The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About042612 DH Agenda AGENDA TEMECULA PLANNING DIRECTOR'S HEARING � REGULAR MEETING April 26, 2012 1:30 P.M. TEMECULA CITY HALL Great Oak Conference Room 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 CALL TO ORDER: Patrick Richardson, Director of Planning and Development PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Director of Development Services on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Planning Director about an item not listed on the Agenda, a white "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the Planning Director. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state vour name and address. Item No. 1 1:30 p.m. Project Number: PA11-0281 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map (Waived Final Map) Project Title: American Life TPM Applicant: Stan Heaton Project Description: A Tentative Parcel Map (Waived Final Map) application to subdivide one partially developed lot (18.79 acres) into two lots Location: 42000 Zevo Drive Environmental Action: CEQA Section 15315, Class 15 Minor Land Divisions Project Planner: Eric Jones The agenda packet (including staff reports) will be available for viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center located at 41000 Main Street, Temecula after 4:00 p.m. the Friday before the Director's Hearing. At that time, the packet may also be accessed on the Cit�s website at www.citvoftemecula.org. _ Supplemental material received after the posting of the Agenda Any supplemental material distributed regarding any item on the Agenda, after the posting of the Agenda, will be available for public review in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, 8:00 a.m. — 5:00 p.m.). In addition, such material will be made available on the City's website —www.citvoftemecula.orq — and will be available for public review at the respective meeting. If you have any questions regarding any item of business on the Agenda for this meeting, please contact the Planning Department, (951) 694-6444. R:\1 DIRECTOR'S HEARINGWgendas�2012\04-26-12 Agenda.doc STAFF REPORT — PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA DIRECTOR'S HEARING DATE OF MEETING: April 26, 2012 PREPARED BY: Eric Jones, Case Planner PROJECT Planning Application Number PA11-0281, a Tentative Parcel Map SUMMARY: (Waived Final Map) application to subdivide one partially developed lot (18.79 acres) into two lots. The project is located at 42000 Zevo Drive RECOMMENDATION: Approve with Conditions CEQA: Categorically Exempt Section 15315, Class 15 Minor Land Divisions PROJECT DATA SUMMARY Name of Applicant: Stan Heaton on behalf of American Life Development Co., LLC General Plan Industrial Park (IP) Designation: Zoning Designation: Light Industrial (LI) Existing Conditions/ Land Use: Site: Existing Industrial Structure and Vacant Land / Industrial Park (IP) ` North: Existing Industrial Structures and Vacant Land / Industrial Park (IP) South: Zevo Drive, Existing Industrial Structures / Industrial Park (IP) East: Diaz Road / Open Space (OS) West: Existing Industrial Structures / Industrial Park (IP) Existinq/Proposed Min/Max Allowable or Required Lot Area: 18.79 Acres Existing 0.92 Acres Minimum Parcel One: 15.12 Acres Proposed Parcel 2: 3.67 Acres Proposed Total Floor Area/Ratio: .32 Existing .40 Maximum .40 Proposed Landscape Area/Coverage: N/A N/A Parking Required/Provided: N/A N/A G:\PLANNING\2011\PA11-0281 American Life TPM\Planning\Hearing\STAFF REPORT.doc1 BACKGROUND SUMMARY Planning Application PA11-0281 was submitted on November 3, 2012 by Stan Heaton on behalf of American Life Development Co. LLC. The application is for a Tentative Parcel Map (No. 35824) with a Final Map Waiver. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all concerns have been addressed, and the applicant concurs with the recommended Conditions of Approval. ANALYSIS The proposed Tentative Parcel Map (Waived Final Map) will divide an existing 18.79 acre lot � into two lots. The newly created parcel one will consist of 15.12 acres and features an existing industrial structure and related improvements. Parcel one will meet all Development Code requirements including, but not limited to, FAR. The newly proposed parcel two will consist of 3.67 acres and will meet all Development Code requirements. This area is currently vacant and no development is proposed for the parcel at this time. The applicant has also submitted an application for a Certificate of Compliance. This application is being reviewed separately. The project site is located within a criteria cell per the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). Therefore the applicant submitted a Habitat Acquisition and Negotiation Strategy/Joint Project Review application for review by staff and the Regional Conservation Authority of Western Riverside County (RCA). The RCA has determined that the project is in full compliance with the objectives of the MSHCP. The Elsinore Fault Zone runs through the western portion of the project area and will impact the . proposed parcels one and two. The project was reviewed by the Riverside County Geologist and he has indicated that the project may proceed since no development is proposed at this time. All future development will be required to meet the appropriate development and CEQA review requirements. LEGAL NOTICING REQUIREMENTS Notice of the public hearing was published in the Californian on April 12, 2012 and mailed to the property owners within the required 800-foot radius. , � ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review (Section 15315, Class 15 Minor Land Divisions). The Tentative Parcel Map will split one parcel into two. The project area is located on property within an urbanized area. The division is in compliance with the General Plan and zoning, requires no variances or exceptions, and has all service and access requirements available. Furthermore, the parcel was not involved in a division of a larger parcel within the previous two years and does not have an average slope greater than 20 percent. G:\PLANNING\2011\PA11-0281 American Life TPM\Planning\Hearing\STAFF REPORT.doc2 FINDINGS ' Tentative Parcel Map (Municipal Code Section 16.09.140) The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Subdivision Ordinance, Development Code, Temecula General Plan and the City of Temecula Municipal Code. As designed and conditioned, the proposed map is consistent with the Subdivisio.n Ordinance, Temecula General Plan, and the City of Temecula Municipal Code. The Tentative Map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into � pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the land is subject to a Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will not be too small to sustain their agricultural use. The proposed map does not impact land designated for conservation or agricultural use. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the Tentative Map. The proposed map subdivides 18. 79 acres into two parcels. The site is partially developed and no further developmenf is proposed at this time. The proposed Tentative Parcel Map design is consistent with the Temecula General Plan and the development standards for the Light Industrial zoning designation. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with Conditions of Approval, are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The project consists of a Tentative Parcel Map (with a Final Map waiver)on partially developed property. As conditioned, the subdivision is not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed by the Fire, Public Works, Planning, and Building and Safety Departments. As a result, the project is consistent or has been conditioned to be consistent with the City's General Plan and Municipal Code which contain provisions to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. The Tentative Parcel Map creates two parcels. New construction is not proposed for these parcels. Any future development will be required to complete the standard development and CEQA review process. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities to the extent feasible. G:\PLANNING�2011\PA11-0281 American Life TPM\Planning\Hearing\STAFF REPORT.doc3 The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public will be provided. All acquired rights-of-way and easements have been provided on the Tentative Map. The City has reviewed these easements and has found no potential conflicts. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). The project does not involve the construction of any residential uses and is therefore not subject to the City's parkland dedication requirements. ATTAC H M ENTS Vicinity Map Plan Reductions Resolution Exhibit A— Draft Conditions of Approyal Notice of Public Hearing , G:\PLANNING�2011\PA11-0281 American Life TPM\Planning\Hearing\STAFF REPORT.doc4 VICINITY MAP \ ,'�. .,` `.-\ , . � \ � '�� Q�� G�� ., , � � � �� , i � , ��.. o��o ,_ _l � � - � �� '��, � � - � / / � - / / � ��` ��> � �' �\ ; . � ' PA11-0281 � � � , % PJ ,; �. �� , �� , Q` / ,�' i -" / �, \ � (. i � � /�: / / \` --\ ; � � � � � �� ,, / / \� �' -� // . o j . �� ,� /. /, ; G�� • `�, � Q p � �- �� /� � � _ �` � i � � \O/ ��G � ��Li ..�� % �� j� � �., sr � '�. � .. / .� `� O � � �,� .� � `• ,,� �, •.. � � OP Pi f / � :' � � % � ., -'*�� / '"�� P J�� //�\ h `. . .� . `�l / //� 0 250 500 Feet PLAN REDUCTIONS TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 36420 FOR WAIVED FINAL MAP �� `°`�� PAII-0281 CITY OF TEMECULA I 4, 1� �;b_� PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP 24085-1, I '� '� ;f / LEGAL �ESCRIPTION: ON FILE IN HOOK 188 OF PARCEL MAPS, PAGES 70-72, q F ,,, ^ , m, � a� �w w�w„-,. w ��E COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ,a�� rz o.�= - -� �`° ),� � oasnnc 2onnrrc: �� . PREPARED APRIL 2012 � � _ ��„��_��.� r � „�r-�a 1.: PROPO&ED ZONING: I �� \ � !� +��_ u - uwr mousmiu / I ' GENERAL PLAN DESICNAT[ON: OAN6R X APPWCANT: GEN6R�t. NOT63: EASEMENT NOTES: y d„ ��` uNSmiK aiwx �uE�CW UiE Cf�FL I cWauix. LLc MC RqlAM� �hYS M4 RFAM6D x � n�tL RPQtoqP Bv �,� �� '/ �" \ ^••• ' � m5 Mq1CCi 5 Yiw1 MF wkTY'E CtlN11 [u1MPIUE r4LLi ZGMC 1KS-�WPIOYd�n5vnw4 Wnhvv (OC*WP ]L ]Pi) n.5 flAfT �D \ ' E7(�CI'f7(��IQ� P. fEL�9w 3 0]O�N � rN[ PNrt Cwmq15 Ord9ro .W GYKI1YJJiKfal C tII4n3 IM vMOM/9 fWinES n � .�A_ n.. , " 8 ( \ v \ L�, � ,.��t" �,� rs u0.6�Cila w9 �tam MNOr.Mx mu� r�v(A Wnu EpSM m RR ixSmWFNr x0. 119a ' PROP09ED L1ND 1ISE: �••: <r', - ' 9 sa ' uu K o r�«aom.wuw. a w. x l -' ti1,� � �. uwr mousmmu up ,,.ne�.s,��.�� .� simxocw oocs w� i.vw ra wwc Mc sa . ,.. v SI7R AREA PROPERI'Y A�DRESS: 0 M�.0 v�".w'��+�u��a .�s��:s�u u iona�"e an,. �"uo w I � 'd,� , �� w „�-� , �..a +a.n .wcz wvsx s,n (ma.s:..a s) •� avo ax�c, h�cm� c. t DEDICATION N07'B: w� muew s. �cvo .s «smwE„� nu ..nn n.. . �� iTn ITIF.g� N-M .F.R/R .PR .�.NTA17 � � � � r �^E^' � ro weuc us mn sa¢cr �� 6� u ix nnm I VICINITY lIAPd '�.�`�� j � `u ou» e � ow w�s�ous w�sm�� .�u ma o.m�u � � w I '' `�� r. crnc �a uu.ow�. msa� e. eowwn,w .o�a�n.c ax .(w z.�`oss-�� .s o�is�m,.nir xa uzns ax`� c�.v��o�r rs x�oR%ae W5� „ G�aaaxu �MMO'�eiE�J ��£x� 5 u wniw o°sma "" aE"NA°a"a� °" a�' G60TECHNICAL NOTE: w:+c�i �wo �;aoA« ^ w.+ea o�m+�c. re� oaa-eea-aeoa a.w . wr ra+ �aau ov�. .ro mww�k vwooxs. ucworn awe ��, �oe� oa-x' i>Ei �wir N.z.n� c �a .re e.sco w �s i+s�movw+.a a.n, vw usc �r a nor nartnaa c:e¢ nu n �-e�o-m�e ��e�aa, eu.i� n�...o��wi,�.w izae:'""sner ou rzviaati c: vzss�i cvs iei- e.s s LEGEND: S�CA �ISTRICT: 19 " E """ E rut �wirxo � i .Kaun uc - ._ . �'" j _� "�, v\ �. V 1 1 i l., � l 1 \, � a c,�.c sod oaw ��, � � � Ge �� Fe�u m.00n zorre: �� i � � 1 <_ ' , aw,, � � � � t.� � �- ' / ° ' "� � � � zac+c 1�� J'� �/ /ir - r�. 1., ir \\ �. � oc OMRAPHY: �J' Y �� +�^ � "� J`�f � � /' �/ ��I � �. __._ � .•w,_ � .. �'� I a � \ \ . .� TOP f�/�J> w.��'�.�y/ ,, - .r.? i, ��..,��'_�,, � : j ' I ,- I'�� , �� +'� 'i�l � '`� �z..\`` d��``\.so �. 17 E.R;.i�remm�� e, o.i,. ��iati;� o.,FO �o-:, �o . ��L, � � a t� • E �Yi� ; : � �c�-. � �__ i ,, � �, � f . i � � , u �, 1 �• , �' � ` 3 , sa' }. - �o. s � a�, f0.�� h s if�° � �h. . '` 4 '�k u.� .zl� �_ °J! i h �' M irncm�ruan ��o�q> d ��,«��`�� /,� �- �� ';�'=fi� ��I � I� �� `�i ,dl 1��,:� ,��'�`� ,�.�}'(� � ..... r . � ?AFiCcL 2 �.M LD9/9G'-30 '_� �1�i, PA�CcL ",2 P:M. 190/85-97.�,� !'� PArICF_L"?,� 3 I �.M 1f30/95i97 `� t Ns�� ., �y `(t�, �� `� �„�'° e D j° ''r�, i � I � } � .�' . °a "� �-VFlCFlNTf< �", i ,, � ' IGH7° INU' UoT'i121_1 � � � , Q -.� ��/�1 u� �r4 �r'�.fi11 r'��_�.�a' '�,� � -i y. ' � " �� , '�' `` L j, � � � ,,�• ,�, �.� J �' � Z'j /`,� � �I_1GH71NDl�S7R1/�� . _� --��'�� LI(�H7'INDUo7RIAL �� P� t;C .I}� f �� 1 ✓(.'•. �� I � /��F�ti (+Z� -� G !�, rI � I �i i , � � FI \ � . � _�, �I � >•,. i � l I i V -h� /i �,ano ', a l \ Y ,v Nz. ��a / � i \ p. L ;�I i I � o � "< ` �. � � �m°m �� (�� -� '. . @ �ti� ilir I ��j--�.r, �v.;;, ° C ' �, � r� ,y " ) � -�. � �' ^ , �� _ __ l � � j4'E./ {� �U\ � /.x"°" � -,�� '�' � /�� I� I � ' � ��, k 1I L�_ -1 y ' f 43� ��t�`�' ` � � $ � �Q-. '� '_ r ,� � � . . ._u} ,,. , � � 4 � ��'�1�� y II '' 1N36 � + � �� ' \ a� ��. 0 � 2 , r� -�l � �` L �= ri �� L,. �.nua osao E- _ ) �, u.ms so , .. � � L" • �� j � �,5"`� , c c+� r o '�' i 1 �� m\ 1 1 �"'�f�� r;i ��`'� � � �,��_''� \ � q.��}�,1 r,i_� ?i;��Fixrs7i"��Ji1�IT,}(ii"d?TTt'f�.9�'v''f�l� r��,�� ., r� w�� `�';' �N °• d � .r � ° : l c��, ' l �'. � /�� . � � �� \��` // � � � � < � u °e i �'�.. _ � ��\� � -v� : �� '�' �` `� a �i ; rvso i s�az w-'� l� �. ii� � y � � c � �� 1 � ,, � I ., .t ." �- '� � ' ) � ' �" `� _ �'L `�3 �� '` , � a � �V � \ '& � ` � 2 �s � 1 � .r �, + � = ;. \ r � i � ?'" _ ., e � � . � N p b � e 9 i v ''>, ' � ;�� , :� . , , � � ,r, �J �� it�tu��r�a l�_/d� � , �� t. f � N�� o�,� � �,�, -� \i"°�' .�- i Naeros�ao'E. � aae.ss. 6 ,� . �`,- ?, i � -. - - ��_ � €�. '�. N� �� 4 r. � p � � r �•, e q� , . 1 � �,) � \�',` i,, 1 ` � oonowiw: �I� �,� �� _ Y . t __�;��I'�� -^+`S1 �v,7� ' \ y; � . - O '�s'z - .� ( _ .. / / � � 1 a) �.� \ cJr �� / �. , ° . y . . ♦- - �$�t\ , \ 6 � . Q � I x „y'�.� j� �C .+ �^�� . Al ��`��l' �`R / .v�.iaore�wn000awwn� '�� . �� (<.� � . -_:��. _ _ . �� _ 1�'�� 1 x�l � � �� $r. � � � f- : C i I � � � `i ��`_.f � '�� - � m ��'- ��rEMa w,RV � � � f �.`t �� t�� S- ?' , � �� k � ` � 1 , � � '�_��77�!�`�Y��,,, � /� ...�� _�� .-„{,�� .�� .�� i. r:a�� i �z �E �� '� P��i15�.'��_�. �_� -.., '.. . � ,K1'`'"" � � �`�m� ��`.iL<� . , % . . Cr ., --� - � ' ' -' " _ AC. GR � i , ,, ��• — _ , ' ; � : "� i5.iz oss a r+er' i _ {3 � �- �� 4 � �T � �„ ;��1 � �, �. � � i � �: I EXI�7ING 1NDJST�iIAI �� , ✓ \t'„ t� � > � PARCEL 2 .- � — t= �.' — t i � � k�� '�- ,� � � I �, .. N , M ��,� � � ,,��-`_f 36�,�..,��55,� � � �,� �, , � ,� � �� r � � } t,; �� I � _ � ��; �r �', � 3� �� , , � � � ,�` Z � ( .� � `� �, .�, \ � ( - o �'� �. `� �� 1 .�'� �� I t ` �'' � 'I . �ic �/ v' (1 . '��I _ ' _. . . � ;C7� f��t`�� 1 �` 4, 59 \ � < `t• 4 _ I L � ry, ', ` .Jti__ ` ,t - � I�� •. 1 L� � l /. � i,i, . I ..- T I �� \ �''. `Pa�v; �� t . � \ M 1 � . +' C!7 c.. F_' 'il �i\ � l � ". � _,, f "� ' �� ) � ` "i � ( �'� J ; / � � I l , . . . . _ � ,• .�s� . �,�'�{', C � � \ � f ` ? \ 1 N i ..^ .� . . ��i, �t �� . I .,: --�. .. .,V { � ,o, \ .:•�:T ;� `�'y' .�.� y� I• I `�� i \ � : . -. � � . � . .. .. � � �' %%`N ��3 ?.? �" � \•,, ti � h� �,-� ; �, N � }, l, .FAULT. � � l -� � J `5+" � �. �, �0 9 . i O � vr�.;�� ;�:serancK�, _,�j�� ``�,. ��ti�)'� $1 � r'�,�/ . h--� o-J��r!� i `� - — �� / `�,`�� ,. \ x ) �-- � � z \. �r� .� • ��:�� ;� •�c � \� .J... \- � .�( i 1 t • _ �L �� - i�=:L �',:r ` r � = -1 '� . , ,�' - `�,•� �=��- _.�U _ ''� 3•. / _ ' wv.°...�-o .. � °\ \ �.�i � � i � 4 � o ' N � , c �,�; +`��rt �'�� .//��'^!.�S ..�_ J�t �\ l<�1 l ��'�, ,`'ai� r!.�ulfiT i7i� <.I _*I'T'�'d: �+ ,.. �i �`3l" _ ' � :\ =:�-� •ti\�-i r' o�� -.�_ t.»,- �`�` ti ��f�i: 4` :L �..� %(r' ;r,-• � �,• � Fnu�T� `� � ' ��a , sa : �. f�" '•a , � �;, �- ° } ,� /.�e . - : �cess,�`� .,,�� \ \�' ;, �; ( ��° P'�. � .`-�f�-5.,_.�r.,. .. � �. _ ._ 4 � ....•. �--�---'. � ,.. .�, � !' ° i,.' 't.i{_11'Y �-_ , , / fi '. �,� , J;. - � . t� � \,_ sf,f _z < x';'r `�y T d-. .:>'qCwT s . _". .,.,..�: a � I i ! � ItU"4Yi i E 9�1 ��', .1 E 41)f Fi f �,+` � k. j�k.l�< :K.��'�YfaJU..I�-� v - / ' _ r, \ � � •,� ,a. •?� t£� 1 -- --Nas-0sao-E aaro� - � -- � I,11,.€ _-- - .� - _ rr �_ - *` 'z y�� t , , r tr- - o �� =- ,>, .- t--- -- aee .'_"�'` . -�=s�o�a7� .: .'_ . . � �... ��i � � � �� \,\ ' s - �b^ - _�e _ ..-- . . - � .. _ a ccE -� - � .s --- - - �- --- . --- ?+ ze nccess.� -- _�� z i . �.- � �. �\\\ �' �� _� �°� --�C+ i_ '�, --- --��° _ d - ZEVQ .DRIVE �'. — �� S� �;�di'�/ . — s =� - z- — m — — — — .inr e — _ _ ..� z`s^�� r � " � � , 3 . / /.� � . rus.us ao E � . ^ �2u,48: � > . L . ��°°�y )� � �.� � � - � �°�" - , - p -,°v : F � :. � � ..- _ _ -._ ; , . - ,�a _ - ff=zraso -� {�'_ f�. �� I C r _ _ _ _ � y _ _ _ � z._ �. �„ . , . �_ '»-�- � � _ f� b pl. t . • _'- _ r �, , ' � f:_ : ; _ , � �;, � ; w. � �+., _t ti ,,.t>' ^, , . , _ � � g t , � 'L �� , � r ll R , ..� Y '"' 'y�. � � �cl�.it__� �y..� �. ��,�?, ,�'�CY� 11-? ��:. �,�„z. "�. C , l '� [' a'r` � t �t 1., . -�`� �� ?• � �J�.._. � �..5 y ��il � \. . n �i.. Y a. 6 ' =� - -. v �i,..� -'� - �� lfdl� y. '� � a 9 �c Ff[k'tl t , �. , y � �1�9 v y �' v '°� .i P� . . � :. : � t � r. � :4:..._ . .i i'1 �ti '�-�1' � y . � '� � °� 4 - '?��P.M. 1B9/8� E8� .�� + �` , ,., � � ` v' PA�C�`' 1 �`'� M ; ; ' ` , ' , � '� .�. ,I _ „ � -- _ a \•\�� r. it �' ��I ��c.�.�;� ,. `s.I '�. . �r' �. �, ��ik. . � _ �°l �' k:' �--+ i�. �a. .^,�' � LIGH7� INDU�7�IA1 � � PU'�LIC 1NET17UfI�JNAL `� " �' "� � � � � aM an ^ti wn � � a w sa �zo zao T� �� ' � € SCALE �'' ; a � 60' r � � tY �a Q� I 23_� � WW � I � I� �� p I = I VI i�y ��.r.;.�i�; S,,.'� :.Y. ✓,,..� �,.,e�r<.,�:��;:' I I � s!r M:'n"u -�,`�"'� � Q 1 I �"I �E �� JOSEPM E. BONADIMAN 6 AS60CIA7ES INC. CI � OF �MECU�.A O ��n2 AO/U ZEW OIdK CO�SUIIIf1g 2figIf12Ef9 10fItl SUNBy05 w � TENTATIVE PARCEL IdAP No. 36420 � SEC770N A-A S6CTNON B-B 6 � p34N.MOwheadAVe.,SanBemartlino.CA.92408 PAlI-028t ��_� U xin Phone:(909)885-3806 Far: (90g)3at-1727 PARCEL t OF PARCEL NAP 210B5-t, ON FILE W IN BOOR 188 OF PARCEL EIAPS. PACES 70-72 """ �° � � d RESOLUTION DH RESOLUTION NO. 12- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNiNG APPLICATION NO. PA11-0281, A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP (WAIVED FINAL MAP) APPLICATION TO SUBDIVIDE ONE PARTIALLY DEVELOPED LOT (18.79 ACRES) INTO TWO LOTS. THE PROJECT IS LOCATED AT 42000 ZEVO DRIVE (APN 909-370-006) Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Director of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On November 3, 2011, Stan Heaton, on behalf of American Life Development, filed Planning Application No. PA11-0281 a Tentative Tract Map Application (waived Final Map) 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 Director, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on April 26, 2012, 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 Director's Hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Director approved Planning Application No. PA11-0281 subject to Conditions of Approval, after finding that the projecf proposed in Planning Application No. PA11-0281, conformed to the City of Temecula's General Plan Development Code (Municipal Code Section 16). Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Director, in approving Planning Application No. PA11-0281, hereby� makes the following findings as required by Municipal Code Section 16.09.140. A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Subdivision Ordinance, Development Code, Temecula General Plan and the City of Temecula Municipal Code; As designed and conditioned, the proposed map is consistent with the Subdivision Ordinance, Temecula General P/an, and the City of Temecula Municipa/ Code. B. The Tentative Map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the land is subject to a Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will not be too small to sustain their agricultural use; The proposed map does not impact land designated for conservation or agricultural use. C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the Tentative Map; The proposed map subdivides 18.79 acres into two parce/s. The site is partial/y developed and no further development is proposed at this time. The proposed � Tentative Parcel Map design is consistent with the Temecula General P/an and the development standards for the Light Industria/ zoning designation. D. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with Conditions of Approval, are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; The project consists of a Tentative Parcel Map on partially developed property. As conditioned, the subdivision is not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidab/y injure �sh or wildlife or their habitat. E. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems; The project has been reviewed by the Fire, Public Works, Planning, and Building and Safety Departments. As a resu/t, the project is consistent or has been conditioned to be consistent' with the City's General Plan and Municipal Code which contain provisions to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public. F. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible; The Tentative Parcel Map creates two parce/s. IVew construction is not proposed for these parcels. Any future development will be required to comp/ete the standard development and CEQA review process. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities to the extent feasib/e. G. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public will be provided; All acquired rights-of-way and easements have been provided on the Tentative Map. The City has reviewed these easements and has found no potential conflicts. H. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby); The project does not involve the construction of any residential uses and is therefore not subject to the City's parkland dedication requirements. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The Planning Director hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Conditional Use Permit Application: A. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review (Section 15315, Class 15 Minor Land Divisions); The Tentative Parce/ Map will split one parcel into two. The project area is located on property within an urbanized area. The division is in compliance with the General P/an and zoning, requires no variances or exceptions, has all service and access requirements availab/e. Furthermore, the parce/ was not involved in a division of a larger parcel within the previous two years and does not have an , average slope greater than 20 percent. Section 4. Conditions. The Planning Director of the City of Temecula approves Planning Application No. PA11-0281, a Tentative Parcel Map (Waived Final Map) application to subdivide one partially developed lot (18.79 acres) into two lots. The project is located at 42000 Zevo Drive (APN: 909-370-006), subject to the Conditions of Approval set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this . reference. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Director this 26th day of April, 2012 Patrick Richardson, Director of Planning and Development I, Cynthia Lariccia, Secretary of the Temecula Director's Hearing, do hereby certify that the forgoing DH Resolution No. 12- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Director of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 26th day of April, 2012. Cynthia Lariccia, Secretary EXHIBIT A DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA11-0281 Project Description: A Tentative Map (Waived Final Map) application to subdivide one partially developed lot into finro lots Assessor's Parcel No.: 909-370-006 MSHCP Category: Exempt (No New Square Footage/Grading) DIF Category: Exempt (No New Square Footage) TUMF Category: Exempt (No New Square Footage) Quimby Category: Exempt (Non Residential Project) Approval Date: April 26, 2012 Expiration Date: April 26, 2015 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within 48 Hours of the Approval of This Project 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 Sixty-Four pollars ($64.00) for the Counry administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15062. If within said 48-hour period the applicanU developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)). General Requirements 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 Ciry 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 o�cials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall G:\PLANNING�2011\PA11-0281 American Life TPM\Planning\Hearing\COAs.doc 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 the approval of this project. PL-4. This approval shall be used within three years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the three year period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. . PL-5. The Planning Director may, upon an application being filed prior to expiration, and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to 5 one-year extensions of time, one year at a time. PL-6. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved site plan and elevations contained on file with the Planning Department. PL-7. Other than stormwater, it is illegal to allow liquids, gels, powders, sediment, fertilizers, landscape debris, and waste from entering the storm drain system or from leaving the property. Spills and leaks must be cleaned up immediately. Do not wash, maintain, or repair vehicles onsite. Do not hose down parking areas, sidewalks, alleys, or gutters. Ensure that all materials and products stored outside are protected from rain. Ensure all trash bins are covered at all times. PL-8. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless modified by the conditions listed below. An Extension of Time may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request, if made 60 days prior to the expiration date. PL-9. A Certificate of Compliance shall be submitted, reviewed and approved bythe Cityafter the public hearing appeal period for the waived map has passed. The Certificate of Compliance shall be recorded immediately after City approval to legalize this land _ division approval since a Final Map Waiver has been approved. OUTSIDE AGENCIES PL-10. The applicant shall abide by all requirements stipulated in the letter from the Regional Conservation Authority dated March 30, 2012. PL-11. The applicant shall abide by all requirements stipulated in the letter from the Riverside County Planning Department (County Geologist) dated March 29, 2012. G:\PLANNING�2011\PA11-0281 American Life TPM\Planning\Hearing\COAs.doc egionai onservation q�,tho�� W��, �,�� , Boazd of IJirectors Chairman J'm xyatt March 30 2012 City of Calimesa � Vice Chairman � �� Marion Ashley - � County of Riz�erside Eric Jones ` � ,.:: xeV�n sasn City of Temecula '�� ,��9 City of Norco 41000 Main Street �Y William Batey '""�--., CityofMorenoValley Temecula, California 92590 , 7,� Ben Benoit City of Wildomnr John Benoit Dear Mr. Jones: County of Riverside Roger Berg City of Beaa�n:ortt Please find the following JPR attached: Randy Bonner City of Cattyon Lnke Bob Buster " CoienEy of Riz�erside JPR 12-02-22-01. The Local Identifier is PM 36420 - American Life Maryann Edwards Tentative Parcel Map, City of Temecula PA11-0281. The JPR file attached CityofTemecula includes the following Thomas Fuhrman � City o�Menifee � RCA JPR Mike Gazdner �j(hlblt A , Vicinity Map with MSHCP Schematic Cores and Linkages City ofRiverside � Linda Krupa • Exhibit B, Criteria Area Cells with MSHCP Vegetation and Project Location CityofHemet . Exhibit C, Criteria Area Cells with MSHCP Soils and Project Location VemeLauritzen • Exhibit E, Criteria Area Cells with Aerial Photography and Proposed CityofJurupaValley Project Impacts Alan Long . Regional Map. Cih� of MurrieEn John Machisic Cihj of Bannrng Melissa Melendez Thank you, Cit uf Lake Elsi�iore Scott Miller City of San ]acinto Eugene Montanez • City of Corona Stephanie tanderfer Adam Rush N/estern Riverside County Regiona) Conservation Authority Cih� of Ensn�ale Jeff Stone County of Riverside John Tavaglione County of Riverside cc: Karin Cleary-Rose Heather A. Pert MarkYarbrough U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service California Dept. of Fish and Game c`r�ofP�`S 777 East Tahquitr Canyon Way, Suite 208 3602 Inland Empire Blvd. #C220 F�cecutive Staff palm Springs, California 92262 Ontario, California 91764 Charles Landry Executive Director 3403 10�h Street, Suite 320 Riverside, California 92501 P.O. Box 1667 Riverside, California 92502-1667 Phone: (951) 955-9700 Fax:(951)955-8873 www.wrc-rca.ore egional RCA Joint Project Review (JPR) onsenration JPR #: 12-02-22-01 A lf�hOt`i� Date: 3/30/12 /'1 Westem Rtverside Courtty Project Information Permittee: City of Temecula Case Information: PM 36420 - American Life Tentative Parcel Map Site Acreage: 18.79 acres Portion of Site Proposed for MSHCP Conservation Area: 0 acres Criteria Co�sistency Review Consistency Conclusion: The project is consistent with both the Criteria ancl Other Plan requirements. Data: Applicable Core/Linkage: Proposed Constrained Linkage 13 Area Plan: Southwest Area APN Sub-Unit Cell Group Cell 909-370-006 SU1 - Murrieta Creek Inde endent 6782 Criteria and Project Information Criteria Comments: a. As stated in Section 3.2.3 of the MSHCP, "Proposed Constrained Linkage 13 consists of Murrieta Creek, located in the southwestern region of the Plan Area. Proposed Constrained Linkage 13 connects Existing Core F(Santa Rosa Plateau Ecological Reserve) in the north to Proposed Linkage 10 in the south. Proposed Constrained Linkage 13 is constrained along most of its length by existing urban Development and agricultural use and the planned land use surrounding the Linkage consists of city (Murrieta and Temecula). Therefore, care must be taken to maintain high quality riparian Habitat within the Linkage and along the edges for species such as yellow warbler, yellow-breasted chat, and least Bell's vireo, which have key populations located in or along the creek. Maintenance of existing floodplain processes and water quality along the creek is also important to western pond turtle and arroyo chub in thi's area." b. The site is located within Cell 6782. As stated in Section 3.3.15 of the MSHCP, "Conservation within Cell 6782 will contribute to assembly of Proposed Constrained Linkage 13. Conservation within Cell 6782 will focus on the existing Murrieta Creek channel and adjacent grassland habitat to the extent feasible. Areas conserved within Cell 6782 will be connected to habitat proposed for conservation in Cell 6656 to the northwest and to grassland and adjacent habitat proposed for conservation in Ce116783 to the east. Conservation within Cell 6782 will be approximately 5% of the Cell focusing in the northeastern portion of the Cell." 1 of 4 egional RCA Joint Project Review (JPR) �onsenration JPR #: 12-02-22-01 �V#h01� Date: 3/30/12 Westem R)versfde CouMy c. Rough Step: The proposed project is within Rough Step Unit 5. Rough Step Unit 5 encompasses 91,734 acres within the southwestern corner of western Riverside County and includes the Santa Rosa Plateau, the Tenaja Corridor, and Murrieta Creek. Within Rough Step Unit 5, there are 24,326 acres within the Criteria Area. Key vegetation communities within Rough Step Unit 5 include coastal sage scrub; grasslands; riparian scrub, woodland, forest; Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub; and woodlands and forests. In 2010, all vegetation categories are "in" rough step except for coastal sage scrub, which is "out" of rough step. Based on the biological report prepared by Principe and Associates, the vegetation communities on site include residential/urban/exotic; however, the MSHCP vegetation mapping shows the site as Grasslands. Despite the two different vegetation categories shown for the site, the development on the project site will not impact the vegetation category (coastal sage scrub) that is currently "out" of rough step. d. Project information was provided by City ot l emecuia, as weii as in the Ivl�ril;r l:onsistency �naiysis prepared by Principe and Associates dated January 12, 2012, which was provided by the Permittee in the JPR application. Additional information prepared by Principe and Associates dated March 6, 2012, was also submitted. The site is located at 42000 Zevo Drive, at the northwest corner of the intersection of Diaz Road and Zevo Drive in the City of Temecula, California. The site was initially graded around 1996. By 2004, the site was developed with a 263,464 square foot industrial building and paved parking , lot and concrete loading docks by Zevo Golf situated at the eastern half of the site with a golf course and driving range with trees and shrubs planted on the western half of the site. The golf course and driving range has been abandoned. The project proposes a tentative parcel map to subdivide the site into two parcels. No specific development is being proposed at this time. e. Reserve Assembly: The project site is located in the south-central portion of Cell 6782, which is not located within the northeastern part of the area described for Conservation. Therefore, the project does not affect the Reserve Assembly goals of the MSHCP. Other Plan Requirements Data: Section 6.1.2 — Was Riparian/Riverine/Vernal Pool Mapping or Information Provided? Yes. There are no riparian/riverine areas on the project site. There are no vernal pools on the project site and soils are not suitable for fairy shrimp habitat. Section 6.1.3 — Was Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Infortnation Provided? No. The project site is not located within a Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area (NEPSSA). Section 6.3.2 — Was Additional Survey Information Provided? Yes. The project site is not located within a Criteria Area Species Survey Area (CASSA). However, the project site is located within an Additional Survey Area for burrowing owl. 2of4 egional RCA Joint Project Review (JPR) onsenration JPR #: 12-02-22-01 A �h�� Date: 3/30/12 Wesbem Rlverstde Courrty Section 6.1.4 — Was Information Pertaining to Urban/Wildland Interface Guidelines Provided? Yes. The property is located near future and existing Conservation Areas. Other Plan Requirement Comments: a. Section 6.1.2: According to the MSHCP Consistency Analysis prepared by Principe and Associates dated January 12, 2012, the site is fully developed within the eastern half of the site. Principe and Associates stated that no natural watercourses are present on site and does not contain riparian vegetation or riverine habitat. Also, Principe and Associates stated there are no areas of suitable habitat for vernal pools or fairy shrimp due to the lack of biological functions and values on site. However, since some of the soils on site are mapped as being saline-alkali, which can be suitable soils for fairy shrimp, Principe and Associates conducted a site visit on March 6, 2012. Principe and Associates noted that on March 3, 2012, fairy shrimp were observed in an unincorporated area of Riverside County east of the City of Temecula and used that as the basis of possible occurrence of fairy shrimp in the local area of the project site. Principe and Associates did not observe ponding water or cracked soils during the time of the March 6, 2012, site visit. Principe noted that there was no substrate of hardpan or silty clay near the surface that would restrict the percolation of water. Principe stated that soils present in the abandoned golf course and driving range located in the western portion of the site are sandy loams that are well-drained and noted that the seasonally wet depression located in the center of the abandoned golf course and driving range was dry. Based on the information provided by Principe and Associates, the project demonstrates compliance with Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP. b. Section 63.2: The project site is located within an Additional Survey Area for burrowing owl. A habitat assessment was conducted by Principe and Associates on February 14, 2012, and a complete visual and walk-over field survey was conducted on March 6, 2012. No burrowing owls, suitable burrowing owl habitats, or signs of burrowing owls were detected during the time of the habitat assessment and survey. Based on the information provided by Principe and Associates, the project demonstrates compliance with Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP. c. Section 6.1.4: To preserve the integrity of areas near the project site which are proposed Conservation Areas, the guidelines contained in Section 6.1.4 related to controlling adverse effects for development adjacent to the MSHCP Conservation Area should be considered by the Pernuttee in their actions relative to the project. Specifically, the Permittee should include as project conditions of approval the following measures: i. Incorporate measures to control the quantity and quality of runoff from the site entering the MSHCP Conservation Area. In particular, measures shall be put in place to avoid discharge of untreated surface runoff from developed and paved areas into MSHCP Conservation Areas. . ii. The use chemicals or generation of bioproducts such as manure, which are potentially toxic or may adversely affect wildlife species, habitat or water qua.lity shall not result in discharge to the MSHCP Conservation Area. The greatest risk is from landscaping fertilization overspray and run-off. 3of4 egional RCA Joint Project Review (JPR) onsenration JPR #: 12-02-22-01 ��h�� Date: 3/30/12 Westem Riverside CouMy . iii. Night lighting shall be directed away from the MSHCP Conservation Area to protect species within the MSHCP Conservation Area from direct night lighting. Shielding shall be incorporated in project designs to ensure ambient lighting in the MSHCP Conservation Area is not increased. iv. Proposed noise generating land uses affecting the MSHCP Conservation Area shall incorporate setbacks, berms or walls to minimize the effects of noise on MSHCP Conservation Area resources pursuant to applicable rules, regulations and guidelines related to land use noise standards. v. Consider the. invasive, non-native plant species listed in Table 6-2 of the MSHCP in approving landscape plans to avoid the use of invasive species for the portions of the project that are adjacent to the MSHCP Conservation Area. Considerations in reviewing the applicability of this list shall include proximity of planting areas to the MSHCP Conservation Areas, species considered in the planting plans, resources being protected within the MSHCP Conservation Area and their relative sensitivity to invasion, and barriers to plant and seed dispersal, such as walls, topography and other features. , vi. Proposed land uses adjacent to the MSHCP Conservation Area shall incorporate barriers, where appropriate in individual project designs to minimize unauthorized public access, domestic animal predation, illegal trespass, or dumping into the MSHCP Conservation Areas. Such barriers may include native landscaping, rocks/boulders, fencing, walls, signage, and/or appropriate mechanisms. Manufactured slopes associated with the proposed site development shall not extend into the MSHCP Conservation Area. SNS/ST 4 of 4 From: 9519550000 Page: 1/9 Date: 4!2/2012 8:31:03 AM � R��R,��Q��-�17X T ^�"'� ..... .... � �I � � � � � � ' .. � .. � � � � � � � � � . / 1 CplO�/t ,�NLS �tltQ Dt�+ector March 29, 2012 Pages.9 (inciuding;thi� caver) City af Temecula Pianning Department ' . FAX: (951) 894-6477 Attention: Etic Jones . , RE: GEd02139 Review Comments � American 1.1fe Oevelopment � � City o� T proJect No, PA11-0281 ! Gounty`Geologlc Report (GEO)_No: 2139, sutimitted for this.project (City of Temecula PA11-0281- American life Development) was prepared �by AKW Geotei�inlcat and Is entitled ,"Fault Rupture Hazard Evaluation, 4200 Zevo Or1ve, City of Temecula, Riv�side County, Callfomie",; dated January 31, 2010. In s�dditian,.AKW submitted " Fault Rupture H�rd Evaluation, 42000.Zevb Drive, City crF .,. : . , Temecula, Califomla; Respanse _tq Revlew Comment�",,dated February.,6, 2010 >, ; �., : . , . . ,�; � , . . , ; _, , .. ,::.. , . ,. This docuin�rrt is herein in corporate as a part of GE0021�9: it should be noted�that it,his�February.8� 20�2 respanse to comments addressed some of the County's previous comments, �requests defetral of some of the required wark (add�ional.trenchmg,.age dating, etc.) ur�til futu , planned site development. Hence,"the follt�wiiig comments reflect the �tatus of, this reviewai's, position an the • . responses provided to date (AKW February. 6, 201U). FurEf�ier wo�ic is��required ptior to this study ` meeting the minimum requirements for apptovat of the ,GEQ repoct .., .;.. ;_ ! ..x�: : . � , .. , �:: � Pr�or ta approval of this GEO report, the foilowing clarific�tion and/or addit�onal inform�tion sh�il e�lso be submittetl to the"County �eologlst for review and approval. ,In additlon, clari�cati�i and/or � additional iiiform�tion; ��lative tii the issues enumerated by Geop�c�ca:in their Febniary 28,:2012 � Geotechnical Report Review Ch�cac Correc�ians memo, slial( be submitted to the Cou(nty ��oto�ist for raview �nd approval. • • . ; ,: - The fqllowing are outstending issues th�t must be r'edified prior to appro��l of this �� GEO report; the original wprding and nurnb�ring included in the County's January 5, �012 comments letter is prov�ded �long with supplemental discussion as appropriate: ; 1. Consultar�t's response aoceptable. � � ( 2. Consultarrt's response ac�eptable_ � . . .. . � ;. , . , :. 3. The r,onsultant recommends identrfi,catian of preci�e /ocaflon of the fau/t fracejlocated at:fhe . ► nonhwesfem comer of th� site. Thf� should be peiformed et fhis time and inc�udetl in the. an�lysis, concluslons, end recommendat�ons for this projecf. � � , . ._ : ; . This revievirer previously concurred ;Vvith and still c,�onCUrs.with lhis reoommendation.� However, a�tematively it may be acceEitable for the City to move forvvard,wlth the proRo ed two-parcel subd'ivision with the stipulation that alf land located�to the west of the existing �uilding be barred frQm development pending precise location of all fault t`raoe(s) and Complete aidequake Riverside Office �, 4080 Lemon Street, 12th Floor DeseR Office � 38686 E� Cerrito Road P.O. Box 1409, Riverside, Cal'domia 92502 Palm Desert� Califomia 9�211 (951) 955�3200 • Fax (951) 85r1811 (78� 883-8277 • Fex (760) 863-7555 From: 9518550000 Page: ?/9 Date: 4/2/2012 8:31:03 AM documehtation of the fault� rupture pote�ia{ is �provided. ` , ' Y 4. Cansultant'� response acceptable. , . � 5. Consult2�nt's response ecceptable. � 6. Consultant'� response accepteble. 7. Consultant's �e�ponse acceptable. j 8. Consultant's responae �cceptable. , , 9. Consultant's �esponse acceptable. ` . __ 10. The consulta� should pmvlde fhe Joglc used /n determining the wfdth of their. 'prnposed Reatrlded Use Zo�es Gfven no cur "rent known propos�l for,the type of occupancy to be placed nn lhl_c eitg th,a n.nn.ai�lfAnt �ehni►1rl �MMkIII�Y I'lw fi�r �fhnr fiinnn �} ��aac� /J w i.rf�iw..I , . • IOIIY��MMlIV1lV iv� vanvi aJ�vvv v� Yoo1a yi-R. Vl1N4Q! atructures, �cel! towers, ,etc.)? .; � � . � : . .: . Given the lack of development plans and the �incomplete assessmeirt of the fe�it, rupture. hazard for ihe this site, all land�in the we�t of the e�dsting bnilding �should be ban�ed frqm devalopment � pending precise locatlon of al! #ault tra�(s) and complete adequate documentation of the fault . ruptuce pirtentlal��ls provlded: • � . , � 91. Tlte �oitsu/tant`should plot tiie trend�of'fhe faults encountened on thls site on tl�elrFau/t Tmnch Locatron Map and fheir Site Geologic Nlap. ,°�� _" ' ° : _ ; . ., The consuttant did not provide the�plot of the f�ult trends and recommends additional trenching. This reviewer ooncurs wl#h #he recommendation for add�tional trenching. The �rends at all feultg r. :.: :, : , . .. encounter�d on the site arid indicated�in alf c�tt�er referen�ed g�ologic studies �hould be'piotted� ' on an appropriately sc'�led map far this site and`these data sfiould also be incljuded 'on, the cross sections�produced`forthis report. � � � , Given the (adc �Df development plans and the incompiete assessment of the fault rupture haz.ard for the this site, all land in the west of the existing,buitding•should be bamed from deyelopment pending precise loc�i#ion of�all fault.trace(s) and cornplete adequate docume�itation of the'fault � ruAture � potential . . 1s . � provided. 12. The consul�ant should dlscuss fhe tr�nd and ove�all geomorphology of the fs[l�ts encounteted on tirls site. This shauld ba descriptnrely compared to the other fau/ts 1n ths a�ea snd the cument/y understoad tectonic regime for fhis a�ea. , 4 The consultaM did not provide the trend/geomarphology description requested and stated they can'better address this comment at the conclusion of additional trenching. This infamnatiQn should be provided. � Oiven the lack of de�elopment plans and the incomplete assessment of the fauit rupture hazarcl fer the this site, all land in the west of the existing building should be barred �rom development pending precise location of all fault trace{s) and complete adequate documentatian of the fault rupture � potentiaf is � I provided_ From: 9519550000 Page: 3/9 Date: 4/2/2012 8:31;Od AM 13. The consultant �COmmends AMS Carbon-l4 sampling be pe�formed du�ing tMe additional trenching for this site. Thls revlewer cancurs with this'recommendation as se�eral carbon samplea �s welf as possible bone and sheli fragment� were obsenred in the tr�nch wafis by thle reviewer. � . . Given the ladc oi development plans and the incomplete assessment af th� #a'ult rupture hazani tor the th(s a1te, a(i land 1n the we�t °of the exi8ting ;building should ba barred �rom development pending predse location af ali fault �trace(�) and complete �dequate documemt�tion of the fault rupture poteniiai � is ' ; provided. 14. Consultar�t's response acceptable. : 15. Coneultarrt's reaponse acr.eptable. � 16. The consult�r�t should ext�lain how thev cal�ulated 5.9 kv to be 6Q9�o tonget th�n 3:8-kv as ��g�,e�d �n �q�,ast serrtence of th� third aaras�raph ot qa�e A-5 of En� u� A. - The consultarit's reaponae did not adequatety address the apparent math�emafical error (i.e. 3.8 X 1.5 = 5.7, not 5.9). However, perfonning e calculation based an the consult�nYs inpuf does provlde the oorrel�tlon �pparently employed by the pedochronologlst. 3imply put, �(130/84) X 3.8 = 5.88 or �ppro�amately 5.9. . . ' . 17. Consultant's response acceptabie_ ; 18. Tris consu/tarrt should explain the� source of fhe reporfed pgroundwater" thelr lr�ench. ` Phatng�raphs included i» Enclasure A show a dry trench. Also, there does nol;eppear to be any eddness of groundwater levels In fhe geophys/ca! e'valuatlon /ncluded in the r+eJ�ort (Enclosure BJ. Was gn�undwafer encountered et� the time of Qx�vatlon or did� the level sbwly rise wifh � seepage; or, was the tr�snch Inundat,ed by storm water flow? ; The consultant should explain why groundwater was not addressed by the gebphyslcist �In their report and howlif this could impact interpretation of their data. 19. The consultant shoe�ld expl�in why thene was no apparrent effart to deweter the �ch fn order fo r�each adequale depth and to provlde for adequate trench logging? , The oonsultant's response to this commertt speaks to anticipated costs assoc�ated wlth dewatering as the reasor� for limlting the depth of the excavatlan and provide� an ppinion that the extent of faulting is r�estricted to the jivestem portion of the site (Fautt F-1). It s�ould be noted that the exploration cOSt &hpuld nQt be a trede-off for adequate hazard as�s sment and, turther, it should be noted that add�tianal trenching is recommended and war#�nted for this site (westerly of the existing building). Dewatering and deeper excavations sl�ould be considered far the ful! assessment of faulting at this site. : Qiven the lack af development plans and the inc;omplete assessment of the fault r�pture hazard for the this site, all land in tfie west of the existing buikiing should be barreH from development pending precise location qf all fauft trace(s} and complete adequate i documentatien of the fautt rupture poter,rtial is provided. ; It is the County's understandirlg that the building currently loc�ted on the ea�tem half af this site was developed in accordance with all applicable regulations and the previQusi From: 9519550000 Page: 4!9 Date: 4/2/2012 8:31:04 AM development of thia site predated publicatlon of the Seismic H�rrJs Zones map far the MurNeta Quadrangle. However, it sFiould�be noted that any future devetopment o� this aite must be performed in acxordance with the Seismlc Hazards Mapping Act pursua t to the ° published Murrfeta Quadrangle Seismic Hazarcis Zones map (the site Is located i a liquef�dion aone that requires inve,stigation). Thank. you for the opportunity to revlew thls case for the City of Temecuia. Plea��$ Cap me et (951� 955-8863-(f you have any questions: .. � 3incerely, � RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNlNC3 DEPARTMENT • f Carolyn. Syms l.una, Dlrector - , < < �� . . . i � . .. , : I , . d: Jones, CEd No. 2283 " :. , j M Chle Englneer(ng aeologlst, TLMA�PIanning � - ; : cc: Ernest W. Roumelis, AKW Geotechnical, Email: akwgeotecfinical(�ver��zon.net Temecula File: GE002139 � . : . . . . f . � B:lGeologyCTemec�ls:R�vievv510E002139 commer�ts-�r PA11-0281 #2.doac .�, � . . . . . . , . ; � � . ; . . . . i. From: 9519550000 Page: 5/9 Date; 4/2/2012 8:31:04 AM . • . ; �. , , ; ; I c � I t i . C N I :C j �CpNBUITA.NTB ! RIVER9IDE C4UNTY PLAN�NG DEPA�.x'MENT ' G�(yTECI3I�TIC,AL REPORT �tEV�EW E'HECK C4RRECTIONB " ��..��.� . � - : February 28, 2012 � . Mt�. Aav�d'L. Jone�s . . . ; Pianning Deparament ; ' Cnunty of Riverside, Ca�i�omia ; � � ; � � On Pebnuuy 15, 2012 I received a�d `cevicwed the, fol�owing docurneats: ; ;. . I. Respa�se to Ca�mments, Fault Rupture I Tazard Evalt�atia,n, 42000 Zevo D�ive, City of Temecula, Cala�'oznia, by AKW Geotechnical, dsted Febru�ry �, 20�2 T also uta.�zed the followvag documents for the teebimical review of doeument li: 2. Technica� Guide�es for R�ev�ew pf C}eotechnical a�d Geologic R,epdrts; County of Riverside, 2000 edxticiaa, Transportation aud Land Managememt Agency, � Building and Safety Deparoment, �lan�ning De�partment, Tr�nsgortation Department. ; . 3. 4uidelines �oz Evaluatin� �d Mitigating. Seismic Hazaxds in Caiiforhis, Special Pub�c�dou a 17A, Califoraia Divisaon of Mines and Creoaogy,1997, Revised 2008 ; T!� purpose of our review xs tq c��ck that the sutimitted documeni,pmv�de sbiJlgeolo�i� �. daxa/ua�foxmatio� to meet the staa�ards of practice within, and guide�aues fo� repores o� Riverside Cuwuy, C�tifomia and' any zequiz�e�meiats and standards set by t$e STate o� Cal.ifor�ai,a f�r 4ea�ogic, Seis�aaitc and En�ineering reports. As a aote, aeeep�ce and/oz . sp�src►val of the consulta�a,t repoxt at tb�e Ptanning: level daes not ge�arantee constitute abceptantceJappzoval, �ar g�radix�g o� a�ading Permit. Additional items will bey rec�uired at the sub�a,ittal/review level fo�r Build'ung aud Safety for acceptance/approval �'for grading a�d gxadin.g pezxui.�ts. ' ; ' 3 0 b 0 ! INDU5TRY ST I � S U I T E 1 0 5 f " OCEANS(DE ` � CA 92034 i � " ' TEL: 760.721.5488 ; . . FAX:7�0.72i.5�39 • , � . . From: 9519550000 Page: 6/8 Date: 4/2/2012 8:31:05 AM • ; . � ' . I j , : i 7 ' �� I . . C tl7 0 � �Al • j Page 2 . . ' . � G�O 2139 � ��bn��ry �$, 2012 ' � � ; Based on our review (See Appendi,x A), the re�viewed document fox tJx� gio�osed cazrumercial developmen�t at 4200Q Zevo Drive, City of Temecuia, CA d ve adequate geatecbnical data/i�nforniation to meet the minixr�um Planni�zg art�nent gnideaiunes for the County of Riverside and ot ap�roved for entitiement p ses. T� following atems need to be address�d, reviewed and appxoved �rior to appz�ov__ ; 1. Tt�e subject reporc does ndt add��+eess all geotechnical hazards associated w�ith the sk�ak�uag �nd associated mo�vemerrt related ;to the faultino and aeiam;�� a�:t;v;t�► �� , nearby fautts(lique�acixon, ! ground ruptuz�e, seismic settlememt, T ekc.), Please pz�epare a report address��g these issues and mat�gation recommendat�o;�s for these . hazai�cds. , � If you have any questions, please do z�ot t�esitate w contact us. �; ' �. �'S�C�1��y , , . .. , . ' � . � *3 _. _ " . ... . -� . . � � � � � . - . � . . :. . , , - , � � �,`� __ - _" . Q �.i. .. .� � . , � . i� �b� I i ame5 �'. Knowlt,o� �,(� � � : RCE 55754/C�G 10�t5 � �. . � . � i i . . , � . i : j . � . i � ; � � From: 9518550000 Page: 7/9 Date: 4/2/2012 8;31:05 AM . � , : � , . �. , ; APPEIVDIX A � . i i , I ' , x. ; . n . . . ... .. . ; . � � 1 . . ' I � I ' . ,S� �� , .. . . . . . . . .. i � . . � i � � From: 9519550000 Page: $/9 Date: 4/2/2012 8:31:05 AM • COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE. � REPOR7 R�NI�W CN�CKLISY � GEOTEGiNICA�, R�POR1" Gg0 2139 1 1. iieports 8y: AKW Geotechnical _' � ; 2. Title of Report: Resonn�► to Gomments Fault HazArd Evaluat'� d�nnn ��.� r� s�n, Qf 1'em�c�la,_�'A, dated Februarv 6. 2012 3. Purpose of RepOrt: ___Fault Evaluation � ; 4. Accepted for Review? Yes �; No ( !f no, why? ' 5. Adequate Index/Plase Maps? Yes �C_,__ No � if no, what is needed? ' __ � � , 6. General Scope of Report Adequate? Yes �„ , No ___,�(___ ; If no, what is needed? Subsidence E�ticnates � � . ; 7. Adequate Geotech�ical Map? Yes ' Mo , X j � If na, what is wron�? j 8. Adequate cross-sections? Yes No � if no, expiain: _-J1lotAonli�iil� � � 9. Any internal inconslstencles between maps, logs, tYOSS-sections? � Yes No N if yes, explain: No ttoss-setti9ns ! i From: 9519550000 Page: 9/9 Date: 4J?J2012 8:31:08 AM , 10. Is laboratory Work Adequate and Apprap�iate? Yes __ ruo �_ ; If no, explain: � Labarat{�yTestin� I � Is Analysts of nata Appropriate and C.�rrect? Yes � No ,�( } li. Are Conclusions Reached and Recommendattons Made Appropriate and Cor�ett? Yes No �c_, ; If no, expfain: Need More Data � i 12. Has Liquefaction, Seismic Shaki�g,. Hydro Cansolidatian and Seismic Settleme»t �een Analyzed and Addressed Accurateiy Yes No � ; 13. Has UBC 2007 foundat�an Analysi� and Recommendatlon been A�dressed? Yes j�,. No „�, 14. Is Report Approved (Accepted) as iAdequate? Yes � No �y,_ ' ! If no, state �eason (s�: � I i 15. Miscellaneous Comments: � ; REVI�INED BY: cFhRaciFica. iNC. ( .. . , i ,�ames �: 4(�aawEton � . I , i 1AMES f. KNOWLTON : ( RCE 55754 / CEG �045 � � � � ' NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING \�\.��i �� Notice of Public Hearing - , � A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the City of Temecula PLANNING DIRECTOR to consider the matter described below: Case No: PA11-0281 Applicant:, Stan Heaton on behalf of American Life Development Co. LLC. Proposal: A Tentative Parcel Map (Waived Final Map) application to subdivide one partially developed lot (18.79 acres) into two lots. The project is located at 42000 Zevo Drive (APN: 909-370-006) Environmental: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed project is exempt from further environmental review and a Notice of Exemption will be adopted in compliance with CEQA (Section 15315, Class 15, Minor Land Divisions) Case Planner: Eric Jones, (951) 506-5115 Place of Hearing: City of Temecula, Great Oak Conference Room Date of Hearing: April 26, 2012 Time of Hearing: 1:30 p.m. . � �� ; _ �,�-°` �� _ �,f � � ,��.�-� ��, . `� ... ... . �'�. I . �� . ' `"'w„� ' .� I P ``-r,. .''�`^K PA'f � -�2� 1 , ; �� i� ��'��'� � � °' -`-,� `'�, . � � � H � �` .�'`� ` ` �'-` ' ` s �, � ,,,F�' 3�f /� �y � ' ` � �f,,,� -., r , ^. � 4 (/�jy k � • . J � � � � �� y �i � � �= ' _ . __--'. � ,°"`. .�� w� a � ��re. ,`�'�''33 33 ,i , — � . _-: � �. . � J s ti F': , r ��' �� a�� NoQ� r �a� ,I d , .:.:' � �� FeeE � '� _.-- �� Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Director 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 Director 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 Director, 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. G:\PLANNING�2011\PA11-0281 American Life TPM\Planning\Hearing\PC-DH NOPH.doc