The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About101712 PC Agenda In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (951) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II]. AGENDA TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 41000 MAIN STREET OCTOBER 17, 2012 — 6:00 PM Next in Order: Resolution: 12-21 PRELUDE MUSIC: Earlene Bundy CALL TO ORDER: Flag Salute: Commissioner Harter Roll Call: Carey, Guerriero, Harter, Kight, and Telesio PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Commission on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three 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. CITY MANAGER REPORT 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. CONSENTCALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1 1.1 Approve the Action Minutes of October 3, 2012 2 Director's Hearinq Summarv Report RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Receive and file Director's Hearing Summary Report 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. 3 Planninq Application Nos. PAl2-0034 and PAl2-0033, a General Plan Amendment to chanqe the land use desiqnation from Medium Densitv Residential to Hiqh Densitv Residential, a Zoninq Text Amendment to revise the text for Planned Development Overlav 11 (PDO-11), and a Development Plan to construct 120 apartment units on a 7.24 acre site, located at the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road, Stuart Fisk RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 12- 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 APPLICATON NO. PAl2- 0034, AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN TO CHANGE THE LAND USE PLAN MAP FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (H) AND A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO REVISE THE TEXT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY-11 (PDO-11) FOR 7.24 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND MIRA LOMA DRIVE" (APN 944-060-006) z 3.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 12- 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. PAl2- 0033, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR MIRA LOMA APARTMENTS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND MIRA LOMA ROAD" (APN 944-060-006) 3.3 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 12- 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 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (H); A ZONE CHANGE TO REVISE THE TEXT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY-11 (PDO- 11); AND A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT 120 APARTMENT UNITS ON 7.24 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND MIRA LOMA DRIVE" (APN 944-060-006) REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONERS DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS REPORT 4 Santiaqo Road Desiqn Guideline ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Planning Commission, Wednesday, November 7, 2012, 6:00 PM City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC The agenda packet (including staff reports) will be available for public viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula) after 4:00 PM the Friday before the Planning Commission meeting. At that time, the agenda packet may also be accessed on the City's website — www.citvoftemecula.orq — and will be available for public viewing at the respective meeting. Supplemental material received after the posting of the Agenda Any supplemental material distributed to a majority of the Commission regarding any item on the agenda, after the posting of the agenda, will be available for public viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula, 8:00 AM — 5:00 PM). In addition, such material may be accessed on the City's website — www.citvoftemecula.orq — and will be available for public viewing at the respective meeting. If you have questions regarding any item on the agenda for this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at the Temecula Civic Center,(951) 694-6400. 3 ITEM 1 ACTION MINUTES TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 41000 MAIN STREET OCTOBER 3, 2012 — 6:00 PM Next in Order: Resolution: 12-20 PRELUDE MUSIC: Earlene Bundy CALL TO ORDER: Flag Salute: Commissioner Guerriero Roll Call: Carey, Guerriero, Harter, Kight, and Telesio ABSENT: CAREY CONSENTCALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Action Minutes of September 5, 2012 APPROVED 4-0-1-0; MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KIGHT, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HARTER; VOTE REFLECTED APPROVAL; CAREY ABSENT 2 Director's Hearinq Summarv Report RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Receive and File Director's Hearing Summary Report APPROVED 4-0-1-0; MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KIGHT, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HARTER; VOTE REFLECTED APPROVAL; CAREY 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. 1 3 Review and provide comments on the Citv's Bike Lane and Trail Proqram and recommend that the Citv Council reaffirm and clarifv the Bike Lane and Trail Proqram Map (Lonq Ranqe Planninq Proiect No. LR12-0009, Matt Peters APPROVED 4-0-1-0; MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KIGHT, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TELESIO; VOTE REFLECTED APPROVAL; CAREY ABSENT RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 12-20 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, UPON REVIEW OF THE CITY'S BIKE LANE AND TRAIL PROGRAM, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL REAFFIRM AND CLARIFY THE BIKE LANE AND TRAIL PROGRAM MAP (LONG RANGE PLANNING PROJECT NO. LR12-0009) REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONERS DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Planning Commission, Wednesday, October 17, 2012, 6:00 PM City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. Ron Guerriero Patrick Richardson Chairman Director of Development Services z ITEM 2 CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Patrick Richardson, Director of Development Services DATE: October 17, 2012 SUBJECT: Director's Hearing Summary Report Planning Director's Agenda items for September, 2012 Date Case No. Proposal Applicant Action September 6, 2012 PAl2-0130 A Minor Conditional Use Permit for Mel Mercado Approved California Baptist University to open Project Manager classrooms and administrative offices for an online professional academic program, located at 40820 Winchester Road #590 and #595 at the Promenade Mall September 20, 2012 PAl2-0086 A Tentative Parcel Map (No. 3641) to Michael Rust Approved subdivide 7,.07 acres into two parcels Cal-Paseo del creating a separate parcel for the Water Sol Quality Management Plan basin as approved by the Army Corps of Engineers as part of the overall drainage plan for the Paseo del Sol development with mass grading of the site proposed. No development is proposed on this property located at the southwest corner of Campanula Way and De Portola Road within Plannin Area 38 September 27, 2012 PAl2-0147 A Minor Conditional Use Permit for the Frank Butler Approved Knuckleheads on Front Street restaurant, Construction a bona fide eating establishment, to provide amplified and non-amplified live indoor entertainment, located at 28410 Old Town Front Street, Suite 112 (Old Town Plaza Attachment: Action Agendas ACTION AGENDA TEMECULA PLANNING DIRECTOR'S HEARING REGULAR MEETING September 6, 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 Development Services 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: PAl2-0130 Project Type: Minor Conditional Use Permit Project Title: California Baptist University Applicant: Mel Mercado, Project Manager at California Baptist University Project Description: A Minor Conditional Use Permit for California Baptist University to open classrooms and administrative offices for an online professional academic program Location: 40820 Winchester Road #590 &#595 at the Promenade Mall Environmental Action: Section 15301, Class 1 Existing Facilities Project Planner: Matt Peters ACTION: APPROVED NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC The agenda packet (including staff reports) will be available for public viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula) after 4:00 PM the Friday before the Director's Hearing. Ai that time, the agenda packet may also be accessed on the Citys website —www.citvoftemecula.ore — and will be available for public viewing at the respective meeting. 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 viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula, 8:00 AM —5:00 PM). In addition, such material may be accessed on the Citys website —www.citvoftemecula.ore — and will be available for public viewing at the respective meeting. Ifyou have questions regarding any item on the agenda for this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at the Temecula Civic Center,(951) 694-6400. ACTION AGENDA TEMECULA PLANNING DIRECTOR'S HEARING REGULAR MEETING September 20, 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 Development Services 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: PAl2-0086 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map Project Title: Paseo Del Sol PA38 TPM Applicant: Michael Rust, Cal-Paseo Del Sol Project Description: A Tentative Parcel Map (No. 36461) to subdivide 7.07 acres into two parcels within Planning Area 38 of the Paseo del Sol Specific Plan. The lot split is required to create a separate parcel for the Water Quality Management Plan basin located at the western property line, as approved by the Army Corps of Engineers as part of the overall drainage plan for the Paseo del Sol development. No development is proposed on this commercially designated property. Mass grading of the site is proposed. Location: Southwest corner of Campanula Way and De Portola Road Environmental Action: Section 15162, Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations Project Planner: Matt Peters ACTION: APPROVED NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC The agenda packet (including staff reports) will be available for public viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula) after 4:00 PM the Friday before the Director's Hearing. Ai that time, the agenda packet may also be accessed on the Citys website —www.citvoftemecula.orq — and will be available for public viewing at the respective meeting. 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 viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula, 8:00 AM —5:00 PM). In addition, such material may be accessed on the Citys website — www.citvoftemecula.orq — and will be available for public viewing at the respective meeting. Ifyou have questions regarding any item on the agenda for this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at the Temecula Civic Center,(951) 694-6400. ACTION AGENDA TEMECULA PLANNING DIRECTOR'S HEARING REGULAR MEETING September 27, 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 Development Services 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: PAl2-0147 Project Type: Conditional Use Permit Project Title: Knuckleheads on Front Street Applicant: Frank Butler Construction Project Description: A Minor Conditional Use Permit forthe Knuckleheads on Front Street Restaurant, a bona fide eating establishment, to provide amplified and non-amplified live indoor entertainment Location: 28410 Old Town Front Street, Suite 112 (Old Town Plaza) Environmental Action: Section 15301, Class 1 Existing Facilities Project Planner: Kenny Taylor ACTION: APPROVED NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC The agenda packet (including staff reports) will be available for public viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula) after 4:00 PM the Friday before the Director's Hearing. Ai that time, the agenda packet may also be accessed on the Citys website —www.citvoftemecula.orq — and will be available for public viewing at the respective meeting. 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 viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula, 8:00 AM —5:00 PM). In addition, such material may be accessed on the Citys website — www.citvoftemecula.orq — and will be available for public viewing at the respective meeting. Ifyou have questions regarding any item on the agenda for this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at the Temecula Civic Center,(951) 694-6400. ITEM 3 STAFF REPORT—PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF MEETING: October 17, 2012 PREPARED BY: Stuart Fisk, Case Planner PROJECT Planning Application No. PAl2-0034, a General Plan Amendment to SUMMARY: change the land use designation from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential and a Zoning Text Amendment to revise the text for Planned Development Overlay 11 (PDO-11); and Planning Application No. PAl2-0033, a Development Plan to construct 120 apartment units on 7.24 acres located at the northeast corner of Rancho Vista Road and Mira Loma Drive (APN 944-060-006). RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval with Conditions CEQA: Mitigated Negative Declaration with Monitoring Plan Section 15070 PROJECT DATA SUMMARY Name of Applicant: John Snell; Inland Communities Corp General Plan Medium Density Residential (M) (existing)/High Density Residential Designation: (H) (proposed) Zoning Designation: Planned Development Overlay 11 (PDO-11) Existing Conditions/ Land Use: Site: VacanUMedium Density Residential (M) North: Multi-Family Residential/Edison Sub-Station (H/PI) South: Single-Family Residential (LM) East: Single-Family Residential/Vail Elementary School (LM/PI) West: Multi-Family Residential (H) Existinq/Proposed Min/Max Allowable or Required Lot Area: 7.24 acres NA Total Floor Area/Ratio: 16.6 units per acre 20 units per acre maximum Landscape Area/Coverage: 55.8% (175,921 sq. ft.) NA Parking Required/Provided: 218 spaces proposed 210 spaces required 1 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 Planned Development Overlav Amendment and General Plan Amendment On April 4, 2007, the City Council approved a Zone Change for the project site from Medium Density Residential (M) to Planned Development Overlay 11 (PDO-11). The approved PDO-11 allows for 62 single-family residential units on condominium lots with a density of 8.4 units per acre. The proposed amendment to PDO-11 would allow for 120 multi-family apartment units on the 7.24 acre site with a density of 16.6 units per acre and would provide for development standards for the site that are specific to multi-family apartment units. The proposed Planned Development Overlay also requires approval of a General Plan Amendment to change the General Plan designation from Medium Density Residential (M) to High Density Residential (H), which is consistent with existing multi-family developments located directly north and west of the project site. Other General Plan designations adjoining the site include Public Institutional (PI; Vail Elementary School) and Residential Low-Medium (LM) to the east and to the south. Though the proposed density is higher than the previously approved PDO-11, the proposed PDO-11 Amendment would result in reduced rooftop area and greater space between buildings as a result of the buildings being three stories and multi-family, and the extensive use of retaining walls required for the design of the previously approved single-family project is eliminated with the proposed project, resulting in a development that is more aesthetically compatible with its surroundings and that better integrates into the surrounding community. Site Plan The site has a steep slope below Mira Loma Drive and flattens out for the majority of the project site. Elevation ranges from approximately 1,095 to 1,144 feet above mean sea-level. A small drainage feature occurs adjacent to the project site along the northeastern boundary of the project site. The project site consists of undeveloped land covered with vegetation and a small area of asphalt from what was a parking area for a small school (The Carden Academy). The Mira Loma Apartments project is proposed as an 8 building, 120-unit apartment complex with associated amenities including a clubhouse building. The Land Use Development Standards in the proposed PDO-11 Amendment, along with the proposed General Plan Amendment, will allow for the total number of units proposed. The proposed multi-family complex will include 40 one-bedroom units ranging in size from 654 square feet to 730 square feet and 80 two-bedroom units ranging in size from 941 square feet to 1,103 square feet. Primary access to the site will be via Mira Loma Drive at the northern end of the project site, with a secondary Mira Loma Drive access located just to the east of the primary access point. The Fire Department has reviewed the site plan and determined that there is proper access and circulation to provide emergency services. The project layout creates a walkable community by providing varied building placement and pedestrian pathways that interconnect throughout the entire site. These pedestrian pathways connect to the on-site tot lot, covered picnic areas along the eastern edge of the project site, z and to Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road with pedestrian scale decorative lighting throughout. Additional on-site amenities include a clubhouse with conference room, lounge, gym room, pool with lap lanes, and decorative paving at the main entry. Architecture The proposed architectural styles for the project are Spanish Colonial and Tuscan. The project proposes four different building types, including a Spanish Colonial and a Tuscan 14-dwelling unit building and a Spanish Colonial and a Tuscan 16-dwelling unit building. All of the apartment buildings are three-story with single-story elements at the ground floor. The proposed club house is based on the Tuscan architectural style of the apartment buildings and is a single story building. The project utilizes stucco and manufactured stone as primary wall materials with light earth tone colors on primary wall surfaces and contrasting trim colors. The project includes one combination of building materials and colors for each of the two elevation styles. The various materials and features proposed include the following for each architectural style: Spanish Colonial: Stucco plaster finish with arched design elements, balconies with metal railings, decorative iron details on exterior elevations, simulated wood header and corbel detailing, wood shutters, predominantly hip roofs with concrete "S" tile roofs, 18-inch eaves, and garage door patterns to compliment the Spanish Colonial architectural style. Tuscan: Stucco and manufactured stone exterior finish, balconies with metal railings, stucco covered window plant shelves, wood shutters, predominately hip roofs with gables at projecting elements, 18-inch eaves, 12-inch rakes, and garage door patterns to compliment the Tuscan architectural style. The project also proposes attached garages, decorative covered trash enclosures designed to match the architectural style of the buildings. The applicant has provided specific details which are unique to the proposed architectural styles and elevations. Articulation is provided on all sides of the buildings so that each side of each product provides specific features of the proposed architectural style. Each of the proposed architectural styles is defined from the other through the use of color and material variation, door and window types, window and door trim, garage door design, materials such as stone, shutter styles, and the overall silhouette. The proposed elevations for this development meet the intent of the Citywide Design Guidelines. With the attached Conditions of Approval, the project meets or exceeds the intent of the Development Code and Design Guidelines. The proposed elevations achieve an overarching design to create a street scene with strong character as well as function, and visual variety. Landscapinq The project will provide 55.8% of the site as landscaped open space, which exceeds the Development Code requirement of 30% for the Residential High Density (H) zone. Perimeter streetscape landscaping will include a mix of deciduous accent trees, evergreen background trees and ground covers. All streetscape trees will be a minimum 24-inch box size. Slope landscaping will include trees (minimum 15 inch box size), shrubs and groundcover. Common area usable open space is provided throughout the site. As discussed above, the project includes a tot lot, network of pedestrian connections with gathering places (shade structures and picnic tables), and club house with pool. The total usable open space on site is 3 approximately 0.40 acre (not including slope areas and detention basins). In addition to common open space areas, all units are provided private patio/balcony areas ranging in size from 49 square feet to 98 square feet depending on the floor plan. Access/Circulation Based on the proposed PDO-11 Amendment, a total of 93 parking spaces are required and 93 spaces are proposed. The proposed Development Plan application includes 12 of the required parking spaces as tandem parking spaces. The proposed PDO-11 Amendment and the Development Code both require one garage parking space for each unit. The proposed PDO- 11 Amendment does provide for a lower parking ratio for uncovered spaces compared to the Development Code as PDO-11 proposes 0.3 uncovered spaces per one bedroom unit compared to 0.5 uncovered spaces required per unit by the Development Code; PDO-11 proposes 0.6 uncovered spaces per two bedroom unit compared to 1.0 uncovered spaces required per unit by the Development Code; and PDO-11 proposes one guest parking space per eight units compared to one guest space per six units required by the Development Code. The difference in the PDO-11 Amendment parking requirements compared to the Development Code requirements represents a 10.4 percent reduction in parking, which is consistent with parking reductions that have been provided for other projects based on Development Code Section 17.03.060.D.2 (Minor Exceptions) which allows for a reduction in the required parking by up to 15 percent. The project applicant contends that based on their experience with other apartment projects rental trends, the amount of guest spaces required by the Code results in excess parking on-site. Staff has reviewed the request and proposed parking layout with the opportunities for on-street parking at Mira Loma Drive. For the parking reduction requested for the Campanula apartment project recently approved by the Planning Commission, staff also surveyed parking opportunities at various times at The Vineyard project located on Pujol Street to determine the availability of parking for that project. The Development Code does allow for deviations from its requirements when the deviation from the code is minor in nature, and will not adversely impact the safety of the public or adjacent properties. Staff has determined that a decrease in the required parking spaces by 10.4 percent will not adversely affect the public safety or adjacent properties. The access lanes and parking areas provide adequate circulation for vehicles anticipated to utilize the site, including service vehicles and emergency vehicles. The Fire Department has reviewed the site plan and determined that there is proper access and circulation to provide emergency services to the site. The Public Works Department has reviewed the site plan and has determined that the project, as conditioned, provides adequate circulation and access. LEGAL NOTICING REQUIREMENTS Notice of the public hearing was published in the Californian on October 4, 2012 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, it has been determined the project will not have a significant impact on the environment; therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project. a An lnitial Study was prepared for the project in an effort to further evaluate if the project would generate any potentially significant impacts to the environment This document was distributed and made available for public review on September 14, 2012. The results of the lnitial Study show environmental impacts for the project are all /ess than significant with the mitigation proposed in the Mitigation Monitoring Program developed for the project. FINDINGS General Plan Amendment The proposed amendment is consistent with the direction, goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. This application is accompanied by a Development Plan for an apartment complex and a Zone Change to amend the existing PDO-11. The General Plan Amendment and PDO-11 Amendment establish the density and design framework for the proposed apartment complex development. The proposed design provides for a higher density, lower cost multi-family residential alternative that assists in providing for a variety of densities to accommodate existing and future housing needs in the City while enhancing the neighborhood through quality project design and appropriate sca/e, massing, amenities, roofline variation, and high quality and varied materials to integrate the project in to the neighborhood, thereby promoting the goals of the General Plan to provide for a diversity of housing opportunities that satisfy the physical, social, and economic needs of existing and future residents of Temecula (Housing Goal 1; Housing Policy 1.1 and 1.2), to provide a land use pattern that protects and enhances residential neighborhoods (Land Use Goa/ 5; Policy 5.1), and to preserve and enhance the positive qualities of individual neighborhoods (Community Design Goal 3; Policy 3.1 and 3.2) . The project design is consistent with the General Plan and all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The proposed amendment will not have an impact on the character of the surrounding area. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have an impact on the character of the surrounding area because it has been designed to better integrate with the surrounding area, which includes High Density Residential (H) development to the north and to the west, than the previously approved design. The proposed design achieves better integration with the surrounding area through the elimination of the extensive use of retaining walls required for the single-family project and the provision of more open areas between buildings, resulting in a development that is more aesthetically compatible with its surroundings and that better integrates into the surrounding community, and through quality project design and appropriate sca/e, massing, amenities, roofline variation, and high quality and varied materials to integrate the project in to the neighborhood. Zoninq Chanqe The proposed Zone Change is consistent with the land use designation in which the use is located, as shown on the Land Use Map, General Plan and Development Code. The proposed Planned Development Overlay Amendment is consistent with the proposed land use designation for the property. The proposed General Plan Amendment and PDO-11 Amendment establish the density and design framework for the proposed apartment complex development. As proposed and conditioned, the project design will be consistent with the General Plan and all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. s Development Plan 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 Mira Loma Apartments project is consistent with the land use standards contained in the proposed PDO-11 Amendment. The project is also consistent with the High Density Residential (H) land use designation contained in the General Plan. The site is properly planned and zoned, and as conditioned, is physically suitable for the type and density of residential development proposed. The project, as conditioned, is also consistent with other applicable requirements of State law and local ordinances, including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Citywide Design Guidelines, and fire and building codes. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare. The overall design of the Mira Loma Apartments, including the site, building, parking, circulation and other associated site improvements, is consistent with, and intended to protect the health and safety of those working and living in and around the site. The project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, has been found to be consistent with all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare. ATTACHMENTS Aerial Map Plan Reductions PC Resolution (General Plan Amendment and Zone Change) Exhibit A— City Council Ordinance Exhibit B— Planned Development Overlay PC Resolution (Development Plan) Exhibit A— City Council Resolution Exhibit B— Draft Conditions of Approval PC Resolution (Mitigated Negative Declaration) Exhibit A— City Council Resolution Initial Study Mitigation Monitoring Plan Notice of Public Hearing s Clty Of 7'eTT1eCUla Pa i z- 0033 � 0034 , ;� - w � - N Y • �' � _. �� ' �, .�. .�" r �. . _ . '�S}x � y I p � .� � , � Y� �'' � �„ f . q . .. sty �y S� l i_ � _� � � 6 � yY % . -� f � �( �� t:. �V . � �. � � � 1,�, / ' ' � . 1 �• '� Y � r � � Y� , { ,.,.,� �;�� • ` ��- :' ,' :/'. "� f '� ; �' `` f! ;' r y �J % � �. f � � / i '' y � ' ��, C � '.i. /./�. .1�� ' > ..._�t� �.Y?3� / ,f. ' . � , , i . �, � . .,, , / ,; ,� ,; � , , ��y � s �� ° � ,,,, • ' '?t � °, .. : ��" �� \ �, � , ' � � !i�`��,� • ��r' ��, ; h i ' , .' � '`� , �;r �, ` � �� , ; � f ,� r ' .;, . , �' � �r , � , � . '� �,� �'i, Pro�cc,t Site I' � ��. �� }.:: �r . . � . , �, ��"- � � �. � ' �. �. �� i� � �� '\� ] .i�' \ ��3 �/� w t,�Y �.. p . 'I'� - t ... s � , � r, . , \ j' i ,�, ,� `-. ,� � � ��( l9 g � � y � /]� .'� "Z. '..� � � 1 1 � c � � ) n ,%� � �S "' �Y�} :1 r r � �. � � � � � � � � �� . / « f �r. � �/� "\��> . � . ; �`. ',:'� , M� _ , � y � 'c�-" 3 .t � �� A 'Y'� � I �`•f.�,7� �'� s f�� 7 y. J S � µ x.. _ _ � / r �I�f} 'f , +,►'<. y,, _ .__- � ��' i l.l a�� , ^ .- � . � .,� � �� ,FFif .. �� ,� e� �.� _ ��.. � � � � ,, �3� a � t 'J', , � ,�,� ` ', r � : �. ; � a: '�_' ;,•+� i� ° 3 �,. '� , , . �� <" l , � �". Y � j' f .. � � F � � / . ' 1 i , 1 . � ]� �u \a . 1 � Y ,�� 1 . �): . . � ��V � � '..(. � .\. �! � �. �' ��' +. � ; h � i� � \ �. ,'�� .• � i ..i t � y � i 1 Ja�_.� .�1 �� ../ 1 �M'r ti I I li �{� ' 3 � ) A �: � t� � � . � �'� / i � J u / 1 , �.. / r� i� J. � '1 :� 4� � �J \ .4 . r� \ .�i� 1 .. � 1 l . / � �I N _' J�' I . G I PF 1 $ C�� y Fl a a b� u n c i� n oa � .�. a �M� a - v Aef{el- June 2011 c r c r -i � ��ri7� �o� T r��i xe rT�: aou � i ��sr4�. �d o irz*_. 2so .wa � , �, - ro ar i�. �-.-.i�� r , i � i \ CffYOFTEMECULA, STATE OFCALIFORNIA DEVELOPMENT PLAN & CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN �� roxrataoa33 & rn�aw3a ,, .., r._n... �14 \ � I\ ' 1 � I1r .�_�__7�. � l i� � � .(��\ . ......,.� 1,�_— __ _ _ _ :�/ 'Y/ V'�. .�, tk . p , , . � � � / w. '_' ' � 1 ;4 n N<v vve�a�s..a -�- \ \t.., , � �� _. / ��=� ��- � ��' .. � �� fND�� I ,,.,,. . s�.: . , 4_.7 — ,�,..� �o �.� e..:: �. � _ —� �.� .�.. � , _ �� .. � �M��:�� _. �,.. .. w..�� µ . ��,� . � � ... � o. . ..., � - . ��: � :.� ��`�- �. . u ��. ..��. �� . x ��. ��. .e.�� x�,u.P� — �pW— �s�. ., +, �� Cm or Te vu . .. , ... , , , . .. . . � Mw.� Lame Aeexme s . ;��r.:.�� ..,.� w,«"� � •w�n u :.'-/� I aw�� • '� ��...�.. ` •I fs k� ��fI�OfI � rc�a� ' rwvdo ' �I I I � a y p y x� _ .�� _ . �wto + n iwv . �_ S W�R \ w�i� -_ __ � ��'_� � ' . _ n.2.�.�. .w9wu o� .,,.... r P.i. � — z�x-�o.s .o-se'a—� � � `� . . .,w,.�cT�aa'�,�j iiiesx�i�"�� a- ¢•��„"�� Q` !� u � .[p �o r,nuf�i �' oco F��+ , � � ° .,=iPd.iii" ___..vro� ___. _.-, , .ou.o . '�<<. _ .. «. __ "A" SiPfC1 - LR §y[_IN1(FSf[PON Y �\ p�(/Y� � �I� PAti4NIR v GtCONA1NL � nV[ufNl �- \ \ � � oS 5 \\ y � ��- � 5�`��A�� uw J F � �{ \ � `I � j I(/ _ R' `��1 �� I%� —Z. ' I . � I .� p srq[LEG'.igpNC[ � � 4f � � � :.. �.:� 1._. R=PS' -- - N.�2g � - � � � � - y N_RS __ =�. a=R _-..: �_ _ W».J . -:�. .. .. �arnxcwuz •^"^ .� ___ : _._� .. I .._ � .. �� ,.�ecrx.� cc sixr . � — ...�.e ..�...i .. pP -- Cm (A Teru¢vu wnv�.0 , s .,a.n... . "°� — Mnn Lo+u Ae.�e� � � �'`�'� ---� i � II—._ � �i �' �ava �ecErvo i n ��, ��y«.�wurt..-__� .. J �i weucrosmmevu � � xeun � , � i II � ,._ ��T�� , �, � � y e � • �� ' �h I I � � � � , �0 � �� 4anio I � � / I I� �.il I I��uw��l A � - i� i I � � � e � �' ��II I I I� I � � ' a _____ -__ _____ __ - _ i I „ .___ wwo � `�� ___ i I'f^i - � _1_ � _ ' L _�____`�'— { J _____ _____��.,�m,.-��...,a �vssece i� .....,�..,. 1 � ., i;: I I °i '1 / l, .� ..��.�.,.f` ��` v961Ai � I I � � a. �^., - ,�.-- - ��v_ - n.. w I I � °: •I - ,w:. �a -° � _ � a . . i i '^-- J� � �r°' „'-_ < / �,� i �� L.. �..�-.- . u, __"____. i.. �_`+-�.r' i r �� .� ._, � '___ -_ � i I � .� T -'.,.... � � , � o ..�..,.�..., , � . , ,___ .- _,��__ _'.�. _",,. ' '� �/ � . ,, , a ... A � , ,___ ,.. • � i i = + — � __� i � - �� I �„ au �o.. � '° .....,,,�.... (A q s � � i .14+ �" .Iw Y Q � �'i �I ��9� � � � , 1 9\ � �� . . W � _ � _ 1.� ��'�n4�/ / / , �\� 1� u � �. '� �.� —� �a �, �, �� , � ��m�� ' � �� e � �t : � o :� ,�, ; w � y �, `� E` \ ,`_ `�, v., � , , . > � � ,� �' � I ' ��,� i Fl �� , .� .,,,.M �.�� C � � � � _ d, m � q � �� I u� '. � ; � ;4 i.i/ � � ��` \ '� ��1�'� il1�� . d .' y i � .,d..., . ; ,,. � r ti � � �� . i `� ., �� -. � a '• c� ,�:� i i rxery ' � ��, �� ` �� ' �ti mmxnmmnni. Vp, ' j � °'°y' � -a � i � eM�u �-.�_ �� i / .,�......, . .s...�.m,..a.. V", "�. d g / � I - \<,\ }\° n "*` x ` , �� ' � �� / \ \ � � ` M ^� .� � % /L/' ��_§� Q . �•. � , „ �' -'' ..m+t x� i �, i -!, ' - -. ,... ! � �' . _ � c a eo � .. . �:"n . � , ...._ �._ �� I / � / � � ' ..'� - ,.... / I � �� I / I �..� a.�..�....��. Mp,y'�LOI � _ . I l HI� � 1 �� /+� . / � �� / / ��I � . COY OP TXMISNA F�i—� �i Nun Low Aa w�arvtt , - , � � � � � � ---- .,_ , � Y ; _� - i � 5 I - _- , �� ' � � - ,�,� ` �� _ .- ��5� �,5� � , � �, � - � i � � , „�. i �- � � � _ � � � ��% , ., y . ; � � `� �� -, - / � �...o�� .. I � i�C BU1I.DINC9 IVPF l ,t� `�`f+�: _.N. . -- � -w.. _ � ,�,, ! /'I ��\ � �• � � � �� : � /. �� ' , f j � � 4 � . A7 l � f'�J ; � Ml / \> �, ` � i ; ,,,, � �\, �, � � '��-�� i / R ,..�,�� ,�/ � - _ _ � , __ �- �r -��% / P� . , _ � �- � / , � � _� � 4 � i� __;y : i _�i, .. Au��olNGrvae't � ,,, � �..o.�� ..._. � . I `W� — — �^ . ... � ._ Cl' ARCHRECfURP1 � M�m �c rz SITE PLAN � ..,;._.. M o�a , ...��1r -,�� ; , , - �, q , ' ' � � \�� ' �� '"�'9� ' i ��. / , i `�,/ , i ..:: � •-,4 ,s�t � �:�, �' ; r. :�,: _ �.; I � - , ;Tr= st-:- - � ''� r„ �u � ,, �� _' rm �• _J �' . - - � � -\ � aear eavonon � m . . /1'=l. :,I _ �� ' ._ . ROOF PLAN � :. ,. .,. � � 1 - -� l '. ..�� - n " �i � �� ;�� .:.s � ptlu�.. s '� i� `- " f T.7 r-� r'viDPi' �i. �., L: �P-t {� .. -...— '�" i "' '4 i i ;i _ r' '.:. � �-- ..Krvr a.s. L d si7 �p �v�i �t� �i-r . ;': R � ' �Y■��_ ,�.,�If��''�1f�' �..� '4: Slda Eeva�lon Front BAVOtIOn 19-PLFX SpanlsM1 Colon101 NWLDING FIPVATIpNS Mira Loma —�� . i[3�TC+C`ub CA Mba Lama Racovcry I.tC � ��' � -� � ��( �� I a JT��^`�r� "�f„�#h i . ,. ~' + �� j; �� y�( �f;��f ��JI�� ,� �4��1�� .� .� � � ��,��a� ��`� ; _ V, 1' � ' � � f; � I f t � f � `�_._ � _ I_� � � i r h - �Y � I -. '�� '' �� e`1� � ��[�l _0 �_ � 0 � t �' �J� - � ��_L � �-�. _ ' �j�� Spanish Cofonial Rear BevdtlOn {�[ n � : � "�'� . =- `��`} � �� ' ��t�t+� , '�E C � - F , , � � � , �>'. ±�� T� �� 1'�� '� � � � I:�� -. - � �l � ,' l� � � cTJ. � e�� e�M,�' j � } j � - �' r �i i^� ��! � �� f � l W+ �� ' �� iJi�l � � �i�� l 1 �!� � -- — - SpaNSh Colonial f-roni ElevatlOn 14-PLGX OUILOIN(� EL6VhTIONS Miro Loma zT � �_ �.cula. CA Mlro Lo R :ry I �� , +# N 1��9T�'i'irr�� -'�,`� ti� � � ��y � �� ,{ � f�� 1 � r��x",fi' �"� �� , _�� ' """�1 �11�J1's� 11�,.,�� . � � � �'��:i � �`�� , ��, i �. � l _a_. I �� ,�;� �;,�� _ _ �� r� "�� A �� _ Sponisn Colonial Side Elevation r il Itp t 1 Il '� �r��tr:�!'�I�i� ��' I��I' . `�_'`'�' ll i J� i �� 4 �` i, � '� �� - �� li,��,l,u� t-�!'� � � � �F�� r ��r �� ,�� .: _ � .�1 � .� ,�Fr� ��;`m� �"n a?° r - �' ��' `�" -� '� , r m ir i jcw� `�� n _ 5�y v.> �\c I I a I h II"' �� i! ��.� �� i,�� i �� f G`�1�� ',4 I� �I� ,s, _ T�s�o� Slde Flevotlon in-v�ex BWLDING ELEVFlTIONS Mira Lomo V� �,,.u�,,.w�-�� - ' \ rc�r.,ocwa. cn , �Y` , . - Mi�� .r..,. .,.Y�,�a., i ;� - _ l,= I - ° J _. � '4R _ ... � ynapbdol . • f�oymRa� I�EII _ >> - � i _ � .. ,'. �ti� "'. �'�' _ -_. ',, __. ; : . ',, ; _ . _. : �',, r 1 - .. , � S . . . .. . AR . .. ...Q . _._ _... <R L.� . `- . . . . . � �.� � i_ •�. — .I . �� . _ ___._ ._. bfL� �.._ 1 i .. � . � . : n - � ° _ I . . ._ � �] _ � I _. __. ___ � � � 3 � . .. ]ft 3 �. �'- 1k-.—. � i O _ _' i: . _ .. . �� . _ — � �, c . .:'- - ..��:i�. �:m�� , S. .. .._ - �C�T' �� 7 .P.. ' ' � }: 4R 2 ' F: ' '' . . F: � 2fl 2 ' � ::. . - • .,,• 14.PLEX Spa I h C I lof lal 6uildl g FI P�ans Mlra Loma r.. , _. TBmecula, CA Mho L very, LLC �\�\ -�� . �\\\\\\\/r� . . \\ �. �.� � �. £ . �' �� ' �`' ��Jtl dt �L'r�,� im. -✓ i a�fl'� • � � � � �� .I _' � _, 1 ' ` L ' . . i � � 7 r...�.:%• � �'�.. � p r ALe�:; � �� . ._' . . . rra. _, , '� , ,. � �.. ' - i - 9 � i ae,o, ei. �ario� /i �� ' _ _ —_� -- _ _ . s (, y a 1 S � � � . � , � �� I � �� / ROOf PLAN '___ ' � � � ``�'�� '�� . ;.� _,cA� , + j h � I � r � � � � . �� t : . 1 I � . ' � , ... ,.. . �yy ....c �t.6 i i f1' 'i. P.�I _-� 6.'".' v- �.+" � I, � � � . ',�--,,. �� rr�t t�_ -. ' , � ,, ,. .. 9� [L�'. M,�. `� .. 1 ."i.W � `- 1a1.� � kF �� . ��Y . :: ��. � �� I. � .= Slde Elevallon F�on� Plovatlon 16 PLEX Span6h CoIOMOI G FLNATION3 . Ml�a Loma 1� { ��.�.�, ,�...�� MNO lamaculo. CA Mlta I oma Rmcrrvary.�LLC � �� 1.� .. ,� , � � r �� , 1�'�a� �F��i�k��t� � _ ��a ?' r` �1��.!J:�xr��fk.�'�:��', � l�� '�� L �1 e !�� ,� _ � `� , r I ��9[�7� �"'1,-9 � ' � '� Y;,�' " � � � b��1 ' � � f �� n � � � � � �'� c �l �'� � L�1�� ir :� �I� r L�. � �� -1-!-� _ �� 7 ��C�1�1�� .�� ' �--� -- - ' Spanlsh Colof�ial � Rear Elevation �' li�f� . �� `!�� n i.� C 1 �� . �:, `Y �,�T�1}� �r�if( R��iF1�i!y�•_ 7. �ILL�I�' .. :,��`��- �� i �� I � Y , V I� �� I�k+--r� ' v-"�--�1 q ,{-�II � � � , � d ` - � � � �� ,'� � �� , , � ,. u �— 1, .�„ f7r�t�� [nA�si ICi'�]�.m mmam� � ol� pI?1 J I:IDL�� lm�¢[.� — � � C� "� �� _ �� f .�� 1� �_9 �� i �� r�� }� — SpoNSI'i Coionlal Front Elevotion 16-CLEX Mlfp LOTQ BWLDING LLEVATIpNS �-� . - _ — _ _ — - - -- Z� in �c-mecul¢ U Mna I�ma Reloc.ny. I I� � �� i��.� � , .� .. ,i�.. �1�'�, J La ds�� - �l' � -ri . I � � f I �� ,.`�.. , i.� ;. � G � �� I��'�� ;�, ��_� �.. .��. � � I f�vrn CRptm *u�i�uur� Gpqr.up� � I � � n R h I n r'I - - _- r _ � � {� ��- [�i �; _ Sponish Colontal � Slao El2vailon �{ n iJ{tPl 7�` h I , ��\l��l I �� hI11 _ , ' j �- Sl�nx.l Iy c! 11. � f i� � �i��1[l.� ��I � 4� � ,_ � � � ��1 °�� [?� � �2 � ,� �� -� � �, �, � .: � �\1 -� P'� � I I� L 190 L JL �. `iv � 9 A i i I��! i,i�i�., f1[ a ;L;: � ar �� li � � �� i�� '��'�� v1 S� — — r�,s�a„ SidB EIBVO�lOf1 16�PLEX RtILL DING �LNATIONS � y, _ Mira Loma __ r..' I 1� a romac�ia. cn LLO �_ �_. — ; � ; ., . , ; a ,R .. _; ��°v�, u.� � � , , ' ��`�� ' _ .. ; ' ,c,s ''. ' . . . = '''I �_, � �� ,� i -- – _�— -- — I – , i , ---� _ . q ..... . .I . 4R � : " ^ _.... i : '4R .. .: f. C� � tr�.l �'. - � '. ��u1 ..i '... � _ tre.7 .' � _ � o — — . , _ - , — , _ ' _ � ;, � ''�' ' �, � . . , , ; ._ _ ��, . �, . .. � ,� ,. .� �.. ' _ " . , , �� .._ .,. � � �. . .�. . .. � ,'� . ' Fm' �. . __ ._ __ __ - � � ... .. ., .. .. : •. � .. v 1R.. . .. d � 3R . , � . , .. - J � � J ,V . p -.. .- i .. `�?I- . � ..: _ �' �: � 1�.,. . . .. .. i�. I� �� •• �� S �. ..: � ��. - . ' � lTm� f�] �'�1 _ : ,-. :: . .. '' .. ' .: .:��.. �;, .. - �;.: ,.,., tx.... .' ,. ' 1R �K " 1 �' IR � i Bu4dl�g Typee B iMttl Floor �aonlsh Cobnbl ...�--..•.. -,,..,"., 16-PLEX 5( ivh C �IOnial 6ulidi 9 Fioo Plons Miw Loma ti� � _ r.�ma�uio Ca r.nea � ...��., ...;a.7�,F.� , _,_ � .., _. � � � � �.�\ _, , . � _ ,� , , � ��`�'.�',�'��'. � i � - ' \• � � , a .�.: �u,c � � ,� � ) T��! �I � a Tl1-t Y � T iry � i i t� �a * I�� _. � .I�� , � �. ��.. �.� ,�� ,� - �;� � ��. _�-, � v �'. ;_ �, � aeo, E�a�a„o� � ; �,., " - ,; ��;, !�! ��, �� - ROOP PLAN :G. „ I �;: .,.... �.. � ( — _J \\ 11 a �� "{ � �� "' • : y � � H: ' 1 °r ry ' � �'�' � " J ,I �,',.� I H.1! J�,w �i+ C �.�, 6 . I 1bv. 6 J �� I } 1^ q R � T"�' � 6 p �� I I ( p� Y P � Y' 1 � �^ � 1 ^ � �7.�.EC.�€ 'tid � � �J�ILd � i '� , � � . ".� . � "N'F��.� #t-`� �� I�i ��rM +!� � . sda Fie�a�ron F,o„i ue��non i a-v�ex r�s�o� 9111LDiNG [�EVATIONS Mira Loma -�� \ ' � rame�mo, cn mi,o i � ao om uc ks + � g � �V�� ' � �� ' � , � �� s��;y��j��' ��'� f/ � �� ' I � � � � � �'�1, � j " , ,� ,� � lj � �� ; i � � � �" �� 1 �ur� U,�7, l�� lf ,� �, �,�,� ' I � ,.a �: , 1 �rl `7 1 � 1 � ��I �1 ' i �� r ' �} I � I� rr' �Ip r �� k � - �� Ir , � \ { I � � �'� j N � � � [ �� f7 y k�� 9 i �l � ii y p I H.�f-� � �l��if ' �_ �ib�i�� ti�`�' F��4�Y � � 1 �� _ i� � � �a ( } f� ��+i f � � , , y y. x , • � ��qam. ��,�. � �� 6 ��I.�_i,� } � �� 1 YP � � i �, r I � (� � � � 1 ��h�i�Y� ��4��#��L�6��'�•�*M1� �.4� Tt�IrA W 7 . i t a � Y �J�� _ �l i_ .�m '_ f Tuscon R2or Eic.vation F ;��ntl�k�� I � `` � `I"��{�i1� ��I!u��f�,�Er� �i�I�' ' .u.�4J�lu t i�li� ,' � #� . I l� . .. � � � , ,��1 i ��h, dF� `rt� � � ��T1li � � � C � �r,'�,� �Il�� , illll;7;t�q r�-�, � � p C"l,l � f ( } � , � ; �� . �l� � ,I� �� I,� �� 4� � n� w, �+ r e� � p t}" �� , 3�� n i ��q i�i n� i r�' 1 � � h t+ >s ' t � � rn , 1. i 1I '( a ��.�'I i� v l: k i I� I $I�� ',. —;l"fi ��.�(�jl �I� �fi�� ' .�1 .� 1 � , . � �1 ��. '� � _��` � � ��.�-"l — � f. , r�scan Front Hevatlon i a-r�ex Mira Loma ew�o�rv� u�vanoNs 1— � rema�w�,. cn �N��o ��, — v. i i<- h �� r Y - _ ( �� ` i �.�� )l.�.�J�� {I �{Ll. 4 � ',..� ��,_� fl � ,- �� I � ��' ��I - ��,�, ��,� � � �. � ,-: � � � � ��'�� '� � � L I y� � 1�- �! �G�PrO � tLtOf� � J �P1QL� _. 1 ti � f� � 1' i - i - � I�'I��,�'i�w I 1 ��+ - SpanlSYi Colonlal JcJa R2vailon vi T�i��ry J�Kb_I�� I�� ,'� �Fj 4 i ��,—s`i�`d'�1�'I,�•!.'��II � �� - I� � h I �q��1� � rk' �. �1,( ,. Jl�� dl�..��`�, � k-�-�`� �` 1 �� E��I � � i Iil �i i.4J �i lu� �. � ' i ��I � �„�,�,,� F�!� �� - � �'t � -�k` n---�5 i' m�k?•�m m t�• _ � �� .j � �t �� r` i� �uu��t'In �ti� . � � �� . l i � _ ._ "' � � e�ai�� V�� i, Tuscan $I(yB EI@Vp11011 lA-PLLX FVATIpNS Mira Lomo —�� ao� � e �,o�,�,.Y.�.�� _ .. _ _ _ \ re..�e��io c,.a Mna � _ 1 ,, -- - 1 _ ', . a .. 4R .. : �� IMnp�bl •.. . 4wvpmkl : � �.]L� -- �1IP� � _ � ; _,. ��.. ��+� �l :�. _ , :'. {I' m.ie _(_�..�- ._..... .-�',� I____, � �� 1_...._.' ... � f.__.... '. .._ ..... .. - __ .. .... I .. � < ..._. 9R 9 . AF '� __.- �� .:.'. �.�� _ ... �� ._ J�.. _. :. �- ' :.. �I ._ ;_ •.� L � � �_J ""_ ___ __" ... � .. ,. �I ��. . � �� . . I.RF] '- � ... 3R 3 I .', �.: 1R...._ � �:. _. _ ' '" _ . .:[ ._f�'] , �'� , 3.i - - g •.s � �_ .- �'�.. t, �; f`�1 _ .. . v: i Pft 2 � e: "' u 2R 2 G' •y. �. -��u• l4-PLEX f can Bvlldl g Fb t Pluns Mira Loma rrr�, , . tomeoulG. CA Mlfa 1. tlP LLC I ' I I � 1 .�� !1 �' ��\ AN�' Y� f�^llq°'fnlM1lyP^'�III �� H�n��1� �� /-� j a . \ �\ / \� `k • y ��F��T ��vt��o�`.�Ei �\ / P � �� -^ 1 : rL 7 T - � f � _l � r� � ' � % � i 5�w �" A � � T 1'e re i ,�, � 4 '� � ��=' .1 .. , r t �� ry � i �- a�.IL �.' .� a I .... / I _ _ �� ..�"ri'Y i"^I"^'�'t.4-+E a..�11 'Y .��'Y�4ii� .�...t.� �!�NZ' ' ' � '� � � � �� _ . y ' ' }"''� I � �� _ , Rao, E�a,.�.�o„ , ��' �—�\ � � :. -I ,. `� � / � �� % , �I , I aooF PwN_;_.:a.__ f �A L.� k 4., n � T. rm t rt:: +f� b� .. �'� �� ati.�'�'i'i��%i�.`,! 1„�. .�� • �VF. y� . a : �: � w . � Y � 1 ' _ i�� ' . i ' �-,� .,. :i I . . •�.�-. , _ :: �. T ♦ - � ; M r + 1 + i 1-t • i� i rt ' { '[ i" �f, � . . . . . a ..I. 1 li . �' �si�\r . 4 �� - -.� � �� ., il ,. - � �_ � �' f�� _"" '�b' P ° '� � a "°,� � "+ �.x,l` .1.:"r .� �. f�+:I��LL V.�-v'F:i - < . SLLye EIBVaHan Front Elavabon 16-PLEX luscan AUII IJING ELFVAlIONS Miro Loma z�. . _ '�� LaT(1CW[1 CA Mtro Lomo Racovary.yllG' ,�''��{ ��,,, a � � � ��1 , �: � ��.:�.x��`��f�,;�,'��;��?} � � � � � �, � � �� , �� , 1 t j ��,i�c;�, �f!�r� �� 1 «� ��^��ur � � � � ; I h�,, tJ��«� �� ' '�, r T . �i i r r- �a ii 4� � ��I i . l� ' P ��,-� �� `_ 1} 1 `� � I� � m j -I��`� '-,�` ' �', �^ ' � � I� , ifi,ll � , i� � � � i �� '� '� � ^` 10�E1Y � �'�� .��1[[�Ir?.�3 � �� (�I � . � �'° ]�uun ,.� �1' Mh t�� - � t� � `v� �� j �mn'�, ` t � 1 ' ^ r i � '.� � ��'�� r}�,� � 7 �1 �;� I,� ? 'JN�L � �1. � . _��.�._"r� . s "` _ �` I � ' y � S �� _ __ — ` I N i ! � ` i '�-Y° i _. Tuscon RPp� C-12vqY1011 �II� I I l7, i �fry}�P�{�,� �I �F17 ��a ��t� � irl � �If� I �� rr �� i�n �� i� . �I r{ in�' i� �1,�g�, �« �� ,llt � i r6 �r 1�1�1 �� C, �,� � � ��t�.d � � t d.� !�� i� ��.:;;�nw ;ily�,'.�t1f�� t :ii. �u�L� - - ,T.� .. r� p ci' i ` 5 , 1 I i I f� �I�� _ah� � �F ' ��i I ��' ; � ja �� .� � �� I� I� ' �m � . I .. ,. LWI�.i4f 4 �Ali�� i I��e� r I i �� °�� <<�� - 7 � �u� — �� lull" iii nmimmf �- ° �Gfno n n � w �r�FVV yti -�-�9P ��,�� < �',u `�i� [�`\ � , rr� 14 i�� f � 1 1 n\ � �� , � � �J r ' � ,µ y -+ �� , � , =,± _{� _ a �� :5_�i�it=-�L-�- ' ��I �r�l:! I \ t,�c I�l�� I . �U� � "�I-�� ;S�F� ,�� ' �, Tuscbn FfOfl} E�gVdflOfl 16 FI FX ,�,� BIJIL�INb ELEVAlIONS , Miro Loma v— St9a. �.-.��. ru�„�.�wa, ca m i., �arv i. �� ''1F ^� + '�, � � � �r z „ r ��y`'' .�,, �� ,� -- r''I � -� ��s _ � � �� '�l I�I � ' �� s�;� � � � �� ddd... � �-_ I�,J �r� � IT'�1 IL:-DG�L� �L9qL�' Cu'1'�t1 � — - - - � ']C�' ��,!�", ��'! L� � l _ s��sh �o��a� � $laa Elavatlon � � ,� r iY t >>�' � "I� i ; s � i `7 ��r�C l p�� I .�� in I � �', i'_ �"�� ii 'iJ�i�r)! �!� :� Yl )n ��r _ � � � r � I � 'l�� If.,�l I �II� � � . 1 i y , �� ,��,, �kl;�� .> -r� � a .�k ' �Mr�k� � n � .i ��g � P lC* .( Ir II �-9n q t A 1� .. i� ^�itl� Z .1�� } I�` �� I �i'�� 1 � y � �I . � II� ��'�� __ f Tuscan Side EIF'vatlOn 16-PtFX BIIILDINC� 6LEVAl10N5 Mlra Loma 1— G � T�mocwa. ca ° q „� - I 'I 1 — T � aq f µ��n,am - � wma� � � _ ��. �_ Y.. ' �, '� . �` .. -. iF-_-�I . _ . ..... __ : p �. ...,,., ��,� _a__r �� ..: .;�-� .- -: _ 1� _a_. . .. ` ,.-.._ ...i't � _ "_ __. ,� ,..,^;. � _, �__ .__ ._�....,'��'�, �,,. ,,, 1 1_: , ,.::: 1 _. -, -- '._ I ._... � i . . , �.. _ . _ : .. _� < . . �'� 1 .._ ... ....4R ... — � I . � 9R ,.: �.. ':�9k �' I. �¢::� .. : d � �15� �: '._ _ ETI::� .... , —:, .. �. .: .., i g.. . :. �-. , p -� o .: � � ... :.. . . . .. . . .,� ...._ ., : .�._. ' i i .i . �' i ... ,. � , � ... ., � , �' . _ _ _._ ' .. ... ' � , � .- � - pp1 � .. . . �� ,� . .. � . _ _ � .1W . �1 � _ � . ._ � - .. .. � IN q . a _ _ .- _' .- ., i { - .. ,.. ` . � I�'1 I'n*1 ;. ,m .:. . . :,: iml . I Fra- 'E lafl '' - , �. >: � ,. . .. , � . , ,, . ;; . , ..�q � ix... '• ..� .. ... i w � ix -�- i ' ,-""". -. -.. l 6-PLEX iuscon Bulidl�g FI x Pians Mirci Loma ti� � -.. rema�w�, ca. mi�� rv, u� _ , _, I - ' ..� -� w- _ � v , u c:� �' � > - .\. i �... _... .:,,o ,,.. ..... I —_ e.� _.... Plan 3 941 S.F. Plan 1 654 S.F. Deck 77 S.F. Deck 53 S.F. � ., � � � —_ _' _ _ �- O ;.-,,, ur� � � :-- - O o ,.�... •-� .M �-, ... .r ,,: ..:... !, ,_-��- .,r ,; �.,,,. �° \. _ 3 _ i _ _� ' .� p . I"'` - ..,. i .' x. ., : 2.A-.,. Plan 2 730 S.F. Plan 1X 675 SF. Oeck 65 S.F. Deck 50 S.F. llnii Floo� Picens Mira Loma � �... ...... lcrt'ccula. C/� Mtra R veN, LlC i � .,. �� c ; .., ,�� _._ Plan 4 1016 S.F. Deck 96 S.F. .— _ � I I _ � '�" � - . '; C_ � '�,! ! ti �! ._..�. ..;.� .. � , �� i ,.. »... .... .,e, ...� — . .— _ . - � __�'..� — I Plan 4 Tuscan (Adaptable)' �' 1075 S.F. , Patio 73 S.F. p�an 4 Spanish 1(Adaptable) 1103 S.F. Patio 112 S.F. UNr RoOr Plans Mfra Loma ��, ��N�,��,��., d � �. .,.�....,. �--...-•.•':::-:=':-.-..-� 1'c�mucu�a. CA Mlra Lama lrrcovoeY. LLC • '° r . -- - _..._ ( � j _'- _-_ � ..___. �i,�.',:� ...__ I � - '� �_.._ i _- -- SPANISNL0.0NW.GOFBlLOEiAIL U.KANYVpCOSM)f2ft � TTILNC4YE �� I � �_ _...�.... 1—' —....u�.�.. � � / 'R.SC.. _.�.e — ��— 1 _ I _I ....e.....� � ....... .�. ..._..�.... Ig '� � W ��.� {I_W I .a,w�.. ¶SLqrvGOR�IE.�EiAIL � SPPNLIILOL.O:LOfNTVEPoi511CLP SFANISNLOLW�PLWNCOW'IR'M � � '�.r.� � —+�s�� —...�....... ,�, .. _,� :: �_ £, ;�; _ _ � , � -__� .-_ � � ^_. ,-__ vxnwr=o�e�r � =twxix�co�cwunoovs!vree Mlra Loma rvo�cai oerans .. ;44µ "` �. �..� a. ... _ Mlto LoTo RBCOwN�.I 1 r ' _._—. T�TegCtllO,C� ne�..x...m..vu.,......n. .,,,;e,�; � �, ��-: � \ `� �'�`� � ' �t1AFL��L��1 . I � � \ Y - / / (,� � � -- — V � Rlgh� Sltla [IOVallon � i I'..' � 1 �� .. � � � ROOF PLAN � � (,e ian siaQ eie�ano� � ! I ��}ar e I ; . ;•.� } ��' ��1�� p � Y ',�' I .' h��; r�t, '� -{I I TY _ p, m � . .. 1_Y :.i. ueor Eie�ono� Fronr e�e�onon Qub Houso MIlQ LomQ 9U��DMC. FLEVAiIONs Z� .. � � � �. Mkn I nma Rc�cOVery, LLC ,"�"� , i GL �fj�fyr �r �r� i wf��,�,�,�, ry�� pi ��7 ��$�.l��.lEl��.�11 Qf41,4a��'f�ul°,�,�d.�e�.t�.e4,�uJillll9f �"�1�7 �� . �I � �Irl� ti �.7 ' � � �, �. J ��L�� i I �-_� , I �jyi ' � iS.l�� _ _ REar EI¢vafion . I �r �7�� 7� �r��1'o�r ��il�4�:�Y�i�i"Yl�,.� i'�r n t� I,..� i I (`� ' � I I �� I ��t�1� � IlY�7�yl�l�� ..tL1Ct��'7�14,1JIAi. 'i'�rP �.li l�e�� w� � %.� ��q_ ��'�j ri � �f 4 ;a. �a�t. t',!d I4�1�� U� �� )ly.-��v¢,�_� t - �:��R�� Y � L.�� l� .�.. I �1Kd� f�� .��. T� i � F � 1 5� �.1'S d{.� �� Front Elevation dub Ho�15e BUII L�INO FI PVATIONS Miro Loma � � ...�,__ _ - —_ _ , i�m�� ia en nu.� � - ' '( .� � �diF��}lAll l�y� L � � � VI�i��.i,9A r �: ri �r � l,�""'� ��'C �.��'� ' ��i�' i ��4�� It�, ��f�� i�� t�t �!�x;� � Rlght Slde Elovation � � a i g�� ` ��_ � ��„ C� � � ;'1 :� ' i f � �aft Sltle Eievatlon Qub Houso � MIfO LOTO oUll pING FI FVATIONS �" ��b � , iOTOCItlqCA MlrpinnlnRa9covnry.11(l• � -- , i -, R�.�v,�,m_� {;�' ,Wti�.� ME�„ ; .,'n : �� O 9 i �� . � _..._ I I .. �i i -� �I i �', '. ] I �'�, �a� � M� �"� � a o=.KE _ ____ �.M o Qub House Mifa Loma FLOOR PWN � ��.�. .. . {amaculo, CA Mlta Laira Racwer�L� s3s � o�Q = � y m ��,,�� O o ; i m �'"" ,.. �:L }„ � ` i �' r / >�� /. _ m�� t q � 9`E4 r"��, i.. ��.5,�� ,�� § q�r d. � � : i � , i � r#� , d f � � _ �� \ �, � <�. � � g i . ��l��f" � ,�, ,.�� -� ��.•�� `` �,. � � E � � E !'� ` . � � A \� y _ �� ` ' �� / � � �C �� \�. . Z . A'� ` \ � . 1... �'� L 1� t , 4 � �� }� .. � . 1 ' t /1 i f •ne v+ �� rw � ti i 1 �.�` n Y ea� . .. �a� l4 ii"'� ; 4 r .. s � 5 � . ; + ... ,,, ��$ e �iC 3{9� � .�L � ��' .� - ., f f� 21g �� 4 �� `� 1=J�� jP�� - �i`,Y :�}-,�� _ - � i�C�� eSS � � �' � y Q { � . 1 �.� � S a $.� �4i ,��. � a / ti��'�i� r� - � � .� . �i. r- A� i . . a `I �} .`:� _ . \ � , '�, � `. � . ;��x�� - � i �'. . � �. _ �. ?. p ) �� S � R 8 gg � t[.0{;�7��{ ¢y lP' '{ iu� �� p ;tr�s F�Eti�9 � tt(t;�r�� rd Ss �' i. �� a, ` �� L / ,��r , � �p 6F� �I� + q��#� ��i��6�� c �� E� ��'� €°� i � 3 � ' i� , � � �� ' 9 � PP ��l�� ig�l�IE� i1��i8 ktt � i(sr � [ & o � �� ' 1 �I s �f � . � . � � [S8' ;i � fe6 F' E EFB&Ei4dS i66�s�` '€6 �S • ; 3 K s � �R �� ar - . .R. , R . . .w.. � � , � S�� nf6 i'. f 6f§ SSti6 96 i i§4 4 45 f s � '{^� + !E! !!! tP41f llRt !! I. p!°k 'I°Z` : f �i � _ _—__ __ __ . I s�s � � � � �� ; � ` � D = S ? 3 � � 3��,aaw � �.�� ~�� `¢ ,�.�•"a`""" � � �-;i Q� I= .,' ..` � F . c y y �°� � f� � � � t f �' `r �, D � � - � k `. � �.. f � d ��. id'�� = ��a• �N � - � ��°� � �� .A `�,., � � m �\ � �� ' W1r �� .: �. � "C� - z �� E� , s v, � �/. : \I �: �. � �� \�.` a � . .. : . . � `� '� � y s . q b.AF� � . � ��i,�.'�. � � 7�' E ��y� - �� M 1 I� 4 ��'. f �'. � b � .��✓ t � �yt . � , . II' � '— � — r�� , .. .�.� � . S �.�XS��i � . ,S .� -�� wl �'. �,.:. r }��' � � � \' j \ 7 \.'� � �?�d ��2 _ `r `��,� � ��1 ` _ �' �. � :� I ri �; � �� ``�� - �� a � '; � : �, iw =� i ` � a � +� ` � � Z SE � w a � k{ h'� � ^ o + l �S: � � �� e i b � �� s i� � i ua � L �.:w: � � �'Yt �.. ,� N' � . _ . � s�� ^ D � j � � O � f�� r'C ( �.-�— ,,� O 7 I I T �i �: � ��,�, ��(nf�,_ � D' o-��,��1�� „ `4 � �, �'t��l' ,' � � , 9� � � 3 ! �" ` � :� y'� � 4 L I l � �^: � vD�aY �I ° � ➢ � . , , ie � a , �7.. � . � . � v a � � � � � ', F l f,r � ) �}1 ' �� 9 � . - � p� i 91s i "` �t � . s . n � � �:� � i d�'mt m� _ Y � 1 � � ¢ y ��. - � �If� E'S� 'b s f {'4' - .� a ji � d� � � ... �lit6tii Ilidt� �: � � �tS l�? � � , t;��,tw ,..;�. i; �� '�i� � o� �m s ak o �� u > _ i //� — �� i ;� - 00 , ' a� � � � 3� t� — , �` t , a' � _ � t� � `E'sA � 3 ; k' D t , � : , r� - r °F+rr ' " [ ` ' � _ �� `" � �� / i � i [ , �� , " j � , > r�� . .,.., 'I7� C -- �B�i% �s.i . `r�� PC RESOLUTION NO. 12- 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. PAl2-0034, AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN TO CHANGE THE LAND USE PLAN MAP FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (H) AND A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO REVISE THE TEXT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY-11 (PDO-11) FOR 7.24 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND MIRA LOMA DRIVE" (APN 944-060-006) Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On February 22, 2012, John Snell, representing Inland Communities Corp, filed Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan, and PAl2-0034, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay- 11 (PDO-11) in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. On October 17, 2012, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan, and PAl2-0034, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay-11 (PDO- 11). C. The Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. D. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on October 17, 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. E. At the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan, and PAl2-0034, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay-11 (PDO- 11) with a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program subject to and based upon the findings set forth thereunder. F. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the Application hereby finds, determines and declares that: General Plan Amendment and Zone Change Planning Application No. PAl2-0034 is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City: General Plan A. The proposed amendment is consistent with the direction, goals and policies of the adopted General Plan; This application is accompanied by a Development Plan for an apartment complex and a Zone Change to amend the existing PDO-11. The General Plan Amendment and PDO-11 Amendment establish the density and design framework for the proposed apartment complex development. The proposed design provides for a higher density, lower cost multi-family residential alternative that assists in providing for a variety of densities to accommodate existing and future housing needs in the City while enhancing the neighborhood through quality project design and appropriate scale, massing, amenities, roofline variation, and high quality and varied materials to integrate the project in to the neighborhood, thereby promoting the goals of the General Plan to provide for a diversity of housing opportunities that satisfy the physical, social, and economic needs of existing and future residents of Temecula (Housing Goal 1; Housing Policy 1.1 and 1.2), to provide a land use pattern that protects and enhances residential neighborhoods (Land Use Goal 5; Policy 5.1), and to preserve and enhance the positive qualities of individual neighborhoods (Community Design Goal 3; Policy 3.1 and 3.2) . The project design is consistent with the General Plan and all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. B. The proposed amendment will not have an impact on the character of the surrounding area; The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have an impact on the character of the surrounding area because it has been designed to better integrate with the surrounding area, which includes High Density Residential (H) development to the north and to the west, than the previously approved design. The proposed design achieves better integration with the surrounding area through the elimination of the extensive use of retaining walls required for the single-family project and the provision of more open areas behveen buildings, resulting in a development that is more aesthetically compatible with its surroundings and that better integrates into the surrounding community, and through quality project design and appropriate scale, massing, amenities, roofline variation, and high quality and varied materials to integrate the project in to the neighborhood. Zone Chanqe A. The proposed Zone Change is consistent with the land use designation in which the use is located, as shown on the Land Use Map, General Plan and Development Code; The proposed Planned Development Overlay Amendment is consistent with the proposed land use designation for the property. The proposed General Plan Amendment and PDO-11 Amendment establish the density and design framework for the proposed apartment complex development. As proposed and conditioned, the project design will be consistent with the General Plan and all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, PAl2-0034: A. Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA), City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the approval of the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and Development Plan applications ("the ProjecY'), as described in the Initial Study. 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 September 14, 2012, and expired on October 14, 2012. 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 comments were received prior to the public hearing and a response to all the comments made therein was prepared, submitted to the Planning Commission and incorporated into the administrative record of the proceedings. D. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the October 17, 2012 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 recommends adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project. Section 4. Recommendation. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula hereby recommends that the City Council amend the existing General Plan on file with the City of Temecula City Clerk's office and approve the proposed amendment to Planned Development Overlay-11 (PDO-11) and adopts Sections 17.22.220 through 17.22.234 including the PDO-11 Text and Development Standards in the form attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 17� day of October, 2012. Ron Guerrerio, 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. 12- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 17� day of October, 2012, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS Patrick Richardson, Secretary ORDINANCE NO. 12- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PAl2-0034, AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN TO CHANGE THE LAND USE PLAN MAP FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (H) AND A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO REVISE THE TEXT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY-11 (PDO-11) FOR 7.24 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND MIRA LOMA DRIVE (APN 944-060-006) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On February 22, 2012, John Snell, representing Inland Communities Corp, filed Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan, and PAl2-0034, General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay- 11 (PDO-11) in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. On October 17, 2012, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan, and PAl2-0034, General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay-11 (PDO- 11). C. The Project was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. D. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("CEQA") and circulated for public review from September 14, 2012, through October 14, 2012, for a 30-day public review. 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. E. On October 17, 2012, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, the Planning Commission considered the Project and any comments received prior to or at the public hearing on October 17, 2012, at which time the City staff presented its report, and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to the Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration. F. Following consideration of the entire record before it at the public hearing and due consideration of the proposed Project the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Project. G. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the entire record before the Planning Commission hearing, and after due consideration of the testimony regarding the proposed Project, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the Project including Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan, and PAl2-0034, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay-11 (PDO-11) in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. H. On , the City Council of the City of Temecula considered the Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration, at a duly noticed public hearing at which time all interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. The Council considered all the testimony and any comments received regarding the Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the public hearing. I. Following the public hearing, the Council adopted Resolution No. 12- adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. J. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Legislative Findings. The City Council in approving the Project hereby finds, determines and declares that: General Plan A. The proposed amendment is consistent with the direction, goals and policies of the adopted General Plan; This application is accompanied by a Development Plan for an apartment complex and a Zone Change to amend the existing PDO-11. The General Plan Amendment and PDO-11 Amendment establish the density and design framework for the proposed apartment complex development. The proposed design provides for a higher density, lower cost multi-family residential alternative that assists in providing for a variety of densities to accommodate existing and future housing needs in the City while enhancing the neighborhood through quality project design and appropriate scale, massing, amenities, roofline variation, and high quality and varied materials to integrate the project in to the neighborhood, thereby promoting the goals of the General Plan to provide for a diversity of housing opportunities that satisfy the physical, social, and economic needs of existing and future residents of Temecula (Housing Goal 1; Housing Policy 1.1 and 1.2), to provide a land use pattern that protects and enhances residential neighborhoods (Land Use Goal 5; Policy 5.1), and to preserve and enhance the positive qualities of individual neighborhoods (Community Design Goal 3; Policy 3.1 and 3.2). The project design is consistent with the General Plan and all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. B. The proposed amendment will not have an impact on the character of the surrounding area; The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have an impact on the character of the surrounding area because it has been designed to better integrate with the surrounding area, which includes High Density Residential (H) development to the north and to the west, than the previously approved design. The proposed design achieves better integration with the surrounding area through the elimination of the extensive use of retaining walls required for the single-family project and the provision of more open areas behveen buildings, resulting in a development that is more aesthetically compatible with its surroundings and that better integrates into the surrounding community, and through quality project design and appropriate scale, massing, amenities, roofline variation, and high quality and varied materials to integrate the project in to the neighborhood. Zone Chanqe C. The proposed Zone Change is consistent with the land use designation in which the use is located, as shown on the Land Use Map, General Plan and Development Code. The proposed Planned Development Overlay Amendment is consistent with the proposed land use designation for the property. The proposed General Plan Amendment and PDO-11 Amendment establish the density and design framework for the proposed apartment complex development. As proposed and conditioned, the project design will be consistent with the General Plan and all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. Section 3. The City Council hereby amends the existing General Plan on file with the City of Temecula City Clerk's office and approves the proposed amendment to Planned Development Overlay-11 (PDO-11) and adopts Sections 17.22.220 through 17.22.234 including the PDO-11 Text and Development Standards in the form attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit A. Section 4. Severability. If any portion, provision, section, paragraph, sentence, or word of this Ordinance is rendered or declared to be invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining portions, provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences, and words of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect and shall be interpreted by the court so as to give effect to such remaining portions of the Ordinance. Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. Section 6. Notice of Adoption. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause it to be published in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this day of , 2012. Chuck Washington, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 12- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the day of and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the day of , , the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk M I RA LOIVIA City of Temecula PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY 1 6� IP°`Y'1 INI..P.N� GOMMUNTFS CORP DEVELOPER: INLAND COMMUNITIES CORPORATION ARCHITECT: HANNOUCHE ARCHITECTS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: DAV�D NEAULT & ASSOCIATES CIVIL ENGINEER: VSL ENGINEERING PR11-0023 MIRA LOMA PIANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY TABLE OF CONTENTS 17 .22220 T�TLE ...........................................................................................................3 1722.222 PURPOSE ...................................................................................................3 17.22.224 RELATIONSHIP WITH THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AND CITYWIDE DESIGN STANDARDS ...............................................................................3 17.22226 USE REGULATIONS ....................................................................3 17.22.228 SUPPLEMENTAL DESIGN AND SETBACK STANDARDS ..................4 1722.230 PROJECT SEttING _......_ ........................................................._4 A. Setting and Location ........................ ........ _ .. _... _ .. _ _ .......... _ ....4 B. Existing Site Conditions.........._ .................................................5 C. Surrounding Land Uses and Development..........._..._...._...........5 1722.232 ARCHiTECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES .............................................6 A. Design Style .................................................................................6 B. Articulation of Design Facades ..................................................6 C. Streetscape ...................................................................................9 D. Massing and Scale .......................................................................9 E. Roof Ptanes .................................................................................9 F. Walls and Fences .....................................................................9 G. Lighting ......................................................................................71 H. Parking ..........................................................................................12 I. Trash Enclosures .............. .......................................................72 17.22.234 LANDSCAPE DESIGN STANDARDS ............................................73 A. Landscape Elements ....................................... _.... _................13 B. Entry Monument....._ ......................_........................,..............15 C. Private Recreation Facility ................_...................,..................16 9/78/2012 Pa9e 2 MIRA LOMA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY 17.22.220 TITLE Section 1722220 through 1722234 shall be known as "PDO - 11" (Mira Loma Planned Development Overlay District) 17.22.222 PURPOSE The Mira Loma Planned Development Overlay District (PDO-91) is infended to meet the high density Multi-Family Residential criteria contained in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Typical housing types may indude townhouses, stacked dwellings and apartments with a density range of 13 — 20 du per acre. 17.22.224 RELATIONSHIP WITH THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AND CITYWIDE DESIGN STANDARDS A) The permitted uses for the Mira Loma Pianned Development Overlay District are described in Section 1722226. B) Except as modified by the provisions of Section 1722228 the following rules and regulations shall apply to all planning applications in this area. 1. The Citywide Design Guidelines that are in effect at the time of application is deemed comple[e. 2. The approval requirements contained in the �evelopmeni Code that are in effect at the time the application is deemed complete. 3. Any other relevant ruie, regulation or sta�dard that is in effect at the time an application is deemed complete. 1722.226 USE REGULATIONS The Mira Loma Planned Development Overlay district (PDO-11) located along Mira Loma Dnve and Rancho Vista Road Is intended to provide for the Multi- Family Apartment Development of 120 Units on 7.24 gross acres with a density of 16.6 du/ac The proposed project is comprised entirely of private residential land uses designed to enhance housing opportunities, consider naturel features, incorporate private and common space, private recreation and develop a common community theme. The project will provide housing opportunities consistent with the City's General Plan Policies in response to the local market demands and will provide for a visually pleasing environment through adoption of supplemental performance standards that have been provided to ensure compatibility with the adjacent neighborhoods. 9/78/2012 Page 3 MIRA LOMA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY 17.22.228 SUPPLEMENTAL DESIGN AND SETBACK STANDARDS The Multi Family component shall comply with the development standards set fourth in Table 1722228. Table 17.22.228 Mira Loma Planned Develo ment Overla District Residential Develo ment Standards PDO-11 AREA Site Acrea e 7.24 ross / 627 net Maximum number of dweliin units er acre 20 Units Per acre tar et 16.6 du/acre net BUILDING SETBACKS Minimumbuildin se aration t6ft.atfirstfloor. 18 ft. at second and third floors Minimum Fron[ setback 20 ft. Minimum Rear setback 20 R. Minimum Side setback 15 k. OTHER REQUIREMENTS � Maximum hei ht 45 ft. Minimum O en s ace Re uired 25% Private o en s ace er unit 50 s.ft. Minimum 17.22.230 PROJECT SETTING A. Setting and Location The Mira Loma Project is comprised of 7.24 gross acres located on Mira Loma Drive on the north side of Rancho Vista Road. A conservation channel runs adjacent to the eastern boundary of the project site. Mira Loma Drive is a loop road, which borders the project from the northern boundary and continues on the west. 9118(2012 Page 4 MIRA LOMA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY 8. Existing Site Conditions The property consists of vacant land with and an existing small asphatt parking bt. The elevation of the property is lower than the surrounding Rancho Vista Road and Mira Loma Drive. C. Surrounding Land Uses and Development A conservation channel runs along the eastern edge of the project. Vail Elementary School is located along the southeast portion of the channel. The northeast edge is bordered by single-family ho�sing (l.ow-Medium Density). Located on the north a�d west of the project site are apartment dwellings (High Density}. �_—_—_ _ _ ._—__— ___ I,M --_ '�' / ��: � LvI . � ��.�� . n , r^-� VAIL GLBMENTRY PROJHCT SCHOOL SITE� ' .-�� y,��r•,.- � 0.rNLNO . o, � os LM LlA 9/18/2012 page 5 MIRA LOMA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY 17.22232 ARCHITECTURAL GUIDE LINES A. Design Style The design of the project site shall comply with the City's Municipal Code Requirements (Residential performance standards — Section 17.06.070 (A, C& D) and Citywide Design Guidelines). The purpose of residential architectural guidelines is to provide guidance for the development of the Mira Loma Project Site. 1. Site plan elements that shall be considered to produce a great neighborhood include. a. Street Trees b. Pedestrian Connectivity a Building Placement d. Recreation Amenities e. Open space preservation 2. Architectural elements / concepts ihat shall be considered to create a quality neighborhood include. a. Articulation of building forms in a horizontal and vertical plane b. Using Design elements to balance the overall building scale c. Varied roof forms and elements d. The use of various color palettes and building materials e. Building materiais/design to reflect architectural styles B. Articulation of Design Facades 1. The building design shall incorporate 360-degree architecture. The use of elements such as overhangs, trellises, and secondary building materials will be used to lend character to the building. 2. Architectural elements that add interest and character, such as arches, alcoves, baiconies, and recessed windows shall be provided. 3. High quality material shall be used to create a look of permanence withi� the project. Variations in color and material will be used in order to create interest and reduce a monotonous appearance. 9/78l2012 Page 6 MIRA LOMA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY B. Articulation of Design Facades (co�t.) 4. Color palettes will be selected per design style. Colors chosen for trim, windows, doors and architectural elements shatl complement the exterior finish material. 5. Fixtures and finishes will be seiected for their co�tnbution to the overall theme of the development. 6. The selected architecWral styles for this project have been determined to be: Spanish Colonial and Tuscan SPANISH COLONIAL .:.� �i t �s�, . — �.z ��.� � I� � i:_: . `' ` � ;:� '� �� i f_ i rv~ ; ,' � ;;� t-rT i�;�;.IG �C: '1�.�1 r i-t I �,� .- �mrt��u r �, ��' R, ��.., .'i r� r_r �$� I I �r ai 1 Ya`Li i �� N� �' I'�i� �b ��: I� � ,' 4 _� � � �. STYLE ELEMENTS: • Simple stucco p�aster finish with arched design elements • Balconies with metal raitings • Decorative iron details on exterior elevations • Simulated wood header and corbel detailing • Wood shutters • Predominantly hip roofs with Concrete'S' Tile Roofs • 18" Eaves • Garage door pattems to compliment the style 9I18/2012 Page 7 MIRA LOMA PLANNE� DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY TUSCAN - x � � � � ��+. ti a _ � y� n M �.5 m g� � � ] . � . i k, _ r � ,. �I � _r.n ��.. ... �„ , � F .�L�� 1� . . -,� -° ...5 . i�.� "� L� 1l ,� S ;R . � �t P� a s Y 5 --? . , ,.� 9s'v I � k� r . ��i� � � �i . �. � � � n ii�� .�.�^ � i ,. �'..d ¢� � � � � p,, x. r '�""?M1` � h �1 �}}. . � �..a�: R .+,s� � ,. '.I w�..'"�d�:F�-?'��' t-. STYLE ELEMENTS: • Simple stucco and manufactured stone exterior finish • Balconies with metal railings • Stucco covered window plant shelves - Wood shutters • Predominately hip forms with gables at projecting elements. • 18" Eaves • 12" Rakes • Garage door pattern to complement the style. 9/18/2012 Page 8 MIRA LOMA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY C. Streetscape and Street Design The streetscape shall be designed in a manner to create a visually interesting community. Landscaping, setbacks, building orientation, recreation features with Spanish Colonial and Tuscan type building designs shall be used to avoid a monotonous appearance. Also see page 18 of this P.D.O. for street cross sections. 1. The interior street has a minimum width of 24'-0" with a clear travel width of 24'-0". This street provides circulation for the residents, emergency services and trash collection. Residents also have access to their garages and entries from the street. The design shall incorporate adequate radii and clearance for emergency vehicle access. D. Massing and Scale The use of a variety of shapes and forms including architectural projections, such as roof overhangs or stepped facades which provide contrast with vertical walls, and chimneys shall be used to avoid box-like design. Excessive mass and bulk of the roof area shall be broken up into smaller areas that reduce the apparent scale of the house and provide visual interest. This shall be accomplished by varying the height portions of the rwf, varying the orientation of the roof, and by using gables, and hip roofs. E. Roof Planes Varying roof forms/changes in roof plane shall be used to minimize a flat, repe[itious plane. Multiple rootlines can be used to create a visually appealing silhouette and will be considered when the buiiding elevations are visible from a public street. F. Walls and Fences Decorative walls, yard walls, and fencing should be designed to integrate with the architectural style of the buildings as well as the landscape design. Materials and finishes will complement the projecYs overall theme. 1. Perimeter fencing to be vinyl post and rail type. 2. Pool fencing to be 5'-0" high tubular steei type. 9/78/2072 Page 9 MIRA LOMA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY F. Walls and Fences (cont.� � �;�,«�°G�1;;;;,uC"a�� ,,.,�,ti�w��,��„�, pp ��,�,��x.�t��.�,.�.��,. ,.,..K O ��,.��...,,� p ,�,��,�,��F�R Q I � I i I ' i 1 � 5' iUBULAR STEEL POOL FENCE SCALE: �' = 1'-0" p �..�.,,.� p V.,,., x��x,. pp m„�i��in � � --..._ o � ' i � -�— /-- * -� i � l. �� _ - � �.�; 3 RAI VI NYL FENCE SCALE: �' = 1'-0" 9/78I2012 Page 10 MIRA LOMA PLANNED DEVEIOPMENT OVERLAY G. Lighting 1. Lighting sha41 be consistent with the Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance. The lighting should not be so intense that it calls attention to the project site. Timers and sensors shall be used to avoid unnecessary lighting. 2. Lighting should be low-voltage / high efficiency when possible. 3. Flashing, moving, high intensity or exposed light source type luminaries are not permitted. 4. E�erior lighting design shall address the issue of security. Parking areas, walkways and building entrances shou�d be well lit for security and safety. 5. Exterior lighting should have a variation of fixtures and illumination levels to define the organization of streets, walkways and community facilities. 6. Neon and similar types of lighting are prohibited per Mount Palomar 7. Maximum 26 watt fluorescent lighting to be used. f� � � Minka Group 8212-ti1-YL (Garage) Minka Group 8217-6i-PL (Entry) 9/16/2012 Pa9e ll MIRA LOMA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY �� r �. �o'.. � � � � �-"":. i .:•. .: h- ,. / ,,... �. . �. ' i;' 9 �� iy i ' �✓�v � x � >n ,��. "¢��w�'�� . . KimLighHng—Era➢ell(Pedcstrian Kiml,igM1ting—LowLevelLumina've & Pariting Area) H. Parking Parking requirements for the project site shalf comply with the following: t Covered Parking: 1 Covered parking space for each 1 Bedroom (or less) Units and 1 Covered parking space for each 2 Bedroom Units. 2. Uncovered Parking: 0.3 uncovered parking space for 1 Bedroom (or less) Units and 0.6 uncovered parking space for 2 Bedroom Units. 3. Tandem Parking: Tandem parking is permissible. 4. Motorcycle Parking: 1 Uncovered parking space for every 25 required regular open parking spaces. 5. Guest Parking: 1 Guest parking space/8 Units. I. Trash Enclosures Trash enclosure areas should be carefully designed, located and integrated into the site plan. 9/18/2012 Page 12 MIRA LOMA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY I. Tresh Enclosures (cont.) L Trash / recyciing wntainers shouid be large enough, piaced frequently enough throughout the site and collected frequently enough to handle the refuse generated. 2. Trash enclosures shouid be designed with similar finishes, materials and detailed as the preliminary buildings within the project and shall be screened with landscaping. TRASH ENCLOSURE _ I � � I 17.22.234 LANDSCAPE DESIGN STANDARDS A. Landscape Elements Landscaping of the project shall conform to Sec[ions 17.06.060 (Residential Districts, Landscape Standards) and 17.32 (Water-efficient Landscape Design) of the City's Municipal Code. Landscape pians shall be required as part of the Development Plan for the project and shall include the following: L The landscape design of the project consists of a combination of water efficient, droughbtolerant plant material to reduce water demand. 9118/2012 Page 13 MIRA LOMA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY A. Landscape Elements (cont.) 2. Streetscape landscape for the major streets, Mire Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road shall, be planted with minimum 24" box specimen size street trees spaced at 45'-0" o.c. spacing (maximum) with combination of 15 and 5 gallon shrubs and ground cover. Fifteen-gallon hedge shrubs will be spaced to adequately provide fence type screening along the public right-of-way line. Flowering ground cover will be provided to fill any voids in the streetscape Iandscape. 3. Project entry at "A" Street shall indude project entry wall to match architectural style of the project as well as 36" box specimen trees, minimum size evergreen flowering variety and combination of fifteen gallon, five gallon and one gallon shrubs in an interesting design pattem to provide visual interest at the entry. 4. Common Area slope shall be provided with landscape and with appropriate trees, shrubs and ground cover to provide erosion control to meet the requirements of the Citys Municipal Code. All slope banks greater than or equal to 3:1 shall, at a minimum, be irrigated and landscaped with appropriate plant material for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: i. One fiReen gallon or larger tree per each six hundred square feet of slope area. ii. Five gallon or larger shrubs for each one hundred square feet of slope area. iii. Appropriate ground cover, minimum spacing of 12" o.c. from flat size container. iv. Slope banks in excess of eight feet in vertical height with slopes greater or equal to 2�1 shall also provide one five gallon or larger tree per each one thousand square feet of slope area in addition to the other requirements of this section. v. Slopes adjacent to open space to be planted with non-invasive species. vi. Drip irrigation shall be provided in ail areas where spray Irrigation is not necessary. Overhead irrigation shall not be permitted within 24 inches of non-permeable surfaces. 9��8�2��2 Page 14 MIRA LOMA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY A. Landscape Eiements (cont.) vii. Turf areas shall be used for functional needs only and are not to be less than 8 feet wide. Subsurtace drip irrigation is required where turf is within 24 inches of any non-permeable surfaces. High e�ciency overhead sprey is allowed behind the 24 inch wide area. B. Entry Monument The project entry and site amenities will complement one another and reflect the overall architectural theme of the project. The use of pilasters, special paving treatments and landscaping will be used to create an easity identif able entryway. . � �. ` .. . 'i.�l � .. _ � 1�� ¢Y. . . . .ta� S �1.-::;-. . .� �,;� ,� , vC _ � ��S , `' �. -� _��IYEfiT� Qi �9� , i � . .._; _ ��n , 9/18/2072 Page IS MIRA LOMA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY C. PNvate Recreatioa Facility The Recreation Center shail be an active facility to provide a family oriented center including the development of a child tot lot with special play equipment structure. The center shall include a recreational pool with generous pool activity area for social functions. A minimum 20 percent of the recreation area shall be landscaped with a combination of trees, shrubs and ground cover. CLUB HOUSE � �x 6 � � � s . 4 r �� 1 Y �-��} �� t t + ' f �� ' �`� T � e�l � � � � V _� a�. � � � i �N ,.�� ._�` •..:t� � � Lt � . {r � �� ' STYLE ELEMENTS: � Simple stucco and manufactured stone exterior finish • Wood shutters • Predominately gable roofs with hip forms at projecting elements. • 18" Eaves 9l18/2012 Pege 16 MIRA LOMA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY 9 ,� � i' , � r — ry�'�'� w ' _ �� - �� : �a,�,� .:_,�. ' � --- - yl . i . - `. �� Y � ��:'.� 2 �^ . _. j — . ,. � � . �1� \ -��_ �: 1 �._ �- J,.J s `J J .. � wi�\ �.� � ry'-) vt� �.. #.:.. Y ��._.... �/ � �� +� a�i.J�� '�'�� I ` /:d � � y ii w �.s� '. �.'� �' , �' •1y �'' , 1 �;� . �'��,, ; � � ,�� . � ,� Y�!I . ' .d : � �` 1-' . `�, t ` \..' Je - �\ -. ,? : `. f ��,i �. '�. � � �' �'`�'-� _. ,, J � � ,,� � � J f � J' I J.��a �/� �: ��: Ov[AU�snePUn �= � � MIRA LOMA APARTMENTS �" r�.romMM�xi�i� . �.o.rzMec�w. _-- MIRA LOMA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY .�7i'a. � . + �,: " � �S� 3 � r .'..� '.,`.' , �t . v � . i +�� ,yy�y�= "'�^Tr y � �"� . �: :`c `nl ��G,1 ,:i I 7�•�� i�iX�� .�... `0 y" r +i. � _'"_ _ ' .F�'�. � W � �a^' . ..... . �.r — ,F � w � " ' � ��'±�'. .-. � � � � ��K d '-♦ 7� ' �9H �m�M. � �:=� -� !��a ��e. .��w,�.. r`rc".i. ^. •� � f .�. ..i1f��. � �• � � ��t:_ .. ., 1 • - � �� - � `1.�� y �L S � � �� / 4 � }I � � ��` � � P'�s^� Y��' 2��h', �'; � � � f� : ��f\ � �,� `��, . _>. � _ 7�' � .. � ` �C" l \ � ,-- s �=:��I, , � �� . �, >� „ . � �: :�'`o _� f[a��ons. r.[vn+ro,tis nN� [mueeer+.c�*s MIRA LOMA APARTMENTS � MIRA LOMA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY s. . ,. . ��,. �r na ee , � n. M1 � y � t..��.�:'.� �.. 1 �' •.!' s y_�`5� 4 55 s��. a P va •A 5 5 �� 1 S � .,S y y ° t'S 5 5 • e. . e ' S5 . 5� 5 � � �'0 • , :j �5555551 5�� e S 1 5 5 S , e. e e e nn n .. ' Sy S b�.e e e,. P �`° a � .._ _. . _._. �.. ... . . .�_.�.. ' �c�-_ �, _t . _: A MIRA LOMA APARiMENTS � � PC RESOLUTION NO. 12- 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. PAl2-0033, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR MIRA LOMA APARTMENTS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND MIRA LOMA ROAD" (APN 944-060-006) Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On February 22, 2012, John Snell, representing Inland Communities Corp, filed Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan, and PAl2-0034, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay- 11 (PDO-11) in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. On October 17, 2012, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan, and PAl2-0034, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay-11 (PDO- 11). C. The Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. D. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on October 17, 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. E. At the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan and PAl2-0034, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay-11 (PDO- 11) with a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program subject to and based upon the findings set forth thereunder. F. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the Application hereby finds, determines and declares that: Development Plan Application PAl2-0034 is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City: 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 Mira Loma Apartments project is consistent with the land use standards contained in the proposed PDO-11 Amendment. The project is also consistent with the High Density Residential (H) land use designation contained in the General Plan. The site is properly planned and zoned, and as conditioned, is physically suitable for the type and density of residential development proposed. The project, as conditioned, is also consistent with other applicable requirements of State law and local ordinances, including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Citywide Design Guidelines, and �ire and building codes. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare; The overall design of the Mira Loma Apartments, including the site, building, parking, circulation and other associated site improvements, is consistent with, and intended to protect the health and safety of those working and living in and around the site. The project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, has been found to be consistent with all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Development Plan Planning Application No. PAl2-0033: A. Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA), City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the approval of the Development Plan and associated applications ("the ProjecY'), as described in the Initial Study. 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 September 14, 2012, and expired on October 14, 2012. 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 comments were received prior to the public hearing and a response to all the comments made therein was prepared, submitted to the Planning Commission and incorporated into the administrative record of the proceedings. D. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the October 17, 2012 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 recommends adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project. Section 4. Recommendation. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula hereby recommends that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PAl2-0033, Development Plan Application with Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program Conditions, subject to the Conditions of Approval set forth on Exhibit A. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 17� day of October, 2012. Ron Guerrerio, 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. 12- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 17� day of October, 2012, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS Patrick Richardson, Secretary RESOLUTION NO. 12- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PAl2-0033, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR MIRA LOMA APARTMENTS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND MIRA LOMA ROAD (APN 944-060-006) Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On February 22, 2012, John Snell, representing Inland Communities Corp, filed Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan, and PAl2-0024, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay- 11 (PDO-11) in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. On October 17, 2012, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan, and PAl2-0024, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay-11 (PDO- 11). C. The Project was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. D. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("CEQA") and circulated for public review from September 14, 2012 through October 14, 2012 for a 30-day public review. 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. E. On October 17, 2012, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, the Planning Commission considered the Project and any comments received prior to or at the public hearing on October 17, 2012, at which time the City staff presented its report, and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to the Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration. F. Following consideration of the entire record before it at the public hearing and due consideration of the proposed Project the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Project. G. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the entire record before the Planning Commission hearing, and after due consideration of the testimony regarding the proposed Project, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the Project including Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan, and PAl2-0024, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay-11 (PDO-11). H. On , the City Council of the City of Temecula considered the Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration, at a duly noticed public hearing at which time all interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. The Council considered all the testimony and any comments received regarding the Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the public hearing. I. Following the public hearing, the Council adopted Resolution No. 12- adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. J. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Legislative Findings. The City Council in approving the Development Plan application hereby finds, determines and declares that: 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 Mira Loma Apartments project is consistent with the land use standards contained in the proposed PDO-11 Amendment. The project is also consistent with the High Density Residential (H) land use designation contained in the General Plan. The site is properly planned and zoned, and as conditioned, is physically suitable for the type and density of residential development proposed. The project, as conditioned, is also consistent with other applicable requirements of State law and local ordinances, including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Citywide Design Guidelines, and �ire and building codes. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare; The overall design of the Mira Loma Apartments, including the site, building, parking, circulation and other associated site improvements, is consistent with, and intended to protect the health and safety of those working and living in and around the site. The project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, has been found to be consistent with all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare. Section 3. Conditions. The City Council of the City of Temecula approves Planning Application No. PAPAl2-0033, Development Plan, subject to the Conditions of Approval set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference. Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and it shall become effective upon its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this day of , 2012. Chuck Washington, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 12- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the day of , 2012, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PAl2-0033 Project Description: A Multi-family Residential Development Plan to construct 120 apartment units on a 7.24 acre site located at the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road. Assessor's Parcel No.: 944-060-006 MSHCP Category: Residential (Greater than 14.1 DU) DIF Category: Residential —Attached TUMF Category: Residential — Multi-Family Quimby Category: Multi-Family Approval Date: Expiration Date: 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 Two Thousand One Hundred and Sixty-Five Dollars and Fifty Cents ($2,165.50) which includes the Two Thousand One Hundred and One Dollars and Fifty Cents ($2,101.50) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Sixty-Four pollar ($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 applicanU 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 the approval of this project. PL-4. This approval shall be used within two years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two 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 3 one-year extensions of time, one year at a time. PL-6. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Planned Development Overlay-11 (PDO-11). PL-7. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures identified within the Mitigated Negative adopted for PAl2-0033 and PAl2-0034. PL-8. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. PL-9. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved site plan and elevations contained on file with the Planning Department. PL-10. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Director. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Director shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest. PL-11. 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-12. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Department for permanent filing two 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of the approved color and materials board and the colored architectural elevations. All labels on the color and materials board and Elevations shall be readable on the photographic prints. PL-13. The Conditions of Approval specified in this resolution, to the extent specific items, materials, equipment, techniques, finishes or similar matters are specified, shall be deemed satisfied by staff's prior approval of the use or utilization of an item, material, equipment, finish or technique that City staff determines to be the substantial equivalent of that required by the Conditions of Approval. Staff may elect to reject the request to substitute, in which case the real party in interest may appeal, after payment of the regular cost of an appeal, the decision to the Planning Commission for its decision. Scheme 1 — Spanish Colonial MATERIAL COLOR Stucco 16/20 sand finish; to match Sherwin- Williams SW7004 Snowbound Stucco Accent Sherwin Williams SW6101 Sands of Time Fascia, rafter tails, wood trim, French Sherwin Williams SW6083 Sable doors and garage doors Shutters Sherwin Williams SW6507 Resolute Blue Wrought Iron Sherwin Williams SW6258 Tricorn Black Roof Tile Eagle Capistrano — Hilo Sunset 3124 Scheme 2 — Tuscany MATERIAL COLOR Stucco 1 16/20 sand finish; to match Sherwin- Williams SW6113 Interactive Cream Stucco 2 16/20 sand finish; to match Sherwin Williams SW6114 Bagel Stucco 3 16/20 sand finish; to match Sherwin Williams SW6115 Totally Tan Stucco 4 16/20 sand finish; to match Sherwin Williams 6116 Tatami Tan Stucco Accent Sherwin Williams SW6101 Sands of Time Fascia, rafter tails, wood trim, French Sherwin Williams SW6069 French doors and garage doors Roast Shutters Sherwin Williams SW6152 Superior Bronze Stone EI Dorado Umbria Fieldledge Roof Tile Eagle Capistrano — Sunrise Blend 3645 Brick NcNear Sandmold — Kilburn 3645 PL-14. Trash enclosures shall be provided to house all trash receptacles utilized on the site. These shall be clearly labeled on site plan. PL-15. If construction is phased, a construction staging area plan or phasing plan for construction equipment and trash shall be approved by the Planning Director. PL-16. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul demolition and construction debris. PL-17. The applicant shall comply with the Public Art Ordinance. PL-18. All parkways, including within the right-of-way, entryway median, landscaping, walls, fencing, recreational facilities and on-site lighting shall be maintained by the property owner or maintenance association. PL-19. All costs associated with the relocation of any existing streetlights shall be paid for by the developer. PL-20. The trash enclosures shall be large enough to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as regular solid waste containers. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) PL-21. Provide the Planning Department with a copy of the underground water plans and electrical plans for verification of proper placement of transformer(s) and double detector check prior to final agreement with the utility companies. PL-22. Double detector check valves shall be installed internal to the project site at locations not visible from the public right-of-way, subject to review and approval by the Planning Director. PL-23. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "If at any time during excavation/construction of the site, archaeological/cultural resources, or any artifacts or other objects which reasonably appears to be evidence of cultural or archaeological resource are discovered, the property owner shall immediately advise the City of such and the City shall cause all further excavation or other disturbance of the affected area to immediately cease. The Planning Director at his/her sole discretion may require the property owner to deposit a sum of money it deems reasonably necessary to allow the City to consult and/or authorize an independent, fully qualified specialist to inspect the site at no cost to the City, in order to assess the significance of the find. Upon determining that the discovery is not an archaeological/ cultural resource, the Planning Director shall notify the property owner of such determination and shall authorize the resumption of work. Upon determining that the discovery is an archaeological/cultural resource, the Planning Director shall notify the property owner that no further excavation or development may take place until a mitigation plan or other corrective measures have been approved by the Planning Director." PL-24. The developer is required to enter into a Cultural Resources Treatment Agreement with the Pechanga Tribe. This Agreement will address the treatment and disposition of cultural resources and human remains that may be impacted as a result of the development of the project, as well as provisions for tribal monitors. PL-25. If cultural resources are discovered during the project construction (inadvertent discoveries), all work in the area of the find shall cease, and a qualified archaeologist and representatives of the Pechanga Tribe shall be retained by the project sponsor to investigate the find, and make recommendations as to treatment and mitigation. PL-26. A qualified archaeological monitor will be present and will have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities, in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe and their designated monitors, to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. PL-27. Tribal monitors from the Pechanga Tribe shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities, including all archaeological surveys, testing, and studies, to be compensated by the developer. PL-28. The landowner agrees to relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area, to the Pechanga Tribe for proper treatment and disposition. PL-29. All sacred sites are to be avoided and preserved. PL-30. A 30-day preconstruction survey, in accordance with MSHCP guidelines and survey protocol, shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance. The results of the 30-day preconstruction survey shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to scheduling the pre-grading meeting with Public Works. PL-31. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "No grubbing/clearing of the site shall occur prior to scheduling the pre-grading meeting with Public Works. All project sites containing suitable habitat for burrowing owls, whether owls were found or not, require a 30-day preconstruction survey that shall be conducted within 30 days prior to ground disturbance to avoid direct take of burrowing owls. If the results of the survey indicate that no burrowing owls are present on-site, then the project may move forward with grading, upon Planning Department approval. If burrowing owls are found to be present or nesting on-site during the preconstruction survey, then the following recommendations must be adhered to: Exclusion and relocation activities may not occur during the breeding season, which is defined as March 1 through August 31, with the following exception: From March 1 through March 15 and from August 1 through August 31 exclusion and relocation activities may take place if it is proven to the City and appropriate regulatory agencies (if any) that egg laying or chick rearing is not taking place. This determination must be made by a qualified biologist." PL-32. A copy of the Rough Grading Plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) PL-33. The applicant shall submit a photometric plan, including the parking lot, drive aisles and pedestrian paths, to the Planning Department, which meets the requirements of the Development Code and the Palomar Lighting Ordinance. The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely impact the growth potential of the parking lot trees. PL-34. Four copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. These plans shall conform to the approved conceptual landscape plan, or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, height and spread, water usage or KC value, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance and Water Storage Contingency Plan per the Rancho California Water District. The plans shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal) and one copy of the approved Grading Plan. PL-35. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall provide a minimum five-foot wide planter to be installed at the perimeter of all parking areas. Curbs, walkways, etc. are not to infringe on this area. PL-36. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note stating that "Three landscape site inspections are required. The first inspection will be conducted at installation of irrigation while trenches are open. This will verify that irrigation equipment and layout is per plan specifications and details. Any adjustments or discrepancies in actual conditions will be addressed at this time and will require an approval to continue. Where applicable, a mainline pressure check will also be conducted. This will verify that the irrigation mainline is capable of being pressurized to 150 psi for a minimum period of two hours without loss of pressure. The second inspection will verity that all irrigation systems are operating properly, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The third inspection will verify property landscape maintenance for release of the one-year landscape maintenance bond." The applicanUowner shall contact the Planning Department to schedule inspections. PL-37. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note on the plans stating that "The contractor shall provide two copies of an agronomic soils report at the first irrigation inspection." PL-38. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance), the total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with approved plan). Applicant shall use evapotranspiration (ETo) factor of 0.70 for calculating the maximum allowable water budget. PL-39. A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted for approval, which details the proper maintenance of all proposed plant materials to assure proper growth and landscape development for the long-term esthetics of the property. The approved maintenance program shall be provided to the landscape maintenance contractor who shall be responsible to carry out the detailed program. PL-40. Specifications of the landscape maintenance program shall indicate that "Three landscape site inspections are required. The first inspection will be conducted at installation of irrigation while trenches are open. This will verify that irrigation equipment and layout is per plan specifications and details. Any adjustments or discrepancies in actual conditions will be addressed at this time and will require an approval to continue. Where applicable, a mainline pressure check will also be conducted. This will verify that the irrigation mainline is capable of being pressurized to 150 psi for a minimum period of two hours without loss of pressure. The second inspection will verity that all irrigation systems are operating properly, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The third inspection will verify property landscape maintenance for release of the one-year landscape maintenance bond." The applicanUowner shall contact the Planning Department to schedule inspections. PL-41. Automatic irrigation shall be installed for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from view of the public from streets and adjacent property. PL-42. If any phase or area of the project site is not scheduled for development within six months of the completion of grading, it shall be temporarily landscaped and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control. PL-43. Wall and fence plans shall be consistent with the Conceptual Landscape Plans showing the height, location and the materials for all walls and fences. PL-44. Precise Grading Plans shall be consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements. PL-45. All WQMP treatment devices, including design details, shall be shown on the construction landscape plans. If revisions are made to the WQMP design that result in any changes to the conceptual landscape plans after entitlement, the revisions will be shown on the construction landscape plans, subject to the approval of the Planning Director. PL-46. Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the subdivision; however, solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with Planning Director approval. PL-47. All utilities shall be screened from public view. Landscape construction drawings shall show and label all utilities and provide appropriate screening. Provide a three- foot clear zone around fire detector checks as required by the Fire Department before starting the screen. Group utilities together in order to reduce intrusion. Screening of utilities is not to look like an after-thought. Plan planting beds and design around utilities. Locate all light poles on plans and insure that there are no conflicts with trees. PL-48. Building Construction Plans shall include detailed outdoor areas (including but not limited to trellises, decorative furniture, fountains, hardscape to match the style of the buildings, subject to the approval of the Planning Director. PL-49. The developer shall provide the Planning Department verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris. PL-50. Prior to the first building permit or installation of additional streetlights, whichever occurs first, the developer shall complete the Temecula Community Services District application, submit an approved Edison Streetlight Plan, and pay the advanced energy fees. PL-51. The developer shall satisfy the City's parkland dedication (Quimby) requirement through the payment of in-lieu fees equivalent to 1.17 acres of parkland, based upon the City's then current land evaluation. Said requirement includes a 20% credit for private recreational opportunities provided and shall be prorated at a per dwelling unit cost per residential building permit requested. Prior to Release of Power, Building Occupancy or Any Use Allowed by This Permit PL-52. An applicant shall submit a letter of substantial conformance, subject to field verification by the Planning Director or his/her designee. Said letter of substantial conformance shall be prepared by the project designer and shall indicate that all plant materials and irrigation system components have been installed in accordance with the approved final landscape and irrigation plans. If a certificate of use and occupancy is not required for the project, such letter of substantial conformance shall be submitted prior to scheduling for the final inspection. PL-53. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Planning Director. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. PL-54. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Director, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan shall be filed with the Planning Department for a period of one year from final Certificate of Occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Planning Director, the bond shall be released upon request by the applicant. PL-55. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently affixed reflectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height of 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously stating the following: "Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning (951) 696-3000." PL-56. In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least three square feet in size. PL-57. All site improvements including but not limited to parking areas and striping shall be installed. PL-58. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. PL-59. Per Municipal Code Chapter 17.30, "Smoking in Multi-Unit Residences," the Developer shall submit a site plan to the City for review and approval, designating a minimum of 25 percent of the units within the project as non-smoking units. OUTSIDE AGENCIES PL-60. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated March 13, 2012, a copy of which is attached. PL-61. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water DistricYs transmittal dated December 29, 2011, a copy of which is attached. BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT General Conditions/Information B-1. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings. B-2. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2010 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2010 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code,2010 California Energy Codes, 2010 California Green building Standards, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, Temecula Municipal Code. B-3. 2010 California Green Building Standards Provide 10% Voluntary Measures on project. B-4. Provide details of all applicable disabled access provisions and building setbacks on plans. B-5. All ground floor units to be adaptable. B-6. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. B-7. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. B-8. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. B-9. Show path of travel from public right way to all public areas on site ( club house, trash enclose tot lots and picnic areas B-10. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plan showing compliance with Ordinance Number 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All streetlights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and aimed not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. B-11. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. B-12. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. B-13. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls will require separate approvals and permits. B-14. Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours of construction, as allowed by the City of Temecula Municipal Ordinance 9.20.060, for any site within one-quarter mile of an occupied residence. The permitted hours of construction are Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 630 p.m., and Saturday from 7:00 a.m. to 630 p.m. No work is permitted on Sundays and nationally recognized Government Holidays. B-15. The City of Temecula adopted an ordinance on March 31, 2003 to collect fees for a Riverside County area wide Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). This project is subject to payment of these fees at the time of building permit issuance. The fees are subject to the provisions of Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. B-16. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. B-17. Provide a house electrical meter to provide power for the operation of exterior lighting, irrigation pedestals and fire alarm systems for each building on the site. Developments with single user buildings shall clearly show on the plans how the operation of exterior lighting and fire alarm systems when a house meter is not specifically proposed. At Plan Review Submittal B-18. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan applicable to scope of work for plan review. B-19. Provide a Sound Transmission Control Study in accordance with the provisions of the Section 1207, of the 2010 edition of the California Building Code. B-20. Provide precise grading plan to verify accessibility for persons with disabilities. B-21. Provide truss calculations that have been stamped by the engineer of record of the building and the truss manufacturer engineer. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) B-22. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans. Prior to Beginning of Construction B-23. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 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. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix B. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 4,000 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure for a 4-hour duration (CFC Appendix B and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-3. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix C. A combination of on-site and offsite 6" x 4" x 2-2 Y" outlets on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrants in the system (CFC Appendix C and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) F-4. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be with a surface to provide all-weather driving capabilities. Access roads shall be 80,000 Ibs. GVW with a minimum of AC thickness of .25 feet. In accordance with Section 1410.1, prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have fire apparatus access roads (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-5. Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 24 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-6. The gradient for fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed 15 percent (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-7. This development shall maintain two points of access, via all-weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau (CFC Chapter 5). F-8. Dead end roadways and streets in excess of 150 feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) F-9. The developer shall furnish three copies of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation for all private water systems pertaining to the fire service loop. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block, and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. Hydraulic calculations will be required with the underground submittal to ensure fire flow requirements are being met for the on-site hydrants. The plans must be submitted and approved prior to building permit being issued (CFC Chapter 14 and Chapter 5). F-10. 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-11. 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-12. Hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers (blue dots) (City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-13. 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. Multi-family residential buildings shall have a minimum of 12- inch numbers with unit numbers being a minimum of six inches in size (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-14. A directory display monument sign shall be required for apartment, condominium, townhouse or mobile home parks. Each complex shall have an illuminated diagrammatic layout of the complex which indicates the name of the complex, all streets, building identification, unit numbers, and fire hydrant locations within the complex. Location of the sign and design specifications shall be submitted to and be approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior to installation. F-15. 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-16. All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry system for emergency access by firefighting personnel (CFC Chapter 5). F-17. 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 any landscaping surrounding buildings is kept at a height of no more than three feet or below the ground floor window sills. Plants, hedges and shrubbery shall be defensible plants to prevent would-be intruders from breaking into the buildings utilizing lower level windows. PD-2. Applicant shall ensure any trees surrounding building rooftops be kept at a distance to prevent 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 buildings. PD-3. Any berms shall not exceed three feet in height. PD-4. Applicant must comply with the standards of title 24 part 6 of the California code of regulations, for residential standards, refer to publication CEC-400-2008-016-CMF- REV-I. PD-5. All parking lot lighting shall be energy saving and minimized after hours of darkness and in compliance with Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations. PD-6. All exterior lighting shall be in compliance with Riverside County Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance 655, low pressure sodium lighting preferred. PD-7. All exterior entries shall have a vandal resistant light fixture installed to illuminate the entry area. The entry area shall be illuminated with a minimum one-foot candle illumination at ground level, evenly dispersed. PD-8. All entry doors shall have a peephole or viewer or other means of viewing the entire entry area. PD-9. All lighting affixed to the exterior of buildings shall be vandal resistant, wall mounted light fixtures. PD-10. All exterior doors, windows, locking mechanisms, hinges, and other miscellaneous hardware shall be commercial or institution grade. PD-11. Any graffiti painted or marked upon the buildings must be removed or painted over within 24 hours of being discovered. Report all such crimes to the Temecula Police 24-hour dispatch Center at (951) 696-HELP. PD-12. Any roof hatches shall be painted "International Orange." PD-13. Any public telephones located on the exterior of the buildings shall be placed in a well-lit, highly visible area, and installed with a"call-out only" feature to deter loitering. This feature is not required for public telephones installed within the interior of the buildings. PD-14. All disabled parking stalls on the premises shall be marked in accordance with Section 22511.8 of the California Vehicle Code. PD-15. Applicant shall comply with Temecula Municipal Code Section 9.14.010, Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages in Public Prohibited. PD-16. Crime prevention through environmental design 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 award of the risk of detection and possible intervention. Windows and clear 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-17. The Crime Prevention and Plans Unit of the Temecula Police Department offers free business and residential security surveys, to schedule an appointment contact the unit at (951) 506-5132. PD-18. Any questions regarding these conditions should be directed to the Temecula Police Department Crime Prevention and Plans Unit at (951) 506-5132. 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. A Grading Permit for precise grading, including all on-site flat work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of- way. PW-3. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right- of-way. PW-4. All improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars. PW-5. The project shall include construction-phase pollution prevention controls into the design of the project to prevent non-permitted runoff from discharging off site or entering any storm drain system or receiving water during all field-related activities. PW-6. A Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) must be conceptually accepted by the City prior to the initial grading plan check. The WQMP will be prepared by a registered civil engineer and include Low Impact Development (LID) Best Management Practices (BMPs), source controls, and treatment devices. PW-7. All onsite drainage and water quality facilities shall be privately maintained. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) PW-8. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Army Corps of Engineers c. California Department of Fish and Game PW-9. The Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) must receive final acceptance by the City prior to issuance of any grading permit. PW-10. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer in accordance with City of Temecula standards, and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to the commencement of grading. The grading plan shall include all necessary erosion control measures needed to adequately protect the site (public and private) and adjoining properties from damage due to erosion. PW-11. The developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works in accordance with Grading Ordinance Section 18.24.120. PW-12. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered soil or civil engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soil conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. PW-13. The developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered civil engineer in accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream facilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required improvements, shall be provided by the developer. PW-14. Construction-phase pollution prevention controls shall be consistent with the City's Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance and associated technical manual, and the City's standard notes for Erosion and Sediment Control. PW-15. The project shall demonstrate coverage under the State NPDES General Permit for Construction Activities by providing a copy of the Waste Discharge Identification number (WDID) issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the projecYs Risk Level (RL) determination number, and name and contact information of the Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD). A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be available at the site throughout the duration of construction activities. PW-16. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. PW-17. The developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. PW-18. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier's check or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. PW-19. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. PW-20. The developer shall obtain letters of approval for any off site work performed on adjoining properties. The letters shall be in format as directed by the Department of Public Works. PW-21. The developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works in accordance with Grading Ordinance Section 18.24.120. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) PW-22. The developer shall construct all public improvements outlined in these conditions to City of Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. a. Improve Rancho Vista Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/V� to include installation of street lights and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). b. Improve Mira Loma Drive (Collector Road Standards - 66' R/V� to include installation of street lights and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). PW-23. The developer shall construct all public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works including street improvements, which may include, but not limited to, pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalk, drive approaches; streetlights, signing, striping, sewer and domestic water systems; under grounding of proposed and existing utility distribution lines; and storm drain facilities. PW-24. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered civil or traffic engineer and reviewed by the Department of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. PW-25. The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered civil engineer, and the soil engineer shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions. PW-26. The developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. PW-27. The developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUM� Program as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.08. Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy PW-28. The project shall submit a completed WQMP Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement that must include the owner's notarized signature, proof of recordation with the County Recorder's Office, and all maintenance procedures for each of the structural treatment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) outlined in the WQM P. PW-29. The project shall demonstrate that the structural treatment control BMPs outlined in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and are ready for immediate implementation. PW-30. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works the developer shall receive written clearance from Rancho California Water District, Eastern Municipal Water District, or other affected agencies. PW-31. All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. PW-32. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. PW-33. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. ,� > `'r -�� t � �� J ��`e' � �� }iIVER�dDE • t UMMUNITY HEALTN FiGENC:Y •� � � UEF�AR`�I1�IENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ,�,. ��-..��•.�-r�=_ -� _ _ ,. . March 13, 2012 ` a City of'I'emecula : �� M � ��j PlanningUepartment f} �- 11 Atln: Cheryl Kitzerow, Project Planner ' - P.O. i3ox 9033 ' 'I�emccula, CA 92589 -. SCBJECT: PA#72-0033 —MIRA LOMA APARTYIENTS DP/ME (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUYIBER#944-060-006) Dear Ms. Kitzerow: In accordance with thc agrecment between the Coimty of Riverside, Deparhnent of Environmentxl Healeh (DL'H) and the City ofTemecula, DEH offers fhe following comments Por thc project referenecd in the subjcct heading of this letter: POTABLE WATEIi ANU SANITAAY SEWER SHRVICE 'Ltus pzojoct shall be required to obtein potable water service and sanitary ecwer service from Rancho Califomia Water llisEricl (RCWD). A"Will-Sorve" lcttor shall be required for water and sewer scrvice from RCWD prior to the approval otthis planning case. ENVIRONMPA'TAL ASSESSMENT (EAl - PHASE I A� Environmentul Assessment Phase I Study shall be rcyuired prior to the apprwa] of this planning case to deteemine whether any chemicals and/orpesticides were used on the property, the location of use, and ¢ny possiblc lingering negxtive effects. This cmidition requires the applicant to compiie sutficient infomtation about [ho property and land uses ro aid the llepartment in making a determination of whether addiCional investigation is needcd. Please eiote that the Enviromnental Asscesment process serves to proteet public health and welfare by lesse�i�g the chan�c of h�azdous or toxic substances rcmaining o�� Yhe property nnd iniexfering with sufe la�d use. Por further iofonnatioq please contact the Environmental Cleamips Prog�am at (951) 955-8982. . _ .. _.. _ _ _ _-- - -- -- - LFnPmr, ni,;�.� u. -1. J�SOb �GF;i? �n. -idCilu rA1J583•a:i2� i�ae� I�lii� ivaa�id -AIY.GGI � �u�n °..r ena W hn3m � ,.�x 19n � r. r n. B:, o[ fN. + 1909) S, fiJ3� �AX 19q9` 955R905 • Ai d0 � n Se�ci. r i fl a. h:�emA . qA rxui Chery1 Kitzerow, Project Planner City of Temecula Mazch 13, 2012 FOR ANY PROPOSED PUBLIC OR SEMI-PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL/SPA A set of thrae (3) complete plans for the swimming poollspa must bc submitted Yo DEH prior to the issuancc of any building peimit to verify compliance with dic California Administretive Code, the Califomit� Hcalth and SaPety Code, and the Uuiform Plumbing Codc. Public or Semi-public Swimming Poo]/Spa plans should be submitted to: • Depariment of Bnviromnental Health, Disfict F.nvironmental Scrvices, Munieta 38740 Sky Canyon Urivc. Suitc A, Mumeta CA 92563 Attention; Plan Check (95 t) 461-0284. Plan Check fccs arc required. HAZARDOUS MAT�RIALS MANAGEMENT BRANCH (HMMB)• The facility shall require a business emergency plan prior to the final of any building permit for any storage of hazardous materials, including swimming poo]/spa chemicals, that is greater than 55 gallons, 200 cubic feet or 500 pounds, or for uny acutely haracdous materials or extrcmely hazazdous substances. Morewcr, the facility will rcquire a hazazdous waSte permit if hazardous waste is generated as defined in 7'ifle 22 of the Califomia Code of Regulations, Section 66260.10 and 662613. If fuRher revicw of the site indicates additional environmental health issues, IiMMt3 reserves the right to regulate the businoss in accordance with applicable County Ordinances. For further information, pleuse contact EINIMB xt (951) 358-5055. If yoc have any quesrions regazding this !etter please wnCact me at (951) 955-898Q. Sinc�r¢ly, I/' °� Michael Mistioa, MBA, REHS Environmental ProYec6on and Oversight Diviaion Land Use / Water Resources Program 2 _ i � � December 29, 201 I � � t3anc9�u � I ', � Richard Valder. I I ,.... . . . VSL Engineering 31805 Temcculi Parkway i I . Suite 129 i ��.�„��,,, v. i.i�,�� Temecultt, CA 93592 � :., ,. i �'^°°�_°^^�^^�i gUBJICCT: WATERAVAILA6ILITY .,� ..��:��,�..,.. MIRA LOMA APARTMISN'1'S, MIRA LOMA DRNE � -1ptliviLY„° "" ANU RANCHO VISTA ROAD (PARCEL NO. 3 OF �I °e PARCEI, NAP N0.21014); APN 944-OCO-006 �. ' �.�.��.t�=� �MIRAI.OMARECOVERY,LLC� . ,r,n��.m e. r�„�,:��.� i n�n.��nc.si.��.��.�,.^.� DearMr. Vflldec "'T^'�° Ptease be acivisect th�t the above-reFereneed projecUproperty is located withi� ��' ��;-_��,�,� fhe3ervioebu�mdu�iesoERanchoCalifoiniaWalecUistriet(RCWD). �,.,�,.�,e:��.,u.� � '�","' ',' '' ��'� The subjcct projeet/property fian[s �jn exi;tin� S-Sneh cliametcr water pipeline � .,�,�,�.��,,,,,_-�� (1380 Pres�tiure Zona) wilhin ivtira Lo�na Drive and au er.istuig 12-inch � nan . ,._�_..,, diameterwaterpipelinewidiiuR�nchoVista2oad(13AOPressui�e7.one)- �.c�.a,rmn,,, r.�. �a� -- Water servCce to [I�c subjecl projecVproperty exists under Aecount A"o. 0103- ��"��"'��` ^V3UOOJ (v9oanl long Lann etun�s). Additions or modificatione to wate� sarvice . i i .., m.i.��,�x arran �mente are sub eo[ to Ihc Rulcs and Re,ulertions ovemin � Water ' ,�,�,�:��.�,�, ri.,�_ .., S' 1 P �S b) � „ � Systent �ncilities and Service, eis well as tlie compleCion of financial I � n=.,i � �� arrangemontsb�[weeuRCWD.mdLhepropeiTyowmer. i ,.� i . ! .°'^ '-'- Where privnte (on-site) facillties are required for wai�7 servioe, fire pmtection, i � imgatioq or other p�irposes, RCWD requires recocdation of a Reciprocal ' . , . .r..�. r .., - F:asement tmd MainCeoance Agrc�Knent ti>r such on-site pciv�te fecilities, � where priva[c on-site watcr fa�cili[ics may_cxoss (or may he shared amongst) n�ultiple lots/projeet u��its, and/or where suoh `common' Facilities mny be owned ai�d maintained by 2 Property Owncrs' Associatrou (proposed now or in i tl�e faLUre). Water avaitability is oontii�gen� upon tlie prope�iy ownur(s) aigni�g ar A�ency I Agreemeiit that assigns water mant�gemeut rights, if xny, m RCWD. ln � additimy water ava7lability is contingent upon t6e timing of the suhject �� project/property development relalive to watcr supply shortage ; �, contingency measures (pursunnt to RCWP's Water Shortage ContingencV : '� Plan or other applicaM1le ordinances), nnd/or the aduption of a required ' Water Supply Assessment, as detcrmined by tl�e LeaA Ageiicy. � i I l n„��i„ ,ur.,, l.etter to Ricb:vd Vaidez Deecmber 29, 2011 Pa�e'fwu Tlicre is no recycled water cun�e.ntly available within tlie li�nits estabtishcd by Ilesolution 2007- 10-5. Should recycled water become avnilable in 8io fumre, the projeLt/pro�erty mny be requiced [o retrofit its facilities to make use of tliis nvttilability [n ncco��iance with Resolutlon 2007-10.5. Rccycicd wator sorvice, thercPore, wuuld be available upon constmction of nny req�iced on-site and/or off=sitc recycled watcr facilities and [he completion of fmanciel arrangements between RCWD and the property ownsr. Requirements for the use oP recycted watec a�cavt�ilable from RCWD. As soon as feasible, Phe project proponent should co�itaet [LCWD for a deteonin¢[imi of existing water system iapability, bascd upmi projecrispecific demands and/or fire tlow requirm�ne�ts, as well �s a cletem�ination of proposed waYer facilities co�rflgw'ation. If new facilities are iequired for seivice, fu �rotection, o� other purposes, Clie pmjcet proponent should coutact RCWD foi� an assessment of pmject-speci6o fees rand raquiremonts. Please note that separate water meters will be requ(red for all Inndscape irrigution. Sewer servlce to tlie su6ject pn�jecl%property, If availnble, woidd be provided by Bastem Municipal Watm' Uistrict Lf �m sewer service is currently availabfe to tlic subjeci projecHpmperty, all proposed wnste discharge systems muet comply witPi tlie Stete Water Resources Contirol Board and/ur the basii� pl�m u6jectives and the pennit cond[tions issued by the appropria[e Regional Waler Qut�lity Cun[rol Board. If you should huve any questious or necd addition�l infbm�ntion, pleaxe conteic[ an Enb ueeriu� Services RepresenCative aP this officr� at (951) 296-6900. � Sincerety, � RANCIiO G\LIFORN[A WATER D16'fftICT ��r� �C�YGLL� ...._ � Liflian R�ovich Engineering Scrvices Representubve ce: CoreyWnilxce,P.nginecrinKM:mnger-Design Warrcn Bzck. Enginccring M,mager-Planning Koa Cope, Coastmc[ian Contrcts Mmingcr Corty Smith, F.ngineering Seraicea Snpervisor i �Y 1 IIt,R-1m04�\Fi50`,FEO �.�ir��,,.�,�x�..�� w„� .i .��_ w� i�.. i i �.ii. .... ., PC RESOLUTION NO. 12- 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 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (H); A ZONE CHANGE TO REVISE THE TEXT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY-11 (PDO-11); AND A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT 120 APARTMENT UNITS ON 7.24 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND MIRA LOMA DRIVE" (APN 944-060-006) Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On February 22, 2012, John Snell, representing Inland Communities Corp, filed Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan, and PAl2-0034, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay- 11 (PDO-11) in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. On October 17, 2012, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan, and PAl2-0034, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay-11 (PDO- 11). C. The Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. D. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on October 17, 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. E. At the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan and PAl2-0034, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay-11 (PDO- 11) with a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program subject to and based upon the findings set forth thereunder. F. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the recommendation for approval of Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan, and PAl2-0034, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay-11 (PDO-11) (the "ProjecY'). A. Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA), City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the approval of the Project, as described in the Initial Study. 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 September 14, 2012, and expired on October 14, 2012. 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 comments were received prior to the public hearing and a response to all the comments made therein was prepared, submitted to the Planning Commission and incorporated into the administrative record of the proceedings. D. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the October 17, 2012 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 recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project. Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 17� day of October, 2012. Ron Guerrerio, 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. 12- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 17� day of October, 2012, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS Patrick Richardson, Secretary RESOLUTION NO. 12- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (H); A ZONE CHANGE TO REVISE THE TEXT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY-11 (PDO-11); AND A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT 120 APARTMENT UNITS ON 7.24 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND MIRA LOMA DRIVE (APN 944-060- 006) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On February 22, 2012, John Snell, representing Inland Communities Corp, filed Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan, and PAl2-0034, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay- 11 (PDO-11) in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. On October 17, 2012, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Planning Application Nos. PAl2-0033, Development Plan, and PAl2-0034, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay-11 (PDO- 11). C. The Project was processed, including but not limited to all public notices, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code § 21000, et seq. and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, 14. Cal. Code Regs. § 15000 et seq. (collectively referred to as "CEQA") D. Pursuant to CEQA, the City is the lead agency for the Project because it is the public agency with the authority and principal responsibility for approving the Project. E. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on October 17, 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. F. The Planning Commission reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the October 17, 2012 public hearing and, based on the whole record before it, found that: (1) the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; (2) there 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. G. Based on the findings set forth in the Resolution, the City Council hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this day of , 2012. Chuck Washington, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 11- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the day of , 2012, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Pro ect Titie Mira Loma A artments I.ead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Contact Person and Phone Number Stuart Fisk, Senior Planner; 957 506-5159 Project Location Located at the northeast comer of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road, Temecula Project Sponsor's Name and Address John Sneli; Inland Communities Corp 650 E Hospitality, Suite 4'10 San Bernardino, CA 92408 Generel Plan Desi nation Medium Densit Resitlential Zonin Mira Loma Planned Development Overia Districhll PDO-11 Description of Project PAl2-0034, a General Plan Amendment to change ihe land use designation from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential and a Zoning Text Amendment to revise the text for Planned Deveiopment Overlay - 11 (PDO-11); and PAl2-0033, a Development Plan to construct 720 apartment units on a 724 acre site Surrounding Land Uses and Setting The project site is surroundetl by residential development inciuding several singie-family residences, apartment buildings, and an elementary school (Vail Elementary) that is located to the east of the project site. The site has a steep slope below Mire Loma Drave and flattens out for the majority of the project site. Elevation ranges from approximately 'I,095 to 1,744 feet above mean sea-IeveL A small drainage feature occurs adjacent to the project site along the northeastern boundary of the project site. Surrounding General Plan land use designations include High Density Residential to the north and to the west, Low-Medium Residential to the south, and Open S ace, Pubiic/Institutionai and Low-Medium Residential to ihe east. Other public agencies whose approval None is re uired '�, �^ .._ ��' � � . '. . fY'�� (((''� - .O` . Y - �FUi� [tilt��'.t4 ..,, . � T � >.� y,' / I � , . l . . ~ . +'e � GiPLFNNING\20�2\PAi2-0033 Mira l.oma Apartments DP\PlanninglCEQ4\CEQA Initial5tudy.dw i Environme�tal 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 ImpacC' as indicated by the checklist on the followiog pages. Aesthetics Mineral Resources A riculture and Forest Resources Noise Air Qualit Po ulation and Housin X Biolo ical Resources Public Services Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recreation X CWtural Resources Trans ortation and Traffic X Geolo and Soils Utilities and Service S stems Hazards and Hazardous Materials X Mandato Findin s of Si nificance H drolo and Water Qualit None Land Use and Plannin Determination (To be completed by the lead agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be re ared. I find that although the proposed project couid have a significant effect on the environment, there will not X 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 DECLAR4TION will be repared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and a❑ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is re uired. I find that the proposed project MAY have a"potentially significant impacY' or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the eariier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAI IMPACT REPORT is re uired, but it must anal ze onl the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project coWd have a sign'rficant effect on the environment, because all potentialty significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that eadier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are im osed u on the ro osed ro'ect, nothin further is re uired. � S ature � � a Dat �� Stuart Fisk Citv of Temecula Printed Name For G:\PIANNWG@Oi21PA�2-0033 Mird Loma Apartments �P�Planning\CEQA\CEQA Inifiaf Stutly.tloc 2 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Lesa Than Pp[en�ially Si9nifcan� Wi�� Less 1 M1an IssuesantlSupO�ingNfertnalion5ources Significant Mipgation Signifcenl No Im ac[ inmr oatea Im ect Im act a Nave 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 X within a state scenic hi hwa ? c Substantially degrade the existing visual characier or quality X of the site and its surroundin s? d Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would X adversei affect da or ni httime views in the area? Comments: 1.a.-c. No Impact: The proposed project is not located on or near a scenic vista; therefore, there will not be an adverse impact on a scenic vista. The project site is not located on a scenic highway. The project site consists of undeveloped land covered with vegetation and a small area of asphalt from what was a parking area for a small school (The Carden Academy). Existing vegetation indudes wild grass, mature trees, and shrubbery. Topographically, the property is sloped downward to the northeast with steep banks along the southern and western boundaries. The elevation of the property is generally lower than surrounding Rancho Vista Road and Mira Loma Dnve. Therefore, the proposed project would not substaMially damage scenic resources, including trees, rock outcroppings or historic buildings. Due to the fact that the project site contains no scenic vistas or resources, the project would not substantialty degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 1.d. Less than Signifieant lmpaet: The majority of the proposed project site is currently vacant with no sources of light or glare. The proposed project will inhoduce new generators of light and glare typically associated with residential development. The City of Temecula requires all new development to comply with the Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance (Ordinance 655). Ordinance 655 requires lighting to be shielded, directed down to avoid glare onto adjacent properties, and emit low leveis of glare into the sky. Lighting issues are addressed during the City's plan review and inspection process, and impacts resutting from the project are anticipated to be less than significant. G9PLANNMG�20t2\PAl2-0033 Mira Loma Apartmenis DP1Pianning\CEOAICEQA Initial SNtly.doc 3 2. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agriculturel 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 lmpacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including tim6eriand, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled 6y 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. Wouid the project: LessThan Po�enOally SignifcantWith LessTlun Issuesantl5uppoNn9lnfotma�lon5ovmes Slgnificant MIlgalbn Signlfmanl No �m act Inm matea Im aG Im act a Convert Pnme Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and X Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-a ricultural use? b Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a X Williamson Act contract? c Conflid 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 X Code section 4526), or timberiand zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104 ? d ResWt in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land X to nomforest use e Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of X Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Comments: 2.a.-e. No Impact: The project site is not currently in agricultural production, nor has the site 6een used for agricultural purposes in the recent or historic past. The site is not under a Williamson Act contract nor is it zoned for agriwltural uses. The site is not zoned forest land or timberland nor is it adjacent to or in proximity to property zoned forest land or timbedand. This property is not considered prime or unique farmland of statewide or local importance as identified by the State Department of Conservation and the City of Temecula Generai Plan. In addition, the project will not involve changes in the existing environment that would resWt in the conversio� of farmland to non-agricultural uses. No impacts are anticipated as a resWt of the proposed prqect. G9PLANNING�2012\PAl2�OW3 Mira Loma Apartments �P\Planning\CE�A\CEQA Inilial Study doc 4 � 3. AIR QUALII"Y. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control dfstrict may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: iess Tna� Po�enuaily SignificantwiU LessTnan IssueSan�SUFlPOrtfqqlntormelion5oumea 9lgni11oan1 Mllga�loo Slgnl�lcanl No Im act Incor oreteE Im act Im aci a Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable X air ualit lan� b Violate any air quaiity standard or contribute substantially X to an existin or ro'ected air ualit violation? c ResWt in a cumulatively considera6le net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient X air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed uantitative thresholds for ozone recursors � d Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? X e Create objectionable odors affecting a substantiai number x of eo le? Comments: 3.a. Less Than Significant lmpacE: An air quality assessment was prepared by Entech Consulting Group in July of 2012 to assess the impacts of the construction and operation of the proposed project. The Entech assessment states that: 'The South Coast Air Basin is currently designated as nonattainment for 0 PM� and PM a maintenance area for CO and NO and in attainment for all other federal criteria pollutants. Emissions calculated by the California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod) were far below the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds, indicating that the construction and operetion of the proposed project will create a less than significant impact to the surrounding area." The project, therefore, will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan and a less than significant impact is anticipated. 3.b.a Less Than Significant /mpact: The air quality assessment conducted by Entech Consuiting Group for the project concludes that the proposed project will cause a less than significant impact to the ambient air quality. The basin is currently in nonattainment for 0 and NO VOC and NO, emissions, precursors to O,, are far below the thresholds established by the SCAQMD. The projecYs demonstretion of compliance with the SCAQMD thresholds is consistent with the federal National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The basin is also in nonattainment for PM, and PM However, the impact analysis performed demonstretes that minimal PM, and PM will be generated throughout the operation of the proposed Project. The PM, and PM emissions generated from the proposed project is far below the thresholds established by the SCAQMD and impacts are therefore anticipated to be less than significant. 3.d. Less rhan Significant: According to the City of Temecula General Plan, as defi�ed in figure AQ-2 of the General Plan, there is one known sensitive receptors (hospitals, schools, libraries, child care centers, and adult-assisted care facifities) that may be exposed to pollutant concentrations in the immediate vicinity. The Vail Elementary school is located immediately east of the project site. In addition, the South Coast Air Quality Managemen[ District (SCAQMD) classifies the surrounding residences as sensitive receptors. The elementary school and surrounding residences may be exposed to some polWtant concentrations on a short-term basis during construction and grading activities. However, the July 2012 air quality assessment conducted by Entech Consulting Group concluded that "After a detailed analysis, it has been determined that no significant GWLANNING120t2\PAt2-0033 Mira Loma Aparonents �P1PlanninglCEOA\CEQA IniCiai SWtly.doc 5 impact will be created from the construction and operation of the proposed project, thus no mitigation measures are required." The Entech Consulting Group air quality assessment did, however, recommend that the following Best Available Control Measures (BACM) be implemented to minimize the emissions of PM, and PM during construction as a preventative measure: • Minimize land disturbances • Utilize watering trucks to minimize dust • Cover trucks when hauling dirt • Put greding and earth moving on hold when wind gusts exceed 25 mites per hour unless the soil is wet enough to prevent dispersion. • Stabilize the surface of dirt piles if they are not removed immediately • Sweep nearby paved streets at least once per day if there is evidence of dirt that has been carried onto the roadway • Revegetate disturbetl land as soon as possible • Remove unused materials The Developmea[ Plan for the projed will be conditioned that these Best Availabie Control Measures be implemented and that these Best Available Control Measures be inciuded in the grading pian notes. 3.e. Less Than Significant lmpact: No objectionable odors are expected as a resWt from operation of the proposed project. Odors are typicaliy associated with industrial projects involving use of chemicals, soivents, petroleum products, and other strong-smelling elements used in manufacturing processes. Odors are also associated with such uses as sewage treatment facilities and landfills. Standard practices related to trash receptacle areas, such as keeping trash bins covered and located away from outdoor areas where residents of multi-family housing may congregate, wiil help minimize the potential for odor nuisance compiaints. Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include the use of architectural coatings and solvents. SCAQMD Rule 1113 limits the amount of volatile organic compounds from architectural coatings and solven[s. Via mandatory compliance with SCAQMD Rules, no construction activities or materials are proposed which would create objectionable odors. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur and no mitigation measures would be required, G:\PLANNING�20121PAl2-0033 Mira Loma ApaNnenis DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Stutly.doc 6 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proJect? �e:s rnan Potenlialty SgnllcantWilh lesSTM1an Issues anJ Svppotling Informa�lon Soumes Sgnifcant Mltigation Signifcan� No Im ac[ �nmr oralea Im ac1 Im ct a Have a subsYantial adverse effect, either directiy or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in X local or regional plans, policies, or reguiations, or by the Califomia 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 Califomia X Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Wate� Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, X coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interru tioq or other means? d Interfere su6stantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with x established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or im ede the use of native wildlife nurse sites? e Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or X ordinance? f Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation X Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation lan? Comments: 4.a. Less Than Significant Impact: According to the MSHCP Consiste�cy Analysis and Habitat Assessment prepared for the site by Michael Brendman Associates (MBA) on July 17, 2012, the project site contains a limited amount of foraging habitat suitable for Burrowing owls (427 acres), however no suitable burrows were observed within the project area. There is no suitable habitat within the 500#oot buffer area outside of the projed areas as the project site is surrounded by development, and no burrowing owls were observed on site or within the 500-foot buffer area. The MBA report concluded that the project area does not contain sufficient foraging habitat to support a burrowing owl pair, is surrounded by development, and is not adjacent to any other suitable habitat. The MBA report concluded that burrowing owl has no potential to occur on the project site. 4.b. Less Than Significant Impact: The MBA report states that the project side contains 0.1 acre of riparian habitat that will be impacted, bu[ does not contain any riverine connectivity. The willows to be impacted are within an upland area outside of the active drainage area and are not connected to the riparian area east of the project site. The MBA analysis of the site determined that there are no vernal pools, or areas suitable for support of sensitive fairy shrimp species within the property. Due to the limited impact to riparian areas, the MBA report recommended no further action or mitigation measures and less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. G9PLANNING\20t2\PAi2-��33 Mira Loma Apartments �P�PlanninglCEQA10EQA Initial Stutly.doc ] 4.a Less Than Significant lmpact: There is an adjacent drainage feature located along the eastem border of the project site that appears to fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and California Department of Fish and Game based on a 2012 Jurisdictional De�ineation prepared by Natural Resources Assessment, Ina (contained in Appendix D of the MBA report). The project was specifically designed to avoid the jurisdictional dreinage areas and less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 4.d. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Inwrporafed: The MBA report states that the project site does contain suitable avian nesting habitat for a variety of species, and that if the clearance of vegetation is required and occurs during the avian breeding season (February to August), a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting birds will be required. If constructlon activities occur outside of the avian breeding season (September to July) no mitigation is required. For any clearance of vegetation during the avian breeding season (February to August), the following mitigation measures shail be implemented: Required Mttivation: If the clearance of vegetation is required and occurs during the avian nesting season (February to August) the following mitigation measures shall be impiemented: • A pre-construction nesting bird survey sha�I be conducted prior to any vegetation disturbance activities. • If passerine birds are found to be nesting or there is evidence of nesting behavior inside or within 250 feet of the impact area, a 250-foot buffer will be required around the nest where no vegetation disturbance will be permitted. • For birds of prey, such as hawks and owls, the buffer shall be expanded to 500 feet. • A qualified biologist is required to dosely monitor the nest untii it is determined that the nest is no longer active, at which time vegetation removal could continue. 4.e. No Impact: The project site is located within the Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Fee Area. The project will be wnditioned to comply with provisions of Chapter 824 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitai Conservation), which requires payment of the Stephens Kangaroo Rat fee prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Additionally, trees subject to the City's Heritage Tree Ordinance are not present on the site. The project is wnsistent with local policies and ordinances protecting biological resources and no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 4.f. No Impact: The project has been designed and necessary mitigation measures will be implemented to be consistent with the provisions of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and no impact is anticipated as a result of this project. G1PLANNIN�\2019PAi2-0033 Mire Loma Apartments DP\Planning\CEOA\CEQA Ini6al51utly.tloc 8 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Less Tnan ISSUesantl5uppartnglnfortnalion5ourees Polenlially SignifcanlWi�b �essT�an Sign�(cant Mi�igation Signilwnt No Im ac! Incor oraletl Im aci �m act a Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? b Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X an archaeolo ical resource ursuant to Section 15064.5? c Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological X resource or site or uni ue eolo ic feature? d Disturb any human remains, induding those interred x outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: 5.a. No Impach The site is not known to contain a resource listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a resuR of the project. S.b.d. Less Than Significant With Mitigation lncorporated: A cultural Resources Assessment was prepared by �SA in June, 2012. No cultural resources were identified during the field survey. Exposed bouiders and portable cobbles were examined for worked surfaces, and no such surfaces were found. Soil profiles were examined for cWtural stretigraphy and rodent back dirt was checked for cWtural remains. The LSA study identifies that the project has been graded and has had stone fill materials deposited on It, and that ground visibility was approximately 20 percent with a cover of matted, dry grasses. The LSA study indicates that the records search and field survey did not identify any cultural resources that wili be affected by the projecL LSA states that the graded alluvial setting offers Iittte potential for undiscovered cultural resources to be present within the project boundaries, and there is only a low potential that such resources may be in secondary deposits. LSA conciuded that no further archaeological investigation or monitoring is recommended. However, LSA did recommend that if previously undocumented cWtural resources are identified during earthmoving activities, a qualified archaeologist shall assess the nature and significance of the find, temporarily diverting construction excavation if necessary. To ensure cultural resources, if identified on the site, are properly treated and preserved, the following mitigation measures shall be foliowed: Reauired Mitiqation: • If previousiy undocumented cWtural resources are ideniified during earthmoving activities, a qualified arohaeologist shall assess the nature and significance of the find, temporerily diverting construction excavation if necessary. • The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods and all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area to the appropriate Tribe for proper treatment and disposition. • AI� sacred sites, should they be encountered within the project area, shall be avoided and preserved as the preferred mitigation, if feasible. • If inadvertent discoveries of subsurface archaeologicaUcultural resources are discovered during grading, the Developer, the project archaeologist, and the Tribe shall assess the signiticance of such resources and shall meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources. Pursuant to Calif. Pub. Res. Code § 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method of preservation for archaeoiogical resources. G:1PtANNING12072\PA�2-0033 Mira Loma Apariments �P1PlanninglCEQA\CEQA Initial5tudy.doc 9 . If the Developer, the project archaeologist and the Tribe cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for such resources, these issues wifl be presented to the Planning Director for decision. The Planning Director shall make the determination based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological resources and shall take into account the religious beliefs, customs, and practices of the Tribe. Nohvithstanding any other rights available under the law, the decision of the Planning Director shall be appealable to the Planning Commission and/or City Council. In addition to the cWtural resource mitigation measures recommended 6y LSA, Pechanga Cultural Resources (the Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians) also requested that the following mitigation measure be included: Required Mitiaation: • Prior to beginning project constructioq the Project Applicant shail retain a Riverside County qualified archaeological monitor to monitor all ground-disturbing activities in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources. Any newly discovered cultural resource deposits shall be subject to a cuttural resources evaluation. • At least 30 days prior to beginning project construdion, the Project Applicant shall contact the Pechanga Tribe to notify ihe Tribe of grading, excavation and the monitoring program, and to coordinate with the City of Temecula and the Tribe to develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall address the treatment of known cuitural resources, the designation, responsibilities, and participation of professional Native American Tribal monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities; project grading and development scheduling; terms of compensation for the monitors; and treatment and final disposition of any cWtural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site. • Prior to beginning project construction, the Project Archaeo�ogist shall file a pre-grading report with the City of Temecula (if required) to document the proposed methodology for grading activity observation which will be determined in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe. Said methodology shall include the requirement for a qualified archaeological monitor to be present and to have [he authority to stop and redirect grading activities. In accordance with the agreement required above, the archaeologica� monitor's authority to stop and redirect grading will be exercised in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe in order to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. Tribal and archaeological monitors shall be aliowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities, and shall also have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. • If human remains are encountered, Califomia Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission must be contacted within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission must then immediately identify the "most likely descendant(s)" of receiving notification of the discovery. The most likely descendant(s) shall then make recommendations within 48 hours, and engage in consultations conceming the treatment of the remains as provided in Pu61ic Resources Code 5097.98 and the Treatment Agreement described above. S.c. Less Than Significant With Mitigafion /ncorporated: A paleontological resources assessme�t was prepared for the project by LSA Associates, Inc. in August, 2012. As part of this study, the San Bemardino County Museum (SBCM) conducted a search of the Regional Paleontological Locality Inventory (RPLI) housed at the SBCM. The results of the record search indicated that no previously-known paleontological localities are recorded within the boundaries of the proposed projed property. However, 7 resource localities are recorded from within '/ mile to the north of the proposed project area. Though the project site has been graded and has had stone fill materials deposited on it, and no paleoatological resources were observed during the field survey, the abundance of fossils from the proposed project area, as well as from the other 400 fossil localities G:�PtANNING@OiZlPAl2 Mire Loma AOarlmenis DP\PlanninglCEQA\CEQA initial Stutly.tloc io mapped from the Pauba Formation, demonstrate the high paleontological sensitivity of the region. The presence of sediments suitable to contain paleontological resources and the positive results of the literature review reinforce the high potential for encountering significant nonrenewable vertebrate fossiis on the proposed project site. As such, the LSA Associates, Inc. study recommends the following mitigation measures: Required Mitipation: • A trained paleontological monitor will be present during ground-disturbing activities within the project area in sediments determined likely to contain paleontological resources. The monitoring for paleontological resources will be conducted on a full-time basis. The monitor will be empowered to temporerily halt or redirect construction activities to ensure avoidance of adverse impacts to paleontological resources. The monitor will be equipped to rapidly remove any large fossil specimens encountered during excavation. During monitoring, samples will be collected and processed to recover microvertebrate fossils. Processing will include wet screen washing and microscopic examination of the residual materials to identify small vertebrate remains. The project paleontologist may reevaluate the monitoring program after 50 percent of the excavation has been completed. • Upon encountering a large deposit of bone, salvage of all bone in the area will be conducted with additional field staff and in accordance with modern paleontological techniques. • All fossils coliected during the project will be prepared to a reasonable point of identification. Excess sediment or matrix will be removed from the specimens to reduce the bulk and wst of storage. Itemized catalogs of all material collected and identified will be provided to the museum repository along with the specimens. • A report documenting the results of the monitoring and salvage activities and the significance of the fossils will be prepared. • Ail fossiis collected during this work, along with the itemized inventory of these specimens, will be deposited in a museum repository for permanent curaiion and storage. Compliance with these recommendations will ensure that excavation impacts to the paleontological resources are maintained below a level of significance. GiPLANNING2012\PAl2-0033 Mira loma Apartmenfs DP\PlanninglCEOA\CEQA �nitial Stutly.tlw 11 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: less Than Po�entially Sigmfcan�WN LessThan IssuesandSupportin9lntorma6onSOUrces Signi&anl Mltigation Signifcanl No Im act Inco oatee im act Im ac1 a Expose people or structures to potential substantiai adverse effects, includin the risk of loss, in'u , or death involvin : i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the rnost recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fautt Zoning Map issued by the State Geologistforthe area or based on other X substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geolo S ecial Publication 42. ii Stron seismic round shakin ? X iii Seismio-reiated round failure, inGudin liquefaction? X iv Landslides? X b ResWt in substantial soil erosion or the loss of to soil? X c Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and X potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreadin , subsidence, li uefaction or collapse? d Be Iocated on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks X to life or ro ert ? e Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or altemative wastewater disposai systems X where sewers are not availabie for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: 6.a.i. No Impact The Ciry of Temecula General Plan and Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan did not identify any faults or faWt zones through the project site. Therefore, no impacis are anticipated as a resWt of this project. 6.a.ii. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: There mzy 6e a potentialry significant impact from seismic ground shaking. Although, there are no known fault hazard zones on the property, the project is located in Southem California, an area that is seismically active. Any potential significant impacts will be mitigated through building construction, which will be consistent with the Uniform Building Code standards. Further, the project will be conditioned to provide soil reports prior to grading and if conditions warrent mitigation, recommendations contained in this report will be followed during construction. The soil reports will also contain recommendations for the compaction of the soil, which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure, liquefac[ion, subsidence and expansive soils. After mitigation measures are pertormed, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Re_quired Mitiaation: • Building construction shall be consistent with the Uniform Building Code Standards. • All recommendations set forth in the Geotechnical Report compieted by GeoMat Testing Laboratories, Inc. dated Fe6ruary 1�, 2012, shall be foliowed, including 6ut not limited to recommendations for earthwork, clearing and grubbing, preparation of surFaces to received compacted fill, preparation of building areas, preparation of slab and paving areas, placement of compacted fill, field/faboratory G:IPLANNWG�20121PAl2-0033 Mira Loma Apartments �P�PlanninglCE4A\CE�A Initial SNtly.tloc 12 testing during grading, wet soils, slopes, retaining wall design foundation recommendations, and grading and foundation plao review shall be followed. 6.a.iii.6.c. Less Than Significant. The project is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that woWd become unstable as a result of the project. A geotechnical report has been prepared for the project and has not identified any geologic unit or unstable soils that would become unstable. The geotechnical report concWdes that, based on SCEC ('1999) guidelines, a potential for loss of bearing capacity due to liquefaction is not expected at the project site. Therefore, a less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project. 6.a.iv. Less TNan Significant: A subsurface soil investigation prepared for the site 6y GeoMat Testing Laboratories, Inc., analyzed slope stability based on Safety Factor ratings and the analysis indicates that "the planned fill and/or cut slopes constructed at an inclination of 2H:1V or flatter wiil be grossiy and surficially stable." Furthermore, the project site and surrounding area have not had a history of Iandslide activity. Therefore, less than signifcant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 6.b. Less Than Significant ImpaCt: The project will not resuit in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. The project site will 6e developed in accordance with City standards, including National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards, which require the implementation of erosion control and best management practices (BMPs). The Flnal Emironmental Impact Report for the City of Temecula Genera Plan has not identified any known landslides or mudslides located on the site or proximate to the site. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a resutt of this project. 6.d. Less Than Significant Impact: The project is not located on expansive soil as defined in Table 18-1- B of the Uniform Building Code (1994) and is not anticipated to create substantial risks to life or property. According to the Geotechnical Report completed by GeoMat Testing Laboratories, Inc. dated February 11, 2012, Expansion Index (EI) testing was pertormed on soil samples obtained from their exploration of the site. Based on the laboratory test resWts, the soils in the upper 15 feet of the site have a very low expansion potential. Therefore, a less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the project. 6.e. No Impact: The project wiil 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:1PlANNWG�20121PAi2-0033 Mire Loma Apartments �P�Pianning\CE�A\CEQA Initlai Study.eoc t3 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: Lessihan Poten�ialty SlgnifcanlWil� LessT�an Issues antl Suppatlinglnlormation Sourrns Significant Mifiqalfon Siqnifinenl No Im act Incor oraletl Im atl Im acl a Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the x environment? b Conf�ict with an applica6le plaq policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse X ases? Comments: 7.a.b. Less Than Significant lmpact: At this time there are no adopted statewide guidelines for greenhouse gas emission (GHG) impacts, but this is being addressed through the provisions of Senate Bill 97 (SB 97). In addition, the City of Temecula does not have any plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. For the proposed project, the project would be considered to have a significant impact if the project would be in conflict with the AB 32 State goals for reducing GHG emissions. Staff assumes that AB 32 will be successful in reducing GHG emissions and reducing the cumu�ative GHG emissions statewide by 2020. It is not anticipated that the project could have a major impact (either positiveiy or negatively) on the global concentration of GHG. GHG impacts are considered to be exclusively cumulative impacts; there are no non-cumulative greenhouse gas emission impacts from a climate change perspective per the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA, 2008). The proposed project would contribute to global climate change as a result of emissions of GHGs, primarily CO emitted by construction activities. However, the project will not conFlict with the CARB's thirty-nine (39) recommended actions in California's AB 32 Climate Change Scoping Plan. The project is expected to have a less than significant impact with regard to greenhouse gas emissions. G:\PLANN�N6�20121PAl2-0033 Mlra Loma Apartmenis DP1PIanning\CE(]A\CEQA Initiai Study.doc 14 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: LessTban Potenlially SigniYican�Wll� less Than Issuesantl Suppotlinglnfotma6on Sources Slgnificant MitiBa6on S�gniflcant No Im aq Inro oraletl Im aci Im aa a Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of X hazardous materials? b Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident X conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely hazardous X materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existin or proposed school? d Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Govemment Code X Section 65962.5 and, as a resWt, would it create a si nificant hazard to the ublic or the environment? 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 resuit X in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the ro ect area? f For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or X workin in the pro'ect area? g Impair implementation of or physicalty intertere with an adopted emergency response pian or emergency x evacuation plan? 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? Comments: S.a. Less Than Significant lmpact The proposed project will not imolve the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.b. Less Than Significant Impacf: The project proposes to subdivide the property and to construct multi- family apartment buildings. �t is not anticipated that this project would 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. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.c. Less Than Significant /mpact: A school is located near the southeast corner of the project site. The proposed multi-family apartment buildings do not include any activities or uses that would pose a potential heaith hazard to the local population or the nearby school. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. G1PlANNING�2012�Pp12-0033 Mira Loma ApaNnenis OP\PlanninglGEQA\CEQA Initial Study.tloc 15 S.d. No lmpact: Based upon the availabie data and the historical land use, there is no evidence to support that hazardous wastes would be present on the site. No impacis are anticipated. 8.e.f. No Impacf: The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within hvo miles of a public or private airstrip according to Figure LU-2 in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Therefore, no impact upon airport uses will result from this proposal. S.g. No Impact: The Project will not impair implementation of or physicalty intertere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The project will take access from maintained public streets and will not impede emergency response or evacuation plans. No impact is anticipated as a resWt of the proposed project. 8.h. No Impact: The proposed project is not located in or near a wildland area that would 6e subject to fire hazards. The location of the proposed project would not expose people or struciures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. No impact is anticipated as a result of this project. G:\PLANNWG\2072\PAl2-0033 Mire Loma Aparhnents DP1P�anninq\CEOAICEQA Iniiiai Stutly.doc i6 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: LesaThan Poien4ally SignifkantWitM1 LessTnan IssuesantlSUppoNnglntormation5ources Sgnificant Mitiqa6on Sgnilcanl No Im act Inco o2tetl im acl M act a Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade water X ualit ? b Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a Iowenng of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate ot X pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which ermits have been ranted 7 c Substantialfy alter the ezisting drainage pattem of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a X stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d Substantial�y alter the existing drainage pattem ot the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount X of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of ezisting or planned storm water drainage x systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f Re uire the re aration of a ro ect-s ecific WQMP? X g Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood X Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation ma ? h Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which X would impede or rediiect flood flows? i Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a X result of the failure of a levee or dam? �nundation b seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X Comments: 9.a. No Impact: The project will not violate any water quality sta�dards or waste discharge requirements. Development will be required to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent has 6een filed or the project is shown to be exempt. By complying with the NPDES requirements, any potential impacts can be mitigated to a level less than significant. 9.b. less than Significant /mpact: The proposed project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. The project is not anticipated to have a significant effect on ihe quantity and quality of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals. The proposed project is required to comply with local development standards, induding lot coverage and G:WIANNING�2012�PAl2-0033 Mi2 Loma Apartments OP�Planning\CEQAICEQA Initia15lutly.tloc 17 landscaping requirements, which will allow percolation and ground water recharge. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 9.c Less lhan Significant Impact: The proposed project wouid not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, induding the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would resWt in substantiaf erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The proposed project will include an on-site drainage plan; however it will not alter off-site drainage pattems or alter the wurse of a stream or river, and will not resuit in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site. The project is also required to comply with Best Management Practices (BMP's), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulations as well as National Pollution Elimination Discharge System (NPEDS) standards, which addresses dreinage, siltation and erosion. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 9.d. Less than Significant Impach The proposed project would not substantiaily alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off- site because the project wili not alter the course of a stream or river. The City of Temecula Public Works Department reviews alI drainage plans and determines adequate dreinage facilities are in place capable of on- site drainage and that off-site drainage facilities can accommodate additional flow. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project 9.e. Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not create or contri6ute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. The project is required to comply with Best Management Practices (BMP's), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulations as well as National Pollution Elimination Discharge Elimination System standards, which address drainage and polluted runoff. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 9.f. No /mpact The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements established by the State of California. However, the project is required to prepare a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) pursuant to the Municipal Separate Storm-Sewer permit (MS4 permit) issued by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. The WQMP must be accepted prior to issuance of a grading permit for the project site. The water quality control measures to be identified in the WQMP will either be incorporated into the design of the project or be added to the project with specific conditions of approval and wili be expected to eliminate potentiai adverse impacts to receiving waters. 9.g. No Impact The proposed project is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Fiood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project 9.h. No Impact: The proposed projed is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area and therefore wiil not piace improvements that couid impede or redirect flood flows within a 100-year flood hazard area. No impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 9.i. No Impact: The proposed project is not located in a dam inundation area or a 100-year floodpiain. Therefore, no impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 9.j. No Impact: The proposed project is not located near a coast line or large body of water which would subject the site to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Therefore, no impact is anticipated as a resutt of the proposed project. G:\PLANNING�2012\PAi&0033 Mire Loma Apartments DP1PIanninglCEOA\CE�A Initial5tudy.tloc 18 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: Less Than Polenfially SignilcantWiN LessThan IssuesandSuppoRinginfortna�ionSOUrces ffignif¢anl Miligation SiB�ifcant No Im aci Inw oralea Im aci Im act a Ph sicall divide an established communit ? X b Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific X plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c ConFlict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communiry conservation plan? X Comments: 10.a.c. No Impact: The proposed project would not divide an established community or confiict with the applicable land use plan. The project would contribute to providing the City with diverse residential ownership opportunities. The project is consistent with the applicable Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan. 10.b. Less than Significant Impact: The project proposes a General Plan Amendment to change the General Plan designation of the site from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential and proposes related changes to the zoning through te�ct changes to Planned Development Overlay 11 (PDO-11) to allow for new development standards for [he site that wiil be specific to apartment buildings. Surrounding development to the north and west of the project site indudes apartments on property with a General Plan Designation of High Density Residential and impacts from the proposed General Plan Amendment and Planned Development Overlay text changes are anticipated to be less than significant. G:�PLANNING120121PAl2-0033 Mira Loma Apartments DFTPlanning\CEOA\CEQ4lnitial5tudy.doc 19 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the projeet: tess Than Pa�en�ially SIB��ficdntWllli Lessihan I55uesantlSUppoRing�nformalion5ources SIB^if¢a^t Mitigafion Significan[ No Im act Inmrporatea Im ct Im act a Result in the bss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the X residents of the state? b Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local X eneral lan, s ecific lan or other �and use lan? Comments: � 1.a.b. No Impact: The project will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource nor in the loss of an available, Iocaliy important mineral resource recovery site. The State Geologist has ciassified the City of Temecula as MRZ-3a, containing areas of sedimentary deposits which have the potential for supplying sand and gravel for concrete and crushed stone for aggregate. However, these areas are determined as not containing deposits of significant economic value based upon available data in reports prepared in accordance with the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMAR4) of 1975. Furthermore, the project site is not identified as an important site known to contain such resources as shown in the Final EIR for the City of Temecula General Plaa Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. GiPiANNING�2012\PAl2-0033 Mira Loma Aparlments DP�PIannInB�CEOAICEQA Initial Study.tla 20 12. NOISE. Would the project resuit in: ie:s rna�� Poteniially Sqnificantwitn Lessinan Issuesantl5uppotlinglnlormationSource5 Signifcanl Miligotion Si9nifcant No Im acl Inmr orale� Im atl Im aci a Exposure of persons to or generation of noise Ieveis in excess of standards established in the local general plan X or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other a encies? 6 Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive roundbome vibration or roundborne noise levels? X c A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the X ro ect? d A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing X without the ro ect? 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 X project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the X pro ect area to excessive noise levels? Comments: 12.a.-d. Less than Significant Impact: Development of the land will resWt in increases to noise leveis during construction phases as well as increases to noise in the area over the long-term. No activities are anticipated within the proposed project that would expose persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundbome noise leveis. The project will create some noise levels over that currently emanating from the project site. However, those noises are not anticipated to create a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise tevels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the projecL The project may resWt in temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels during construction. Construction machinery is capable of producing noise in the range of 100+ DBA at 100 feet, which is considered annoying. However, noise from construction of the project will comply with City ordinances regulating the hours of activity to Monday through Friday from 630 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. and Saturday fmm 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. No significant impacts are anticipated. 12.e.-f. No /mpact: This project is not within hvo miies of a public airport or private airstrip. Therefore, the project will not expose peopie to excessive noise levels generated by an airport and no impacts will result from this project. G'\PIANNING�20121PAi2-0033 Mira Loma Hpartmenfs DP\P�anninglCE�AICEQA Initial5tutly.doc 2t 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: 1 ess Tnan Potenllapy Signilcan(WitO LassThan Issues anC Suppatling In(orma�ion Sources Significan( Miligetion Signiflcanl No �m aGi IOOo� o�aled Itli dd IIn BG a Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and X businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure � b Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing X elsewhere? c Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the X construction of re Iacement housin elsewhere? Comments: 13.a.-c. No Impact: The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The proposed project is a multi-family residential prqect. The project site consists of undeveloped land covered with vegetation in the south and asphalt from a small parking are for a school (The Carden Academy) that occupied a portion of the site in the north until approximately 2007, when all structures associated with the school were removed. Therefore, the project will not displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing. The project will neither displace housing nor peopie and will not necessitate the construction of replacement housing. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. G:1PtANNiNG@0121PA72-0033 Mira loma Apartments �P�PIanninglCEDA\CEQA Initial Stutly.tlw 22 14. PUBUC SERVICES. tess Tnan Potenlially SignificantWiU LessThan Issues an0 Suppotling Infirma�ion Sovrces Signifcanl Mifgation Signifman� Na Im ac1 Incor orated Im acl Im acl a Would the prqect resuit 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 X wuld cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other ertormance ob'ectives fo� an of the ublic services: Fire rotection? X Police rotection? X Schools? X Parks? X Other ublicfacilities? X Comments: 14.a. Less Than Significant Impact. The project wili have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered fire, police, recreation or other public facilities. The project will incrementally increase the need for some public services. However, the increase is expected to be a very small increment and payment of the City's Development Impact Fees will ensure that any potential impact will be reduced to an insignificant level. As a result, the project is anticipated to have a less than significant impact upon the need for new or altered public facilities. G9PLANNING�2012\PAl2-0033 Miro Wma ApaNnents DP�Planning\CE�A\CEQA Initial Stutly.doc . 23 15. RECREATION. LessTnan Potenfially SlgnilcantWt� Less Tlian Issuesa�SuppoRinglnfortnation5ovrces Si9��flcant Ml�igaM1On Signifiwn� No Im act Incor otatetl Im ad Im ap a Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regiooal parks or other recreational faciiities such that X substantial physical deterioretion of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which X mi ht have an adverse h sical effect on the environment? Comments: 15.a. Less fhan Signiflcant Impact: The project proposes multi-family housing on residentially zoned property. The project will not displace recreationally zoned lands or remove vacant lands that are used for recreational purposes. The project will include open space and recreational facilities for its residents and is not anticipated to significantly increase the use of neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities to a point that would cause signifcant physicai tleterioration of these facilities. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 15.b. Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project does include open space a�d recreational facilities for its residents and is not anticipated to require construction or expansion of additional public recreational facilities Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. G:NLANNING�20721PA72-OW3 Mira Loma Apartments �P1Planning\CEQ4ICEQA Initial Stutly.doc 24 16. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC. Would the project: �ess Than Po�enfially S:gniticanlWilM1 LessTM1an Issues and Suppotling Informatbn Sources Slgni(cant Mlligalion Signifcant No Im acl Inco oratetl Im acl Im acl a Confiict 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 induding mass transit and non-motorized X travel and relevant components of the circulation system, induding 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 Ievei of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards X established by the county congestion management agency for desi nated roads or hi hwa s? c Result in a change in air tra�c pattems, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results X in substantial safet risks? d Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible X uses e. ., farm e ui ment)? e ResWt in inade uate emer enc access? X f Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise X decrease the performance or safet of such facilities? Comments: 16.a.b. Less than Significant fmpacL The project does propose an amendment to the City of Temecuia Generel Plan from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential. A traffic study was prepared for the project by RK Engineering Group, Inc. and was submitted to the City in order to ensure compliance with alI appropriate traffic regulations. Based on the intersections and roadways evaluated, the study reveals that the proposed project will not result in a conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the pertormance of the circulation system in the project area. Further, the project will not conflict wilh 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. 16.c. No Impacf: The project is not anticipated to result in a change in air traffic pattems, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. The project area is not within the Rench Valley Airport influence area. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a resWt of the project. 16.d.e. Less Than Signifiwnt Impact: The projed will be required to be consistent with City standards, including street design and emergency access. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 16.f. No Impact: The project will be required to be consistent with adopted policies, plans, or progrems supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks). No impacts are anticipated as a resWt of the project. G'\PLANNING120121PAi&0033 Mira Loma Apariments �P\PlanningiCEOA\CEDA Initial Study.tloc 25 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: LessThan PMenfially SlgnifcanlWHh LessThan Issues antl Supporting Informa0on Sources Significant Ml�iga�ion Sigoifican� No Irt'� ct inw oratea im act Im act a Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the X applicable Regional Water Quality Controi Board? b Require or resWt in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing X facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c Require or result in the construction of new storm water dreinage faciiities or expansion of existing facilities, the X construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d Have sufficient water supplies availabie to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or X ex anded entitlements needed? e Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has X adequate capacity to serve the project's projected tlemand in addition to the rovider's existin commitments? f Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to x accommodate the ro ecYs solid waste dis osal needs? g Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X re ulations related to solid waste? Comments: �7.a.b.e. Less than Significant Impact: The project will not exceed wastewater treatment requirements, require the construction of new treatment facilities, nor affect the capacity of treatment providers. Though the project will have an incremental effect upon existing systems, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a resWt of this project. 17.c. Less than Significant Impact: The project will require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities on site that will connect to the existing system cu�renfly in place along Mira Loma Drive and to an existing flood control channel located east of and adjacent to the project site. The design of the existing system is su�cient to handle the runoff from this project and will not require the expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant ernironmental effects. Less than sign'rficant impacts are anticipated as a result of ihis project. 17.d. Less than Significant Impact: The project will not significantly impact existing water supplies nor require expanded water entitlements. While the project will have an incremental impact upon existing systems, the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's General Plan states: "RCWD anticipates supprying water to 167,640 persons within its service area in 2020 (p. 5.143)." The FEIR further states: "EMWD anticipates supplying water to 756,699 persons within its service area in 2020, (p. 5.14-3)." This anticipated water supply includes a portion of Temecula and less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of ihis project. 17.f.g. Less than Significant Impact: The project will not result in a need for new landfill capacity. Any potential impacts from solid waste created by this development can be mitigated through participation in Source Reduction and Recycling Programs, which are implemented by the City. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project G9PLANNINGp072\PAl2-0033 Mira Loma Apartmen[s �P\Pianning\CEOA\CEQA Initial Stutly.tloc 26 18. MANOATORY FINDMGS OP SIGNIFICANCE. Would the project: Less Than PotenGally SignlfwniWth LessThan Sigpificant Mi09albn SiguiYman� No Issues antl Su ortln Inferma4on SourcBS im ac1 Inror wate0 Im act Im act a Does the project have the potential to degrade the qua�ity of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fsh or wildiife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or X 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 prehisto ? b Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulativery considerable ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are X considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future ro'ects)? c Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either X directl or indirectl ? Comments: 'IS.a. Less 7han Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: As discussed in the sections above, the project would involve a General Plan Amendmeni to change the land use designation from Medium Density Residentiai to High Density Residential; a Zoning Te# Amendment to revise the teut for Planned Development Overlay - 11 (PDO-11); and a Development Plan to construct 120 apartment units on a 7.24 acre site. The project is not anticipated to significantly reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildiife popWation to drop below self-sustaining levels, or threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community. According to the MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment (Burrowing Owl) prepared for the project by Michael Brandman Associates, the project site does contain suitable avian nesting habitat for a variety of species. The report states that if the clearance of vegetation is required and occurs during the avian breeding season (February to August), a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting 6irds will be required. If construction activities occur outside of the avian breeding season (September to July) no mitigation is required. For any clearance of vegetation during the avian breeding season (February to August), mitigation measures shall be required. A wltural Resources Assessment prepared by LSA in June, 2012 recommends mitigation measures to ensure that if any cultural resources are identified on the site, they are properly treated and preserved. Additionally, a paleontological resources assessment was prepared for the project by LSA Associates, Inc. in August, 2012. The study concluded that the presence of sediments suitable to wntain paleontological resources and the positive results of the literature review reinforce the high potential for encountering significant nonrenewable vertebrate fossils on the proposed project site. As such, the LSA Associates, Inc. study recommends mitigation measures to propedy treat and preserve paleontological resources. 18.b. Less Than Significant Impact: No significant cumulative impacts have bee� identified with the implementation of the proposed project. �8.c. less Than Significant Impact No subsfantial environmental effects that wouid cause adverse effects on human beings have been identified. G:\PLANNING12012\PAl2-0033 Mira Loma Apartments DP\Planning�CEQA\CE�A Initial SNdy.tloc 27 19. EARLIER ANALVSES. 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 decla�ation. Section 15063(c)�3)(D�. In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets. a Earlier anal ses used. Identif earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b Impacts adequatety 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 mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. 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 t� address site-specific conditions for the pro ect. 19.a. The City's General Plan, Final Environmental Impact Report and the City of Temecula's Geographic Information System (GIS) Map Sets were used as a referenced source in preparing the Initial Study for this project. The City's General Plan and Final Envimnmental Impact Report are available for review at the City of Temecula Planning Department located at 41000 Main Street in Temecula. The GIS Map Sets are available online at www.cityoftemecula.org. 19.b. On Apnl 10, 2007, the City of Temecula City Council approved Planning Appiication Nos. PA05-0234 (PDO) and PA05-0109 (TTM) and adopted the associated Mitigated Negative Declaration. The current proposal, PAl2-0033, involves a revised PDO and General Plan amendment and is not the same as the project previously analyzed, This Initial Study has been prepared to specifically address the current proposal. 19.a See attached Mitigation Monitoring Program. SOURCES 1. City of Temecula General Pian 2. City of Temecula General Pian Final Environmental Impact Report 3. South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook 4. MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habrfat Assessment (Burrowing Owl), Michael Brandman Associates, August 15, 2012. 5. Mi�a Loma Apartments Traffic Impact Study, RK Engineering Group, Inc., September 11, 2012. 6. Additional Subsurface Soil Investigation, Review of Rough Grading Plan, Foundation Recommendations and Liquefaction Analysis, Tenfative Tract Map 33584, A.P.N. 944-060-006, Proposed Residential Development, GeoMat Testing Laboratories, Inc., February 11, 2012. 7. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study, Mira Loma Apartments, EMech Consulting Group, Juty 2012. 8. Cuitural ResourcesAssessment, LSAAssociates, Ina, June 2012. 9. Paleontological Resources Assessmen( LSA Associates, inc., September 2012. G.\PIANNING120tt\PA1Z0033 Mi�a Loma Apartments �P\Plannin9\CEQA\CEOA Inilial5lutly.tloc 28 Mitigation Monitoring Program Project Description: PAl2-0034, a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential; a Zoning Text Amendment to revise the text for Planned Development Overlay - 11 (PDO-11); and a Development Plan to construct 120 apartment units on a 7.24 acre site. Location: The Project is generally located at the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road, Temecula Applicant: John Snell; Inland Communities Corp 650 E. Hospitality, Ste 410 San Bernardino, CA 92408 Biological Resources General Impact: A report by MBA for the project states that the project site does contain suitable avian nesting habitat for a variety of species, and that if the clearance of vegetation is required and occurs during the avian breeding season (February to August), a pre- construction clearance survey for nesting birds will be required. If construction activities occur outside of the avian breeding season (September to July) no mitigation is required. For any clearance of vegetation during the avian breeding season (February to August), the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: Mitigation Measures: Bio-1 A pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted prior to any vegetation disturbance activities. Bio-2 If passerine birds are found to be nesting or there is evidence of nesting behavior inside or within 250 feet of the impact area, a 250-foot buffer will be required around the nest where no vegetation disturbance will be permitted. Bio-3 For birds of prey, such as hawks and owls, the buffer shall be expanded to 500 feet. Bio-4 A qualified biologist is required to closely monitor the nest until it is determined that the nest is no longer active, at which time vegetation removal could continue. Specific Process: Place the above Mitigation Measures as Conditions of Approval on the project to reduce potential biological resource impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Milestone: Prior to Grading Permit Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning Department and Public Works Department 1 Cultural Resources General Impact: A cultural Resources Assessment was prepared by LSA that recommend that to ensure cultural resources, if identified on the site, are properly treated and preserved, mitigation measures shall be followed. In addition the Pechanga Tribe of Luiseno Mission Indians also requested specific cultural resource mitigation measure to be in place. Mitigation Measures: Cultural-1 If previously undocumented cultural resources are identified during earthmoving activities, a qualified archaeologist shall assess the nature and significance of the find, temporarily diverting construction excavation if necessary. Cultural-2 The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods and all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area to the appropriate Tribe for proper treatment and disposition. Cultural-3 All sacred sites, should they be encountered within the project area, shall be avoided and preserved as the preferred mitigation, if feasible. Cultural-4 If inadvertent discoveries of subsurface archaeological/cultural resources are discovered during grading, the Developer, the project archaeologist, and the Tribe shall assess the significance of such resources and shall meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources. Pursuant to Calif. Pub. Res. Code § 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method of preservation for archaeological resources. Cultural-5 If the Developer, the project archaeologist and the Tribe cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for such resources, these issues will be presented to the Planning Director for decision. The Planning Director shall make the determination based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological resources and shall take into account the religious beliefs, customs, and practices of the Tribe. Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the decision of the Planning Director shall be appealable to the Planning Commission and/or City Council. Cultural-6 Prior to beginning project construction, the Project Applicant shall retain a Riverside County qualified archaeological monitor to monitor all ground- z disturbing activities in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources. Any newly discovered cultural resource deposits shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation. Cultural-7 At least 30 days prior to beginning project construction, the Project Applicant shall contact the Pechanga Tribe to notify the Tribe of grading, excavation and the monitoring program, and to coordinate with the City of Temecula and the Tribe to develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall address the treatment of known cultural resources, the designation, responsibilities, and participation of professional Native American Tribal monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities; project grading and development scheduling; terms of compensation for the monitors; and treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site. Cultural-8 Prior to beginning project construction, the Project Archaeologist shall file a pre-grading report with the City of Temecula (if required) to document the proposed methodology for grading activity observation which will be determined in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe. Said methodology shall include the requirement for a qualified archaeological monitor to be present and to have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. In accordance with the agreement required above, the archaeological monitor's authority to stop and redirect grading will be exercised in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe in order to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. Tribal and archaeological monitors shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities, and shall also have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. Cultural-9 If human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage 3 Commission must be contacted within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission must then immediately identify the "most likely descendant(s)" of receiving notification of the discovery. The most likely descendant(s) shall then make recommendations within 48 hours, and engage in consultations concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public Resources Code 5097.98 and the Treatment Agreement described above. Cultural-10 A trained paleontological monitor will be present during ground-disturbing activities within the project area in sediments determined likely to contain paleontological resources. The monitoring for paleontological resources will be conducted on a full-time basis. The monitor will be empowered to temporarily halt or redirect construction activities to ensure avoidance of adverse impacts to paleontological resources. The monitor will be equipped to rapidly remove any large fossil specimens encountered during excavation. During monitoring, samples will be collected and processed to recover microvertebrate fossils. Processing will include wet screen washing and microscopic examination of the residual materials to identify small vertebrate remains. The project paleontologist may reevaluate the monitoring program after 50 percent of the excavation has been completed. Cultural-11 Upon encountering a large deposit of bone, salvage of all bone in the area will be conducted with additional field staff and in accordance with modern paleontological techniques. Cultural-12 All fossils collected during the project will be prepared to a reasonable point of identification. Excess sediment or matrix will be removed from the specimens to reduce the bulk and cost of storage. Itemized catalogs of all material collected and identified will be provided to the museum repository along with the specimens. Cultural-13 A report documenting the results of the monitoring and salvage activities and the significance of the fossils will be prepared. Cultural-14 All fossils collected during this work, along with the itemized inventory of these specimens, will be deposited in a museum repository for permanent curation and storage. a Specific Process: Place the above Mitigation Measures as Conditions of Approval on the project to reduce potential cultural resource impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Milestone: Agreements and conditions prior to issuance of a grading permit, monitoring ongoing through grading operations, and final reports upon completion of grading. Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning Department and Public Works Department Geology and Soils General Impact: There may be a potentially significant impact from seismic ground shaking. Although, there are no known fault hazard zones on the property, the project is located in Southern California, an area that is seismically active. After mitigation measures are performed, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Mitigation Measures: Geology & Soils-1 Building construction shall be consistent with the Uniform Building Code Standards. Geology & Soils-2 All recommendations set forth in the Geotechnical Report completed by GeoMat Testing Laboratories, Inc. dated February 11, 2012, shall be followed, including but not limited to recommendations for earthwork, clearing and grubbing, preparation of surfaces to received compacted fill, preparation of building areas, preparation of slab and paving areas, placement of compacted fill, field/laboratory testing during grading, wet soils, slopes, retaining wall design foundation recommendations, and grading and foundation plan review shall be followed. Specific Process: Place the above Mitigation Measures as Conditions of Approval on the project to reduce potential seismic-related ground failure impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Milestone: Grading permit issuance and Building Permit issuance Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning Department, Public Works Department and Building Department s ��\ i .�� Notice of Public Hearing ' ivxs A PUBLIC HEARWG has been scheduled before the City of Temecula PLANNING COMMISSION to consider the matter described below: Case No: PAl2-0034 and PAl2-0033 Applicant: John Snell; Inland Communities Corp Proposal: A General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Medium Density Residential (M) to High Density Residential (H) and a Zoning Text Amendment to revise the te# for Planned Development Overlay 11 (PDO-11); and, a Development Plan to construct 120 apartment units on a 724 acre site located at the northeast corner of Mire Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road Environmental: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Ad (CEQA), the proposed project will not have a significant impact upon the environment based upon a completed Environmental Initial Study and Mitigation and Monitoring Program. As a result, a Mitigated Negative Declaretion will be adopted in compliance with CEQA. Case Planner: Stuart Fisk, (951) 506-5159 Place of Hearing: City of Temecula, Council Chambers Date of Hearing: October 17, 2012 Time of Hearing: 6:00 p.m. —�_ �f ` �� , ��y� ' �' - _ `� ' � ��=� � , �� s e- / � "' ��% � � � " �� -: �� u�� 3H°". , i �' � V PAl2- 0033 & 0034 � � �� " „, � �. \ � �� --(�. r`. '�' � �� l� � ' — ' '` /L� /I �i� �- }s}- �� , .> �� ' ' lifJ� ` i i P � � � � ; � '. � �� ., � ,iti \ , �. .� •��1� (�� o v�,cin iv,o ' ; ' \�, � �`-� � C.; � � �OF�r' -� I The agenda packet (including staff reports) will be available for viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula) after 4:00 p.m. the Friday before the Planning Commission Meeting. Ai that time, the packet may also be accessed on the Citys website — www.citvoftemecula.ora. My Supplemental Material distributed to a majority of the Commission 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 call the Planning Department, (951) 694-6400. ITEM 4 �AAI�/ ��. - i��" ' �� s: ..., `* —'°5. 198 � MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commissioners FROM: Greg Butler, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: October 17, 2012 SUBJECT: Santiago Road — Design Guideline Santiago Road is a shown as a"Limited Secondary Arterial Road (2-lanes Divided)" on the Circulation Element of the City's General Plan. This roadway designation has a unique offset cross-section intended to enhance the rural nature of the streets with this designation, while all modes of transportation including vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian. In areas with long stretches of undeveloped land or an entirely new street alignment, the implementation of such a roadway cross-section would serve its purpose well. Along the Santiago Road corridor though there are only two developable properties that would be subject to the current roadway cross-section. Approaching these undeveloped segments, Santiago Road has been developed to various other roadwaycross-sections that were in place at the time of development. To further complicate the development of Santiago Road a meandering natural drainage course traverses the area encroaching into what would be improved road right-of-way if one strictly adhered to the current roadway cross-section. The Public Works department has analyzed the existing improved segments of Santiago Road, as well as the alignment of the natural drainage course, and determined that without significant drainage course re-alignment requiring costly and burdensome resource agency permits, implementing the existing cross section would be infeasible. We are therefore recommending that a flexible design guideline be implemented so we can accommodate all modes of travel and still maintain the rural feel of the roadway cross-section. The guideline allows flexibilityto adjust the pavement alignment within the ROW to avoid physical obstacle while still providing enough pavement width for a wider bike lane and a wider curb adjacent graded walkway for pedestrians and equestrians. Attachments -b C1ProgramFiles(x86)Weevia.COm�DOCUmentCOnveReiitemp�2536.doc �;'; R/W R!W 88' 46' 23' � 23' � � I � � 10' S' l2' 'r' 't* 12' 5' l2' 10' l0` Z , GRADED NATURAL TR,4IL TRANSlTIONAL SHOUtDER � LANOSCAPE NATIVE A. C. BERM PER I A. C. BERM PER FENCE � C. 0. T. STD. 2/4 C. 0. T. STD. 2I4 ' 2_ 9G, A. C. i A. �� VMT. .,,,_2� � ` 9K .,� � � � �� ;. 2 � � , ,,� > �� ,, � � G 1 � � ' �,5�� ' ,{" ` `—� �la �S� ��3 r �� ( sy ; \�� *�i;!�� {AX �: � � � � , � ��. ,�� . � �, �.:. �.. .,.��! *.f, �i x� � �,u�.e+ \ �� tiY �� '�I',.�., �,i(��s� �v�i��'�,��,/�,^as' +�,��/,�/.��,.'` �ip�� . < y,v ��;:�.. , �� "� BASE ��- STABICIZE� � COMPACTE COURSE D. �. STA9ILIZED SU96RADE p. G. �� NorES: COMBlNED THICKNESS OF BASE AND SURFACE MATER/AL TD BE DFT'ERM/NED BY 1'HE y SOILS FNGINEER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. �ff SEF STANDARD NOS. 1l3 & ll5 FOR PAVEMENT DES/6N REQUIREMFNTS AND �ENERAL NOTES. ** PA/NTED MED/AN OR LEFT-TURN LANE AT lNTERSECTIONS. x� FENCE SHALL BE A THREE RA/L VINYL fENCE FOUR FEET Hl6H WlTH ALL PpSTS, FOUNDATIONS, END CAPS AN� PDSTS, PER THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. S 1'ABll. IZED DECOMPOSED GRAN/ TE (D. G. ) SHALL CQNFORM TO �REENBOQK SECTION 200-7, EXCEPT AS MDDIFIED BY THE OIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS. APPROVED BY.• G�ITY OF TE�VIECIJLA !,J OCFOBER /2, ZOfI DEPARTMENT C7FPUBLIC'WORKS GREG BUTLER, Gl CTO Of PUBLIC WORXS/C/TY ENGINEER DATE .: ��. -.�..: ,�,(M/TED R.C.E. N0. 4TlOS' E/ Y.� A ' DATE REV. BY.• APPR' DATE SE�ON�ARYARTER/AL � .........._ _......, ror9s, r2ioe r 4 2 LANES DI VIL�ED � Z 3 STANDARA NQ. IO2B 3 6 ' R � W VAR/ES - 66' MIN. R � w 46' 23' � 23' 2 ,) l0' M/N. IJ' l2' !2' ll` I_„� 0' MIN l Z , GRADED � GRADFD � SHOULDFR SHOULDER� A. C. BERM PER I A. C. BERM PER i � C. D. T. STD. 2/4 C. 0.1: STD. 2f4 ' 2_� A. �MT. I �� PVMT. � 2� :, � � BASF � ` � �STAB/LIZFD STAf �'` n COURSE p. G. �' D. 6. * COMPACTE SUB6RADE R/W VAR/ES - 6b' M/N. R/W 46' 23' � 23` Z , ( l0' M/N. 5` l2' 8'"' „* 12' 5' l0' MIN. I 2 , GRADED � SHOUL � PA�lNTED IEfT TURN SHOULDER � A. C. BERM PER i A. C. BERM PER � C. 0. T. STD. 2l4 C. 0. T. STD. 2/4 ' 2� �„ A. �MT. I �� PVMT. _„ Z% — . �... � �, r , , R , SlAB/L/ZED COMPACTE COURSE STAB/UZED D. G. " SUBGRADE p, G, � INTERSECTION DFTAIL NOTES: * FOR LON6/TUD/NAL 6RADES OVFR 5�, THE GRADFD SHDULDER SHALL BE ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT. ** PAtNTEO LEfT-lURN LANE AT /NTERSECF/ONS. CQMB/NED TH/CKNESS Of BASE AND SURFACE MATER/AL TO BE DETERM/NE� BY THE SOlLS ENG/NFER'S RECOMMEN�ATIONS. STAB/L/ZE� �ECOMPOSED GRAN/TE (D. G.) SHALL CONFORM TO GREENBODK SECT/ON 200-7, EXCEPT AS MODIf/ED BY TNE DIRECTOR OF PUBL/C WORKS. SEE STANDARD NOS. 1l3 & 1l5 FOR PAVEMENT DES/GN REQUIREMENTS AND GENERAL NOTES. APPROVED BY.• , CITY OF TE1V�'iCU�rA DEPARTMENT OFPUBLIC WORKS' GRE� BUTLER, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY EN6INEER oa rE ` SANTIAGD ROAD R. C.E. N0. 47/09 RE l S REV. Y.� Af'PRD DATE REV. BY.• APPR'D DATE DES/GN GU/DFLINES � � 4 2 LANES Z 5 3 6