Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout16-12 PC Resolution PC RESOLUTION NO. 16-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVE A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA13-0141, A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PA07-0200) AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (PA07- 0202) FOR THE TEMECULA VALLEY HOSPITAL TO RELOCATE A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED HELISTOP TO TWO NEW LOCATIONS INCLUDING AN INTERIM LOCATION FOR USE DURING PRELIMINARY PROJECT PHASES AND A PERMANENT LOCATION ON THE ROOF OF A FUTURE HOSPITAL TOWER TO BE CONSTRUCTED DURING A LATER PHASE AND TO CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATELY 5,000 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE STORY STORAGE BUILDING TO BE LOCATED AT THE SITE OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED HELISTOP. THE 35.3 ACRE HOSPITAL SITE IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF TEMECULA PARKWAY, APPROXIMATELY 700 FEET WEST OF MARGARITA ROAD (A.P.N. 959-080-026)" Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On June 30, 2004, Universal Health Services of Rancho Springs, Inc. ("UHS"), filed Planning Application No. PA04-0462, a General Plan Amendment; on October 12, 2005 filed PA05-0302, a Zone Change to PDO-9 (Planned Development Overlay-9); on June 30, 2005 filed PA04-0463, a Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan; and on November 4, 2004 filed PA04-0571, a Tentative Parcel Map, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code, which applications are hereby incorporated by reference, for the property consisting of approximately 35.31 acres generally located on the north side of Highway 79 South, approximately 700 feet west of Margarita Road, known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959-080-001 through 959-080-004 and 959-080-007 through 959-080-010 ("Project'). B. The Project was processed including, but not limited to, public notice in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). C. On April 6, 2005, the Planning Commission considered the Project 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 of or opposition to this matter. D. The Planning Commission, based on testimony presented by the general public, determined that an Environmental Impact Report would be required for this Project. E. On April 20, 2005, a scoping session was held before the Planning Commission to determine the extent of issues to be addressed in the Environmental Impact Report for the Project. F. A Draft Environmental Impact Report was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines and circulated for public review from September 28, 2005 through October 28, 2005. G. On November 16, 2005, and again on January 5, 2006, the Planning Commission considered the Project at duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support of or opposition to this matter. H. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 06-01 recommending that the City Council certify the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Project and approve a Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project. I. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 06-04, recommending approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for the Project (PA04-0463). J. On January 24, 2006, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law on the Final Environmental Impact Report at which time all persons interested had the opportunity to present oral and written evidence on the Final Environmental Impact Report. K. On January 24, 2006, following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Council and due consideration of the Project, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 06-05, entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR PLANNING APPLICATION NOS. PA04-0462 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT) PA05-0302 (ZONE CHANGE), PA04-0463 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN) AND PA04-0571 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP) AND RELATED ACTIONS, AND ADOPTING THE FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM IN CONNECTION THEREWITH FOR THE PROPERTY CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 35.31 ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, APPROXIMATELY 700 FEET WEST OF MARGARITA ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-080-001 THROUGH 959-080-004 AND 959-080-007 THROUGH 959-080-010 (PA04-0462, PA05-0302, PA04-0463, PA04-0571)." L. On January 24, 2006, the City Council considered the Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for the Project (PA04-0463) 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 of or opposition to this matter. M. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 06-07, approving the Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for the Project (PA04-0463). N. On February 24, 2006, the California Nurses Association and Citizens Against Noise and Traffic each filed a separate petition challenging the City of Temecula's approval of the Temecula Regional Hospital project proposed by Universal Health Services, Inc. O. On May 3, 2007, the Riverside County Superior Court ordered that the City of Temecula set aside its approval of the Project, including without limitation, its certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report and all related approvals and permits, until the City of Temecula has taken the actions necessary to bring the Project into compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). The Riverside County Superior Court ruled in favor of the California Nurses Association and Citizens Against Noise and Traffic, holding that: (1) the MTBE plume was not properly analyzed in the Final Environmental Impact Report; (2) the siren noise at the hospital was significant and should have been mitigated; and (3) not all feasible traffic mitigation measures were adopted for cumulative traffic impacts. P. The Riverside County Superior Court also held that the Final Environmental Impact Report properly addressed: (1) cumulative noise, light and glare, and aesthetic impacts; (2) landscaping mitigation deferral; (3) biological resources; (4) geology and soils mitigation; and (5) land use consistency. Q. On July 12, 2007, another scoping session was held to determine the extent of issues to be addressed in the new Environmental Impact Report for the Project. R. In response to the Riverside County Superior Court's decision, a new Draft Environmental Impact Report was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines and circulated for public review from November 5, 2007 through December 5, 2007. S. On January 9, 2008, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application Nos. PA07-0198 (General Plan Amendment), PA07-0199 (Zone Change), PA07-0202 (Conditional Use Permits), PA07-0200 (Development Plan), PA07-0201 (Tentative Parcel Map) in a manner in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code, which applications are hereby incorporated by reference, for the property consisting of approximately 35.31 acres generally located on the north side of Highway 79 South, approximately 700 feet west of Margarita Road, known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959-080-001 through 959-080-004 and 959-080-007 through 959-080-010 ("Project"), 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 of or opposition to this matter. T. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 08-01 recommending that the City Council certify the new Final Environmental Impact Report for the Project and approve a Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project. U. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 08-04, recommending approval of the Development Plan (PA07-0200). V. On January 22, 2008, the City Council rescinded and invalidated its approvals of Planning Application Nos. PA04-0462, General Plan Amendment; PA05- 0302, Zone Change to PDO-9 (Planned Development Overlay-9); PA04-0463, Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan; and PA04-0571, Tentative Parcel Map for the property consisting of approximately 35.31 acres generally located on the north side of Highway 79 South, approximately 700 feet west of Margarita Road, known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 959-080-001 through 959-080-004 and 959-080-007 through 959-080-010. W. On January 22, 2008, the City Council considered the Development Plan (PA07-0200) 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 opposition to this matter. X. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Council, and due consideration of the proposed Project, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 08-10, entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO CERTIFY THE SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE TEMECULA REGIONAL HOSPITAL, ADOPT FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, ADOPT A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND ADOPT A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM IN CONNECTION THEREWITH FOR THE TEMECULA REGIONAL HOSPITAL PROJECT, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF TEMECULA PARKWAY (HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH) APPROXIMATELY 700 FEET WEST OF MARGARITA ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 959-080- 001 THROUGH 959-080-004 AND 959-080-007 THROUGH 959-080-010 (PA07-0198, PA07-0199, PA07-0200, PA07-0201, PA07-0202). The new Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) and mitigation monitoring reporting program accurately addresses the impacts associated with the adoption of this Resolution. Y. On June 18, 2010, Universal Health Services of Rancho Springs, Inc., filed Planning Application No. PA10-0194, a Major Modification Application in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. Z. The Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. AA. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on December 15, 2010, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. BB. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 10- 28 recommending that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA10-0194 and adopt an addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the project. CC. On February 8, 2011, the City Council considered Planning Application No. PA10-0194 (Major Modification) at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and di testify either in support or opposition to this matter. DD. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Council, and due consideration of the proposed Project, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11-17 approving Planning Application No. PA10-0194 (Major Modification) and certifying an addendum to the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Major Modification at a noticed public hearing. EE. On May 31, 2013, Universal Health Services of Rancho Springs, Inc., filed Planning Application No. PA13-0141 , a Major Modification Application to a Development Plan (PA07-0200) and Conditional Use Permit (PA07-0202) for the Temecula Valley Hospital to relocate the previously approved helistop to two new locations including an interim location for use during preliminary project phases and a permanent location on the roof of a future hospital tower to be constructed during a later phase and to construct an approximately 5,000 square foot single story storage building for non-hazardous material storage (including disaster supplies, linens, and storage of excess construction materials to allow for repairs) to be located at the site of the previously approved helistop. FF. The Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. GG. A Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR), Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Statement of Overriding Considerations were prepared for the Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines. Thereafter, City staff circulated a Notice of Completion indicating the public comment period and intent to adopt the SEIR as required by law. The public comment period commenced via the State Clearing House from November 12, 2014 through December 26, 2014. Copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Community Development, located at 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590; the Temecula Public Library located at 30600 Pauba Road; and the City of Temecula website. HH. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on April 15, 2015, 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. II. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 15-06, recommending that the City Council certify the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Project (PA13-0141) and approve a Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project. JJ. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 15-05, recommending approval of the Major Modification to the Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit for the Project (13- 0141). KK. On July 27, 2015, prior to the July 28, 2015 City Council hearing scheduled for the project, staff received a letter from legal counsel representing the Los Ranchitos Homeowners' Association concerning the noise analysis, alternatives analysis, project description, and feasible mitigation measures contained within the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Project. At the July 28, 2015 City Council hearing the City Council continued the application off calendar to provide time to revise the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report to address the comment letter through a Recirculated Supplemental Environmental Impact Report. LL. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, reconsidered the Application and the Recirculated Supplemental Environmental Impact Report on May 4, 2016, 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. MM. Prior to taking action, the Planning Commission has heard, been presented with, reviewed and considered all of the information and data in the administrative record, and all oral and written testimony presented to it during the hearing. The recommendation to the City Council as set forth in this resolution, and finding contained herein, reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission and are deemed adequate for purposes of making decisions on the merits of the Project and related actions. NN. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in recommending that the City Council approve the Application, hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.030.E of the City of Temecula Municipal Code for a development plan and by Section 17.04.010.E of the City of Temecula Municipal Code for a Conditional Use Permit: Development Code Findings (Section 17.05.030.E): A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for the City of Temecula and with all the applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City; The proposed Modification to a Development Plan is in conformance with the goals and policies in the General Plan for the City of Temecula, the Development Code, and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City of Temecula. As designed and conditioned the project is consistent with all applicable zoning ordinances, state laws and the General Plan. In addition, the project is consistent with the development standards of the Development Code and associated Planned Development Overlay (PDO-9), including setbacks, parking, landscaping, lighting, lot coverage and height. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public, health, safety and general welfare; The overall development of the land has been designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare as the project has been designed to minimize any adverse impacts upon the surrounding neighborhood and has been reviewed and conditioned to comply with the General Plan, Development Code, and uniform building and fire codes. Conditional Use Permit Findings (Section 17.04.010.E): A. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code; The proposed Conditional Use Permit modification is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. The proposal, a Major Modification to a Development Plan (PA07-0200) and Conditional Use Permit (PA07-0202) for the Temecula Valley Hospital to relocate the previously approved helistop to two new locations including an interim location for use during preliminary project phases and a permanent location on the roof of a future hospital tower to be constructed during a later phase and to construct an approximately 5,000 square foot single story storage building for non-hazardous material storage (including disaster supplies, linens, and storage of excess construction materials to allow for repairs) to be located at the site of the previously approved helistop is consistent with the goals and policies contained in the General Plan and land use standards in the Development Code. The goals and policies in the Land Use Element of the General Plan encourage `A diverse and integrated mix of residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, public and open space land uses" (Goal 1); 'A City of diversified development character where rural and historical areas are protected and co-exist with newer urban development" (Goal 3); and 'A City compatible and coordinated with regional land use and transportation patterns" (Goal 8). In addition, the project is consistent with the development standards of the Development Code and associated Planned Development Overlay (PDO-9), including setbacks, parking, landscaping, lighting, lot coverage and height. B. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures; The proposed modifications to the hospital's Conditional Use Permit are consistent with the previously approved helistop site with regard to the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and affect on the adjacent uses, buildings or structures. Although the Supplemental EIR identifies "Substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity and exposure of persons to excessive noise levels", it also identifies that Section 9.20.030 (Noise Ordinance) of the Temecula Municipal Code exempts sound emanating from "Public safety personnel in the course of executing their official duties, including, but not limited to, sworn peace officers, emergency personnel and public utility personnel. This exemption includes, without limitation, sound emanating from all equipment used by such personnel, whether stationary or mobile"and the Supplemental EIR identifies that limitations on medical flights are not allowed pursuant to Public Utilities Section 21662.4.(a), which states that aircraft flights for medical purposes are exempt from local ordinances that restrict flight departures and arrivals to particular hours of the day or night, or restrict flights due to noise. As such, the proposed project modifications are compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use modifications (exempting noise pursuant to Section 9.20.030 of the Temecula Municipal Code and Section 21662.4.(a) of the Public Utilities Code) will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures. Additionally, the proposed storage building integrates into the hospital complex and is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and will not adversely affect the adjacent hospital uses, buildings or structures. C. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning Commission or City Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood; The site for the conditional uses, including the hospital buildings and helistop, is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in this development code and required by the planning commission or council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. The project is in compliance with the development standards of the Development Code and associated Planed Development Overlay (PDO-9), including setbacks, parking, landscaping, lighting, lot coverage and height. The site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed hospital facilities without affecting the yard, parking and loading areas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in the Development Code. D. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community; The Modification to the Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The purpose of the Modification to the helistop location is to address Caltrans Division of Aeronautics and Federal Aviation Administration safety concerns in a manner that minimizes impacts to the surrounding community with regard to aesthetics, hazards, and helicopter noise. As such, with regard to the helistop, the purpose of the Modification to the use permit is specifically to redesign the helistop to ensure that the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. E. That the decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a Conditional Use Permit be based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council on appeal; The decision to recommend that the City Council conditionally approve the proposed Modification to a Conditional Use Permit is based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following environmental finding and determinations in connection with the recommendation for approval of Planning Application No. PA13-0141, a Major Modification to the Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit for the Temecula Valley Hospital (the "Project'). A. On January 24, 2006, the City Council approved and certified the Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") for the Temecula Regional Hospital; on January 22, 2008, the City Council approved and certified the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ("FSEIR") for the Temecula Regional Hospital; and on February 8, 2011 the City Council approved and certified the Addendum to the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report. B. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the approval of the Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit Major Modification Application (the "Project'), as described in the Initial Study. Based upon the findings contained in that study, City staff determined that the City determined that the proposed modifications to the project did trigger conditions described in Sections 15162 and 15163 of the CEQA Guidelines which require the preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) and that a SEIR is appropriate for the proposed modifications to the hospital project. C. On November 25, 2013, a Notice of Preparation was released to all agencies and persons that might be affected by the project. D. On December 11, 2013, a scoping session was held at which time City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to determine the extent of issues to be addressed in the SEIR for the Project. E. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, City staff prepared a SEIR analyzing the potential environmental effects of the approval of the Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit Major Modification, and described in the SEIR. Based upon the finding contained in that study, City staff determined that there was substantial evidence that the Project could result in new significant effects or increase the severity of previously identified effects. The Supplemental EIR found that new circumstances do exist that introduce new significant effects or increase the severity of previously identified significant effects and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Statement of Overriding Considerations was prepared. F. Thereafter, City staff circulated a Notice of Completion indicating the public comment period and intent to adopt the SEIR as required by law. The public comment period commenced via the State Clearing House from November 12, 2014 through December 26, 2014. Copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Community Development, located at 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590; the Temecula Public Library located at 30600 Pauba Road; and the City of Temecula website. G. Six 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 proceedings. H. The Planning Commission reviewed the SEIR and corresponding Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Statement of Overriding Considerations and all comments received regarding these documents prior to and at the April 15, 2015 public hearing and based on the whole record before it found that: (1) the SEIR, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Statement of Overriding Considerations were prepared in compliance with CEQA; (2) there was substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment with regard to helicopter noise; and (3) the SEIR, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Statement of Overriding Considerations reflected the independent judgment of the Planning Commission. I. Thereafter, City staff circulated a Notice of Completion indicating the public comment period and intent to adopt the Recirculated SEIR as required by law. The public comment period commenced via the State Clearing House from February 8, 2016 to March 23, 2016. Copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Community Development, located at 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590; the Temecula Public Library located at 30600 Pauba Road; and the City of Temecula website. I Five 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 proceedings. K. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Recirculated SEIR and corresponding Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Statement of Overriding Considerations and all comments received regarding these documents prior to and at the May 4, 2016 public hearing and based on the whole record before it finds that: (1) the Recirculated SEIR, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Statement of Overriding Considerations were prepared in compliance with CEQA; (2) there is substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment with regard to helicopter noise; and (3) the Recirculated SEIR, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Statement of Overriding Considerations reflected the independent judgment of the Planning Commission. L. The custodian of records for the FEIR, the SFEIR, the Addendum for the modification application, the second SFEIR, the Recirculated SFEIR and all other materials, which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based, is the Community Development Department of the City of Temecula. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department located at the Planning Department of the City of Temecula, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. M. All legal prerequisites to the approval of this Resolution have occurred. Section 4. Conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula hereby recommends that the City Council approve the Major Modification Application to a Development Plan (PA07-0200) and Conditional Use Permit (PA07-0202) for the Temecula Valley Hospital to relocate the previously approved helistop to two new locations including an interim location for use during preliminary project phases and a permanent location on the roof of a future hospital tower to be constructed during a later phase and to construct an approximately 5,000 square foot single story storage building for non-hazardous material storage (including disaster supplies, linens, and storage of excess construction materials to allow for repairs) to be located at the site of the previously approved helistop on 35.3 acres generally located on the north side of Temecula Parkway, approximately 700 feet west of Margarita Road, known as Assessor Parcel Number 959-080-026, as set forth in Planning Application No. PA13-0141, subject to the specific Conditions of Approval set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 4th day of May, 2016 Ron Guerriero, Chairman ATTEST: Luke Watson, Secretary (SEAL) STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Luke Watson, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 16-12 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 4th day of May, 2016, by the following vote: AYES: 4 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: GUERRIERO, TELESIO, TURLEY- TREJO, WATTS NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NONE ABSENT: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS YOUMANS ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NONE Luke Wa n, Secretary EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA13-0141 Project Description: UHS Helistop Major Modification: A Major Modification to a Development Plan (PA07-0200)and Conditional Use Permit(PA07-0202)for the Temecula Valley Hospital to relocate a previously approved helistop to two new locations including an interim location for use during preliminary project phases and a permanent location on the roof of a future hospital tower to be constructed during a later phase and to construct an approximately 5,000 square foot single story storage building for non-hazardous material storage (including disaster supplies, linens, and storage of excess construction materials to allow for repairs) to be located at the site of the previously approved helistop. The 35.3 acre hospital site is generally located on the north side of Temecula Parkway, approximately 800 feet west of Margarita Road at 31700 Temecula Parkway. Assessor's Parcel No.: 959-080-026 MSHCP Category: Commercial DIF Category: Service Commercial/Office TUMF Category: Service Commercial/Office Quimby Category: NA(Non-Residential Project) Approval Date: May 25, 2016 Expiration Date: May 24, 2018 PLANNING DIVISION Within 48 Hours of the Approval 1. Filino Notice of Determination. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Fifty Dollars ($50.00)for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination with De Minimus Finding as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15062. If within said 48-hour period the applicant/ developer has not delivered to the Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish and Wildlife Code Section 711.4(c)). General Requirements 2. Compliance with Previous Approvals. Except where modified by this approval, all Conditions of Approval for Planning Application Nos. PA10-0194 (Major Modification), PA07-0200 (Development Plan), and PA07-0202 (Conditional Use Permit) remain in effect and shall be complied with. 3. Indemnification of the Citv. 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. 4. Expiration. 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, or use of a property in conformance with a Conditional Use Permit. 5. Time Extension. The Director of Community Development 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. 6. City Plan Review Prior to OSHPD Submittal. Prior to submittal of plans for bed tower 2 and/or the rooftop helistop to the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, the applicant shall submit the plans to the City of Temecula Community Development Department for review and shall complete a Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission review of the permanent helistop prior to its approval by the Caltrans Division of Aeronautics. 7. Compliance with EIR. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures identified within EIR No. (enter EIR # here). 8. Conformance with Approved Plans. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved site plan and elevations contained on file with the Planning Division. 9. Landscape Maintenance. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Director of Community Development 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. 10. Graffiti. All graffiti shall be removed within 24 hours on telecommunication towers, equipment, walls, or other structures. 11. Water Quality and Drainage. 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. To ensure compliance with this Condition of Approval: a. Spills and leaks shall be cleaned up immediately. b. Do not wash, maintain, or repair vehicles on site. c. Do not hose down parking areas, sidewalks, alleys, or gutters. d. Ensure that all materials and products stored outside are protected from rain. e. Ensure all trash bins are covered at all times. 12. Paint Inspection. The applicant shall paint a three-foot-by-three-foot section of the building for Planning Division inspection, prior to commencing painting of the building. 13. Photographic Prints.. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Division 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. 14. Materials and Colors. 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. Materials & Colors: a. Storage building main body color-- Dryvit#456, "oyster Shell" in "Sandblast" texture to match existing hospital building b. Storage building base -- Indian Red to match existing hospital building c. Storage building aluminum shadow box windows -- Medium bronze to match existing hospital building d. Storage building tinted glass -- Bronze tint to match existing hospital building e. Storage building stucco cornice -- Indian Red to match existing hospital building trim 15. Modifications or Revisions. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this project 16. Trash Enclosures. The trash enclosures shall be large enough to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as regular solid waste containers. 17. Trash Enclosures. Trash enclosures shall be provided to house all trash receptacles utilized on the site. These shall be clearly labeled on the site plan. 18. Covered Trash Enclosures. All trash enclosures on site shall include a solid cover and the construction plans shall include all details of the trash enclosures, including the solid cover. 19. Phased Construction. If construction is phased, a construction staging area plan or phasing plan for construction equipment and trash shall be approved by the Director of Community Development. 20. Revocation of CUP. This Conditional Use Permit may be revoked pursuant to Section 17.03.080 of the City's Development Code. 21. City Review and Modification of CUP. The City, its Director of Community Development, Planning Commission, and City Council retain and reserve the right and jurisdiction to review and modify this Conditional Use Permit (including the Conditions of Approval) based on changed circumstances. Changed circumstances include, but are not limited to, the modification of business, a change in scope, emphasis, size of nature of the business, and the expansion, alteration, reconfiguration or change of use. The reservation of right to review any Conditional Use Permit granted or approved or conditionally approved hereunder by the City, its Director of Community Development, Planning Commission and City Council is in addition to, and not in-lieu of, the right of the City, its Director of Community Development, Planning Commission, and City Council to review, revoke or modify any Conditional Use Permit approved or conditionally approved hereunder for any violations of the conditions imposed on such Conditional Use Permit or for the maintenance of any nuisance condition or other code violation thereon. 22. Construction and Demolition Debris. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris and shall provide the Planning Division verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul demolition and construction debris. 23. Public Art Ordinance. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City's Public Art Ordinance as defined in Section 5.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit 24. Placement of Transformer. Provide the Planning Division 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. 25. Placement of Double Detector Check Valves. Double detector check valves shall be installed at locations that minimize their visibility from the public right-of-way, subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development. 26. Archaeological/Cultural Resources Grading Note. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "If at any time during excavation/construction of the site, archaeological/cultural resources, or any artifacts or other objects which reasonably appears to be evidence of cultural or archaeological resource are discovered, the property owner shall immediately advise the City of such and the City shall cause all further excavation or other disturbance of the affected area to immediately cease. The Director of Community Development at his/her sole discretion may require the property owner to deposit a sum of money it deems reasonably necessary to allow the City to consult and/or authorize an independent, fully qualified specialist to inspect the site at no cost to the City, in order to assess the significance of the find. Upon determining that the discovery is not an archaeological/ cultural resource, the Director of Community Development shall notify the property owner of such determination and shall authorize the resumption of work. Upon determining that the discovery is an archaeological/cultural resource, the Director of Community Development shall notify the property owner that no further excavation or development may take place until a mitigation plan or other corrective measures have been approved by the Director of Community Development." 27. Discovery of Cultural Resources. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "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." 28. Relinquishment of Cultural Resources. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: '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." 29. Preservation of Sacred Sites. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "All sacred sites are to be avoided and preserved." 30. MSHCP Pre-Construction Survey. 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 Division prior to scheduling the pre-grading meeting with Public Works. 31. Burrowing Owl Grading Note. 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 Division 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." Prior to Issuance of Building Permit 32. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). 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. 33. Downspouts. All downspouts shall be internalized. 34. Development Impact Fee (DIF). The developer shall comply with the provisions of Title 15, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all its resolutions by paying the appropriate City fee. 35. Photometric Plan. The applicant shall submit a photometric plan, including the parking lot, to the Planning Division, which meets the requirements of the Development Code and the Riverside County Palomar Lighting Ordinance 655. The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely affect the growth potential of the parking lot trees. 36. Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans. Four (4) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division. These plans shall be submitted as a separate submittal, not as part of the building plans or other plan set. 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. 37. Landscaping Site Inspections. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note stating, "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 verify 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 applicant/owner shall contact the Planning Division to schedule inspections. 38. Agronomic Soils Report. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note on the plans stating, "The contractor shall provide two copies of an agronomic soils report at the first irrigation inspection." 39. Water Usage Calculations. 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. 40. Landscape Maintenance Program. A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted to the Planning Division for approval. The landscape maintenance program shall detail 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. 41. Specifications of Landscape Maintenance Program. Specifications of the landscape maintenance program shall indicate, "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 verify 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 applicant/owner shall contact the Planning Division to schedule inspections. 42. Irrigation. The landscaping plans shall include automatic irrigation for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from view of the public from streets and adjacent property. 43. Hardscaping. The landscape plans shall include all hardscaping for equestrian trails and pedestrian trails within private common areas. 44. Precise Grading Plans. Precise Grading Plans shall be consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements. 45. WQMP Treatment Devices. 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 Director of Community Development. 46. Utility Screening. 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 check detectors as required by the Fire Department before starting the screen. Group utilities together in order to reduce intrusion. Screening of utilities is not to look like an after-thought. Plan planting beds and design around utilities. Locate all light poles on plans and ensure that there are no conflicts with trees. Prior to Release of Power, Building Occupancy or Any Use Allowed by This Permit 47. Letter of Substantial Conformance. The applicant shall submit a letter of substantial conformance, subject to field verification by the Director of Community Development 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. Such letter of substantial conformance shall be submitted prior to scheduling for the final inspection. 48. Landscape Installation Consistent with Construction Plans. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Community Development. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. 49. Performance Securities. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Community Development, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Planning Division for a period of one year from final Certificate of Occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Director of Community Development, the bond shall be released upon request by the applicant. 50. Installation of Site Improvements. All site improvements, including but not limited to, parking areas and striping shall be installed. 51. Compliance with Conditions of Approval. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. Outside Agencies 52. Compliance with RCALUC Conditions. The applicant shall comply with the conditions provided in the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission letter dated March 4, 2014. 53. RCALUC Review of Permanent Helistop. The applicant shall complete a Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission review of the permanent helistop prior to its approval by Caltrans Division of Aeronautics and prior to its installation. Furthermore, the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission's conditions on the permanent helistop shall be incorporated into any subsequent permits that the City may issue to implement the actions of the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT General Requirements 54. Conditions of Approval. The developer shall comply with all Conditions of Approval, the Engineering and Construction Manual and all City codes/standards at no cost to any governmental agency. 55. Entitlement Approval. The developer shall comply with the approved site plan, the conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and other relevant documents approved during entitlement. Any significant omission to the representation of site conditions may require the plans to be resubmitted for further review and revision. 56. Precise Grading Permit. A precise grading permit for onsite improvements (outside of public right-of-way) shall be obtained from Public Works 57. Encroachment Permits. Prior to commencement of any applicable construction, encroachment permit(s) are required; and shall be obtained from Public Works for public offsite improvements; Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 58. Environmental Constraint Sheet(ECS). The developer shall comply with all constraints per the recorded ECS with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 59. Grading/Erosion & Sediment Control Plan. The developer shall submit a grading/erosion & sediment control plan(s) to be reviewed and approved by Public Works. All plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. The approved plan shall include all final WQMP water quality facilities and all construction-phase pollution-prevention controls to adequately address non-permitted runoff. Refer to the City's Engineering & Construction Manual at: http://www.cityoftemecu la.org/Temecula/Government/P u bl icW orks/e ng i neeringconstm a n ual.ht M 60. Erosion & Sediment Control Securities. The developer shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 24, Section 18.24.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code by posting security and entering into an agreement to guarantee the erosion & sediment control improvements. 61. NPDES General Permit Compliance. The developer shall obtain project coverage under the State National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Construction Activities and shall provide the following: a. A copy of the Waste Discharge Identification Number(WDID) issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB); b. The project's Risk Level (RL) determination number; and c. The name, contact information and certification number of the Qualified SWPPP Developer(QSD) Pursuant to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) requirements and City's storm water ordinance, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be generated and submitted to the Board. Throughout the project duration, the SWPPP shall be routinely updated and readily available (onsite) to the State and City. Review www.cabmphandbooks.com for SWPPP guidelines. Refer to the following link: http://www.waterboard s.ca.gov/wate r_issues/prog rams/sto rmwater/construction.shtm I 62. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and O&M Agreement. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and O&M Agreement. The developer shall submit a revision to the original WQMP (prepared by a registered professional engineer) that was approved with the original grading permit. It must receive acceptance by Public Works. A copy of the updated project-specific WQMP must be kept onsite at all times. In addition, the updated WQMP Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement shall be revised accordingly and submitted for review and approval. Refer to the WQMP template and agreement link below: http://www.cityoftemecula.org/Temecula/Government/PublicWorks/W QMPandN PDES/W QMP. htm 63. Drainage. All applicable drainage shall be depicted on the grading plan and properly accommodated with onsite drainage improvements and water quality facilities, which shall be privately maintained. Alterations to existing drainage patterns or concentration and/or diverting flows is not allowed unless the developer constructs adequate drainage improvements and obtains the necessary permissions from the downstream property owners. All drainage leaving the site shall be conveyed into a public storm drain system, if possible. The creation of new cross lot drainage is not permitted 64. Soils Report. Asoils report, prepared by registered soil or civil engineer, shall be submitted to Public Works with the initial grading plan submittal. The report shall address the site's soil conditions and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) 65. Certifications. Certifications are required from the registered civil engineer-of-record certifying the building pad elevation(s) per the approved plans and from the soil's engineer-of-record certifying compaction of the building pad(s). Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 66. Completion of Improvements. The developer shall complete all work per the approved plans and Conditions of Approval to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. This includes all onsite work (including water quality facilities), public improvements and the executed WQMP Operation and Maintenance agreement 67. Utility Agency Clearances. The developer shall receive written clearance from applicable utility agencies (i.e., Rancho California and Eastern Municipal Water Districts, etc.)for the completion of their respective facilities and provide to Public Works. 68. Replacement of Damaged Improvements/Monuments. Any appurtenance damaged or broken during development shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of Public Works. Any survey monuments damaged or destroyed shall be reset per City Standards by a qualified professional pursuant to the California Business and Professional Code Section 8771 69. Certifications. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by Public Works. BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION General Requirements 70. Disabled Access. Applicant shall provide details of all applicable disabled access provisions and building setbacks on plans to include: a. All ground Floor units to be adaptable. b. Disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. c. Van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. d. Path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. e. Path of travel from public right-of-way to all public areas on site, such as trash enclosures. 71. County of Riverside Mount Palomar Ordinance. Applicant shall submit, at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plan showing compliance with County of Riverside Mount Palomar Ordinance Number 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All streetlights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Building and Safety Division. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and aimed not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. 72. Street Addressing. Applicant must obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings by requesting street addressing and submitting a site plan for commercial or multi-family residential projects or a recorded final map for single-family residential projects. 73. Clearance from TVUSD. 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. 74. Obtain Approvals Prior to Construction. Applicant must obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 75. Obtaining Separate Approvals and Permits. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls will require separate approvals and permits. 76. Demolition. Demolition permits require separate approvals and permits. 77. Sewer and Water Plan Approvals. On-site sewer and water plans will require separate approvals and permits. 78. Hours of Construction. Signage shall be prominently posted at the entrance to the project, indicating 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 Saturday from 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sundays and nationally recognized Government Holidays. At Plan Review Submittal 79. Submitting Plans and Calculations. Applicant must submit to Building and Safety four (4) complete sets of plans and two (2) sets of supporting calculations for review and approval including: a. An electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic, and mechanical plan applicable to scope of work. b. A Sound Transmission Control Study in accordance with the provisions of the Section 1207, of the 2013 edition of the California Building Code. c. A precise grading plan to verify accessibility for persons with disabilities. d. Truss calculations that have been stamped by the engineer of record of the building and the truss manufacturer engineer. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) 80. Onsite Water and Sewer Plans. Onsite water and sewer plans, submitted separately from the building plans, shall be submitted to Building and Safety for review and approval. 81. Demolition Permits. A demolition permit shall be obtained if there is an existing structure to be removed as part of the project. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) 82. Plans Require Stamp of Registered Professional. Applicant shall provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on the plans. Prior to Beginning of Construction 83. Pre-Construction Meeting. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. FIRE PREVENTION General Requirements 84. Fire Requirement. Guard posts will need to be constructed of steel not less than 4-inches in diameter and concrete filled. They need to be set not less than 3-feet deep in a concrete footing of not less than a 15-inch diameter. Top of posts shall not be less than 3-feet above ground (CFC Chapter 3) Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) 85. Required Submittals (Fire Underground Water). For the new proposed storage building 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 33 and Chapter 5) 86. Required Submittals (Fire Sprinkler Systems). The new proposed storage building will be required to be equipped with an automatic fire sprinkler system. For the new proposed storage building 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. 87. Reguired Submittals (Fire Alarm Systems). The new proposed storage building will be required to be equipped with a fire alarm system. For the new proposed storage building 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.