors (to replace existing), six (6) twelve -inch (12") diameter painted steel columns with steel tension rods over the office and worship hall entrances, and a fifty (50) foot stainless steel or anodized aluminum cross. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting Property to the south (beyond the project parcel and site boundary) includes the Santa Gertrudis Creek channel, which is zoned 03-0, Open Space — Conservation. To the west, is the 1-15 Freeway. To the north is approximately 15 acres of vacant land zoned SC — Service Commercial with a Professional Golfers Career College just beyond. Property to the east includes business and offices across Ynez Road, including the Riverside County Library and Administrative Offices. Other public agencies whose approval is required None G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 2 TP1►IECL�,A Mountain View Community Church Project Site CIty Dares J Parcels AMN 2011 0 425 850 1273 R. I ss :nap a a uso- Rau: c, .A ru-. i ln:arrol rnacirru =ib ra ry rianrai fa"n" rriy Pa a a,ers Tal4;paar at ha Tap mar cc nay las be accraa%, arrant, a utMraitr -okay tMS NW S NOT TO BF LL1Ft) FCC NAVICdir01. Ma • center: 6283812, 2138097 Neta: Ina Protea aD9teu a NIesCVr MO a Mna Muifkaian fa !taste Chaves • No Qtaanq a Vs PM, Ounces aro p-apa{aa Scala: 1:41,317 G:\PiANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 3 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 Agriculture and Forestry Resources Noise Air Quality Population and Housing Biological Resources Public Services Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recreation Cultural Resources X Transportation and Traffic Geology and Soils Hazards and Hazardous Materials Utilities and Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance Hydrology and Water Quality None Land Use and Planning _ 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 prepared. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal measures based on the earlier analysis as described IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze I find that although the proposed project could have potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further significant impact" or "potentially significant at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL only the effects that remain to be addressed. a significant effect on the environment, because all adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to including revisions or mitigation measures that are is required. Matthew D. Peters, AICP Printed Name If /2/i/ Date City of Temecula For G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 4 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? X c Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? X d Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? • X Comments: 1.a. No Impact: The proposed project is on a fully developed parcel. No scenic vistas have been identified per the City's General Plan nor will be adversely impacted by approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Minor Modification for facade changes. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 1.b. No Impact: No major rock outcroppings or historic buildings exist on the project site. The project site is not located on a scenic highway. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 1.c. Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project will not degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site or quality of its surroundings. The 7.35 acre project site is fully developed. The City's Development Code and Design Guidelines establish design standards which will ensure that the project site is developed in a manner consistent with the City's architectural requirements. The facade modification will include the addition of Red Sandstone accents walls, a fifty (50) foot stainless steel or anodized aluminum cross, six (6) metal channel overhangs, four (4) glass roll -up doors to replace existing, and six (6) twelve -inch (12") diameter painted steel columns with steel tension rods over the two entrances. The project site is surrounded by a vacant parcel to the north and the Santa Gertrudis Creek channel, which is designated as Open Space -Conservation (OS -C) to the south. The proposed project area is adjacent to Interstate 15 to the west and the County of Riverside Administrative Offices and other offices to the east. Also, a Business Park and parcels designated as Light Industrial can be found farther to the Northeast. Impacts are considered less than significant; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 1.d. Less than Significant Impact: The project will not create a new source of light or glare as the project site will utilize an existing lighting system. The City of Temecula requires that all developments comply with the Palomar Lighting Ordinance (Ordinance 655). Ordinance 655 requires that all lighting sources be shielded and directed downward to avoid glare on adjacent properties and ensure low levels of glare in the sky. Impacts are considered less than significant; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 5 2. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST 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. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact X a Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? X c Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)? Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use X X d e Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? X Comments: 2.a. e. No Impact: The proposed project will not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance to a non-agricultural use. The project site is fully developed and zone SC — Service Commercial. According to the City of Temecula General Plan, the project does not contain any Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Many of the surrounding properties are already developed and designated as commercial, light industrial and business park as per the General Plan and are not used for farmland. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 2.b. No Impact: The project site is zoned Service Commercial (SC). This zoning designation does not allow for agricultural uses as per the General Plan of the City of Temecula. The site is not regulated by a Williamson Act contract. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 2.c.d. No Impact: The project location is not suitable for forest and/or timberland uses as defined by the Public Resources and Government Codes. Forest land is defined as land that can support ten (10) percent native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions and that allows for management of recreation and other public benefits. The proposed project site is fully developed and zoned Service Commercial (SC) and not as Timberland Production Zone as defined by Section 51104(g) of the G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 6 Government Code. As such, the parcel is intended to be developed with service commercial properties and therefore is not available to grow trees commercially as required by the Timberland definition contained in Section 4526 of the Public Resources Code. In addition, forest and land does not exist on the parcel or in the immediate area and no impact is expected. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. G:IPLANNING120101PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\PIanning11 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 7 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: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? X b Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality 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 quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? X d Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? X e Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? 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. and b. Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed Project involves a Minor Conditional Use Permit and Minor Modification (facade changes) for Mountain View Community Church to operate in an existing building, which is located on a fully developed site — no grading or site plan changes are proposed. The proposed Project is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). The South Coast Air Quality Management District and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) are the responsible agencies for preparing the Air Quality Management Pian for the SCAB. The Project is subject to the requirements of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the California Air Resources Board (CARB), and SCAQMD. A Project is deemed inconsistent with air quality plans if it results in population and/or employment growth that exceed growth estimates in the applicable air quality plan. The proposed Project will not result in population and/or employment growth that exceed the applicable air quality plan. 3.c. Less Than Significant Impact: CEQA Guidelines Section 15064 (h)(3) stipulates that for an impact involving a resource that is addressed by an approved plan or mitigation program, the lead agency may determine that a project's incremental contribution is not cumulatively considerable if the project complies with the adopted plan or program. In addressing cumulative effects for air quality, the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan is the most appropriate document to use because it set forth comprehensive programs that will lead the South Coast Air Basin, including the Project area, into compliance with all federal and state air quality standards. It also utilizes control measures and related emission reduction estimates based upon emissions projections for a future development scenario derived from land use, population, and employment characteristics defined in consultation with local governments. Because the Project is in conformance with the AQMP and the Project is not significant on an individual basis, it is appropriate to conclude that the Project's incremental contribution to criteria pollutant emissions is not cumulatively significant. 3.d. No 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. The Project is not anticipated to generate substantial pollutant concentrations G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 8 and therefore, there is no opportunity for any exposure. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 3.e. Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the Project will create minimal objectionable odors associated with very minor construction activity, which will be temporary. During construction the Project will have odors associated with equipment and materials. The site is not located within the immediate vicinity of sensitive receptors and these odors are normally not considered offensive so as to cause sensitive receptors to complain. Diesel fuel odors from construction equipment and new asphalt paving fall into this category. These impacts will be of short duration and are considered less than significant. No objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people will be created when the Project is operational. No mitigation measures are required. G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 9 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project? Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact X a Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat 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? X c Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? X X X d e f Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? X Comments: The Project involves a Minor Conditional Use Permit and Minor Modification (facade changes) for Mountain View Community Church to operate in an existing building, which is located on a fully developed site — no grading or site plan changes are proposed. 4.a. No Impact: According to the City of Temecula General Plan, the project is not located within a sensitive biological area. The proposed project will not have a significant substantial impact, either directly or indirectly, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species by local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 4.b.c. No Impact: The project site does not contain any wetlands, riparian forests, vernal pools, or wildlife nursery sites. There are no natural watercourses on the project site. The project site is fully developed with a building, parking lot, and regularly maintained landscaping, and does not pose any threats to federally protected wetlands, riparian habitats or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 4.d. No Impact: Based upon existing conditions, the proposed project is not expected to have a significant adverse impact on the wildlife movements in the surrounding area within established native resident or G:\PLANNING12010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 10 migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife sites. Further, the project site is not located within a Criteria Cell of the MSHCP Plan Area. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 4.e. No Impact: Approval of the project will not conflict with any local ordinances or policies as they relate to the protection of biological resources. The City of Temecula has recently adopted a Heritage Tree Ordinance designed to protect certain species of trees within the City. However, no trees designated in the ordinance where located on the subject property. The City of Temecula General Plan outlines a number of policies which emphasize the interrelationship between the built and natural environment. The General Plan recognizes the importance of conserving important biological habitat and protecting plant and animal species of concern. As a result, the General Plan requires that development proposals identify significant biological resources. As per this project, no biological resources are being threatened as identified in local policies or ordinances. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 4.f. No Impact: The proposed project will not conflict with the provisions of the Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). The MSHCP is a comprehensive, multi -jurisdictional plan which focuses on the conservation of 146 species and their associated habitats in Western Riverside County. The Plan's overall goal is to maintain a biological and ecological diversity within the rapidly urbanizing area. This project is not located in a criteria cell as the proposed project is on a fully developed site. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 11 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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 archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? X X X c d Comments: The Project involves a Minor Conditional Use Permit and Minor Modification (facade changes) for Mountain View Community Church to operate in an existing building, which is located on a fully developed site — no grading or site plan changes are proposed. 5. a. b. No Impact: "Historic Resources" as defined by CEQA Section 15064.5 are prehistoric and historic - era (i.e. greater than 45 years of age) resources that are assessed as being "significant", insofar as their evidentiary contents can be demonstrated relevant to the established local, regional or national research domains, issues and questions. The project site is a fully -developed parcel and no cultural or historical resources have been recorded within the boundaries of the subject parcel. No historical artifacts, features, or sites were identified on the subject parcel. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 5.c. No Impact: According to the City's General Plan the project site has low sensitivity for paleontological resources. Furthermore, the project site is already fully developed. No further grading is proposed as part of the project. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 5.d. No Impact: The project site is already fully developed and no further grading is proposed as part of the project. According to the City's General Plan, no formal cemeteries are located near the project site. The project is not anticipated to disturb any human remains. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. G:\PLANNING\20101PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 12 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less -than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 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 Geology Special Publication 42. Strong seismic ground shaking? _ X X X i. ii iii Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? Landslides? X X iv b Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 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 spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? X X X c 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 property? 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. No Impact: While the City of Temecula has rolling hills and areas of steep topography, the individual project site is slightly elevated above 1-15 and has not been found to be prone to landslides. The project site is a fully developed parcel and will not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects. While the project site is in a high liquefaction zone, the project site is already fully -developed per California Building Codes. The Elsinore Fault traverses the City of Temecula but the project site itself lies outside of this region. The project is not altering the foundation and does not propose additional square footage. Therefore, the project site does not expose people or structures to potential adverse effects. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 6.b. No Impact: The project will not result in a loss of topsoil or erosion since the project is on an already - developed parcel. The project does not contain plans to conduct grading. Therefore, soil erosion or Toss of topsoil is not anticipated to occur. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 6.c.d. No Impact: As described above, the area is prone to liquefaction. However, the project site is located on a fully -developed parcel. The project is not proposing to alter the foundation of the existing building nor is the project proposing additional square footage. As a result, the proposed project is not anticipated to incur adverse effects on the parcel that would cause the property to become unstable. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 6.e. No Impact: The project will not utilize septic tanks, but will instead be connected to the public sewer system. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 13 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on , the environment? X b Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? X Comments: 7.a. b. No Impact: The Project involves a Minor Conditional Use Permit and Minor Modification (facade changes) for Mountain View Community Church to operate in an existing building, which is located on a fully developed site — no grading or site plan changes are proposed. The minor modification for facade changes involves the installation of sandstone accent walls, a metal cross, metal canopies over the entrances, new roll -up doors (to replace existing), and steel columns on an existing building, on a fully developed parcel. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. G:\PLANNING12010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 14 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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 existing or proposed 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 significant hazard to the public or the environment? X e For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a pian has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? X f For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? X g Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 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: 8.a. No Impact: The proposed project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use or disposal of hazardous materials. The proposed land use is a religious facility and will not be routinely transporting, using or disposing hazardous materials. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 8.b.c. No Impact: The proposed project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The proposed project is a religious facility and will not emit hazardous materials into the environment, or impact the public through day-to-day operations. In addition, the project will not require the handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances and waste. Additionally, the proposed project is not located within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 15 8.d. No Impact: The project site is located on a fully -developed parcel and is not located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 8.e. No Impact: The proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan, nor is it located where such a plan has been adopted. Also, the project is not within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 8.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 a private airfield. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 8.g. No Impact: The proposed project will not impair the implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency plan. The proposed project site is located within an area that is surrounded by other service commercial development, as well as community commercial and public institutional developments. The proposed project will physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 8.h. No Impact: According to the City of Temecula Geographic Information Systems Department, the project site is not located within a High Fire Hazard area. Therefore, the project will not 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 residents are intermixed with wildlands. Since the project is not located within a High Fire Hazard area and is not located in the immediate proximity of a High Fire Hazard area, injury, death and loss of life resulting from a wildfire is not likely to occur. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. G:\PLANNING12010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 16 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 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 permits have been granted)? Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? X X X b c 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 on- or off-site? X 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 runoff? X f Require the preparation of a project -specific WQMP? Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? X X g h Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? X X i j Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X Comments: 9.a. No Impact: The proposed project has been reviewed by the City's NPDES Engineer and will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The project is on a previously fully - developed parcel, and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) is not required for the project. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 9.b. No Impact: The project involves changes to the facade of the building. Groundwater will not be impacted. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 9.c.d. No Impact: The project involves minor construction to the exterior of the building. The project will not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding. The G:\PLANNING12010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 17 project does propose altering of the course of a stream or river. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 9.e. No Impact: The project will not be increasing runoff as a result of increasing the impervious surface on the project site. The project does not include proposals to increase the impervious surface. No impact will occur. 9.f. No Impact: The project does not require a project -specific WQMP. The project site is a fully - developed parcel. Thus, no impacts will occur. 9.g. No Impact: The project does not involve placement of housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on the City of Temecula Geographic Information System because the project area does not include any residential communities. No impact will occur. 9.h. No Impact: All alterations to the existing building are cosmetic and are being made to the exterior of the building. Said alterations will not impede or redirect flows. Thus, no impact will occur. 9.i. Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. The proposed project is does lie within a dam inundation area per the City's General Plan. However, the project site is a fully -developed parcel and does not contain critical or essential facilities. A less than significant impact is anticipated. 9.j. No Impact: Due to the project area's distance from the ocean and 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. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. G:\PLANNING\20101PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 18 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a Physically divide an established community? 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 effect? X c Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X Comments: 10.a. No Impact: The proposed project will not physically divide an established community. The proposed project is surrounded by other service commercial parcels to the north, open space immediately south and community commercial parcels father south. The proposed project does not involve any additional street or highway improvements which could otherwise divide an established community. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 10.b. No Impact: The proposed project will not conflict with an applicable land use plan, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project, (including, but not limited to the General Plan, Specific Plan, or Zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 10.c. No Impact: The proposed project will not conflict with the provisions of the Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). The MSHCP is a comprehensive, multi jurisdictional plan which focuses on the conservation of 146 species and their associated habitats in Western Riverside County. The Plan's overall goal is to maintain biological and ecological diversity within the rapidly urbanizing area. According to the City of Temecula Geographic Information Systems Department, it has been determined that the project site is not located within an MSHCP Criteria Cell. The Project does not have a potential to impact a Burrowing Owl Habitat. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. G:IPLANNING120101PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\PIanning11 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 19 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact X a Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? X Comments: 11.a. No Impact: Development of 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. Due to the project site being a fully -developed parcel, and any construction is limited to minor fagade changes, no impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 11.b. No Impact: The project is not anticipated to result in the loss of locally important mineral resources. According to the General Plan, the Temecula Planning Area is not considered to contain mineral resources of significant economic value. The fully -developed parcel on which the proposed project will be located does not represent an area of locally important mineral resources. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 20 12. NOISE. Would the project result in: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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 agencies? X b Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? X c A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? X d A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 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 area to excessive noise levels? X f For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X Comments: 12.a. Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project will increase noise levels only during construction, and only between the hours of 6:30 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. Monday through Friday and 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on Saturdays (No Sundays) as required by City Ordinance 9.20.060.D. The noise impacts associated with the proposed Project are expected to occur in the immediate vicinity of construction equipment. The increased noise levels will occur during mostly daylight hours, when average noise levels from vehicular traffic are generally the highest. The noise generated from construction activities would be short term in duration and considered less than significant. 12.b. Less Than Significant Impact: Construction activity associated with the project would not result in excessive ground -borne noise or perceptive vibration. The removal of roll -up doors and the installation of glass storefront along with the installation of materials during the facade alterations will create short-term, low levels of ground -borne noise and vibrations. Once construction is complete, the proposed project is not expected to generate vibration or noise. Therefore, impacts associated with construction -related noise and vibrations are considered less than significant. 12.c. No Impact: The materials being applied to the existing building do not produce noise, and therefore, would create no permanent increase in ambient noise levels. Thus, no impact will occur. 12.d. Less Than Significant Impact: As discussed in response (a) above, there would be a short-term increase in noise levels during construction. However, due to the short duration and location, the impacts are considered less than significant. G:\PLANNiNG\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 21 12.e.f. No Impact: The project is not located within an airport land use plan or where such a plan has been adopted, nor is the project within two miles of a private or public airport or airstrip. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 22 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation - Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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 roads or other infrastructure)? X b Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X c Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X Comments: 13.a. No Impact: The proposed project would not result in substantial population growth in the area because no new homes or businesses are proposed, and no infrastructure related to population growth is proposed. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 13.b.c. No Impact: The project will not displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing, as the site is a developed parcel zoned SC — Service Commercl and is not zoned for residential uses. Therefore, the project will not necessitate the construction of replacement housing due to displacement of housing or people. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. G:\PLANNING12010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 23 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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 performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? X Police protection? Schools? X X Parks? X Other public facilities? X Comments: 14.a. No Impact: The project involves a Minor Conditional Use Permit for a Church and changes to the facade of an existing building. The project has been reviewed and conditioned by the City's Fire and Building and Safety departments and will not introduce any new hazards or generate population growth that would require an increase in fire or police protection services. The project would not result in an increase of population or housing in the project area. Therefore, no new demand on local schools, parks or public facilities would occur. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 24 15. RECREATION. Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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 might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? X Comments: The Project involves a Minor Conditional Use Permit and Minor Modification (facade changes) for Mountain View Community Church to operate in an existing building, which is located on a fully developed site — no grading or site plan changes are proposed. 15.a. No Impact: The project would not result in an increase in population, which would increase the use of existing parks or other recreation facilities. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 15.b. No Impact: The proposed project does not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreation facilities. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 25 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated X Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths and mass transit? b Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? 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 X c d Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Result in inadequate emergency access? Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? X X X e f Comments: 16.a. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: The Project involves a Minor Conditional Use Permit for Mountain View Community Church to operate in an existing building, which is located on a fully developed site — no grading or site plan changes are proposed. The church is proposing to occupy approximately 101,600 square feet of an existing 115,556 square foot building. The property is zoned Service Commercial (SC). In summary, the Church is proposing to utilize their portion of the building for office and administration purposes (up to 40 employees and volunteers) Monday through Friday with evening adult classes (up to 30 students) and choir practices (up to 150 singers). Saturdays will include up to 400 people for afternoon worship and day/evening theater performances. Sunday worship services will accommodate up to 450 people during 3 service times: 7:45-9:00 am; 10:00-11:30 am; and 12:00-1:30 pm. The Church will include a banquet hall for weddings, funerals and outside functions with typical use on Thursday, Friday or Saturday. The project will involve a Minor Modification for minor facade changes to the existing building (no grading or site plan changes are proposed), including the addition of red sandstone veneer accent walls, four (4) new glass rollup doors (to replace existing), six (6) twelve -inch (12") diameter painted steel columns with steel tension rods over the office and worship hall entrances, and a fifty (50) foot stainless steel or anodized aluminum cross.. A Traffic Impact Analysis for the Project was prepared by Minagar and Associates, Inc. Traffic impacts were analyzed based on "Existing Plus Project" and on a "Cumulative Basis" considering surrounding potential future developments within the general area of the Project. G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 26 With respect to "Existing Plus Project" conditions, the project is forecast to contribute peak hour trips to the surrounding roadway circulation system that will result in significant traffic impacts at the intersection of Winchester Road at the 1-15 Northbound On and Off Ramps during the weekend (Sunday) peak hour occurring during the project's mid-day Church service. The Project was also analyzed under an Opening Year "Without Project" scenario and a "Cumulative scenario". The Cumulative scenario will result in impacts during the weekday PM and Sunday mid -peak hours, as well as at the intersection of Ynez Road and Date Street during the weekday afternoon (PM) peak hour. Mitigation Measures Traffic #1 The Project shall participate in the funding of its' Fair Share allocation for the 1-15 northbound ramp for the Existing - Plus Project Conditions and its' Fair Share allocation for Ynez Road and Date Street intersection for the Existing - Plus Project - Plus Approved Project (Cumulative Scenario). Fee-based infrastructure mitigation programs have been found to be adequate mitigation measures under CEQA. The Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) is responsible for administering the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) fee program in Western Riverside County. WRCOG is a joint powers authority consisting of each of the 17 cities in Western Riverside County, the Eastern Municipal Water District, the Western Municipal Water District, and the March JPA. TUMF is an established "Fair Share" program that has constructed many regional roadway improvements in Riverside County since its inception. Of the 118 projects programmed since the inception of TUMF, 40 projects have already been completed, 12 are under construction, 32 projects are in engineering or right-of-way (ROW) acquisition, and another 27 projects are in planning and environmental stages. The remaining projects are in preliminary design and planning phases. Project's Fair Share - Based on the impacts identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Minagar and Associates, Inc for Existing Plus Project Conditions, the project's fair share for costs associated with restriping Winchester Road at the intersection of Winchester and the northbound 1-15 on ramp amounts to $81.24. In addition, the project's fair share for costs associated with Existing Pius Project Plus Approved Projects (Cumulative) at the intersection of Ynez Road and Date Street amounts to $2,534.16. Total fair share contributions are $2,615.40. The impacts of this Project have been analyzed as a part of the long-range implementation of the General Plan, and the continued implementation of the mitigation measures adopted as part of the General Plan ER Update will ensure that the traffic impacts associated with this project are less than significant. After implementation of these measures, Project impacts will be Tess than what currently exists. No additional mitigation measures are required. 16.b. Less Than Significant Impact: Please reference Response No. 16.a. No additional mitigation is required. 16.c. No Impact: The Project will not 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. The Project is not located in an area that would affect any air traffic patterns. No impacts are anticipated; therefore, no mitigation is required. 16d. Less Than Significant Impact: Access and roadway improvements are existing and have been designed to comply with design criteria contained in the Caltrans Design Manual and other City requirements and standards. As designed, no significant hazards are expected. 16.e. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will not result in inadequate emergency access. The Fire Department, and Building and Safety Departments have both reviewed and conditioned the project. Impacts are considered Tess than significant; therefore, no additional mitigation measures are required. G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 27 16.f. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will not result in inadequate parking capacity. On-site parking spaces have been provided in accordance with the City's Development Code. No impacts are anticipated; therefore, no mitigation is required. 16.g. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. Bus turnouts are present on Ynez Road at this time, across the street from the Project; turnouts within the Project are not likely. Tenants will have storage available for bicycles and bike racks are available on the property. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation is required. G:\PLANNING120101PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\PIanningll CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 28 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? X b Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? X c Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? X d Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? X e Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? X f Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? X g Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? X Comments: 17.a. No Impact: The project will not exceed wastewater treatment requirements, require the construction of new treatment facilities, nor affect the capacity of treatment providers. The project site is a fully -developed parcel with an existing wastewater treatment system. The project would not generate a demand for water or wastewater treatment as there exists a wastewater treatment system. The project will not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 17.b. No Impact: The project will not require or result in the expansion or construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 17.c. No Impact: The proposed project is on a fully -developed parcel in an existing building. Therefore, the project will not require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities. The existing drainage facilities serving the area well equipped to handle the project and no impact is anticipated as a result of the project. 17.d.e. No Impact: The project would not generate a demand for water or wastewater treatment. Therefore, the project would not cause a violation in wastewater treatment requirements, or require the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 17.f.g. No Impact: The project will generate a minimal amount of solid waste during construction. The project will include a condition of approval requiring the developer to contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul demolition and G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 29 construction debris. The amount of solid waste generated by the project would not be substantial or interfere with the sufficient permitted capacity of nearby landfills and there would be no impact. G:IPLANNING120101PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MODIPIanning11 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 30 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? 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 probable future projects)? Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact X X X a b c Comments: The Project involves a Minor Conditional Use Permit and Minor Modification (facade changes) for Mountain View Community Church to operate in an existing building, which is located on a fully developed site — no grading or site plan changes are proposed. 18.a. No Impact: The project site is surrounded by development and does not contain any viable habitat for fish or wildlife species. This is a project to be carried out in an existing building on a fully -developed parcel and does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 18.b. No Impact: This project will not have any affects that will be considered cumulatively considerable when viewed in connection with the effect of the past, current and future projects. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 18.c. No Impacts: The project will not have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, directly or indirectly. The Conditional Use Permit and Minor Modification for facade changes will be designed and developed consistent with the Development Code and the General Plan. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 31 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 analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by 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 they address site-specific conditions for the project. 1. The City's General Plan, Final Environmental Impact Report and the City of Temecula's Geographic Information System Map Sets were used as a referenced source in preparing the Initial Study for this project. The City's General Plan and Final Environmental Impact Report are available for review at the City of Temecula Planning Department located at 41000 Main Street in Temecula. The Geographic Information Systems Map Sets are available online at www.cityoftemecula.org. 2. The affects of the proposed project were adequately analyzed when the City of Temecula's General Plan and General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report were adopted and mitigation measures were incorporated. 3. No Mitigation Measures from earlier analyses have been relied upon for this project. Project specific mitigation measures, as identified in this document will be incorporated as Conditions of Approval to ensure that any potentially significant impacts are reduced to a Tess than significant level. All mitigation measures will be required per the project's Conditions of Approval and/or incorporated into the project. The Mitigation Monitoring Program is attached hereto to ensure that mitigation is implemented, monitored and enforced by all necessary departments and agencies. SOURCES 4. City of Temecula General Plan 5. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report 6. South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook 7. City of Temecula GIS Environmental Review/CEQA Overlays 8. Traffic Impact Anlaysis Report for Mountain View Community Church CUP, 101,619 SF Site at 26201 Ynez Road (APN 910-281-001). G:\PLANNING\2010\PA10-0318 Mountain View Church MOD\Planning\1 CEQA\CEQA Initial Study.doc 32 Mitigation Monitoring Program Project Description: A Minor Conditional Use Permit for Mountain View Community Church to operate in an existing building, which is located on a fully developed site — no grading or site plan changes are proposed. The church is proposing to occupy approximately 101,600 square feet of an existing 115,556 square foot building. The property is zoned Service Commercial (SC). In summary, the Church is proposing to utilize the building for office and administration purposes (up to 40 employees and volunteers) Monday through Friday with evening adult classes (up to 30 students) and choir practices (up to 150 singers). Saturdays will include up to 400 people for afternoon worship and day/evening theater performances. Sunday worship services will accommodate up to 450 people during 3 service times: 7:45-9:00 am; 10:00-11:30 am; and 12:00- 1:30 pm. The Church will include a banquet hall for weddings, funerals and outside functions, which are typically used on Thursday, Friday or Saturday. The project will involve a Minor Modification for minor facade changes to the existing building (no grading or site plan changes are proposed), including the addition of red sandstone veneer accent walls, four (4) new glass rollup doors (to replace existing), six (6) twelve -inch (12") diameter painted steel columns with steel tension rods over the office and worship hall entrances, and a fifty (50) foot stainless steel or anodized aluminum cross. Location: 26201 Ynez Road, Temecula, CA 92591 (APN 910-281-001) Applicant: Christopher Francis, Logos Design Collaborative 250 E. Rincon Street, Suite 103 Corona, CA 92879 General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Transportaion/Traffic Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths and mass transit? Traffic #1. The Project shall participate in the funding of its' Fair Share allocation for the 1-15 northbound ramp for the Existing - Plus Project Conditions and its' Fair Share allocation for Ynez Road and Date Street intersection for the Existing - Plus Project - Plus Approved Project (Cumulative Scenario). Based on the impacts identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Minagar and Associates, Inc for Existing Plus Project Conditions, the project's fair share for costs associated with 1 Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: restriping Winchester Road at the intersection of Winchester and the northbound 1-15 on ramp amounts to $81.24. In addition, the project's fair share for costs associated with Existing Plus Project Plus Approved Projects (Cumulative) amounts to $2,534.16. Total fair share contributions are $2,615.40. Place the above conditions of approval on this project to reduce traffic impacts to a Less Than Significant Impact. Payment of fees Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit Planning Department and Public Works Department 2 Case No: Applicant: Proposal: Notice of Public Hearing A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the City of Temecula PLANNING COMMISSION to consider the matter described below: Environmental: Case Planner: Place of Hearing: Date of Hearing: Time of Hearing: PA10-0317 and PA10-0318 Christopher Francis, Logos Design Collaborative A Minor Conditional Use Permit and Minor Modification (facade improvements) for Mountain View Community Church to operate in a Service Commercial (SC) zone and occupy approximately 101,619 square feet of an existing building located at 29201 Ynez Road (APN 910-281-001) In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed project will not have a significant impact upon the environment based upon a completed Environmental Initial Study and Mitigation Monitoring Plan. As a result, a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be adopted in compliance with CEQA. Matthew D. Peters, AICP, (951) 694-6408 City of Temecula, Council Chambers December 7, 2011 6:00 p.m. 250 500 Feet // \\ Notice of Public Hearing 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 the hearing. Any petition for judicial review of a decision of the Planning Commission shall be filed within the time required by, and controlled by, Sections 1094.5 and 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. In any such action or proceeding seeking judicial review of, which attacks or seeks to set aside, or void any decision of the Planning Commission, shall be limited to those issues raised at the hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing described in this notice. The proposed project application may be viewed at the City of Temecula Planning Department, 41000 Main Street, Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Questions concerning the project may be addressed to the case planner.