HomeMy WebLinkAbout030491 PC AgendaA G~.EN. DA
TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
REC;ULA R MEET I NG
March 0~, 1991 6:00 PM
VAIL EbEMENTARYSCHOOL
' T~ula, CA92390
CALL TO. ORDER;
ROLL CALL:
Chairman Chiniaeff
Blair,. Fahey, Ford,
Chinlaeff
Hoagland,
I so members of the public can address the
that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are
limited to three (3) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Commissioners
aboutan item not listed .On the Agenda, a pink "ReqUestto Speak" form should
be filled out a'~ filed with the Commissioner Secretary.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and
address,
For .all other.::agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the
Plaii'l~ing-!~S~ar~ybefore Commi-~sion gets to that item, There is a three (3)
minute {i~i~;liliti~".~0~idual Speakers.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
NON PUBLIC ,HEARING :ITEMS
PUBLIC HE~RING ITEMS
~t:
Location:
Proposal:
Recommendation:
Case Planner:
Conditional Use Permit No. 6 (CUP No. 6)
Prestige InCorporated
North Side Of {~uslness Park Drive, Approximately 3,000
feet north of Rancho California Road.
Request to convert 101,98~ square feet of an existing
industrial/warehouse structure for use as a commercial
meeting/seminar venue including provision of food
services.
Approval
Charly Ray
22~29
Location
Propose -:
Inc.
of Green Tree Lane. approximately 300 feet
north of PaUba Road~
Second ExtensiOn of Time for four parcel:'~subdivision of
4.8 acres.
anner:
3. Case No. ,PI0t:Plan 217
AppliCant: Herron S Rumansoff Architects, Inc.
Representative: Herron ~, Rumansoff Architects;
Location: ~1~60 Sanborn Avenue
Proposal: Request to construct a two-story ref~a|l:10ffiCe structure
totaling 15,3u,3 square foot on a 1.2 acre site.
R~m,mendation: Approval
C~rPla~ n~ Charly Ray
~ ~aSe;No:I ,, :~.~i~e Parcel Map No. 25981
Applicant: wiii:i~m Kouvelis
L~cation: .S0UthOf Pauba and East of Showalter Road
PropoSal: ,Subd'ivide 3.01 Acres into three Residential lots.
Rec~mmeodati0h i :~pproVal
case plar~ner~~' ~ii~hard Ayala
Pi~nnlitg' Director' Report
6. :Planning Commisdon Discussion
7. Other Business
ADJOURNMENT
NeX~ meeting: Marcih';l!8; 1991, 6:00 p.m. , Vail Elementary School. 299.15 Mira Loma
DrilVe, Ter~CUla~ c~i~f~ornla
5J/Ib
PC/Agn3/0~
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
March 4, 1991
Case No.: Conditional Use Permit No. 6
Prepared By: Charly Ray
Recommendation:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for
Conditional Use Permit No. 6; and,
ADOPTResolution91- recommending
approval of Conditional Use Permit
No. 6, based on the analysis and
findings contained herein.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
Prestige, Inc.
Ms. Pia Oliver
Request to convert approximately 102,000 square
feet of an existing industrial/warehouse structure
for use as a corporate meeting/seminar center;
including in-house food and beverage catering
services.
43085 Business Park Drive
M-SC ( Manufacturing - Service Commercial )
North: M-SC (Manufacturing
Commercial )
South: M-SC
East: M-SC
West: M-SC
Service
No change in current zoning requested.
Commercial/Industrial Warehouse structure.
North: Sewage Treatment Plant ( under
construction )
South: Professional office/warehouse
complexes
East: Vacant
West: Professional Medical offices
STAFFRPT\CUP6 1
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
No. of Acres:
No. of Buildings:
Proposed Use:
On-Site Parking
Provided:
Total Parking
Required:
8.3~, acres
One existing at 1L~0,L~36 total
square feet. Proposed C. U. P.
use encompasses 101,9u,8 sq.ft.
of the existing building.
Commercial Convention/Seminar
meeting center; provisions
include food catering services.
393 spaces
On-site assets and adjacent off-
site parking as necessary - see
"Site Design/Parking" analysis,
following page.
This proposal was initially submitted to the City of
Temecula on August 21, 1990, and was reviewed on
a preliminary basis by the City Staff Development
Review Committee {DRC) on October 11, 1990, and
on a formal basis on December 6, 1990.
In summary, the proposal in its present
configuration requests use of 102,000 square feet of
an existing commercial warehouse structure for use
as a meeting/seminar center with attendant
commercial food services. The primary impacts and
related analyses of this proposal focus on existing
parking adequacy and interior structural
modifications necessary to allow the change in use
planned.
The applicant proposes to convert 102,000 (+/-)
square feet of an existing warehouse structure for
use as a commercial convention/seminar center.
The subject property is located roughly at the
northern end of the Business Park Drive loop,
which in turn is situated generally northwest of the
intersection of 1-15 and Rancho California Road
(Reference Exhibit A) . The property is currently
zoned for Manufacturing - Service commercial (M-
SC) uses as indicated by Exhibit B. A Conditional
Use Permit (CUP) is required to conduct the
requested business within this zone district in that
the requested use is not specifically allowed by
Land Use regulations governing the subject site.
Uses not specifically listed as "Permitted" by
ordinance may be conditionally permitted provided
that the Planning Commission finds the proposed
use to be characteristically the same as uses
specified as allowed in the M-SC zone district. In
STAFFRPT\CUP6 2
ANALYSIS:
this case, Staff considers the proposed use
generally appropriate, if adequacy of off-street
vehicle parking can be assured, and necessary
interior structural modifications are realized as
discussed in the following project analysis.
In general terms, the proposed use is more intense
than similar uses within the immediate vicinity,
e.g., medical/professional offices to the south and
west; although the use requested probably would
not be an issue given adequate automobile parking
at the project site and appropriate interior
improvements allowing safe operation of the
proposal. However, the existing structure on the
subject site is a commercial warehouse and was
designed and constructed to warehouse standards,
including existing parking provisions and interior
finish.
Site Desiqn/Parkinq
As evidenced by the site plan submitted by the
applicant, Exhibit D, existing on-site parking
available to this proposal totals 393 spaces. Based
on the project scale and occupancy type it can be
expected that parking demands will periodically
exceed this availability. To mitigate this potential
shortage, the applicant proposes to share existing
parking facilities with the property immediately
adjacent to the southwest (a medical professional
building).
Such an arrangement is considered acceptable to the
City if contractually assured with the owner(s) of
the affected property. To this extent, the
applicant has provided documentation allowing use
of parking spaces on the adjacent medical office
site, reference Attachment No. 5. Further, proper
utilization of all available parking is encouraged by
the provision of valet staff parking attendees as
specified in Condition of Approval No. 12. Such use
is considered feasible, and to an extent, preferable
to construction of additional asphaltic parking
areas, given that the medical office parking spaces
will be largely vacant and relatively accessible
during the peak use operations of the proposed
convention center when additional parking areas
may be required.
STAFFRPT\CUP6 3
GENERAL PLAN AND
ZON I NG CONSISTENCY:
Structural Adequacy
As mentioned above, the existing structure was
constructed to warehouse standards. As such,
existing interior improvements are inadequate to
assure the health and safety of occupants utilizing
the proposed convention/seminar venue, primarily
due to the warehouse~s current lack of structural
elements necessary to comply with applicable
Uniform Fire and Building Code(s) Standards. In
response to City Building and Safety comments, as
well as those of the Riverside . County Fire
Department, the applicant has agreed to retrofit the
existing structure interior as specified by Building
and Safety Department Condition Nos. 25-31 and
those conditions referenced in the attached Fire
Warden Transmittal of January 16, 1991; thereby
bringing the existing building into conformance with
structural/fire protection requirements appropriate
for the use proposed.
It is further noted that the project is also affected
by a known seismic fault underlying the easterly
portion of the project site/subject structure.
Within the structure itself this area is identified as
the Restricted Use Zone referenced in City Building
and Safety Department Condition Nos. 3.a. and
3. b., and subject to occupancy limitations specified
therein. The project's potential geologic hazard { s ),
impact(s), and mitigation measures are also
discussed in item No. 1.9. of the attached
Environmental Assessment.
If the provisions stated above are conscientiously
complied with, the proposed use should not be
detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare
of the community at large. As such, the City of
Temecula Planning Department Staff recommends
approval of this proposed CUP as conditioned (see
attached Conditions of Approval).
As conditioned, Staff finds the proposed use is no
more objectionable than other uses generally allowed
within the site~s current Manufacturing - Service
Commercial land use designation. Given
conscientious compliance with the projectIs
Conditions of Approval, the proposed use is likely
to conform with the General Plan eventually adopted
by the City which is anticipated to contain the same
general CUP provisions affecting the subject
property.
STAFFRPT\CUP6
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
An Initial Environmental Assessment has been
prepared for Conditional Use Permit No. 6; the
analysis of which concludes with the finding that
although the proposed use could have a significant
effect on the environment, there will not be a
significant effect in the case under consideration
because the measures specified in the project~s
Conditions of Approval mitigate potential adverse
impacts.
FINDINGS:
The site of the proposed use together with
the off-site parking required and
contractually provided is suitable in size to
accommodate the proposed intensity of
development.
The proposed use will not have a substantial
adverse effect on abutting property or the
permitted use thereof. Proposal overflow
parking will occur primarily during hours
which parking areas on affected adjacent
properties will be largely vacant. Further,
off-site parking arrangements have been
contractually procured by the applicant in
concurrence with the affected property
owner(s). Nuisance overflow parking is
considered grounds for termination of this
Conditional Use Permit, reference Planning
Department Condition Nos. 11-1~, and 19.
The site for the proposed use has adequate
access to improved Business Park Drive as
evidenced in the site plan for CUP No. 6,
Exhibits A and D.
The proposed project will not inhibit or
restrict future ability to use active or passive
solar energy systems. Adequate building
exposure is provided for these alternatives.
As conditioned, the project will not have a
significant adverse effect on the environment
as evidenced in the Initial Environmental
Assessment for CUP No. 6.
STAFFRPT\CUP6 5
CR:ks
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution
Conditions of Approval
Environmental Assessment
Exhibits:
A.
B.
C.
D.
El.
E2.
Sublease
Vicinity Map
Zoning Map
SWAP
Site Plan
Floor Plan
Floor Plan Detail
Parking Contract Agreement between
Professional Hospital Services, Inc. (Master Lessor) and
Prestige Association, Inc. (Sublessee)
City Ordinance No. 348, Section 18.31
Letters of Correspondence/Public Comment
Fee Checklist
STAFFRPT\CUP6 7
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION
STAFFRPT\CUP6 8
RESOLUTION NO. 90-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 6 TO PERMIT
CONVERSION OF 101,9~.8 SQUARE FEET OF AN EXISTING
INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSE STRUCTURE FOR USE AS A
CONVENTION/SEMINAR CENTER AT THE COMMON
LOCATION KNOWN AS u,:~085 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE.
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA.
WHEREAS, Prestige, Inc., filed CUP No. 6 in accordance with the Riverside
County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has
adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said CUP application was processed in the time and manner
prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said CUP on March ~,, 1991,
at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or
opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said CUP;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findinqs. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes
the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated
city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following
incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to
the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the requirements of state
law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following
requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking
other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each
of the following:
There is a reasonable probability that the land use
or action proposed will be consistent with the
general plan proposal being considered or studied
or which will be studied within a reasonable time.
STAFFRPT\CUP6 9
(b}
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future adopted
general plan if the proposed use or action is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(C)
The proposed use or action complied with all other
applicable requirements of state law and local
ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest
Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the
incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of
Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City.
At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while
the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General
Plan.
C. The proposed CUP is consistent with the SWAP and meets the
requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit:
( 1 ) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation
of the general plan.
{2) The Planning Commission finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits,
pursuant to this title, each of the following:
(a)
There is reasonable probability that CUP No. 6
proposed will be consistent with the general plan
proposal being considered or studied or which will
be studied within a reasonable time.
(b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future adopted
general plan if the proposed use or action is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(C)
The proposed use or action complies with all other
applicable requirements of state law and local
ordinances.
D. (1) Pursuant to Section 18.26(e), no CUP may be approved
unless the applicant demonstrates the proposed use will not be detrimental to
the health safety and welfare of the community, and further, that any CUP
approved shall be subject to such conditions as shall be necessary to protect
the health, safety and general welfare of the community.
( 2 ) The Planning commission, in recommending approval of the
CUP, makes the following findings, to wit:
a)
The site of the proposed use together with
the off-site parking required and
contractually provided is suitable in size to
STAFFRPT\CUP6 10
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
accommodate the proposed intensity of
development.
The proposed use will not have a substantial
adverse effect on abutting property or the
permitted use thereof. Proposal overflow
parking will occur primarily during hours
which parking areas on affected adjacent
properties will be largely vacant. Further,
off-site parking arrangements have been
contractually procured by the applicant in
concurrence with the affected property
owner(s). Nuisance overflow parking is
considered grounds for termination of this
Conditional Use Permit, reference Planning
Department Condition Nos. 11-1~, and 19.
The site for the proposed use has adequate
access to improved Business Park Drive as
evidenced in the site plan for CUP No. 6,
Exhibits A and D.
The proposed project will not inhibit or
restrict future ability to use active or passive
solar energy systems. Adequate building
exposure is provided for these alternatives.
As conditioned, the project will not have a
significant adverse effect on the environment
as evidenced in the Initial Environmental
Assessment for CUP No. 6.
There is a reasonable probability that the
project will be consistent with the City's
General Plan once it is adopted, based on
analysis in the staff report and the proposaPs
conformance with existing applicable
ordinances and Conditions of Project
Approval.
The lawful conditions stated in the approval
are deemed necessary to protect the public
health, safety and general welfare. The
Conditions stated in the attached Staff
analysis are based in mitigative measures
necessary to reduce the severity of, or
entirely eliminate potential adverse impacts of
the project, including potential impacts on
adjacent parking facilities, human health and
safety, and City fire protection services.
STAFFRPT\CUP6 11
h)
There is not a probability of detriment to, or
interference with the future adopted General
Plan Land Use if the proposed use is
ultimately inconsistent with the new General
Plan. The proposed use is of insignificant
scale in the context of regional development.
Further, the project is likely to prove an
interim short-term use of the project site,
thereby minimizing potential long-range
impacts. Further, if found to be ultimately
detrimental, the use is subject to termination
under City ordinance provisions contained in
Section 18.31 of City Ordinance No. 3q8
( Attachment No. 6 ).
These findings are supported by Staff
analysis, minutes, maps and exhibits,
associated with this application and herein
incorporated by reference.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the CUP proposed is
compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that the proposed
project, as mitigated by the attached Conditions of Approval, will not have a
significant impact on the environment, and a Negative Declaration, therefore, is
hereby granted.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends
approval of CUP No. 6 for the conversion of 101,9u,8 square feet of an existing
industrial/warehouse for use as a convention and seminar center at q3085 Business
Park Drive, Temecula, California subject to the attached conditions.
See Attachment No. 2.
SECTION
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of October, 1990.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
STAFFRPT\CUP6 12
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting .thereof, held
on the 1st day of October, 1990 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
STAFFRPT\CUP6 13
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
STAFFRPT\CUP6 14
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Plot Plan No: Conditional Use Permit No. 6
Project Description: Proposed Conversion of
102,000 S uare Feet of An Existinq
I ndustria~Warehouse Structure for Use As A
Seminar/Meetinq Venue; Includin.q On-Site
Caterinq Capabilities
Assessor's Parcel No.: 921-020-0~,6
Planninq Department
The use hereby permitted by this plot plan is for use of 101,9~,8 square feet
of an existing industrial/warehouse structure for accommodation of corporate
meetings/private party functions. Internallyprovidedfoodcateringservices
for on-site activities is also allowed.
The permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officers, and employees from any claims, action, or
proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officers, or employees
to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Conditional
Use Permit No. 6. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the permittee of
any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will
cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the
permittee of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in
the defense, the permittee shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend,
indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula.
This approval shall be used within one { 1 ) year of approval date; otherwise,
it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial
construction contemplated by this approval within the one (1) year period
referenced, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the
beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval.
The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that
indicated by Exhibits D, E1 and E2, or as amended by these conditions.
In the event the use hereby permitted ceases operation for a period of one ( 1 )
year or more, this approval shall become null and void.
The applicant shall comply with the Engineering Department~s Conditions of
Approval which are included herein.
STAFFRPT\CUP6 15
10.
11,
12.
13.
14.
15.
Fire protection shall be provided in accordance with the appropriate section
of Ordinance No. 546 and the County Fire Warden's transmittal dated January
16, 1991, a copy of which is attached.
Within forty-eight (48) hours of the approval of the project, the
applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount d One Thousand,
Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars ($1,275.00), which includes the One
Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars ( $1,250.00 ) fee, in compl lance with AB
3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4( d )(2 ) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar ($25.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152
and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour
period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department
the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall
be void by reason d failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section
711.4(c).
The applicant shall comply with conditions/provisions of the Riverside County
Health Department which are incorporated herein.
The applicant shall comply with conditions/provisions of the City of Temecula
Building and Safety Department which are incorporated herein.
The applicant shall comply with the provisions specified in the sublease
executed the 21st day d November, 1990, by and between PROFESSIONAL
HOSPITAL SUPPLY, INC., (the "Sublessor"), whose address is 43225
Business park Drive, Temecula, CA 92390 and PRESTIGE ASSOCIATES,
INC., (the "Sublessee"), whose address is 27635 Jefferson Avenue,
Temecula, CA 92390, a copy of which is attached. This document shall be
notari zed and recorded with the County d Riverside Clerk and Recorder prior
to issuance of building permits. Proof d recordation shall be submitted
concurrently with application for building permits.
All functions shall be provided valet parking to insure proper use of on-site,
as well as authorized use d off-site parking spaces; thereby minimizing
overflow parking on adjacent properties and City rights-d-way.
No parking within City rights-d-way shall be permitted in association with the
requested use.
No outdoor activities shall be allowed on the subject site.
Prior to the issuance d building permits, the applicant shall obtain all
necessary clearances and/or permits from the following agencies:
Planning Department
Engineering Department
Environmental Health
School District
Fire Department
STAFFRPT\CUP6 16
16,
Any proposed additional outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans
submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check approval,
and shall comply with the requirements of Riverside County Ordinance No.
655.
17.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
18.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or
any use allowed by this permit.
19o
This Conditional Use Permit is subject to revocation pursuant to the provisions
of Section 18.31 of City Ordinance No. 3q8.
Engineerinq Department - Transportation
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS:
20.
Based on the Traffic Study, the developer shall enter into an agreement with
the City to contribute 10% to the construction costs of the signal (including
intersectional signing and striping) at the intersection of Ridge Park Drive
and Rancho California Road.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY:
21.
Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the developer shall deposit with
the Engineering Department a cash sum as established per acre as mitigation
for traffic signal impact. This fee will not be required if appropriate
documentation of prior fee payment is provided.
En.qineerinq Department - Civil
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY:
22.
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities
imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public
facility mitigation as required under the Negative Declaration for the project,
in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or final
public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally established by the
date on which Developer requests its building permits for the project or any
phase thereof, the Developer shall execute the Agreement for Payment of
Public Facility Fee, a copy of which has been provided to Developer.
Developer understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees
in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the
amount of such fees) and specifically waives its right to protest such
increase.
STAFFRPT\CUP6 17
Riverside County Department of Environmental Health Services (DEHS)
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS, THE APPLICANT SHALL:
23.
Provide DEHS "Will-serve" applicable letters from the water and sewering
agencies; and
Three complete sets of plans for each food establishment will be submitted,
including a fixture schedule, a finish schedule, and a plumbing schedule in
order to ensure compliance with the California Uniform Retail Food Facilities
Law.
Department of Buildinq and Safety
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS:
25.
Provide two (2) complete sets of plans for tenant improvement, wet stamped
by a licensed structural engineer or architect. Provide complete area analysis
on plot plan or cover sheet.
26.
Incorporate a two-hour area separation wall between A.2.1 and B.2
occupancy. Exercise the use of a parapet Wall Sec. 1704 or Sec. 505(e) 1988 -
Uniform Building Code (UBC).
27. Print occupant load on plans.
28. Provide 80.5 lineal feet of exiting in A.2.1 occupancy.
29.
Provide bathroom facilities for all occupants per the 1988 Uniform Plumbing
Code appendices and the Installation Standards contained therein; also,
provide the approved and signed off As Built Sewer Plan for lateral size
confirmation.
30.
Submit two ( 2 ) complete sets of plans on tenant improvements and kitchen area
to: County of Riverside Health Department, 3636 University Avenue,
Riverside, CA 92501 (275-8980). Health Department approved plans shall be
submitted to Buildinq and Safety prior to tenant Improvement Plan Review.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY:
31.
The following conditions shall become part of the Certificate of Occupancy for
the Leed Building:
"The City of Temecula Building and Safety Department, in review of
past history and current geological reports provided on the Leed
Building located at 43085 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA, does find
there is some potential for ground breakage and differential settlement
to recur along previous fissure trails within the building. Therefore,
the following conditions shall become part of the Conditional Use Permit
(CUP).
STAFFRPT\CUP6 18
32.
33.
a)
No human occupancy within the area designated as the "Recommended
Building Restricted Use Zone" (RUZ) noted by figure u, on the project
site Geological Report dated March 29, 1989, shall be allowed far more
than 2,000 man hours per year. No change in use, other than storage
and warehouse use shall occur in the restricted use zone.
b)
All Portions of Structure: In the event of seismic activity, differential
settlement, change of occupancy use, additions to structure, or should
any other modifications occur, the CUP may be reviewed by the City
with the possibility of suspension of the CUP and Certificate of
Occupancy.
It shall be the responsibility and duty of the owner to request a review
and inspection of the structure and its occupancy every two {2 ) years.
If no request by the owner is received by the City within the time
period set forth, the Certificate of Occupancy will be suspended.
In the event new geological findings occur in, or branches near, the
RUZ, the owner shall supply an updated Geological Review along with
a Structural Statement from the Engineer of Record to the City Building
and Safety Department."
Lighting on site and located on structures shall comply with Mount Palomar
Lighting Ordinance No. 655.
Applicant shall fill out an Application for Final Inspection. Allow two weeks
processing time to obtain all required clearances prior to final inspection.
STAFFRPT\CUP6 19
PLANNING & ENGINEERING
46-209 OASIS STREET, SUITE 405
INDIO, CA 92201
(619) 342,8886
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
FIRE DEPARTMENT
IN COOPERATION WITH THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
AND FIRE pROTECTION
GLEN J. NEWMAN
FIRE CHIEF
pLANNING & ENGINEERING
3760 12TH STREET
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
(714) 787-6606
DATE: January i6~ 1991
TO:
City of Temecula
ATTN:
Planning Department
RE:
Conditional Use Permit
With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above
referenced plot plan, the Fire Department recommends the follow-
ing fire protection measures be provided in accordance with
Riverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection
standards:
The western portion of the building show as A-2 occupancy
shall be constructed according to plans approved by the
building and fire departments with all corridors and out
side exits fully improved prior to any use.
The center portion of the building shown as B-2 occupancy
shall be limited to temporary manufacturing or trade type
shows with open aisles and limited seating.
3. Prior to use of the B-2 portion the following improvement
shall have been completed.
(A) All outside doors shall have lighted exit signs located
above and below each opening.
(B) Doors shall be equipped with panic hardware.
All temporary partitions or space dividers shall be
fire retardant material.
(D)
Install portable fire extinguisher minimum 2A-10BC.
One per 5000 square foot. Minimum 75 feet travel
distance.
CUP 6 Page 2
(E)
All temporary electrical distribution systems shall
be UL approved and inspected by the fire department
prior to use.
All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be
ferred to the Planning Division staff.
RAYMOND H. REGIS
Chief FAre Department Planner
ml
Michael GraySDeputy Fire Marshal
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
STAFFRPT\CUP6 20
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
II
Backqround
1. Name of Proponent:
Prestiqe, Inc.
Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
27635 Jefferson Avenue
Temecula, CA 92390
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
January 23, 1991
Agency Requiring
Assessment:
CITY OF TEMECULA
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 6
6. Location of Proposal:
~,3085 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA
Environmental Impacts
( Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets. )
Yes Maybe No
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
X
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
X
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
X
The destruction, covering or modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
X
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
X
STAFFRPT\CUP6 21
Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudslides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
Air. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air
quality?
The creation of objectionable
odors?
Alteration of air movement,
moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, whether locally
or regionally?
Water. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or
fresh waters?
Substantial changes in absorption
rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
Discharge into surface waters, or
in any alteration of surface water
quality, including, but not limited
to, temperature, dissolved oxygen
or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow or ground waters?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
STAFFRPT\CUP6 22
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
Substantial reduction in the amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as flood-
ing or tidal waves?
Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any native species of
plants ( including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare, or endangered species
of plants?
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop?
Animal Life. Will the proposal result
in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or insects)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
STAFFRPT\CUP6 23
10.
11.
12.
13.
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
Light and Glare. Will the proposal
produce substantial new light or glare?
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal
involve:
A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances ( including,
but not limited to, oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
Population. Will the proposal alter
the location, distribution, density, or
growth rate of the human population of
an area?
Housing. Will the proposal affect
existing housing or create a demand for
additional housing?
Transportation/Circulation. Will the
proposal result in:
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
STAFFRPT\CUP6 24
Yes Maybe No
b. Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking? X __
c. Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems? __ __ X
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods? __ __ X
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic? X
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? __ X
lq. Public Services. Will the proposal have
substantial effect upon, or result in a
need for new or altered governmental
services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection? __ X
b. Police protection? __ X
c. Schools? X
d. Parks or other recreational
facilities? X
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads? __ X
f. Other governmental services: __ __ X
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy? __ __ X
b. Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy? __ __ X
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas? __ X
STAFFRPT\CUP6 25
17.
18.
19.
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)?
Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities?
20. Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
Yes
__ Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
STAFFRPT\CUP6 26
21. Mandatory Findin9s of Significance.
Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into
the future. )
Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumu-
latively considerable? ( A project~s
impact on two or more separate
resources may be relatively small,
but where the effect of the total of
those impacts on the environment
is significant. )
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substan-
tial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
STAFFRPT\CUP6 27
I I I Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
1 .a-f.
1.g.
3.a-e.
3.f,g.
3.h,i.
4.a-d.
5.a-c.
6.a.
6.b.
No. The proposal entails internal modifications to an existing
structure. No development activity affecting existing topographic or
geologic substructures is proposed.
Maybe. The structure accommodating the proposed use overlies an
identified earthquake fault. Potential exposure of persons to geologic
hazards is largely mitigated by use restriction(s) imposed on affected
portions of the structure in question. Reference Building and Safety
Department Conditions of Approval Nos. 31a and b.
No. The proposed change in use will increase localized air pollutants
due to increased auto traffic to and from the subject site. Effects on
ambient air quality are considered insignificant however.
No. No development is proposed which would normally affect surface
bodies of water. As such no impacts on these resources is anticipated.
Maybe. Groundwaters may be nominally affected as a result of
increased water usage/sewage discharge effluent due to the increasing
use intensity proposed for the structure in question. Overall effect on
regional groundwater quantity/quality should be largely unnoticeable.
No. Increase in water usage due to this proposal are considered
individually insignificant; and the property in question is not subject
to known flood/tidal hazards.
No. Vegetation shall not be introduced, nor removed to effect this
proposal.
No. The proposal does not entail aspects that could logically affect
wildlife nor their habitat.
Maybe. Ambient noise levels may increase due to the more intense use
of the subject site proposed. Noise impacts, if any, will be of short
duration and should not extend beyond the proposal's immediate
boundary.
No. No use is proposed which would logically generate significant noise
levels.
No. Short term glare may result due to increased night time auto
traffic; impacts on night skies are considered insignificant.
STAFFRPT\CUP6 28
10.a,b.
11.
12.
13.a.
13.b.
13.c.
13.d.
13.e.
13.f.
Yes. The proposed change in use is considered a substantial alteration
to existing occupancy. Effects of the proposal extending beyond the
existing building confines should be insignificant. The most noticeable
exterior impact will be an increase in automobile parking requirements,
reference Item No. 13.b. Mitigation is as per Condition Nos. 11-1u,.
Condition No. 7 referencing attached County Fire Warden 1 project
requirements mitigates potential increased fire hazards resulting from
the change in use proposed. Condition Nos. 31a and b mitigate
potential increased exposure of persons to identified geologic hazards.
No. Even with the more intense use proposed, increases in use of
natural resources; i.e., water and fossil fuels should be insignificant
when considered in a regional context.
No. The project does not propose elements entailing storage or use of
hazardous substances; nor is the subject site within identified
emergency response movement corridors.
No. The project does not entail population relocation aspects.
No. Similarly, no housing is proposed for construction nor demolition.
Maybe. Additional vehicular movement in the vicinity of the subject site
could be considered or substantial increase over that currently
commuting to/from the property. Regional effects are considered
nominal.
Yes. Based on the proposed change in structure occupancy, the
project will generate a significant new demand for site/use - specific
automobile parking. Anticipatedoverflowparkingimpactsaremitigated
largely through shared parking arrangements with the property
adjacent to the southwest. Reference Condition of Approval Nos. 11-
No. Impacts on transportation systems, primarily adjacent roadways
will be nominal and of limited duration. No substantial impact is
anticipated. Potential impacts of nominal scale are mitigated by
Condition of Approval Nos. 20 and 21.
No. It is anticipated additional persons and delivery vehicles will travel
to and from the subject site to frequent the proposed
convention/seminar operations. Impacts, however, should not be
noticeable beyond the immediate project vicinity.
No. Use of, or interference with waterborne rail or air traffic is not
proposed nor anticipated.
Maybe. Any increase in projected traffic impacts may include the
potential for additional accidents. Incrementally, risk of additional
accidents is considered negligible however.
STAFFRPT\CUP6 29
14.a,b.
14.c,d.
14.e.
14.f.
15.a,b.
16.a-f.
17.a,b.
18.
19.
20.a-d.
21 .a-d.
Maybe. Due to increased occupancy of the subject site as proposed,
there is the potential for increased police and fire protection services.
Impacts are those normally associated with nominal additional
development and are not considered significant.
Maybe. The proposed use may contribute secondary impacts on school
and recreational facilities. Impacts are mitigated by applicable
development fees as well as school impact fees specified by state law,
and implemented locally by the Temecula Valley Unified School District
(TVUSD).
Maybe. Additional automobile/truck traffic is anticipated to frequent
the project site, which may increase road maintenance requirements in
the immediate vicinity of the subject site. Impacts are not expected to
be significant.
No. Additional impacts on other governmental services have not been
identified at this time.
No. Due to increased occupant loads, there should be a slight increase
in fuel/energy demands for space/water heating and cooling, as well as
energy consumed in food preparation as proposed. No significant
impacts are anticipated.
Maybe. Nominal utility service upgrade may be required to support the
proposed use. No significant impact on regional services is anticipated.
Maybe. The proposed site represents a significant change in allowable
building occupancy, requiring parallel modifications to the existing
structural interior in order to mitigate potential health hazards.
Notably, additional fire protection requirements are as specified in
project Condition of Approval Nos. 7 and the referenced attachment.
Mitigation of potential exposure to geologic hazards is indicated in
Condition Nos. 31 .a and 31 .b.
No. No additional construction is proposed which would logically impact
existing vistas.
Maybe. Reference Item No. 14.d. Further, in general terms, the
project may be considered an addition to existing recreational assets,
providing increased recreational opportunities.
No. No development affecting the referenced resources is proposed,
and no impact on these resources is anticipated.
No. Reference Item Nos. 1 through 20.
STAFFRPT\CUP6 30
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signi-
ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi-
ficant effect on this case because the mitigation measures
described on attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval
have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
January 23, 1991
Date
For CITY OF TEMECULA
X
STAFFRPT\CUP6 31
ATTACHMENT NO.
EXHIBITS
STAFFRPT\CUP6 32
CITY OF TEMECULA )
SITE
VICINITY MAP
VICINITY MAP )
r~Rie, i~'~o. A
CASE NO. r.,.u.{'.l,~0.~
P.o. DATE:
CITY OF TEMECULA ). '
%
%
'[: R.ANCH~,
ZONE MAP )
CITY OF TEMECULA
SWAP MAP
~'e~'T Ao. c
CASE NO.C.O-~'.4O.~
P.c. OATE ~/~(~t
/
/
I
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
r
FLOORPLAN
FCASE NO, C.~. ~o.~TM
EXHIBIT NO, ¢t.;
k,P.C. DATE ~
CITY OF TEMECULA )
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
PARKING SUBLEASE CONTRACT
STAFFRPT\CUP6 33
SUBLEASE
This Sublease is executed this Z~ day of ~drf ,
19 9/, by and between PROFESSIONAL HO'~'~YTAL SUPPLY, INC., (the
"Sublessor"), whose address is 43225 Business Park Drive, Temecula,
CA 92390 and PRESTIGE ASSOCIATES, INC., (the "Sublessee"), whose
address is 27635 Jefferson Avenue, Temecula, CA 92390.
RECITALS
A. L and T Corporation as Lessor, and Professional Hospital
Supply, Inc. as Lessee, executed a lease on August 29, 1990 (the
"Master Lease"). By, the terms of the Master Lease, the real
property described in Paragraph 1 of this Sublease was leased to
Professional Hospital Supply, Inc. for a term of 9 years,
commencing on August 29, 1990, and ending on August 29, 1999,
subject to earlier termination as provided in the Master Lease.
B. Sublessor desires to sublease to Sublessee a portion of
the property currently occupied bySublessor under the terms of the
Master Lease, and Sublessee desires to lease that property from
Sublessor.
C. Under the terms of the Master Lease, Lessor's consent to
this Sublease is not required.
THEREFORE, Sublessor and Sublessee agree as follows:
1. LeasinQ and Description of Property. Subject to the
terms, conditions, and covenants set forth in this Sublease,
Sublessor hereby leases to Sublessee, and Sublessee hereby leases
from Sublessor, the improved parking areas on the property located
in Riverside County, California, described as follows:
Parcel One of Parcel Map 21501 as shown by Map
on file in Book 157, Pages 82 and 83 of the
Recorder's Office, Riverside County, California.
County
The subleased property shall hereinafterbereferred to as the
"Subleased Premises," and is commonly known as 43225 Business Park
Drive, Temecula, California.
JANDTSUB.LSE I
2. Term. This Sublease shall commence on November 15, 1990,
and shall end on the date on which the Master Lease terminates or
on August 29, 1999, whichever is earlier.
3. Rent. Sublessee shall pay to Sublessor as rent for the
Subleased Premises a rental of $150 for each occasion on which its
invitees, agents, successors and assigns use the Subleased Premises
for parking vehicles.
4. Use of Premises. Sublessee, its invitees, customers,
agents, successors and assigns may use the Subleased Premises to
park vehicles at the Subleased Premises at all hours during the
weekend and, during the week only, during the hours between 6=00
P.M. and 6=00 A.M. Such use includes pedestrian ingress and egress
to said Subleased Premises. Sublessee shall provide a security
guard at the Subleased Premises on each occasion on which its
invitees, agents, successors and assigns use the Subleased
Premises.
5. Advance Notice. Sublessee shall give Sublessor at least
forty-eight (48) hours advance notice of its intent to use the
Subleased Premises.
6. Damaues to Leased Premises. Sublessee shall be
responsible for any damages to the Subleased Premises or to the
buildings located adjacent to the Subleased premises, which
buildings are leased by Professional Hospital Supply, Inc. pursuant
to the Lease by and between L and T Corporation and Professional
Hospital Supply, Inc.
7. Ouiet Enjoyment. Sublessor covenants that Sublessee
shall be entitled to quiet enjoyment of the Subleased Premises,
provided that Sublessee complies with the terms of this Sublease.
8. Condition of Premises. Sublessee shall be required to
remove all litter and trash from the Subleased Premises leftby the
invitees, agents, successors and assigns of Sublessee. Except for
the specific requirements contained in this Sublease, Sublessor
shall be required at its own expense to maintain the Subleased
Premises.
9. Applicability of Master Lease. This Sublease is subject
and subordinate to the terms and conditions of the Master Lease.
10. Termination of the Master Lease. If the Master Lease is
terminated, this Sublease shall terminate simultaneously and the
JANDTSUB.LSE 2
Sublessor and Sublessee shall thereafter be released from all
obligations under this Sublease.
SUBLESSORz
PROFESSIONAL HOSPITAL SUPPLY,
JO HOFFEE,~''~
By: )H~OFFE ,
INC ·
SUBLESSEE:
JANDTSUB. LSE 3
State of California )
) SS
County of Riverside )
unaersi~ed officer, ' the
personally
appeared JOHN HOFFEE II, known
personally to me to be the President
of the above-named corporation, and
that he, as such officer, being
authorized to do so, executed the
foregoing instrument for the
purposes therein set forth, by
signing the name of the corporation
by him as such officer.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF I ~ave hereunto
set my hand and official seal.
State of California
My Commission expires:
OFFICIAL SEAL
JANDTSUB. LSE 4
State of California )
) SS
County of Riverside )
, ~ , the
undersigne officer, personally
appeared PAMELA JANDT, known
personally to me to be the Executive
Vice-President of the above-named
corporation, and that she, as such
officer, being authorized to do so,
executed the foregoing instrument
for the purposes therein set forth,
by signing the name of the
corporation by her as such officer.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF I ~ave hereunto
set my hand and official seal.
State of California
My Commission expires= ~'//- ~ /
LOS AII~LES
~, EXP. JUNE 11,
JANDTSUB. LSE 5
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
ORDINANCE NO. 311.8, SECTION 18.31
STAFFRPT\CUP6 34
~I~SECTZON 18,31. FiNDZNG$ AND PROCEDURE FOR REVOCATION OF VARIANCES Arid
PEII~ITS.
Any cond(ttonal use pemtt, publtc use perrata, variance, cemmerda~
;I $a sty upon fining that o~ or ~re of t~ follo~n9
con~tfo~ for ~catton extst,
(1) That the use ts detrimental to the publlc health, safety or
eneraq welfare, or Is a publlc nuisance,
That the use ts Ntng conicted ~n ~ollt(on of the terns and
COn~ttons Of t~ ~mtt,
(4) That the use for ~ch t~ ~mtt ms ~anted has ceased or has
hen sus~nded hr one ~ar or mo~,
Upon detestnation by the Dtrector of Bu¶l~ng end Safety that grounds
for revocation extst, the following procedure shall take effect:
(1) NOTICE OF REVOCATION, Nottce of revocation end a copy of the
ftnd~ngs of the D(rector of Butld~ng and Safety sha~l be mailed
by the D(rector by certified mall to the owner of the propert~ to
wh(ch the permtt or vattahoe Ippl(es, is shown by the records of
the Assessor of RIverside County, The decision of the D~rector
(2)
(3)
of Butld~ng and Safety shall be ftna~ unless a notice of appeal
(s t~mely filed,
NOTICE OF APPEAl., I~thtn 10 days following the malltrig of the
notice of revocation, the owner of the property to whtch the
pemtt or vartance app3hs ma file ~th the Plannln Dtrectora
nottce of appeal from the deckston of the D(rector o~ Butldtng
end Safety, A nottce of appeal shall be accompanied by the
f~l~ng fee set forth ~n Ordinance No, 671, A not(ca of appea~
not accempan~ed by such fee shall be deemed null end void and
shall not be processed.
$ETT|NG HEARING; COSTS. Appeals w~th(n the area ;Jurisdiction of
the E~st Area Planntng Counctl, w~th the exception of appeals
concerning comaerda1 lIECS pea¶as, shaql be heard by the Count11
or, tf the Council so ehcts, shaql be heard by a County Heartng
Officer pursuant to end tn accordance w~th Ordinance No, 643,
All other appeals, including ~ppeals concerntn~ commercial ~ECS
permtts, sha~l be heard by the Planning Camlsston, of ~f the
Ceffn~sston so elects, shall be heard by I County HearSng Offtcer
pursuant to end tn accordance ~th Ordinance No, 643, , Notice
Of the ttme, date end place of the hearing shill be g~ven as
1
protided tn Section 18.26(c). in the event that an sppeats
heard by a County Hearing Officer ind the o~ner of the property
to wh4ch the perrata or variance a plies does not prevatl 4n the
~ppeal, the ~er shall not ~ obligated ~ p~ e~ heartng
costs, In t~ event that an ~peal ts ~ard b~ ~ ~unty Hearth9
Offtcer end t~ o~er of the pro~r~ ~ ~tch the ~mtt or
t ~er shall not ~
vartance applhs prevatls In t~ appeaq, ~
obqtgated to pay all hearing costs.
199
(4)
(s)
(6)
(7)
(S)
(e)
TESTIMONY UNDEP. OATH. All testimony at the hearing shall be
taken under Oath.
NOTICE OF DECISION. Notice of the Planning Cmwntssion or
Planntng Council's dectston and a report of the proceedings shall
be filed wtth the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors not later
than 15 daJs following the date the dectston ts adopted. A copy
of the notice and the report shall he mailed to the applicant and
filed ~th the Clerk of
Planntng C~,,,,tsston or Planntng Counctl ~es not reach a ~clston
~e to a tie ~te, such fact shall N ~ported ~ the Board of
~rHso~ tn the s~e manner and ~th(n the sine ttme for
rearring ~ctstons and ~ch e fatlure to ~ach I ~clston shall
const1 tote affi mance of the But 1 ·ng Dt rector's rawcat( on of
the ~mtt or variance.
PLACENENT ~ ~TTER ON ~A~'S tENDA. The Chrk of the Board of
~r~so~ shall place the Nottce of hctston on the Board's
agenda for the next ~gular met~ng to N held following the
lapse of 5 da~ after the Notice is ftled wtth the Board.
T~SFER TO ~A~ OF ~PERVZ~ ON ~PE~. The ~vocatton or
non-re,carton of a ~mtt or vertance by the Planntng C~tsston
or Planntng Council shall ~ ftnal unless, ~th~n ten (~O)days
follo~ng the matter at ~tch the Nottce of hdston was on the
ageride of the Board of ~pervtsors, the fo11~ng occur:
a. An apHal to the Board of Su~rdso~ is ma~ by t~ o~er of
the property ~tch is the subject of the ~vocat~on
proceedings, or
b. The Board of ~pervtsors or~ the matter transferred to
for furt~r p~ceefngs.
FURTHER PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE ~ OF ~PERVZSORS. if etaher
of t~ acttons mentToned tn paragraphs a. and b. of hbsectton 7
above are taken, the Board of ~pervtso~ ma~:
a. Refuse to redw the Planntng C~tss(on or Planntng
Counct1's ~ctsfon, tn ~tch case t~ ,ctston shall
ftnal, or
b. Review a transcript or ~cordlng of the testtmo~ and all
other evilrice tntro~ced kfore the Planntng C~isston or
revere the ~dston of the n o 1 n~ng
Courtall or ~hr t~ matter ~ck ~ the Planning Cm(ss(on '
or Planning Council for the tekt of further evidence or
heartrig additional argment tn ~h~ch case nottce shell be
given to the owner of the propor~ ~hich ts the subject of
the proceedtngs, or
C. Set the matter for hearing before ~tself. At such heartrig
the Board of Suporv~sors shall hear and decide the matter de
novo is tf no prior hearing had been held. Nottce of the
ttme, date end place of the publtc hearing shall he given as
provided tn Section 28.26(c).
ACTION BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. The decision of the Board
Superdsors on revocation of a permit or variance ts final.
200
ATTACHMENT NO. 7
LETTERS OF CORRESPONDENCE/PUBLIC COMMENT
STAFFRPT\CUP6 34
RECE::IVEO ,tAN 9 199f
i/.5"
January 7, 1991
Temecula Planning Department
P.O. Box 3000
Temecula, California 92390
Reference: Conditional Use Permit #6
Dear Sirs:
As a property owner and businessman located at 43225
Business Park Drive, Temecula, this letter will convey
my acceptance of EVENT PLANNERS OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
conducting operations in the Business Park.
~:~
cc: Pam Jandt
President
Event Planners of Southern California
PROFESSIONAL HOSPITAL SUPPLY, INC.
43225 Business Park Drive · P. O. Box 9010 · Rancho California, CA 92390-7030
January 10, 1991
Temecula Planning Department
P.O. Box 3000
Temecula, CA 92390
Subject: Use Permit #6
Gentlemen:
The proposal for the Temecula Valley Conference Center is not met with any
enthusiasm from the people at Opto 22. In fact, the general reaction is one of
strong opposition for several very good reasons:
We originally chose the eight acre site in the Rancho California Business Park
for our high-tech manufacturing and R&D center because of the quiet campus like
atmosphere. We are building a facility that will have more than four acres of
beautiful landscaping which will include a sculpture garden, employee
recreation area with picnic tables, volley ball court, etc. The thought of
having hundreds of the general public parking and partying across from this
facility will certainly create additional security and tempting trespassing
problems that should not be necessary.
It is our opinion a general public commercial type enterprize as described is
inappropriate for this business park and would diminish its character and
desirability.
Very truly yours
OPTO 22
R. G. Engman
President
URZ O
Vineyard & Wine
January 7 1991
City of Temecula
Planning Commission
Conditional Use Permit #6
Dear Sir,
The Cilurzo Vineyard and Winery wishes to support the de-
velopment of a new Meeting and Convention Center in the city
of Temecula. We feel this will bring more tourists to this
valley. This will increase sales at many many business~ including
ours. Temecula will grow as a city only with a strong economy
to support her citizens.
audrey Cilurzo
41220 Calle Contento · P.O. Box 775 · Temecula. California 92390 · (714) 676-5250
RECEIVED ,JAN 16 1991
' ,' WINDSOR PARTNERS
January 14, 1991
City of Temecula
Planning Department
P.O. Box 3000
Temecula, CA 92390
4308 Business Park Dr~ve
Gentlemen:
We are the property owner of Windsor Park I, located at 43172-43180
Business Park Drive. We are aware that the applicant Event
Planners of Southern California is applying for the above
conditional use permit.
We do not have any objections to the issuance of this permit
provided that the applicant follows their "Statement of Purpose",
particularly those conditions relating to large events not being
held weekdays which could create severe traffic problems within the
park.
Sincerely,
Matthew Pollack
MHP:mp
Cc: Event Planners
29377 Rancho California Road, Suite 200
Ternecula, CA 92390 (714) 676-8400
FAX (714) 676-8554
January 17, 1991
City of Temecula
Planning Department
P.O. Box 3000
Temecula, CA 92390
To whom it may concern:
The Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce encourages support of the
concept of establishing a meeting and conference center in
Temecula.
We hope that you will evaluate all requests received by you as
there is real immediate need for assemblage within the community
and the more visitors that come to Temecula, the stronger our
local economy will be. In addition, we feel that the growing
number of restaurants, motels, gift shops, antique stores and the
fourteen wineries will be of great interest to visitors who will
attend the various conferences held at a center of this
magnitude.
Sincerely,
Leigh Engdahl
General Manager
40945 County Center Drive, Suite C, Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 676-5090
ATTACHMENT NO. 8
FEE CHECKLIST
STAFFRPT\CUP6 35
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CASE NO.: Conditional Use Pemit No. 6 (CUP 6)
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this
project.
Fee
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Rat)
Parks and Recreation
( Quimby )
Public Facility
( Traffic Mitigation )
Public Facility
( Traffic Signal Mitigation )
Public Facility
{Library)
Fire Protection
Flood Control
(ADP)
Condition of Approval
N/A
N/A
Condition No. 22
( EngineeringDepartment )
Condition No. 20/21
( EngineeringDepartment )
N/A
N/A
N/A
STAFFRPT\CUP6 36
ITEM #2
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
MarGh 4, 1991
Case No.: Parcel Map No. 22629
Prepared By: Steve Jiannino
Recommendation: Approve Second Extension of Time for Parcel Map No. 22629
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
Centennial Engineering
Centennial Engineering
For a Second Extension of Time for Parcel Map No.
22629, a 4 lot subdivision on 4.83 acres.
West side of Green Tree Lane, 300 feet north of
Pauba Road.
R-R, Rural Residential
North:
South:
East:
West:
R-R, Rural Residential
R-R, Rural Residential
R-R, Rural Residential
R-R, Rural Residential
Not requested
Vacant
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant
Vacant
Single Family Residential
Private School
Lot area: 4.8 acres
Number of Lots: 4
Min. lot size: 1.1 acres
Max. lot size: 1.3
Parcel Map No. 22629 was originally approved by the
County Planning Director September 4, 1987 with
the approval being received and filed by the Board
of Supervisors, October 13, 1989. The County
approved the First Extension of Time for Parcel Map
STAFFRPT\PM22629
ANALYSIS:
GENERAL PLAN AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
FINDINGS:
No. 22629 on September 12, 1989, which extended
the Parcel Map approval to October 13, 1990. The
current request is for a Second Extension of Time
which will extend the map approval to October 13,
1991.
Parcel Map No. 22629 is a four lot residential
subdivision of u,.8 acres. The smallest lot is 1.1
acres. The site is located east of Linfield School
and north of Pauba Road. The project has been
reviewed by the Development Review Committee
(DRC) at a Pre-DRC and Formal DRC meeting.
Staff has added Conditions of Approval to this
project to be consistent with current City
Standards.
The project density of. 83 DU/AC is consistent with
the Southwest Area Community Plan (SWAP). The
project is also consistent with the R-R (Rural
Residential) zoning for the site. Therefore, Staff
finds it probable that this project will be consistent
with the new General Plan when it is adopted.
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the City's
future General Plan, which will be completed
in a reasonable time and in accordance with
State Law, due to the fact that the project is
consistent with the existing SWAP
designations and current zoning on the site.
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to or interference with
the future and adopted General Plan, if the
proposed use or action is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact
that the project is in conformance with
existing and anticipated land use and
development within the area.
The proposed use or action complies with
state planning and zoning laws, due to the
fact that the proposed use conforms with
those uses listed as "allowed" within the
project site's existing R-R ( Rural
Residential) zoning for the site.
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configuration, circulation
patterns, access, and density, due to the
STAFFRPT\PM22629 2
10o
fact that; adequate area is provided for all
proposed residential structures.
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the public health or
welfare, due to the fact that the conditions
stated in the approval are based on mitigation
measures necessary to reduce or eliminate
potential adverse impacts of the project.
Parcel Map No. 22629 is compatible with
surrounding land uses. The harmony in
scale, bulk, height, density and coverage
creates a compatible physical relationship
with adjoining properties, due to the fact
that the proposal is similar in compatibility
with surrounding land uses.
The proposal will not have an adverse effect
on surrounding property because it does not
represent a significant change to the present
or planned land use of the area,due to the
fact that the proposed project is consistent
with the current zoning of the subject site
R-R, ( Rural Residential ), and also consistent
mwith the adopted Southwest Area Community
Plan (SWAP) designation of 1 acre minimum.
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the built or natural
6nvi ronment.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed projects, due to
the fact that this is clearly represented in the
site plan and the project analysis.
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits and environmental documents
associated with these applicants and herein
incorporated by reference, due to the fact
that they are referenced in the attached Staff
Report, Exhibits, Environmental Assessment,
and Conditions of Approval.
STAFFRPT\PM22629 3
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Department Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission:
APPROVE the Second Extension of Time for
Parcel Map No. 22629 subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval, based on the
findings contained in the Staff Report.
SJ: mb
Attachments:
Conditions of Approval
Exhibits
STAFF R PT\PM22629
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Parcel Map No: 22629
Project Description: Four (4) lot Residential
Subdivision of 4.8 acres.
Assessor's Parcel No.: 946-070-010
Planninq Department
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance L~60, Schedule G, unless
modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in
accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request,
if made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
This conditionally approved tentative map will expire four years after the
original approval date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance ~,60. The
expiration date is October 1:3, 1991.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the
provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate fee set forth in
that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions
of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by
Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat
Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer or his assignee must
conform to the park district Quimby Ordinance, unless waived to time of
issuance of a building permit.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
The project must comply with all the Conditions of Approval adopted by the
Planning Director and the Board of Supervisors for the original Parcel Map
No. 22629. ~
STAFFRPT\PM22629 5
Enqineering Department
The following are the Engineering Department Conditions of Approval for this
project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Engineering
Department.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act,
and all applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions.
The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor or registered
Civil Engineer, subject to all the requirements of the State of California
Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance No. L~60.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
9. The developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control district;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Engineering Department;
Riverside County Health Department; and
CATV Franchise.
10.
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformance with applicable City standards.
11.
Street improvements, including, but not limited to, aggregate base and
graded road section.
Improvement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending a
minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and alignment
as approved by the City Engineer.
12.
The subdivider shall submit four copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
13.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing
Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The
charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits.
If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to
STAFFRPT\PM22629 6
this property, no new charge needs to be paid.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
Construct street improvements including but not limited to, aggregate base
and graded road section.
15.
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities
imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public
facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the
project, in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim
or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally
established by the date on which Developer requests its building permits for
the project or any phase thereof, the Developer shall execute the Agreement
for Payment of Public Facility Fee, a copy of which has been provided to
Developer. Developer understands that said Agreement may require the
payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees) and specifically waives its right to protest
such increase.
Transportation Enqineerin.q
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
16.
A signing plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved
by the City Engineer for Via Telesio and shall be included on the street
improvement plans.
17.
Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering
for the design requirements.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
18.
A construction area traffic control plan shall be designed by a registered Civil
Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for any street closure and detour
or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the City Engineer.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
19. All signing shall be installed per the approved signing plan.
20.
All Conditions of Approval stated in the County Road Department letter dated
September ~,, 1987 shall still apply to this project.
STAFFRPT\PM22629 7
CITY OF TEMECULA
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
QUIMBY ORDINANCE
The amount of land to be dedicated, or fees paid, shall be based on the residential density of the subdivisic
The residential density shall be determined by inultiplying the numbei of dwelling u_nits by the number of
persons per unit by the ratio of the number of acres of park land required for each 1,000 persons (i.e., .005).
Credits given for proposed parks will be under the discretion of the Temecula Community Services District
(TCSD) Director.
Whenever the actual amount of land to be dedicated is less than the amount of land required to be dedicated,
the subdivider shall pay fees for the fair market value of any additional land that otherwise would have been
required to be dedicated plus 20% for offsite improvements.
For subdivisions containing 50 parcels or less only the payment of fees may be required; provided however,
that when condominium project, stock cooperative or community apartment project exceeds 50 dwelling units,
the dedication of land may be required even though the number of parcels may be less than 50.
~ulxr~isio~s mntm~ less than h f~l psculs waT bo subject ~o ttm followiog oom~ions: Upo~ tho rocluest of m
approval of a tentafi~ map, larci maD, or planned develapnlent, real estate developmenf, ~ cooperMire,
commimibl aparlment project and cendominium for which · tentative map or parcel map is filed, a p, jd~,,,;ned
Ouimby Act fee in the amo~t equal ~e the fai, market value of required acreage (Plus 20%
xha# be paid by the owner of eech such pan:e//s) as a~ ~ the issuance of xuch permit as authorbed '
The following chart has been prepared to assist staff in calculating requirements of the existing Quimby
Ordinance:
Dwellinps T__vpe
l(ea) Single Family (Detached Garage)
l(ea) Single Family (Attached Garage)
l(ea) Mobile home
2(ca) Dwellings Units Per Structure
3 or 4(ca) Dwelling Units Per Structure
5 or More Dwelling Units Per Structure
* Plus 20% for offsite improvements.
The purpose of this document is for internal staff use only.
Gary L. King, Park Development Coordinator CrCSD)
Acres Required*
.01490
.01295
.01360
.01320
.01240
.01170
PLANNING DZRECTOR'S APPROVAL DATE: 9-4-87
RXVERSXDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTIIENT
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL FlAP 110. 22629
1. The subdivider shall defend, tndenntf and hold hamless the County of
Riverside, its agents, officers, and em;;~yees from any clatm, action, or
proceeding against the County of Riverside or its agents, officers, or
employees to attack, set aside, void or annul an approval of the County
of RIverside, its advtsory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body
concerning PH 22629 , ~htch action is brought wtthtn the time
pertod provided for tn California Governnent Code Section 66499.37. The
f
County o Riverside ~tll promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim,
actton, or proceeding agatnst the County of RIverside and wtll cooperate
fully in the defense. If the County fatls to promptly notify the
subdivider of any such claim, actton, or proceeding or fails to Cooperate
fully In the defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter, be responsible
to defend, tndsntfy, or hold harmless the County of RIverside.
2. The tentative <~arcel map shall confom to the requirements of Ordinance
460, Schedule unless modified by the conditions 11sted below. This
approved tenta'~ve parcel map will exptre t~o years after the approval
date of 10-13-87 unless extended as provided by Ordinance 460.
e
e
The ftnal map shall be prepared by a registered ctvtl engineer or licensed
land surveyor subject to all the requirements of the State of California
Subdivision Hap Act, Riverside CoMnty Subdivision Ordinance 460.
All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the publtc and shall
continue in frce unttl the governing body accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from
all encumbrances as
approved
by the County Road Commissioner. Street names shall be subject to
approval of the Road Commissioner.
[assents, when requtred for roadway slopes, dratnage facilities,
utl]tttes, etc., shah be sho,n on the final map if wtthtn the ]and
ha ] provide for
dtvtston boundary. All offers of dedication s 1
nonexclusive publtc road and utility access. All easerents, offers of
dedication and conveyances shall be submitted and recorded as directed by
the RIverside County Surveyor.
Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the
parcel map boundary to a County maintained road.
All delinquent property taxes shall be pald prtor to recordatton of the
ftnal map.
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 22629
Conditions of Approval
Page 2
Prior to any grading, a Grading Plan in compliance with the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70, as amended by Ordinance 457, shall be submitted to the
County Department of Building and Safety.
The subdivider shall comply with the street improvement recommendations
outlined in the County Road Department's letter dated 7-29-87, a copy of
which is attached.
10.
The subdivider shall comply with the. environmental health recommendations
outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated 6-26-87, a
copy of which is attached.
11.
The subdivider shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined
in the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated 7-28-87, a
copy of which is attached. If the land division lies within an adopted
flood control drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of Riverside County
Land Division Ordinance 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area
drainage facilities shall be collected by the Road Commissioner prior to
recordation of the final map or waiver.of parcel map.
12.
The subdivider shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined
in the County Fire Department's letter dated 7-28-87, a copy of which is
attached.
GRADING
t3.
Grading plans shall conform to the Hillside Development Standards as presented
in the Comprehensive General Plan. ~ll cut and/or fill slopes, or individual
combinations thereof, which exceed ten feet in vertical height shall be
modified by an appropriate combination of a special terracing (benching) plan,
increased slope ratio (e.g. 3:1}, retaining walls, and/or slope planting
combined with irrigation. All driveways shall not exceed a 15% grade.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits a qualified paleontologist shall be
retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the proposed
grading with respect to potential paleontological impacts. Should the
paleontologist find the potential is high for impact to significant resources,
a pre-grade meeting between the paleontologist and the excavation and
grading contractor shall be arranged. When necessary, the paleontologist
or representative shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect
or halt grading activity to allow recovery of fossils. The paleontologist
shall inform the Planning Department in writing of the outcome of grading
operations with regard to impacts and/or mitigations required.
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.
Conditions of Approval
Page 3
22629
AGENCIES
15.
All proposed construction shall comply with the California Institute of
Technology, Palomar Observatory recor~nendations dated 6-30-87, a copy
of which is attached.
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
16.
No building permits shall be issued by the County of Riverside for any
residential lot/unit within the project boundary until the developer,
or the developer's successors-in-interest provides evidence of compliance
with public facility financing measures. A cash sum of one-hundred
dollars ($100} pe~ lot/unit shall be deposited with the Riverside County
Department of Building and Safety as mitigation for public library
development.
17. All lots created by this land division shall have a minimum area of 1.13
acres gross.
18.
When lots are crossed by major public utility easements, each lot shall
have a net usable area of not less than 3600 square feet, exclusive of
the utility easement.
19. All lot length to width ratios shall be in conformance with Section 3.8C
of Ordinance 460.
20. Corner lots shall be provided with additional area pursuant to Section
3.8B of Ordinance 460.
21. Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the development
standards of the R-R zone.
ENVRIONMENTAL CONSTRAINT SHEET CONDITIONS
22.
An Environmental Constraints Sheet {ECS) shall be prepared with the final
map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently
filed with the office of the County Surveyor. Prior to the recordation
of the final map, a copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning
Department for review and approval. The approved ECS shall be forwarded
with copies of the recorded final map to the Planning Department and the
Department of Building and Safety.
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 22629
Conditions of Approval
Page 4
23.
24.
25.
The following note shall be placed on the final map: "Constraints affecting
this property are shown on the accompanying Environmental Constraints Sheet,
the original of which is on file at ~he office of the Riverside County
Surveyor. These constraints affect all parcels."
The following note shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet:
"This property is located within thirty (30} miles of Mount Palomar
Observatory. Light and glare may adversely impact operations at the
Observatory. Outdoor lighting shall be from low pressure sodium lamps
that are oriented and shielded to prevent direct illumination above the
horizontal plane passing through the luminare."
A note shall be placed on the ECS indicating the availability of domestic
water services to'the subject property as of the date of recordation of
the final map.
LD:me
7-31-87
leRoy D. Srlloot
OFFICE OF ROAD COMMISSIONER 6 COUNTY SURVEYOR
September 4, 1987
Riverside County Planning Commission
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside, CA92501
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re: Parcel Map 22629
Schedule H - Team I
Amended at Director Hearing 9-4-87
With respect to the conditions of approval for the referenced tentative land
division map, the Road Depart~nent recommends that the landdiviaer provia, the
following street improvement plans and/or road dedications in accordance with
Ordinance 460 and Riverside County Road Improvement Standards (Ordinance 461).
It is understood that the tentative map correctly shows acceptable centerline
profiles, all existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses with
appropriate O's, and that their omission or unacceptability may requi re the map
to be resubmitted for further consideration. These Ordinances and the following
conditions are essential parts and a requirement occurring in ONE is as binding
as though occurring in all. They are intended to be complementary! and to
describe the conditions for a complete design of the i~provement. All questions
regaPdipg the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to .the Road
Commissioner's Office.
The landdivider shall protect downstream properties from damages
caused by alteration of the drainage patterns, i.e., concentra-
tion of diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by
cdnstructi~g adequate drainage facilities including enlarging
existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement or by
both. All drainage easements shall be shov~ on the final map
and noted as follows: "Drainage Easement - no building,
obstructions, or encroachments by land fills are allowed". The
protection shall be as approved by the Road Department.
The landdivider shall accept and properly dispose of all offsite
drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the
Road Commissioner permits the use of streets for drainage
purposes, (he provisions of Article XI of Ordinance No. 460
will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street
capacity or the use of streets be prohibited for drainage
Purposes, the subdivider shall provide adequate drainage
facilities as approved by the Road Department.
Parcel Nap 22629
a~ly-2g,-;gi7 September 4, 1987
"qe 2
.nded at Director Hearing 9-4-87
The required improvements are reflected in the following
conditions shall be completed or a Performance Security
in lieu thereof shall be posted in accordance with
Riverside County Ordinance 460, Article XV, prior to
recordation of the final map. The improvements are
required based on the following findings:
a) The improvements are a necessary prerequisite to the
orderly development of the surrounding area.
b) The improvements are necessary for the public health and
safety.
4. Corner cutbacks in conformance with County Standard No. 805 shall be
shown on the final map.
Prior to the recordation of the final map, or the granting of a
waiver of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Riverside County Road Department, a cash sum of $150.00 per lot
as mitigation for traffic signal impacts.
6. The minimum centerline radii shall be as approved by the Road
Department.
'7. 'All centerline intersections shall be at 90° or as approve~ by the
Road Department.
Fuhnnan Court (Via Telesio) shall be improved with 24 feet of
acceptable Aggregate Base (0.33' thick) on a 32 foot graded section
within a 60 foot full width dedicated right of way as approve~ by
the Road Commissioner.
* -9;--GPee~-l~Pee-Re,~-sha~-b~-tmp~Qved-wttb-24-(mmt-o£_acceptab).e._
Aggregrt~-Be~-(-O~))L-tun+c4r)~)e-~-3~-fon:K~-gradeq~-s~tforr-wftt~frr-a
C~eiss+o~r.
qJOe
Improvement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending
a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and
alignment as approved by the Riverside County Road Commissioner.
Completion of road improvements does not imply acceptance for maint-
enance by County.
An access road to the nearest road maintained for public use shall
be constructed with a 24' graded section within a mintmum 40' part
width right of way in accordance with an approved centerline profile
as approved by the Road Commissioner.
Parcel ,~p 22629
a~y-99v-~98~- September 4, 1987
Pa~e 3 ,
~,~led at Director Hearing 9-4-87
GH:lh
Very truly yours,
Gus Hughes
Road Division Engineer
*9. Green Tree Road shall be 30' half width right of way only within a 60
foot full width dedicated Tight of way as approved by the Road Commissioner.
tAmended at Director Hearing 9-4-87
KENNETH I_. EDWARDS uies NANKIT I'TRJEET
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
July 28, 1987
Riverside County
Planning Department
County Administrative Center
Riverside, California
Attention: Regional Team No. 1
Laurie Dobson
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re: Parcel Map 22629
Parcel Map 22629 is a proposal to divide 4.8 acres into 4 lots
the Temecula Valley area, on the west side of Green Tree Lane
about 300 feet north of Pauba Road.
in
Runoff in a natural watercourse that drains an area of about 30
acres traverses Parcel 2.
Following are the District's recommendations:
This parcel map is located within the limits of the Mur-
rieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan for which
drainage fees have been adopted by the Board. Drainage
fees shall be paid as set forth under the provisions of
the "Rules and Regulations for Administration of Area
Drainage Plans", amended July 3, 1984:
Drainage fees shall be paid to the Road Commissioner
as part of the filing for record of the subdivision
final map or parcel map, or if the recording of a
final parcel map is waived, drainage fees shall be
paid as a condition of the waiver prior to recording
a certificate of compliance evidencing the waiver of
the parcel map; or
At the option of the land divider, upon filing a re-
quired affidavit requesting deferment of the payment
of fees, the drainage fees shall be paid to the
Building Director at the time of issuance of a grad-
ing permit or building permit for each approved par-
cel, whichever may be first obtained after the
recording of the subdivision final map or parcel map;
however,
Riverside County
Planning Department
Re: Parcel Map 22629
- 2 - July 28, 1987
Drainage fees shall be paid to the Road Commissioner
as a part of the filing for record of the subdivision
final map or parcel map, or before receiving a waiver
to record a land division, for each lot within the
land division where construction activity as evi-
denced by one of the following actions has occurred
since May 26, 1981:
(a) A grading permit or building permit has been
obtained.
(b) Grading or structures have been initiated.
The natural watercourse that traverses Parcel 2 should be
delineated and labeled on the environmental constraint
sheet. A note should be placed on the environmental con-
straint sheet stating that the watercourses must be kept
free of all buildings and obstructions.
A copy of the environmental constraint sheet and the
final map should be submitted to the District for review
and approval prior to recordation of the final map.
Questions concerning this matter may be referred to Stuart
McKibbin of this office at 714/787-2333.
Very truly yours,
KENNETH L. EDWARDS
Chief Engineer
JOHN H. KASHUBA
Senior Civil Engineer
cc: Centennial Engineering
SEM:bjp
FIRE DEPARTMENT
RAY HEBRARD
FIRE CHIEF
Plannlnl & Engineering Office
7-28-87 4080 Lemon Street, Suite II
Riverside, CA 92501
(714) 787-6606
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ATTN: TEAM
RE: PM 22629
With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land division,
the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided
in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection
standards:
FIRE PROTECTION
Schedule "H" fire protection. An approved standard fire hydrant (6"x4"x2½"),
shall be located so that no portion of the frontage of any lot is more than
500 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 500 GPM for 2 hours
duration at 20 PSI.
The applicant/developer shall provide written certification from the appropriate
water company that the required fire hydrants are either existing or that
financial arrangements have been made to provide them.
MITIGATION FEES
Prior to the. recordation of the final ~ap, the developer shall deposit, with the
Riverside County Fire Department, a cash sum of $400.00 per lot/unit as mitigation
for fire protection impacts.
All questions regarding the meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the
Fire Department Planning and Engineering staff.
MICHAEL E. GRAY, Planning Officer
DATE: dune'23, 1987
TO:
Assessor
Building and Safety
Surveyor Dave Duda
Road Department
Health
Fire Protection
Flood Control District
Fish & Game
LAFCO Doug Vierra
RECEIVED
JUN 3 0 1987
PALO MAR OBSER~:,~IORY
Calif. Native Plant Soc.
Rancho Calif. Water
Southern Calif. Edison
Southern galif. Gas
General Telephone'
Temecula Chamber of Commerce
Regional Water Quality Control Bd #g
Temecula Union School Dist.
Mt, Palomar
Valleywide Parks & Rec.
County Library
Commissioner Bresson
PARCEL NAP 22629 - (Tm-1) - E.A. 31726 -
Centennial Engineering, Inc. - Rancho
California District - First Supervisori~
District - West of Freen Lane, North of
Pauba Road - R-R Zone - Schedule G - No
Waiver - 4.83 acres into 4 lots - NOd 1
- A.P. 923-430-002
Please review the case described above, along with the attached case map. A Land
Division Committee meeting has been tentatively scheduled for July 30, 1987. If it clear
it will then go to public hearing.
Your comments and recommendations are requested prior to July 16, 1987 in order that we
may include them in the staff report for this particular case.
Should you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact
Laurie Dobson at 787-1363
Planner
COMMENTS:
PLEASE SEE ATTACHED
DATE: 6/30/87 SIGNATURE
PLEASE print name and title
Dr. Robert~:ato/Assistant Director/Palomar
4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787-6181
46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304
INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201
(619) 342-8277
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
This case is within 30 miles of the Palomar Observatory and is therefore
within the zone requiring the use of low-pressure sodium vapor lamps for
street lighting, as stipulated by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors.
We request that the design for other types of outdoor lighting that may be
employed on this property be made consistent with the spirit of the decision
of the Board of Supervisors which is intended to mitigate the adverse effects
such facilities have on Zhe astronomical research at Palomar. Beneficial
steps to that end include:
1. Use the minimum amount of light needed for the task.
2. Orient and shield light to prevent direct upward illumination.
3. Turn off lights at 11:00 p.m. (or earlier) unless, in commercial
applications, the associated business is open past that time, in which
case the lights should be turned off at closing.
Use low-pressure sodium lamps for roadways, walkways, equipment yards,
parking lots, security and other similar applications. These lights
need not be turned off at 11:00 p.m.
For further information, call (818) 356-4035.
Robert J. Brucato
Assistant Director
DATE: June 23, 1987
TO:
Assessor
Building and Safety
Surveyor Dave Duda
Road Department
Health
Fire Protection
Flood Control District
Fish & Game
LAFCO Doug Vierra
RiVER3iDE COUrt;,u
'PLAnnin( DEP&RDilEn;
Calif. Native Plant Soc.
Rancho Calif. Water
Southern Calif. Edison
Southern Calif. Gas
General Telephone
Temecula Chamber of Con~erce
Regional Water Quality Control Bd #9
Temecula Union School Dist.
Mt. Palomar
Valleywide Parks & Rec.
County Library
Commi ssi oner Bresson
RIVERSIDE PUBtIC
LIBRARY
PARCEL MAP 22629 - (Tm-1) - E.A. 31726 -
Centennial Engineering, Inc. - Rancho
California District - First Supervisoria'
District - West of Freen Lane, North of
Pauba Road - R-R Zone - Schedule G - No
Waiver - 4.83 acres into 4 lots - MOd 11
- A.P. 923-430-002
Please review the case described above, along with the attached case map. A Land
Division Committee meeting has been tentatively scheduled for July 30, 1987. If it clears
it will then go to public hearing.
Your comments and recommendations are requested prior to July 16, 1987 in order that we
may include them in the staff report for this particular case.
Should you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact
Laurie Dobson at 787-1363
Planner
COMMENTS:
PLEASE print name and title
4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787-6181
46-2Og OASIS STREET, ROOM 304
INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201
(619) 342-8277
COUNTY OF RIVEESIDE DEPAI{IHEHT OF III:,AL,||I
ENVIRONMENTAL IIEAL'fll SERVICES DIVISI(JH
LAND USE SECTION
3575 Eleventi~ Street Mall
Riverside, CA 92501
PARCEL HAP
REG1OHAL TEAH
DATE .:
WATER SOURCE: ~Gncho
PARENT P.M. (~f Any)
~c~ncAo C~ h'f. A.EA/DiSI'.Ic'r
SCItEDULE C') ORD. 460
TIlE DEPAR'fl'tEHT OF IIEAI.,TII IIAS I(EVIEWED TIlE HAP DESCRIBED ABOVE. IF
THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING 'I'llIS 'I'RANSHITTAL, COIlTACT 187-654.
OUR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE AS F(3LLOWS:
The Envkonmentil Health Services Division (EHSD) has reviewed the above
MIp and wh~e we am not privileged to receive any preliminary informmion relative to
aubeurf~r,e sewage disposal or connection to sewers or domestic wator lupply, It
our considered opinion that the soil8 that might be encountered In this area rrmy not
be conducive to effective subsurface sewage disposal Some dlf~ouity my be
countered In effluent dtspos~I from individ'd:~] s~wage disposal systems ~nd
of anti characteristics in the -:r~ a th~.r~. i'~:~y b~ a rcquimment for extensive grading,
~ompactlon, cutting, et~. Prior 'Z3 recordai~c:n of the final map, an Ic~epteMI IOII8
feasibility report slmll be submitted fc~ review and approval by the EHSD.
Thls Parcel map indicates the! Rc~nc. ho C~I;~. t/Joker D;,tt-,
will s~rv~ the loll,. Thi,~ D~;,,partment has not rl~4vad an~
offtc.~al cer~,'fi,-.~T'4on fr~n t,'~t water compmqy Indicatlni llml!
ttlllh~rtess and ~le~,irs to do so. Therefore, no eertlfh~tloa
for e water dl~trtbutl~ sy~.m or connection It wml.,
FOR IlLDUlY DIRECIDR OF
HEALIll FDR EHViIRIZHI'F~'q'EAL
HEALIll
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CASE NO.: Second Extension of Time,
Parcel Map No. 22629
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this
project.
Fee
Habitat Conservation Plan
{K-Rat)
Parks and Recreation
(Quimby)
Public Facility
~ Traffic Mitigation )
Public Facility
{ Traffic Signal Mitigation )
Public Facility
{Library)
Fire Protection
Flood Control
(ADP)
Condition of Approval
Condition No. 3
Condition No. ~,
Condition No. 15
Condition No. 5
( County Roads)
Original Conditions of
Approval No. 16
Letter Dated 7-28-87
Letter Dated 7-28-87
STAFFRPT\PM22629 8
ITEM #3
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
March 4, 1991
Case No.: Plot Plan No. 217 (PP 217)
Prepared By: Charles Ray
Recommendation: The Planning Department Staff
recommends that the Planning
Commission:
1. ADOPT the Negative Declaration for
Plot Plan No. 217, and
2. ADOPT Resolution 91- approving
Plot Plan No. 217; based on the
analysis and findings contained in
the Staff Report and subject to
the attached Conditions of Approval.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
Herron and Rumansoff Architects, Inc.
Herron and Rumansoff Architects, Inc.
Request to construct a two-story retail/office
structure totaling 15,3Ll3 net leasable square feet on
a 1.2 acre (net) site.
~,1Li60 Sanborn Avenue (generally northeasterly of
the intersection of Date and Jefferson Streets)
M-SC (Manufacturing o Service Commercial)
North: M-SC ( Manufacturing
Commercial )
South: M-SC
East: M-SC
West: MoSC
Service
As existing; no change proposed.
Vacant, graded building pad
STAFFRPT\PP217 1
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant, Graded
Vacant, Urban Scrub
Vacant, Graded
Vacant, Graded
Site Area: 1.46 acres (Gross)
1.2 acres (Net)
Building Area:
1st Floor(Net Leasable Area) 13,543 sq.ft.
2nd Floor( Net Leasable Area) 1,800 sq.fto
Total Net Leasable Area:
Building Coverage:
Parking Provided:
Auto Spaces:
Class II Bike Racks:
15,343 sq.ft.
27.5% (lq,375 sq.ft. )
68 spaces
7 racks in an enclosed
secured area
Plot Plan No. 217 (PP 217) was submitted to the City
Planning Department for consideration on October
31, 1990. Initial Development Review Committee
assessment of the proposal was conducted on
November 21, 1991. The application was, at that
time, deemed incomplete requiring minor design
revisions and additional information.
Issues of substance are summarized below:
To facilitate traffic movement between parcels
within this subdivision, reciprocal access
should be provided between the project site
and the property adjacent to the north
(Parcels 8 and 7 respectively of Parcel Map
No. 23561-1 ).
A brief traffic analysis summarizing potential
project impacts of this proposal was required
in order to adequately assess project-specific
road/signalization improvements which may
be necessary.
Clarification of design guidelines governing
this project's architectural treatment(s),
landscaping provisions and necessary
streetscape improvements was requested.
This is information necessary to determine
baseline design elements required of this
project.
STAFFRPT\PP217 2
ANALYSIS:
Consideration of overall parking/building
area ratios allowing a variety of structural
occupancies should be considered.
Alternative trash enclosure site locations
should be investigated to determine
location ( s ) preferred by the contracted trash
pick-up service vis-a-vis that of the building
owner/occupants.
Bicycle parking is to be provided in
accordance with City Ordinance No. 3L~8
specifications, and is to be so indicated on
the project site plan.
Resolution of the above referenced issues is as
summarized within the following project analysis.
Land Use/Architectural Compatibility
The proposed use is identified as one of those
allowed under the subject site's current zoning
designation of manufacturing/service commercial
( Reference Exhibit B ). Additionally, it is
anticipated that like structures and uses will
eventually be constructed in the vicinity of the
project in question, as evidenced by the site design
guidelines provided by the applicant. These
guidelines govern overall development within the
underlying parcel map boundaries {Parcel Map No.
23651), and detail such criteria as acceptable
building/construction types, on-site landscaping
standards, and streetscape concepts and design
elements. Materials and design elements proposed
by the applicant is considered compatible with the
approved design criteria { Reference Exhibits F, H,
1.1, and 1.2). As such, the project is considered
compatible with current development standards
affecting the proposal site and neighboring
properties.
Site Access
Access to the site is provided by improved,
dedicated rights-of-way; i.e., Jefferson and
Sanborn Avenues | Reference Exhibit A ). Further,
the applicant has submitted a brief traffic analysis
addressing transportation system impacts this
proposal may eventually generate. Findings and
conclusions of this report have been reviewed and
STAFFRPT\PP217 3
accepted by the City Transportation Engineering
Department. Rights-of-way improvements deemed
necessary to mitigate potential transportation
system impacts of this proposal are as indicated in
the Transportation Engineering Department
Conditions of Project Approval.
Parking/On-Site Circulation
As summarized previously, alternative parking ratio
standards was initially requested as a proposal
redesign consideration. Subsequent discussions
with the applicant clarified the basis for parking as
currently provided, i.e., at this time the project
parking requirements are user-specific, based on
the total buirding area devoted to relatively passive
storage vis-a-vis more intensely utilized
office/commercial activities. As described by the
applicant, initial and anticipated project tenants are
likely to be similar in terms of necessary supportin9
parking improvements. As such, required
number( s ) and configuration ( s ) of parking spaces
should remain relatively static in the long term.
Current auto/bicycle parking allocated to this
proposal is considered adequate, and based on the
scenario above, should prove adequate over the life
of this proposal. Significant change in proposed
occupancy will mandate site/user-specific parking
demand analyses with corresponding modifications
to vehicle parking provisions.
The applicant has also incorporated design
allowances facilitating future reciprocal access
between the property in question and the northerly
adjacent parcel. Reciprocal access graphically
portrayed in Exhibit D is assured via recordation of
the Reciprocal Access Agreement specified as
Planning Department Condition No 13.
Alternative trash enclosure locations which might
facilitate trash truck circulation within the project
site were also investigated by the applicant. The
enclosure location currently indicated by Exhibit D
is considered appropriate by the proposaPs
prospective tenants as well as the affected trash
pick-up service.
STAFFRPT\PP217 4
GENERAL PLAN AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
FINDINGS:
The project, as proposed, conforms with existing
zoning ordinances affecting the subject property,
and is compatible with Southwest Area Plan {SWAP )
land use recommendations for the site and its
environs ( Reference Exhibit C ). As discussed
previously, the proposal is also compatible with
existing and anticipated development in its vicinity.
As such, it is likely Plot Plan No. 217 will be
consistent with the City's General Plan
recommendations for the property in question, upon
the plan's final adoption.
Pursuant to applicable portions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial
Environmental Assessment was prepared for Plot
Plan No. 217. Based on findings contained in that
assessment, it was determined the project in
question will not have a significant impact on the
bui It or natural environment; a Negative Declaration
of potential environmental impacts is recommended
for adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that Plot
Plan No. 217 will be consistent with the City's
future General Plan, which will be completed
in a reasonable time and in accordance with
State law. The project, as proposed,
conforms with existing applicable city zoning
and development ordinances. Further, the
proposal is characteristic of similar
development approved by the City to date
and respects design guidelines affecting the
subject property and its vicinity.
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference with
the City's future General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan. The project is of insignificant scale
in context of the broad goals and directives
anticipated in the City's General Plan.
The proposed use or action complies with
State planning and zoning laws. Reference
local Ordinances No. 348, 460; and California
Governmental Code Sections 65000-66009
(Planning and Zoning Law).
STAFFRPT\PP217 5
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configuration, circulation
patterns, access, and intensity of use.
Adequate site circulation, parking, and
landscaping are provided, as well as
sufficient area to appropriately construct the
proposed building, Reference Exhibits D and
F.
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the public health or
welfare. Reference the proposal's Initial
Environmental Assessment, (Attachment No.
3), and project Conditions of Approval
( Attachment No. 2 ).
The proposal will not have an adverse effect
on surrounding property, because it does not
represent a significant change to the present
or planned land use of the area. The project
conforms with applicable land use and
development regulations and reflects design
aspects currently existing in the proposal's
general vicinity and those specified in
previously approved project design
guidelines affecting the property in question.
The project has acceptable access to a
dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and
useable by, vehicular traffic. The project
draws access from Sanborn Avenue, a
dedicated City right-of-way currently
undergoing necessary improvements prior to
its acceptance within the City Maintained
Road System. Project access conforms with
applicable City Engineering standards and
ordinances.
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the built or natural
environment as determined in the initial study
performed for this project. Reference the
attached Initial Environmental Study and
Conditions of Approval for Plot Plan No. 217.
The design of the project together with the
type of supporting improvements are such
that they are not in conflict with easements
for access through, or use of the property
STAFFRPT\PP217 6
10.
within the proposed project. Reference the
proposed site design in the context of the
approved, underlying parcel map
configuration; Exhibit D, Site Plan and
Exhibit G, Parcel Map No. 23561-1.
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits and environmental documents
associated with this application and herein
incorporated by reference. Supporting
documentation is attached.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for
Plot Plan No. 217, and
ADOPT Resolution 91- approving
Plot Plan No. 217; based on the
analysis and findings contained in
the Staff Report and subject to
the attached Conditions of Approval.
CR:ks
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution
Conditions of Approval
Environmental Assessment
Exhibits
A. Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C. SWAP Recommended Land Use
D. Site Plan
E. 1. Floor Plan, 1st Story
2. Floor Plan, 2nd Story
F. Landscape Plan
G. Parcel Map No. 23561-1
H. Elevations
I. 1. Color Exterior
2. Materials
Fee Check List
STAFFRPT\PP217 7
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNINC COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDINC APPROVAL OF
PLOT PLAN NO. 217 TO CONSTRUCT 15,343 NET
LEASABLE SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL/OFFICE
STRUCTURE ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 1.2+/- NET
ACRES LOCATED AT 41460 SANBORN AVENUE AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 910-200-088.
WHEREAS, The Parkwest/Microase Partners filed Plot Plan No. 217 in
accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision
Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Plot Plan application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing
pertaining to said Plot Plan on March 4, 1991, at which time interested persons had
opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Plot Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission received a copy of the Staff Report
regarding the Plot Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findinqs. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
( 2 ) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
STAFFRPT\PP217 8
(a)
There is a reasonable probability that the
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
(b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
(C)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, ( hereinafter "SWAP" ) was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within
the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as
its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely
fashion with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed Plot Plan is consistent with the SWAP and
meet the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government
Code, to wit:
(1) The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The Planning Commission finds, in recommending
approval of projects and taking other actions, including
the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title,
each of the following:
a)
There is reasonable probability that Plot Plan
No. 217 proposed will be consistent with the
general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
STAFFRPT\PP217 9
c)
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
D. {1 ) Pursuant to Section 18.30(c), no plot plan may be
approved unless the following findings can be made:
The proposed use must conform to all the
General Plan requirements and with all
applicable requirements of state law and City
ordinances.
b)
The overall development of the land is
designed for the protection of the public
health, safety and general welfare; conforms
to the logical development of the land and is
compatible with the present and future logical
development of the surrounding property.
(2) ThePlanningCommission, inapprovingtheproposed
Plot Plan, makes the following findings, to wit:
a)
There is a reasonable probability that Plot
Plan No. 217 will be consistent with the City's
future General Plan, which will be completed
in a reasonable time and in accordance with
State law. The project, as proposed,
conforms with existing applicable city zoning
and development ordinances. Further, the
proposal is characteristic of similar
development approved by the City to date
and respects design guidelines affecting the
subject property and its vicinity.
b)
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference with
the City~s future General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan. The project is of insignificant scale
in context of the broad goals and directives
anticipated in the City~s General Plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complies with
State planning and zoning laws. Reference
local Ordinances No. 30,8, 0,60; and California
Governmental Code Sections 65000-66009
{Planning and Zoning Law).
STAFFRPT\PP217 10
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configuration, circulation
patterns, access, and intensity of use.
Adequate site circulation, parking, and
landscaping are provided, as well as
sufficient area to appropriately construct the
proposed building, Reference Exhibits D and
F.
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the public health or
welfare. Reference the proposal's Initial
Environmental Assessment, (Attachment No.
3), and project Conditions of Approval
( Attachment No. 2 ).
The proposal will not have an adverse effect
on surrounding property, because it does not
represent a significant change to the present
or planned land use of the area. The project
conforms with applicable land use and
development regulations and reflects design
aspects currently existing in the proposaPs
general vicinity and those specified in
previously approved project design
guidelines affecting the property in question.
The project has acceptable access to a
dedicated right-d-way which is open to, and
useable by, vehicular traffic. The project
draws access from Sanborn Avenue, a
dedicated City right-of-way currently
undergoing necessary improvements prior to
its acceptance within the City Maintained
Road System. Project access conforms with
applicable City Engineering standards and
ordinances.
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the built or natural
environment as determined in the initial study
performed for this project. Reference the
attached Initial Environmental Study and
Conditions of Approval for Plot Plan No. 217.
STAFFRPT\PP217 11
i)
The design of the project together with the
type of supporting improvements are such
that they are not in conflict with easements
for access through, or use of the property
within the proposed project. Reference the
proposed site design in the context of the
approved, underlying parcel map
configuration; Exhibit D, Site Plan and
Exhibit G, Parcel Map No. 23561-1.
j)
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits and environmental documents
associated with this application and herein
incorporated by reference. Supporting
documentation is attached.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Plot Plan
proposed conforms to the logical development of its proposed site, and
is compatible with the present and future development of the
surrounding property.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that although the
proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the
Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration,
therefore, is hereby granted.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves Plot
Plan No. 217 to construct 1~,597+/- gross square feet of commercial/office structure
located at 4140 Sanborn Avenue and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 910-200-088
subject to the following conditions:
A. Attachment No. 2, attached hereto.
SECTION 4.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day
of , 199
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
STAFFRPT\PP217 12
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held
on the ~,th day of March, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
STAFFRPT\PP217 13
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Plot Plan No: 217
Project Description:
two-story retail/office structure
15,343 net leasable square feet.
Assessor's Parcel No.: 910-200-088
(PP 217)
Request to construct a
tota I i nq
Planninq Department
The use hereby permitted by this plot plan is for construction of a two-story
retail/office structure totaling 15,343 net leasable square feet.
The permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officers, and employees from any claims, action, or
proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officers, or employees
to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Plot Plan
No. 217 (PP 217). The City of Temecula will promptly notify the permittee of
any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will
cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the
permittee of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in
the defense, the permittee shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend,
indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula.
This approval shall be used within two {2 ) years of 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 (2) year period
which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of
substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. This approval shall
expire on March 15, 1993.
The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as
shown on Plot Plan No. 217 marked Exhibit D, or as amended by these
conditions.
Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly
upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way.
The applicant shall comply with the Engineering Department~s Conditions of
Approval which are included herein.
STAFFRPT\PP217 14
10.
11.
12.
13.
Fire protection shall be provided in accordance with the appropriate section
of Ordinance No. 50,6 and the County Fire Warden~s Conditions of Approval
contained herein.
Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, three (3) copies of a
Parking, Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Plans shall be submitted to the
Planning Department of approval. The location, number, genus, species, and
container size of the plants shall be shown. Plans shall meet all requirements
of Ordinance No. 30,8, Section 18.12, and shall be accompanied by the
appropriate filing fee.
The applicant shall comply with Riverside County Department of Health
ConditiOns of Approval contained herein.
The applicant shall comply with the City Building and Safety Department's
Conditions of Approval included herein.
The applicant shall comply with the City Engineering Department's Conditions
of Approval included herein.
All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with approved landscape,
irrigation, and shading plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. An
automatic sprinkler system shall be installed and all landscaped areas shall be
maintained in a viable growth condition. Planting within ten (10) feet of an
entry or exit driveway shall not be permitted to grow higher than thirty (30)
inches.
Prior to construction of the reciprocal driveway/access point specified by
Condition No. 29, a minimum of 68 parking spaces shall be provided in
accordance with Section 18.12, Riverside County Ordinance No. 30,8. Parking
spaces shall be provided as shown on the Approved Exhibit O. The parking
area shall be surfaced with asphaltic concrete paving to a minimum depth of
3 inches on 0, inches of Class II base.
A minimum of 2 handicapped parking spaces shall be provided as shown on
Exhibit D. 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
if 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 not displaying distinguishing
placards or license plates issued for physically
handicapped persons may be towed away at owner's
expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed at
STAFFRPT\PP217 15
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
or by telephone
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 3 square feet in size.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain clearance
and/or permits from the following agencies:
Planning Department
Engineering Department
Environmental Health
School District
Fire Department
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the following additional plans shall
be submitted for Planning Department approval:
Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Plans.
A Plot Plan application for a Sign Program shall be submitted and approved by
the Planning Director prior to occupancy.
Building elevations shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on
Exhibit H.
Materials used in the construction of all buildings shall be in substantial
conformance with that shown on Exhibit I. 1 ( Color Elevations ) and Exhibit I. 2
( Materials Photo ).
Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from ground view. Screening
methodology/material shall be subject to Planning Department approval.
All trash enclosures shall be constructed prior to the issuance of occupancy
permits. As a minimum each enclosure shall be six feet in height and shall be
made with masonry block and a solid steel gate which screens the bins from
external view.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen canopy trees along
streets and within the parking areas. Landscaping shall comply substantially
with that proposed in concept by Exhibit F.
All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans
submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check approval
and shall comply with the requirements of Riverside County Ordinance No.
655.
Five (5) Class II bicycle racks shall be provided in convenient locations as
approved by the Planning Director to facilitate bicycle access to the project
area.
STAFFRPT\PP217 16
25.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, performance securities, in amounts
to be determined by the Director of Building and Safety to guarantee the
installation of planrings, walls, and fences in accordance with the approved
plan, and adequate maintenance of the Planting for one year, shall be filed
with the Department of Building and Safety.
26.
Landscaping streetscape ( s ) shall comply with previously approved streetscape
concepts contained in the Conditions of Approval/Design guidelines for Parcel
Map No. 23561, reference Exhibit F.
27.
Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, all required landscape planting
and irrigation shall have been installed and be in a condition acceptable to the
Director of Building and Safety. The plants shall be healthy and free of
weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed
and in good working order.
28.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
29.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall record an agreement
specifying rights of reciprocal access between Lots 7 and 8 of Parcel Map No.
23561-1. This agreement shall be reviewed and approved by City Counsel
prior to its recordation.
30.
Within forty-eight (48) hours of the approval of the project, the
applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand,
Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars ($1,275.00), which includes the One
Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars ($1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB
3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4{ d ) ( 2 ) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar ($25.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152
and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour
period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department
the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall
be void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section
711.4(c).
Enqineerinq Department
The following are the Engineering Department Conditions of Approval for this
project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Engineering
Department.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
STAFFRPT\PP217 17
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
31.
As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, the
developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Engineering Department;
Riverside County Health Department; and
CATV Franchise.
32.
The developer shall submit four (L~) prints of a comprehensive grading plan
to the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform
Building Code and Chapter 70 as may be additionally provided for in these
Conditions of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 2u,"x36'' mylar by a
Registered Civil Engineer.
33.
The developer shall submit four (u,) copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
3q.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid
and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office.
35.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing
Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The
charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits.
If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to
this property, no new charge needs to be paid.
36°
All concentrated drainage directed toward the public street shall be diverted
through the undersidewalk drains.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT:
37.
A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for
review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil
Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final
Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
38.
Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall deposit with the
Engineering Department a cash sum as established per acre as mitigation for
traffic signal impact.
39.
Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where
sidewalks meander through private property.
STAFFRPT\PP217 18
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATION OF OCCUPANCY:
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities
imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public
facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the
project, in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim
or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally
established by the date on which Developer requests its building permits for
the project or any phase thereof, the Developer shall execute the Agreement
for Payment of Public Facility Fee, a copy of which has been provided to
Developer. Developer understands that said agreement may require the
payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees) and specifically waives its right to protest
such increase.
Buildinq and Safety Department
Submit two (2) sets of plans to include plumbing, electrical, mechanical, and
structural drawings for review to Building and Safety.
Lighting on site and located on structures shall comply with Mount Palomar
Lighting Ordinance No. 655.
Applicant shall fill out an Application for Final Inspection. Allow two weeks
processing time to obtain all required clearances prior to final inspection.
School fees must be paid to Temecula Unified School District prior to issuance
of building permits.
Riverside County Fire Protection Department
With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced plot plan,
the fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided
in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection
standards:
45.
The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commercial buildings using the procedure established in
Ordinance 5L)6.
46.
Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 2250 GPM
for a 2 hour duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, which must be
available before any combustible material is placed on the job site.
A combination of on-site and offsite super fire hydrants (6"x~,'lx2 1/2 x 2
1/2), will be located not less than 25 feet or more than 165 feet from any
portion of the building as measured along approved vehicular travelways.
The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the
system.
STAFFRPT\PP217 19
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
The required fire flow may be adjusted at a later point in the permit process
to reflect changes in design, construction type, area separation or built-in
fire protection measures.
Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the
Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types,
location and spacing, and, the system shall meet the fire flow requirements.
Plans shall be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local
water company with the following certification: "1 certify that the design of
the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the
Riverside County Fire Department."
Install a complete fire sprinkler system in all buildings requiring a fire flow
of 15 GPM or greater. The post indicator valve and fire department
connection shall be located to the front, within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a
minimum of 25 feet from the building{ s) . A statement that the building{ s) will
be automatically fire sprinklered must be included on the title page of the
building plans.
Install a supervised waterflow monitoring fire alarm system. Plans must be
submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation, as per
UBC.
A statement that the building will be automatically fire sprinklered must
appear on the title page of the building plans.
Install panic hardware and exit signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform
Building Code.
Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes.
Install portable fire extinguishers with a minimum rating of 2A-10BC. Contact
a certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall be
responsible to submit a check or money order in the amount of $558.00 to the
Riverside County Fire Department for plan check fees.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall deposit with the
City of Temecula, a check or money order equaling the sum of 25 cents per
square foot as mitigation for fire protection impacts. This amount must be
submitted separately from the plan check review fees.
Blue-dot reflectors shall be mounted in private streets and driveways to
indicate location of fire hydrants. They shall be mounted in the middle of the
street directly in line with fire hydrants.
Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed in the
Building and safety Office.
STAFFRPT\PP217 20
All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to the Planning
and Engineering Staff.
Riverside County Health Department
PRIOR TO BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL:
60. "Will-serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering districts.
61.
If there are to be any food establishments, three complete sets of plans for
each foot establishment will be submitted including a fixture schedule, a finish
schedule and a plumbing schedule in order to ensure compliance with the
California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law.
62.
If there are to be any hazardous materials, a clearance letter from the
Environmental Health Services Hazardous Materials Management Branch {Jon
Mohoroski, 358-5055), will be required indicating that the project has been
cleared for:
a. Underground storage tanks.
b. Hazardous Waste Generator Services.
c. Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with AB 2185. )
d. Waste reduction management.
STAFFRPT\PP217 21
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
Backqround
1. Name of Proponent:
2. Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
5.
6.
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
Agency Requiring
Assessment:
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
Location of Proposal:
Herron 8 Rumansoff Architects, Inc.
530 St. Johns Place
Hemet, CA 923L~3
November 6, 1990
CITY OF TEMECULA
Plot Plan No. 217 {PP 217)
u, lu,60 Sanborn Ave, Temecula, CA
II
Environmental Impacts
{Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets. )
Yes Maybe No
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
X
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
X
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
X
The destruction, covering or modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
X
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
X
STAFFRPT\PP217 22
Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudslides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
Air. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air
quality?
The creation of objectionable
odors?
Alteration of air movement,
moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, whether locally
or regionally?
Water. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or
fresh waters?
Substantial changes in absorption
rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
Discharge into surface waters, or
in any alteration of surface water
quality, including, but not limited
to, temperature, dissolved oxygen
or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow or ground waters?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
STAFFRPT\PP217 23
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
Substantial reduction in the amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as flood-
ing or tidal waves?
Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any native species of
plants (including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare, or endangered species
of plants?
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop?
Animal Life. Will the proposal result
in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or insects)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Yes
Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
STAFFRPT\PP217 24
10.
11.
12.
13.
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
Light and Glare. Will the proposal
produce substantial new light or glare?
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal
involve:
A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances ( including,
but not limited to, oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation ) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
Population. Will the proposal alter
the location, distribution, density, or
growth rate of the human population of
an area?
Housing. Will the proposal affect
existing housing or create a demand for
additional housing?
Transportation/Circulation. Will the
proposal result in:
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
STAFFRPT\PP217 25
15.
16.
Yes Maybe N_9o
b. Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking? X __
c. Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems? __ __ X
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods? __ X
Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic? X
Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X __
Public Services. Will the proposal have
substantial effect upon, or result in a
need for new or altered governmental
services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection? X __
b. Police protection? X __
c. Schools? X
d. Parks or other recreational
faci l ities? X
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads? X __
f. Other governmental services: __ __ X
Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy? __ __ X
b. Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy? __ __ X
Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas? X __
STAFFRPT\PP217 26
17.
18.
19.
20.
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health )?
Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities?
Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
Yes Maybe
X
X
X
X
X
No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
STAFFRPT\PP217 27
Yes Maybe No
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into
the future. )
Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumu-
latively considerable? (A project's
impact on two or more separate
resources may be relatively small,
but where the effect of the total of
those impacts on the environment
is significant. )
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substan-
tial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? __
X
X
X
X
STAFFRPT\PP217 28
III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
1o8.
No. No substantial cut/fill operations are proposed; nor is excavation
included which could logically affect geologic substructures; no
significant impacts.
1.b. Yes. The project, by its nature, necessitates compaction and
overcovering of existin9 soils, with no discernible impacts.
1 .c. No. Topographic nor surface relief features of significance currently
exist on the property in question; no anticipated impact on these
resources.
1.d.
1.e.
1.f.
1.9·
2.a-c.
3oa.
No. Likewise, unique geologic or other distinctive physical features
are not evident in the property in question.
No. On-site erosion will actually decrease due to overcovering of the
site with proposed structures and surface improvements. Accordingly,
off-site erosion will likely increase adjacent to the subject property.
The proposaPs Conditions of Approval mitigate identified potential
adverse impacts of increased off-site erosion which may affect
neighboring uses.
No. The project does not propose elements which could logically impact
erosive qualities of beaches, rivers, or stream beds.
No. No identified geologic hazards affect the property in question.
No. Local air quality may be adversely affected due to increases in auto
emissions associated with additional traffic anticipated to access to
project site. However, due to the limited scope of this project,
discernable impacts should be negligible.
No. No identified water courses exist in the immediate vicinity of the
project. As such, these features should no be impacted.
Yes. On-site absorption rates will be dramatically altered subsequent
to proposed construction; i.e., permeable grounds will be rendered
impervious by structures and parking areas. Increases in runoff are
appropriately channeled to/thru existing and planned drainage
improvements as specified in the proposaPs Conditions of Approval;
thereby mitigating potential impacts of significance.
No. The project site does not lie within a known flood hazard zone.
No. While the project may contribute nominally to area-wide surface
runoff, eventual increases in destination surface waters should be
indiscernible.
STAFFRPT\PP217 29
3.f,g.
3.h.
3.i.
q. oe.
.q..d.
5.a.
5.b.
5.c.
6.a.
6.b.
Maybe. Increased runoff rates may contribute nominally to discharge
turbidity. Dilution of site-specific runoff regionally renders water
quality impacts indiscernible.
No. Ground water permeation of the site will undoubtedly decrease
subsequent to construction of proposed buildings and pavement, with
little or no effect on regional ground water flow direction ( s ) or rate( s ).
No. The scope and nature of the proposal logically preclude significant
impact on overall water resources availability.
No. Reference Item 3.c.
Maybe. Nominal amounts of existing native vegetation may be removed
during construction activities with nominal, if any, impacts on
vegetative resources.
No. Unique, rare or endangered species are not present on the subject
site.
No. While new plant species are proposed in conjunction with site
landscaping, no effect on existing native vegetation is anticipated as
little or no native vegetation currently exists on the property in
question.
No. The site is not currently used for agricultural purposes.
Maybe. Nominal populations of small common animal and insect species
may be displaced or eliminated as construction activities proceed.
Overall impact on regional animal life populations should not be
detectable.
No. Unique, rare, nor endangered animal species currently inhabit the
subject site.
No. Habitat of significance is not present on the property in question.
Yes. Site construction activities and occupancy of proposed structures
will undoubtedly increase localized noise levels. Ambient sound levels
should not be noticeably affected however.
No. The proposal does not entail aspects that could logically expose
persons to severe noise levels.
No. If inappropriately designed and constructed, the project could
potentially produce significant light and glare, impacting night skies
in general, and degrading observatory qualities of the Mt. Palomar
Observatory in particular. However, as a condition of project
approval, the proposal is required to adhere to all site lighting
guidelines and Ordinances currently adopted and enforced by the City.
STAFFRPT\PP217 30
10.a,b.
11.
12.
13.a.
13.b.
13.c.
13.d.
13.e.
13.f.
Yes. The proposal will result in a significant change in the project
siteIs currently vacant/undeveloped state. However, the applicantis
development request is compatible with existing ordinances, adjacent
land uses, and SWAP guidelines. As such, no significant land use
impacts are anticipated.
No. The scale and nature of the project logically preclude substantial
consumption/depletion of natural resources. Further, the proposalis
construction is required to comply with the Cityis adopted energy
consumption standards (reference 1989 Uniform Building Code
specifications for applicable lighting and heating/cooling allowances).
No. The proposal does not involve use or storage of hazardous
materials; nor is the site affected by, or affect an identified emergency
response/evacuation plan.
No. The project does not entail population altering aspects.
No. Similarly, no housing will be removed or constructed as a logical
result of project approval and implementation.
No. Vehicular traffic accessing the project site will undoubtedly
increase subsequent to project occupancy. However, such anticipated
increases cannot be considered significant given the limited scope of the
proposal.
Yes. Additional, necessary parking will be constructed to serve
customers and employees accessing the proposal when occupied.
Project parking conforms with ordinance requirements and
specifications; no significant impacts anticipated.
No. Reference Item 13.a.
Maybe. There may be a discernable modification in traffic patterns
subsequent to project occupancy. Accordingly, the proponent is
required to participate monetarily in development of any circulation
system improvements determined necessary to support the proposal.
No. Location and nature of the proposal logically preclude it potentially
impacting waterborne, rail, or air transportation systems.
Yes. All new construction, and its occupancy, logically increase traffic
movements and therefore potential traffic accident hazards. However,
potential hazards resulting from this proposal are those normally
associated with limited scale commercial development, and are an
expected and acceptable impact of project implementation.
STAFFRPT\PP217 31
1Li.a,b,e.
l~.d,f.
15.a,b.
16.a-f.
17.a,b.
18.
19.
20.a-d.
21.
Yes. The proposal will, by its very nature, generate additional fire
and police protection requirements, as well as contribute incrementally
to the City's public facilities maintenance costs. Such impacts are
mitigated in general via assessment districts, development/permit fees
as well as property taxes which the City currently assesses. Additional
public service funding mechanisms will undoubtedly be enacted as
dictated by evolvin9 City requirements.
Maybe. Regional school populations may incur secondary impacts due
to this proposal. Accordingly, the applicant is assessed school impact
fees appropriate for the type and scale of development proposed.
No. Impacts directly affecting parks/recreation assets or other
governmental services have not been identified at this time.
No. Reference Item Nos. 9.a. and b.
Yes. Nominal service extensions will necessarily be required to serve
site specific requirements. Significant utility service line impacts
beyond the general confines of the project site are not anticipated.
No. The project does not propose elements which are normally
considered health hazards. Nor is development proposed on or in the
vicinity of identified hazardous areas.
No. No scenic vistas of significance exist in the project site vicinity.
Further, the proposal evidences architectural design features
compatible with City standards. The site, and structure design
proposed are also visually compatible with neighboring development.
No. Project elements do not include addition nor deletion of recreational
improvements.
No. The proposaPs site has not been identified as being of historic or
prehistoric significance, Ethnic and religious values will not Iocjically
be affected by commercial development of a vacant site, amid property
designated for commercial uses.
No, Reference Items 1-20.
STAFFRPT\PP217 32
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signi-
ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi-
ficant effect on this case because the mitigation measures
described on attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval
have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
November 6, 1990
Date
For CITY OF TEMECULA
X
STAFFRPT\PP217 33
CITY OF TEMECULA )
ZONE MAP
cAs,= NO. fe2Ji
p.c. oAT,=
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
VICINITY MAP
CASE NO. ~ '1
P.C. DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA )
SITE PlAN
~iT~
r'~'~i¢5~°' ~' 1
~CASE NO.
p.c. oAT. ~1~1~
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
SWAP MAP
1--. i.-LiC¥~ i~O';[~
CASE NO. l~P~.ri
P.C. OATS ~14111
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
SECOND FLOO;t SQUARE FOOTAGE
~ASE NO. f:q~)2Ll"}
( ,=,.oo..,,...).,,.,.,,
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
FLOORPL&N
CASE NO. t~'Z41
EXHIBIT NO.f.|-
~..c. DATE
C CITY OF TEMECULA ,~
re~i~T~. F
CASE NO. ff'2R
CITY OF TEMECULA )
~-~,i~7d(>. F
CASE NO. T::~?-.r~
p.c. ::ATE s/'lhl
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
CASE NO.
p.c. oA'rs
.I
CASE .0.
P.C. eAT.
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CASE NO.: Plot Plan No. 217
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this
project.
Fee
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Rat)
Parks and Recreation
(Quimby)
Public Facility
( Traffic Mitigation )
Public Facility
( Traffic Signal Mitigation )
Public Facility
( Library )
Fire Protection
Flood Control
(ADP)
AB 3158 Compliance
Condition of Approval
N/A
N/A
Condition No. 40
( Engineering Dept. )
Condition No. 38
( Engineering Dept. )
N/A
Condition No. 57
(R.C.F.P.D.)
Condition No. 35
( Engineering Dept. )
Condition No. 30
(Planning Dept. )
STAFFRPT\PP217 34
CITY OF TEMECULA )'
ELEVATIONS
CASE
EXHIBIT NO. Pt '.~
~,P.c. oATE
ITEM
BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ANALYSIS:
The application for Tentative Parcel Map No. 25981
was originally submitted to the Riverside County
Planning Department on March 13, 1990. It has been
through the LDC (Land Development Committee)
process in the County and, upon transfer to the
City, has gone through a Pre-Development Review
and a Formal Review process. A biological study
was requested and indicated that the proposed
development will have no significant effect upon the
subject site. However, the site is located within the
Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan
and will be subject to mitigation fees. An
archaeological assessment was also requested and
indicated that no cultural resource constraints exist
on the subject site.
The applicant is proposing to subdivide a 3.01 acre
parcel situated south of Pauba Road and east of
Showalter Road into three (3) parcels as follows:
Parcel 1: 1.00 gross acres
Parcel 2: 1.00 gross acres
Residence )
Parcel 3: 1.01 gross acres
(existing
The project site contains an existing residence
where the proposed parcel 2 will be located. The
remainder of the site is basically undisturbed and
consists of gently rolling slopes. Showalter Road
which will be the main access to Parcel 1 and 3 is
currently unimproved.
Land Use and Zoninq
The proposed tentative parcel map is currently
surrounded by low density residential lots zoned R-
R ( Rural Residential ) and composed of
approximately one-half acre and larger lots. This
area retains a rural character with unimproved
roads and septic systems. The applicant is
proposing to create three (3) one acre lots which
are consistent with the Southwest Area Community
Plan which calls for 1-2 DU/AC for the subject site.
Planning Staff has reviewed the proposed project
and has determined that the proposed one acre lots
will not have a significant impact on the rural
character of the immediate surrounding area.
STAFFRPT\PM25981 2
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
March 4, 1990
Case No.: Tentative Parcel Map No. 25981
Prepared By: Richard Ayala
Recommendation: 1.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
P R O POSA L:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
ADOPT Negative Declaration for
Tentative Parcel Map No. 25981;
ADOPT Resolution No. 91-
approving Tentative Parcel Map
No. 25981 based on the analysis
and findings contained in the
Staff Report and subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval.
William Kouvelis
Benesh Engineering
Subdivide 3.01 acres into three (3) residential lots
South of Pauba Road and east of Showalter Road
R-R ~ Rural-Residential)
North:
South:
East:
West:
R-R ( Rural Residential )
R-R ( Rural Residential)
R-R { Rural Residential)
R-R I Rural Residential)
Not requested
Single Family Residential
North: Vacant
South: Vacant
East: Vacant
West: Single Family Residence
No. of Acres:
Proposed
Lot Sizes:
3.01
Parcel1:
Parcel 2:
Parcel 3:
1.00 Gross Acre
1.00 Gross Acre
1.01 Gross Acre
STAFFRPT\PM25981 1
Pursuant to the requirements of Assembly Bill 3158
(Chapter 1706) which authorizes the charging of
certain fees for the filing of Negative Declarations
which provide funding for the Department of Fish
and Game, the Planning Department Staff has
included the following condition (see condition No.
24) within the recommended Conditions of Approval:
"Within forty-eight (48) hours of the
approval of the project, the applicant/
developer shall deliver to the Planning
Department a cashiers check or money order
in the amount of One Thousand, Two
Hundred, Seventy-Five dollars ( $1,275.00 ),
which includes One Thousand, Two Hundred
Fifty Dollars ($1,250.00) fee, in compliance
with AB 3158, required by Fish and Game
Code Section 711 .4(d)(2) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar County Administrative fee to
enable the City to file the Notice of
Determination required under Public
Resources Code Section 21152 and 14 Cal.
Code of Regulations 15075. If within such
forty-eight (48) hour period the
applicant/developer has not delivered to the
Planning Department the check required
above, the approval for the project granted
herein shall be void by reason of failure of
condition, Fish and Game Code Section
711.4(c)".
FINDINGS:
The proposed Parcel Map will not have
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial
Study performed for the project. A Negative
Declaration is recommended for adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is consistent with the
surrounding current residential develop-
ment, the Southwest Area Plan and existing
zoning.
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference
with, the future adopted General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan, due to the fact that the project is
consistent with surrounding development.
STAFFRPT\PM25981 4
CIRCULATION:
GENERAL PLAN AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
Access and Circulation
Access to the new lots will be provided from
Showalter Road and a new cul-de-sac I see site plan )
which both will be improved with Class I I aggregate
Base along the length of the project site. The
existing residence {Parcel 2) will continue to have
access from Pauba Street.
Grading
The proposed project will alter the existing natural
terrain with the construction of manufactured slopes
at 2:1, in order to create useable building pads
ranging from 11,000 to 13,000 square feet.
However, this impact is not considered to be
significant since appropriate mitigation measures
have been implemented with the project.
Erosion Control
All slopes over three feet in height will be
landscaped and irrigated according to the City
Development Code. Furthermore, graded but
undeveloped land will be maintained in a weed-free
condition and be planted with interim landscaping or
provided with other erosion control measures as
approved by the Director of Building and Safety.
Traffic
The Transportation Engineering Staff has reviewed
this project; and has determined that the proposed
project will have a minimal impact to the existing
road system and there will be no adverse
unmitigable significant traffic impacts resulting
from the development of this proposed project.
The proposed density of the project is consistent
with the Southwest Area Community Plan of 1-2
DU/ac. In addition, Staff finds it probable that this
project will be consistent with the New General Plan
when it is adopted.
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
An Initial Study was performed for this project
which determined that although the proposed
project could have a significant effect on the
environment, no significant impact would result to
the natural or built environment in the City because
the mitigation measures described in the Conditions
of Approval have been added to the project, and a
Negative Declaration has been recommended for
adoption.
STAFFRPT\PM25981 3
10.
11.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law due to the fact that
the project conforms to the current zoning
for the site and to Ordinance No. ~,60,
Schedule H.
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density due to the fact that the project has
access to public roads and appropriate
building area.
The design of the subdivision or the
proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidable injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
initial study.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities due to
the fact that the lots are large enough to
provide sufficient southern exposure.
All lots have acceptable access to existing
and proposed dedicated rights-d-way which
are open to, and are useable by, vehicular
traffic, access is provided from Pauba Road
and Showalter Road.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project as
conditioned. The project will not interfere
with any easements.
The lawful conditions stated in the project~s
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
STAFFRPT\PM25981 5
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP" ) was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within
the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as
its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely
fashion with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed Parcel Map is consistent with the SWAP and
meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government
Code, to wit:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The Planning Commission finds, in approving projects
and taking other actions, including the issuance of
building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the
following:
a)
There is reasonable probability that Parcel
Map No. 25981 proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
STAFFRPT\PM25981 8
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP NO. 25981 TO SUBDIVIDE A 3.01 ACRE PARCEL
INTO THREE PARCELS SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD AND
EAST OF SHOWALTER ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NO 945-070-004.
WHEREAS, William Kouyelis Filed Parcel Map No. 25981 in accordance
with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances,
which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Parcel Map application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Parcel Map on at
which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or
opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
approved said Parcel Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
a)
There is a reasonable probability that the
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
STAFFRPT\PM25981 7
g)
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities due to
the fact that the lots are large enough to
provide sufficient southern exposure.
h)
All lots have acceptable access to existing
and proposed dedicated rights-of-way which
are open to, and are useable by, vehicular
traffic, access is provided from Pauba Road
and Showalter Road.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project as
conditioned. The project will not interfere
with any easements.
j)
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
k)
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Parcel Map
proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that although the
proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the
Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration,
therefore, is hereby granted.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends
approval of Parcel Map No, 2598;I for the subdivision of a 3.01 acre parcel into three
parcels located South of Pauba Road and East of Showalter Road and known as
Assessor's Parcel No. 9~5-070-00~ subject to the following conditions:
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
STAFFRPT\PM25981 10
D. {1) Pursuant to Section 6.5, no parcel map may be
approved unless the applicant demonstrates the proposed use will not
be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community, and
further, that any Parcel Map approved shall be subject to such
conditions as shall be necessary to protect the health, safety and
general welfare of the community.
(2) ThePlanningCommission, inapprovingtheproposed
parcel map, makes the following findings, to wit:
a)
The proposed Parcel Map will not have
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial
Study performed for the project. A Negative
Declaration is recommended for adoption.
b)
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is consistent with the
surrounding current residential develop-
ment, the Southwest Area Plan and existing
zoning.
c)
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference
with, the future adopted General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan, due to the fact that the project is
consistent with surrounding development.
d)
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law due to the fact that
the project conforms to the current zoning
for the site and to Ordinance No. ~,60,
Schedule H.
e)
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density due to the fact that the project has
access to public roads and appropriate
building area.
f)
The design of the subdivision or the
proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidable injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
initial study.
STAFFRPT\PM25981 9
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Parcel Map No: 25981
Project Description: Subdivide 3.01 Acres
into three residential parcels.
Assessor's Parcel No.: 9~,5-070-00~,
Planninq Department
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule H, unless
modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in
accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request,
if made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
This conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the
approval date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance L~60. Theexpiration
date is
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final
map.
All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall
continue in force until the governing body accepts or abandons such offers.
All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the City
Engineer. Street names shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, drainage facilities, utilities,
etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land
division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be
submitted and recorded as directed by the City Engineer.
A copy of the final grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department
for review and approval. All on-site cut and fill slopes shall:
Be limited to a maximum slope ratio of 2 to 1 and a maximum vertical
height of thirty (30) feet.
Be contour-graded to blend with existing natural contours.
c. Be a part of the downhill lot when within or between individual lots.
All slopes over three (3) feet in height shall be landscaped and irrigated
according to the City Development Code. A detailed landscaping and
irrigation plan, prepared by a qualified professional, shall be submitted to the
City Planning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of grading
permits.
STAFFRPT\PM25981 12
PASSED. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this u, th day of March. 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held
on the ~,th day of March. 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNINC COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
STAFFRPT\PM25981 11
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
All building plans for all new structures shall incorporate, all required
elements from the subdivisionJs approved fire protection plan as
approved by the County Fire Marshal.
All dwellings to be constructed within this subdivision shall be designed
and constructed with fire retardant (Class A ) rods as approved by the
Fire Marshal.
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 Department approval.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the
provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate fee set forth in
that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions
of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by
Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat
Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution.
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officer, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officer, or employees
to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Tentative
Parcel Map No. 25981, which action is brought within the time period provided
for in California Government Code Section 660,99.37. The City of Temecula will
promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding
against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the
City fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or
proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not,
thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of
Temecula.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable
TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required,
and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility
provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired
in the residence.
Prior to recordation of the Final Map, the developer or his assignee must
conform to the park district Quimby Ordinance, unless waived to time of
issuance of a building permit.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits and/or building permits, the
developer or his successor~s interest shall submit a mitigation monitoring
program to the Planning Department for approval, which shall describe how
compliance with required mitigation measures will be met and the appropriate
monitoring timing of the mitigation.
ST A FF R PT\PM25981 1 u,
10.
11.
The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations
outlined in the County Health Department~s transmittal dated March 19, 1990,
a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in
the Riverside County Flood Control District~s letter dated April ~,, 1990, a
copy of which is attached. If the project lies within an adopted flood control
drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of City of Temecula Land Division
Ordinance 1~60, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities
shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits.
The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined
in the County Fire Department~s letter dated January 29, 1991, a copy of
which is attached.
All proposed construction shall comply with the California Institute of
Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy, as outlined in the
Southwest Area Plan.
12. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following:
13.
15.
Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
development standards of the R-R (Rural Residential ) zone.
Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed-free
condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or
provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the
Director of Building and Safety.
The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all slopes,
landscaped areas and irrigation systems until such time as those operations
are the responsibilities of other parties as approved by the Planning Director.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a qualified paleontologist shall be
retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the proposed
grading with respect to potential paleontological impacts, Should the
paleontologist find the potential is high for impact to significant resources, a
pre-grade meeting between the paleontologist and the excavation and grading
contractor shall be arranged. When necessary, the paleontologist or
representative shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt
grading activity to allow recovery of fossils
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
No building permits shall be issued by the City for any residential
lot/unit within the project boundary until the developer~s successor~s-
in-interest provides evidence of compliance with public facility
financing measures. A cash sum of one-hundred dollars {$100) per
lot/unit shall be deposited with the City as mitigation for public library
development.
STAFFRPT\PM25981 13
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
35.
36.
37.
Streets "D" and "E" shall be improved with 2q feet of acceptable aggregate
base (0.33~ thick) on a 32 foot graded section within a 60 foot full width
dedicated right-of-way as approved by the Road Commissioner.
In the event road or off-site right-of-way or easements for grading are
required to comply with these conditions, such easements shall be obtained by
the developer; or, in the event the City is required to condemn the easement
or right-of-way, as provided in the Subdivision Map Act, the developer shall
enter into an agreement with the City for the acquisition of such easement at
the developeris cost pursuant to Government Code Section 66~,62.5, which
shall be at no cost to the City.
Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard
No. 805.
Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall
be delineated or noticed on the final map.
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformance with applicable City standards.
Street improvements, including, but not limitedto: aggregate baseand
graded road section.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Engineering Department a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation
towards traffic signal impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time
of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a written
agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a
building permit.
Improvement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending a
minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and alignment
as approved by the City Engineer.
The subdivider shall submit four prints of a comprehensive grading plan to
the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70, and as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions
of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 2~" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil
Engineer.
The subdivider shall submit four copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer.
All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer.
STAFFRPT\PM25981 16
22.
Within forty-eight (L~8) hours of the approval of the project, the
applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand,
Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars ($1,275.00), which includes the One
Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars {$1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB
3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711 .~,id)(2) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar i$25.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152
and 1~, Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight |~8) hour
period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department
the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall
be void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Came Code, Section
711 .q(c).
Enqineerinq Department
The following are the Engineering Department Conditions of Approval for this
project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Engineering
Department.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
23.
The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act,
and all applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions.
The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor or registered
Civil Engineer, subject to all the requirements of the State of California
Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance No. ~,60.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
25.
As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, the
developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control district;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Engineering Department;
Riverside County Health Department; and
CATV Franchise.
26.
All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to
the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the
City Engineer.
27.
Sufficient right-of-way along Pauba Road shall be confirmed to exist or
conveyed for public use to provide for a public street for public use to
provide for a ~, foot half width right-of-way.
STAFFRPT\PM25981 15
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
~6. All signing shall be installed per the approved signing plan.
Buildinq and Safety Department
Submit approved parcel map to Building and Safety for addressing.
Provide a waterway reserved easement on Parcel 3 for natural water flow from
Parcels 1 and 2, along with storm drain easements for vacant Parcel No. 9~,5-
070-001.
Temecula Community Services District
Subdivisions containing less than five (5) parcels will be subject to the
following conditions: Upon the request of a building permit for construction
of residential structures on one or more of the parcels within four years
following approval of a tentative map, parcel map, or planned development,
real estate development, stock cooperative, community apartment project and
condominium for which a tentative map or parcel map is filed, a predetermined
Quimby Act fee in the amount equal to the fair market value of required
acreage ( Plus 2096 for offsite improvements) shall be paid by the owner of each
such parcel (s ) as a condition to the issuance of such permit as authorized by
Riverside County Ordinance No. u,60 as amended through Ordinance No.
~60.93.
STAFFRPT\PM25981 18
38.
The subdivider shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by
alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow.
Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities,
including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
39.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-d-way, fees shall be paid
and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineeris Office.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Department prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-
way.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing
Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The
charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits.
If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to
this property, no new charge needs to be paid.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities
imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public
facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the
project, in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim
or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally
established by the date on which Developer requests its building permits for
the project or any phase thereof, the Developer shall execute the Agreement
for Payment of Public Facility Fee, a copy of which has been provided to
Developer. Developer understands that said Agreement may require the
payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees) and specifically waives its right to protest
such increase.
Transportation Enqineerinq
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
A signing plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved
by the City Engineer for Lots "C", "D" and "E" and shall be included on the
street improvement plans.
Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering
for the design requirements.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
A construction area traffic control plan shall be designed by a registered Civil
Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for any street closure and detour
or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the City Engineer.
STA FFR PT\PM25981 17
COUNTY Or
ENVIRO~
PARENT P.M. (IF ANY)' _--
/~r I ~ / 71~ >
: I VERS I DE DEPARTMENT OF H~ ~ LTH
,NTAL HEALTH SERVICES DIV. 3N
3636 UNIVERSITY AVENUE
RIVERSIDE, CA 92503
PARCEL MAP .
REGIONAL TEAM ~/- ~A~ K~e ./,~-
SCHEDULE
WA I VER REQUEST
THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH HAS REVIEWED THE MAP DESCRIBED ABOVE.
ARE ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS TRANSMITTAL,
RECOMMENDATIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS:
AREA
ORD. 460
IF THERE
CONTACT (714) 787-6543. OUR
The Environmental Health Services Division (EHSD) has reviewed the
above Parcel Map and while we are not privileged to receive any preliminary
information relative to subsurface sewage disposal or connection to sewers
or domestic water supply, it is our considered opinion that the soils that
might be encountered in this area may not be conducive to effective
subsurface sewage disposal systems and because of soil characteristics in
the area, there may be a requirement for extensive ~radin~, compaction,
cutting, etc. Prior to recordatlon of the final map, an acceptable soils
feasibility report shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Environmental Health Services Division.
When ~radin~ is required, the soils engineer must assume theoretical
cuts, fills, compaction, etc. and perform the tests and borinqs at the
necessary subsurface sewage disposal system depths.
the soils engineer must provide a aradinq plan for review and approval,
which shall include and address the foliowine:
1. The proposed cuts and/or fills in the areas of
2. The sewaoe system and it s 100% expansion area.
placed in natural undisturbed soil.
3. The elevation of the individual buildin= pads in
~eference to the elevation of the disposal system.
On those projects where the ~radin~ plans are prepared by othe~ than
the person preparing the soils feasibility report, a statement must be
included on the qradin~ plan submitted for review and approval with the
soils engineer's signature and seal as to the appropriateness of the
grading with regard to the conclusions and recommendations set forth in the
soils engineer's estimate by more than two feet, additional reports may be
required.
A copy of the final qradin~ plan, on a scale not smaller than 1"=40'
maximum with detailed subsurface sewage disposal data to include 100%
expansion, shall be submitted for review and approval.
FOR DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
HEALTH FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
HEALTH
DOH SAN 117 (REV. 01/90)
(SIGNATURE)
(TITLE)
PLANNING & ENGINEERING
46-209 OASIS STREET, SUITE 405
INDIO, CA 92201
(619) 342,8886
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
FIRE DEPARTMENT
IN COOPERATION W~TH THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
AND FIRE PROTECTION
GLEN J. NEWMAN
FIRE CHIEF
January 29, 1991
PLANNING & ENGINEERING
3760 12TH STREET
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
(714) 275-4777
TO:
ATTN:
RE:
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PARCEL MAP 25981
With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land division,
the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided
in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection
standards:
FIRE PROTECTION
Schedule "H" fire protection approved standard fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2F') located
one at each street intersection and spaced no more than 660 feet apart in any
direction, with no portion of any lot frontage more than 330 feet from a hydrant.
Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 GPM for 2 hours duration at 20 PSI.
Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the
Fire Department for review. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil
engineer, containing a Fire Department approval signature block, and shall
conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow. Once
plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented
to the Fire Department for signature.
The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and accepted
by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being
placed on an individual lot,
MITIGATION
Prior to the recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with
the Riverside County Fire Department, a cash sum of $400.00 per lot/unit as
mitigation for fire protection impacts.
All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to the
Planning and Engineering staff.
RAYMOND H. REGIS
Chief Fire Department Planner
Laura Cabral, Fire Safety Specialist
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
II
Backqround
1. Name of Proponent:
William Kouvelis
Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
30675 Pauba Road
Temecula, California 92390
{71q) 676~2502
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
January 10, 1991
Agency Requiring
Assessment:
CITY OF TEMECULA
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
Tentative Parcel Map No. 25981
6. Location of Proposal:
South ofPauba Road and east of
Showalter.
Environmental Impacts
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets. )
Yes Maybe No
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
X
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
X
X
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
The destruction, covering or modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
X
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
X
STAFFRPT\PM25981 19
KENNETH L EDWARDS
CHIEF ENGINEER
1995 MARKET STREET
P.O. BOX 1033
TELEPHONE (7143 787-2015
FAX NO. (714) 788-9965
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92502
Riverside County
P1 anning Department
County Administrative Center
Riverside, California
Attention: Regional Team No.
pl a..er
Area:
Re: Phi 2~'ff8 1
We have reviewed this case and have the following comments:
Except for nuisance nature local runoff which may traverse portions of the
property the project is considered free from ordinary storm flood hazard.
However, a storm of unusual magnitude could cause some damage. New construc-
tion should comply with all applicable ordinances.
The topography of the area consists of well defined ridges and natural water-
courses which traverse the property. There is adequate area outside of the
natural watercourses for building sites. The natural watercourses should be
kept free of buildings and obstructions in order to maintain the natural
drainage patterns of the area and to prevent flood damage to new buildings.
A note should be placed on an environmental constraint sheet stating, "All new
buildings shall be floodproofed by elevating the finished floors a minimum of
18 inches above adjacent ground surface. Erosion protection shall be provided
for mobile home supports."
This project is in the /Vr~ff~e~ (T'feek~l'p. y4te~ VaJ{e /~IDI::> Area
drainage plan fees shall be paid in accor nce with the Xpplicable r~les and
regulations.
The proposed zoning is consistent with existing flood hazards. Some flood
control facilities or floodproofing may be required to fully develop to the
implied density.
The District's report dated is still current for this project.
The District does not object to the proposed minor change.
This project is a part of . The project will be
free of ordinary storm flood hazard when improvements have been constructed in
accordance with approved plans.
The attached comments apply.
IH~.ruKASHUBI/~s
;enior Civil Engineer
DATE: ~r 3( (~iO
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
Substantial reduction in the amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as flood-
ing or tidal waves?
Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any native species of
plants (including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare, or endangered species
of plants?
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop?
Animal Life. Will the proposal result
in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or insects)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ST A FF R PT\PM25981 21
Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudslides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
Air. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air
quality?
The creation of objectionable
odors?
Alteration of air movement,
moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, whether locally
or regionally?
Water. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or
fresh waters?
Substantial changes in absorption
rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
Discharge into surface waters, or
in any alteration of surface water
quality, including, but not limited
to, temperature, dissolved oxygen
or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow or ground waters?
Yes
Maybe
No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
STAFFRPT\PM25981 20
Yes Maybe No
b. Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking? __ __ X
c. Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems? __ __ X
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods? __ __ X
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic? X
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? __ __ X
1~,. Public Services. Will the proposal have
substantial effect upon, or result in a
need for new or altered governmental
services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection? X __
b. Police protection? X __ __
c. Schools? X
d. Parks or other recreational
facilities? X
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads? X __
f. Other governmental services: __ X
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy? __ __ X
b. Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy? __ __ X
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas? __ __ X
STAFFRPT\PM25981 23
10.
11.
12.
13.
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
Light and Glare. Will the proposal
produce substantial new light or glare?
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal
involve:
A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances ( including,
but not limited to, oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation ) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
Population. Will the proposal alter
the location, distribution, density, or
growth rate of the human population of
an area?
Housing. Will the proposal affect
existing housing or create a demand for
additional housing?
Transportation/Circulation. Will the
proposal result in:
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
STAFFRPT\PM25981 22
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into
the future. )
Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumu-
latively considerable? ( A project's
impact on two or more separate
resources may be relatively small,
but where the effect of the total of
those impacts on the environment
is significant. )
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substan-
tial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? __
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
STAFFRPT\PM25981 25
17.
18.
19.
20.
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)?
Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities?
Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
STAFFRPT\PM25981 24
WATER
3.a,c,].
No. The proposed project will not have a substantial impact on any
water courses or supplies and the project lies outside of all 100 year
flood zones. Furthermore, the project will be free of ordinary storm
flood hazard when improvements have been constructed in accordance
with the approval plans.
3.b.
Maybe. The proposed project will slightly increase the impermeable
surface area. Thus, possibly allowing for changes in absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff on the
subject site. However, the amount of runoff water will not be
significant and will receive subsequent review.
PLANT LIFE
Yes. The proposed project involves grading the subject site which will
eliminate all of the existing native plants; and the proposal includes
landscaping and erosion control which will be designed to City
standards. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant
since appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented with the
project.
No. No sensitive vegetational associations or species were identified
on-site.
No. No agricultural production occurred on-site.
ANIMAL LIFE
No. Presently, the proposed project site is vacant and native animal
species have been displaced. Thus, no substantial impacts will be
imposed on any animal life. However, the subject site is in an area
shown as Stephen~s Kangaroo Rat Habitat, thus, the project will be
subject to the appropriate mitigation fees to be used toward
implementing Riverside County~s Habitat Conservation Plan.
NOISE
6.a,b.
No. The proposed project will not have significant impact on noise nor
expose people to severe noise levels.
LIGHT AND CLARE
No. Only two additional residential homes will be proposed on the
subject site.
LAND USE
No. The proposed project will not result in a substantial alteration of
the present or planned land use of the area.
STAFFRPT\PM25981 27
III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
EARTH
1.a.
No, The project site will be substantially graded , which will include
approximately 11,500 cubic yards of excavation and 15,000 cubic yards
of fill. However, a conceptual mass grading plan for the project was
reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and designed in
accordance with Temecula's standards and the Conditions of Approval
include mitigation measures in regards to grading. Therefore, the
proposed project will not create an unstable earth condition or change
in the geologic substructure.
1.b.
Yes. All development disrupts the soil profile to some degree and
results in soil displacement, compaction, and over-covering. Further
analysis will determine if additional mitigations are required.
1oC.
Yes. The project site is located within a fairly prominent natural
hillside of Temecula. However, the grading effort was designed to
adhere to the gross natural topography of the site in its original
condition, as well as the building pad designs of the surrounding
properties. While substantial grading and recontouring of this site,
which includes 11,500 c.y. of excavation and 15,000 c.y. of fill, will
occur in the immediate area, the overall plan is intended to promote
preservation of site topography. Therefore, this impact is not
considered significant.
1 .d,f,g.
No. The proposed project will not create any significant impacts
regarding geologic features or conditions, No evidence of faulting was
found and indications of mass movement or major landsliding have not
been observed or reported on the site, nor will the proposed project
expose people to any geologic hazards.
1.eo
Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the
construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are replanted
and the proposed drainage facilities are constructed. The wind erosion
impact is considered significant but will be mitigated through the use
of watering trucks and erosion control planting of disturbed areas after
grading. After the project is completed, water will be channeled to
drainage easements and streets. Appropriate drainage control devices
will have to be approved by the City Engineer and designed in
accordance with Temecula~s standards and the Conditions of Approval.
Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant, due to the
fact that appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented with
the project.
AIR
No. The proposed project will not result in any substantial changes in
air quality or movement.
STAFF R PT\PM25981 26
HUMAN HEALTH
17.a,b. No. No Health hazards were apparent or proposed on site.
AESTHETICS
18.
No. The proposal will not result in the obstruction of any scenic view
open to the public. However, emphasis should be placed on the
development of proposed future residences in relationship to the
surrounding area.
RECREATION
19.
No. The subject site is not used for recreational uses.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
20.a-d.
No. The proposal will not result in adverse effects to historic
structures, cultural values, or restrict religious or sacred uses in the
area. However, if any cultural resources are encountered as a result
of grading, a qualified paleontologist or archaeologist must be on site.
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
21 .a.
Maybe. The proposed project may have a significant impact on plant or
wildlife species. However, the project is located within an area
designated by the Riverside County as habitat for the endangered
Stephen's Kangaroo Rat, the project will be subject to mitigation fees
for the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan. I n addition,
during grading activities, a qualified paleontologist shall be present.
21 .b.
Maybe. The proposed project may have the potential to achieve short-
term,to the disadvantage of long term, environmental goals. However,
no significant impacts will occur if the mitigation measures are followed.
21 .c.
Maybe. The project does have individually limited impacts, however,
if these impacts are cumulatively considered, they do not have a
significant impact on the overall environment.
21 .d.
No. This project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings either directly or indirectly. All regulations and standards will
be imposed and maintained on the project so that adverse effects are
minimized or eliminated.
STAFFRPT\PM25981 29
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMI NAT ION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signi-
ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi-
ficant effect on this case because the mitigation measures
described on attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval
have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
X
January 10, 1991
Date
For
CITY OF TEMECULA
STAFFRPT\PM25981 30
ATTACHMENT NO,
EXHIBITS
STAFFRPT\PP217 34