Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout100791 PC AgendaAGENDA TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING October 07, 1991 6:00 PM VAIL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 29915 Mira Loma Drive Temecula, CA 92390 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Hoagland ROLL CALL: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the commissioners on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Commissioners about an item nqt listed on the Agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and 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 Planning Secretary before Commission gets to that item. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers. COMMISSION BUSINESS 1. Approval of Agenda 2. Minutes 2.1 Approval of minutes of September 16, 1991 Planning Commission Meeting. NON PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS PC~Agn\IO-7 1 Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Television/Radio Antenna Ordinance City of Temecula City Wide An Ordinance establishing regulations for Television/Radio Antennas John Meyer Continue to October 21, 1991. Case No. Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Expand Old Town Historical District Boundary City of Temecula Old Town Historic District, generally located between Murrieta (River Street) Creek and Hwy 15, between 2nd and 6th Streets. Expand Old Town Historical District Boundary. John Meyer Approval Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 Sterling Builders Northeast Corner of DePortola and Butterfield Stage Road Change the zoning on 88.4 acres from R-A-2-1/2 to R-1 and R-5; and subdivide 88.4 acres into 215 single family residential lots. Richard Ayala Recommend Approval Case No.: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Recommendation: Case Planner: Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 David Pearson South Side of Pauba Road, between Ynez and Margarita Roads Subdivide 20 acres into 34 single family residential lots. Recommend Approval Charly Ray PC%Agn\10-7 2 Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Parcel Map No. 25059 Minor Change No. 1 Preferred Equities Ridge Park Drive, south we~' side approximately 70 feet east of its intersection with lcho Ca-dfornia Road. Modify or delete engineerira ~nditior, s. Richard Ayala Approval Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Plot Plan No. 239 - Rancho California Water District Headquarters Complex Rancho California Water District Northwesterly of the Intersection of Diaz Road and Rio Nedo. Construction of three (3) structures housing Rancho California Water District Headquarters functions as follows: 2-story office at 40,000 square feet; warehouse at 13,000 square feet and an Operations (Maintenance) Building at 20,000 square feet. Total Project Site Area = 11.45 acres Charly Ray Approval Case: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Parcel Map 24085 Rancho California City Center Association No. 1 Westerly side of Diaz Road, north of the future extension of Winchester Road. To create 57 commercial/industrial parcel on a 73 acre site in the M-SC Debbie Ubnoske Recommend Approval 10. Case: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Parcel Map 24086 Rancho California City Center Association No. 1 Westerly side of Diaz Road, north of the future extension of Winchester Road. To create 49 commercial/industrial parcels on a 70 acre site in the M-SC Debbie Ubnoske Recommend Approval PC\AOn\10-7 3 11. Ca s6: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Parcel Map 25139 50 City Center Associates West of Diaz Road and South of Cherry Street To create 66 commercial/industrial parcels on a 97 acre site in the M-SC Zone. Debbie Ubnoske Recommend Approval 12, Case: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Parcel Map 25408 Phillip T.. See Southwesterly of future extension of Winchester Road Southwest of Diaz Road. To create 20 commercial/industrial parcels on a 36 acre site in the M-SC zone. Debbie Ubnoske Recommend Approval 13. Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Change of Zone No. 18; and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 Sam McCann/Bedford Properties Southeast corner of Margarita Road and DePortola Road. Amend the boundary of the Paloma Del Sol (formerly the Meadows) Specific Plan to include planning area No. 36. Gary Thornhill Recommend Approval 14. Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Plot Plan 240 Red Robin International Northwest corner of Rancho California Road and Lyndie Lane To construct a 6,300 square foot restaurant on an approved building pad location on the site of Plot Plan 18 revised. Charly Ray Approval PC\AOn\IO*7 4 Planning Director ReDOrt Planning Commission Discussion Other Business ADJOURNMENT Next meeting: Joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting October 10, 1991, 7:00 p.m., Temecula City Hall, 43174 Business Park Drive. DU/Ib pc/Agn 10/07 PC\Agn%10-7 5 ITEM # 2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, BEPTEMBER 16, 1991 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Planning Commission was called to order Monday, September 16, 1991, 6:00 P.M., at Vail Elementary School, 29915 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula. The meeting was called to order by Chairman John E. Hoagland. PRESENT: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None Also present were Assistant City Attorney John Cavanaugh, Planning Director Gary Thornhill, Senior Planner Debbie Ubnoske, City Engineer Doug Stewart, Director of Public Works Tim Serlet, Robert Righetti, Department of Public Works, Gary King, Park Development Coordinator, and Gail Zigler, Minute Clerk. PUBLIC COMMENTS None COMMISSION BUSINESS 1. Approval of Agenda CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND advised that Items 7 and 11 would be continued to the meeting of October 7, 1991, and Item 13 continued to the meeting of October 21, 1991. Chairman Hoagland also advised that Item 15 would be heard as a Non Public Hearing Item. GARY THORNHILL suggested that Item 15 be moved to prior to Item 4. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF moved to approve the agenda as amended, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAREY. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None 2. Minutes 2.1 Approval of minutes of August 19, 1991 Planning Commission meeting. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF amended page 5, Item 4, fifth paragraph, to read "...Winchester Road frontage of the building". COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF moved to approve the minutes as amended, seconded by COMMISSIONER BLAIR. AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Fahey NON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM8 3. Park Property on La Serena Way, Christmas Tree Sales 3.1 Presentation by Gary King. Request by the Ridgeview Homeowners Association to lease property owned by the City of Temecula, which is currently set aside for future park development as part of the General Plan, for sub-lease to christmas tree grower. Request brought to the Commission on an advisory basis for comments on the proposed use. GARY KING advised that the City is considering using this site for equestrian trails and/or park site as part of the overall master plan for the City. The Commission as a whole expressed a concern for the access to the site for the proposed retail use. COMMISSIONER FORD suggested using the land as an easement and use as storage for trees. CHAIRa~N BOAGL/~ND stated that he felt re-sale and/or storage for boxed trees would be a more appropriate use. Chairman Hoagland suggested that the City pursue the sub- lease from a grower. COMMISSIONER BLAIR stated that she supported the City's opinion of waiting for completion of the master plan before designating a permanent use of the site. 15. Plot 15.1 COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF moved that the item be turned back to staff and kept in reserve for future park development and if an interim use is considered, that the City pursue the sub-lease from a wholesale grower of boxed trees, seconded by COMMIBBIONER FORD. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chin_aeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None Plan Administrative No. 184 Proposal for landscape plans for costco site and Winchester and Margarita Road Frontage. Located at the northwest corner of Margarita and Winchester Roads. DEBBIE UBNOBKE provided the staff report and distributed photographs of the proposed trees to be used in the street scapes. GREG ERICKBON, Bedford Properties, 28765 Single Oak Drive, Temecula, stated that they were proposing alternating the palm trees and crepe myrtle trees with the tree in the photograph (African Sumac, an evergreen). He added that they would also incorporate this tree into the Palm Plaza streetscape. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF suggested that staff condition for a requirement of 24" box trees to be planted. The applicant concurred with the recommendation. ALI MOAYERI, representing Costco, offered to the Commission that instead of removing the sidewalk along the south side of the building and replacing it with landscaping, that some of the parking stalls be replaced with landscape islands with tree heights varied. COMMISSIONER FORD moved to approve Administrative Plot Plan No. 184, based on the developer's intent for consistency in this entire area, seconded by COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF. Planning Director Report Planning Commission Discussion Other Business There will be a joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting October 10, 1991, at 7:00 P.M., Temecula City Hall, 43174 Business Park Drive. ADJOURNMENT Next meeting: October 21, 1991, 6:00 p.m., Vail Elementary School, 29915 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula, California DU/Ib pc/Ag n 10/07 PC%AOn%10-7 5 COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF clarified that crepe myrtle trees would not be used in the interior of the parking lot landscaping. AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Fahey PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 4. Change of Zone No. 5740 4.1 Proposal to change the zoning designation of the subject property from R-A-20 (residential agriculture) to I-P (industrial park) and R-5 (open area combining zone). Located on the westside of Ridgepark Drive, south of Rancho California Road. CHARLES HAY provided the staff report. G~Y THORNHILL advised the Commission that the property is abutted by other properties currently zoned for I-P uses and that the SWAP designations of the subject site are O.C. (office/commercial) and MTN (mountainous ten acre minimum parcels), corresponding to the requested zoning of the property in question. The Commission expressed a concern for the Western Corridor road going through this property. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 6:55 P.M. TONY TERICM, To-Mac Engineering, 41934 Main Street, Temecula, representing the applicant, advised the Commission that prior to any development a second, site specific plot plan application must be filed and approved. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF expressed a concern for approving the zoning without a development plan. COMMISSIONER BLAIR questioned how far along the applicant was on the plans for development. JOHN FIRESTONE, applicant, indicated that the plans may be complete within the next six months. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF moved to close the public hearing at 7:00 P.M. and recommend adoption of the Negative Declaration for Change of Zone No. 5740; and Adopt Resolution 91-/next) recommending approval of Change of Zone No. 5740, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None Tentative Tract Map No. 24183 5.1 Proposal to subdivide 48.8 acres into 151 single family residential lots; 3 open space parcels; and 1 park (2.0) acres), within planning area No. 5 of the Meadows Specific Plan. Located north of Highway 79, between Margarita and Butterfield Stage Roads. CHARLES RAY provided the staff report. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF asked if TCSD was satisfied with what they were getting from the applicant as park site. GARY KING stated that TCSD was satisfied with park land dedication and added that they would like to see the park fully developed and ready for dedication at 30% of Tract 24183 occupancy. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF questioned if the dedication of the park should be completed upon recordation of the final and the improvements and acceptance could occur at a later date. COMMISSIONER FORD questioned why there was no specific improvements to the park site stated in the Conditions of Approval. CHAIRMAN HOAQLAND asked the assistant city attorney, without specific improvements determined, and if the map is approved, how does the City secure these improvements from the developer. JOHN CAVANAUQH advised that staff could condition the dedication prior to the final map being recorded and also condition that prior to final map recordation that applicant and the TCSD enter into an agreement specifying necessary park improvements. PC'MIN9/16/91 5 9-18-91 PLANNINO COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 1991 ROBERT RIGHETTI advised the Commission that at the August 5, 1991 meeting, staff amended Condition No. 77, which is now Condition No. 79 and should read, "Plans for a traffic signal shall be designed by a registered civil engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of DePortola Road with Street "A" and Meadows Parkway with Street "A". All traffic signals shall be installed and operational per the special provisions and the approved traffic signal plans. Prior to designing the above plans, contact the Department of Public Works for the design requirements. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 7:15 P.M. ROBERT KEMBLE, Robert Bien, William Frost & Associates, 28765 Single Oak Drive, Temecula, representing the applicant, indicated their concurrence with the staff report. Mr. Kemble added that the applicant would concur with the request for an agreement for park site improvements; however, he asked that the wording of that condition be read. JOHN CAVANAUGH suggested that the Commission could condition for the dedication prior to final map recordation and that prior to recordation of the final map the City and the developer enter into an agreement specifying park site improvements at the time of recordation, in accordance with the development standards in effect. ROBERT KEMBLE indicated the applicant's concurrence with the amendments to the Conditions of Approval. COMMISSIONER FAHEY stated that based on the specific plan, she does not feel this area can support the higher density development proposed by Tentative Tract No. 24183. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND concurred with Commissioner Fahey's comments. PL~NNIN~ COMHISSION NINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 1991 COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF moved to close the public hearing at 7:20 P.M. and Recommend adoption of the Negative Declaration for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24183 and Adopt Resolution No. 91-{next) recommending approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24183, modifying Conditions No. 25, No. 26 and No. 79, seconded by COMMISSIONER FORD. AYES: 2 COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff, Ford NOES: 3 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Noagland COMMISSIONER FORD stated that this item was brought back to the Commission to look at TCSD working out a mitigated park measure with the developer and not densities proposed by the tentative map design. The Commission questioned what action they could take, in regards to their general concerns regarding the residential density proposed. JOHN CAVANAUGH advised that in order to take action in the form of denial of the tentative tract map, the Commission would have to make findings that the proposed application is somehow not consistent with or deviates from the standards of the Development Agreement as it applies to the governing Specific Plan. Mr. Cavanaugh added that the Commission could also continue this item to allow staff to make findings for denial, continue the project indefinitely or reconsider the Commission's original motion. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF moved to reconsider his previous motion. AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Blair COMMISSIONER FAHEY stated based on the input from staff and the city attorney, the Commission is trying to address the density problem when it is no longer subject to Commission review therefore, she indicated that she would support the motion by Commissioner Chiniaeff. PCMIN9/16/91 7 9-18-91 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 1991 COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF moved to close the public hearing at 7:30 P.M. and Recommend adoption of the Negative Declaration for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24183 and AdoPt Resolution No. 91-{next) recommending approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24183, modifying Conditions No. 25, No. 26 and No. 79, seconded by COMMISSIONER PORD. COMMISSIONER FAHEY stated that although she would support the motion, she still had concerns about the overall lack of park land in this area; however, the revised Tentative Map, including the proposed park site dedication, reflects the intent of the approved Specific Plan and Development Agreement, and cannot be changed by the Commission. COMMISSIONER BLAIR stated that she would not support the motion based on the fact that the project is increasing densities without allowing for adequate park lands. COMMISSIONER HOAGLAND stated that he was dissatisfied with the options left available to the Commission on this item. He added that although he feels that staff could not come up with valid findings for denial, the Commission has voiced valid problems as they generally relate to densities and small residential lot sizes when not supported by additional park sites or recreational amenities. AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Blair CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND declared a recess at 7:45 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 7:50 P.M. 6. Tentative Tract Map No. 25417 6.1 Proposal to subdivide 41.2 acres into 6 multi-family residential lots and 2 open space parcels, within Planning Area No. 6 of the Meadows Specific Plan. Located northeast of Highway 79 and Margarita Road. CHARLES RAY provided the staff report. PCMIN9/16/91 8 9-i8-91 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16o 1991 ROBERT RIGHETTI advised that Condition No. 69 was revised at the August 5, meeting, and is now Condition No. 70, should be amended to read" ..... intersections of Street "A" and DePortola Road and Street "A" and Meadows Parkway. COMMISSIONER FORD requested clarification from Gary King about the statement regarding the 7.79 acres and discussions with the applicant on what is being proposed. Commissioner Ford clarified that this would not be in lieu of other park sites and amenities for this project. GARY KING stated that previously TCSD understood they would be receiving a 7.79 acre park site dedication within this tract; however, the applicant is requesting TCSD to recalculate the proposal's Quimby dedication requirements based on reduction in residential acreage developed subsequent to dedication of the proposed 7.79 acre park site. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 7:58 P.M. ROBERT KEMBLE, Robert Bien, William Frost & Associates, 28765 Single Oak Drive, Temecula, representing the applicant, requested clarification on the actual acreage that would be required under Quimby. Mr. Kemble stated that they were willing to comply with the Quimby Act. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF suggested that the applicant might consider submitting a development plan on the parcels so that the Commission might determine whether the applicant is providing adequate park land dedication. COMMISSIONER FAREY stated that there was clearly confusion between staff and the applicant on an understanding of what the requirement for park land dedication would be and therefore, the project would be impossible to approve at this juncture. COMMISSIONER FORD added that he was confused with the project Conditions of Approval and felt that there is a misunderstanding between staff and the applicant. COMMISSIONER BLAIR concurred and COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF added that staff needed the opportunity to review full, detailed site specific development plans before approving the proposal. P(:M]Ng/16/91 9 9-18-91 PLANNING COIO[ISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 1991 CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND stated that an over-whelming concern of the residents attending the General Plan meetings is residential density within the City vs. public services/ recreation provided. COMMISSIONER BLAIR moved to send Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25417 back to staff and continue off calendar, and that the applicant develop full site development plans, including detailed park dedications, and related improvement plans, thereby providing the Commission a complete overview of the entire project,seconded by COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF. AYES: NOES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: 0 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland None 7. Parcel Map No. 25059 Minor change No. I 7.1 Proposal to modify or delete engineering conditions. Located on Ridge Park Drive, south west side approximately 70 feet east of its intersection with Rancho California Road. COMMISSIONER FAHEY moved to continue Parcel Map No. 25059 Minor Change No. i to the regularly scheduled meeting of October 7, 1991, seconded by COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None Directional Sign Ordinance 8.1 City wide ordinance establishing regulations for directional signs. CHARLES HAY provided the staff report. COMMISSIONER FORD stated if would be difficult to get the 100' square feet and suggested lowering the square footage. PCMIN9/16/9I 10 9-18-91 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 1991 GARY THORNHILL concurred with his suggestions and added that staff could clarify either one side or the other. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND clarified that under the Ordinance you would be allowed one sign in two places in the City. GARY THORNHILL indicated that this was correct. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 8:30 P.M. LARRY SMITH, Coleman Homes, 43180 Business Park Drive, Temecula, representing the Temecula Homebuilders Association, stated their concurrence with the sign ordinance; however, they feel there should be more allowable panels and also, Item i on Page 4, does not provide specific distances from the intersection. COMMISSIONER FORD agreed that there needs to be more panels allowed. He stated that he felt there are to many inconsistencies and should go back to staff for further work. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF stated that he felt that the penalties were not appropriate and should be raised. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND suggested that staff come up with some quidelines on where these signs can be placed. COMMISSIONER BLAIR moved to close the public hearing at 8:35 P.M. and Adopt Resolution No. 91-(next) recommending adoption of the Directional Sign Ordinance, and direct staff to address the Commission's concerns, seconded by COMMISSIONER FORD. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None GARY THORNHILL requested a recommendation on the intersection distances. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND directed staff to confer with the Traffic Engineer for appropriate distances from the intersection. PLANNING COMMIESION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 1991 9. Change of 2one No. 17 and First Extension of Time Vesting Tentative Tract Map NO. 23125 9.1 Proposal to change the zoning on 88.4 acres from R-A-2 1/2 to R-1 and R-5; and subdivide 88.4 acres into 215 single family residential lots. Located on the northeast corner of DePortola and Butterfield Stage Road. RICHARD AYALAprOvided the staff report. GARY KING advised that Condition #22, page 27, would be amended to read "...prior to recordation of the final map, and approved to TCSD standards prior to issuance of the sixty third building permit." COMMISSIONER CEINIAEFF questioned if any more of lot 215 could be developed. GARY KING stated that there was approximately 5 acres that has been set aside as wet land area, 2.75 acres negotiated as park land and approximately 10 acres is designated as open space, which can be integrated into the City trail system. COMMISSIONER FORD questioned delineating lot 215 into two separate lots through conditioning. GARY THORNHILL advised that they could condition that separation. CHAIRMAN EOAGLAMD stated that the City would be able to accept the 2.75 acre park site; however, deny or accept the wet land area through dedication. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 8:45 P.M. DAVE JAMES, Ranpac Engineering, 27447 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula, representing the applicant, stated their concurrence with the staff report. COMMISSIONER FAMEY questioned if the applicant would be willing to designate lot 215 into three separate lots as slopes, park land and wet land. DAVE JAMES stated that they would be willing to condition that the final map designate lot 215 into three separate lots. PCMIN9/16/91 12 9-t8-91 PLANNXNG COMMXSBXON MXNUTE8 8EPTEMBER ~6, ~99~ CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND asked if the Homeowners Association would accept the slope area for maintenance. DAVE JAMES stated that they had hoped the City would accept all of lot 215 including the slopes; however, if the City did not accept all of lot 215, the HOA would maintain the lot(s) not accepted as dedication. COMMISSIONER FORD suggested that a condition be included to ensure that the Homeowners Association maintain the interior open spaces. COMMISSIONER FAHEY questioned Condition No. 2 being redundant to TCSD condition requiring land dedication. GARY KING concurred with Commissioner Fahey and stated that Condition No. 2 could be deleted. GARY THORNHILL recommended deleting Condition 18, D & E, and amend with a condition stating that the Homeowners Association shall maintain non-arterial slopes. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND stated he was unclear how the City was going to develop park land on what appeared to be the sump area of the wet lands. DOUG STEWART stated that staff will investigate the sump location prior to approving the park land. COMMISSIONER FORD suggested conditioning that applicant will work with Engineering and TCSD to get the wet land area into useable land. COMMISSIONER FAHEY moved to continue Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125, to the next available meeting, to allow staff to address the concerns of the Commission regarding dedication of the park land and the maintenance of open spaces by the Homeowners Association and bring back to the Commission with the written conditions, seconded by COMMISSIONER BLAIR. PCMI~9/16/91 13 9-18-91 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 1991 CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND stated that the applicant needs to work with TCSD to provide plans for improvement to the park area taking into consideration the location of the storm drain. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None Plot 10.1 Plan No. 232 (Bay City Services) Proposal to construct a two-story office/warehouse/ trucking service facility totaling 6,900+/- square feet on a 6.04 acre site; developed portion of the project site = 1.9+/- acre. Located in the Rancho California Business Park, Phase II, Parcel No. 10, west frontage of Business Park Drive Loop. CHARLES RAY provided the staff report. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND questioned how the remainder of the project was to be developed. GARY THORNHILL stated that staff could not mandate the applicant to develop the entire site. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 9:12 P.M. TOM AWBREY, 1515 Moreno, San Diego, architect, concurred with the staff report and added that they would be willing to hydroseed the undeveloped remainder of the project site. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF expressed a concern for the project becoming a refuse disposal site and stated that he did not feel the use was compatible to the area. Commissioner Chiniaeff added that he did not feel the wall would withstand the intended use. TOM AWBREY advised that the site is to be used for truck fueling and maintenance only. Mr. Awbrey added that there would be a 14' high screen wall around the site as well. COMMISSIONER BLAIR questioned why the applicant changed from a stucco/masonry wall to the metal wall. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE8 SEPTEMBER 16, 1991 TOM AWBREY stated that originally they were considering a masonry wall with a split face finish and the metal panel above; however, how they were now proposing the all metal, 14' screen wall as a viable design solution based on previous use of the proposed materials and construction type. The Commission as a whole expressed a concern for the proposed screen wall materials. GARY THORNHILL stated that the Commission could condition the applicant to have the wall match the building or, require enhanced landscaping to screen the wall, or they could approve a combination wall. COMMISSIONER FAREY moved to close the public hearing at 9:30 P.M. and Adopt Negative Declaration for Plot Plan No. 232 and Adopt Resolution PC 91-(next) approving Plot Plan No. 232 with the modification that the wall be stucco/masonry to match the construction of the building as well as enhanced landscaping to screen the wall, seconded by COMMISSIONER BLAIR. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND requested the applicant's concurrence to the modifications. TOM AUBREY offered that a combination wall might be more attractive. COMMISSIONER FORD suggested that the applicant use some banding on the wall as well as the enhanced landscaping. The maker of the motion and the second concurred. AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Hoagland NOES: i COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff Ford, 11. Plot Plan No. 239 (Rancho California Water District) 11.1 Proposal to construct three structures housing Rancho California Water District Headquarters functions as follows: 2-story office at 40,000 square feet; warehouse at 13,000 square feet and an Operations (Maintenance) Building at 20,000 square feet. Total project site area 11.45 acres. Located northwesterly of the intersection of Diaz Road and Rio Nedo. PCM]N9/16/91 15 9-18-9t PLANNIN(3 COMMISSION MINUTES BEPTEMBER 16, 1991 COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF moved to continue Plot Plan No. 239 to the regularly scheduled meeting of October 7, 1991, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY. AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Hoagland None Ford Fahey, COMMISSIONER FORD temporarily excused himself from the vote. 12, Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 12.1 Proposal to subdivide 20 acres into 34 single family residential lots. Located on the south side of Pauba Road, between Ynez and Margarita Roads. CHARLES HAY provided the staff report. The Commission indicated that they had not received the map for the project in their agenda packages and therefore could not adequately address the request. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF requested that a map of the surrounding area be included in the next agenda package. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 9:40 P.M. KEN RUDOLPH, 43082 Corte Villa, Temecula, submitted a "Request To Speak"; however, Mr. Rudolph rescinded his request when called to speak by the Chairman. COMMISSIONER FAHEY moved to Continue Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 to the meeting of October 7, 1991, seconded by COMMISSIONER FORD. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None PCMINg/16/91 16 9-18-91 PLANNING CONMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 1991 13. Tentative Tract 25277 and Zone Change 5724 13.1 Proposal to change the zone from R-R, Rural Residential, to R-l, single family residential and to create 102 residential lots and 7 open space lots. Located on the southwesterly side of Pechanga Creek abutting the easterly side of Temecula Creek Inn Golf Course. CHAIRMA~ HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 9:40 P.M. COMMISSIONER BLAIR moved to continue Tentative Tract 25277 and Zone Change 5724 to the regularly scheduled meeting of October 21, 1991, seconded by COMMISSIONER FORD. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None 14. Change of Zone No. 5631; and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 14.1 Proposal to change to zoning designation of the subject property from R-R (Rural Residential 20,000 square feet minimum) to R-1 (one-family residential - 7,200 square feet minimum); and, subdivide approximately 56.6 acres into 102 single family residential lots and 4 open space lots. Located on the northside of Pauba Road, West of Margarita Road. CHARLES RAY provided the staff report. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 9:50 P.M. ROBERT KEMBLE, Robert Bien, William Frost & Associates, 28765 Single Oak Drive, Temecula, representing the applicant, stated that they concurred with the staff's findings and recommendations. Mr. Kemble stated that they felt they had adequately addressed the issues and concerns raised by staff and the Commission during the last meeting. The following individuals spoke in opposition to the project: KEN RUDOLPH, 43082 Corte Villa, Temecula GARY PETCH, 43065 Vista Del Rancho, Temecula KEVIN PRUCHETTI, 30559 Pauba Road, Temecula STEVE NELSON, 43015 Showalter Road, Temecula AUDREY MEDARI5, 30601 Moontide Court, Temecula PCM]Ng/16/91 17 9-18-91 PI.~,NNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 1991 MICHAEL MEDARIS, 30601 Moontide Court, Temecula BRIAN NANTAIS, 42635 Remota Street, Temecula MARCIA SLAVIN, 30110 La Primavera, Temecula CHARLOTTE LEATHERS, 42623 Remora Street, Temecula MARIE DUNN, 30156 La Primavera Street, Temecula NATE DIBIASI, 30445 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula BOB RHEIN, 30353 Verfonda, Temecula PHILIP 8AUM, 43209 Vista De1 Rancho, Temecula MARCINAHADJES, 42808 Sota Suzanne, Temecula The individuals listed above strongly disagreed with the recommendations by the staff for the following reasons: grading, higher density, increased traffic flow, contamination of the small lake area, etc. Marcia Slavin, president of the Lakeview Homeowners Association brought in water samples from the lake which shows past and present water contamination. ROBERT KEMBLE stated that the applicant came back to the Commission after addressing issues and concerns raised by the Commission in the January meeting; however, consideration of alternative uses was not a concern the applicant was requested to address. Mr. Kemble added that the problem with the lake were not as a result of the Acacia development up stream. COMMISSIONER FAHEY stated that she had expressed concerns at the January hearing that she feels have not been adequately addressed and added that she felt there was a probable inconsistency with the future General Plan due to the proposed change in density on a prominent ridgeling and that the requested increase in density vs. the existing zoning of the project site has the potential of a negative environmental impact that cannot be mitigated. Commissioner Fahey indicated that project Conditions of Approval relating to drainage to the Lake Village area and increased traffic flow on Pauba Road were inadequate to mitigate potential project impacts, and concluded that she could not support this project. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF stated that this site has been designated residential since the early 1980's. Commissioner Chiniaeff also stated that he thought the proposed lot pattern on the east side of the project appeared strained. PC'MIN9/16/91 18 9-18-91 PLANNIN~ COMMISSION MINUTES 8EPTEMBgR 16, 1991 COMMISSIONER BLAIR stated that she had expressed a number of concerns regarding the project in January and feels they still exist. She added that she felt the lights at the Sports Park are of major concern and a health consideration. COMMISSIONER PAHEY moved to Deny Change of Zone No. 5631 and Deny Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 based on the proposals being inconsistent with the future General Plan due to the increased density along a prominent ridgeling, the significant grading required, and recommend Deny adoption of the Negative Declaration due to the potential negative impact the increased density may have on traffic and drainage into the Lake Village area, seconded by COMMISSIONER BLAIR, COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF stated that he would support the motion based on the potential grading impacts of this project. COMMISSIONER FAHEY advised that this was not a denial for development of the property; however, the requested zoning should respect site limitations including topography of the area. AYES:' NOES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: 0 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Noagland None CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND advised the public that this would be a recommendation to the City Council and was not a final action. 16. Variance No. 6 16.1 Proposal for variance in order to allow an additional freestanding sign display in lieu of the maximum allowed freestanding signs per Ordinance 348. RICHARD AYALAprovided the staff report. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 10:45 P.M. LARRY MARKHAM, Markham & Associates, 41750 Winchester Road, Temecula, representing the applicant, indicated their concurrence with the staff report. PC'MINg/16/91 19 9-18-91 PLANNIN(~ COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER ~6, 1991 COMMISSIONER FAHEY moved to close the public hearing at 10:50 P.M. and moved to Adopt Resolution No. 91-(next] approving Variance No. 6, seconded by COMMISSIONER FORD. 'AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: NOES: 1 COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING DIRECTOR REPORT Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford Hoagland GARY THORNHILL advised the Commission of the following: , Joint meeting with Temecula City Council scheduled on October 10, 1991, for a General Plan study session. , Planning Department will be expanding the notice area to 600 feet in most cases. * Planning Department will interviewing for assistant and associate planners. PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION None OTHER BUSINESS None ADJOURNMENT COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF moved to adjourn at 10:50 P.M. to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting, seconded by COMMISSIONER FORD. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None PCMIN9/16/91 2 0 9-1~-91 PLANNINg COMMISSION MINUTE8 SEPTEMBER 16, 1991 The next regularly scheduled meeting of the City of Temecula Planning Commission will be held Monday, October 7, 1991, 6:00 P.M., Vail Elementary School, 29915 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula. Chairman John E. Hoagland Secretary PCM~'q9/16/91 2 1 9-18-91 ITEM # 3 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Gary Thornhill, Planning Director~'~'' October 7, 1991 Case No.: Television/Radio Antenna Ordinance The Television/Radio Antenna Ordinance was originally scheduled forthe Planning Commission meeting of August 5, 1991; and a Public Hearing Notice was placed in The Californian pursuant to the California Government Code. This item was last continued to a date specific, for the October 7, 1991 Planning Commission meeting. At this time the City Attorney is still reviewing the draft ordinance. Therefore staff requests a further continuance to allow the City Attorney to complete the review of the proposed ordinance prior to the Commission's action on this item. Because of the number of continuances, staff will re-advertise this item as a Public Hearing for the October 21 Planning Commission meeting. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission CONTINUE the Television/Radio Antenna Ordinance to their meeting of October 21, 1991. JRM SANDIEFKM\STAFFFIPT\RADIOORD .M2P ITEM # 4 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 7, 1991 Case No.: Change of Zone No. 19 Prepared By: John R. Meyer Recommendation: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending approval of Change of Zone No. 19. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: City of Temecula PROPOSAL: Expand Old Town Historical District Boundary. LOCATION: Old Town Historic District, generally located between Murrietta (River Street) Creek and Hwy 15, between 2nd and 6th Streets. EXISTING ZONING: C-1 (General Commercial) C-P (Restricted Commercial) M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial) R-1 (One Family Dwellings) PROPOSED ZONING: No Change Proposed EXISTING LAND USES: Commercial Residential Vacant BACKGROUND: On October 11, 1979, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance No. 578 which sets the parameter for establishing Historic Preservation Districts. The Temecula Historic Preservation District (District) was then established by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on October 8, 1980. The Historical District boundary was established to coincide with the historical Temecula city boundary. JRM~MEYERJR\CZ19.M1P I PROPOSED BOUNDARY: ANALYSIS: Ordinance No. 578 provided for the establishment of a Local Review Board (Board) to oversee preservation activities and review development proposals within the District. The Board serves in an advisory capacity to the Planning Director, who has the responsibility to issue Certificates of Historical Appropriateness. Although specific design standards for Old Town have not been adopted, general guidelines encourage development to conform to a late 1800's/early 1900's style of architecture and building materials. Development outside the District boundary may have a significant impact on the character of Old Town. With the current boundary configuration, key sites fall outside the jurisdiction of the District. Therefore, the City Council has directed Staff to expand the existing boundary and initiate a process to prepare a specific plan for Old Town. The expansion and subsequent specific plan are intended to strengthen the preservation effort and promote Old Town as a significant community resource. With direction from the City Council, staff recommends the following boundary expansion: North to Rancho California Road. South to First Street/Santiago Road. East - No change West to include the area within the Murrietta Creek Channel. The existing and proposed boundaries are shown in Exhibit I. As mentioned above, development outside the District boundary may have a significant impact on the character of Old Town. The expansion of the Old Town Historic District will provide a more comprehensive review of development proposals that relate to the original Old Town. JRM\MEYERJR~CZ19.M1P 2 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: FINDINGS: The purpose of expanding northerly to Rancho California Road is to create an Old Town gateway statement at a freeway interchange, by providing better signage and identification. It will also allow for review of any major remodels of the existing commercial development. The expansion to the south will provide for a better delineation or "break point" of the district boundary. The Murrietta Creek provides a logical boundary and buffer for Old Town. By including the area within the channel within the District any future improvements within the channel will be subject to the Old Town guidelines. This project has been determined to be a Statutory Exemption per Section 15262 of CEQA. An Environmental Impact Report or Mitigated Negative Declaration will be prepared as part of the specific plan. The subject item is recommended for approval subject to the following findings: The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general plan. The proposed boundary expansion will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment, as determined in the Initial Study for this project. There is a reasonable probability that the boundary expansion will be consistent with the future General Plan. The proposed boundary expansion will likely be consistent with the goals, policies and action programs which will be contained in the General Plan when it is ultimately adopted. The area of the proposed boundary expansion is suitable to accommodate all the land uses currently permitted in the zoning district. JRM\MEYERJ~CZ19.MIP 3 That said findings are supported by analysis, minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 91 - recommending approval of Change of Zone No. 19. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Exhibits JRM\MEYERJR\CZ19.M1P 4 ATTACHMENT I RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 19 TO EXPAND THE OLD TOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT BOUNDARY, NORTH TO RANCHO CALIFORNIA DRIVE, SOUTH TO FIRST STREET/SANTIAGO DRIVE AND EAST TO INCLUDE AREA WITHIN MURREITTA CREEK CHANNEL. WHEREAS, The City of Temecula filed Change of Zone No. 19 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Change of Zone application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Change of Zone on October 7, 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 recommend approval of said Change of Zone; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Findin~. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: A. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general plan. The proposed boundary expansion will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment, as determined in the Initial Study for this project. C. There is a reasonable probability that the boundary expansion will be consistent with the future General Plan. JRM~MEYERJR\CZ19.M1P 5 The proposed boundary expansion will likely be consistent with the goals, policies and action programs which will be contained in the General Plan when it is ultimately adopted. The area of the proposed boundary expansion is suitable to accommodate all the land uses currently permitted in the zoning district, The proposed boundary expansion will not be detrimental to the health safety and welfare of the community. That said findings are supported by analysis, minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. SECTION 2. Environmental ComPliance. An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that the proposed project is a Statutory Exemption per Section 15262 of CEQA. SECTION 3. Exoansion of Boundarv. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Zone Change No, 19 to expand the Old Town Historical District Boundary as follows: North to Rancho California Road. South to First Street/Santiago Road. East - No change West to include the area within the Murrietta Creek Channel. SECTION 4.,. Incorporate MaD BV Reference. Exhibit A, showing the recommended boundaries of the Old Town Historical District, is attached herein incorporated by reference. SECTION 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of April, 1991. JRM\MEYERJR\CZ19.M1P 6 John Hoagland 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 7th day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS J RM\MEYERJR\CZ19 .M1P 7 OLD TOWN TEM ECULA HISTORIC EXISTING pROPOSED DiSTR~,CT ITEM # 5 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Gary Thornhill, Planning Director October 7, 1991 Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time-Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 were presented before the Planning Commission on September 16, 1991. Both applications were unanimously motioned to be continued to the October 7, 1991, Planning Commission meeting in order for both Staff and applicant to address the dedication of the parkland and the maintenance of open spaces by the homeowners association. The parkland dedication requirement (Quimby) is 2.75 acres of improved parkland identified on Tract Map No. 23125 as lot "A" which will be dedicated to the TCSD prior to recordation of the final map and be improved to TCSD standards prior to issuance of the 63rd Building Permit. Approximately 12 acres of undeveloped open space contiguous with the proposed parksite identified as lot "C" and approximately 2.6 acres of wetland identified as lot "B" will be dedicated to the TCSD upon completion of required improvements and prior to the issuance of the 63rd building permit. In addition, all interior slopes including lot "D" will be maintained by an HOA (see Tract Map No. 23125). The exterior slope maintenance areas are proposed to be maintained by the TCSD and will be properly identified on the final map. S\STAFFRPT\23125A,VTM STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning Department Staff Recommends that the Planning Commission Recommend to the City Council: ACCEPTANCE of Environmental Impact Report No. 263 for Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125. ADOPTION of Resolution No. 91 - recommending approval of Change of Zone No. 17; and ADOPTION of Resolution No. 91 - recommending approval of First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125. A I ~ ACHMENTS: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Memorandum (September 16, 1991 ) Staff Report (July 15, 1991) Resolution (Change of Zone No. 17) Resolution (First Extension of Time Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125) Condition of Approval (First Extension of Time Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125) California Department of Fish and Game Transmittal Dated August 18, 1990 Los Angeles District, Corps of Engineers Transmittal Dated February 8, 1991 Minutes (July 15, 1991) Minutes (September 16, 1991 ) S~STAFFRPT~23125A.VTM 2 MEMORANDUM Planning Commission FROM: Gary Thornhill, Planning Director DATE: September 16, 1991 SUBJECT: Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time-Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 were presented before the Planning Commission on July 15, 1991. Both applications were unanimously motioned to be continued to the following Planning Commission meeting in order for both Staff and applicant to address slopes, H.O.A., and acceptability of the proposed park site for the subject project. In response to the Commission's direction to reduce the slopes on the subject tract map, the applicant feels that a re-design of the project in order to reduce slopes would be an extreme hardship, due to the tentative and final map approvals that have been obtained over the past three years at a cost of approximately $728,000.00 for consultants and agency fees alone. The Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) has reviewed the subject tract and has concluded that interior slopes within Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 shall be maintained by an established H.O.A. However, the exterior slopes may be dedicated to the City of Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) by way of an irrevocable offer of dedication for maintenance. In either case, the slopes proposed shall comply with existing standards as approved by the TCSD. The proposed tract consists of 212 single family residential homes. The parkland dedication requirement (Quimby) is 2.75 acres or payment of the equivalent fair market value plus 20% for off-site improvements. The proposed tract has approximately 18 acres of open space to the east of the project and is proposing to improve 2.75 acres for active park use. Therefore, the applicant meets the required parkland dedication. The remaining open space will retain its natural condition and will be maintained by the TCSD. S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 3 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning Department Staff Recommends that the Planning Commission Recommend to the City Council: ACCEPTANCE of Environmental Impact Report No. 263 for Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125. ADOPTION of Resolution No. 91 - recommending approval of Change of Zone No. 17; and ADOPTION of Resolution No. 91 - recommending approval of First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report (July 15, 1991) Resolution (Change of Zone No. 17) Resolution (First Extension of Time Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125) Condition of Approval (First Extension of Time Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125) Minutes (July 15, 1991) S\STAFFRPT~23125A.VTM ~f STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION July 15, 1991 Case No.: Change of Zone No. 17 First Extension of Time Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 Prepared By: Richard Ayala Recommendation: Forward the following recommendations to the City Council: ACCEPT Environmental Impact Report No. 263 for Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125; ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending approval of Change of Zone No. 17; and ADOPT Resolution No. 91- approving First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Sterling Builders, Inc. REPRESENTATIVE: Ranpac Engineering Corporation PROPOSAL: ChanGe of Zone No. 17 Change of Zone No. 17 is a proposal to change the zoning on 88.4 acres of land from R-A-2 1/2 (Residential Agricultural - 2 1/2 Acres Minimum) to R-1 (One-Family Dwellings) and R-5 (Open Area Combining Zone - Residential Developments). S\STAFFRPT~23125A.VTM 5 First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract MaD No. 23125 First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 proposes a two hundred fifteen (215) lot residential subdivision of 88.4 acres. LOCATION: Northeast Corner of De Portola and Butterfield Stage Road. EXISTING ZONING: R-A-2 1/2 (Residential Agricultural - 2 1/2 Acre Minimum) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: South: East: West: R-1 (One-Family Dwelling) R-R (Rural Residential) R-R (Rural Residential) SP (Specific Plan) PROPOSED ZONING: R~I (One-Family Dwellings) and R-5 (Open Area Combining Zone Developments) - Residential EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Vacant South: Vacant East: Vacant West: Vacant PROJECT STATISTICS: Project Area: Proposed No. of Lots: Proposed Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Density: SWAP Density: Acreage Designated By Proposed Zones: R-1 (One-Family Dwellings): R-5 (Open Area Combination Zone- Residential Development): 88.4 acres 212residenljal, 3 open space 7,200 sq.ft. 2.3 DU/AC 2-4 DU/AC 61.61 acres 22 acres S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 6 BACKGROUND: Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 were presented before the Planning Commission on July 15, 1991. Both applications were unanimously motioned to be continued to the following Planning Commission in order for both Staff and applicant to address slopes, H.O.A., and acceptability of the proposed park site for the subject project. The original application, Change of Zone No. 5122 was a request to change the zoning on 88.4 acres of land from R-A-2 1/2 (Residential Agricultural - 2 1/2 Acres Minimum) to R-1 (One-Family Dwellings) and R-5 (Open Area Combinating Zone - Residential Development) zones. This Zone Change was approved by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors on October 20, 1988, along with Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 which proposed a 212 Residential lot subdivision on 88.4 acres. However, due to an oversight by the County, the Zone Change was acted upon on May 29, 1990, after the official incorporation date of the City of Temecula (December 1, 1989). Therefore, the Zone Change was never officially adopted. The applicant submitted a new application, Change of Zone No. 17, to the City of Temecula Planning Department on May 21, 1991. First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 was submitted to the City of Temecula on July 6, 1990 and was processed through Pre-DRC (Development Review Committee) at which time the zone change issue was identified. The Extension was then put on hold until the Zone Change could be resolved. Therefore, both Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 are being processed concurrently. S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 7 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Change of Zone No. 17 The applicant is proposing to change the zone on 88.4 acres of land situated at the northeast corner of De Portola Road and Butterfield Stage Road, which is identical to the original Zone Change No. 5122. The land use breakdown is as follows: R-l, One-Family Dwellings - 61.61 acres. This zoning permits single family dwellings. R-5, Open Area Combining Zone Residential Developments - 22 acres. This zone allows for the development of parkland uses. The proposed zoning will be consistent with projects approved in the area such as the Crowne Hill project (Change of Zone No. 4814, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23143) located immediately adjacent to the north. This project was approved by the Board of Supervisors on August 16, 1988, and will ultimately create 1,092 R-1 residential lots, 26 R-A-2 1/2 lots and 11 open space lots for parks, a school, and open area. The Paloma Del Sol Plan (SP 219) is located directly to the west of the project site, across Butterfield Stage Road. This specific plan covers 1,389 acres and will allow up to a maximum of 5,611 dwelling units. The area of this specific plan nearest to the proposed project site calls for Medium density residential, 2-5 dwelling units per acre. First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract MaD No. 23125 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 proposes to subdivide the subject 88.4 acre site into a residential development consisting of 212 residential lots and 3 open space lots, with an overall density of 2.3 units per acre. The proposed development has been designed in accordance with the standards of the R- 1 zone (One-Family Dwellings). S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 8 ANALYSIS: The project site is located at the Northeast corner of De Portola Road and Butterfield Stage Road. At present, the site is vacant. ChanQe of Zone No. 17 The subject site is currently zoned R-A-2 1/2 (Residential Agricultural, 2 1/2 Acres Minimum) and designated 2-4 DU/AC by the SWAP (Southwest Area Community Plan) Map. Surrounding properties adjacent to the subject site are designated by SWAP as being 2-4 DU/AC, Commercial and Specific Plan uses. Currently, there is an approved specific plan (Paloma Del Sol) situated to the west, and a 1,092 residential subdivision (VTM 23143) directly to the north of the subject site, which consists of similar developments and densities being proposed by the applicant. The applicant is proposing to zone the areas adjacent to Butterfield Stage Road and De Portola Road R-5 in order to provide for adequate open space between the proposed roads and residential development. The interior of the subject site is entirely zoned R-1. In addition, Staff has reviewed the proposed zoning for the subject site and has found it to be acceptable due to the proposed density being consistent with the SWAP and approved projects adjacent to the subject site. First Extension of Time Vesting Tentative Tract MaD No. 23125 Design Considerations The proposed subdivision has been designed in accordance with the standards of the R-1 (One- Family Dwellings) zone and Ordinance Nos. 348 and 460. The main access to the project is provided by De Portola Road. S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 9 FUTURE GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY: Ooen Space/Slopes The Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) has reviewed that subject tract and has concluded that Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 shall be maintained by an established H.O.A. However, the H.O.A. may, at a later date, elect to have the slopes dedicated to the City of Temecula, Community Services District (TCSD) by way of an irrevocable offer of dedication for maintenance. In either case the slopes proposed shall comply with existing standards as approved by the TCSD. Density The proposed subdivision (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125) has a density of 2.3 DU/AC. The Southwest Area Community Plan (SWAP) calls for 2- 4 DU/AC, thus, meeting the SWAP residential Density requirement. Quimby Act The proposed tract consists of 212 single family residential homes, The parkland dedication requirement (Quimby) is 2.75 acres or payment of the equivalent fair market value plus 20% for off-site improvements. The proposed tract has identified a proposed 2 acre park. With the required parkland dedication of 2.75 acres, the 2 acre park has a shortage of .75 acres. The applicant has agreed to increase the park to 2.75 acres in lieu of parkland fees. The proposed Change of Zone and density of 2.3 units per acre is consistent with the Southwest Area Community Plan designation of 2-4 units per acre. In addition, Staff finds it probable that this project will be consistent with the new General Plan when it is adopted. S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 10 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: FINDINGS: In accordance with the procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Environmental Impact Report No. 263 was prepared in connection with the proposed project. All significant effect of the project on the environment and measures necessary to avoid or substantially lessen such effect was evaluated in accordance with the Riverside County Rules to implement CEQA. Certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 263, was approved by the Riverside Board of Supervisors on October 25, 1988. Change of Zone No. 17 The proposed zone change will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment, as determined in the Environmental Impact Report for this project. There is a reasonable probability that the zone change from R-A-2 1/2 to R-1 and R-5 will be consistent with the future General Plan. Further, densities and uses proposed are similar to existing densities and uses in the vicinity of the project site. There is not a reasonable 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 proposal is consistent with surrounding land uses. The proposed change in district classification is reasonable and beneficial at this time as it is a logical expansion of residential uses which exist adjacent to, and in the vicinity of, the project site. S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 11 The proposed change in district classification will likely be consistent with the goals, policies and action programs which will be contained in the General Plan when it is ultimately adopted. The density and land use proposed are consistent with the Southwest Area Plan and approved and proposed adjacent specific plans. The site of the proposed change in district classification is suitable to accommodate all the land uses currently permitted in the proposed zoning district as it is of adequate size and shape for the proposed residential use. Possible land use conflicts are not likely to arise as the project proposes residential uses similar to those existing in the general vicinity of the subject site. Adequate access exists for the proposed residential land use from Butterfield Stage Road and De Portola Road. Additional internal access and required road improvements to proposed lots will be designed and constructed in conformance with Riverside County standards. Said findings are supported by analysis, minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract MaD No, 23125 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 existing site development S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 12 standards in that it proposes articulated design features and site amenities commensurate with existing and anticipated residential development standards. 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 design guidelines standards. 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 land use designation. 'he 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 fact that; adequate area is provided for all proposed residential structures; adequate landscaping is provided along the project's public and private frontages; and the internal circulation plan should not create traffic conflicts as design provisions are in conformance with adopted City standards. 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. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 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 S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 13 10. compatibility with surrounding land uses; and adequate area and design features provide for siting of proposed development in terms of landscaping and internal traffic circulation. 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, and also consistent with the adopted Southwest Area Community Plan (SWAP) designation. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural environment as determined in the Negative Declaration adopted by the County for the project, due to the fact that impact mitigation is realized by conformance with the project's Conditions of Approval. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic, due to the fact that the project currently proposes two independent access points from De Portola Road which has been determined to be adequate by the City Engineer. 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. S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 14 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: vgw Attachments: 1. 2. 3. 11. 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. Based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval, the Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward the following recommendations to the City Council: ACCEPTION of Environmental Impact Report No. 263 for Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125; ADOPTION of Resolution No. 91 - recommending approval of Change of Zone No. 17; and m ADOPTION of Resolution No. 91 - recommending approval of First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125. Resolution (Change of Zone No. 17) Resolution (First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125) Conditions of Approval (First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125) Exhibits A. Change of Zone No. 17 B. First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 15 ATTACHMENT 3 RESOLUTION NO. 91- CZ17 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 17 TO CHANGE THE ZONING ON 88.4 ACRES OF LAND FROM R-A-2 1/2 (RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL - 2 1/2 ACRES MINIMUM) TO R-1 AND R-5 ALONG THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF DE PORTOLA ROAD AND BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 926-330-004 AND 926-070- 020. accordance Ordinances, WHEREAS, Sterling Builders, Inc., filed Change of Zone No. 17 in with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Change of Zone application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Change of Zone on October 7, 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 Change of Zone; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Findinos. 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: S\STAFFRPT~23125A.VTM 16 CZ17 (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. 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 Change of Zone is consistent with the SWAP and does 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 approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the following: S%STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 17 CZ17 a) There is reasonable probability that Change of Zone No. 17 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 6.5, no Change of Zone 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 Zone Change 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 proposed Tentative Tract Map, makes the following findings to wit: a) The proposed zone change will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment, as determined in the Environmental Impact Report for this project. b) There is a reasonable probability that the Zone Change from R-A-2 1/2 to R-1 and R-5 will be consistent with the future General Plan. Further, densities and uses proposed are similar to existing densities and uses in the vicinity of the project site. c) There is not a reasonable probability of substantial detriment to, or interference with, the future and adopted General Plan, if the proposed use or action is ultimately S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 18 CZ17 inconsistent with the plan due to the fact that the proposal is consistent with surrounding land uses. d) The proposed change in district classification is reasonable and beneficial at this time as it is a logical expansion of residential uses which exist adjacent to, and in the vicinity of, the project site. e) The proposed change in district classification will likely be consistent with the goals, policies and action programs which will be contained in the General Plan when it is ultimately adopted. The density and land use proposed are consistent with the Southwest Area Plan and approved and proposed adjacent specific plans. f) The site of the proposed change in district classification is suitable to accommodate all the land uses currently permitted in the proposed zoning district as it is of adequate size and shape for the proposed residential use. Possible land use conflicts are not likely to arise as the project proposes residential uses similar to those existing in the general vicinity of the subject site. g) Adequate access exists for the proposed residential land use from De Portola Road and Butterfield Stage Road. Additional internal access and required road improvements to proposed lots will be designed and constructed in conformance with Riverside County standards. h) Said findings are supported by analysis, minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 19 CZ17 SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance. The Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project indicates that the proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment. SECTION 3. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Zone Change No. 17 to change the zoning on 88.4 acres of land from R-A-2 1/2 to R-1 and R-5 along the northeast corner of De Portola and Butterfield Stage Roads and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 926-330-004 and 926-070-020. SECTION 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of October 1991. JOHN HOAGLAND 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 7th day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS S\STAFFRPT~23125A.VTM 20 ATTACHMENT 4 TE-VTM23125 RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 23125 A 215 RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION ON 88.4 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF DE PORTOLA ROAD AND BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 926-330-004 AND 926-070-020. WHEREAS, Sterling Builders, Inc., filed the Time Extension in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Time Extension application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Time Extension on October 7, 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 approved said Time Extension. 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: S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 2 1 TE-VTM23125 (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 Time Extension 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 Time Extension 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: S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 22 TE-VTM23125 a) There is reasonable probability that the Time Extension 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) Pursuantto Section 18.30(c), no Time Extension may be approved unless the following findings can be made: a) The proposed use must conform to all the General Plan requirements and with all applicable requirements of state law and City ordinances. b) The proposed subdivision does not affect the general health, safety, and welfare of the public. (2) The Planning Commission, in approving the proposed Time Extension, makes the following findings, to wit: a) 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 existing site development standards in that it proposes articulated design features and site amenities commensurate with existing and anticipated residential development standards. S~STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 23 b) c) d) e) f) TE-VTM23125 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 design guidelines standards. 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 land use designation. 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 fact that; adequate area is provided for all proposed residential structures; adequate landscaping is provided along the project's public and private frontages; and the internal circulation plan should not create traffic conflicts as design provisions are in conformance with adopted City standards. 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. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 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 S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 24 TE-VTM23125 compatibility with surrounding land uses; and adequate area and design features provide for siting of proposed development in terms of landscaping and internal traffic circulation. g) 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, and also consistent with the adopted Southwest Area Community Plan (SWAP) designation. h) The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural environment as determined in the Negative Declaration adopted by the County for the project, due to the fact that impact mitigation is realized by conformance with the project's Conditions of Approval. i) The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic, due to the fact that the project currently proposes two independent access points from De Portola Road which has been determined to be adequate by the City Engineer. j) 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. k) That said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental documents associated with these applicants and herein S%STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 25 T~VTM23125 incorporated by reference, due to the fact that they are referenced in the attached Staff Report, Exhibits, Environmental Assessment, and Conditions of Approval. E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 2, the Time Extension 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. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby determines that the previous environmental determination (Adoption of Environmental Impact Report No. 263) still applies to said Tract Map (Extension of Time). SECTION 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves The First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 for a 215 residential subdivision on 88.4 acres located on the northeast corner of De Portola Road and Butterfield Stage Road and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 926-330-004 and 926-070-020 subject to the following conditions: A. Attachment III, attached hereto. SECTION 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of October 1991. JOHN HOAGLAND CHAIRMAN S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 26 TE-VTM23125 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 7th day of October 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS PLANNING COMMISSIONERS PLANNING COMMISSIONERS S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 27 ATTACHMENT 5 CITY OF TEMECULA ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 Commission Approval Date: Expiration Date: Planning Department Unless previously paid, 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 subdividcr shall providc for thc dedication of park land and/or in licu, fccs to thc satisfaction of thc Tcmocula Community Scrviccs District (TCSD) Board of Dircctorc PRIOR TO RECORDATION of final map, as authorizcd by City of Tcmccula Ordinancc No. 460.93. The park land dedication requirement shall be a predetermined amount based on the use and number of units proposed. If the park land requirement cannot be met, the applicant shall be required to pay a predetermined Quimby Act Fee in the amount equal to the fair market value of the required park land acreage (Plus 20% for offsite improvements). 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. This conditionally approved Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 will expire one (1) year after the original expiration date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance 460. The expiration date is October 20, 1991. S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 28 5. The subdivider shall comply with the original Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 (see attached) except as amended herein. 6. Prior to recordation, Change of Zone No. 17 shall be effective. The applicant shall comply with the California Department of Fish and Game (Streambed Alteration Agreement 5-381-90) recommendations outlined in the transmittal dated August 18, 1990, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the Los Angeles District, Corps of Engineers recommendations outlined in the transmittal dated February 8, 1991, a copy of which is attached. Engineerinq 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. The developer shall comply with all previous Conditions of Approval except as amended by the following conditions. 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. PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 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; Riverside County Flood Control district; City of Temecula Fire Bureau; Planning Department; Engineering Department; Riverside County Health Department; CATV Franchise; Parks and Recreation Department; and Temecula Community Services District. S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 29 10. Any Noticc of Intention to anncx into the Temocula Community Scrvice District, Scrvicc Lcvcl "C" (Landscapc Maintenance), shall bc submittcd to thc TCSD prior to rccordation of thc final map.. All costs involvcd in District anncxation shall bc bornc by thc dcvolopcr. 11. Notice of Intention to anncx into the Tcmccula Community Servicc District, Service Level "A" (Mcdians), shall bc submitted to TCSD prior to rccordation of thc final map. All costs involved in District anncxation shall bc bornc by thc dcvclopcr. 12. Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of street improvements. 13. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act any Subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 14. 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. 15. 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. PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT: 16. 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. 17. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. 18. 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. The fee to be paid shall be 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 S\STAFFRPT~23125A.VTM 30 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. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. 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). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY: 19. If construction of improvements are phased and completed prior to development occurring on adjacent properties, a 28' wide secondary access road shall be provided within a recorded private road easement as approved by the City Engineer. 20. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Transportation Engineering PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 21. A signing plan shall be designed by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for all internal streets with 66' of right-of-way or less and shall be shown on the street improvement plans. 22. Condition No. 32 of the Riverside County Road letter dated June 28, 1988, shall be deleted. Temecula Community Service District (TCSD) Department 23. The exterior (perimeter) slopes proposed in the Tract Map No. 23125 may be dedicated to the TCSD by way of an irrevocable offer to dedicate for landscape maintenance purposes, upon compliance to existing standards as approved by the TCSD, and upon completion of the application process. 24. The Parkland Dedication Requirement (Quimby) is 2.75 acres of improved S\STAFFRPT\23125A.VTM 3 1 25. 26. 27. 28. parkland to be dedicated to the TCSD prior to issuance of 63rd Building Permit. Approximately 12 acres of undeveloped open space contiguous with the proposed park site identified as Lot "C" and approximately 2.6 acres of wetland identified as Lot "B" shall be dedicated to the TCSD upon completion of required improvements, and prior to the issuance of the 63rd Building Permit. All interior slopes including Lot "D" shall be maintained by an HOA. The exterior slope maintenance areas proposed to be maintained by the TCSD shall be properly identified on the final map. Riverside County Condition Nos. 18, d and e shall be replaced by the following condition: All non-arterial slopes shall be maintained by the established homeowners association for the subject tract (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125). S\STAFFRPT~23125A.VTM 32 2V~i~ Enterprise ,."irc!e ~e~ Temecui~. California ~2290 ire ~vo ,:oplef ,:.f 8treambed AlteratZon A~reemen~ 5-381-90. If ~z~n k~th ,:~ple~ and re~urn Dne ~.D :up :ffi:e. lJrt~ten notice 2ep~rtment in vrltzn~ vl~hin 1~ ~ay~ ,:f receipt rf thz~ Proposal if you agree vzth the ~erm-~/,::n~:'.;~ns .:,f · /,~xd your right t.D arb~cri~lc.n. It :~ recc.mmended that you ccntac~ the Dapartment as soon ~s p:~sLble to discuss pcs~Lble chan~es the proposed A~reemen%. 2~ not make tny chan~e~ or c~rrectzons proposed Agreement v;~h.ou~ fir~ recelv~n~ zcnc:~-rence, .~hervtae, chan~es · ~70 is recn~ired f.:r the tmpacts t.} the vatercour-.e t, hat b~sec~s ~he i:roject zn ) north-south d~rect~.sn east of 9utterfi~l,~ Stage ~oad. have quest lcns r_~r~ :n.~ ~he propoaed c,Dnd ~ t ;.:,ns .',l ease contact you for your cooperae~ic.n in this matter. AdRFKT'~ EEBAEDING P~OPOSED 8TILE~M Cl~ LAKE 55 LV~?--~8.pur'.uen~, to 8ectit_n :.~er-_:n', :n tb,~. ;~.h d.-y of Yulv, :991:,, n~.xfie.j the Ceper:nenc ~_v, .-.hey -:-.Ib-.:~_n::-_~y .:han,;,e the heal, ~,'~r~'-"A8. =he _'~.p.mrtr. enr. ':-epresenr. ed by EAV:_~ ?. '_~F'_'? :-._-: ::e~er.':~ned :klr.. ~'.::h .:,perst. Ions may :ubs~anr~elly .~dver:eiy -~ffecr.. ~O~IE, ~he Depar~men~ hereby r. repo'.e', measures t.: pr,:tect fith and v~ld!:fe reeourcet dur~n) ~he ,Di~rm~cr'~ york, The ,Dpe. r~c.r hereby m,)rees -,~ ~.::ep~ ~he foil.swing me~sure-./con.~lt:,sne a~ I;sr~ ,af the propc. se,~ york: fsee ~ached list .Dr proposed messureT). above, bhi~ A~reemen~ i~ no l:.n~er v~lid and s nov n.t.t.!fizst.~on ~ubmx~ed ~.: ~he Depar~men~ .sf Fish snd ,}eme, Fm~iure ~: :s=ply Frovisions .Dr ~hls A.)reemen~ end v~h ocher :nc[ud~ng b~t n~ limited ts Fish ind .~me C.sde-Eec:;::-,s ZL.~I. ~93.5, 5550, 555~, ~937 and 59~8 may resul~ ~n prose.zu:.xzn. this AGreemenr~ tur, h.'..r'.-_ts the ,"F.4rst,~r FroPercy, nc, r ~oe.~ xt relieve the Operate,st ,:f re',pons'-k,~i:'.y f:.r vir, h ~pplicable federa[, :tab, e, .:r l.>caX hws ,:r A,)reemen~ ac4_s not .:onsr~l~ur, e Depsrcmenr~ c.f Fish .-ha 'i--_r.e the proposed .:,r~r~rAon, .:t ~s-.ure ~h,e Depsr.--~enr,'s '~1{ ~icee--enr~ becomes effective c.n i!te .sf ')oer~t,sr'~- ter=::-~e~ 12 mon~.h,~ from X~ltl)~In~.~. ~{.9lect. ~c~lvltle! fir ::ni::".'::;c.n :nlv. ~2,~ree~en~.lheX! remain ;n effec~ fir :hat ,:e,reli~rv :.} ~t. isfv the ~.erms/.:,:ndxt~,:nl .:.f ~hi~ ,e~r~nt.. ::nstr'.::stc. n :ioe~ no~ k~Ln vtth~n 50 dav~ .:f the ,D~rs~.~r': ~:n;;'.~ :f the ~reeten~ 'his Aoreemen~ shill ~ voided, ( s xgnst,re ) ( date ) California Del~mrtment Fish .snd Game ( 8 ignsture ) ( date ) f.:.ll.:.wln,] r-r~vl'_i,:ns c:ns.-.:y.:.-..e ::-,e !:mzt..~f acr-:v:',zes -=.-':'.~ed rf:oi','e.i !:y r~hzs agreemar::. T~'.e *-:~.-.::',,~ if .'.,~1.~ .-,i:reemenr~ ~:e: :'..;~ the 6perab.}r t·. F..rec!';~ed fr:m :i.:.~ng :,r.,her sc~z\',.t. ie-., F...'.he ~cvever, !,:r.;'.'Itles n:,r.. -'-F-e,::f::!/:7 a-_.:ree,.~ ~.s aP.d r'.!-.,i','~..~ ~:)- Ee'Z'.;i:'~S i~,O0 -;5 2. ~e Operator prcpose~ ~..} .~l~er ~i'.e ~r~mbe_d fDr placemen~ of fill vlth:n a rlparian and sandy wash habitat. f;ll :.f .~ small r:pmr~!n ~rea and :res~:~n cf an additLDnal .~;.~cres :f r:FarL~n hsbx~.at. sdj~.zent. tD t. he :.. ~'.e "-greed ';c, rk :n.-luz]es i'r:j~?~ ~re! is loca~.ed ~pprcx;m~.eb' dO(u)' ~NN ,:.f Hwy 7~ br::i,;;e :vet Tem~';Ll Ever :n ~ivers~de County. 5e~cr:~d ,:n/~n the ~lans [ .:f Tr~c~ 23125 to a mxnzmum bo%~om v~.~h Df 20' vi~h slopes :f f-a:l as d~sc';ssed u;~h ~anpac'~ ~ack Eas~cn. ~i~e s!or~s and t,:e .;f si,:,Fss shall 5. Fill {lopes alon~ ~he western per:meter ,:f Trac~ 23125, L,~ 1. sha[1 be vegetated wx~h native vegetation and a mznlmum of .3 acres of rlparzan hab~ta~ shall be created w~h~n h~ ! near :~s southern ~,.~dry adjacen~ ~o the ',~dis~,lrbed r~r~rtan habitat. 6. l-,e OPerator shall s,Yom~ ~.~ ~he ~egarz~en~ f. DF review and approval, prx:r to mx~iation of project ac%~v~xes, a detaxled plantxng palette for .: f i:i~n~ngs. [no luded v~h ~he plant~n~ pal~te shall ire a prcp<~ed ~azn~enanca plan f~r the m~t;.)a~sn area =h.a~ vzll :nsure s mlnz:'Jm :f ~0% s,.u-vlval if~er ~he first year'a .)rcv~h and I00% for years ~wo ~h~cugh five. successful t, he plan~s shall achieve ~h.e m&n~mum growth a~ ~he end .:.f three and f:'/e years. I f the m;n~mum growth ks no~ achieved then ~he 2.oe_ra~cr shall ke responsible for ~akxng ~he appropr;ate corrective measures as ~e~er::ned by Oepartmen~ represen~a~r/es. T!-,.e Operator ~hall !:e responsible 2?EC:E3 BIlE ~T PLANTING HEIGHT PLANTING CENTEE8 i years 5 years (GALLCNB) Arrcys ~lll,:v PB 8 ft l0 ft 15 ft I gallon ,3 ft 10 f~ 15 f~ I gallon 20 ft 5 ft 9 f~ 5 gallon ~n = ft ~ ft 13 ft 15 gallon ~5 f~ 10 ft I8 f~ C,s~ttnvcx:)d gall.~n · ~ ft 12 ft gallon , ~ f~ 15 ft gallon , 13 ft 20 ft · = ie.F. endL-.~ :f u'.e,~ ~s ~.u>F. ilzent~i -'11 E!':ub '."- - = .=!-.nt :n :'.~_r..ur_~l:ced I:l'.~np'_ _=car3 r'_nci.:miy ~,:sr. te:'e.4.. =I1 ::!5~:~:'~ '-'1~! l~ave ._ m~n~mum of SO% ~_urv~v~l ~.he f;r-.r~ 7ear and I;~Q% bhere-_fter for years T>.e ;perasor -~hsil submit r.o ~he Depar~.men~ fD.- ray:my snd !pr.,r~.vai ~nnu"_ily r-heremft. er "...~u-ougn year five. T. .'i~e Opers.~.~'r -.hall reccri a con-.erva..~.zn es-.emenr. :n hL~ I, Ln :.f The ~e~r~men~ .:r ;~E ,:ie~l,l, nee for ~.he ~t~p~e :f r,~xr:~:~n~ ~nd en~an::ng f;sh ~nO ~Idlife re~o,rcee ~n ~e~e~uL~y. Auth,Dr~ze~ v~hxn .r.;nsePv~tlon e~Tement shail be the proceed ~a~]:~ng are~ near ~he ~u~heas~ ,/crT. er Df L.;~ I ~n~ ~he f. rcpc=ed r~,:re~Icn tr~l~ ~ong the iier:z~e~ ;,f h.2~ ~. Frocf Lf reccrdl=a~l,~n !hill Le p:-ovl:ied e. .~e ,Dpe. r~r....-,r :hall msxc~r..axn{use ,Dr ?and ~.-~ol'~ 5nd apprgved herbxc~dee) sn exotic plant removal program d,=~ng ~he m~in~enance program. g. Tn.e Operator shall comply w~th all litter snd pollutx,Dn laws. All con~r:c~o~s. ~ubcon~rsc~or~ and employees shall sl~o ::bey the~e laws and it ~hall he ~he resDonTLbl~tv of the tOperazor ~o ~nsure ~heir rompllanos. 10. ?:.3 e~u&omen~ :axntenance sh~ll Ee done within or near shy stream channel ,>r lake maroon where ce, troleum uroducts or o=her oollutants From the e~uxoment lay enter these areas under any Flow. 11. ~%e =eBsr'~men~ reserves the rloht to enter the cro,!ec~ {:ce ~% any time to entire t~a~ zhere ;~ ccmoiLance w~th ~erm=/cond~;on~ cf ~;~ A,~reemen~. 12. ~e Deoar. cment reserves the rioht to ~us~ena and/or revoke this AQreement ~[ the Deoart=ent determines thau ~he cir:ums~ances warrant. clrc'j:.stances ~h~t ,:~uld require · reevalua=ion ~nclude. bu~ ~re Iz=~%ed to. ~he 5. Fsxl,ire ~o c:molv vLth the terms/conditions ,;f this b. The information orov~dea by the O~ra~or In !uo~r~ .~f A,)r~=e~/No~lfl.zatli~ Iz determined bY the Deo~r~=en~ ~o be ;ncczulete. ,i,r :. ~n new ;nf.~rmat~on ~ccmes ~va~Xable t.s the reoresen~a~ve(~) tht was not known when ~re~rinq the ~ertt.'ccnd1~l,;~%s ,Dr this A,~reemen~. ~. ~e ~ro.lec~ a~ ae~crt~a ~n the Notlfica~n/~3reemenu .:hmn:ed..sr condlt~,snl affect~n.) fish and vlldlife 13. ~',e ,Doerstot shall provide a COPy of this A~reeaent to all contractors, su~contractors. and the O~erator's Dro.iect supervisors. CoDSee Of a~Hnt e~ll ~ readily available at work sites at all times d~i~ ~ri~s of active work and must ~ Dre=ent~ to any OeMrtmen~ o~ enforcemen~ ~r~o~el From ano~r doenoV u~n demand. l;. Tl:e :~er)~cr shall n.Dtlf'/the E~c)r~:en~. in vr:t~n~. aS leas: five(5) dave ur~or to ini~ia%ion of con=~ruc~ion(Dro.iec~) activities and a~ lemsu five(5) days prior to comule~ion of cons~ruc~on(oro.)ec~) ac~iv~=xes. T;o~f;za~en ~hsll be ~en~ ~o ~he Zeosr~en~ s~ ~0 ~el~en Shore. 8u~e ~9, L.:n~ ~emch. Ca.. 90~02. A~:n: Envlr,:nmensal 8erv1:e~. and Came Office of the Chief Regulatory Branch DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY February 8, 1991 Sterling Builders c/o RANPAC Corp. ATTN: John R. Easton 27447 Enterprise Circle West Temecula, California 92390 RE: File Number 91-201-MJ Gentlemen: This is in reply to your application dated June 29, 1991 for a Department of the Army Permit to place 20,000 c.y. of fill material in 0.56 acre of waters of the United States, of which 0.15 acre of wetland habitat. As mitigation, 0.3 acre of wetland habitat will be created on-site. The project is located in the streambed of an unnamed tributary of Temecula Creek, approximately 6000' west-northwest of State Highway 79 bridge crossing over Temecula Creek, in the city and county of Riverside, California. Regulations for our permit program, published in the Federal Register, include Part 330 - Nationwide Permits (see the enclosure). The Corps of Engineers has determined that your proposed activity complies with the terms and conditions of the nationwide permit at Part 330.5(a)(26) for discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands, that are located above the headwaters or are isolated waters and which would cause loss or substantial adverse modification of less than one acre of such waters. As long as you comply with the nationwide permit conditions described in Part 330.5(b) and submit mitigation site reports to the Corps every year for the next three years after mitigation has been completed, an individual permit is not required. This letter of verification is valid until the nationwide permit is modified, reissued, or revoked. All the nationwide permits are scheduled to be modified, reissued or revoked prior to 13 January 1992. It is incumbent upon you to remain informed of changes to the nationwide permits. We will issue a public notice announcing the changes when they occur. Furthermore, if you commence or are under contract to commence this activity before the date the nationwide permit is modified or revoked, you will have twelve months from the date of the modification or revocation to -2- complete the activity under the present terms and conditions of this nationwide permit. A nationwide permit does not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges. Also, it does not authorize any injury to the property or rights of others or authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal project. Furthermore, it does not obviate the need to obtain other Federal, state, or local authorizations required by law. If you have any questions please contact Mike Jewel1 of my staff at (213) 894-5606. Sincerely, Diane K. Node ~ o f' Acting Chief, Southern Section Enclosure RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBDIVISION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23125 DATE: AHENDE]) NO. 2 EXPIRES: STANDARD CONDITIONS 1. The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County of · - Riverside, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or ~ )roceeding against the County of Riverside or its agents, officers, or ' ~ e~ployees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the County :r-~ -of Riverside, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body LU ~ ~ concerning Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23125, which action is brought 0 ~ ) sbout within the t;me period provided for in California Government Code )ection 66499.37. The County of Riverside will promptly notify the OC N ~ ;ubdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the County of C). liverside and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the County fails to )romptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or q2 -- m ;ails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, >- :hereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the ' County of Riverside. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Hap Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule A, unless mo<iified by the conditions listed below. This conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors approval date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance 460. The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor subject to all the requirements of the State of California Subdivision ~ap Act and Ordinance 460. The subdivider shall submit one copy of a soils report to the Riverside tounty Surveyor's Office and two coptes to the Deparb~ent of Building and Safety. The riport shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. If any grading is proposed, the subdivider shall submit one print of comprehensive grading plan to the Oepar)ent of Building and Safety. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70 as amended by Ordinance 457 and as maybe additionally provided fo~ in these conditions of approval. Tr_5'T~NG TENTAtiVE TRACT I10. 23125, Mad. Cgmditions of Approval Page 2 7. A grading permit shall be obtained from the Deparl~ent of Building and Safety prior to camnencement of any grading outside of county maintained road right of way. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. The subdivider shall comply ~dth the street improvement recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Road Deparbnent's letter dated 6-2B-B8, a copy of ~/nich is attached. I0. Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract map boundary to a County maintained road. 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 Road Cocrnissioner. Street names shall be subject to approval of the Road Commissioner. 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 County Surveyor. % 13. Water and sewerage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance with the provisions set forth in the Riverside County Heal th Department's letter dated 6-23-88, a copy of which is attached. ~ 14. The subdivider shall comply with the flood control recommendations ',~t'- ~ outljz~e,d by the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated ':~ ': ,/'~'6-28-BB~ a copy of which is attached. If the land division lies within an t~ . ~,,/~'~'daa~d'flood control drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of Ordinance ,,' 460, appro riate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities shall be coVhcted by the P~ad Commissioner. T~e subdivider shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the County Fire 14arshal's letter dated 6-22-B8, a copy of which is attached. Subdivision phasing, including any proposed common open space area improvement phasing, if applicable, shall be subject to Planning Deparb~ent approval. Any proposed phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular access to all lots in each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and purpose of the subdivision approval. 17. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following: VESTING TENTAtiVE ll~CT II0. 23125, Aid. ~2 conditions of Appnwal Page 3 a. All lots shall have a minimum size of 7200 square feet net. b. All lot length to width ratios shall be in conformance with Section 3.8C of Ordinance 460. 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. 18. Prior to RECORDATION of the final map the following conditions shall be satisfied: Prior to the recordation of the final map the applicant shall submit written clearances to the Riverside County Road and Survey Department that all pertinent requirements outlined in the attached approval letters from the following agencies have been met: County Fire Department County Rood Control County Heal th Department County Planning Depart~nent Prior to the recordation of the final map, Change of Zone No. 5122 shall be approved by the Board of Supervisors and shall be effective. Lots created by this land division shall be in conformante with the development standards of the zone ultimately applied to the property. ~ ~ ~e~--_~rj~-reqo~dation of~he~ r~pr-tb~ojee~-sitl~iili~b~ ~ .~annexed into 6SA ~ Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall convey to the County fee simple title, to all common or common open space areas, free and clear of all liens, taxes, assessment, leases (recorded and unrecorded) and easements, except those easements which in the sole discretion of the County are acceptable. As a conditions precedent to the County accepting title to such areas, the subdivider shall submit the lollwing documents to the Planning Oepar)ent for review, which documents shall be subject to the approval of that department and the Office of the County Counsel: 1) A declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions; and z) A sample document conveying title to the purchaser of an individual lot or unit which ~rovides that the declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions Is incorporated therein by reference. YESTIE ir_KrATIYE TRACT N0. 23125, Amd. #2 Conditions of Approval Page 4 The declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions submitted for review shall (a) provide for a term of 60 years, (b) provide for the establis~nent of a property owners' association comprised of the owners of each individual lot or unit and (c} contain the following provisions verbatim: aNotwithstanding any provision in this Declaration to the contrary, the following provision shall apply: The property owners' association established herein shall, if dormant, be activated, by incorporation or otherwise, at the request of the County of Riverside, and the property owners' association shall unconditionally accept fran the County of Riverside, upon the County's demand, title to all or any part of the 'common area', more particularly described on Exhibit'A' attached hereto. The decision to require activation of the property owners' association and the decision to require that the association unconditionally accept title to the 'common area' shall be at the sole discretion of the County of Riverside. In the event that the common area, or any part thereof, is conveyed to the roperty owners' association, the association, thereafter shal~ own such 'common area', manage and shall continuously maintain such 'common area', or any part thereof, absent the prior written consent of the Planning Director of the County of Riverside or the County's successor-in-interest. The property owners' association shall have the right to assess the owners of each individual lot or unit for the reasonable cost of maintaining such 'common area', and shall have the right to lien the property of any such owner who defaults in the payment of a maintenance assessment. An assessment lien, once created, shall be prior to all other liens recorded subsequent to the notice of assessment or other document creating the assessment lien. This Declaration shall not be terminated, 'substantially' amended or property deannexed therefrom absent the prior written consent of the Planning Director of the County of Riverside or the County'S successor-in-interest. A proposed amendment shall be considered 'substantial' if it affects the extent, usage or maintenance of the 'common area'. In the event of any convict between this Declaration and the Articles of Incorporation, the Bylaws, or the property owners' association Rules and Regulations, if any, this Declaration shall control,' Once approved, the declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions shall be recorded at the same time that the final map is recorded, Vr:Jl'ZRG TEXTATIVETRACTRO. 23Z25, ~ad. 12 Conditions of Approval Page 5 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 recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be .pennanentl filed with the office of the County Surveyor. A copy of the EC$ shal~ be transmitted to the Planning Depart~nent 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. The foll owi ng note shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet: 'County Environmental Impact Report No. 263 was prepared for this property and is on file at the Riverside County Planning Deparb~ent. Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERNITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: a. All mitigation for seismic and liquefaction hazard shall be that which is found in Environmental Impact Report No. 263. b. The following tree preservation guidelines shall be incorporated the projects approved grading, building and landscaping plans as appropriate: Every effort shall be made to prevent encroacPmnent of structures, grading or trenching within the dripline or twenty-five (25) feet of the trunk of any trees, whichever is greater. If encroacl~nent within the dripline is unavoidable, no more than one third of the root area shall be disturbed, grading or covered with impervious materials. The root area is considered to extend beyond the dripline a distance equal to one half the radius. 3. Building, grading or improvements shall not occur within ten (10} feet of any tree trunk. Retaining walls shall be constructed where necessary to preserve .at.r.1 ,W:".: .t 1.,t o.e-h.lf the di,t. nc. betwaen th, tru.k .nd the driF Walls shill be designed with a post or caisson footing rather than a Continuous footing to minimize root damage. YESTIlt TEXTAftVE TItACT II0. Z3125, AId. Conditions of ~roval - Page 6 5. Alteration of natural drainage shall be avoided to the greatest extent possible. 6. Runoff channelled near trees shall not substantially change normal Soil moisture characteristics on a seasonal basis. Runoff shall not be directed towards the base of trees so that the base of the trees remain in wet soil for an extended period. Where natural topography has been altered, drainage away from trunks shall be provided where necessary to ensure that water will not stand at the crown. Sedimentation and siltation in the drainage ways shall be controlled where necessary to avoid filling around the base of the trees. Land uses that would cause excessive soil compaction within the dripline of trees shall be avoided. If the areas are planned for recreation, provide trails to restrict compaction to a small area. Heavy use under trees shall be avoided unless measures to minimize compaction are undertaken. IO. Landscaping or irrigation shall not be installed within ten (10) feet of any trees. All existing native specimen trees on the subject property shall be preserved wherever feasible. Where they cannot be preserved they shall be relocated or replaced with specimen trees as approved by the Planning Director. Replacement trees shall be noted on approved landscaping plans. If any archaeological resources are uncovered during grading or trenchin , all activities shall cease and an archaeologist shall be consul re). recommendations of the Any archaeologist shall be adhered to. All cut slopes located adjacent to ungraded exceeding ten (10) feet in vertical height shall incorporating the following grading techniques: natural terrain and be contour-graded 1) The angle of the graded slope shall be gradually adjusted to the angle of the natural terrain· 2) Angular forms shall be discouraged. The graded form shall reflect the natural rounded terrain, 3) The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with curves with radii designed in proportion to the total height of the slopes where drainage and stability pemit such rounding. VESTXIIG TERTATIVE TRACT R0. 23125, AId. Conditions of Approval Page 7 4) Where cut or fill slopes exceed 300 feet in horizontal length, the horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved in a continuous, undulating fashion. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall provide evidence to the Director of Building and Safety that all adjacent off-site manufactured slopes have recorded slope easements and that slope maintenance responsibilities have been assigned as approved by the Director of Building and Safety. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a qualified paleontologist shall be retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the ~roposed grading with respect to potential paleontological impacts. houl d 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 hal t grading activity to allow recovery of fossils. Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERHITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: No building permits shall be issued by the County of Riverside for any residential lot/unit within the project boundary until the developer's successor's-in-interest provides evidence of compliance with public facility financin measures. A cash sum of one-hundred dollars ($100) per lot/unit shall be deposited with the Riverside County Department of Building and Safety as mitigation for public library development. Ce Prior to the submittal of building plans to the Department of Buildin and Safety an acoustical study shall be performed by an acousticaV engineer to establish appropriate mitigation measures that shall be ap lied to individual dwelling units within the subdivision to reduce a~J~ient noise interior levels to 45 Ldn. All street lights an 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 and the Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan. d. Prior to issuance of building permits, detailed park site and riparian area development lans shall be submitted to the Planning Oeparb~ent for approval. l~ese plans shall conform with guidelines found in the approved design manual (Exhibit M). The park shall include active YEb'TXRG TERTAT1YE TRACT I0. 23125, Conditions of AppnTval Page 8 recreational features such as picnic tables, barbecue areas, tot lots, etc. For the security and safety of future residents, the following crime V. ; t ig.,:asures shall co.sid.red duri.g site and buildi.g a. Proper lighting in open areas; b. Vi sibil ity of doors and windows from the street and between buildings; c. Fencing heights and materials; d. Adequate off-street parking; and e. A clearly understood method of street numbering to facilitate emergency response. Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval. The plans shall address all areas and aspects the tract requiring landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to, parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front yard landscaping, and shall conform to the standards set forth in the tract's approved Design Nanual (Exhibit H). The plans shall be certified by a landscape architect, and shall provide for the following: Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all landscaped areas requiring irrigation, and shall incorporate drip irrigation wherever possible. · Parkways and landscaped building setbacks shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or a transition into the primary use area of the site. Landscape elements shall include earth berming, ground cover, shrubs and specimen trees in conjunction with meandering sidewalks, benches and other pedestrian amenities where appropriate as approved by the Planning Department. 3, Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent trees at key visual focal points within the project. Where street trees cannot be planted within ri ht-of-way of parkways ue to insuf)icient road interior streets and project d right-of-way, they shall be ~lanted outside of the road right-of-way. VESTING TEMTATIVE TRACT ~0. 23125.//d. t2 Conditioes of Approval Page 9 5. Landscaping plans shall incorporate native and drought tolerant plants where appropriate· 6. All trees shall be minimum double staked· Weaker and/or slow growing trees shall be steel staked. 7. Front and rear yard landscaping shall incorporate the use of shade trees. Roof-mounted mechanical equirnent shall not be permitted within the subdivision, however solar equirrnent or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with P1 anning Deparb~ent approval. All front yards shall be provided with landscaping and automatic irrigation. A plot plan shall be submitted to the Planning Depart=ent pursuant to Section 18.30 of Ordinance No. 348 accompanied by all applicable filing fees, as a plot plan that is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act and is not transmitted to any governmental agency other than the Riverside County P1 anning Deparbnent. The plot pl an shall ensure the conformance of the final site development w~th the tract's approved Design t4anual (Exhibit H), and shall contain the following elements: A final site plan showing the lots, building footprints, all setbacks, fences and/or walls, and floor plan and elevation assignments to individual lots. One (1) color and materials sample board (maximum size of B X 13 inches by 3/8 inch thick) containing precise color, texture and material swatches or photographs (which may be from suppliers; brochures). Zndicate on the board the name, address and phone numbers of both the sample board preparer and the project a plicant, tract number, and the manufacturer and product numbers w~ere acceptable) also (trade . possible names One (1) copy of the architectural elevations colored to represent the selected color combinations, with symbols keyed to the color and materials board. The written color and material descriptions shall be located on the elevation. Six (6)i~;Is of each of glossy photographic color prints Csiz, 8 X 10 ) of both color and materials board and colored architectural elevations for permanent filing, hearing body review and agency distribution. All writing must be legible. VESTIll TENTATIVE TRACT IlO. 23125, Jtmd. #2 Conditions of Approval Page 10 21. Said plot plan shall require the approval of the Planing Director .orp ootth l :ua. , of an, ,,.,din , rmits for lot, inc u , .ith,n submittal of p~ot plans prior to the issuance of ~ilding ~mi~ Ny ) phas~ provided: A separate plot ~ an shall be submitted to the Planing Deparl=ent for each phase, which shall be accompanied by appropriate filing fees. 2. Each individual plot plan shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to the issuance of building permits for 1 ots included within that plot plan. Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: a. Wall and/or fence locations shall conform to approved site plan. All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with approved plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. If seasonal conditions do not permit planting, interim landscaping and erosion control measures shall be utilized as approved by the Planning Director and the Director of Building and Safety. c. Prior to occupancy, bike paths shall be installed along De Portola Road and Butterfield Stage Road. GN:sc 9/02/88 All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with ~pprove~ plans and shall be verified by a Planning Department field Inspection. Not withstanding the preceding conditions, wherever an acoustical study is required for noise attenuation purposes, the heights of all required mlls shall be detemined by the acoustical study where applicable. Prior to occupancy, the park site and riparian enhancement area shall be developed in accordance with approved plans. INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMOKANDUM COGlqTY OF RIvr. aSIDE Road and Survey Department May 11, 1988 MAY 16 1988 RIVIS;,~...,. ~. 'ONTY PLANNING DEP:A"RTMENT TOt Lee Johnson, Principal Engineering Technician FROe~: Edwin Studor, Transportation Planner Tentative Tract 23125 (Sterling Ranch) - Traffic Study We have reviewed the Traffic Study for Tentative Tract 23125, and generally agree with the analysis relative to traffic and circulation. Based upon our review of this proposal, it is that the following considerations be given in conditions of approval for this project. reconu~ended developing 1. The project proponent shall participate in the Traffic Signal Mitigation Program as spproved by the Board of Supervisors. Butterfield Stage Road and De Portola Road, adjacent to the project, should be improved to an arterial highway (110' foot right-of-way). A 150 foot left turn lane pocket should be provided for traffic on Butterfield Stage Road and De Portola desiring to turn left into each project entrance. ES:AE:lg cc: Planning Department Subdivision file March 8, 1988 T!AR 0 9 1988 RIVERS;DE COUNTY PLANNING DEPAgTMENT Officers: Steu T. Mills General Muagt, r PhilUp L. Forbe~ Di~:tor of Finance - Norman L. Thomas Director of Enginering Thomas R. McAllesteT DL~ctor of Operations & Maintenance Batrbara J. Reed Dinstrot of Administration - Disu;~ $sawtary Rutin and Tucker Riverside County Planning Department 4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor Riverside, California 92501-3657 Subject: Water Availability Reference: Vesting Tract 23125 Gentlemen: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District. Water service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. Sites for additional water production facilities may be required within the proposed development depending upon the level of increased demand created by the proposal. If RCWD can be of further service to you, please contact this office. Vet7 truly yours, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRIQr Senga P. Doherty Engineering Services Representative F011/dpt84 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT 28061 DIAZ ROAD · POST OFFICE BOX 174 · TEMECULA. CA 92390~174 · (7141 676-4101 · FAX (714) 676-0615 CITY OF TEMECULA ) LOCATION 'MAP CITY OF TEMECULA ) ,* 2-~.', DU/~-C' J / / VAIxI,'~RANCH SP 22,,3 C SWAP MAP r d?/7, CASE NO./~r. Fx7. P.C. DATE/~_~_~/ CITY OF TEMECULA ~ sP ZONE " / ZONE SP ZONE ZONE MAP ) CASE NO, P,C, DATE '1 CHANGE OF ZONE NO. /~ 7~ ,,"' SEC8,9,17,16, Z'8$,R2W, ~,~LSO BEING ,4 PORTION OF RANC'''~' ~% '~'~' VICINffY MAP L~.. DE ~TOLA R-I R-5 R-5 PARCEL "A' ,\ 'R-5 ~-SEE DETAIL R-5 ~.~_q.., DE ___F~__T_OLA RD DE_TAn, "S'; ,Jt~|, 0 2OO RANPAC 3 , of Chairman and Vice Chairman It by Commissioner Blair, seconded by Commissioner to nominate John Hoagland for the office of Chairperson. Commissioner For~ the name of Commissic ~clined the nomination. Chiniaeff in nomination. The motion was unanimously rjed. Chairman Hoagland entertained no moved by Commissioner Chi ' eft, Commissioner Linda Fa to the office unanimously cards //,/~ntinued to the meeting of August 19, 1991. 5 for the office of Vice Chairperson. It was by Commissioner Blair to nominate Chairperson. The motion was Chanoe of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time Vestina Tentative Tract MaD NO. 23125 The staff report was presented by Steve Jiannino. Commissioner Chiniaeff questioned the maximum height of the slopes proposed and asked who would have maintenance responsibility for these slopes. Staff advised that the slopes range from 30 to 60 feet and that ultimate maintenance responsibility has not been determined. Commissioner Ford expressed concern with the lack of information regarding the parks dedications proposed. Chairman Hoagland opened the public hearing at 6:22 PM. Dave James, representing Ranpac Engineering, 24727 Enterprise Circle West, representing the applicant stated that the applicant agrees with the conditions of approval and advised that the map is conditioned to allow for the Quimby fees to be negotiated at the time the design development guidelines are addressed prior to recordation of the final map. Commissioner Chiniaeff again outlined his concerns regarding the maintenance of the slopes which are shown to be on private residential parcels. Planning Director Thornhill suggested that a homeowners association be required for this purpose. Mike Gray, Riverside County Fire Department, stated that the County's slope maintenance program is very difficult to administer where individual private parcels are involved. He advised that in some instances the problems have been unsolvable. 2/PCMins/071591 2 In response to a question from Commissioner Fahey, Assistant City Attorney John Cevanaugh advised that if a homeowners association is in place and is given the responsibility to properly maintain the slopes, the association should require that an easement be granted which allows them access to the private property. It was moved by Commissioner Chiniaeff, seconded by Commiasioner Blair to continue the public hearing on this matter to the meeting of August 19, 1991, with direction given to staff to 1 ) work with the developer on the design with the goal of reducing the severe slopes, 2) to condition the project to require a homeowners association, and 3) to work with the Community Services Department on the matter of slopes dedications and the acceptability of the proposed park site. The motion was unanimously carried. Aooeal No. 15 liannino presented the staff report outlining the proposed · oof of the adjoining suite. ~Hoagland opened the public hearing at 6:45 PM. It by Commissioner Fahey, seconded by Public Hearir 6:45 PM and to adopt a resolution entitled to close the RESOLUTION NO. 91-68 A TEMEC~ TO INSTALL AN EXISTING ROOF AVENUE AND AVENUE. THE PLANNING C OF THE OF APPEAL NO. 15, AI NO. 91, SQUARE FOOT SIGN ABOVE AN ON THE )RTHWEST CORNER OF JEFFERSON ~,ND KNOWN AS 27425 JEFFERSON The motion carried by the followir AYES: 5 COMMI,~ Ford, Chiniaeff, Hoagland · NOES: 0 COl )NERS: None ABSENT: 0 ;SIONERS: None 7 ChanQe of Zo 16 The staff was presented by Steve Jiannino. Chai~ Hoegland opened the public hearing at 6:51 PM. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 199~ 9. Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 9.1 Proposal to change the zoning on 88.4 acres from R-A-2 1/2 to R-1 and R-5; and subdivide 88.4 acres into 215 single family residential lots. Located on the northeast corner of DePortola and Butterfield Stage Road. RICHARD AYALA provided the staff report. GARY KING advised that Condition #22, page 27, would be amended to read "...prior to recordation of the final map, and approved to TCSD standards prior to issuance of the sixty third building permit." COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF questioned if any more lot 215 could be developed. GARY KING stated that there was approximately 5 acres that has been set aside as wet land area, 2.75 acres negotiated as park land and approximately 10 acres is designated as open space, which can be intergrated into the City trail system. COMMISSIONER FORD questioned deliniating lot 215 into two separate lots through conditioning. GARY THORNHILL advised that they could condition that separation. CMAIR~j%N HOAGLRND stated that the City would be able to accept the 2.75 acre park site; however, deny or accept the wet land area through dedication. CHAIRMAN EOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 8:45 P.M. DAVE JAMES, Ranpac Engineering, 27447 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula, representing the applicant, stated their concurrence with the staff report. COMMISSIONER FAREY questioned if the applicant would be willing to designate lot 215 into three separate lots as slopes, park land and wet land. DAVE JAMES stated that they would be willing to condition that the final map designate lot 215 into three separate lots. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND asked if the Homeowners Association would accept the slope area for maintenance. PCMINg/16/91 -11- 9-18-91 PLANN'rN~ COIO!ISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 1991 DAVE JAMES stated that they had hoped the City would accept all of lot 215 including the slopes; however, if the City did not accept all of lot 215, the HOA would maintain the lot(s) not accepted as dedication. COMMISSIONER FORD suggested that a condition be included to ensure that the Homeowners Association maintain the interior open spaces. COMMISSIONER FAHEY questioned Condition No. 2 being redundant to TCSD condition requiring land dedication. GARY KING concurred with Commissioner Fahey and stated that Condition No. 2 could be deleted. GARY THORNHILL recommended deleting Condition 18, D & E, and amend with a condition stating that the Homeowners Association shall maintain non-arterial slopes. CHAIPa(AN HOAGLAND stated he was unclear how the City was going to develop park land on what appeared to be the sump area of the wet lands. DOUG STEWART stated that staf~ will investigate the sump location prior to approving the park land. COMMISSIONER FORD suggested conditioning that applicant will work with Engineering and TCSD to get the wet land area into useable land. COMMISSIONER FAHEY moved to continue Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time Vesting Tentatie Tract Map No. 23125, to the next available meeting, to allow staff to address the concerns of the Commission regarding dedication of the park land and the maintenance of open spaces by the Homeowners Association and bring back to the Commission with the written conditions, seconded by COMMISSIONER BLAIR. CHAIPa(ANHOAGLAN~ stated that the applicant needs to work with TCSD to provide plans for improvement to the park area taking into consideration the location of the storm drain. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None PCMIN9/16/91 -12- 9-18-91 ITEM # 6 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City of Temecula Planning Commission Gary Thornhill, Planning Director October 7, 1991 Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 (TTM 25892); Subdivision of 20 acres into 34 single family residential lots. The Planning Commission continued the Public Hearing for TTM 25892 from the Commission meeting of September 16, 1991 to their meeting of October 7, 1991 in order to provide the Commission adequate time to review the proposed map design. Copies of the Tentative Map were provided to the Commission at the meeting of September 16, 1991. Additional information regarding land uses adjacent to this project is attached hereto. Recommendation: 1. RECOMMEND ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 25892; and ADOPT Resolution No. 91- Map No. 25892. recommending approval of Tentative Tract klb CITY OF TEMECULA ) /~/ ./ o. tl c s EXHIBIT NO. CITY OF TEMECULA ) II II II IL .."'11" ./ II II ', ~. /1 // / e CASE CITY OF TEMECULA // // \' // EXHIBIT NO, ~P.C. DATE ~:)"~'~/ Case No.: Recommendation: 1. STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION September 16, 1991 Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PROPOSAL: LOCATION: EXISTING ZONING:. SWAP DESIGNATION: SURROUNDING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: Prepared By: Oliver Mujica RECOMMEND ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 25892; and ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 25892. David Pearson Richard Masyczek Subdivide approximately 20 acres into 34 single family residential lots. South side of Pauba Road, between Ynez Road and Margarita Road. R-R (Rural Residential) 2-5 DU/AC North: South: R-R East: R-R West: R-R Not Applicable Vacant R-R (Rural Residential) (Rural Residential) (Rural Residential) (Rural Residential) S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM SURROUNDING LAND USES: PROJECT STATISTICS: BACKGROUND: North: South: East: West: Vacant Single Family Residential Single Family Residential Single Family Residential Total Land Area: No. of Proposed Lots: Min. Residential Lot Size: Avg. Residential Lot Size: SWAP Designation: 20 acres 34 21,780 sq.ft. 25,650 sq.ft. 2-5 DU/AC On March 1, 1990, the applicant filed Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 and Change of Zone No. 5736 to the Riverside County Planning Department. Change of Zone No. 5736 was a request to change the zoning designation of the subject property from R-R (Rural Residential - 20,000 sq. ft. minimum) to R-1 (Single Family Residential 7,200 sq. ft. minimum); and, Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 proposed to subdivide the subject 20 acre property in 37 single family residential lots. The project was reviewed by the Riverside County Land Division Committee (LDC) March 29, 1990. The LDC requested the following items: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Paleontological Survey Biological Survey Slope Stability Report Traffic Study Design Manual Archaeological Survey Slope Analysis Subsequently, this project was transferred to the City of Temecula on April 24, 1990. On April 24, 1991, this project was reviewed by the Preliminary Development Review Committee (Pre- DRC) in order to informally evaluate the project and address any possible concerns, as well as suggest possible modifications. The issues raised by the Pre- DRC included the following: S\STAFFRPT\25892 .TTM 2 1. Density 2. Erosion Control 3. Grading 4. Drainage 5. Slope Stability Subsequent to the Pre-DRC meeting, Staff met with the applicant to discuss the Planning staff's concerns and the required supplemental material in order to address the Pre-DRC's concerns. After dicussing the project with the staff, the applicant decided to withdraw the application for Change of Zone No. 5736; reduce the number of residential lots from 37 to 34; provide a minimum lot size of 21,780 square feet; eliminate an interior loop street design; and reduce the amount of grading. On July 18, 1991, Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 was reviewed by the Formal Development Review Committee; and, it was determined that the project, as designed, can be adequately conditioned to mitigate the DRC's concerns. The DRC has forwarded a recommendation of approval subject to conditions. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: As noted above, Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 proposes to subdivide the subject 20 acre parcel into 34 single family residential lots. The proposed subdivision has been designed in accordance with the standards of the R-R (Rural Residential - 20,000 square foot minimum) zone, as well as Ordinance Nos. 348 and 460. ANALYSIS: Traffic Imoacts 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. S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 3 Land Use and Zoning The subject site is currently vacant. Surrounding land uses include single family residential homes to the west and south (1/2 and 1 acre lots); to the north is Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320, which is proposing 7,200 square foot minimum lot sizes; and to the east is the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan area. Access and Circulation Pauba Road will be improved along the subject site with a half width street. Access from Pauba Road will be provided by Streets "A" and "B", which have a sixty (60') foot right-of-way; and are cul-de-sac streets. The circulation design has been approved by both the Traffic Engineering Department and the Riverside County Fire Department. Grading and Landform Alteration The project site is located within a fairly prominent natural hillside area of Temecula. However, the mass grading effort was designed to adhere to the gross natural topography of the site in its original condition. While substantial grading and recontouring of this site, which includes 171,898 cubic yards of excavation and 171,532 cubic yards of fill will occur in the immediate area, the overall plan is intended to promote preservation of site topography. It should be noted that a recommended condition of approval has been included to require that all slopes over five (5') feet in height shall be landscaped immediately upon the completion of grading and shall be maintained by the homeowner's association. S\STAFFRPT\25892 .TTM 4 Slopes Planting shall commence as soon as slopes are completed on any portion of the site and shall provide for rapid short term coverage of the slope as well as long-term establishment cover per City of Temecula standards. Cut slopes equal to or greater than five (5') feet in vertical height and fill slopes equal to or greater than three (3') feet in vertical height will be planted with a ground cover to provide stability and protect the slope from erosion. Slopes exceeding fifteen (15') feet in vertical height will be planted with shrubs, spaced not more than ten (10') feet on center or trees spaced not to exceed twenty (20') feet on center or a combination of shrubs and trees at equivalent spacings, in addition to the ground cover. Special consideration will be given to the slopes along the southern side of the tract where a variety of plant types and sizes will be provided for visual and aesthetic purposes. The plants selected and planting methods employed shall be suitable for the soil and climatic conditions. All areas required to be landscaped shall be planted with turf, ground cover, shrub or tree materials selected from the plant palette contained in the guidelines. Drainaae The existing surface run-off currently flows towards the south. The proposed drainage plan has been designed to maintain the existing flows through the use of catch basins and terrace drains. S\STAFFRPT\25892 .TTM 5 GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY: The proposed project density of is consistent with the SWAP Land Use Designation of 2-5 DU/AC. In addition, Staff finds it probable that this project will be consistent with the new General Plan when it is adopted since the proposed subdivision is consistent with the existing zoning and surrounding developments. 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. FINDINGS: 1. The proposed Tract Map will not have a 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 residential developments. 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 developments. 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. 460, Schedule A. S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 6 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 the subdivision has been designed to the standards of the R-R (Rural Residential) zone. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably 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-of-way which are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic, access is provided from Pauba 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. 10. The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. 11. Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 7 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: vgw Attachments: 1. 2. 3. 4. The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: RECOMMEND ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 25892; and ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 25892. Resolution Conditions of Approval Environmental Assessment Exhibits: A. Vicinity Map B. Zoning Map C. SWAP Map D. Tentative Tract Map Large Scare Plans S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 8 RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25892 TO SUBDIVIDE A 20 ACRE PARCEL INTO 34 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED ON PAUBA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 945-090-004 AND 005. accordance Ordinances, WHEREAS, David Pearson filed Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 in with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Tentative Tract Map application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tentative Tract Map on September 16, 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 Tentative Tract Map; 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: S\STAFFRPT\25892 .TTM 9 (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 Tentative Tract 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 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 Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 10 (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 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are made: a) That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. b) That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. c) That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of development. d) That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the proposed density of the development. e) That the design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. f) That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. g) That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. A land division may be approved if it is found that S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 11 alternate easements for access or for use will be provided and that they will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction. (2) The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the proposed Tentative Tract Map, makes the following findings, to wit: a) The proposed Tract Map will not have a significant negative impact on the environment, as determined in the Initial Study performed for the project. A Negative Declaration is recommended for adoption. b) c) d) 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 residential developments. 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 developments. 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. 460, Schedule A. S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 12 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 the subdivision has been design to the standards of the R-R (Rural Residential) zone. f) The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as determined in the initial study. 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. i) 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. 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) Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 13 E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Tentative Tract Map 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 recommended for adoption. SECTION 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 for the subdivision of a 20 acre parcel into 34 single family residential lots located on Pauba Road and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 945-090-004 and 005 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. SECTION 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of September, 1991. JOHN HOAGLAND 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 16th day of September, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS S\STAFFRPT~25892.TTM 14 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tentative Tract Map No: 25892 Project Description: Subdivide 20 Acres into 34 Single Family Residential Lots. Plannine Department Assessor's Parcel No.: 945-090-004 and 005 The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule B, 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 by the City Council, unless extended as provided by Ordinance 460. The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor subject to all the requirements of the State of California Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance 460. The subdivider shall submit one copy of a soils report to the City Engineer and two copies to the Department of Building and Safety. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract map boundary to a City maintained road. 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. S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 15 10. 11. 12. 13. 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. Subdivision phasing, including any proposed common open space area improvement phasing, if applicable, shall be subject to Planning Department approval. Any proposed phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular access to all lots in each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and purpose of the subdivision approval. A copy of the final grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department and Public Works Department for review and approval. All on-site cut and fill slopes shall: Be limited to a maximum slope ratio of 2 to 1 or as approved by the City Engineer. b. 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. An erosion control landscaping plan demonstrating methods of erosion protection for these slopes shall be prepared by a qualified professional and shall be submitted to the City Planning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of grading permits. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated April 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. 14. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following: Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the development standards of the R-R (Rural Residential - 20,000 square foot minimum) zone. S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 16 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. 15. 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. 16. Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the City Engineer. 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. 17. The following note shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet: "This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommeRdatjoRs." 18. Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: If the project is to be phased, prior to the issuance of grading permits, an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for approval. The plan shall be used as a guideline for subsequent detailed grading plans for individual phases of development and shall include the following: Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and sedimentation during and after the grading process. Approximate time frames for grading and identification of areas which may be graded during the higher probability rain months of January through March. 3. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations. 4. Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase. S\STAFFRPT~25892.TTM 17 19. 20. All cut slopes located adjacent to ungraded natural terrain and exceeding ten (1 O) feet in vertical height shall be contour-graded incorporating the following grading techniques: The angle of the graded slope shall be gradually adjusted to the angle of the natural terrain. Angular forms shall be discouraged. The graded form shall reflect the natural rounded terrain. The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with curves with radii designed in proportion to the total height of the slopes where drainage and stability permit such rounding. Where cut or fill slopes exceed 300 feet in horizontal length, the horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved in a continuous, undulating fashion. The developer shall provide evidence to the Director of Building and Safety that all adjacent off-site manufactured slopes have recorded slope easements and that slope maintenance responsibilities have been assigned as approved by the Director of Building and Safety. 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: Detailed common open space area landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval for the phase of development in process. The plans shall be certified by a landscape architect, and shall provide for the following: Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all landscaped areas requiring irrigation. S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 18 Landscape screening where required shall be designed to be opaque up to a minimum height of six (6) feet at maturity. All utility service areas and enclosures shall be screened from view with landscaping and decorative barriers or baffle treatments, as approved by the Planning Director. Utilities shall be placed underground. Parkways shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or a transition into the primary use area of the site. Landscape elements shall include earth berming, ground cover, shrubs and specimen trees. Front yards shall be landscaped and street trees planted. Wall plans shall be submitted for the project perimeter and along Pauba Road. Wooden fencing shall not be allowed on the perimeter of the project. All lots with slopes leading down from the lot shall be provided with gates in the wall for maintenance access. Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent trees at key visual focal points within the project. The focal points shall be identified on the plans submitted for approval by the Planning Department. Where street trees cannot be planted within right-of-way of interior streets and project parkways due to insufficient road right- of-way, they shall be planted outside of the road right-of-way. Landscaping plans shall incorporate native and drought tolerant plants where appropriate. All existing specimen trees and significant rock outcroppings on the subject property shall be shown on the project's grading plans and shall note those to be removed, relocated and/or retained. 10. All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow growing trees shall be steel staked. 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. S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 19 Prior to the submittal of building plans to the Department of Building and Safety an acoustical study shall be performed by an acoustical engineer to establish appropriate mitigation measures that shall be applied to individual dwelling units within the subdivision to reduce ambient interior noise levels to 45 Ldn. All building plans for all new structures shall incorporate all required elements from the subdivision's approved fire protection plan as approved by the County Fire Marshal. Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval. The plans shall address all areas and aspects of the tract requiring landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to, parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front yard landscaping. 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. Building separation between all buildings including fireplaces shall be ten (10') foot minimum. All street side yard setbacks shall be ten (10') foot minimum. All front yards shall be provided with landscaping and a manually operated permanent underground irrigation system. If the project is master developed, prior to the issuance of building permits, a plot plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department pursuant to Section 18.30 of Ordinance No. 348 accompanied by all applicable filing fees, as a plot plan that is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act and is not transmitted to any governmental agency other than the City Planning Department. The plot plan shall ensure the conformance of Ordinances No. 348 and No. 460, and shall contain the following elements: A final site plan showing the lots, building footprints, all setbacks, and floor plan and elevation assignments to individual lots. S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 20 21. One (1) color and materials sample board (maximum size of 8 x 13 inches by 3/8 inch thick) containing precise color, texture and material swatches or photographs (which may be from suppliers' brochures). Indicate on the board the name, address and phone numbers of both the sample board preparer and the project applicant, tract number, and the manufacturer and product numbers where possible (trade names also acceptable). One (1) copy of the architectural elevations colored to represent the selected color combinations, with symbols keyed to the color and materials board. The written color and material descriptions shall be located on the elevation. Six (6) copies of each of glossy photographic color prints (size 8 x 10 inches) of both color and materials board and colored architectural elevations for permanent filing, hearing body review and agency distribution. All writing must be legible. Said plot plan shall require the approval of the Planning Director prior to the issuance of any building permits for lots included within the plot plan. The submittal of plot plans prior to the issuance of building permits may be phased provided: A separate plot plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for each phase, which shall be accompanied by appropriate filing fees. Each individual plot plan shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to the issuance of building permits for lots included within that plot plan. Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with approved plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. If seasonal conditions do not permit planting, interim landscaping and erosion control measures shall be utilized as approved by the Planning Director and the Director of Building and Safety. All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with approved plans and shall be verified by City field inspection. S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 21 22. 23. 24. 25. Not withstanding the preceding conditions, wherever an acoustical study is required for noise attenuation purposes, the heights of all required walls shall be determined by the acoustical study where applicable. 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 Tract Map No. 25892, which action is brought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. 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. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the developer shall at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code Section 66462 at such time as the City acquires the property interests required for the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at the developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. 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 provided. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. S\STAFFRPT\25992,TTM 22 26. 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. 27. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. 28. 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). Riverside County Fire Deoartment 29. Schedule "A" fire protection approved standard fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2 1/2") located one at each street intersection and spaced no more than 330 feet apart in any direction, with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 GPM for 2 hours duration at 20 PSI. 30. 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. 31. 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. 32. All buildings shall be constructed with fire retardant roofing material as described in Section 3203 of the Uniform Building Code. Any wood shingles or shakes shall have a Class "B" rating and shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 23 33. 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. Should the developer choose to defer the time of payment, he/she may enter into a written agreement with the County deferring said payment to the time of issuance of the first building permit. Riverside County Deoartment of Public Health 34. A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the water company and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the water system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet, along with the original drawing to the County surveyor. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and joint specifications, and the size of the main at the junction of the new system to the existing system. The plans shall comply in all respects with Div. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety Code, California Administrative Code, Title 22, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, when applicable. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and water company with the following certification: "1 certify that the design of the water system in Tract Map 25892 is in accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the water service, storage, and distribution system will be adequate to provide water service to such Tract Map." This certification does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to such tract map at any specific quantities, flows or pressures for fire protection or any other purpose". This certification shall be signed by a responsible official of the water company. The plans must be submitted to the County Surveyor's Office to review at least two weeks prior to the request for the recordation of the final map. 35. This subdivision has a statement from Rancho California Water District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand providing satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be made prior to the recordation of the final map. 36. This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the District, the County Surveyor and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the original drawing, to the County Surveyor, The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint specifications and the S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 24 size of the sewers at the junction of the new system to the existing system. A single plat indicating location of sewer lines and water lines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and the sewer district with the following certification: "1 certify that the design of the sewer system in Tract Map 25892 is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed tract map." 37. The plans must be submitted to the County Surveyor's Office to review at least two weeks prior to the request for the recordation of the final map. Transportation Enclineerincl PRIOR TO RECORDATION: 38. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for Pauba Road along the project frontage including any transitions. Signing plans only shall be required for internal Streets A and B. These plans shall be included with the street improvement plans. 39. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering for the design requirements. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS: 40. 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: 41. All signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan. Engineering 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. S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 25 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. PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 42. 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; Riverside County Flood Control district; City of Temecula Fire Bureau; Planning Department; Engineering Department; Riverside County Health Department; CATV Franchise; Parks and Recreation Department; US Department of Fish and Wildlife; and Metropolitan Water District 43. 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. 44. Pauba Road shall be improved with 32 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right- of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 102 (64'/88'). 45. Street "A" and "B" shall be improved with 40 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 104, Section A (40'/60'). 46. Cul-de-sac geometrics shall be installed per Riverside County Standard No. 800. 47. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Pauba Road and so noted on the final map with the exception of street intersections as approved by the City Engineer. 48. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. S\STAFFRPT~25892,TTM 26 49. 50. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's shall be subject to the following conditions: a. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense. The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Planning, City Engineer and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents. The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with the final map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City. The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of slope and drainage areas within the subdivision. The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. All parkways, open areas, drainage areas and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by homeowner's association or other means acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to the Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to issuance of building permits. 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. S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 27 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, medians, sidewalks along Pauba Road, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, and other traffic control devices as appropriate. b. Storm drain facilities. c. Landscaping (street). d. Sewer and domestic water systems. Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the City Engineer. 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. The minimum centerline radii shall be 300 feet or as approved by the City Engineer. All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the City Engineer. 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. A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent. All driveways shall be located a minimum of two (2) feet from the property line. The subdivider shall submit two 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 24" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil Engineer. The subdivider shall submit two copies of a soils report to the Engineering Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 28 60. 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. 61. On-site drainage facilities, located outside of road right-of-way, shall be contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating "Drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions." 62. If required after approval of the final drainage report, a drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release or concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. 63. All lots containing storm drains carrying water from public streets shall contain a dedicated easement for storm drain purposes and provide for an access road to the storm drain outlet. 64. 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. 65. Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of street improvements. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 66. 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. 67. 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. 68. 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. 69. If any work is to be performed within the Metropolitan Water District Right-of- Way, the developer shall submit a copy of the grading plan to the MWD for review and approval. S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 29 PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT: 70. 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. 71. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. 72. Developer shall pay any capital fee for, or install, 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. The fee to be paid shall be 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. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. 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). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; Provided that developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY: 73. Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on all interior public streets. 74. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 14 days following placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. S\STAFFRPT\25892 .TTM 30 Background 1. 2. CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY II Name of Proponent: Address and Phone Number of Proponent: Date of Environmental Assessment: 4. Agency Requiring Assessment: David Pearson 41593 Winchester Road, Suite 101 Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 694-1111 August 20, 1991 Name of Proposal, if applicable: Location of Proposal: Environmental Impacts CITY OF TEMECULA Tentative Tract MaD No. 25892 South Side of Pauba Road, between Ynez and Maraarita Roads (Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.) Yes 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? Disruptions, displacements, compac- tion or overcovering of the soil? X X Maybe Substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction, covering or modi- X S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 3 1 fication of any unique geologic or physical features? Any substantial increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off site? X X Yes Maybe 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? X Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earth quakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? X Air. Will the proposal result in: Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X The creation of objectionable odors? X Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, whether locally or regionally? X Water. Will the proposal result in: Substantial changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? X Substantial changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? X S\STAFFRPT\2SS92.TTM 32 c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? X Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? X Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including, but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X Alteration of the direction or rate of flow or ground waters? X Yes Maybe ~ Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct addi- tions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? X Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? X Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flood- ing or tidal waves? X 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)? X Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants? X Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegetation, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? X S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 33 d. 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? X X X X 10. S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. 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: a. Substantial increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Substantial depletion of any non- renewable natural resource? Risk of Upset. Will the proposal 34 Yes Maybe X X X X X X 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? X Possible interference with an emerg- ency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? X 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? X 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? X 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? X Yes Maybe _hi Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking? X Ce Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? X Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? X em Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? X Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 35 15. 16. substantial effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities7 e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services: Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? X X X X X X X X X Communications systems? Water? Sewer or septic tanks? Storm water drainage? Solid waste and disposal? Yes Maybe ~ X X X X X S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 36 17. 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? 18. 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? 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X 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? 21. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential X X X X X X X Yes Maybe ~ S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 37 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 S~STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 38 Ill Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation Earth 1.a. 1.b. 1 .c-d. 1.e. 1.f. No. The project site will be graded as part of a mass grading effort. There will be substantial grading for this project, which includes 171,898 cubic yards of excavation and 171,532 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 the geologic substructure. Yes. The proposed development disrupts the soil profile and results in soil displacement, compaction, and overcovering. However, a slope stability report was prepared for this project, in which specific recommendation were made in order to develop the project. Therefore, this impact is not considered significant, due to the fact that the Conditions of Approval include mitigation measures in regards to all grading. Yes. The project site is located within a fairly prominent natural hillside of Temecula. However, the mass grading effort was designed to adhere to the gross natural topography of the site in its original condition. While substantial grading and recontouringofthis site, which includes 171,898 c.y. of excavation and 171,532 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. 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. 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. No. The project site is not adjacent to any creek or stream bed. Therefore, a significant impact will not occur. S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 39 1.g. Air 2.a. 2.b,c. Water 3.a,d. 3.b. 3.c. Maybe. The subject site is not located within a subsidence or liquefaction zone and is not subject to liquefaction and subsidence by the Riverside County General Plan. However, to mitigate any potential hazards, a geological report will be prepared prior to any construction of the property. The report will include mitigation measures. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant. Maybe. The proposed project consisting of 34 residential units will generate an increase in vehicle trips to the site. The increased vehicle trips will increase the carbon monoxide emissions and particulates in the area. However, since the ambient air quality in the project vicinity is currently very good due to the local wind patterns, this potential impact is not considered significant. The proposed project will not by itself deteriorate the local area's or regional air quality, but will add to the cumulative impact on air quality due to the substantial growth in the area. No. The proposed project will not create any objectionable odors or alter the area's climate. No. The proposed project will not impact any body of water. Yes. The proposed project will increase the amount of impermeable surfaces on the site and the existing drainage pattern will be altered. However, water will be channeled to drainage easements and streets through drainage facilities and control devices which 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 since appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented with the project. No. Flood waters will continue to be directed to the streets and flood channels. However, in order to mitigate the downstream impacts brought about by runoff and the proposed drainage facilities, the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (the District) has indicated that the project will be required to pay a flood S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 40 3.6. 3.f. 3.g. 3.h. 3.i. Vegetation 4.a,c. 4.b. 4.d. mitigation charge (Area Drainage Plan fee), which has been included as a Condition of Approval. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant since appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented with the project. Drainage plans for the site will have to meet the requirements of the City's Engineer. Yes. During construction, the proposed project will increase turbidity in local surface waters. This impact is temporary and is not considered significant. After the project is completed, water will be channeled to drainage easements and streets, which will have to be approved by the City Engineer. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant since appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented with the project. No. The proposed project will not alter the rate of flow of ground water. No. Although the proposed project will increase the amount of impermeable surfaces on the site, the addition of irrigation for the landscape areas will help to off-set any loss of water absorbed into the ground. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant. No. The proposed project will not significantly affect the public water supply. Maybe. Conditions of Approval are included for this project which require proper design and installation of drainage conveyance devices. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant since appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented with the project. Yes. The proposed project involves a mass grading of 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. S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 41 Wildlife No. Maybe. A survey for Stephen's Kangaroo Rat prepared for this project analyzed biologic resources on-site. In that no individuals of the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat were found there is no occupied habitat within the bounds of the tract map. Implementation of the tract as proposed will not result in a taking nor would it result in any adverse effect on the species or on the species' habitat. In that surrounding lands to the north, south, east and west have previously been developed at urban levels of use or are presently being developed at such levels of use, preservation of this site as a reserve is inappropriate. In addition, the site is now isolated from all other known colonies by impassable residential and other barriers and reinvasion of the site is virtually impossible. Implementation of the project as proposed will not have a significant effect and no mitigation other than payment of fees under the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Fee Ordinance is required. Noise 6.a-b. No. A noise assessment was prepared for this project. Analysis indicates that the project site is exposed to significant levels of noise as a result of traffic on Pauba and Margarita Roads. However, it is concluded that the project design, as recommended herein, will comply with the interior noise exposure standard placed on residential construction by the County of Riverside and the State's noise insulation standards. It is further recommended that the final engineering design of the project be reviewed by a recognized acoustical engineer to ensure compliance with the County's noise standards. Light and Glare Yes. However, the project has been conditioned to comply with applicable lighting standards. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant since appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented with the project. Land Use S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 42 8. No. Project is consistent with both the zoning designation and the Southwest Area Community Plan. Natural Resources 9.a-b. No. This project itself will not significantly increase the rate of use of natural resources. Construction materials and petroleum products will be used extensively to support the specific plan project overall. Risk of Upset 10.a-b. No. The proposed project will not promote a risk of explosion or release hazardous substances nor will it interfere with emergency response plan or an emergency evaluation plan. Population 11. Yes. Although the project proposes to increase the density to 102 lots, the proposed project is consistent with the City Land Use Designation which allows a maximum of 283 lots (according to SWAP). Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant. Housing 12. No. Since the proposed project creates housing, the proposed land use will not create a demand for additional housing. Transportation/Circulation 13.a. Yes. 13.b-e. No. 13.f. Maybe. The Traffic Study which was prepared for the proposed project has addressed potential traffic impacts and has concluded that the cumulative impacts will not be significant. In addition, appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented through the Conditions of Approval. Public Services 14.a-e. Yes. 14.f. No. The proposed project will have significant adverse effect effect on public services. However, these impacts are not considered to be significant since appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented through the Conditions of Approval. S\STAFFRPT\25892.TTM 43 Energy 15.a-b. No. The proposed project will not result in the substantial use or increase in demand of fuel or energy. Utilities 16.a-f. No. The proposed project might require the use of utilities but will not require substantial alteration to the existing system, Human Health 17.a-b. No. The proposed project will not have significant adverse effect on human health. Aesthetics 18. No. Because the proposed project has been designed to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, there will be no significant impact on aesthetics. Recreation 19. Yes. The proposed project will result in an impact upon existing recreational opportunities. However, the proposed project provides adequate recreational facilities for the subject residents and appropriate Quimby fees will be paid. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant since appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented with the project. Cultural Resources 20.a-d. No impact. Mandatory Findines 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. In addition, during grading activities, a qualified paleontologist shall be present. S\STAFFRPT\25892 .TTM 44 21 .b. 21 .c. 21 .d. Maybe. The proposed project may have the potential to achieve short4 term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals. However, no significant impacts will occur if the mitigation measures are followed. Maybe. The proposed project may have impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable which may have environmental effects. However, no significant impacts will occur if the mitigation meBsures are followed. No. The proposed project will not have impacts which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. S\STAFFRPT\25892,TTM 45 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. X I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Auaust 20, 1991 Date Oliver Mujica, Senior Planner For CITY OF TEMECULA S\STAFFRPT~25892 .TTM 46 September 11, 1991 DEVELOPME ' pRESIDENT U.S, REP. OFFICE: GUAM OFFICE: P.O. BOX 3093 City of Temecula Planning Dept. c/o Ms. Debbie Ubnoski 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Ms. Ubnoski: I'm of the understanding that you are recently in charge (on behalf of the City) of processing a Tentative Tract Map on which I would like to comment. The subject property is known as proposed Tentative Tract 25892 (approximately 20 acres fronting Pauba Road; Southwest corner of Pauba and Margarita Roads). My family and I own two homes and eight parcels of property in the immediate vicinity comprising approximately 37 acres of land. We personally constructed our two homes of approximately 4,000 square feet each with the finest of architecture and material in mind. These homes are presently situated on lots approved for the same density (1/2 acre) at the Tentative Tract Map stage that Mr. Pearson's Tentative Tract Map 25892 proposes. I have reviewed Map 25892 and find it to be well planned in terms of lotting layout, street configuration and surrounding land uses. This project certainly provides a compatible "upper-end" transition between Santiago Rancho and Los Ranchitos to the South and the Paloma Del Sol project and the school facilities to the North. I certainly envision nice custom homes on lots not too large to maintain, occupied with families eager to locate in the center of our fine community. In short, I strongly sup ort the adoption of Tentative Tract Map 25892 a 111 be in attendan on September 16, 1991 at 6:00 p.m. to v alize the same. Y urs truly, Noel Pai JUDY ROSEN & ASSOCIATES September 11, 1991 City of Temecula Planning Dept. c/o Ms. Debbie Ubnoske 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Ms. Ubnoske: Please allow me to respond to the notice recently sent to me regarding proposed Tentative Tract Map # 25892. I presently own a one acre parcel immediately to the south of the subject property. My current intentions are to construct my personal residence approximately 4 - 5,000 square feet in size. Behind my property is Santiago Ranches with its large custom homes. I perceive this proposed development as being consistent with not only the Swap Map, but also with the existing development in our area. It is important to the homeowners in our community to maintain our exclusivity. This project should offer its own community environment because of its size, number of lots and location. Mr. Pearson's project provides an appropriate transition between the activities at Margarita and Pauba Roads and my immediate area. Finally, Mr. Pearson's project receives my full support because of its well-planned community of 1/2 acre lots. I believe this will be an asset to our r~g!~n be~,,~e of the rural setting for large custom homes it provides while allowing for parcel sizes a homeowner can reasonably be expected to fully maintain. Yours truly, \ Dave Asmus 41877 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTh · SUITE 100 · TEMECUIA, CA 92390 714/676-2135 · FAX 714/694-0344 ITEM # 7 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 7, 1991 Case No.: Parcel Map No. 25059 Minor Change No. I Prepared By: Richard Ayala Recommendation: BUT DENY MINOR CHANGE NO. 1 FOR PARCEL MAP NO. 25059 APPROVE PARCEL MAP NO. 25059 MINOR CHANGE NO. 1 SUBJECT TO THE MODIFICATION AND DELETION OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PARCEL MAP NO. 25059 APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Preferred Equities Development Group REPRESENTATIVE: Anthony Polo PROPOSAL: Deletion of Conditions of Approval regarding traffic signal. LOCATION: South side of Ridge Park Drive east of Rancho California Road EXISTING ZONING: Industrial Park (I-P) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: Industrial Park (I-P) South: Residential Agricultural, 20 Acre Minimum Size Lot (R-A-20) East: Residential Agricultural, 20 Acre Minimum Size Lot (R-A-20) West: Industrial Park (I-P) PROPOSED ZONING: Not requested. S\STAFFRPT~25059.PM EXISTING LAND USE: SURROUNDING LAND USES: BACKGROUND: ANALYSIS: Vacant North: Office South: Vacant East: Vacant West: Vacant On January 15, 1991, the City Council approved Parcel Map No. 25059 and the associated Plot Plan No. 34. Both projects were conditioned for a traffic signal at the intersection of Rancho California Road and Ridge Park Drive. The applicant contends that the signal requirement is inappropriate for the Parcel Map due to the fact that the map does not cause a traffic impact. The development of the office building, Plot Plan No. 34, is what will cause the traffic impact and result in the necessity for a traffic signal. The applicant is requesting deletion of Engineering Condition Numbers 37 through 43 for Parcel Map No. 25059 regarding a traffic signal at the intersection of Rancho California Road and Ridge Park Drive, including street striping. According to Engineering Staff, it is a standard practice to require bonding and improvement plans when map recordation occurs. Since improvements are required with the parcel map, design and bonding for the improvements would be appropriate upon recordation of the map. With the establishment of three small parcels and one large parcel, the need for a bond is increased to guarantee that the required street and traffic improvements are constructed and installed in a timely manner. The Engineering Department has reviewed the application of Minor Change No. 1 for Parcel Map No. 25029 regarding the traffic signal at the intersection of Rancho California Road and Ridge Park Drive, including street striping conditions, Engineering Staff recommends that modification and deletion of S\STAFFRPT\25059.PM 2 Conditions of Approval Nos. 37 through 43 for Parcel Map No. 25059 be made in lieu of the applicant's proposal to delete Conditions of Approval Nos. 37 through 43. Attached are modified conditions of approval per the Engineering Department (see attachment I). Planning Staff concurs with the Engineering Department recommendation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: DENY Minor Change No. I for Parcel Map No. 25059. APPROVE Parcel Map No. 25059 Minor Change No. 1 subject to the modification and deletion of Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map No. 25029. vgw Attachments: 1. 2. Conditions of Approval Exhibits A. Vicinty Map B. SWAP Map C. Zone Map D. Site Plan S%STAFFRPT\25059 .PM 3 ATTACHMENT I CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Parcel Map No. 25059 Minor Change No. 1 PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT. A. Revise Condition No. 37 to read as follows: 37. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, plans for traffic signals, as warranted by an amended traffic study subject to the final approval of the Department of Public Works, shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for the intersections of Rancho California Road at Ridge Park Drive and Rancho California Road at Vincent Moraga. B. Revise Condition No. 38 to read as follows: 38. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, a signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer the intersection of Rancho California Road at Ridge Park Drive to the intersection of Rancho California Road at Vincent Moraga as directed by the Department of Public Works. Based on the approved Traffic Study, these plans shall be designed to provide for 300' of left turn storage capacity on westbound Rancho California Road to southbound Ridge Park Drive and southbound Vincent Moraga. C. Delete Condition No. 39. in its entirety D. Revise Condition No. 40 to read as follows: 40. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the subdivider shall submit an amended traffic study prepared by a registered Traffic Engineer to determine the subdivider's percent of cost and the warrants for both signals. The developer shall front the construction costs of the signals as warranted for Rancho California Road at Ridge Park Drive and Rancho California Road at Vincent Moraga. The amended traffic study shall be subject to the final approval of the Department of Public Works. S\STAFFRPT\25059 .PM 4 E. Revise Condition No. 41 to read as follows: 41. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the developer shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with the City of Temecula for the remaining percentage of the construction costs, above his pro rata share, for construction of the signals, as warranted, for Rancho California Road at Ridge Park Drive and Rancho California Road at Vincent Moraga. F. Revise Condition No. 42 to read as follows: 42. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, plans for traffic signal interconnect shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer along Rancho California Road from Diaz Road to Ridge Park Drive. G. Revise Condition No. 43 to read as follows: 43. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact the Department of Public Works for the design requirements and the necessary agreements. Additionally, the following conditions should be changed to read "PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS: H. Revise Condition No. 44 to read as follows: 44. Prior to occupancy of any portion of the site, all signing and striping shall be installed and operational per the approved signing and striping plan. I. Revise Condition No. 45 to read as follows: 45. Prior to occupancy of any portion of the site, the traffic signals for the intersections of Rancho California Road at Ridge Park Drive and Rancho California Road at Vincent Moraga shall be installed and operational as warranted per the special provisions and the approved traffic signal plan. J. Revise Condition No. 46 to read as follows: 46. Prior to occupancy of any portion of the site, all traffic signal interconnects shall be installed per the approved plan and as directed by the Department of Public Works. S\STAFFRPT\25059 .PM 5 Mayor Ron Parks Mayor Pro Tern Karel F. Lindemans January 21, 1991 CITY OF TEMECULA P.O. Box 3000 Temecula, California 92390 (714) 694-1989 FAX (714) 694-1999 RECEIVED FEB 0 1 '1991 Aa:'d ............ Councilmembers Patricia H. B: ' II Peg Moore J. Sal MuBoz Mr. John Head Preferred Equities 285q5 Felix Valdez, B-3 Temecula, AC 92390 SUBJECT: Final Conditions of Approval For Tentative Tract Map No. 25059 Dear John: On January 15, 1991, the City of Temecula City Council approved Tentative Tract Map No. 25059 subject to the enclosed Conditions of Approval. Tentative Tract Map No. 25059 is a proposed four (q) lot subdivision of 5.51 acres located on Ridge Park Drive and known as Assessor's Parcel Nos. 9u,0-310-033, 0311 and 037. This approval is effective until January 15, 1993 unless extended in accordance with Ordinance q60, Section 8. u,. Written request for a time extension must be submitted to the City of Temecula a minimum of 30 days prior to the expiration date. If you have any further questions regarding this subject, Planning Department at {71q) 69~-6q00. Gary Thornhill Planning Director please contact the OM/GT:ks CC: Engineering Department Fire Department Anthony Polo, Markham E, Associates Case File PLANNING\L18~ CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tentative Parcel Map No: 25059 Project Description: Four ~1~) Lot Industrial Subdivision Assessor~s Parcel No.: 9110-310-033, 0311 and 037 Planninq Department The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 1160, Schedule E, 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 1160. The expiration date is January 15, 1993. The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor subject to all the requirements of the State of California Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance q60. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. Legal access as required by Ordinance 1160 shall be provided from the tract map boundary to a City maintained road. 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. Subdivision phasing, including any proposed common open space area improvement phasing, if applicable, shall be subject to Planning Department approval. Any proposed phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular access to all lots in each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and purpose of the subdivision approval. STAFF R PT\PP311 PM25059 3 10. 11. 12. 13. 15. An Association shall be established for maintenance of Lot q. Open Space/Common Area and the developer/applicant shall pay for all costs relating to establishment of the Property Owners Association. 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 130 ) feet. Setbacks from top and bottom of slopes shall be a minimum of one-half the slope height. b. 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. All proposed construction shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy, as outlined in the Southwest Area Plan. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following: Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the development standards of the I-P {Industrial Park) zone. Craded 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 recordat/on of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet IECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the City Engineer. 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, STAFFRPT\PP3~ PM25059 2 16. Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: I1) Prior to the issuance of grading permits detailed common open space area landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval for the phase of development in process. The plans shall be certified by a landscape architect, and shall provide for the following: Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all landscaped areas requiring irrigation. Landscape screening where required shall be designed to be opaque up to a minimum height of six 16) feet at maturity. All utility service areas and enclosures shall be screened from view with landscaping and decorative barriers or baffle treatments, as approved by the Planning Director. Utilities shall be placed underground. Parkways shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or a transition into the primary use area of the site. Landscape elements shall include earth berming, ground cover, shrubs and specimen trees. Front yards shall be landscaped and street trees planted. Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent trees at key visual focal points within the project. Where street trees cannot be planted within right-of-way of interior streets and project parkways due to insufficient road right-of-way, they shall be planted outside of the road right-of- way. Landscaping plans shall incorporate native and drought tolerant plants where appropriate. All existing specimen trees and significant rock outcroppings on the subject property shall be shown on the project's grading plans and shall note those to be removed, relocated and/or retained. All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow growing trees shall be steel staked. STAFFR PT\PP3q PM25059 3 17. If the project is to be phased, prior to the approval of grading permits, an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for approval. The plan shall be used as a guideline for subsequent detailed grading plans for individual phases of development and shall include the following: Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and sedimentation during and after the grading process. Approximate time frames for grading and identification of areas which may be graded during the higher probability rain months of January through March. 3. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations. Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase. All cut slopes located adjacent to ungraded natural terrain and exceeding ten ~10) feet in vertical height shall be contour- graded incorporating the following grading techniques: The angle of the graded slope shall be gradually adjusted to the angle of the natural terrain. Angular forms shall be discouraged. The graded form shall reflect the natural rounded terrain. The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with curves with radii designed in proportion to the total height of the slopes where drainage and stability permit such rounding. Where cut or fill slopes exceed 300 feet in horizontal length, the horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved in a continuous, undulating fashion. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall provide evidence to the Director of Building and Safety that all adjacent off-site manufactured slopes have recorded slope easements and that slope maintenance responsibilities have been assigned as approved by the Director of Building and Safety. 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 dived, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of fossils. STAFFRPT\PP3~ PM25059 q 18. 19. 20. Prior to the issuance of BUILDINC PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: Prior to the submittal of building plans to the Department of Building and Safety an acoustical study shall be performed by an acoustical engineer to establish appropriate mitigation measures that shall be applied to inclividual dwelling units within the subdivision to reduce ambient interior noise levels to 115 Ldn. All building plans for all new structures shall incorporate, all required elements from the subdivision~s approved fire protection plan as approved by the County Fire Marshal. Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval. The plans shall address all areas and aspects the tract requiring landscaping and irrigation to be installed including. but not limited to, parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front yard landscaping. Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with approved plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. If seasonal conditions do not permit planting. interim landscaping and erosion control measures shall be utilized as approved by the Planning Director and the Director of Building and Safety. All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with approved plans and shall be verified by City field inspection. Not withstanding the preceding conditions, wherever an acoustical study is required for noise attenuation purposes. the heights of all required walls shall be determined by the acoustical study where applicable. 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. 25059, which action is brought within the time period provided STAFFRPT\PP3u, PM25059 5 for in California Government Code Section 66u,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. 22. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests. and if he or she should fail to do so, the developer shall at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval. enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code Section 66462 at such time as the City acquires the property interests required for the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at the developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. 23. 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 provided. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements: 25. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions [CC~;R's) shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department prior to final approval of the tract maps. The CCSRts shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining the open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, and exterior of all buildings. 26. No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner~s group, or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control. and the duty to maintain. all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CCSR's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance. repairs, and services. Recorded CCI~R's shall permit enforcement by the City of Provisions required by the City as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence STAFFRPT\PP3M PM25059 6 27. 28. of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such dwelling unit or lot, either ( 1 ) an undivided interest in the common areas and facilities, or |2) as share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association, owning the common areas and facilities. Maintenance for all landscaped and open areas, includin9 parkways, shall be provided for in the CCF, R's. 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 I $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 l$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 148) 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 711.41c). En.qineerinq 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. 30. The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act, and all applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions. 31. 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, 460. STAFFRPT\PP3~ PM25059 7 PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 32. 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. CalTrans 33. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions I CCSR's) shall be prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer and City Attorney. The CC~;R's shall be signed and acknowledged by all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The CCaR's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CCSR's shall be subject to the following conditions: a. The CC~,R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense. The CC~,R~s shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Planning, City Engineer and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents. The CCSRIs and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with the final map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City. The CCI~R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas and facilities. The CCSR's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. The CCF, R~s shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CCI~R~s, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC8R~s or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. STAFFRPT'\PP3~ PM25059 8 311. Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 1161 and as approved by the City Engineer. 35. 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. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY: 36. 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 Engineerinq PRIOR TO RECORDATION: 37. Plans for a traffic signal shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for the intersection of Rancho California Road and Ridge Park Drive. 38. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for the intersection of Rancho California Road and Ridge Park Drive. Based on the Traffic Study, these plans shall be designed to provide for 300~ of left turn storage capacity on westbound Rancho California Road to southbound Ridge Park Drive. Credit shall be given toward the developers signal mitigation fees for the design and construction of the signal at Ridge Park Drive and Rancho California Road. The developer shall contribute 116 percentage for the construction costs of the signal at Rancho California Road and Ridge Park Drive. The developer may enter into a reimbursement agreement with the City for the remaining percentage of the construction costs, above his pro rata share, for the signal at Rancho California Road and Ridge Park Drive. STAFFRPT\PP311 PM25059 9 Plans for traffic signal interconnect shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer along Rancho California Road from Diaz Road to Ridge Park Drive. 43. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering for the design requirements. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS: All signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan. The traffic signal at Rancho California Road and Ridge Park Drive shall be installed and operational per the special provisions and the approved traffic signal plan, 46. All traffic signal interconnects shall be installed per the approved plan. STAFFRPT\PP3~ PM25059 10 CITY OF TEMECULA ) LOCATION 'MAP P.C. DATE/~_ CITY OF TEMECULA ) SWAP MAP CITY OF TEM=-CULA _) M-SC /I ,/ CALIFORNIA CZ RD M -SC I-P ZONE MAP ) /._ "~ CASE NO,/,f/,v,,,r,_~,,~r ,~ / /,4 · P.C. DATE/~.--~-~'/ ,/ \ \ \ ",\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ITEM # 8 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 7, 1991 Case No.: Plot Plan No. 239 (PP 239) Prepared By: Charles Ray Recommendation: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: RECOMMEND ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration for Plot Plan No. 239; and ADOPT Resolution 91 - recommending approval of Plot Plan No. 239; based on the analysis and findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PROPOSAL: Rancho California Water District Donald J. Gillis (Gillis Iler and Clark) Construction of the new Rancho California Water District Headquarters Complex as follows: 40,000 square feet 2-story office building 13,000 square feet single story warehouse structure 20,000 square feet single story operations maintenance building Service Vehicle Storage Yard at 250 spaces and Employee/Visitor Parking Areas at 287 spaces. Total site area: 11.5 +/- acres STAFFRPT%239.PP LOCATION: EXISTING ZONING: SURROUNDING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: SURROUNDING LAND USES: PROJECT STATISTICS: BACKGROUND: Between Avenida De Ventas and Winchester Road, approximately 3/4 mile west of Diaz Road. Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-SC) North: M-SC South: M-SC East: M-SC West: M-SC As existing no change proposed Vacant North: Vacant South: Vacant East: Vacant West: Vacant Site Area: Approximately 11.5 acres Building Area: 2-story office Building: 40,000 square feet Warehouse: 13,000 square feet +/- Operations Maintenance Building: 20,000 square feet +/- Total: 73,000 square feet +/- Parking Provided: For: District Vehicles per Rancho Water District vehicle storage yard requirements: 250 spaces For: Employees/Visitors: 270 required, 287 provided Plot Plan No. 239 was submitted to the City of Temecula Planning Department on June 17, 1991. The project, as originally proposed, conformed substantially with applicable design standards and zoning ordinances. Review, comment and concerns STAFFF~PT\239PP 2 regarding the proposal focused primarily on determination of traffic impact mitigation necessary to support the project. Further, as the subject site consists of 13 separate lots, or portions thereof, the applicant is also required to process a parcel map to effect a "Reversion to Acreage" in order to effect the project as configured. Both of the aforementioned concerns are addressed in the following project analysis. ANALYSIS: Land Use and Architectural ComDatibilitv The proposed use is identified as one of those permitted, subject to plot plan approval, under the subject site's current zoning designation of Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-SC) (Reference Exhibit B). Adjacent properties are currently vacant, but will likely be developed with similar commercial/industrial projects based on recent development patterns within the City. Project materials and design elements proposed by the applicant are considered compatible with the design guidelines currently observed by the City. As such, the project is considered compatible with applicable City development standards and ordinances affecting the proposal site and neighboring properties, as well as probable future development of surrounding parcels. LandscaDinQ Appropriately, on-site planting and irrigation schemes are in keeping with City policies regarding water conservation and use of drought-tolerant vegetative species. The project site also includes a "Demonstration Garden", evidencing the Water District's commitment to regional water- conservation; employing drought tolerant species in locally appropriate applications. Site Access The site is accessible by recently improved rights of way for Avenida De Ventas and Winchester Road STAFFRPT\239,PP 3 extensions. Improvements for these rights of way have been approved by the City of Temecula in conjunction with the underlying Parcel Map 21383. Primary project site ingress and egress for employees and visitors is provided by 2, two-way commercial- width drives accessing Winchester Road at the southwesterly corner of the project site, as indicated on the project site plan (Reference Exhibit D). Access to dedicated employee parking areas, is card- controlled via a secondary internal entrance point also indicated on Exhibit D. District maintenance vehicle access is provided via 3 separate commercial width drives leading into the district vehicle storage yard as shown on the project site plan; one drive fronts Winchester Road, while two are proposed on the Avenida De Ventas frontage. Ingress/egress at these points is controlled by rolling gates, also indicated on the project site plan. Traffic Imoacts At the request of the Public Works Department, the applicant submitted a focused traffic analysis based upon the original traffic study prepared by the subdivider. Project related traffic impacts, as documented by the traffic study submitted by the applicant, are mitigated by signalization and public facilities fees, specified in the attached Conditions of Approval. (Reference also Attachment No. 5 - "Fee Checklist". ) Parking and On-Site Circulation The structure, as designed, is user-specific, with parking facilities designed to support administrative and maintenance functions of the Rancho California Water District. Employee/visitor parking exceeds the minimum of 270 spaces required by ordinance; 287 are provided. Parking for district vehicles is proposed at 250 spaces based on current requirements, and allowing for programmed STAFFRPT\239.PP 4 expansion of services support activities per R.C.W.D. specifications. As conditioned, on-site circulation patterns and drive aisle designs are considered adequate to support the project. Gradina and Drainaqe The existing site is essentially level, having been rough graded in accordance with grading plans for the underlying Parcel Map No. 21383. Toxic/Hazardous Materials Use & Storage The applicant proposes on-site temporary holding of used vehicle lubricants employing a reclaimed oil system. The system will consist of an above grade tank covered with a concrete envelope. This tank will be periodically drained by a licensed contractor, and final disposition of used oil and related by products will be the contractor's responsibility. Location of the proposed reclaimed oil storage tank is indicated on the project site plan (Reference Exhibit D). Plans for temporary holding and recycling of used petroleum products have been reviewed and approved by the County Fire and Health Departments, as mitigated by the attached project Conditions of Approval. Uniform Building Code and State MaD Act Comoliance Pursuant to section 504 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC), the applicant is required to eliminate the property lines currently subdividing the project site. In summary, the referenced UBC section prohibits single structures from crossing property lines as is currently proposed by the applicant (Reference Exhibit D.1 .) The formal process to accomplish this ("Reversion to Acreage", per Chapter 6 of the State Map Act) entails redescription of the property and recordation of a new map reflecting the project site STAFFRPT\239,PP 5 EXISTING ZONING, FUTURE GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY: ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: FINDINGS: as a single parcel. Recordation of this map is conditioned to issuance of Building Permits (Reference Condition of Approval No. 39.) The project site as currently indicated also reflects a lot line adjustment along the proposal's westerly boundary. Existing and adjusted property lines are indicated in Exhibit H. Lot Line Adjustment No. 21 filed independently by Johnson + Johnson, the project site owner, will effect the adjusted property lines as proposed by Plot Plan No. 239. Approval of LLA No. 21 is also required prior to issuance of Building Permits (Reference Condition No. 38.) The project, as conditioned, conforms with existing zoning and subdivision ordinances affecting the subject property, and is compatible with Southwest Area Plan (SWAP) land use recommendations for the site (Reference Exhibit C). As discussed previously, the proposal is also compatible with existing and anticipated development in its immediate vicinity. As such, Plot Plan No. 239 will likely 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, 239. Based on findings contained in that assessment, it was determined the project in question will not have a significant impact on the built or natural environment; a Negative Declaration of potential environmental impacts is recommended for adoption. There is a reasonable probability that Plot Plan No. 239 will be consistent with the City's future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with STAFFRPT\239,PP 6 State law. The project, as conditioned, conforms with existing applicable city zoning ordinances and development standards. Further, the proposal is characteristic of similar development approved by the City to date and that anticipated in it's vicinity based on current development trends. 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 compatible with existing development standards which will likely be included in the City's future General Plan. Substantial inconsistency is unlikely. The proposed use or action as conditioned complies with State planning and zoning laws. Reference local Ordinances No. 348,460; and California Governmental Code Sections 65000-66009 (Planning and Zoning Law). As conditioned, 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. A reversion to acreage and lot line adjustment affecting underlying parcels are required prior to issuance of building permits. Adequate site circulation, parking, and landscaping are provided, as well as sufficient area to appropriately construct the proposed structures (Reference Exhibits D and E.) 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). 6. The proposal will not have an adverse effect STAFFRPT\239,PP 7 The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property. It does not represent a significant change to the present or planned land use of the area. As conditioned, the project conforms with applicable land use and development regulations, and reflects design elements currently existing within the City. The project has acceptable access to dedicated rights-of-way which are open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic. The proiect draws access from Winchester Road and Avertida de Ventas, improved dedicated City rights-of-way. Project access, as designed and conditioned, 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. 239. 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: vgw The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: RECOMMEND ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration for Plot Plan No. 239, and ADOPT Resolution 91- recommending approval of Plot Plan No. 239; based on the analysis and findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. STAFFI~PT~239 .PP 8 Attachments: Resolution Conditions of Approval Environmental Assessment Exhibits A B C D D.1 E.1, E.2 F.1, F.2, F.3 G.1, G.2, G.3 H I 5. Vicinity Map Zoning Map SWAP Recommended Land Use Site Plan Site Plan/Underlying Parcelization Composite Landscape Plans Elevations Floor Plans Parcel Map No. 21383 - Adjusted Property Lines 1. Color Exterior 2. Materials Samples Fee Check List STAFFRPT~239,PP 9 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLOT PLAN NO. 239 TO CONSTRUCT RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX AS FOLLOWS: 40,000 SQ.FT. 2-STORY OFFICE BUILDING; 13,000 SQ.FT. SINGLE STORY WAREHOUSE STRUCTURE; 20,000 SQ.FT. SINGLE STORY OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE BUILDING; RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT SERVICE VEHICLE STORAGE YARD AND EMPLOYEE/VISITOR PARKING AREAS ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 11.5 +/- ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN AVENIDA DE VENTAS AND WINCHESTER ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 3/4 MILES WEST OF DIAZ ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-120-024 (PARENT NO.) WHEREAS, The Rancho California Water District filed Plot Plan No. 239 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 October 7, 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. 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 STAFFRPT~239.PP 10 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. (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 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 recommending approval of projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of STAFFRPT\239.PP 11 the following: a) There is reasonable probability that Plot Plan No. 239 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 18.30(c), no plot plan may be approved unless the following findings can be made: a) 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) The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the proposed Plot Plan, makes the following findings, to wit: a) There is a reasonable probability that Plot Plan No. 239 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 conditioned, conforms with existing applicable city zoning SI'AFFRPT~239PP 12 b) cl d) e) f) ordinances and development standards. Further, the proposal is characteristic of similar development approved by the City to date; and that is anticipated in it's vicinity based on current development trends. 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 compatible with existing development standards which will likely be included in the City's future General Plan. Substantial inconsistency is unlikely. 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). As conditioned, 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. A reversion to acreage and lot line adjustments affecting underlying parcels are required prior to issuance of building permits. Adequate site circulation, parking, and landscaping are provided, as well as sufficient area to appropriately construct the proposed structures (Reference Exhibits D and E.) 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. It does not represent a s ~nificant change to the present or planned land use of the area. As s~^~F.~23s.~ 13 conditioned, the project conforms with applicable land use and development regulations and reflects design elements currently existing within the City. g) The project has acceptable access to dedicated rights-of-way which are open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic. The project draws access from Winchester Road and Avenida de Ventas, improved dedicated City rights-of-way. Project access, as designed and conditioned, conforms with applicable City Engineering standards and ordinances. h) 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. 239. i) 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 Comoliance. 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. 239 to construct Rancho California Water District headquarters complex as STAFFRPT~239PP 14 follows: 40,000 square feet 2-story office building 13,000 square feet single story warehouse structure, 20,000 square feet single story operations maintenance building, Rancho California Water District, service vehicle storage yard and employee/visitor parking areas, on a parcel containing 11.5 +/- acres located between Avenida de Ventas and Winchester Road, approximately 3/4 miles west of Diaz Road and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 909-120-024 (Parent No.) subject to the following conditions: A. Reference Attachment No. 2. SECTION 4.~. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 199 JOHN HOAGLAND 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 __ day of , 199_ by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS PLANNING COMMISSIONERS PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Plot Plan No: 239 Project Description: Construction of the new Rancho California Water District HeadQuarters Comolex as follows: 40,000 square feet 2 story office building 13,000 square feet single story warehouse structure 20,000 square feet single storyoperations/ maintenance building Rancho California Water District Employee, Service Storage Yard & Visitor Parking Areas totaling 537 spaces Assessor's Parcel No.: 909-120-024 (Parent No.) Planning Deoartment The use hereby permitted by this plot plan is for construction of the new Rancho California Water District Headquarters Complex as follows: 40,000 square feet 2 story office building, 13,000 sq.ft. single story warehouse structure, 20,000 square feet single story operations/maintenance building and supporting Rancho California Water District employee, service storage yard and visitor parking areas. 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. 239. 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 STAFFRPT~239.PP 16 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 The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as shown on Plot Plan No. 239 marked Exhibit D, or as amended by these conditions. Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, (3) copies of a Parking, Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. Plans shall meet all requirements of Ordinance No. 348, Section 18.12, and shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with approved landscape, irrigation, and shading plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, or within the time frame specified by the City Planning Director and City Building Official. 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. Five hundred and thirty-seven parking spaces, designed in accordance with Section 18.12, Riverside County Ordinance No. 348, shall be provided as shown on the Approved Exhibit D. The parking area shall be surfaced with asphaltic concrete paving to a minimum depth of 3 inches on 4 inches of Class II base. A minimum of 5 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 STAFFF~T\239,PP 17 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: 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. "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 __ 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. 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 Exhibits F. 1, F.2. Materials used in the construction of all buildings shall be in substantial conformance with Exhibits F.1, F.2 and Exhibits 1.1, 1.2. Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from ground view. Screening material shall be subject to Planning Department approval. Prior to the final building inspection approval by the Building and Safety Department, a six foot high decorative wall shall be constructed the perimeter of the project's proposed vehicle storage yard as illustrated on the project site plan, Exhibit D. The required wall shall be subject to the approval of the Director of the Department of Building and Safety and the Planning Director. 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 constructed of materials architecturally compatible with the primary facility, utilizing a steel gate which screens bins from external view. Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen canopy trees along streets and within the parking areas. STAFFF~°T%239.PP 18 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall comply with Ordinance No. 663 (Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation and Procurement) by paying the fee required by that ordinance which is based on the gross acreage of the parcel proposed for development. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fees required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required under the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution. Seven (7) Class II bicycle racks shall be provided in convenient locations as approved by the Planning Director to facilitate bicycle access to the project area. 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 plantings, 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. Contingent upon availability of irrigation water, prsor 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 Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. Alternatively, installation of landscaping may be secured by bonding means, and in amounts specified by the Director of Planning; and installed at such times as irrigation water is in adequate supply as determined by RCWD and the City Planning Director. 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). All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. STAFFRPT\239.PP 19 Enaineerinq Deoartment 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. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 22. 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; CATV Franchise; and Parks and Recreation Department. 23. The developer shall submit two (2) 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 24"x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil Engineer. 24. The developer shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report specifically related to the project site to the Engineering Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site, as well as the structural 'design of driveway and parking lot areas. 25. A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check, and shall address the restricted use zone, fault line area; and areas of potential liquefaction and subsidence as identified by the report prepared by Schaefer Dixon Associates, dated June 7, 1989 and August 15, 1989, for PM 21383. STAFFRPT~239.PP 20 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 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. No grading shall take place prior to the improvement plans being substantially complete, appropriate clearance letters having been received, and subsequently approved by the City Engineer. If grading is to take place between the months of October and April, erosion control plans will be required. Erosion control plans and notes shall be submitted and approved by the Engineering Department. All site plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency with approved plans. 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. Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. 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 limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, and traffic control devices as appropriate. b. Storm drain facilities. 33. c. Landscaping (street parkway). d. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines if needed. 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. STAFFRPT\23S.PP 21 34. 35. Drainage calculations shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. All onsite and offsite drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 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 and site improvement 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. Lot Line Adjustment 21 shall be approved by the Planning Department and a copy of the recorded documents shall be provided by the applicant to the Department of Public Works prior to any building permits being issued. 39. 40. 41. 42. A Parcel Map for reversion to acreage shall be prepared and submitted to the Planning Department to be recorded over the affected parcels of Parcel Map 21383. The Parcel Map shall be recorded prior to issuance of any building permits. 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. Prior to building permit, the subdivider shall notify the City's C.A.T.V. Franchises of the intent to develop. Conduit shall be installed to C.A.T.V. Standards 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 Negative Declaration for the project. The fee to be paid shall be 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 STAFFPi'T~239.PP 22 Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been provided to developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. 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). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; orovidqd that developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATION OF OCCUPANCY: 43. A minimum flowline grade shall be 0.50 percent. 44. Onsite improvement plans per City Standards for the private streets or drives shall be required for review and approval by the City Engineer. 45. All landscaping adjacent to driveway approaches shall be installed to provide for adequate site distance. 46. All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards or a commercial curb return approach may be used and shall be shown on the street improvement plans in accordance with County Standard 400 and 401 (curb sidewalk). The easterly driveway on Winchester Road, and the two driveways on Avenida De Ventas shall be a minimum width of 36 feet. The two westerly driveways on Winchester Road shall be a minimum width of 30 feet. Riverside County Fire 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: 47. 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 546. STAFFRPT%239.FP 23 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53, 54. 55. 56. The applicant/developer shall provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 4000 GPM for a 3 hour duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, which must be available before any combustible material is place on the job site. A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants, on a looped system (6"x4"2~x2~), will be located not less than 25 feet or more than 165 feet from any portion of the budding as measured along approved vehicular travelways. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. 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. The 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." The applicant/developer shall install a complete fire sprinkler system in all buildings. 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. The applicant/developer shall 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. Occupancy separation will be required as per the Uniform Building Code, Section 503. The applicant/developer shall install panic hardware and exit signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code, Low level Exit Signs, where exit signs are required by Section 3314(a). 57. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes. STAFFI~°T~239 PP 24 58. The applicant/developer shall install portable fire extinguishers with a minimum rating of 2A-IOBC. Contact a certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. 59. Applicant/developer shall be responsible for obtaining underground or aboveground permits from both the County Health and Fire Departments. 60. 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. 61. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall deposit, with the City of Temecula, a check or money order equaling the sum of 25 ¢ per square foot as mitigation for fire protection impacts. This amount must be submitted seoaratelv from the plan check review fees. 62. Applicant/developer shall be responsible to install a fire alarm system. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation. 63. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed in the Building and Safety Office. All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to the Planning and Engineering staff. Riverside County Deoartment Of Health The Environmental Health Services has reviewed Plot Plan No. 239 and has no objections. Sanitary sewer and water services should be available in this area. Prior to any building plan review for Health clearance, the following items are required: 64. "Will-serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies. 65° 'A clearance letter from the Hazardous Services Materials Management Branch (Jon Mohoroski, 358-5055), will be required indicating that the project has been cleared for: Underground storage tanks Hazardous Waste Generator Services Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with AB 2185) Waste reduction management 66. Waste Regulation Branch (Waste Collection/LEA approvals). STAFFPa:~T%239.PP 25 Note: Any current additional requirements not covered, can be applicable at time of Building Plan review for final Environmental Health Service clearance. City of Temecula Deoartment of Building and Safety 67. A request for street addressing must be made prior to submittal Building Plan Review. 68. The applicant/developer shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1988 editions of the Uniform Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes, 1990 National Electrical Code, California State Administrative Code, Title 24 Handicapped and Energy Regulations and the Temecula City Code. 69. Lighting on site and located on structures shall comply with Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance No. 655. STAFFP~T%239PP 26 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY Backaround 1. Name of Proponent: 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: Date of Environmental Assessment: Agency Requiring Assessment: Name of Proposal, if applicable: 6. Location of Proposal: Environmental Impacts Rancho California Water District 28061 Diaz Road. Temecula, CA (714) 676-4101 Auaust 26.1991 CITY OF TEMECULA Plot Plan No. 239 (PP 239)-Rancho California Water District HeadQuarters Comolex Between Avertida De Ventas and Winchester Road, aooroximatelv 3/4 mile west of Diaz Road (Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.) 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? Disruptions, displacements, compac- tion or overcovering of the soil? Substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features? X The destruction, covering or modi- fication of any unique geologic or physical features? Maybe No X X X S'iSTAFFRPT\239.PP 27 Any substantial increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off site? 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? Ye~ Maybe No X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT~239.PP 28 4. Plant a. 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? 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? 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? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT\239PP 29 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? 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? YeS Maybe N__o X X X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT\239.PP 30 10. 11. 12. 13. 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? Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking? Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT\239.PP 14. 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: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks or other recreational facilities7 Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services: 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: 16. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? be Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: Power or natural gas? Communications systems? Water? Sewer or septic tanks? Storm water drainage? Solid waste and disposal? YeS Maybe No X X X X X X X X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT\239.PP 32 17. 18. 19. 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 S\STAFFRPT\239PP 33 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 III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation Earth 1.a. 1.b. 1.C. 1.d. 1.6. 1.f. 1.g. Air 2.a,b,c. No. Construction is not proposed at depths sufficient to adversely affect geologic substructures of the site. Similarly significant grading/fill activities are not proposed - no significant impacts. Yes. Compaction and overcovering of soil is necessary to implement the proposal. The relatively nominal scale of this project does not indicate likelihood of significant impacts on regional topography or soil characteristics. No. Reference Items 1 .a and 1 .b. The subject site is essentially level at present. Further, fill activities of significance are not proposed. N0. No unique geologic or topographic features currently exist on the subject site. No. Nominal alterations in regional surface erosion patterns can be expected if this project is eventually realized. Proposed additional on-site structures and paving will likely reduce erosion at the project site; resulting in additional off-site drainage discharge volumes. Impacts on regional drainage characteristics are insignificant as mitigated by project specific drainage conveyances. (Reference City of Temecula Engineering Department Conditions of Approval.) No. Construction is not proposed that would logically affect distant beach sands. Neither should the project produce deposition/erosion potentially modifying stream channels or lake beds. N0. The subject site is not affected by known earthquake, landslide, mudslide or ground failure hazards. Further, all proposed fill/compaction and subsurface construction shall conform to applicable City and Uniform Building Code standards. No. Addition of localized air pollutants will result from increased vehicle traffic accessing the project site with little or no noticeable regional impacts. Short term increases in localized pollutants and associated noxious odors are likely during construction activities. Impacts are not considered significant regionally. S\STAFFRPT\239 ,PP 3 5 Water 3.a. 3.b. 3.c. 3.d,e. 3.f,g. 3.h. 3.i. Plant Life 4.a-d. No. The proposed structure is not located within defined marine or fresh water flows. No. Currently permeable ground will be rendered impervious as a result of this proposal. Consequently, surface runoff and absorption rates on the project site itself will change. Site drainage shall conform with plans approved by the City of Temecula. Necessary improvements to effect proper site drainage shall be as indicated in the attached drainage plans and project conditions of approval. No significant impacts on drainage patterns are anticipated. Reference also Item 1 .e. No. Plans proposed at this time indicate no potential adverse on or off site flooding impacts. Proposed drainage plans and all related necessary improvements shall be as specified by the City Engineering Department. No. Increased runoff from the project site may nominally increase surface levels and turbidity of off-site bodies of water with no impacts of significance. NO. Reduced permeation at the project site may eventually affect underlying groundwater. Impacts of this project individually are considered insignificant. No. Water consumption rates typical of small commercial/industrial projects is proposed. All water consumption activities are subject to monitoring and allowances specified by the applicable purveyor. Proposed vehicle washing activities shall utilize recycled water per applicable local and state requirements, Landscaping and irrigation shall respect current drought conditions affecting the City as specified in the project Conditions of Approval and exhibited by the proposed project landscape and irrigation plan concepts. N0. Reference Item No. 3.c. No. The project site is currently barren of all vegetation, new plant species which may be introduced as a result of required site landscaping cannot be considered invasive because of the referenced lack of existing on-site vegetation. Similarly, no impacts are anticipated on agricultural assets. S\STAF~RPT\239.PP 36 Animal Life No. Minor losses of common urban species, e.g., small lizards, insects, rodents, and their habitats may result from this project. Numerically and qualitatively, these losses are considered environmentally insignificant. Further, if not previously paid, the applicant is required to submit Stephen's Kangaroo Rat habitat procuremerit fees in the amount specified by City ordinance. Such monies are to be used for purchase of suitable habitat for the Kangaroo Rat as it is gradually displaced due to generalized development of the Temecula Valley. This proposal contributes incrementally to regional displacement of the Kangaroo Rat. Noise 8.a. Maybe. Minor increases in local ambient noise levels will occur. No. subsequent to project implementation and commercial/industrial occupancy of the project site. Area-wide noise impacts will be insignificant. Proposed hours of operation shall conform with normal business hours of operations, generally considered to be between 7:00 A.M. and 8:00 P.M. Short term construction noise levels generated may result in temporary localized disturbances considered insignificant as adjacent properties are currently vacant. Lioht and Glare No. While the project could potentially impact night skies, the proposal is required to comply with applicable City/Palomar Observatory lighting policies and ordinance(s). These policies and ordinances address potential night-sky lighting impacts of development proposals that might logically affect activities of the Mr. Palomar Astronomical Observatory. Land Use NO. The project is consistent with underlying land use ordinances and Southwest Area Plan guidelines affecting the subject property. No change in Land Use designations is proposed in conjunction with this project; no anticipated impacts. Natural Resources 9.a,b. No. The proposal is of limited scale and will not logically deplete substantial amounts of renewable or non-renewable natural resources. S\STAFFRPT\239,PP 37 Risk of UPset lO.a,b. No. Use and storage of hazardous substances e.g. waste oil/petroleum products proposed has been reviewed and approved in concept by the Riverside County Fire Department and the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health Services. Potential risk of upset involving hazardous substances e.g. fuel, oil, petroleum wastes, is reduced to insignificance through compliance with the attached project Conditions of Approval. Population 11. No. The project does not contain population relocation elements. Housinq 12. NO. No housing is proposed to be added nor deleted. Transportation/Circulation 13.a,c. No. Commercial/industrial construction of relatively limited scale is proposed, generating similarly limited amounts of destination traffic. Traffic generated will consist primarily of daily Rancho California Water District operations vehicles and commuting employees. Nominal amounts of visitor traffic can also be expected, Regionally, traffic impacts of this individual project are determined to be insignificant. Further, the project is required to contribute monies to area-wide, as well as localized public improvements (e.g., signalization mitigation) proportionate to the proposal's anticipated impacts as determined by the City Public Works Department. 13.b. Yes. In compliance with City ordinance and project specific requirements,the project provides a total of 537 additional off-street, improved parking spaces as referenced in the proposal's Conditions of Approval (attached), and as indicated on Staff Report Exhibit D. 13.d. NO. The project will attract additional destination traffic, primarily employees and service vehicles, to the subject site upon its implementation. Impacts on regional circulation patterns are expected to be insignificant given the proposal's limited scale, Reference also Item 13.a. 13.e. No. The project is not in a location which will logically affect waterborne, rail or air traffic, nor does it propose addition 3r deletion of such facilities. S\STAFFRPT\239,PP 38 13.f. Maybe. Increases in traffic generated by this proposal may consequently increase the possibility of traffic accidents. Impacts are likely to be unnoticeable in view of the proposal's limited scope and proposed infrastructure improvements supporting the project. Public Services 14.a-c. Maybe. New commercial/industrial development may generate at least nominal increased demands for police and fire protection services, utility provisions and, indirectly, schools. Mitigation is realized through project- specific building permit fees, assessment districts, property taxes, and similar funding mechanisms. 14. d. Maybe. Construction is not proposed which will directly impact schools or parks. However, the applicant is required by state law to contribute applicable school fees as partial mitigation for secondary impacts on school systems resulting from the commercial/industrial development proposed. 14.e. Ye~. Construction of new roads and associated increases in road maintenance activities in the immediate vicinity of the proposal will be required due to proportionate increases in traffic generated locally. Mitigation of such impacts are as specified by the City Public Works Department in the project's Conditions of Approval, attached. 14.f. No. Impacts on other governmental services have not been identified at this time. EnerqV 15.a,b. No. Reference Item Nos. 9.a. and b. Utilities 16.a-f. No. Service line extensions and increased demands can be expected for the utilities referenced. The facility itself supports regional water acquisition and distribution activities, No significant impacts are anticipated. Human Health 17.a,b. No. The project does not include introduction of potential health hazards of significance to the region; nor are there existing identified health hazards at the project site. Potential hazards associated with use and storage of toxic materials on the subject site are mitigated per the attached project Conditions of Approval. S\STAFFRPT\239PP 39 Aesthetics 18. No. The application has been reviewed for architectural quality and compatibility by the City, and is considered appropriate in the context of existing and proposed development in its vicinity. Recreation 19. No. Additional recreational assets are not proposed, nor are they to be deleted in conjunction with this project; direct impacts on recreational facilities are not anticipated. Cultural Resources 20.a. No. Construction is not proposed that will logically affect known archaeological religious or cultural assets; no identified impacts. 20.b. N0. The proposal is not within an identified historic preservation/conservation district. As such, impacts on the existing character of historic assets in the region are unlikely. 21 .a,b, c,d. No. Reference Item Nos. 1-20. S\STAFFRPT\239,PP 40 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. Auaust 26. 1991 Date For CITY OF TEMECULA S\STAFFRPT\239PP 41 CITY OF TEMECULA ) ./' ../' CITY OF TEMECULA ) 14. ~ c, - r cAsE .o.~-~'~ EXHIBIT ~.P.C. DATE CITY OF TEMECULA ) CASe .0. eX.:SnT NO.C, ~_P.C. DATE I i I i "l I 0 = Iij jl J!JJ ~i Z i F ~ Z IIII < 0 · z ua ~ a >_ Z I.- 1 / / / C~Z~' zt-.,c lU m O ATTACHMENT NO. 5 CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST CASE NO.: Plot Plan No. 239 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. 16 N/A Condition No. 42 Condition No. 40 N/A Condition No. 61 Condition No. 33 S\STAFFRPT\239,PP 42 ITEM # 09 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 7, 1991 Case No.: Parcel Map No. 24085 Prepared By: Scott Wright Recommendation: 1. ADOPT THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION; AND 2. ADOPT RESOLUTION 91- RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP NO. 24085 APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Rancho California City Center Association No. 1 REPRESENTATIVE: NBS/Lowry PROPOSAL: To create 57 parcels on a 72.6 acre site LOCATION: Westerly side of Diaz Road, north of the future extension of Winchester Road EXISTING ZONING: Manufacturing-Service Commercial, (M-SC) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: South: East: West: Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial, (M- SC) Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial, (M- SC) Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial, (M- SC) Manufacturing-Service Commercial, (M- SC) PROPOSED ZONING: Not Requested EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant S\STAFFRPT\24085 SURROUNDING LAND USES: PROJECT STATISTICS: BACKGROUND: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: North: Vacant South: Vacant East: Murrieta Creek West: Vacant Gross Site Area: Net Site Area: No. of Parcels: Average Parcel Size: Earthwork: 72.6 acres 55.9 acres 57 0.98 acres Cut = 363,000 yards Fill = 363,000 yards cubic cubic Tentative Parcel Map No. 24085 was submitted to the County on November 22, 1988. The application was continued at the Land Development Committee (LDC) meeting of January 12, 1989 pending submittal of paleontological and biological surveys, additional grading information, geology and liquefaction reports, flood plain information, and a traffic study. The LDC continued Parcel Map No. 24085 at four subsequent meetings, pending clearance from the County Geologist and the County Traffic Engineer, submittal of a paleontological report, submittal of a slope stability report, additional information regarding liquefaction, and clearance of the biological survey. Parcel Map No. 24085 was transmitted to the City on April 11, 1990. City Staff requested a copy of the geologic report showing a restricted use zone, a traffic study, an archaelolgy report, information regarding property boundaries and the alignment of Winchester Road, and landscape and architecture standards. The proposal is to create 57 parcels with an average parcel size of approximately one acre on a site with a gross area of 72.6 acres. There is an open space area 150 feet in width reflecting the restricted use S\STAFFRPT\24085 2 zone recommended in the geologic report. The easterly side of the site comprises a Murrieta Creek channel easement and a flood control easement to the County of Riverside. ANALYSIS: Traffic linDacts Future development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24085 is expected to generate 5,340 vehicle trip ends per day. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the project determined that projected future traffic based on existing traffic, project generated traffic, and traffic generated by other growth in the area will result in a peak hour Level of Service D or better at all intersections within the scope of the traffic study if recommended improvements are implemented. The recommendations include contributing to the extension of Diaz Road, providing traffic signals at certain intersection, contributing to the signalization of other intersections, providing a signing and striping plan, and contributing to the construction of the Overland overcrossing and the restriping of Winchester Road to six lanes. These improvements are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval. Fault Hazards The site is traversed by a potentially active fault which was previously unmapped. The geologic report prepared in conjunction with the parcel map defines a fault zone with two branches and recommends the establishment of a restricted use zone to include observed faults, their in-line projections, and a buffer zone. The larger branch of the restricted use zone is shown on the tentative parcel map as an open space area 150 feet in width. No habitable structure shall be constructed within either branch of the restricted use zone. S\STAFFRPT\24085 3 Liquefaction Potential Liquefiable soils are present in the lower lying portion of the site. Liquefaction may induce surface subsidence on the site in the range of 0.1 to 1.4 inches. The geologic report recommends that thte effects of liquefaction, including the loss of bearing capacity, surface subsidence, and lateral spreading be re-evaluated for each individual structure on the site when grading and building plans become available. Soils reports addressing the issues delineated above shall be a condition of approval of the subject parcel map and of any future development proposals on the site. Flood Hazard A portion of the proposed parcels are located within the 100 year flood plain limits of Murrieta Creek. Measures to remove the project from the 100 year flood plain are listed in the Conditions of Approval (see County Flood Control District letter of November 16, 1990). Drainage The site is located within the limits of the Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan and payment of drainage fees is required. All lots are required to drain toward adjacent streets or an adequate outlet approved by the City Engineer. Parcel Map 21383 is located adjacent to and upslope from the site. If development of the subject property occurs before development of the site of Parcel Map No. 21383, adequate inlet facilities shall be constructed to collect all tributary flows and convey them to Murrieta Creek. On-site grading shall be designed to penetrate existing tributary drainage areas and outlet points, and development of the subject and adjacent properties shall be coordinated S\STAFFRPT\24085 4 to ensure that water courses remain unobstructed and that stormwaters are not diverted from one watershed to another. The site, including each phase if phasing occurs, shall be protected from 100 year tributary storm flows. Gradina Parcel Map No. 24085 will involve 363,000 cubic yards of cut and fill. Cut slopes will be up to 25 feet in height, and fill slopes be up to 10 feet high. Some cut will penetrate into the Pauba formation which consists of sandstone and siltstone. No cut or fill slopes will exceed a slope ratio of 2:1. The slope stability report determined that the proposed 2:1 cut slopes will be grossly stable to a maximum height of 29 feet, and surficial erosion potential should be mitigated by directing drainage away from the slope faces and installing landscape planting on the slopes. The recommendations of the slope stability report are included in the conditions of approval. Biological Impacts Biological surveys of the site found no evidence of the presence of any plant or animal species classified as rare or endangered. The project will involve the loss of foraging habitat for a number of species of birds, reptiles, and mammals. This is an incrementally adverse but regionally non-significant impact which is mitigated by the retention of an open space park area in the larger restricted use zone. Further mitigations may be required by State and Federal resource agencies relative to channel improvements for Murrieta Creek. The use of native California shrubs and trees in the landscaping will enhance reoccupation of the bird community. S\STAFFRPT\24085 5 Landscape and Architectural Standards The applicant has provided a set of landscape and architectural standards to ensure that development of the site maintains a consistent level of quality. Conformity with the lanscape and architechural standards will be required of all future development of the site. Water and Sewer Availabilitv Water and sewer service will be available from the Rancho California Water District upon completion of financial arrangements between the property owner and the District. Lot Line Adjustments and Street Realignments The formation of Assessment District 155 included a realignment of the right of way for the future extension of Winchester Road west of Diaz Road. Since the centerline of the right of way constituted the boundary between properties, the realignment resulting in changes to property boundaries. The subject parcel map was affected by a realignment resulted in changes to property boundaries. The subject parcel map was affected by a realignment of Winchester Road at the intersection with Avenida de Venta. In order to prevent discrepancies in the legal descriptions of the property at the time of recordation of the map, Staff has required that the applicant and other affected property owners eliminate the discrepancies by filing lot line adjustments, street vacations, and offers of rededication reflecting the new alignment of Winchester Road and the resulting changes in property boundaries. These requirements shall be completed prior to map recordation. S\STAFFRPT\24085 6 Lot Size All proposed lots encompass approximately one acre and are adequate to satisfy the minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet where sewers are available. All lots are over 100 feet wide and meet the minimum width requirement of 65 feet where sewers are available. Access All proposed parcels abut upon a street offered for public dedication. Access to the site is taken from Diaz Road and from the future extension of Winchester Road west of Diaz Road through streets "A", "B" and "C". No parcels shall take direct access from Winchester Road or Diaz Road. Archaeological Resources The site of Parcel Map No. 24085 contains a recorded archaeological site (CA-RIV-237) which is believed to encompass approximately 70,000 square meters, part of which is outside of the subject property. During an archaeological surface survey of the site conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of basalt and quartz debitage, fragmented manos and metares, fire-affected rocks, pestles, hammerstones, and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed. The recommendations of the Archaeological Assessment are to conduct a surface collection of the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and significance of the site. The resulting information shall be used to determine what additional measures may need to be implemented to preserve cultural resources prior to grading. The Archaeological Assessment also includes the recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted S\STAFFRPT\24085 7 for any future grading activities. These recommendations shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map No. 24085. In addition, a Native American representative shall be present during the archaeological excavation and also during grading. Fossil Resources The site is located in the fossiliferous Pauba Formation. In accordance with the recommendation of the San Bernardino County Museum, the subdivider shall retain a paleontologist to monitor grading operations, evaluate any fossils encountered during grading, prepare a report of findings, and provide for preservation and curation of recovered specimens. FUTURE GENERAL PLAN, SWAP AND ZONNING CONSISTENCY: Parcel Map No. 24085 is consistent with the Southwest Area Plan designation of the site for light industrial uses. The parcel map conforms to the requirements of the M-SC, Manufacturing-Service Commercial Zone. The project is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivisions in the vicinity, and there is a reasonable probability that the project will be consistant with the Future General Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The Initial Study prepared for Parcel Map No. 24085 indicates that the project will not have any impacts on the environment which cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance, and Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Neclaration. FINDINGS: The proposed Parcel Map will not have a significant negative impact on the environment, as determined in the Initial Study performed for the project. A Negative Declaration is recommended for adoption. S\STAFFRPT~24085 8 There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the General Plan being prepared at this time in that the proposed commercial-industrial subdivision is consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial Land Use designation, the Manufacturing- Service Commercial Zone, and exising land uses in the vicinity. 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 in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivisions in the vicinity. The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project conforms to the current zoning for the site and Ordinance No. 460, Schedule "E". The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lot, access, and density. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as determined in the Initial Study prepared for this project. The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future passive energy control opportunities in that all parcels have adequate southerly exposure. All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of-ways w,~ich are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic. S~STAFFRPT\24085 9 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Attachments: 1. 2. 3. 4. 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. 10. The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. 11. These findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the following recommendation to the City Council: ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 24085; and ADOPT Resolution 91 - approving Tentative Parcel Map No.24085 based on the analysis contained herein and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. Resolution Conditions of Approval Environmental Assessment Exhibits A. Vicinity Map B. SWAP Map C. Surrounding Zoning D. Tentative Parcel Map 24085 vgw S\STAFFRPT\24085 10 RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP NO. 24085 TO SUBDIVIDE A 72.6 ACRE PARCEL INTO 57 PARCELS AT THE WESTERLY SIDE OF DIAZ ROAD NORTH OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL 909-120-022. WHEREAS, Rancho California City Associates I filed Parcel Map No. 24085 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 October 7, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WH EREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said Parcel Map; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Findinos. 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: S\STAFFRPT\24085 11 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 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. 24085 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. S\STAFFRPT\24085 12 c) The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. D. (1) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are made: a) That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. b) That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. c) That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of development. d) That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the proposed density of the development. e) That the design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. f) That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. g) That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. A land division may be approved if it is found that alternate easements for access or for use will S\STAFFRPT\24085 13 be provided and that they will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction. (2) The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to wit: The proposed Parcel Map will not have a 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 in that the proposed commercial-industrial subdivision is consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial Land Use designation, the Manufacturing- Service Commercial Zone, and exising land uses in the vicinity. 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 in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivisions in the vicinity. The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project conforms to the current zoning for the site and Ordinance No. 460, Schedule "E". The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lot configuarations, access, and density. S\STAFFRPT\24085 l~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 prepared for this project. The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future passive energy control opportunities in that all parcels have adequate southerly exposure. All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic. 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. The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary to protect the public hearlth, safety and general welfare. These 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 Comoliance. An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that the proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment, and a Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby granted. S\STAFFRPT\24085 15 SECTION 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Parcel Map No. 24085 for the subdivision of a 72.6 acre parcel into 57 parcels located at the westerly side of Diaz Road north of the future extension of Winchester Road, and known as Assessor's Parcel 909-120-022 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. SECTION 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of October, 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 7th day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS S~ST~FF~PT\240SS 16 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tentative Parcel Map No: Project Description: Assessor's Parcel No,: 24085 To create 57 Parcels on a 72.6 acre site 909-120-022 Planning Department The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule "E", 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 460. The expiration date is Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the parcel map boundary to a City maintained road. 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. S\STAFFRPT\2408S 17 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Subdivision phasing, including any proposed common open space area improvement phasing, if applicable, shall be subject to Planning Department approval. Any proposed phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular access to all lots in each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and purpose of the subdivision approval. 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. Setbacks from top and bottom of slopes shall be a minimum of one-half the slope height. b. 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. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated September 17, 1991, 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 November 16, 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 460, 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 June 5, 1991, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the slope stability recommendations outlined in the County Geologist's transmittal dated September 6, 1989, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the County Geologist's transmittal dated October 16, 1989, a copy of which is attached. 15. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho Water District transmittal dated July 3, 1991, a copy of which is attached. S\STAFFRPT\24095 18 16. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following: 17. 18. Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the development standards of the Manufacturing - Service Commercial zone. 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 recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the City Engineer. 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. 19. The following notes shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet: 20. "This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy as outlined in the Southwest Area Plan. "Archaeological and paleontological monitoring of grading is required, and summary reports shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits." "Part of the site is located in the 100 year flood plain of Murrieta Creek. Measures to remove the project site from the flood plain are listed in the Conditions of Approval." "The site is traversed by a potentially active earthquake fault. The map includes a restricted use zone in which no structures for human occupancy are allowed." Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: If the project is to be phased, prior to the approval of grading permits, an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for approval. The plan shall be used as a guideline for subsequent detailed grading plans for individual phases of development and shall include the following: S\STAFFRPT~24085 19 21. 22. 23. Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and sedimentation during and after the grading process. Approximate time frames for grading and identification of areas which may be graded during the higher probability rain months of January through March. 3. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations. 4. Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase. Prior to the issuance of grading permits a qualified archaeologist shall conduct a stratified surface sampling of archaeological site CA-RIV 237 and shall excavate 20 to 30 one cubic meter cubsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and significance of the site. Based on the results of these tests, the extent of further sampling and data collection will be determined. A qualified archaeologist shall also monitor grading activities and shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading activity to allow recovery of cultural resources. A Native American representative shall be present during archaeological testing and during grading and shall also have the authority to temporarily halt or divert grading activity. 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. A paleontologist shall be on-site to monitor grading operations. 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: Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval. The plans shall address all areas and aspects the tract requiring landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to, parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front yard landscaping. Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from view of surrounding property. S\STAFFRPT\24085 20 c. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 25 feet with at least 10 feet landscaped. 24. Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with approved plans and shall be verified by City field inspection and certified in writing by the landscape architect. Not withstanding the preceding conditions, wherever an acoustical study is required for noise attenuation purposes, the heights of all required walls shall be determined by the acoustical study where applicable. 25. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Mitigation 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. 26. 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. 24085, which action is brought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. 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. 27. 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. Electrical lines rated 33kv or greater shall be exempted from the requirement to be installed underground. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements: S\STAFFRPT~24085 2 1 28. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's shall be subject to the following conditions: a. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense. The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Planning, City Engineer and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents. The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with the final map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City. The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage and facilities. The landscape and architecture standards shall be incorporated by reference into the CC&R's. The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the association or other means acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to the Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to issuance of building permits. S\STAFFRPT~24085 22 29. 30. 31. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrent with the map or prior to the issuance of building permit where no map is involved. No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group, or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City of Provisions required by the City as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. 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). Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall obtain approval of and record all lot line adjustments, street vacations, and dedications to reflect the realignment of the future right of way of Winchester Road. S\STAFFRPT~24085 23 Deoartment of Public Works The following are the Department of Public Works 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 Department of Public Works. 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. PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 32. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, 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; Department of Public Works; Riverside County Health Department; CATV Franchise; CalTrans; and Parks and Recreation Department. 33. 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 Department of Public Works. 34. 35. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Winchester Road shall be improved with 38 feet of half street improvement plus one 12' lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within a 65' dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 101 (38'/50'). S\STAFFRPT~24OS5 24 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. Diaz Road shall be improved or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 101 (76'/100'). Streets "A", "B" and "C" shall be improved, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 111 (56'/78'). Avenida de Ventas and Street "D" shall be improved with 28 feet of half street improvement plus one 12' lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within a 51' dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 111 (28'/39'). If construction is to be phased, the landowner/developer shall acquire sufficient public offsite rights-of-way to provide for secondary access road(s) to a paved and maintained road as may be needed. Said access road(s) shall be constructed in accordance with County Standard No. 106, Section B, (32'/60') at a grade and alignment approved by the Department of Public Works. In the event road or off-site right-of-way 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 developer's cost pursuant to Government Code Section 66462.5, which shall be at no cost to the City. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and Diaz Road and so noted on the final map with the exception of driveway openings and public street intersections as approved by the Department of Public Works. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage if required shall be delineated or noticed on the final map. Where applicable, an easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to approval of the Final Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, especially on Winchester Road and Diaz Road. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, 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 submiRed and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. S\STAFFRPT\24085 25 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 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 limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate. b. Storm drain facilities. c. Landscaping (street and parks). d. Sewer and domestic water systems. e. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. f. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. The street design, grading and improvement concept of this project shall be coordinated with Assessment District 155 and adjoining development. Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the Department of Public Works. Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department of Public Works 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. Street names shall be subject to the approval of the Building and Safety Department. The minimum centerline radii shall be 500 feet or as approved by the Department of Public Works. All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. S\STAFFRPT\24085 26 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 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 Department of Public Works. A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent. All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards and shall be shown on the street improvement plans in accordance with County Standard 400 and 401 (curb sidewalk). The subdivider shall submit two prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the Department of Public Works. 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 24" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil Engineer. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. The report shall also address setback requirements for fault line areas. The subdivider shall submit two copies of a soils report to the Department of Public Works. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities, located outside of road right-of-way, shall be contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating "Drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions." A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the recorded drainage easement shall be submitted to the City for review prior to the recordation of the final map. A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control District for review. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. S\STAFFRPT\24085 27 64. 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. 65. A portion of the site is in an area identified on the Flood Hazard Maps as Flood Zone A subject to flooding of undetermined depths. Prior to the approval of any plans, this project shall comply with Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance 91-12 of the City of Temecula and the rules and regulations of FEMA for development within a Flood Zone "A" which may include obtaining a letter of map revision from FEMA. 66. The developer shall record an Environmental Constraint Sheet delineating the area within the 100-year floodplain. 67. Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of street improvements. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 68. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works. 69. A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of- way. 70. An application for Development permit shall be submitted per Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance 91-12 of the City of Temecula. All requirements of this ordinance shall be complied with as directed and approved by the Department of Public Works. 71. 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. 72. A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within its right-of-way. S\STAFFRPT~24085 28 73. The subdivider shall submit a haul route plan, including but not limited to, specific information related to truck loads, destination, permission and clearance letters as requested. PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT: 74. A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works 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. 75. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. 76. 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. The fee to be paid shall be 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. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. 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). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY: 77. Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on all interior public streets. S\STAFFRPT~2408S 29 78. Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Traffic control plans shall be provided as directed by the Department of Public Works, and may be required to be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. 79. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 14 days following placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. Transoortation Engineering PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 80. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works and shall be included in the street improvement plans. 81. Plans for traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of Avenida de Ventas at Diaz Road and Avenida de Ventas at Winchester Road, and shall be included in the street improvement plans with the second plan check submittal. 82. The developer shall execute a Reimbursement Agreement for the design and construction of traffic signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz Road, Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle East. The percent of costs and the warrants for these signals shall be as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to recordation. 83. The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with the City of Temecula to contribute a pro-rata share to the construction of the extension of Diaz Road to Washington Street/Rancon Center Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland overcrossing, Winchester Road restriping to six lanes, and the western bypass corridor as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to recordation. S\STAFFRPT\24085 30 PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS: 84. 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 Department of Public Works. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: 85. All traffic signals, signing and striping shall be installed and operational per the approved plans and as directed by the Department of Public Works per the approved focused traffic analysis. 86. All landscaping installation within corner cutoff areas at all intersections and adjacent to all driveways shall provide for adequate site distance. 87. Stop signs shall be installed within the project site at the intersection of local streets. 88. Diaz Road shall be striped with left turn pockets at each intersection adjacent to the project, S\STAFFRPT\24085 3 1 E 'AR ENT OF HEALTH 4065 COUNTY CIRCLE DR. RIVERSIDE, CA. 92503 (Mailing Address - P.O. Box 7600 92512 ')0} September 17, 1991 CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT 43174 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE TEMECULA, CA 92590 Al-rN: Scott Wright: RE: PARCEL MAP NO. 24085: BEING A PORTION OF PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP N0. 4646 P.M. 6/75 RECORDS, RIVeSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. (57 lots) Dear Gentlemen: The Department of Public Health has reviewed Parcel Map No. 24085 and recommends: A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the water company and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the water system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a mxnlmum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet. along with the original drawlng to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of valves and fire hydrants; plpe and 3olnt specifications, and the size of the maln at the 3unctlon of the new system to the existing system. The plans shall comply in all respects with Dlv. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety'Code, California Administrative Code, Title 22, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of Californfa, when applicable. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and water company wlth the following certification: "I certlfy that the design of the water system 1n Parcel Map No. 24085, xs in accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water D~strict and that the water services, storage, and distribution system will be adequate to provide water service to such Parcel Map". City of Temecula Page Two ~ttf~ ?lf~tt Wright Snptember 17, 1991 This certification does not constitute a guaFantee that it will supply water to such Parcel Map at any specific quantities . flows or pressures for fire protection or any other pt;rpose". This certlflcatlon shall be signed by a responsible official of the water company. Ihe_.R!.~.ns ~Y~[st_~e ~4.~i~.~.d~p_TheC!.ty....0.f.T~me~!l~j._s..Qffl~._~Qrevl~t This subdivision has a statement from the Rancho California Water District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand providing satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It will be necessary for financial arrangements [o be made prior to the recordation of the final map. This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be connected to the sewers of the D1strlct. The sewer system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the District, the City of Temecula and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the original drawing, to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and }oint specifications and the size of the sewers at the Junction of the new system to the existing system. A single plat indicating location of sewer lines and water lines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. Th= plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and the sewer district with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the sewer system in Parcel Map NO, 240~5 1~ in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed parcel map." CIty of Temecula Page Three Attn: Scott Wright September 17, 1991 It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be completeEy flnalized prior to recordatlon of the final map. Sincerely, .H.S.IV Envlronmen~a lth ~ervlces SM:dr KEr~ ~ETH L,. EDWARDS RECEIVEn ;;3'/2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA 92502 November 16, 1990 City of Temecula Post Office Box 3000 Temecula, CA 92390 Attn: Planning Department Scott Wright Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: Parcel Map 24085 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 This is a proposal to divide 72.6 acres into commercial parcels in the City of Temecula. The site is located west of Diaz Road about 1100 feet south of Winchester Road. This property is approximately one year flood plain located adjacent to Murrieta Creek and half of the parcels are located within limits of the creek. the 100 The District is currently developing a final design for improvement of Murrieta Creek with the assistance of a seven member citizens' committee appointed by the Board of Supervisors. Because of the complexity of the hydraulic and environmental factors involved, and to ensure orderly development, the District will design the entire Murrieta Creek improvement. Piecemeal design of portions of this major regional flood control project is not acceptable to the District. Following development of an acceptable design, the District intends to pursue a funding mechanism for the required improvements, probably by means of an assessment district over the flood plain. The right of way needed for Murrieta Creek in this area is 250 feet each side of the centerline. This includes a 50 foot habitat mitigation strip on each side which will be returned if it is not needed. This is shown correctly on Amended Map No. 3. This site also receives offsite runoff from the hills to the southwest. Tentative Parcel Map 21383 is proposed in the hillside area west of this property. This map shows that the storm drain in Winchester Road would extend up the hill. Much of the offsite runoff tributary to this site would then be collected by the development of Parcel Map 21383 and conveyed to the storm drain system. Should Parcel Map 21383 not be constructed, adequate inlet facilities will need to be constructed to collect all of the tributary flows and convey them to Murrieta Creek. The storm drain in Winchester Road is proposed to continue nortl into Parcel Map 24086. Onsite flows are proposed to be collected and conveyed to the Creek by several storm drain systems. City of Temecula -2- Re: Parcel Map 24085 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 November 16, 1990 Following are the District's recommendations: A portion of the proposed project is in a floodplain and may affect "waters of the United States", "wetlands" or "jurisdictional streambeds", therefore, in accordance with the requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program and Related Regulations (44 CFR, Parts 59 through 73) and County Ordinance No. 458: A flood study consisting of HEC-2 calculations, cross sections, ~aps and other data should be prepared to the satisfaction of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the District for the purpose of revising the effective Flood Insurance Rate Map of the project site. The submittal of the study should be concurrent with the initial submittal of the related project improvement plans and final District approval will not be given until a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) has been received from FEMA. A copy of appropriate correspondence and necessary permits from those government agencies from which approval is required by Federal or State law (such as Corps of Engineers 404 permit or Department of Fish and Game 1603 agreement) should be provided to the District prior to the final District approval of the project. This parcel map is located within the limits of the Murrieta 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 February 16, 1988: Drainage fees shall be paid to the Transportation 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 City Re: of Temecula Parcel Map 24085 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 -3- November 16, 1990 At the option of the land divider, upon filing a required affidavit requesting deferment of the payment of fees, the drainage fees may be paid to the Building Director at the time of issuance of a grading permit or building permit for each approved parcel, whichever may be first obtained after the recording of the subdivision final map or parcel map; provided however, this option to defer the fees may not be exercised for any parcel where grading or structures have been initiated on the parcel within the prior 3 year period, or permits for either activity have been issued on that parcel which remain active. Murrieta Creek Channel should be constructed through the proposed project in conformance with the District's approved design including habitat mitigation measures which may be required by the various resource agencies. In lieu of constructing the channel improvements the applicant shall cooperate in the formation of and participate in a financial mechanism such as a community facilities district or an assessment district to pay for the cost of the District's proposed Murrieta Creek Channel improvements. The right of way for Murrieta Creek, including the area required for habitat mitigation should be dedicated to the District. The right of way needed for Murrieta Creek in this area is 250 feet each s~.~e of the centerline. This includes a 50 foot habitat mitigation strip on each side which will be returned if it is not needed. This site also the southwest. adequate inlet collect all of Murrieta Creek. receives offsite runoff from the hills to Should Parcel Map 21383 not develop, facilities will need to be constructed to the tributary flows and convey them to Pads on this site should be elevated 12 inches above the ~00 year water surface elevation in Murrieta Creek. Onsite drainage facilities located outside of road right of way should be contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note should be added to the final map stating, "Drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions". City of Temecula Re: Parcel Map 24085 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 November 16, 1990 Offsite drainage facilities should be located within dedicated drainage easements obtained from the affected property owners. The documents should be recorded and a copy submitted to the District prior to recordation of the final map. All lots should be graded to drain to the adjacent street or an adequate outlet. 10. The 10 year storm flow should be contained within the curb and the 100 year storm flow should be contained within the street right of way. When either of these criteria is exceeded, additional drainage facilities should be installed. 11. Drainage facilities outletting sump conditions should be designed to convey the tributary 100 year storm flows. Additional emergency escape should also be provided. 12. The property's street and lot grading should be designed in a manner that perpetuates the existing natural drainage patterns with respect to tributary drainage area and outlet points. 13. An encroachment permit should be obtained for any work on District facilities or within District right of way. The encroachment permit application should be processed and approved concurrently with the improvement plans. 14. Prior to initiation of the final construction drawings for those facilities required to be built as part of the Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan, the developer should contact the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District to ascertain the terms and conditions of design, construction, inspection, transfer of rights of way, project credit in lieu of fees and reimbursement schedules which may apply. Title reports and title insurance must be provided for all right of way to be transferred to the District. The developer should note that if the estimated cost for required area drainage plan facilities exceeds the required drainage fees and the developer wishes to receive credit for reimbursement in excess of his fees, the facilities will be constructed as a public works contract. Scheduling for construction of these facilities will be at the discretion of the District. City of Temecula Re: Parcel Map 24085 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 -5- November 16, 1990 15. If the tract is built in phases, each phase shai1 be protected from the I in 100 year tributary storm flows. 16. Temporary erosion control measures should be implemented immediately following rough grading to prevent deposition of debris onto downstream properties or drainage facilities. 17. 18. 19. 20. Development of this property should be coordinated with the development of adjacent properties to ensure that watercourses remain unobstructed and stormwaters are not diverted from one watershed to another. This may require the construction of temporary drainage facilities or offsite construction and grading. Master Drainage Plan facilities to be constructed as part of this development's improvement obligation are to be inspected, operated and maintained by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. The developer should enter into an agreement with the District establishing the terms and conditions covering their inspection, operation and maintenance. Inspection and maintenance of the storm drain system to be built with this tract must be performed by either the County Transportation Department or the Flood Control District. The engineer (owner) must request (in writing) that one of these agencies accept the proposed storm drain system. The request should note the tract number, location, and briefly describe the system (sizes and lengths). Request to the District should be addressed to Kenneth L. Edwards, Chief Engineer, Attn: Frank Peairs, Planning Engineer. If the District is willing to accept the system, an agreement between the owner and the District must be executed. A request to draw up an agreement must be sent to the District to the attention of Michael Rawson. All flood control facilities should be constructed to District standards. All facilities that the District will assume for maintenance will require the payment of a one time maintenance charge equal to the "present worth" of maintenance costs from the time of acceptance through 1998. City of Temecula Re: Parcel Map 24085 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 -6- November 16, 1990 21. The applicant's engineer should contact the Plan Check section to schedule a pre-design before the engineer starts detailed project District's meeting design. 22, A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the District via the Transportation Department for review and approval prior to recordation of the final map. Grading plans should be approved prior to issuance of grading permits. Questions concerning this matter may be referred to the Subdivision section of this office at 714/275-1210. JOHN H. KASHUBA ~Senior Civil Engineer c: NBS/Lowry ZS:slw FIRE DEPARTMENT _ 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE · PERRIS. CALIFORNIA 92370 ~ (714) 65%3183 GLEN J. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF -June 5, 1991 TO: ATTN: RE: CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPT PARCEL MAP 24085 AMD #4 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: The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 5000 GPM and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant shall be 2500 GPM for 2 hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. Approved super fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2½"x2~") shall be located at each street intersection and spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction, with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. 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. All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to the Planning and Engineering staff. RAYMOND H. REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner By Michael E. Gray, Fire Captain Specialist MEG/tm [~ INDIO OFFICE 79-733 Coun~ Club Drive, Suit~ F. hutio, CA 92201 (619) 342~886 · FAX (619) 775-2072 PLANNING DIVISION Fi TEMECULA OFfiCE 41002 County C~Rer [h'ivt, Suite 225, Tem~uh, CA 92390 (714) 694-5070 * FAX (714) 694-5076 ~'1 RIVERSIDE OFFICE 3760 t2th ~.~..i, Riverside, CA 92501 ~ printed o, recyctedp~per (714) Z75-4777 * FAX (714) 369-7451 September 6, 1989 OilmAImTMENTAL LITTER COUNTY' OF RIVERSIDE PLANNING DEPARTNENT TO: John Chtu - Team 5 ~_ FRON: Steven A. Kupferran - Engineering Geologist RE: Tentative Parcel Naps 24085 and 24086 Slope Stability Report No, 149 The following report has been revtewed relathe to slopo stability at the subject stte: · Slope Stability Assessment, Tentative Parcel Naps 24085, 24086, Rancho Callforn(a, Riverside County, CA," by Schaefer Dtxon Associates dated August 16, 1989. This report determined that: Tentative Parcel Nap 24085 wtll be graded wlth cut slopes rangtrig up to 25 feet high and ftll slopes approxtmtely 10 feet high, both at 2:1 (horizontal: vertical). 2. Tentative Parcel Nap 24086 wt1Tbe graded with 2:1 (H:V) cut and ftll slopes less than 30 feet high, The Pauba formation In the planned cut areas conststs primarily of mederately hard to hard, mederately fractured, locally frtable sandstones and siltstones, 4.. Proposed cut slopes mde tn Pauba formation sediments, havtng favorable-oriented beddtn planes, are expected to be grossly stable at 2:1 (H:V) to a mxtmm height of 29 feet· 5. Surftctal erosion ts posslble tn both cut and fil1 slopes of granular Pauba fomatlon mterlals. This report recommended that: 1. Cut slope excavations should be observed durtng grading by the project engineering geologist. John Chtu September 6. 1989 DratMge on cut and fill slopes shculd be directed amy from the slope face. Dratnage devices should be constructed as per the Untform Butldtng Code. 3. Proper landscaping shculd be established 1needlately after construction and mtntalned. 4. Slope rash and topsoil mterlals exposed In cut slopes should be removed and replaced with compacted f111 mterlals. This report satisfies the General Plan requirement for a slope stability report. the recommendations made In this report should be adhered to in the design and construction of thts project. SAK:al RiVER)iDE county PLANNING DEPAR;mE' ; October 16. 1989 Schaefer Dixon Associates 23 Mauchly Zrvtne, CA 92718 Attention: Mr. Paul Davis Mr. Nicholas F. Selmeczy Mr. Michael L. Leonard, St. SUBJECT: Selsmlc-Geologlc/Ltquefactton Hazard Project No. 9R-4332C Tentative Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086 APN: 909-120-020,022 County Geologic Report No. 627 Rancho California Area Gentlemen: We have reviewed the seismic-geologic aspects of your report entitled 'Report on Geotechntcal Investigation, Assessment District No. 155, Parcel Map 24085, 24086, 21029, 21382, and 21383, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA," dated June 7, 1989 and )mur responses to County Geologic Review, dated August 15, 1989 and September 21, 1989. It should be noted that previous reports prepared for this property were entitled 1.) 'Preliminary Geotechntcal Investigation, Proposed Industrial/Cofirnercial Site, West of Cherry Street and Diaz Road, A.D. No. 155, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA' by Leighton and Associates, dated June 23, 1986, and 2°) 'Engineering Geologic Investigation of Faulting and Anticipated Alluvial Removals, Proposed Industrial/Coemercial Site, AD No. 155, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA,' by Leighton and Associates, dated August 18, 1987. This report did not recognize or address the potential for ground flssuring in the area, which occurred in late 1987. It is understood that your report now supercedes these previous reports for the subject property. Your report determined that: The surface trace of a previously unmapped, through going fault extends northwest-southeast across the center of the property. A short branch of this fault trends more northerly, coincident with a strong photolineament and the 1987 ground fissure. These faults are delineated on Plate 1, Geotechnical Map, revised 8-15-89/9-21-Bg, in your report. 2. These faults are considered to be active in accordance with State of California, Division of Mines and G~blogy criteria. 3. The Willard fault traces located at higher elevations on the westerly portion of the site are Judged to be pre-Holocene in age. 4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 (714) 787-6181 46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304 INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201 Schaefer Dixon Associates - 2 - October 16, 1989 The Whtttler-Elstnore fault zone ts considered capable of the htghest ground mottons at the site. A lO0-year probable magnitude earthquake of 6.3 on thts fault weuld result In a peak horizontal ground acceleration of 0.41g at the site. Ltqueftable and marginally ltqueftable zones are present in the lower-lying portion of the site, below a depth of approximately fee~. The liquefiable areas are delineated on Plate 1, Geotechnical Map, revised 8o15-Bg/g-21-Bg. Surface subsidence my be induced by liquefaction and the settlement is estimated to be in the range of 0.1 inch to 1.4 inches, however reduction of bearing capacity for shallow spread footings is not anticipated. The potential for lateral spreading is considered low based on the present geometry of the Murrieta Creek Channel relative to the liqueftable zones at the site. 7. The potential for selches, earthquake-induced flooding and lurching is considered to be extremely low at this site. 8. The mapped landslide at the northwest portion of the property is a shallow, surficial failure. Ground ~tssuring will mast likely occur along the establish traces of historic and Holocene fault displacements. It is not expected that ground fissures will occur in portions of the property away from pre-exlsting Holocene faults. Your report recommended that: No habitable structures shall be placed acrossed the active (Holocene) faults and ground fissures. A Restricted Use Zone (R.U.Z.) shall be established to include the observed faults, their tn-ltne projections and buffer zone. The total width and extent of the R.U.Z. is shown on Plate 1, Seotechnlcal Map, revised 8-15-89/9-Z1-89. The effects of soil liquefaction, including loss of bearing capacity, surface subsidence and lateral spreading shall be ro-evaluated for each Individual stroCturo on the site when grading and butldtng plans b~come available. The mapped landslide at the northwest portion of the property shall be delineated on the project grading plans. In addition, the disturbed surfictal materials shall be completely romo~ed during grading, in conformnce with standard earthwork practlce~. Schaefer Dtxon Associates - 3 - October 16, 1989 Recommendations for removing the uncontrolled fill from the exploratory trenches, and for placement of structures adjacent to or astride any of these trenches, should be specifically provided as part of the geotechnical grading plan review report for the subject projects. 6. Final plans and specifications should be reviewed by the geotechnical consultant prior to site construction. It is our opinion that th~ report was prepared in a competent manner and h satisfies t e additional information requested under the California Environmental Quality Act review and the Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan. Final approval of the report is hereby given. We recommend that the following conditions be satisfied before recordatton of Tentative Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086 and/or issuance any County permits associated with this project: The recommended Restricted Use Zone shown on Plate 1, Geotechntcal Hap, revised 8-15-89/9-21-89 in the report shall be delineated on the project maps and/or Environmental Constraints Sheet (E.C.S.). The areas within the Recommended Restricted Use Zone shall be labeled "FAULT AND GROUND FISSURE HAZARD AREA." Z. The following notes shall be placed on the E.C.S. and/or Subdivision maps: (a) 'The property is affected by earthquake faulting and ground fissures. Structures for human occupancy shall not be allowed in the Fault and Ground Fissure Hazard Area.' (b) · County Geologic Report No. 627 was prepared for this property on June 7, 1989 by Schafer Dixon Associates, and is on file at the Riverside County Planning Department. Specific items of concern are as follows: earthquake faulting, fissuring and ground subsidence, liquefaction, landsliding, and uncompacted trench backfill." 3. The E.C.S. and/or project maps shall be submitted to the Planning Department Engineering Geologist for review and approval. 4. The exploratory trench backftll shall be addressed by the project geotechntcal engineering prior to issuance of grading permits. Liquefaction reports for individual structures shell be submitted to the Planning Department Engineering Geologist for review and approval prior to Plot Plan approval. Schaefer Dixon Associates - 4 - October 16o 1989 The reco,rnendations aide in your report for mitigation of seismic/geologic hazards shall be adhered to in the design and construction of this project. Very truly yours, RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTHENT Rog. r s. S~,.et.r-P~...,.g O,T.ctor CEG-1205 SAK:al c.c. Johnson & Johnson, Inc. - Dean Allen CDNG - Earl Hart Building & Safety (2) - Norm Lostbom John Chiu - Team I Ran Wa r July 3, 1991 City of Temecula Engineering Department 43180 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92592 SUBJECT: Water and Sewer Availability Parcel Map 24085 Gentlemen: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water and sewer service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. Currently, RCWD has an inter-agency agreement with Eastern Municipal Water District to provide sewer service to your area. All plan check submittals will be made to RCWD. Water availability would be contingent lapon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. If RCWD can be of further service to you, please contact Ms. Senga Doherty. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E. Manager of Development Engineering SB:SD:ajwll6 cc: Senga Doherty, Engineering Technician CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY Background 1. Name of Proponent: 2, Address and Phone Number of Proponent: Date of Environmental Assessment: NBS Lowry 27403 Ynez Road, Suite 209 Temecula. CA 92390 (714) 676-6225 August 21, 1991 4. Agency Requiring Assessment: CITY OF TEMECULA Name of Proposal, if applicable: Parcel MaD NOS. 24085 and 24086 Location of Proposal: Southwesterly of Diaz Road bounded by the future extension of Winchester Road on the northwesterly and southwesterIv sides of the site. Environmental linDacts (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 X X Disruptions, displacements, compac- tion or overcovering of the soil? Substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features? S\STAFFRPT~24085 The destruction, covering or modi- fication of any unique geologic or physical features? Any substantial increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off site? 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? Ye~ Maybe No X X X X X X X X X S%STAFFRPT~24085 2 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? 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? Yei Maybe No X X X X X X X X X X 10, 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? Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? be 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: Ye~ Maybe No X X X X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT~24085 4 11. 12. 13. 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? Ye~ Maybe No X X X X X Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking? Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X X X X X S\STAFFRPT\24085 5 14. 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? b. Police protection? c. Schools? Parks or other recreational facilities? Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services: 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: 16. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? YeS Maybe NQ X X X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT~24085 Communications systems? Water? Sewer or septic tanks? Storm water drainage? Solid waste and disposal? 6 X 17. 18. 19. 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 NQ X X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT~24085 7 Ye~ 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 S\STAFFRPT\24085 8 III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation 1.a,b,c. 1.d. 1.e. 1.f. 1.g. Yes. Parcel Map No. 24085 will involve 363,000 cubic yards of cut and fill, and Parcel Map No. 24086 will involve 349,000 cubic yards of cut and fill. Some cut will penetrate into the Pauba Formation which consists of sandstone and siltstone. Mitigation of liquefaction potential on the site may involve removal and recompaction of soil on the site. All cut and fill slopes will not exceed a 2:1 grade. Cut slopes on the site of Parcel Map No. 24085 will be up to 25 feet in height and fill slopes will be approximately 10 feet high. Cut and fill slopes on the site of Parcel Map No. 24086 will be less than 30 feet in height. The Slope Stability Report determined that the proposed 2:1 cut slopes will be grossly stable to a maximum height of 29 feet, and surficial erosion potential should be mitigated by directing drainage away from the slope faces and installing landscape planting on the slopes. The recommendations of the Slope Stability Report shall be included in the conditions of approval for the subject parcel maps. No. There are no unique geologic or physical features on the site. Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are replanted. The wind erosion impact is considered high and significant but will be mitigated through minimal grading, retention of natural vegetation whenever feasible, and use of watering trucks and hydroseeding disturbed areas after grading. After construction of the project, water run-off is likely to increase due to the addition of impermeable surfaces. Appropriate drainage control devices will have to be approved through the Engineering Department and will have to be designed in accordance with Temecula's standards and the conditions of approval. No. Any drainage into the Murrieta Creek channel will be via drainage improvements as approved by the City Engineer and will not result in erosion or siltation. Yes. Portions of the site are susceptible to liquefaction and subsidence, and the site is traversed by a potentially active fault. The Geology Report recommends that the effects of liquefaction, including loss of bearing capacity, surface subsidence and lateral spreading should be re- evaluated for each individual structure when grading and building plans become available. In accordance with the requirements of state law, a restricted use zone based on the geology report is shown on the map. The restricted use zone represents a setback from the earthquake fault S\STAFFRPT~24085 9 2.a,b,c. 3.3. 3.b. 3.c. 3.d. 3.e, 3.f,g. 3.h. on the site, and no structures for human occupancy will be permitted within the restricted use zone. Hazards to buildings outside of the restricted use zone due to groundshaking associated with the fault are addressed by the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. The geologic hazard mitigations recommended in the Geology Report and the County Geologists letter shall be conditions of approval. No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any impacts to air quality or the climate. Subsequent development proposals will be assessed for potential impacts to air quality and mitigation measures will be required if necessary. No. The portion of the property necessary for the future construction of Murrieta Creek flood control facilities is indicated on the tentative parcel map as a County Channel Easement. There will be no change in the course or direction of water in Murrieta Creek. Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in changes in the amount of surface runoff. The improvement of the site will provide for adequate drainage facilities as approved by the City Engineer. No. The project will result in minor, localized redirection of flood waters to the extent necessary to elevate the site above the 1 O0 year flood plain elevation, but the overall direction and flow of flood waters will not be changed. Maybe. Grading and future development of the site may increase the amount of surface runoff flowing into the Murrieta Creek channel. This is not considered a significant impact and is consistent with the provisions of the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan and Assessment District 155. Yes. Grading may result in an increase in turbidity in local surface water. This impact is temporary and is not considered significant. No. Recompaction of soil to mitigate the potential for liquefaction is not expected to result in a significant impact on the direction or rate of flow of ground waters. No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any impact on public water supplies. S\STAFFRPT%24085 10 3.i. 4.a,b. 4.c. 4.d. 5.a,b. 5.c. 6.3. 6.b. 9.a,b. No. Prior to recordation of the proposed parcel map, the applicant shall obtain a Letter of Map Revision from the Federal Emergency Management Agency indicating that grading of the site or other improvements are adequate to ensure that the site will be above the 1 O0 year flood plain elevation. No. A botanical survey of the site found no sensitive plant species on the site. Grazing and the introduction of non-native grasses have previously disturbed the natural native flora on the site. Maybe. Landscaping of the site may introduce some non-native species. This is not considered a significant impact. No. The site is not currently used as crop land. No. A biology survey of the site did not reveal the presence or any indications of any species classified as rare or endangered. Yes. The project will involve a loss of grass land and chaparral which provides foraging habitat for birds, mammals, and reptiles. In regional terms, the loss of foraging habitat is an incrementally adverse but non- significant impact. The biology report recommends the use of native California shrubs and trees to revegetate graded and open areas in order to enhance reoccupation of the bird community. Use of native plant life shall be a condition of approval. Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in increased noise levels during grading. This impact will be temporary and is not considered significant because the site is not near any noise sensitive land uses. No. Future development will be reviewed for potential noise impacts, and land uses which generate severe noise impacts will be prohibited or required to provide adequate noise mitigation. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not cause new light or glare, and subsequent development of the site will be subject to standard conditions prohibiting lighting from impacting adjacent properties and requiring low-glare sodium vapor lights. No. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zone and the land use designation in which the property is located. No. The project will not involve a substantial increase in the rate of consumption of natural or non-renewable resources. S\STAFFRPT~24085 11 lO.a,b. 11,12. 13.a. 13.b. 13.c,e. 13.d. No. The proposed parcel map will not involve the use of hazardous materials or interference with emergency response or evacuation plans. No. The proposal is not likely to alter the distribution or growth rate of the population or create a demand for new housing, Future development of the site will help address the irabalance of local jobs in relation to existing and approved housing. Yes. Future development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24085 is expected to generate 5,340 vehicle trip ends per day. 5,150 trip ends per day are expected as a result of development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24086. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the project determined that intersections and roadways in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended improvements are implemented. The following recommended traffic impact mitigations are incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map No. 24085. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works and shall be included in the street imporvements plans. Plans for traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of Avenida de Ventas at Diaz Road and Avenida de Ventas at Winchester Road, and shall be included in the street improverant plans with the second plan check submittal. The developer shall execute a Reimbursement Agreement for the design and construction of traffic signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz Road, Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle East. The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with the City of Temecula to contribute a pro-rata share to the construction of the extension of Diaz Road to Washington Street/Rancon Center Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland overcrossing, Winchester Road restriping to six lanes, and the western bypass corridor as determined by a focused traffic analysis approved by the Deaprtment of Public Works. No. Future development of the site will be required to provide adequate off-street parking as appropriate for the particular land use proposed. No. The project will have no impact upon existing transportation systems or upon water, rail, or air traffic. No. The proposed parcel maps will not alter present patterns of circulation. S\STAFFRPT%24085 12 13.f. 14.a-f. 15.a,b. 16.a-d,f. 16.e. 17.a,b. 18. 19. 20.a,b,c. No. The streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended street improvements are implemented. The street improvements will be conditions of approval for the proposed parcel map. No. The project will not result in a need for new public services. Future development will generate an increase in the need for public services in the areas of fire and police protection and road maintenance. Payment of the required traffic signal mitigation fee, the facility fee, and property taxes will fund the additional public services. No. The project will not result in a substantial use or increase in demand for fuel or other energy sources. No. Future development of the site will require only hook up to or service by existing utility systems and will not result in a need for new or substantially altered utility systems. Yes. The proposed Parcels Maps will involve the construction of the Murrieta Creek Channel through the site. The construction of channel improvements will be in compliance with the recommendations of the County Flood Control District and will be provided by the developer or by the developer's participation in an assessment district. No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any potential health hazards. Future development will be assessed for potential health hazards, and mitigations, if needed, shall be required. No. The proposal will not result in the obstruction of any scenic views. Future development will be reviewed in order to prevent the construction of aesthetically offensive structures or site layouts. No. The site is not currently used for recreational purposes. Maybe. The site of Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086 contain a recorded archaeological site (CA-RIV-237) which is beleived to encompass approximately 70,000 square meters, part of which is outside of the subject property, During an archaeological surface survey of the site conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of basalt and quartz debitage, fragmented manos and metates, fire-affected rocks, pestles, hammerstores, and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed. The recommendations of the Archaeological Assessment are to conduct a surface collection of the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and S\STAFFRPT~24085 13 significance of the site. The resulting information shall be used to determine whether the site is a unique resource for the area and whether measures to preserve the site or salvage some percentage of the cultural resources should be implemented. The Archaeological Assessment includes the recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted for any future grading activities, These recommendations shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Maps 24805 and 24806. In addition, a Native American representative shall be present during archaeological excavation and also during grading. 20.d. 21 .a. 21 .b,c. 21 .d. No. The site is not used for any religious or sacred purposes. No. Although the project will result in a reduction of foraging habitat, this impact is not considered regionally significant. The inclusion of native trees and shrubs in the landscaping will provide adequate mitigations for potential biological impacts due to reduction of foraging habitat. No, The long term and cumulative traffic impacts of the project will be adequately mitigated by the street improvements recommended by the traffic study which are conditions of approval for the proposed parcel map. Streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service. No. The proposed parcel map will not create any health hazards. Environmental review of future development of the site will address any potential health hazards and mitigations, if necessary, will be required. S\STAFFRPT\24085 14 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. X August 12, 1991 Date For CITY OF TEMECULA CITY OF TEMECULA ) S I TE-~ VICINITY MAP CASE NO. '~ :z~c~s P.C. DATE CITY OF TEMECULA ) .LI SWAP MAP CASE NO. ..c..ATE e e CITY OF TEMECULA ~ ~/// e ZONE MAP ~ r CASE NO. C.C. DATE Z ILl ITEM # 10 APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PROPOSAL: LOCATION: EXISTING ZONING: SURROUNDING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: SURROUNDING LAND USES: STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 7, 1991 Case No.: Prepared By: Recommendation: Parcel Map No. 24086 Scott Wright 1. ADOPT the negative declaration; and 2. ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending approval of Parcel Map No. 24086 Rancho California City Center Association No. 1 NBS/Lowry To create 49 parcels on a 69.7 acre site Westerly side of Diaz Road, north of the future extension of Winchester Road Manufacturing-Service Commercial, M-SC North: South: East: West: Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial M-SC Manufacturing-Service Commercial M-SC Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial M-SC Manufacturing-Service Commercial M-SC Not Requested Vacant North: South: East: West: Vacant Vacant Murrieta Creek Vacant S\STAFFRPT~24086,PM PROJECT STATISTICS: Gross Site Area: Net Site Area: No. of Parcels: Average Parcel Size: Earthwork: 69.7 acres 53.3 acres 49 1.09 acres Cut = 349,000 yards Fill = 349,000 yards cubic cubic BACKGROUND: Tentative Parcel Map No. 24086 was submitted to the County on November 22, 1988. The application was continued at the Land Development Committee (LDC) meeting of January 12, 1989 pending submittal of paleontological and biological surveys, additional grading information, geology and liquefaction reports, flood plain information, and a traffic study. The LDC continued Parcel Map No. 24086 at four subsequent meetings, pending clearance from the County Geologist and the County Traffic Engineer, submittal of a paleontological- report, submittal of a slope stability report, additional information regarding liquefaction, and clearance of the biological survey. Parcel Map No. 24086 was transmitted to the City on April 11, 1990. City staff requested a copy of the geologic report showing a restricted use zone, a traffic study, an archeology report, information regarding property boundaries and the alignment of Winchester Road, and landscape and architecture standards. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposal is to create 49 parcels with an average parcel size of approximately one acre on a site with a gross area of 69.7 acres. There is an open space area 150 feet in width reflecting the restricted use zone recommended in the geologic report. The easterly side of the site in Murrieta Creek comprises a channel easement and a flood control easement to the County of Riverside. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 2 ANALYSIS: Traffic Impacts Future development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24086 is expected to generate 5,150 vehicle trip ends per day. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the project determined that projected future traffic based on existing traffic, project generated traffic, and traffic generated by other growth in the area will result in a peak hour Level of Service D or better at all intersections within the scope of the traffic study if recommended improvements are implemented. The recommendation include contributing to the extension of Diaz Road, providing traffic signals at certain intersection contributing to the signalization of other intersection, providing a signing and striping plan, and contributing to the construction of the Overland overcrossing and the restriping of Winchester Road to six lanes. These improvements are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval. Fault Hazards The site is traversed by a potentially active fault which was previously unmapped. The geologic report prepared in conjunction with the parcel map defines a fault zone with two branches and recommends the establishment of a restricted use zone to include observed faults, their in-line projections, and a buffer zone. The restricted use zone is shown on the tentative parcel map as an open space area 150 feet in width. No habitable structure shall be constructed within either branch of the restricted use zone. Li~3uefaction Potential Liquefiable soils are present in the lower lying portion of the site. Liquefaction may induce surface subsidence on the site in the range of 0.1 to 1.4 inches. The geologic report recommends that the effects of liquefaction, including the loss of bearing capacity, surface subsidence, and lateral spreading be re-evaluated for each individual structure on the S\STAFFRPT~24086 .PM 3 site when grading and building plans become available. Soil reports addressing the issues delineated above shall be a condition of approval of the subject parcel map and of any future development proposals on the site. Flood Hazard Approximately one half of the proposed parcels are located within the 100 year flood plain limits of Murrieta Creek. Measures to remove the project from the 100 year flood plain are listed in the conditions of approval (see County Flood Control District letter of November 16, 1990). Drainage The site is located within the limits of the Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan and payment of drainage fees is required. All lots are- required to drain toward adjacent streets or an adequate outlet approved by the City Engineer. Parcel Map No. 24086 is located adjacent to and upslope from the site. If development of the subject property occurs before development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24086 adequate inlet facilities shall be constructed to collect all tributary flows and convey them to Murrieta Creek. On-site grading shall be designed to penetrate existing tributary drainage areas and outlet points, and development of the subject and adjacent properties shall be coordinated to ensure that water courses remain unobstructed and that stormwaters are not diverted from one watershed to another. The site, including each phase if phasing occurs, shall be protected from 100 year tributary storm flows. Grading Parcel Map No. 24086 will involve 349,000 cubic yards of cut and fill. Cut slopes will be less than 30 feet in height, and fill slopes be up to 10 feet high. S\STAFFRPT\24086 .PM 4 Some cut will penetrate into the Pauba formation which consists of sandstone and siltstone. No cut of fill slopes will exceed a slope ratio of 2: 1. The slope stability report determined that the proposed 2:1 cut slopes will be grossly stable to a maximum height of 29 feet, and surficial erosion potential should be mitigated by directing drainage away from the slope faces and installing landscape planting on the slopes. The recommendations of the slope stability report shall be included in the conditions of approval. Biological Imoacts Biological surveys of the site found no evidence of the presence of any plant or animal species classified as rare or endangered. The project will involve the loss of foraging habitat for a number of species of birds, reptiles, and mammals. This is an incrementally adverse but regionally non-significant impact which is mitigated by the retention of an- open space park area in the larger restrict use zone. Further mitigations may be required by State and Federal resource agencies relative to channel improvements for Murrieta Creek. The use of native California shrubs and trees in the landscaping will enhance reoccupation of the bird community. LandscaPe and Architectural Standards The applicant has provided a set of landscape and architectural standards to ensure that development of the site maintains a consistent level of quality. Conformity with the landscape and architectural standards will be required of all future development of the site. Water and Sewer Availability Water and sewer service will be available from the Rancho California Water District upon completion of financial arrangements between the property owner and the District. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 5 Lot Line Adjustments and Street Realignments The formation of Assessment District 155 included a realignment of the right of way for the future extension of Winchester Road west of Diaz Road, Since the centerline of the right of way constituted the boundary between properties, the realignment which resulted in changes to property boundaries. The subject parcel map was affected by a realignment which resulted in changes to property boundaries. The subject parcel map was affected by a realignment of Winchester Road at the intersection with Avenida de Venta. In order to prevent discrepancies in the legal descriptions of the property at the time of recordation, staff has required that the applicant and other affected property owners eliminate the discrepancies by filing lot line adjustments, street vacations, and offers of rededication reflecting the new alignment of Winchester Road and the resulting changes in- property boundaries. These requirements shall be completed prior to map recordation. Lot Size All proposed lots encompass approximately one acre and are adequate to satisfy the minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet where sewers are available. All lots are over 100 feet wide and meet the minimum width requirement of 65 feet where sewers are available. Access All proposed parcels abut upon a street offered for public dedication. Access to the site is taken from Diaz Road and from the future extension of Winchester Road west of Diaz Road through streets "A", "B" and "C". No parcels shall take direct access from Winchester Road or Diaz Road. S\STAFFRPT\24086 .PM 6 Archaeological Resources The site of Parcel Map No. 24086 contains a recorded archaeological site (CA-RIV-237) which is believed to encompass approximately 70,000 square meters, part of which is out site of the subject property. During an archaeological surface survey of the site conducted in June of 1891, many pieces of basalt and quartz debitage, fragmented manos and metares, fire-affected rocks, pestles, hammerstones, and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed. The recommendations of the Archaeological Assessment are to conduct a surface collection of the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and significance of the site. The resulting information shall be used to determine whether the site is a unique resource for the area and whether measures to preserve the site or salvage some percentage of the cultural resources- should be implemented. The Archaeological Assessment also includes the recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted for any future grading activities. These recommendations shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map No. 24086. In addition, a Native American representative shall be present during the archaelologaical excavation and also during grading. Fossil Resources The site is located in the fossiliferous Pauba Formation. In accordance with the recommendation of the San Bernardino County Museum, the subdivider shall retain a paleontologist to monitor grading operations, evaluate any fossils encountered during grading, prepare a report of finding, and provide for preservation and curation of recovered specimens. S\STAFFRPT\24086,PM 7 GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY: Parcel Map No. 24086 is consistent with the Southwest Area Plan designation of the site for light industrial uses. The parcel map conforms to the requirements of the M-SC, Manufacturing-Service Commercial Zone. There is a reasonable probability that the project will be consistent with the future General Plan in that the project is consistent with a existing land uses and approved subdivisions in the vicinity. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The Initial Study prepared for Parcel Map No. 24086 indicates that the project will not have any impacts on the environment which cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance, and Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration. FINDINGS: The proposed Parcel Map will not have a 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 in that the proposed commercia-industrial subdivision is consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial Land Use designation, the Manufacturing- Service Commercial Zone, and existing land uses in the vicinity. 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 in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivisions in the vicinity. S\STAFFRPT~24086 ,PM 8 10. 11. The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project conforms to the current zoning for the site and Ordinance No. 460, Schedule "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. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as determined in the Initial Study prepared for this project. The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future passive energy control opportunities in that all - parcels have adequate southerly exposure. All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic. 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. The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. These findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 9 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the following recommendation to the City Council: ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 24086; and ADOPT Resolution 91 - approving Tentative Parcel Map No.24086 based on the analysis contained herein and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 2. 3. 4. Resolution Conditions of Approval Environmental Assessment Exhibits A. Vicinity Map B. SWAP Map C. Zoning Map D. Tentative Parcel Map No. 24086 vgw S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 10 RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP NO, 24086 TO SUBDIVIDE A 69.7 ACRE PARCEL INTO 49 PARCELS AT THE WESTERLY SIDE OF DIAZ ROAD NORTH OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL 909-120-020. WHEREAS, Rancho California City Associates I filed Parcel Map No. 24086 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 October 7, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either- in support or opposition; WH EREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of 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: S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 11 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 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. 24086 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. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 12 c) The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. D. (1) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are made: a) That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. b) That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. c) That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of development. d) That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the proposed density of- the development. e) That the design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. f) That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. g) That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. A land division may be approved if it is found that alternate easements for access or for use will S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM I 3 be provided and that they will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction. (2) The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to wit: The proposed Parcel Map will not have a 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 in that the- proposed commercia-industrial subdivision is consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial Land Use designation, the Manufacturing- Service Commercial Zone, and existing land uses in the vicinity. 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 in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivisions in the vicinity. The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project conforms to the current zoning for the site and Ordinance No. 460, Schedule "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. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 14 The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as determined in the Initial Study prepared for this project. The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future passive energy control opportunities in that all parcels have adequate southerly exposure. All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic. 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. The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. These 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 Comoliance. An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that the proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment, and a Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby granted. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 15 SECTION 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Parcel Map No. 27086 for the subdivision of a 69.7 acre parcel into 49 parcels located at the westerly side of Diaz Road north of the future extension of Winchester Road, and known as Assessor's Parcel 909-120-020 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. SECTION 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of October, 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 7th day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS S\STAFFRPT\24086,PM 16 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tentative Parcel Map No: Project Description: Assessor's Parcel No.: 24086 To create 49 oarcels on a 69.7 acre site 909-120-020 Planning Deoartment m m The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule E, 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 460. The expiration date is Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the parcel map boundary to a City maintained road. 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. S%STAFFRPT~24086.PM 17 Subdivision phasing, including any proposed common open space area improvement phasing, if applicable, shall be subject to Planning Department approval. Any proposed phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular access to all lots in each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and purpose of the subdivision approval. 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: 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Be limited to a maximum slope ratio of 2 to 1 and a maximum vertical height of thirty (30) feet. Setbacks from top and bottom of slopes shall be a minimum of one-half the slope height. b. 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. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations. outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated June 13, 1991, 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 November 16, 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 460, 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 June 5, 1991, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the slope stability recommendations outlined in the County Geologist's transmittal dated September 6, 1989, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the County Geologist's transmittal dated October 16, 1989, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho California Water District transmittal dated July 3, 1991, a copy of which is attached. S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM 18 16. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following: 17. 18. Lots created by this subdivision shale be in conformance with the development standards of the Manufacturing - Service Commercial zone. 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 recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the City Engineer. 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. 19. The following notes shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet: 20. "This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar- Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy as outlined in the Southwest Area Plan." "Archaeological and paleontological monitoring during grading is required, and summary report shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits." "Part of the site is located in the 100 year flood plain of Murrieta Creek. Measures to remove the project site from the flood plain are listed in the conditions of approval." "The site is traversed by a potentially active earthquake fault. The map includes a restricted use zone in which no structures for human occupancy are allowed." Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: 1) If the project is to be phased, prior to the approval of grading permits, an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for approval. The plan shall be used as a guideline for subsequent detailed grading plans for individual phases of development and shall include the following: 21. 22. 23. Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and sedimentation during and after the grading process. Approximate time frames for grading and identification of areas which may be graded during the higher probability rain months of January through March. 3. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations. 4. Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase. Prior to the issuance of grading permits a qualified archaeologist shall conduct a stratified surface sampling of archaeological site CA-RIV 237 and shall excavate 20 to 30 one cubic meter cubsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and significance of the site. Based on the results of these tests, the extent of further sampling and data collection will be determined. A qualified archaeologist shall also monitor grading activities and shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading activity to allow recovery of cultural resources. A Native American representative shall be present during archaeological testing and during grading and shall also have the authority to- temporarily halt or divert grading activity. 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. A paleontologist shall be on-site to monitor grading operations. 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: Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval. The plans shall address all areas and aspects the tract requiring landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to, parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front yard landscaping. Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from view of surrounding property. S\STAFFRPT~24086 ,PM 20 c. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 25 feet with at least 10 feet landscaped. 24. 25. Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with approved plans and shall be verified by City field inspection, and certified in writing by the landscape architect. Not withstanding the preceding conditions, wherever an acoustical study is required for noise attenuation purposes, the heights of all required walls shall be determined by the acoustical study where applicable. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Mitigation 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. 26. 27. 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. 24086, which action is brought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. 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. Electrical lines rated 33kv or greater shall be exempted from the requirement to be installed underground. S\STAFFRPT~24086 .PM 2 1 Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements: 28. No tot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group, or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City of Provisions required by the City as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. 29. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by- all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's shall be subject to the following conditions: a. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense. The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Planning, City Engineer and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents. The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with the final map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City. The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage and facilities. The landscape and architecture standards shall be incorporated by reference into the CC&R's. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 22 The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the association or other means acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to the Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to issuance of building permits. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds- and shall be recorded concurrent with the map or prior to the issuance of building permit where no map is involved. 30. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall obtain approval of lot line adjustments, street vacations, and dedications to reflect the realignment of the future right-of-way of Winchester Road. 31. 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). S\STAFFRP'1~240SS.PM 23 DePartment of Public Works The following are the Department of Public Works 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 Department of Public Works. 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. PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 32. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, 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; Department of Public Works; Riverside County Health Department; CATV Franchise; CalTrans; and Parks and Recreation Department. 33. 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 Department of Public Works. 34. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements Of said section. 35. Winchester Road shall be improved with 38 feet half street improvements plus one 12' lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within a 65' dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 101 (38'/50'). 36. Diaz Road shall be improved, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 101 (76'/100'). S%STAFFRPT\24086.PM 24 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. Streets "A", "B" and "C" shall be improved, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 111 (56'/78'). Street "D" shall be improved with 28 feet of half street improvement plus one 12' lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted within a 51 foot dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 111 (28'/39'). If construction is to be phased, the landowner/developer shall acquire sufficient public offsite rights-of-way to provide for secondary access road(s) to a paved and maintained road as may be needed. Said access road(s) shall be constructed in accordance with County Standard No. 106, Section B (32'/60'), at a grade and alignment approved by the Department of Public Works. A standard knuckle shall be constructed within the land division per Riverside County Standard No. 801. In the event road or off-site right-of-way 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 developer's cost pursuant to Government Code Section 66462.5, which shall be at no cost to the City. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and Diaz Road and so noted on the final map with the exception of driveway openings and public street intersections as approved by the Department of Public Works. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage if required shall be delineated or noticed on the final map. Where applicable, an easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to approval of the Final Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, especially on Winchester Road and Diaz Road. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, 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 Department of Public Works. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 25 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 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 limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate. b. Storm drain facilities. c. Landscaping (street and parks). d. Sewer and domestic water systems. e. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. f. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. The street design, grading and improvement concept of this project shall be- coordinated with A.D. 155 and adjoining developments. Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the Department of Public Works. Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department of Public Works 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. Street names shall be subject to the approval of the Building and Safety Department. The minimum centerline radii shall be 500 feet or as approved by the Department of Public Works. All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 26 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 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 Department of Public Works. A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0,50 percent. All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards and shall be shown on the street improvement plans in accordance with County Standard 400 and 401 (curb sidewalk). The subdivider shall submit two prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the Department of Public Works. 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 24" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil Engineer. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. The report shall also address setback requirements for fault line areas. The subdivider shall submit two copies of a soils report to the Department of Public Works. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities, located outside of road right-of-way, shall be contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating "Drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions." A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the recorded drainage easement shall be submitted to the City for review prior to the recordation of the final map. A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control District for review. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. S\STAFFRPT\24086,PM 27 65. 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. 66. A portion of the site is in an area identified on the Flood Hazard Maps as Flood Zone A subject to flooding of undetermined depths. Prior to the approval of any plans, this project shall comply with Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance 91-12 of the City of Temecula and the rules and regulations of FEMA for development within a Flood Zone "A" which may include obtaining a letter of map revision from FEMA. 67. The developer shall record an Environmental Constraint Sheet delineating the area within the 100-year floodplain. 68. Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of street improvements. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 69. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works. 70. A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of- way. 71. An application for development permit shall be submitted per Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance 91-12 of the City of Temecula. All requirements of this ordinance shall be complied with as directed and approved by the Department of Public Works, 72. 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. 73. All conditions of Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District letter dated November 16, 1990, shall be complied with. S\STAFFRPT~24086,PM 28 74. A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within its right-of-way. 75. The subdivider shall submit a haul route plan, including but not limited to, specific information related to truck loads, destination, permission and clearance letters as requested. PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT: 76. A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works 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. 77. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. 78. 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. The fee to be paid shall be 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. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. 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). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of ~ny traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY: 79. Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on all interior public streets, 80. Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. 81. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 14 days following placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. Transportation Enqineerinq PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 82. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works and shall be included in the street improvement plans. 83. Plans for a traffic signal shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersection of Winchester Road North at Diaz Road, and shall be included in the street improvement plans with the second plan check submittal. 84. The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with the City of Temecula to contribute a pro-rata share to the construction of the extension of Diaz Road to Washington Street/Rancon Center Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland overcrossing, Winchester Road restriping to six lanes, and the Western bypass corridor as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to recordation. 85. The subdivider shall execute a reimbursement agreement for the design and construction of traffic signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz Road, Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle East. The percent of costs and the warrants for these signals shall be as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to recordation. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS: 86. 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 Department of Public Works. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 30 PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: 87. All traffic signals, signing and striping shall be installed and operational per the approved plans and as directed by the Department of Public Works per the approved focused traffic analysis. 88. All landscaping installation within corner cutoff areas at all intersections and adjacent to all driveways shall provide for adequate site distance. 89. Stop signs shall be installed within the project site of the intersection of local streets. 90. Diaz Road shall be striped with left turn pockets at each intersection adjacent to the project. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 3 1 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CITY OF TEMECULA Plannino Department 43180 Bus~ness Park Drive, Temecula. CA 92390 Suite 200 ATTN: Scott Wright: RE: PARCEL MAP NO. 24086: MAP 4646 P.M. 6175 RECORDS. (57) lOTS PORTION OF PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL RIVMMSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. Dear Gentlemen: The Department of Public Health has reviewed Parcel Map No. 24086 and recommends: A water system shall be installed accordinq to plans and specifications as approved by the water company and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the water system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet, along with the oriQinal drawing to the County Surveyor. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of valves and fire hydrants: pipe and .3oint specifications, and the size of the main at the 3unction of the new system to the existing system. The plans shall comply in all respects with Dlv. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety Code, California Administrative Code, Title 22, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, when applicable. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in Parcel Map No. 24086, is in accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the water services, storage, end distribution system will be adequate to provide water service to such Parcel map". City of Temecula PaGe Two Attn: Scott Wright June 13, 1991 This certification does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to such parcel map at any specific quantities, flows or pressures for fire protection or any other purpose". This certification shall be slqned by a responsible official of the water company. t_MQ.._~_~...._~.Li~.f_~ o the request for the re_g. QL~a~lo~ ~.nal map. This subdivision has a statement from Rancho California Water District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand providing satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be made prior to the recordation of the final map. This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the District, the County Surveyor and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the oriqinal drawinq, to the County Surveyor. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint specifications and the size of the sewers at the junction of the new system to the existing system. A single plat indicating location of sewer lines and water lines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and the sewer district with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the sewer system in Parcel Map No. 24086 is in accoFdance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water Distrlct and that the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed parcel map." City of Temecula Paqe Three Attn: Scott Wrlqht June 13, 1991 Th~._~.lAnf_.muf~._be s_~bmitted to the County Survevor's 0fflce ~.~._.review at_least two weeks prior to the recuest_fO~_~jOa. [.~..QI.~_~i_q;3__QL. the final map, tt will be necessary for financial arrangements to be completely flnallzed prior to recordation of the final map, Sincerely, , E,H,S,a IV Environmental Health Services SM:dr L. EDWARD$ RECE!t'E:ZD NO; 2 i, RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA 92502 1995 MARKET STREET PO BOX IO33 TELEPHONE (714) 275-12OO FAX NO (714) 7BB-9965 November 16, 1990 City of Temeeula Post Office Box 3000 Temecula, CA 92390 Attn: Planning Department Scott Wright Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: Parcel Map 24086 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 This is a proposal to divide 69.7 acres into commercial parcels in the City of Temecula. The site is located southwest of the intersection of Diaz Road and Winchester Road. This property is located adjacent to Murrieta Creek and approximately one half of the parcels are located within the 100 year flood plain limits of the creek. The District is currently developing a final design for improvement of Murrieta Creek with the assistance of a seven member citizens' committee appointed by the Board of Supervisors. Because of the complexity of the hydraulic and environmental factors involved, and to ensure orderly development, the District will design the entire Marrieta Creek improvement. Piecemeal design of portions of this major regional flood control project is not acceptable to the District. Following development of an acceptable design, the District intends to pursue a funding mechanism for the required improvements, probably by means of an assessment district over the flood plain. The right of way needed for Murrieta Creek in this area is 250 feet each side of the centerline. This includes a 50 foot habitat mitigation strip on each side which will be returned if it is not needed. This is shown correctly on Amended Map No. 3. This site also receives offsite runoff from the hills to the southwest. This development assumes that Parcel ~p 21029 will be constructed and the tributary flows will be collected in Winchester Road. Should Parcel Map 21029 not be constructed, adequate inlet facilities will need to be constructed to collect all of the tributary flows. Access for maintenance purposes should be provided to all inlet and outlet structures. Following are the District's recommendations: A portion of the proposed project is in a floodplain and may affect "waters of the United States", "wetlands" or "jurisdictional streambeds", therefore, in accordance with the requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program and Related Regulations (44 CFR, Parts 59 through 73) and County Ordinance No. 458: City of Temecula Re: Parcel Map 24086 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 -2- November 16, 1990 A flood study consisting of HEC-2 calculations, cross sections, maps and other data should be prepared to the satisfaction of the Federal Emergency ~nagement Agency (FEMA) and the District for the purpose of revising the effective Flood insurance Rate Map of the project site. The submittal of the study should be concurrent with the initial submittal of the related project improvement plans and final District approval will not be given until a Conditional Letter of Map Revision ~CLOMR) has been received from FEM~. A copy of appropriate correspondence and necessary permits from those government agencies from which approval is required by Federal or State law (such as Corps of Engineers 404 permit or Department of Fish and Game 1603 agreement) should be provided to the District prior to the final District approval of the project. This parcel map is located within the limits of the Murrieta 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 February 16, 19~8: Drainage fees shall be paid to the Transportation Commissioner as part of the filing for record of the subdivision final map or par- cel 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 required af- fidavit requesting deferment of the payment of fees, the drainage f~es may be paid to the Building Director at the time of issuance of a grading permit or building permit for each approved parcel, whichever may be first obtained after the recording of the sub- division final map or parcel map; provided however, this option to defer the fees may not be exercised for any parcel where grading or structures have been initiated on the parcel within the prior 3 year period, or permits for either activity have been issued on that parcel which remain active. ~I~rrieta Creek Channel should be constructed through the proposed project in conformance with the District's approved design including habitat mitigation measures which may be required by the various resource agencies. In lieu of constructing the channel improvements the applicant shall cooperate in the formation of and participate in a financial mechanism such as a co~nunity facilities district or an assessment district to pay for the cost of the District's proposed Murrieta Cree~ Channel improvements. City of Temecula Re: Parcel ~p 24086 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 -3- November 16, 1990 11. 12. 13. The right of way for Murrieta Creek, including the area required for habitat mitigation should be dedicated to the District. The right of way needed for Murrieta Creek in this area is 250 feet each side of the centerline. This includes a 50 foot habitat mitigation strip on each side which will be returned if it is not needed. This development assumes that Parcel Map 21029 will be constructed and the tributary flows will be collected in Winchester Road. Should Parcel Map 21029 not be constructed, adequate inlet facilities will need to be constructed to collect all of the tributary flows. Access for maintenance purposes should be provided to all inlet and outlet structures. Pads on this site should be elevated 12 inches above the 100 year water surface elevation in Murrieta Creek. Onsite drainage facilities located outside of road right of way should be contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note should be added to the final map stating, "Drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions". Offsite drainage facilities should be located within dedicated drainage easements obtained from the affected property owners. The documents should be recorded and a copy submitted to the District prior to recordation of the final map. All lots should be graded to drain to the adjacent street or an adequate outlet. The 10 year storm flow should be contained within the curb and the 100 year storm flow should be contained within the street right of way. ~nen either of these criteria is exceeded, additional drainage facilities should be installed. Drainage facilities outletting sump conditions should be designed to convey the tributary 100 year storm flows. Additional emergency escape should also be provided. The property's street and lot grading should be designed in a manner that perpetuates the existing natural drainage patterns with respect to tributary drainage area and outlet points. An encroachment permit should be obtained for any work on District facilities or within District right of way. The encroachment permit application should be processed and approved concurrently with the improvement plans. City of Temecula Re: Parcel Map 24086 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 -4- November 16, 1990 14. Prior to initiation of the final construction drawings for those facilities required to be built as part of the Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan, the developer should contact the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District to ascertain the terms and conditions of design, construction, inspection, transfer of rights of way, project credit in lieu of fees and reimbursement schedules which may apply. Title reports and title insurance must be provided for all right of way to be transferred to the District. The developer should note that if the estimated cost for required area drainage plan facilities exceeds the required drainage fees and the developer wishes to receive credit for reimbursement in excess of his fees, the facilities will be constructed as a public works contract. Scheduling for construction of these facilities will be at the discretion of the District. 15. If the tract is built in phases, each phase shall be protected from the 1 in 100 year tributary storm flows. 16. Temporary erosion control measures should be implemented immediately following rough grading to prevent deposition of debris onto downstream properties or drainage facilities. Development of this property should be coordinated with the development of adjacent properties to ensure that watercourses remain unobstructed and stormwaters are not diverted from one watershed to another. This may require the construction of temporary drainage facilities or offsite construction and grading. 18. ~ster Drainage Plan facilities to be constructed as part of this development's improvement obligation are to be inspected, operated and maintained by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. The developer should enter into an agreement with the District establishing the terms and conditions covering their inspection, operation and maintenance. 19. Inspection and maintenance of the storm drain system to be built with this tract must be performed by either the County Transportation Department or the Flood Control District. The engineer (owner) must request (in writing) that one of these agencies accept the proposed storm drain system. The request should note the tract number, location, and briefly describe the system (sizes and lengths). Request to the District should be addressed to Kenneth L. Edwards, Chief Engineer, Attn: Frank Peairs, Planning Engineer. If the District is willing to accept the system, an agreement between the owner and the District must be executed. A request to draw up an agreement must be sent to the District to the attention of Michael Rawson. City of Temecula Re: Parcel Map 24086 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7~ 1990 -5- November 16, 1990 All flood control facilities should be constructed to District standards. All facilities that the District will assume for maintenance will require the payment of a one time maintenance charge equal to the "present worth" of maintenance costs from the time of acceptance through 1998. 21. The applicant's engineer should contact the District's Plan Check section to schedule a pre-design meeting before the engineer starts detailed project design. 22. A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the District via the Transportation Department for review and approval prior to recordation of the final map. Grading plans should be approved prior to issuance of grading permits. Questions concerning this matter may be referred to the Subdivision section of this office at 714/275-1210. o Civil Engineer c: ~S/Lowry ZS:slw RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT _ 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE * PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92370 ~ (714) 657-3183 GLEN J. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF June 5, 1991 TO: ATTN: RE: CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPT PARCEL MAP 24086 AMD #4 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: The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 5000 GPM and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant shall be 2500 GPM for 2 hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. Approved super fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2~"x2½") shall be located at each street intersection and spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction, with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. 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. All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall he referred to the Planning and Engineering staff. RAYMOND H. REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner By Michael E. Gray, Fire Captain Specialist MEG/tm ~ IND10 OFFICE 79-733 Counn'y Club Drive, Suite F. hdio, CA 92201 (619) 342~886 · FAX (619) 775-2072 PLANNING DIVISION 71 RIVERSIDE OFY1CE 3760 12th Sin:t-t, Riverside, CA 92501 (714) 2754777 * FAX (714) 369-7451 I"1 TEMECULA OFMCE 41002 Count~ Center Drive, Suite 225, Tcmcgula, CA 92390 (714) 694.5070 · FAX (714) 694-5076 ~ lx/nted on recycled paper September 6, 1989 DEPARTMENTAL LETTER COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO: FROM: RE: John Chtu - Team 5 Steven A. Kupferman - Engineering Geologist Tentative Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086 Slope Stability Report No. 149 The following report has been reviewed relative to slope stability at the subject site: "Slope Stability Assessment, Tentative Parcel Maps 24085, 24086, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA," by Schaefer Dixon Associates dated August t6, 1989. This report determined that: Tentative Parcel Map 24085 will be graded with cut slopes ranging up to 25 feet high and fill slopes approximBtely 10 feet high, both at 2:1 {horizontal: vertical). 2. Tentative Parcel Map 24086 will be graded with 2:1 (H:V) cut and fill slopes less than 30 feet high. The Pauba formation in the planned cut areas consists primarily of moderately hard to hard, moderately fractured, locally friable sandstones and siltstones. Proposed cut slopes fade in Pauba fonmtton sediments, having favorable-oriented bedding planes, are expected to be grossly stable at 2:1 {H:V) to a mximum height of 29 feet. 5. Surficial erosion is possible in both cut and fill slopes of granular Pauba formation mterials. This report recommended that: 1. Cut slope excavations should be observed during grading by the project engineering geologist. John Chiu - 2 - September 6, 1989 Drainage on cut and fill slopes should be dl rected away from the slope face. Drainage devices should be constructed as per the Uniform Building Code. 3. Proper landscaping should be established immediately after construction and maintained. 4. Slope wash and topsoil materials exposed in cut slopes should be removed and replaced with compacted fill materials. This report satisfies the General Plan requirement for a slope stability report. the recommendations made in this report should be adhered to in the design and construction of this project. SAK:al RiVERSiDE countu, PLAnninG DEP,, R;mEn; October 16, 1989 Schaefer Dixon Associates 22 Mauchly Irvine, CA 92718 Attention: Mr. Paul Davis Mr. Nicholas F. Selmeczy Mr. Michael L. Leonard, Sr. SUBJECT: Seismic-Geologic/Liquefaction Hazard Project No. 9R-4332C Tentative Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086 APN: g09-120-020,022 County Geologic Report No. 627 Rancho California Area Gentlemen: We have reviewed the seismic-geologic aspects of your report entitled "Report on Geotechnical Investigation, Assessment District No. 155, Parcel Map 24085, 24086, 21029, 21382, and 21383, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA," dated June 7, 1989 and your responses to County Geologic Review, dated August 15, 1989 and September 21, 1989. It should be noted that previous reports prepared for this property were entitled 1.} "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Industrial/Commercial Site, West of Cherry Street and Diaz Road, A.D. No. 155, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA" by Leighton and Associates, dated June 23, 1986, and 2.) "Engineering Geologic Investigation of Faulting and Anticipated Alluvial Removals, Proposed Industrial/Commercial Site, AD No. 155, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA," by Leighton and Associates, dated August 18, 1987. This report did not recognize or address the potential for ground fissuring in the area, which occurred in late 1987. It is understood that your report now supercedes these previous reports for the subject property. Your report determined that: The surface trace of a previously unmapped, through going fault extends northwest-southeast across the center of the property. A short branch of this fault trends more northerly, coincident with a strong photolineament and the 1987 ground fissure. These faults are delineated on Plate 1, Geotechnical Map, revised 8-15-89/9-21-89, in your report. 2. These faults are considered to be active in accordance with State of California, Division of Mines and Geology criteria. 3. The Willard fault traces located at higher elevations on the westerly portion of the site are judged to be pre-Holocene in age. 4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 (714) 787-6181 46'209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304 INDtO, CALIFORNIA 92201 (619) 342'8277 Schaefer Dixon Associates - 2 - October 16, 1989 The Whittier-Elsinore fault zone is considered capable of the highest ground motions at the site. A lO0-year probable magnitude earthquake of 6.3 on this fault would result in a peak horizontal ground acceleration of 0.41g at the site. Liquefiable and marginally liquefiable zones are present in the lower-lying portion of the site, below a depth of approximately 15 feet. The liquefiable areas are delineated on Plate 1, Geotechnical Map, revised 8-15-89/9-21-89. Surface subsidence may be induced by liquefaction and the settlement is estimated to be in the range of 0.1 inch to 1.4 inches, however reduction of bearing capacity for shallow spread footings is not anticipated. The potential for lateral spreading is considered low based on the present geometry of the Murrieta Creek Channel relative to the liquefiable zones at the site. 7. The potential for seiches, earthquake-induced flooding and lurching is considered to be extremely low at this site. 8. The mapped landslide at the northwest portion of the property is a shallow, surficial failure. Ground fissuring will most likely occur along the establish traces of historic and Holocene fault displacements. It is not expected that ground fissures will occur in portions of the property away from pre-existing Holocene faults. Your report recommended that: No habitable structures shall be placed acrossed the active {Holocene) faults and ground fissures. A Restricted Use Zone {R.U.Z.) shall be established to include the observed faults, their in-line projections and buffer zone. The total width and extent of the R.U.Z. is shown on Plate 1, Geotechnical Map, revised 8-15-89/9-21-8g. The effects of soil liquefaction, including loss of bearing capacity, surface subsidence and lateral spreading shall be re-evaluated for each individual structure on the site when grading and building plans become available. The mapped landslide at the northwest portion of the property shall be delineated on the project grading plans. In addition, the disturbed surficial materials shall be completely removed during grading, in conformance with standard earthwork practices. Schaefer Dixon Associates - 3 - October 16, I989 Recommendations for removing the uncontrolled fill from the exploratory trenches, and for placement of structures adjacent to or astride any of these trenches, should be specifically provided as part of the geotechnical grading plan review report for the subject projects. 6. Final plans and specifications should be reviewed by the geotechnical consultant prior to site construction. It is our opinion that the report was prepared in a competent manner and satisfies the additional information requested under the California Environmental Quality Act review and the Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan. Final approval of the report is hereby given. We recommend that the following conditions be satisfied before recordation of Tentative Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086 and/or issuance any County permits associated with this project: The recommended Restricted Use Zone shown on Plate 1, Geotechnical Map, revised B-15-89/9-21-89 in the report shall be delineated on the project maps and/or Environmental Constraints Sheet {E.C.S.). The areas within the Recommended Restricted Use Zone shall be labeled "FAULT AND GROUND FISSURE HAZARD AREA." 2. The following notes shall be placed on the E.C.S. and/or Subdivision maps: "The property is affected by earthquake faulting and ground fissures. Structures for human occupancy shall not be allowed in the Fault and Ground Fissure Hazard Area." (b) "County Geologic Report No. 627 was prepared for this property on June 7, 1989 by Schafer Dixon Associates, and is on file at the Riverside County Planning Department. Specific items of concern are as follows: earthquake faulting, fissuring and ground subsidence, liquefaction, landsliding, and uncompacted trench backfill." 3. The E.C.S. and/or project maps shall be submitted to the Planning Department Engineering Geologist for review and approval. 4. The exploratory trench backfill shall be addressed by the project geotechnical engineering prior to issuance of grading permits. Liquefaction reports for individual structures shall be submitted to the Planning Department Engineering Geologist for review and approval prior to Plot Plan approval. Schaefer Dixon Associates - 4 - October 16, 1989 The recommendations made in your report for mitigation of seismic/geologic hazards shall be adhered to in the design and construction of this project. Very truly yours, RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Roger S. S~eeter - Planning Director Engineering Geologist / CEG-1205 SAK:al c.c. Johnson & Johnson, Inc. - Dean Allen CDMG - Earl Hart Building & Safety {2} - Norm Lostbom John Chiu - Team 1 Water July 3, 1991 City of Temecula Engineering Department 43180 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92592 SUBJECT: Water and Sewer Availability Parcel Map 24086 Gentlemen: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water and sewer service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. Currently, RCWD has an inter~agency agreement with Eastern Municipal Water District to provide sewer service to your area. All plan check submittals will be made to RCWD. Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement which assigns water management fights, if any, to RCWD. If RCWD can be of further service to you, please contact Ms. Senga Doherty. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E. Manager of Development Engineering SB:SD:ajw116 cc: Senga Doherty, Engineering Technician CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY Backaround 1. Name of Proponent: 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: Date of Environmental Assessment: NBS Lowry 27403 Ynez Road, Suite 209 Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 676-6225 August 21, 1991 II 4. Agency Requiring Assessment: m m Name of Proposal, if applicable: Location of Proposal: CITY OF TEMECULA Parcel MaD NOS. 24085 and 24086 Southwesterly of Diaz Road bounded bv the future extension of Winchester Road on the northwesterly and southwesterly sides of the site. Environmental ImPacts (Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.) Yes Maybe N__o Earth, Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? X b. Disruptions, displacements, compac- tion or overcovering of the soil? X c. Substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features? X S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 34 The destruction, covering or modi- fication of any unique geologic or physical features? Any substantial increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off site? 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? Ye~i Maybe No X X X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT~24086 .PM 3 5 d m Plant a, 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? 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? 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, ur in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X X S\STAFFF~PT\24086.PM 36 10. 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? 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: Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 37 11. 12. 13. 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 Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking? Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X X X X X S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 38 14. 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? b. Police protection? c. Schools? Parks or other recreational facilities? Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services: 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: 16. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? Yes Maybe No X X _ _ X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM Communications systems? Water? Sewer or septic tanks? Storm water drainage? Solid waste and disposal? 39 X X X X 17. 18. 19. 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 S\STAFFRPT\24086,PM 40 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 S\STAFFRPT\24088.PM 41 III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation 1.a,b,c. 1.d. 1.e. 1.f. 1.g. Yes. Parcel Map No. 24085 will involve 363,000 cubic yards of cut and fill, and Parcel Map No. 24086 will involve 349,000 cubic yards of cut and fill. Some cut will penetrate into the Pauba Formation which consists of sandstone and siltstone. Mitigation of liquefaction potential on the site may involve removal and recompaction of soil on the site. All cut and fill slopes will not exceed a 2:1 grade. Cut slopes on the site of Parcel Map No. 24085 will be up to 25 feet in height and fill slopes will be approximately 10 feet high. Cut and fill slopes on the site of Parcel Map No. 24086 will be less than 30 feet in height. The Slope Stability Report determined that the proposed 2:1 cut slopes will be grossly stable to a maximum height of 29 feet, and surficial erosion potential should be mitigated by directing drainage away from the slope faces and installing landscape planting on the slopes. The recommendations of the Slope Stability Report shall be included in the conditions of approval for the subject parcel maps. No. There are no unique geologic or physical features on the site. Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are replanted. The wind erosion impact is considered high and significant but will be mitigated through minimal grading, retention of natural vegetation whenever feasible, and use of watering trucks and hydroseeding disturbed areas after grading. After construction of the project, water run-off is likely to increase due to the addition of impermeable surfaces. Appropriate drainage control devices will have to be approved through the Engineering Department and will have to be designed in accordance with Temecula's standards and the conditions of approval. No. Any drainage into the Murrieta Creek channel will be via drainage improvements as approved by the City Engineer and will not result in erosion or siltation. Yes. Portions of the site are susceptible to liquefaction and subsidence, and the site is traversed by a potentially active fault. The Geology Report recommends that the effects of liquefaction, including loss of bearing capacity, surface subsidence and lateral spreading should be re- evaluated for each individual structure when grading and building plans become available. In accordance with the requirements of state law, a restricted use zone based on the geology report is shown on the map. The restricted use zone represents a setback from the earthquake fault S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 42 2.a,b,c. 3,8, 3.b. 3,c, 3.d. 3.e, 3.f,g. 3.h. on the site, and no structures for human occupancy will be permitted within the restricted use zone. Hazards to buildings outside of the restricted use zone due to groundshaking associated with the fault are addressed by the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. The geologic hazard mitigations recommended in the Geology Report and the County Geologists letter shall be conditions of approval. No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any impacts to air quality or the climate. Subsequent development proposals will be assessed for potential impacts to air quality and mitigation measures will be required if necessary. No. The portion of the property necessary for the future construction of Murrieta Creek flood control facilities is indicated on the tentative parcel map as a County Channel Easement, There will be no change in the course or direction of water in Murrieta Creek. Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in changes in the amount of surface runoff. The improvement of the site will provide for adequate drainage facilities as approved by the City Engineer. No. The project will result in minor, localized redirection of flood waters to the extent necessary to elevate the site above the 1 O0 year flood plain elevation, but the overall direction and flow of flood waters will not be changed. Maybe. Grading and future development of the site may increase the amount of surface runoff flowing into the Murrieta Creek channel. This is not considered a significant impact and is consistent with the provisions of the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan and Assessment District 155. Yes. Grading may result in an increase in turbidity in local surface water. This impact is temporary and is not considered significant. No. Recompaction of soil to mitigate the potential for liquefaction is not expected to result in a significant impact on the direction or rate of flow of ground waters. No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any impact on public water supplies. S\STAFFRPT\24086 .PM 43 3.i. 4.a,b. 4.c, 4.d. 5.a,b. 5,c. 6.8. 6.b. 9.a,b. No. Prior to recordation of the proposed parcel map, the applicant shall obtain a Letter of Map Revision from the Federal Emergency Management Agency indicating that grading of the site or other improvements are adequate to ensure that the site will be above the 100 year flood plain elevation. No. A botanical survey of the site found no sensitive plant species on the site. Grazing and the introduction of non-native grasses have previously disturbed the natural native flora on the site. Maybe. Landscaping of the site may introduce some non-native species. This is not considered a significant impact. No. The site is not currently used as crop land. No. A biology survey of the site did not reveal the presence or any indications of any species classified as rare or endangered. Yes. The project will involve a loss of grass land and chaparral which provides foraging habitat for birds, mammals, and reptiles. In regional terms, the loss of foraging habitat is an incrementally adverse but non- significant impact. The biology report recommends the use of native California shrubs and trees to revegetate graded and open areas in order to enhance reoccupation of the bird community. Use of native plant life shall be a condition of approval. Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in increased noise levels during grading. This impact will be temporary and is not considered significant because the site is not near any noise sensitive land uses. No. Future development will be reviewed for potential noise impacts, and land uses which generate severe noise impacts will be prohibited or required to provide adequate noise mitigation. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not cause new light or glare, and subsequent development of the site will be subject to standard conditions prohibiting lighting from impacting adjacent properties and requiring low-glare sodium vapor lights. No. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zone and the land use designation in which the property is located. No. The project will not involve a substantial increase in the rate of consumption of natural or non-renewable resources. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 44 lO.a,b. 11,12. 13.a. 13.b. 13.c,e. 13.d. No. The proposed parcel map will not involve the use of hazardous materials or interference with emergency response or evacuation plans. No. The proposal is not likely to alter the distribution or growth rate of the population or create a demand for new housing. Future development of the site will help address the irabalance of local jobs in relation to existing and approved housing. Yes. Future development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24085 is expected to generate 5,340 vehicle trip ends per day. 5, 150 trip ends per day are expected as a result of development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24086. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the project determined that intersections and roadways in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended improvements are implemented. The following recommended traffic impact mitigations are incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map No. 24085. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works and shall be included in the street imporvements plans. Plans for traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of Avenida de Ventas at Diaz Road and Avenida de Ventas at Winchester Road, and shall be included in the street improverant plans with the second plan check submittal. The developer shall execute a Reimbursement Agreement for the design and construction of traffic signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz Road, Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle East. The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with the City of Temecula to contribute a pro-rata share to the construction of the extension of Diaz Road to Washington Street/Rancon Center Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland overcrossing, Winchester Road restriping to six lanes, and the western bypass corridor as determined by a focused traffic analysis approved by the Deaprtment of Public Works. No. Future development of the site will be required to provide adequate off-street parking as appropriate for the particular land use proposed, No. The project will have no impact upon existing transportation systems or upon water, rail, or air traffic. No. The proposed parcel maps will not alter present patterns of circulation. S~STAFFRPT\24086 .PM 45 13.f. 14.a-f. 15.a,b. 16.a-d,f. 16.e. 17.a,b. 18. 19. 20.a,b,c. No. The streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended street improvements are implemented. The street improvements will be conditions of approval for the proposed parcel map. No. The project will not result in a need for new public services. Future development will generate an increase in the need for public services in the areas of fire and police protection and road maintenance. Payment of the required traffic signal mitigation fee, the facility fee, and property taxes will fund the additional public services. No, The project will not result in a substantial use or increase in demand for fuel or other energy sources. No. Future development of the site will require only hook up to or service by existing utility systems and will not result in a need for new or substantially altered utility systems. Yes. The proposed Parcels Maps will involve the construction of the Murrieta Creek Channel through the site. The construction of channel improvements will be in compliance with the recommendations of the County Flood Control District and will be provided by the developer or by the developer's participation in an assessment district. No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any potential health hazards. Future development will be assessed for potential health hazards, and mitigations, if needed, shall be required. No. The proposal will not result in the obstruction of any scenic views, Future development will be reviewed in order to prevent the construction of aesthetically offensive structures or site layouts. No. The site is not currently used for recreational purposes. Maybe. The site of Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086 contain a recorded archaeological site (CA-RIV-237) which is beleived to encompass approximately 70,000 square meters, part of which is outside of the subject property. During an archaeological surface survey of the site conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of basalt and quartz debitage, fragmented manos and metates, fire-affected rocks, pestles, hammerstores, and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed. The recommendations of the Archaeological Assessment are to conduct a surface collection of the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 46 20.d. 21 .a. 21 .b,c. 21 .d. significance of the site. The resulting information shall be used to determine whether the site is a unique resource for the area and whether measures to preserve the site or salvage some percentage of the cultural resources should be implemented. The Archaeological Assessment includes the recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted for any future grading activities. These recommendations shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Maps 24805 and 24806. In addition, a Native American representative shall be present during archaeological excavation and also during grading. No. The site is not used for any religious or sacred purposes. No. Although the project will result in a reduction of foraging habitat, this impact is not considered regionally significant. The inclusion of native trees and shrubs in the landscaping will provide adequate mitigations for potential biological impacts due to reduction of foraging habitat. No, The long term and cumulative traffic impacts of the project will be adequately mitigated by the street improvements recommendeG by the traffic study which are conditions of approval for the proposed parcel map. Streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service. No. The proposed parcel map will not create any health hazards. Environmental review of future development of the site will address any potential health hazards and mitigations, if necessary, will be required. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 47 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- ticant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi- ticant 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. X I find the proposed project MAY have e significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. August 12, 1991 Date For CITY OF TEMECULA S\STAFFRP~24086.PM 48 CITY OF TEMECULA ) SITE .. / /// / ./// VICINITY MAP CASE NO. ?~ ~-~ P.C. DATE CITY OF TEMECULA ) RLI SWAP MAP CASE NO. ~Mf,2ya~r~ ..c. DATE ,~/~/~, CITY OF TEMECULA ~ / ./' ~/ ZONE MAP CASE NO. C.C. DATE i ITEM # 11 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 7, 1991 Case No.: Parcel Map 25139 Prepared By: Scott Wright Recommendation: Adopt the Negative Declaration; and Adopt Resolution 91- recommending approval of Tentative Parcel Map 25139 APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: 50 Center City Associates REPRESENTATIVE: Alba Engineering PROPOSAL: To create 66 parcels and a 6.8 acre open space area on a 97.3 acre site. LOCATION: Southwesterly of the future extension of Diaz Road and southeasterly of the future extension of Cherry Street. EXISTING ZONING: Manufacturing - Service Commercial (M-SC) SURROUNDING ZONING: N o rth: South: East: West: Specific Plan, (SP) Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M- SC) Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M- SC) Residential Agricultural (R-A-20) PROPOSED ZONING: Not requested EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant S\S\25139.TPM 1 SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Vacant South: Vacant East: Murrieta Creek West: Vacant PROJECT STATISTICS: Gross site area: No. of Parcels: Average Parcel size: Area of Open Space: Cut and Fill Figures: Cut = Fill = 97.3 acres 66 0.98 acre 6.8 acres 1,430,000 cubic yards 880,000 cubic yards BACKGROUND: Tentative Parcel Map 25139 was submitted to the County on August 15, 1989. The County Land Development Committee (CLDC) reviewed the application on September 21, 1989 and requested clearance letters for the paleontology survey and the geology and liquefaction reports as well as clarification of the site's status as an agricultural preserve. The LDC continued the case on November 2, 1989 pending receipt of updated clearance letters for the biology, geology, and liquefaction reports and the need for additional information regarding the flood plain, slopes, agricultural preserve, review of the design manual, and a redesign to address concerns of the County Flood Control District, The file was transmitted to the City on April 18, 1990. City staff requested a traffic study, landscape and architecture standards, an updated letter from the County Flood Control District, and information regarding slope stability, soil export, archaeological resources, property boundaries, and the alignment of Winchester Road. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposal is to create 66 parcels between 0.51 acre and 3.7 acres in size with an average parcel size of 0.98 acre. There will be an undisturbed 6.8 acre open space on the southwesterly side of the site in order to retain some hillside chaparral habitat. Parcels 58 through 66 will involve substantial cuts into the hillside and will be separated from the open space area by slopes over 1 O0 feet high with a slope S%S\25139.TPM 2 ANALYSIS: ratio of 1.5:1. The site is traversed by a fault setback zone within which no structures for human occupancy will be allowed. The easterly side of the site lies within the Murrieta Creek Channel and is indicated as a channel easement to the County of Riverside. Grading and Slope Stabilitv The project will entail 1,430,000 cubic yards of cut and 880,000 cubic yards of fill and will create 1.5:1 cut slopes up to 120 feet high. The project will involve the export of 550,000 cubic yards of soil from the site. It shall be a Condition of Approval for Parcel Map 25139 that information regarding the number of truckloads, the haul route, the destination point, and a stockpile permit or an approved grading plan for the recipient site shall be submitted and haul route permit obtained from the City prior to issuance of grading permits. The final disposition of the export soil will be subject to environmental review in conjunction with the project which will use the export soil as fill. The revised Slope Stability Analysis prepared for this project states that the cut slopes will be stable under normal and seismic conditions, provided they are free of adverse geologic conditions. The Revised Slope Stability Analysis includes recommendations that an engineering geologist conduct geological mapping during grading to verify that the soils and geologic conditions encountered do not differ significantly from those assumed in the Slope Stability Analysis. If significant differences are encountered, buttressing may be required to stabilize the slope. Cut and fill slopes should be provided with appropriate surface drainage and landscaped as soon as possible after grading. The Tentative Map shows a brow ditch and bench drain at 30 foot intervals in the cut slope. The recommendations of the Slope Stability Analysis shall be Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 25139. S\S\25139.TPM 3 Staff has concerns relative to grading on this site. However, with the absence of policy relative to grading, Staff's recommendation is to condition the map in such a way as to initiate the greatest extent possible, grading impaction mitigation measures relative to grading are determined in the Conditions of Approval. With respect to this issue, the City's General Plan effort will most likely include policies relative to grading. Flood Hazards A portion of the site is located in the 100 year flood plain. Measures to remove the project from the 100 year flood plain are listed in the conditions of approval (see County Flood Control District letter of July 9, 1990). Drainaoe The site is located within the limits of the Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan and payment of drainage fees is required. All lots are required to drain toward adjacent streets or an adequate outlet approved by the City Engineer. On- site grading shall be designed to perpetuate existing tributary drainage areas and outlet points, and development of the subject and adjacent properties shall be coordinated to ensure that watercourses remain unobstructed and that storm waters are not diverted from one watershed to another. The site, including each phase if phasing occurs, shall be protected from 100 year tributary storm flows. Off- site drainage facilities shall be located within dedicated drainage easements obtained from the affected property owner(s). Said easements shall be recorded and a copy submitted to the Flood Control District prior to map recordation. Drainage facilities collecting and conveying flows down the steep cut slopes shall be designed in accordance with the District's Drainage Standards for high cut slopes dated November 8, 1990. S\S\25139.TPM 4 Geologic and Liauefaction Hazards A fault hazard and subsidence investigation was prepared for an earlier parcel map application on the subject property. The report determined that the site is traversed by an active branch of the Elsinore Fault, and that the possibility of ground rupture is high in the vicinity of the fault. The potential for fissuring and ground subsidence due to water withdrawal are high in the vicinity of the fault. There is also a potentially active Pre-Holocene fault which transects the extreme western portion of the site which will be maintained as open space. The report recommended a fault and fissure setback zone along the active trace of the branch of the Elsinore Fault in which no structures for human occupancy will be allowed. Other recommendations included continuation of a program to monitor ground movement associated with subsidence and use of at least 5 feet of recompacted fill and post-tensioned slabs for all structures within 200 feet of the fault setback zone. The liquefaction report prepared for an earlier parcel map on the site determined that the potential for liquefaction exists on the site. The reports recommendations included placement of fill on the lots susceptible to liquefaction or densification of subsurface alluvium to at least 92% relative compaction. The Riverside County Geologist reviewed both reports and found that they satisfy the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and County General Plan Policies regarding geological hazards. The recommendations of the reports shall be Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 25139. Traffic and Circulation Future development of the site is expected to generate 5, 180 vehicle trip ends per day. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the project determined that projected future traffic based on existing traffic, project generated traffic, and traffic S\S\25139.TPM 5 generated by other growth in the area will result in a peak hour level of Service D or better at all intersections within the scope of the traffic study if recommended improvements are implemented. The recommendations include contributing to the extension of Diaz Road, providing traffic signals at certain intersections and contributing to the signalization of other intersections, providing a signing and striping plan, and contributing to the construction of the Overland overcrossing and the restriping Winchester Road to six lanes. These improvements are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval. Additionally, this project, along with PM 25408, will be constructing the first portion of the western bypass corridor from the City's northerly boundary at Douglas Avenue. This portion of the proposed alignment of the corridor has been reviewed and approved by the City's Department of Public Work and found acceptable. Access Access to the site will be taken from Winchester Road and Via Industria. All proposed parcels will have frontage on and take access from dedicated streets. Parcels fronting Winchester Road, Diaz Road, Via Industria, and Cherry Street shall limit access to joint use access driveways. Parcel Size and Dimensions Development standards in the M-SC Zone require a minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet and an average width of at least 65 feet where sewers are available and will be utilized. The proposed parcels range from 0.51 acre to 1.37 acres and have an average lot widths of over 1 O0 feet. S\S\25139.TPM 6 Fossil Resources The site is located on the fossilferous Pauba Formation. In accordance with the recommendation of the San Bernardino County Museum, the subdivider shall retain a paleontologist to monitor grading operations, evaluate any fossils encountered during grading, prepare a report of findings, and provide for preservation and curatjon of recovered specimens. Archaeological Resources The site of Parcel Map 25139 contains a recorded archaeological site {CA-RIV-237) which is believed to encompass approximately 70,000 square meters, part of which is outside of the subject property. During an archaeological surface survey of the site conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of basalt and quartz debitage, fragmented manos and metares, fire-affected rocks, pestles, hammerstones, and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed. The recommendations of the archaeological assessment are to conduct a surface collection of the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and significance of the site. The resulting information shall be used to determine what additional measures should be implemented to preserve cultural resources. The archaeological assessment also includes the recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted for any future grading activities. These recommendations shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 25139. In addition, a Native American representative shall be present during the archaeological excavation and also during grading. S\S\25139.TPM 7 The property in question also contains another site (WSP-1) which contains a 3/4 circle rock enclosure. The site is possibly a late period campsite. A 100% surface collection, mapping, soils testing, and subsurface testing by excavating 8-10 cubic meters of earth is recommended. In this case, testing procedures are likely to constitute final mitigation. Biological Imoacts A biological survey of the site found no sensitive plant species. Two sensitive bird species were observed or detected on the site: the Long-eared Owl and the Grasshopper Sparrow. Neither bird had an official status as a sensitive species, but both were listed by experts as declining species. The Grasshopper Sparrow will be impacted by a reduction in foraging habitat which is considered a non-significant but incrementally adverse impact. Impacts on the Long-eared Owl are more difficult to assess. Recommended measures to reduce habitat impacts are maintenance of an undisturbed open space area on the western side of the site and enhancement of Murrieta Creek riparian corridor by planting Cottonwood and Sycamore trees adjacent to Diaz Road. The tentative map indicates an open space area on the western side of the site. The recommended planting of Cottonwood and Sycamore trees adjacent to Diaz Road may conflict with the need to use more drought resistant, low maintenance type of vegetation with less invasive root systems which would be less detrimental to public improvements. Appropriate alternatives to cottonwood or sycamore trees should be identified and planted. Water and Sewer Availability A will serve letter from the Rancho Water District indicates that water and sewer service are available to the site upon completion of financial arrangements and satisfaction of the District's other requirements. S\S\25139.TPM 8 Aaricultural Preserve Status The site is designated as an Agricultural Preserve. Section 66474.4 of the Subdivision Map Act would normally preclude approval of a parcel map creating parcels of insufficient size for agricultural use. However, Section 66474.4 (d.3.) exempts lands subject to a Notice of Non-Renewal indicating that the Agricultural Preserve contract is due to expire within three years. The County Assessor's Office has informed City Staff that a Notice of Non- Renewal indicates that the contract for the property in question is due to expire on January 1, 1992. The same exemption is provided in Section 7.1 (H.3.b) of Ordinance 460. Lot Line Adjustments and Street Realignments The formation of Assessment District 155 included a realignment of the right of way for the future extension of Winchester Road west of Diaz Road. Since the centerline of the right of way constituted the boundary between properties, the realignment resulted in changes to property boundaries. The subject Parcel Map was affected by a realignment of Winchester Road adjacent to Tentative Parcel Maps 25408 and 24086. In order to prevent discrepancies in the legal descriptions of the property at the item of recordation, staff has required that the applicant and other affected property owners eliminate the discrepancies by filing Lot Line Adjustments, Street Vacations, and offers of Rededication reflecting the new alignment of Winchester Road and the resulting changes in property boundaries. These requirements must be completed prior to map recordation. S\S\25139.TPM 9 SOUTHWEST AREA PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY: The proposed parcels conform to the development standards of the M-SC Zone. The M-SC Zone is consistent with the SWAP designation of Light Industrial. There is a reasonable probability that the project will be consistent with the future General Plan in that the project is consistent with existing and approved developments and subdivisions in the area. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The Initial Study prepared for Parcel Map 25139 indicates that the project will not result in any environmental impacts which cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance, and a Negative Declaration is recommended. FINDINGS: The proposed parcel map will not have a 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 in that the proposed commercial - industrial subdivision is consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial Land Use Designation, the Manufacturing - Service Commercial Zone, and existing land uses in the vicinity. 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 in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivision's in the vicinity. S\S%25139,TPM The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project conforms to the current zoning for the site and to Ordinance No. 460, Schedule E. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lots, access, and density. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as determined in the Initial Study prepared for this project. The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future passive energy control opportunities in that all parcels have adequate southern exposure. All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic. 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. 10. The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. 11. These findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. S\S\25139.TPM 11 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the following recommendation to the City Council: Adopt the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map 25139; and Adopt Resolution 91 - approving Parcel Map 25139 based on the findings contained herein and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. vgw Attachments: 2. 3. 4. Resolution Conditions of Approval Environmental Assessment Exhibits: A. Vicinity Map B. SWAP Map C. Zoning Map D. Tentative Parcel Map 25408 S\S\25139 ,TPM 12 RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 25139 TO SUBDIVIDE A 97.3 ACRE PARCEL INTO 66 PARCELS AND A 6.8 ACRE OPEN SPACE ACRE LOCATED SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF DIAZ ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-120-018 WHEREAS, 50 Century City Associates filed Tentative Parcel Map No. 25139 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Tentative Parcel Map application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tentative Parcel Map on October 7, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WH EREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said Tentative 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. S\S\2S139.TPM 13 (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. (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 Tentative 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 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 Tentative Parcel Map No. 25139 proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. s~sx2s~ 3e,TPU 14 (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 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are made: a) That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. b) That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. c) That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of development. d) That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the proposed density of the development. e) That the design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. f) That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. g) That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. A land division may be approved if it is found that S\S\25139.TPM 15 alternate easements for access or for use will be provided and that they will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to 98sements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction. (2) The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to wit: a) The proposed parcel map will not have a 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 in that the proposed commercial - industrial subdivision is consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial Land Use Designation, the Manufacturing - Service Commercial Zone, and existing land uses in the vicinity. 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 in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivision's in the vicinity. d) The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project conforms to the current zoning for the site and to Ordinance No. 460, Schedule E. e) The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lots, access, and density. S\S\25139.TPM 16 f) The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as determined in the Initial Study prepared for this project. g) The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future passive energy control opportunities in that all parcels have adequate southern exposure. h) All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic. 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. 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) These findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Tentative Parcel Map 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. S\S\25139.TPM 17 SECTION 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 25139 for the subdivision of a 97.3 acre parcel into 66 parcels and a 6.8 acre open space parcel located southwesterly of the future extension of Diaz Road and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 909-120-018 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. SECTION 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of October, 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 7th day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS S\S\25139.TPM 1 B CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tentative Parcel Map No. 25139 Project Description: To create 66 parcels and a 6.8 open space acre on a 97.3 acre site Assessor's Parcel No.: 909-120-026 Plannine Department The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule E, 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 460. The expiration date is Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the parcel map boundary to a City maintained road. 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. Subdivision phasing, including any proposed common open space area improvement phasing, if applicable, shall be subject to Planning Department approval. Any proposed phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular access to all lots in each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and purpose of the subdivision approval. S\S\25139.TPM 19 8. 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: a. 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. 10. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated November 13, 1990, a copy of which is attached. 11. The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated July 9, 1991, 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 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits. 12. The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the County Fire Department's letter dated August 27, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 13. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the County Geologist's transmittals dated July 20, 1988 (revised November 3, 1989) and January 18, 1989 (revised November 3, 1989), which are attached. 14. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho Water District transmittal dated November 20, 1989, a copy of which is attached. 15. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following: Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the development standards of the M-SC 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. 16. 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. S\S\25139.TPM 20 17. Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the City Engineer. 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. 18. The following notes shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet: 19. "This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory outdoor lighting policy as outlined in the Southwest Area Plan. "Archaeological and paleontological monitoring of grading is required, and summary reports shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits." m "Part of the site is located in the 100 year flood plain of Murrieta Creek. Measures to remove the project site from the flood plain are listed in the conditions of approval." "The site is traversed by a potentially active earthquake fault. The map includes a restricted use zone in which no structures for human occupancy are allowed." Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: (1) Prior to the issuance of grading permits detailed common open space area landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval for the phase of development in process. The plans shall be certified by a landscape architect, and shall provide for the following: Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all landscaped areas requiring irrigation. Parkways shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or a transition into the primary use area of the site. Landscape elements shall include earth berming, ground cover, shrubs and specimen trees. Front yards shall be landscaped and street trees planted. Cm Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent trees at key visual focal points within the project. S\S\2S139.TPM 2 1 Where street trees cannot be planted within right-of-way of interior streets and project parkways due to insufficient road right- of-way, they shall be planted outside of the road right-of-way. Landscaping plans shall incorporate native and drought tolerant plants where appropriate. All existing specimen trees and significant rock outcroppings on the subject properR shall be shown on the project's grading plans and shall note those to be removed, relocated and/or retained. All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow growing trees shall be steel staked. If the project is to be phased, prior to the approval of grading permits, an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for approval. The plan shall be used as a guideline for subsequent detailed grading plans for individual phases of development and shall include the following: Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and sedimentation during and after the grading process. Cut slopes shall be landscaped as soon as possible after grading. Approximate time frames for grading and identification of areas which may be graded during the higher probability rain months of January through March. 3. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations. 4. Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase. 20. 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. 21. Prior to the issuance of grading permits a qualified archaeologist shall conduct a stratified surface sampling of archaeological site CA-RIV 237 and shall excavate 20 to 30 one cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and significance of the site. Based on the results of these tests, the extent of further sampling and data collection will be determined. A s~s~2s~ 3..~.M 22 qualified archaeologist shall also monitor grading activities and shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading activity to allow recovery of cultural resources. A Native American representative shall be present during archaeological testing and during grading and shall also have the authority to temporarily halt or divert grading activity. A 100% surface collection, mapping, soils testing, subsurface testing and mapping a 3 to 5 cubic meters of excavation shall be conducted at archaeological site WSP-1 in order to determine the extent and significance of the site and whether further testing and/or collection is warranted. A report of findings shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of grading permits. A CA-RIV number shall be assigned to the site and shown on the environmental constraints sheet. 22. Prior to issuance of grading permits a certified stephens kangaroo rat biologist shall ascertain if stephens kangaroo rats inhabit the site and shall submit a report to the Planning Department. If any stephens kangaroo rats are found, a lO(a) permit for incidental take must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits. 23. Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval. The plans shall address all areas and aspects of the map requiring landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to, parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front yard landscaping. Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from view of surrounding property. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of twenty five (25) feet with at least 10 feet landscaped. Archaeological and paleontological summary reports shall be submitted to the Planning Department delineating cultural or fossil resources encountered during grading, recovery procedures and an inventory of recovered items, and a statement of their scientific significance. 24. Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with approved plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. If seasonal conditions do not permit planting, interim landscaping and erosion control measures shall be utilized as approved by the Planning Director and the Director of Building and Safety. S~S~2S~9.T.M 23 Not withstanding the preceding conditions, wherever an acoustical study is required for noise attenuation purposes, the heights of all required walls shall be determined by the acoustical study where applicable. 25. 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. 26. 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. 25139, which action is brought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. 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. 27. All utility systems including gas, electric,(excepting electrical lines rated 33kv or greater), 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. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements: 28. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's shall be subject to the following conditions: a. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense. The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Planning, City Engineer and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents. S\S\25139.TPM 24 The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with the final map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City. The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas and facilities. The landscape and architecture standards shall be incorporated by reference into the CC&R's. f The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. g The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. The declaration shall contain language prohibiting further subdivision of any lots, whether they are lettered lots or numbered lots. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the association or other means acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to the Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to issuance of building permits. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds, and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. 29. No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group, or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City of provisions required by the City as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. 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). Department of Public Works The following are the Department of Public Works 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 appropriate staff person of the Department of Public Works. It is understood that the Developer has correctly shown on the tentative map all existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review. PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 31. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, 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; Department of Public Works; Riverside County Health Department; CATV Franchise; and Parks and Recreation Department. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 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 Department of Public Works. Prior to recordation all appropriate Lot Line Adjustments and street vacations shall be processed and recorded as directed by the Departments of Planning and Public Works. Additional property for Parcel I must be legally obtained and boundary adjusted to proposed centerline of Cherry Street. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Diaz Road shall be improved with 76 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right- of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 101, (100'/76'). Via Industria shall be improved with 64 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right- of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 102, (88'/64). Streets "A," "B," "C" and "D" shall be improved with 56 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 111, Section (78'/56'). Winchester Road shall be improved with 38 feet of half street improvement plus one 12 foot lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within a 64 foot dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 101, Section (100'/76'). Cherry Street shall be improved with 28 feet of half street improvement plus one 12 foot lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted within a 54 foot dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 111, (78'/56'). If construction is to be phased, the landowner/developer shall acquire sufficient public offsite rights-of-way to provide for secondary access road(s) to a paved and maintained road as may be needed. Said access road(s) shall be constructed in accordance with County Standard No, 106, Section B, (32'/60') at a grade and alignment approved by the Department of Public Works. S\S\25139.TPM 27 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. In the event road or off-site right-of-way 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 developer's cost pursuant to Government Code Section 66462.5, which shall be at no cost to the City. Parcels fronting Winchester Road, Diaz Road, Via Industria and Cherry Street shall limit access to joint use access driveways. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Diaz Road and Winchester Road and so noted on the final map with the exception of Public Street Intersections and driveway openings as approved by the Department of Public Works and as shown on the Tentative Map. Cul de sacs shall be designed and constructed per County Standard No 800A. 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. Provisions shall also be made to provide for maintenance of all onsite drainage facilities as directed by the Department of Public Works. Where applicable an easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to approval of the Final Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, 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 Department of Public Works. 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 limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate. b. Storm drain facilities. S\S\25139 .TPM Landscaping (street and parks). Sewer and domestic water systems. 28 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. e. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. f. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. The street design, grading and improvement concept of this project shall be coordinated with Assessment District 155 and adjoining developments. Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in accordance with the requirements of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the Department of Public Works. Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department of Public Works 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. Street names shall be subject to the approval of the Building and Safety Department. The minimum centerline radii shall be 500 feet or as approved by the Department of Public Works. All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 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 Department of Public Works. A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent. All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards and shall be shown on the street improvement plans in accordance with County Standard 400 and 401 (curb sidewalk). The subdivider shall submit two (2) prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the Department of Public Works. 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 24" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil Engineer. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. The report shall also address setback requirements for fault line areas. S\S%25139.TPM 29 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. The subdivider shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report to the Department of Public Works. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities, located outside of road right-of-way, shall be contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating "Drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions." A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the recorded drainage easement shall be submitted to the City for review prior to the recordation of the final map. A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control District for review. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 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. A portion of the site is in an area identified on the Flood Hazard Maps as Flood Zone A subject to flooding of undetermined depths. Prior to the approval of any plans, this project shall comply with Ordinance 91-12 of the City of Temecula and with the rules and regulations of FEMA for development within a Flood Zone "A" which may include obtaining a letter of map revision from FEMA. The developer shall record an Environmental Constraint Sheet delineating the area within the 100-year floodplain. Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of street improvements. S\S\25139.TPM 30 PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 71. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public works. 72. A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of- way. 73. All Conditions of Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District letter dated July 9, 1991, shall be complied with. 74. 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. 75. The subdivider shall submit a haul route plan including, but not limited to, specific information related to truck loads, destination, permission and clearance letters as requested. 76. During grading, the slope should be geologically mapped by an Engineering Geologist to verify that the soils and geologic conditions encountered do not differ significantly from those assumed in the slope stability report prepared by Leighton and Associates dated November 17, 1988. If geologic conditions differ from those assumed, buttressing may be required to stabilize the slope. PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT: 77. A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works 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. 78. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. 79. 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. The fee to be paid shall be 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. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer shall post security to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the security shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. 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). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY: 80. Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on all interior public streets. 81. Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Traffic control plans shall be provided as directed by the Department of Public Works, and may be required to be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. 82. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 14 days following placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. Transportation Engineering PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 83. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works and shall be included in the street improvement plans. 84. Plans for traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of Winchester Road North at Diaz Road, Via Industria at Cherry Street and Winchester Road at Cherry Street, and shall be included in the street improvement plans with the second plan check. S\S\25139.TPM 32 85. The developer shall execute a Reimbursement Agreement for the design and construction of traffic signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz Road, Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle East. The percent of costs and the warrants for these signals shall be as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to recordation. 86. The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with the City of Temecula to contribute a pro-rata share to the construction of the extension of Diaz Road to Washington Street/Rancon Center Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland overcrossing, Winchester Road restriping to six lanes, and the western bypass corridor as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to recordation. 87. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering for the design requirements prior to recordation. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS: 88. 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 Department of Public Works. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS: 89. All traffic signals, signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan and as directed by the Department of Public Works per the approved focused traffic analysis. 90. All landscaping installation within corner cutoff areas at all intersections and adjacent to all driveways shall provide for adequate sight distance. 91. Stop signs shall be installed within the project boundary at the intersections of local streets. 92. Diaz Road shall be striped with left turn pockets at each intersection adjacent to the project. s~s~2s~ 3S.T.M 33 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH RECEIVE,,:;; : ·/ November 13. 1990 CITY OF TEMECULA 43180 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE TEMECULA. CA 92390 AilN: Si~E JIANNINO RE: PARCEL MAP NO. 25139: PORTION PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 4646 P.M. 6/75 RECORDS RIVeSIDE COUNTY. (64 LOTS) Dear Gentlemen: The Department of Public Health has reviewed Parcel MaD N0. 25139 and recommends that: A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the water company and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the water system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet, alonq with the orlqlnal drawlnq to the County Surveyor. The prints shall show the internal Dips diameter, location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and Joint specifications, and the size of the main at the .]unction of the new system to the existing system. The plans shall comply in all respects with Div. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety Code, California Administrative Code, Title 22, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, when applicable. The plans shall be slqned bv a reOistered enQlneer and water company with the followinQ certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in Parcel MaD 25139 is in accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Ranthe California Water District and that the water service, storage, and distribution system will be adequate to provide water service to such Parcel City of Temecula PaUe Two Attn: Steve Jiannino November 13, 1990 This certification does not constitute a ~uarantee that it will supply water to such parcel map at any specific quantities, flows or pressures for fire protection or any other purpose" This certification shall be sIGned by a responsible official of the water company. This subdivision has a statement from Rancho Californla Water District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand provIdln~ satisfactory financial arrangements are commleted with the subdivider. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be made prior to the recordatlon of the final map. This subdivision l~ within the Rancho California Water DIstrict and shall be connected to the sewers of the DIstrict. The sewer system shall be installed according to plans and s~eclflcatlons as aDproved by the DIstrict, the County Surveyor and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the original drawlng, to the County Surveyor. The prlnts shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and 3olnt speclflcatlons and the size of the sewers at the Ounctlon of the new system to the existing system. A sinale plat indicating location Of sewer lines and water lines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and the sewer district with the following certification: "! certify that the deslqn of the sewer system in Parcel No. 25139 is in accordance wlth the sewer system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the waste disposal ~vstem is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed parcel maD." CIty of Temecula Paoe Three Attn: Steve Jlannlno November 13. 1990 It will be necessary for financial arranQements to be completely flnallzed prior to recordatlon of the final map. ~Slncerely. '- am nvironmental Health Specialist SM:dF IV KENNETH L EDWARDS RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT RIVERSIDE CALIFORNIA 92502 July 9, 1991 1995 MARKET STREET P O BOX 1033 TELEPHONE ~7141275 1200 City of Temecula City Halt 43180 Business Park Dr., Ste. Temecula, California 92390 200 Attention: Planning Department Steve Jiannino Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: Parcel Map 25139 Amended No. 3 This is a proposal to divide 97.3 acres into commercial parcels located south of the intersection of Diaz Road and Cherry Street. This property is located adjacent to Murrieta Creek and approxi- mately one half of the parcels are located within the 100 year flood plain limits of the creek. The District is currently developing a final design for improvement of Murrieta Creek with the assistance of a seven member citizens' committee appointed by the Board of Supervisors. Because of the complexity of the hydraulic and environmental factor involved, and to ensure orderly development, the District will design the entire Murrieta Creek improvement. Piecemeal design of portions of this major regional flood control project is not acceptable to the District. Following development of an acceptable design, the District intends to pursue a funding mechanism for the required improvements, probably by means of an aesessment district over the flood plain. The right of way needed for Murrieta Creek in this area is 250 feet each side of the centerline. This includes a 50-foot habitat mitigation strip on each side which wilt be returned if it is not needed. This property is also affected by the runoff which approaches it from the hills to the eouthwest. High, steep cut slopes up to 116 feet are proposed here which intersect flows from several canyons. These canyons can produce debris laden flows which must be safely and reliably collected and conveyed down the steep slopes to ensure protection of the proposed project. The collection/conveyance system for these slopes as proposed is not sufficient to meet the District's concerns. Ci~' of Temecula Pet Parcel Map 25139 Amended No. 3 ' ' :owing are the District's r'ecc!,~mendat:Dns :: _~Sl s heal th and safety: a~feat "waters sf the ~' ite~ States' , ' ' , .r'~s- R-_laLe:! ~eaulat:.s, ns (44 CFR, saF:s 5e %i-,,r:,;?: 7':. ins . ..- L A f!ood study cons1st]t]~ of HEC-2 Ca]culatloros, cr,oss sect: .'.,':s maps and other data s?~.ou l d De p -e~ared to tr, e ~=::;:;= ::or: ,:f the FeCera: Emergensz .'aHaaeme, t Agerio2 (;EMA) a:'.~ ?_~,e ~:str:ct for the purpose -; re,~sin9 the effect~/e Flood Insurance Rate Map oF the OrDject site. The subm'tta] of the stud> should be ccnsurre'~t with the · n~t~a] submltta~ of the related project ~mprcvement plans and f~na] O~str~ct appro,.,a~ w~]] net be g~ven untm] a Conditional Letter of Map Re,:s,on (CLOMR) has ceeq received from FEMA. "' COD:, c;,; appropriate correspondence permits from those government age~-:c.e5 prove7 ~ s r'equi red by Federal Corps of Engineers 404 permit or Game ~603 agreement) should be 'h;s parse] map is located with-~n the ' ,m!Ls 5f the Muf , 'eta Creek/Temecula Val !ey Area Dra~naae Plan Jr z~r~,a~e ~ees have been adopted h/ the ~,~l ~ De paid as set forth under t~,e ~rc. 'Pules and Regulations for Adff~:rllstr]Cicr'~ j; :,'-ea 2 'a '.:.~-~ P'.ans", amended February 16, ~9S8: Drainage fees shall be pa:c tc the miss~oner as part of Lbe f,]~ng for vision final map cr parcel maD, or' 'F :',e final parce~ man ~s wa~ed, dra:~:~ge ;ees she" De ca'a as a condition cf tne wa~/er or~or to %~-zate of cjmo'nance e,,oer',s.~g :h~ ,.~i:.e: ;; -~e parcel map; Dr 2qty of Temecula Pet Parcel Map 25139 Amended No, 3 -3 - july 9, 199! At the option cf :no !and zi/:ae,, ;port fni~r:g a re- _'~:~ea a;fidavlt ,equestir, g ce~erment of 'she sayr'~er~% of fees, ;he drainage fees may be pa~d tc the Bu,']'qg -"'or' :'c, :~'t asncn of the fanai conssrjct c.r'~ s; a,':ngs for %rose fac"~t,es required Lo De bui~ as part s~ Lr, e '~urr ~eta :reeP,"emecuca 7alley Area Ora:nage P!a.~, :he ce/elaper shou:c contact the P.versde 2aunt/ F]3o~ Control ~nd Water SbnSer'zat~or~ O:strlct to ~5car-talf~ t~',e terms and ' qd t:ons ~f H~ I~ construstlcr., :nspect~on, transfer of gnLE '2F ,,~a,,, ~r,3ject cfed!t in I ~eu of fees ard "eimburse- me,t s.:~ed~'e,: ,~,,c- may app~). Title reports and - _ t,- The sper should acre tr.a e%% ,rated cost Pot requireO area drainage pl &:: fac.': - t es e.ceeds the required drainage fees and :r.~ wshes :'2 ,'eGos,re credit for reimsursement :n e~sess --~ tees, tr~e faci~,t.%es wilt be constructed as a pub'~s :sn%ract. Sched~!iqg for construction of these ~,"~ De a: the discre:~on of ~he Ois%r~c:. Murketa Creek Cnanne] should De construetee ;_ropcseC project in conformonce with the Osstr Lt's a~aF"c,ec 2es%~n ,ncluding hob;tat mitigation measures required by the varlous resource agencies. in i~eu o constructing the channel !mprovements she app' cooperate in the formaticn of and par:i~ipate mechanism such as a community fac:~t~es d~str assessment distr~ct tc pay ~or t~e cos: of ~Re proposed Murrieta Cree~ Channel ~mprovements. T",e r grt: of way fcr Hurt!eta Cree~,, inc]ud:n~ :r:e =re& -ec.-ed for haD~tat m~tigatlon shoulc be deo~ca:ed ::~ t'.e 2~s::::. The r~g~: sf way needed for Hurryeta Cree~ ~hS ,~r'ea ~S 250 feet each side of the center!:ne. ncluces a ~O-foot habitat m~tigat~on str~$ on e~c!-! .~:ch w:ll De re:u-ned i~ =t :s not needed. S:ty of Tomerule Parcel Map 25139 Amended No, 3 The facilities collec:ong an:/:cnveyong flows ':u: slopes from the i~!is %o the soutpwes% s~',s~c Slopes. dated No,'emuer ~. '9}0. and attarher Pads oil this slte shall be elevated asFve t~e '1'7 year water sur~a~e e!e'~a~!s--, c'-ar-Oe ra%e Df 2~.500 sfs ~r, Mu"r~eta way snouid Be con:a~ned within drainage easemerits s':owr: 3: :"e ~r;'=l rna~. ~, r~Dte should De added tc t~e f~ ~q map stag ".~, S,'-a: a~e easements she] ! be ~,ep: ;rae .:F bu~ Id~:~gs ~;~ cbst,-uz, ti ors' CfFs'te Cra{r~age fac:l~ties snou!d be located ~':h~n dedi- cated drainage easements obtained from the arrested property c,~nes(s). Dccument(s~ should Oe recorded arc a copy submit- %ej to the C;str/ct prnsr to recordat~on of :he fnnal map. A" lots should be graded to dra~n to the adjace~r sit'set 2- an acec~ate cut]st. The 10 year storm flow should be Cor, ta~qed a!-s the 100 }ea; storm f]ow should be coata~ne: s:."eet r:Oht of way. When e~ther of :hess cr~ter:a -s e:.:eeded, adCi~ona] drainage fac:!ities 'ed. 3r'ainage facilities outletting sums cond:t~ons des gned to Cor. vey the tributary 100 year storm Adds:tonal emergency escape sr, oulc also Ue De T~,e property's street and lot grading sP, cdlC De oes'gfned :,' a manner tha~ perpetuates the e~sting nature~ dra:naG3 patterns with respect to tributary draanage area a-,c cul'e~ points. '4. An encroachment permit should be obtained fo!" ~n> wor'P or~ District facilities or with:n D~st~-ct -~2ht of ~a,. The ensroachment permit application should be ~roce~ses and approves concurrentl} with %he :mpro~ement plans. the tract is on'It ir~ phases, each phase sha'~ ...... ~ ~"'~ t~ in !~n storm #' C-ty' of Temecula Re: Parcel Nap 25139 Amended No. 3 - 5 - _ul) 9, 199! 15 21 Temporary erosion 3:,qLr3: measures shout2 be ~mp!emestec immediately foliow~r,g Cebr:s CrlLG Gownstream ~r::~Der-t:es C.f d:'a~r"age fact ' '.t:es. bevelcement cf th;s property should De socr,_~:naT. e.: ~ th t~:e strict: ;n hr',d grading. Enspectlon and maintenance of the storm drain s/stem to be ~u:.It w:tt- tb~s tract must be performea b:, e'the~' the County ':'ac}o~j~,"tar_ ~;r~ Debar truant Or the ~laog 'Sor'tr'~! D~striCt. The cOgs leer owner; must request z Jr, wr~tln9) tr:at one of :~',ese agencies accept the proposed storm dra:n system. The '-equest shoul~ note the tract number, locatjcn. and briefly decor:be the ;~ystem (3;:es and lengths). Request. to the 2~sCr~ct should be addressed to Kenneth L. Edwards, Chief Eq~e~r, Attn: Frank J. Peaits, Chief of Planns:g Division. '= t~.e D!str~c: is w~ll~ng to accept the system, a~ agree- ment between the owner and the D:stric: must be e.ecuteC. request tD ~Faw dP aR agreement must be sen: to t? the atten:;sDn cf M;chael D. Rawson. A~' =~occ cor, t:'o! faci!:ties Should be sc~st~cte3:5 ~:'5- ""st st:~'~dards. All facilities that the DiStr'C: ,~"' ~=~me ~'D~- ma:ntenance will require the pa>mert oF ~ one t:me ma~,,tenance charge equal to the "present worth' :~f ma:ntenance costs from the time of acceptance throng!-, 199~. The ~ppl icant's ef~g:neer should sontact the '~is'., :,:t' ~ P' a ' :; ec,, section to schedule a pre-des~gn meet:ng Decors %!;e en~:neer starts detailed pro3ect design. If this project will disturb f~ve or more acres of a larger project that will disturb f!,e or more ~2.~-ss will require a National Po!lutant Discr, arge El~m~nat!cn System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resc;r~es 2:2ntr'si Board. Clearance for grading or reccrdat~on w~ll given until the project has been granted a permit cr shown to be exempt. ..... n tad i n~ ..... t, c,:Dy of *~'= lmpro'vement plans, = a',cr',g w~tH, supDort~n9 hycroleg~c and ~:-,a~l ~e submitted c3 the D~str~ct v~a ]'epartment f,sr review prnm~ to rescrdat~on .%~d'q~ o~ans 5F, ou~d be appro','ed Dr ~r ' t) of Temecula Parcel Map 25139 Amended No. 3 jul:~ 3, !99' Effective July 29, 129!, De7 Drcinance 5~ sbal? se date stamped Sy %he engnneer and %c the Flaod 2ontro! D~str~ct a~ong Nu%h a ccmp'etec Con~r,:.~ ~mprovement S,Ds% Sr~ee~ and the appropr:a~.e s,'an chec~ fee, ;,a='L':-:r!s sc. rlcef,i-~g %his matter may be referred -,, s :;- -~ ~, ~,':La E 'neer~ng OHN ~.FASHUBA Civil Eng:neer RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT IN COOPERATION WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION GLEN J. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF AUGUST 27, 199L PLANNING & ENGINEERING 46-209 OASIS STREET, SUITE 405 INDIO, CA 92201 (619) 342,8886 PLANNING & ENGINEERING 3760 12TH STREET RIVERSIDE. CA 92501 (714) 275-4777 TO: CITY OF TEMECULA ATTN: RE: PLANNING DEPARTMENT PARCEL MAP 25139 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 The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 5000 GPM and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant shall be 2500 GPM for hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. Approved super fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2-2½") shall be located at each street intersection and spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction, with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to 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: "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Dept." 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. All questions regarding the meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Fire Department Planning and Engineering staff. RAYMOND H. REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner ml Laura Cabral, Fire Safety Specialist :tiVE:t)iDE COUntU. PLAnnin(; DEP, :iCmEnC July 20, 1988 (Revised November 3, 1989) Leighton and Associates 27715 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 109 Rancho California, California 92390 Attention: Mr. Mark Bergman Mr. Daniel Chu SUBJECT: Liquefaction Hazard Project No. 118602325-02 Tentative Parcel Map 25139 APN: 909-120-018 County Geologic Report No. Rancho California Area 527 Gentlemen: We have reviewed your report entitled "Phase I Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential for Parcel Map 21502, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA," dated June 23, 1988. Your report determined that the potential for liquefaction exists on the site for an earthquake of 6.0 magnitude and horizontal ground acceleration of 0.369. The site is within one mile of the Wildomar fault. The zone of liquefaction is shown on Plate 1, Geotechnical Map of your report. Your report recommended that one of the following alternatives should be considered. Placement of fill (approximately 10 feet in thickness total to an approximate elevation of 1,033 feet m.s.1} on Lots 48 through 51 ( Tentative Parcel Map 21502} to increase the overburden pressure. Based on the preliminary plans, the remaining lots identified as in the liquefiable zone will have between 15 feet to 28 feet of fill placed. This appears to be of adequate depth for mitigating the liquefaction potential. Densification of the alluvium between 20 feet to 40 feet of the subsurface cohesionless material to at least 92 percent relative compaction as determined by ASDTM D1557-78, by vibrofl otation dynamic compaction, or other techniques. 3. Placement of the structures on piles to bypass the liquefiable zone. 4. Utilizing post tensioned slabs for the proposed structures. 4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 (714) 787-6181 46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304 INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201 (619) 342-8277 Leighton and Associates 2 July 20, 1988 (Revised November 3, 1989) Alternatives I and 2 will reduce the potential for liquefaction of the cohesionless material found in borings B-4 and B-5. Alternatives 3 and 4 will not mitigate the liquefaction potential, but will allow measures for mitigation should liquefaction occur. It is our opinion that the report was prepared in a competent manner and satisfies the additional information requested under the California Environmental Quality Act review and the Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan. Final approval of the report is hereby given. We recommend that the following note be placed on the Parcel Map prior to its recordation: "County Geologic Report No. 527 was prepared for this property on June 23, 1988 by Leighton and Associates and is on file at the Riverside County Planning Department. The specific items of interest are liquefaction and seismic design of structures. These items affect Parcels 1 through 9, 18 through 40, and 46 through 53." The recommendations made in your report for mitigation of liquefaction potential shall be adhered to in the design and construction of this project. Very truly yours, RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Roger S. Streeter - Planning Director Steven A. Kupferman / ~' Engineering Geologist ~ ~/ CEG-1205 ' SAK:al c.c. Rancon Corp. Norm Lostbom - Building & Safety (2} Planning Team 1 - John Chiu :iiVE:DiDE counc PLAnnin(; DEPA:ICmEnC January 18, 1989 (Revised November 3, 1989) Leighton and Associates 27715 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 109 Rancho California, CA 92390 Attention: Mr. Mark Bergmann Mr. Daniel Chu SUBJECT: Fault Hazard-CEQA Project No. 11860325-02 Tentative Parcel Map 25139 APN: 909-120-018 County Geologic Report No. 527 F Rancho California Area Gentlemen: We have reviewed the fault hazard aspects of your report entitled "Geotechnical Report for a Phase II Fissure and Subsidence Investigation and Phase III Geotechnical Investigation for Parcel Map No. 21507, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA," dated August 29, 1988, your revised report dated November 17, 1988, and your response to County review dated November 17, 1988. Your report determined that: A previously unmapped, active branch of the E1sinore fault zone was encountered in exploratory trenches excavated on this project. This branch is tentatively being called the "Murrieta Creek Fault." Therefore, the possibility of damage due to ground rupture is high in the vicinity of this fault. The Willard Branch of the Elsinore Fault Zone transects the extreme western portion of the property in a northeasterly to southwesterly direction and was determined to be potentially active or Pre-Holocene. A peak bedrock acceleration of 0.61g could occur at the site should a magnitude 6.0 earthquake occur along the Wildomar fault, located 3200 feet northeast. 4. No landslide deposits were encountered nor are any ancient landslides known to exist at the site. 5. The eastern one-third of the site is located within the 100 year flood plain. 6. The possibility of seiches, tsunamis and inundation due to failure of large water storage facilities is considered very low. 4080 LEMON STREET, 9'r~ FLOOR RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 (714) 787'6181 46'209 OASIS STREET. ROOM 304 INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201 (619) 342-8277 Leighton and Associates - 2 - January 19, 1989 (Revised November 3, 1989) A zone of open fissuring approximately 20 feet wide was observed within the alluvium in the exploratory trenching. The potential for fissuring and ground subsidence due to ground water withdrawal is considered to be high in the vicinity of the "Murrieta Creek fault." Your report recommended that: A fault and fissure setback zone should be established along the active trace of the "Murrieta Creek fault" encountered on the site. The setback zone should be established 50 feet from the furthest limits of faulting. Within the fault setback zone, structures for human occupancy may not be constructed. The location of the fault setback zone is shown on the Geotechnical Map, Plate 1 in your November 17, 1988 report. A monitoring program has been initiated at the site to evaluate the amount of ground movement associated with subsidence and possible variations in the depth to groundwater. The readings from this monitoring program will continue to be taken on a weekly basis until such time that site construction and development precludes procutting additional data, or the readings remain substantially unchanged. Proposed structures within 200 feet of the fault setback zone should be constructed with post-tensioned floor slabs to help mitigate potential problems with ground cracking. The post-tensioned slabs should be constructed in accordance with the recommendations of a qualified structural engineer. The engineer should design the slabs to withstand a i inch differential settlement in 5 horizontal feet. In addition, all building pads within 200 feet of the fault setback zone should have a 5 foot minimum fill below the pad. All cut lots and all fill lots with less than 5 feet of fill will need to be overexcavated and recompacted to provide the 5 foot minimum. This special foundation zone is shown on the Geotechnical Maps, Plate I in your report. 4. All surface runoff should be collected and directed offsite. Uncompacted, exploratory trench backfill should be completely removed and recompacted prior to placement of fills, where exposed at the pad finished grade or within 10 feet in depth from the pad finished grade to the top of the trenches. It is our opinion that the report was prepared in a competent manner and satisfies the additional information requested under the California Environmental Quality Act review and the Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan. We recommend that the following conditions be satisfied before final recordation of the map or issuance of any County permits associated with this project: Leighton and Associates - 3 - January 19, 1989 (Revised November 3, 1989} The Recommended Fault Setback Limits shown on the Geotechnical Map, Plate 1 in the report shall be delineated on the Environmental Constraints Sheet (E.C.S.}. The areas within the Recommended Fault Setback Limits shall be labeled "FAULT HAZARD AREA." 2. The following notes be placed on the E.C.S.: (A) "This property is affected by earthquake faulting. Structures for human occupancy shall not be allowed in the Fault Hazard Area. This constraint affects parcel numbers 8, 9, 10, 18, 19, 39, 40, 46 and 47." (b) "County Geologic Report No. 527F was prepared for this property on November 17, 1988 by Leighton and Associates, and is on file at the Riverside County Planning Department. Specific items of concern are as follows: earthquake faulting, fissuring and ground subsidence, seismic design of structures, flooding, and uncompacted trench backfill." Notes 2(a) and 2(b) above shall also be placed on the final Parcel Map with the following addition to Note No. 2(a) "...as shown on the accompanying Environmental Constraints Sheet, the original of which is on file at the office of the Riverside County Surveyor." A copy of the final map and Environmental Constraints Sheet shall be submitted to the Planning Department Engineering Geologist for review and approval. The recommendations made in your report shall be adhered to in the design and construction of this project. Very truly yours, RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT R~. Str ter - Planni g Directy Engineering Geologist , CEG-1205 SAK:al c.c. Diaz Road Investors c/o Rancon Corp. Greiner Engineering - Merl Schultz Earl Hart - CDMG Building & Safety - Norm Lostbom {2) Board of Directors; James A. Darby President Jeffrey L. Minklet Sr Vice Presxdent Ralph Daily Doug Kulberg Jon A. Lundin T. C. Rowe Richard D. Steffey Officers: John F. Hennigar General Manager Phillip L. Forbes Director of Finance- Thomas R. MeAljester D~rector of 0peraBoas & Mamtenance Edward P. Lemons Dtret tor of Engxneenng Linda M. Fregoso McCormick & Kidman Legal Counsel November 20, 1989 Riverside County Planning Department 4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor Riverside, California 92501-3657 Subject: Water Availability Reference: Parcel Map 25139 Gentlemen: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District. Water service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements (including all in-tract facilities) between RCWD and the property owner. Currently, the District has an inter-agency agreement with Eastern Municipal Water District to provide sewer service to your area. All plan check submittals will be made to Rancho California Water District. Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. If you have anyquestions, please contact Senga Doherty at (714) 676-4101. Very truly yours, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon Engineering Manager F012B/jkth332f Attachment cc: Senga Doherty R A N C H O C A L I F O R N I A W A T E R D I S T R I C T 28{)61 DIAZ ROAD · POST OFFICE BOX 174 , TEMECULA. CA 92390-0174 · ~714) 676-4t01 , FAX {714~ 6764,;1' CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY Background 1. Name of Proponent: 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: Date of Environmental Assessment: 4. Agency Requiring Assessment: Name of Proposal, if applicable: Location of Proposal: Environmental Impacts (Explanations of all 1. Earth. Alba Engineering 9968 Hibert Street, San Dieqo (619) 549-3303 August 21, 1991 CITY OF TEMECULA Parcel MaD 25139 Southwest corner of Cherry Street and Diaz Road answers are provided on attached sheets.) Yes Maybe No Will the proposal result in: Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? X X X Disruptions, displacements, compac- tion or overcovering of the soil? Substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features? The destruction, covering or modi- fication of any unique geologic or physical features? X S\S\2513S.TPM 34 Any substantial increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off site? 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 simila~ 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? Yq~ Maybe No X X X X X X X X S\S~25139.TPM 35 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? 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? Ye~ Maybe No X X X X X X X X X S\S\25139.TPM 36 d. Substantial reduction in acreage Animal Life. Will the proposal result of any agricultural crop? Yes Maybe No X it1; 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? Cm Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 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? X X X X X X X X X 10. 11. 12. 13. 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? Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking? Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X X s~s~2s~ 3e.T.M 38 14. 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: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks or other recreational facilities? Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services: 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: 16. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: Power or natural gas? Communications systems? Water? Sewer or septic tanks? Storm water drainage? Solid waste and disposal? YeS Maybe No X X X X X X X X X X X X S\S\25139.TPM 39 17. 18. 19. 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 s~s~25 ~ 3S.TPM 40 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 affects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Yes Maybe N.o X X X X III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation 1.a,b,c. Yes. The project will entail 1,430,000 cubic yards of cut and 880,000 cubic yards of fill and will create 1.5:1 cut slopes up to 120 feet high. The revised Slope Stability Analysis prepared for this project states that the cut slopes will be stable against deep-seated failure, arcuate failure under seismic conditions, and surficial failure provided it is free of adverse geologic conditions. The Revised Slope Stability Analysis includes recommendations that an engineering geologist conduct geological mapping during grading to verify that the soils and geologic conditions encountered do not differ significantly from those assumed in the Slope Stability Analysis. If significant differences are encountered, buttressing may be required to stabilize the slope. Cut and fill slopes should be provided with appropriate surface drainage and landscaped as soon as possible after grading. The Tentative Map shows a brow ditch and bench drain at 30 foot intervals in the cut slope. The project will involve the export of 550,000 cubic yards of soil from the site. It shall be a Condition of Approval for Parcel Map 25139 that information regarding the number of truckloads, the haul route, the destination point, and a stockpile permit or an approved grading plan for the recipient site shall be submitted and haul route permit obtained from the City prior to issuance of grading permits. The final disposition of the export soil will be subject to environmental review in conjunction with the project which will use the export soil as fill. 1.d. No. There are no unique geologic or physical features on the site. 1.6. Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are replanted. The wind erosion impact is considered high and significant but will be mitigated through retention of natural vegetation whenever feasible, and use of watering trucks and landscaping disturbed areas after grading. After construction of the project, water run-off is likely to increase due to the addition of impermeable surfaces. Appropriate drainage control devices will have to be approved through the Engineering Department and will have to be designed in accordance with Temecula's standards and the Conditions of Approval. 1.f. No. The subject site is not located near any channel, lake or ocean that would be impacted by deposition or erosion as a result of this project. Drainage improvements and landscaping will prevent soil erosion. s\s~2s~ 3~.'r~ 42 1.g. 2.a,b,c. 3.8. 3.b. 3.c. 3.d. 3.e. 3.f,g. Yes. Portions of the site are susceptible to liquefaction and the site is traversed by an earthquake fault. Liquefaction mitigation measures were described above in item 1 b. In accordance with the requirements of state law, a restricted use zone based on the geology report is shown on the map. The restricted use zone represents a setback from the earthquake fault on the site, and no structures for human occupancy will be permitted within the restricted use zone. Groundshaking hazards to buildings outside of the restricted use zone are addressed by the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in any impacts to air quality or the climate. Subsequent development proposals will be assessed for potential impacts to air quality and mitigation measures will be required if necessary. No. The portion of the property necessary for the future construction of Murrieta Creek flood control facilities is indicated on the Tentative Parcel Map as a County Channel Easement. There will be no change in the course or direction of water in Murrieta Creek. Yes. The proposed Parcel Map will result in changes in the amount of surface run-off. Improvement of the site will provide for adequate drainage facilities as approved by the City Engineer. No. The project will result in minor, localized redirection of flood waters to the extent necessary to elevate the site above the 1 O0 year flood plain elevation, but the overall course and flow of floodwaters will not be changed. Maybe. Grading and future development of the site may increase the amount of surface run-off flowing into the Murrieta Creek channel. This is not considered a significant impact and is consistent with the provisions of the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan and Assessment District 155. Yes. Grading may result in an increase in turbidity in local surface water. This impact is temporary and is not considered significant. No. Recompaction of soil to mitigate the potential for liquefaction is not expected to result in a significant impact on the direction or rate of flow of ground waters. S\S\25139.TPM 43 3.h. 3.i. 4.a,b. 4.c. 4.d. 5.a,b. 5.c. 6.8. 6.b. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in any impact on public water supplies. No. Prior to recordation of the proposed Parcel Map, the applicant shall obtain a Letter of Map Revision form the Federal Emergency Management Agency indicating that grading of the site or other improvements adequate to ensure that the site will be above the 100 year flood plain elevation. No. A botanical survey of the site found no sensitive plant species on the site. Maybe. Landscaping of the site may introduce some non-native species. This is not considered a significant impact. No. The site is not currently used as crop land. Maybe. Three grasshopper sparrows and evidence of breeding by the Iong-eared owl were observed on the site during the biological survey of the site. Although neither species had any official status when the biology report was written, they have been listed by the Audobon Society as declining species. The recommended mitigation is to retain an intact open area on the west side of the site. T' =~ Tentative Parcel Map shows a 6.8 acre open space area on the west side of the site. Yes. The project will involve a los of grass land and chaparral which provides foraging habitat for birds, mammals, and reptiles. In regional terms the loss of foraging habitat is an incrementally adverse but non- significant impact which will be mitigated by the measures described above in section 5b. Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in increased noise levels during grading. This impact will be temporary and is not considered significan~ because the site is not near any noise sensitive land uses. No. Future development proposals will be reviewed for potential noise impacts and land uses which generate severe noise will be prohibited or required to provide adequate noise mitigation. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not cause new light or glare, and subsequent development of the site will be subject to standard conditions prohibiting lighting from impacting adjacent properties and requiring low-glare sodium rapor lights. S\S\25139,TPM 44 8. No. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zone and the land use designation in which the property is located. 9.a,b. 10.a,b. 11,12. 13.a,d. 13.b. 13.c,e. 13.f. No. The project will not involve a substantial increase in the rate of consumption of natural or non-renewable resources. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not involve the use of hazardous materials or interference with emergency response or evacuation plans. No. The proposal is not likely to alter the distribution or growth rate of the population or create a demand for new housing. Future development of the site will help address the imbalance of local jobs in relation to existing and approved housing. Yes. Future development of the site is expected to generate approximately 5, 180 vehicle trip ends per day. Via Industria is part of a western corridor bypass road which will alter present patterns of circulation. The purpose of the by pass road is to relieve congestion on existing streets. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the project determined that intersections and roadways in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended improvements are implemented, and Via Industria will help to mitigate traffic impacts on Winchester Road approaching I-15. Recommended improvements include the extension of Diaz Road to the City limits, traffic signals at the intersections of Winchester Road and Enterprise Circle, Winchester Road and Diaz Road, Via Industria and Cherry Street, Diaz Road and Winchester Road north, and "A" Street and Diaz Road. These improvements shall be Conditions of Approval. No. Future development of the site will be required to provide adequate off-street parking as appropriate for the particular land use proposed. No. The project will have no impact upon existing transportation systems or upon water, rail, or air traffic. No. The streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended street improvements are implemented. The street improvements will be Conditions of Approval for the proposed Parcel Map. Parcels fronting on Winchester Road, Diaz Road, Via Industria, and Cherry Street shall limit access to joint use driveways. S\SI25139,TPM 45 14.a.-f. 15.a,b. 16.a.-d,f. 16.e. 17.a,b. 18. 19. 20.a,b,c. No. The project will not result in a need for new public services. Future development will generate an increase in the need for public services in the areas of fire and police protection and road maintenance. Fire impact mitigation fee, the public facility fee, and taxes will fund the additional public services. No. The project will not result in a substantial use or increase in demand for fuel or other energy sources. No. Future development of the site will require only hook up to or service by existing utility systems and will not result in a need for new or substantially altered utility systems. Yes. The proposed Parcel Maps will involve the construction of the Murrieta Creek channel through the site. The construction of channel improvements will be in compliance with the recommendations of the County Flood Control District and will be provided by the developer or by the developer's participation in an assessment district. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in any potential health hazards. Future development will be assessed for potential health hazards. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in the obstruction of any scenic views. Future development will be reviewed in order to prevent the construction of aesthetically offensive structures or site lay outs. Cut slopes will be landscaped as soon as possible after grading. No. The site is not currently usecl for recreational purposes. Maybe. The site of Parcel Map 25139 contains a recorded archaeological site (CA-RIV-237) which is believed to encompass approximately 70,000 square meters, part of which is out site of the subject property. During an archaeological surface survey of the site conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of basalt and quartz debitage, fragmented manos and metares, fire-affected rocks, pestles, hammerstones, and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed. The recommendations of the Archaeological Assessment are to conduct a surface collection of the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and significance of the site. The resulting information shall be used to determine whether the site is a unique resource for the area and whether measures to preserve the site or salvage some percentage of the cultural resources should be implemented. The Archaeological Assessment also 20.d. 21 .a. 21 .b,c. 21 .d. includes the recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted for any future grading activities. These recommendations shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 25139. In addition, a Native American representative shall be present during the archaeological excavation and also during grading. The property in question also contains another site (WSP-1) which contain a 3/4 circle rock enclosure. The site is possibly a late period campsite. A 100% surface collection, mapping, soils testing, and subsurface testing by excavating 8-10 cubic meters of earth are recommended. In this case, testing procedures are likely to constitute final mitigation. No. The site is not used for any religious or sacred purposes. No. Although the project will result in a reduction or foraging habitat, this impact is not considered regionally significant. The 6.8 acres of undisturbed open space on the westerly side of the site for potential biological impacts due to reduction of foraging habitat. No. The long term and cumulative traffic impacts of the project will be adequately mitigated by the street improvements recommended by the traffic study which are Conditions of Approval for the proposed Parcel Map. Streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not create any health hazards. Environmental review of future development of the site will address any potential health hazards and mitigations, if necessary, will be required. s~s\2s ~ 39.TPM 47 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. X I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date For CITY OF TEMECULA S\S\2513S.TPM 48 // CITY OF TEMECULA ) ee ,. ..SITE · \. VICINITY MAP /- CASE NO. T~,"-% ~-~ ~'~'~ P.C. DATE :~/'~/'~I CITY OF TEMECULA ~ ,LI RLI SWAP MAP /~ CITY OF TEMECULA ~ ,_ / ZONE MAP CASE NO. C.C. DATE ITEM # 12 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 7, 1991 Case No.: Parcel Map 25408 Prepared By: Scott Wright Recommendation: 1. 2. ADOPT the negative declaration; and ADOPT Resolution 91 - recommending approval of Parcel Map No. 25408 APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Phillip T. See REPRESENTATIVE: Greiner, Inc. PROPOSAL: To create 20 parcels and a 6.52 acre open space area on a 36.2 acre site in the Manufacturing-Service Commercial Zone LOCATION: West of Diaz Road, and southwesterly of the future extension of Winchester Road EXISTING ZONING: Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-SC) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: South: East: West: Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M- SC) Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M- SC) Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M- SC) Residential Agriculture, 20 acre minimum (R-A-20) PROPOSED ZONING: Not requested EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant S\Staffrpt\25408 ,PM SURROUNDING LAND USES: PROJECT STATISTICS: BACKGROUND: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ANALYSIS: North: Vacant South: Vacant East: Vacant West: Vacant Gross Site Area: Net Site Area: No. of Parcels: Average Parcel Size: Area of Open Space: Cut = Fill = 36.21 acres 23.68 acres 20 1.18 acres 6.52 acres 1,800,000 cubic yards 500,000 cubic yards Tentative Parcel Map 25408 was submitted to the County on November 14, 1989. The application was reviewed by the County Land Development Committee on December 12, 1989 and was continued pending submittal of the following information: a traffic study, biological and paleontological surveys, soil and liquefaction reports, a slope stability report, and a Planned Industrial Development design manual. Parcel Map 25408 was transmitted to the City on May 1, 1990. City staff requested a traffic study and information regarding property boundaries, the alignment of Winchester Road, slope stability, soil export, archaeological resources, and landscape and architecture standards. The proposal is to create 20 parcels ranging in size from 0.95 acre to 1.39 acres with a total gross area of 36.21 acres. The site is zoned M-SC, Manufacturing - Service Commercial. A 6.52 acre area located in the southwesterly portion of the site will be maintained as an open space area comprising some undisturbed land and some 1.5: 1 cut slopes 80 to 100 feet in height. Grading The project will involve 1,800,000 cubic yards of cut, 500,000 cubic yards of fill and 1,300,000 cubic yards of soil export. The Engineering Department S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 2 Conditions of Approval include the requirement to obtain a haul route permit and provide information regarding truck loads, the proposed haul route, destination site and stockpile permits and/or approved grading plan at the recipient site with the property owner's permission. These requirements shall be satisfied prior to issuance of grading permits. Staff has concerns relative to grading on this site. However, with the absence of policy relative to grading, Staff's recommendation is to condition the map in such a way as to mitigate, the greatest extent possible, grading impacts of this project. Mitigation measures relative to grading are contained in the project Conditions of Approval. With respect to this issue, the City's General Plan effort will most likely include policies relative to grading. Slope Stability The cut slopes at the southwesterly side of the site are indicated on the tentative map with slope ratios of 1.5:1. The revised slope stability analysis prepared for this project states that the cut slopes will be stable under normal and seismic conditions, provided it is free of adverse geologic conditions. The revised slope stability analysis included recommendations that an engineering geologist conduct geological mapping during grading to verify that the soils and geologic conditions encountered do not differ significantly from those assumed in the slope stability analysis. If significant differences are encountered, buttressing may be required to stabilize the slope. Cut and fill slopes should be provided with appropriate surface drainage and landscaped as soon as possible after grading. The Tentative Map shows a brow ditch and bench drain at 30 foot intervals in the cut slope. The recommendations of the slope stability analysis are Conditions of Approval for the Tentative Parcel Map S\Steffrpt\25408 .PM 3 Traffic and Circulation Future development of the site is expected to generate 1,730 vehicle trip ends per day. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the project determined that projected future traffic based on existing traffic, project generated traffic, and traffic generated by other growth in the area will result in a peak hour level of Service D or better at all intersections within the scope of the traffic study if recommended improvements are implemented. The recommendations include contributing to the extension of Diaz Road, providing traffic signals at certain intersections and contributing to the signalization of other intersections, providing a signing and striping plan, and contributing to the construction of the Overland overcrossing and the restriping Winchester Road to six lanes. These improvements are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval. Additionally, this project, along with PM 25139, will be constructing the first portion of the western bypass corridor from the City's northerly boundary at Douglas Avenue. This portion of the proposed alignment of the corridor has been reviewed and approved by the City's Department of Public Works and found acceptable. Access Access to the site will be taken from Winchester Road and Via Industria. All proposed parcels will have frontage on and take access from dedicated streets. Parcels fronting Via Industria shall limit access to joint use access driveways as approved by the Department of Public Works. S\Staffrpt~2S4OB.PM 4 Parcel Size and Dimensions Development standards in the M-SC zone require a minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet and an average width of at least 65 feet where sewers are available and will be utilized. The proposed parcels range from 0.95 acre to 1.41 acres and have average lot widths of over 100 feet. Drainage The site is located within the limits of the Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan and drainage fees shall be paid. All lots shall be graded to drain to the street or an adequate outlet as approved by the City Engineer. Drainage facilities must be designed to covey 1 O0 year storm flows, including 100 year storm runoff tributary to the site, to Murrieta Creek. Street and lot grading will perpetuate existing natural drainage patterns. Evidence of a viable drainage facility maintenance mechanism must be submitted to the County Flood Control District prior to final map recordation. Fossil and Cultural Resources The archaeological assessment states that the site has low potential to be a small food processing site which could address limited archaeological research questions and recommends a 100% surface collection, soils testing, subsurface testing and mapping and 3 to 5 cubic meters of excavation. The site is located on the fossiliferous Pauba Formation. In accordance with the recommendation of the San Bernardino County Museum, the subdivider shall retain a paleontologist to provide monitoring during excavation as well as recovery, reporting, and preservation of specimens found during grading. S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM 5 Biological ImPacts The project will result in loss of grassland and chaparral which typically provides foraging habitat for raptors, sparrows, rabbits, gophers, ground squirrels and reptiles, The only sensitive vertebrate observed during the biological survey was a golden eagle. The biologist recommended that a portion of the site abutting the up slope chaparral be maintained in a natural state in order to preserve some foraging habitat. Part of the open space slope at the southwesterly side of the site will be maintained in a natural condition. Although the Biological Survey of the site failed to disclose the presence or signs of Stephens Kangaroo Rats, the Conditions of Approval require the developer to submit a report by a certified Stephens Kangaroo Rat Specialist prior to issuance of grading permits. If any Stephens Kangaroo rats inhabit the site, a l O(a) permit for incidental take must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits. The only plant specimen on the site worthy of note in the biological report is an adolescent Engelmann oak. The oak tree shall be preserved, relocated or replaced at a 10 to 1 ratio or as approved by the Planning Director. Landscape and Architectural Standards The applicant has provided a set of landscape and architectural standards to ensure that development of the site maintains a consistent level of quality. Conformity with the landscape and architectural standards will be required of all future development on the site. The landscape and architectural standards shall be incorporated by reference into the project's Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions. S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM 6 SOUTHWEST AREA PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY: Water and Sewer Availability The Rancho California Water District has an interagency agreement with the Eastern Municipal Water District to provide sewer service to the area in which the site is located. Water and sewer service will be available from the Rancho California Water District upon completion of financial arrangements between the property owner and the District. Lot Line Adiustments and Street Realignments The formation of Assessment District 155 included a realignment of the right of way for the future extension of Winchester Road west of Diaz Road. Since the centerline of the right of way constituted the boundary between properties, the realignment resulted in changes to property boundaries. The subject parcel map was affected by a realignment of Winchester Road. In order to prevent discrepancies in the legal descriptions of the property at the time of recordation, staff has required that the applicant and other affected property owners eliminate the discrepancies by filing lot line adjustments, street vacations, and offers of rededication reflecting the new alignment of Winchester Road and the resulting changes in property boundaries. These requirements must be met prior to final map recordation. The proposed parcels conform to the development standards of the M-SC Zone. The M-SC Zone is consistent with the Light Industrial Land Use Designation in which the site is located. There is a reasonable probability that the project will be consistent with the Future General Plan in that the project is consistent with existing development and approved subdivisions in the area. S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 7 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: FINDINGS: The Initial Study prepared for Parcel Map 25408 indicates that the project will not result in any environmental impacts which cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance and a Negative Declaration in recommended. The proposed parcel map will not have a 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 Future General Plan being prepared at this time in that the proposed commercial-industrial subdivision is consistent with the Swap Light Industrial Land Use Designation, the Manufacturing-Service Zone and existing land uses in the vicinity. 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 in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivisions in the vicinity. The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project conforms to the current zoning for the site and to Ordinance No. 460, Schedule 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. S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM 8 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 10. 11. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as determined in the Initial Study prepared for this project. The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future passive energy control opportunities in that all parcels have adequate southern exposure. All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic. 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. The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. These findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the following recommendation to the City Council: 1. Adopt the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map 25408; and Adopt Resolution 91- approving Parcel Map 25408 based on the finding contained herein and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. S\staffrpt\25408.PM 9 vgw Attachments: 2. 3. 4. Resolution Conditions of Approval Environmental Assessment Exhibits A. Vicinity Map B. SWAP Map C. Zoning Map D. Tentative Parcel Map 25408 S\Steffrpt\2S408.PM 10 RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 25408 TO SUBDIVIDE A 36.21 ACRE PARCEL INTO 20 PARCELS AND A 6.52 ACRE OPEN SPACE AREA LOCATED WEST OF DIAZ ROAD SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-120-026 WHEREAS, Phillip T. See filed Tentative Parcel Map No. 25408 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Tentative Parcel Map application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tentative Parcel Map on October 7, 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 Tentative 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. S\Staffrpt\25408,PM 11 (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. (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 Tentative 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 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 Tentative Parcel Map No. 25408 proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 12 (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 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are made: a) That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. b) That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. c) That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of development. d) That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the proposed density of the development. e) That the design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. f) That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. g) That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. A land division may be approved if it is found that S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 13 alternate easements for access or for use will be provided and that they will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction. (2) The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to wit: a) The proposed parcel map will not have a 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 Future General Plan being prepared at this time in that the proposed commercial-industrial subdivision is consistent with the Swap Light Industrial Land Use Designation, the Manufacturing-Service Zone and existing land uses in the vicinity. 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 in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivisions in the vicinity. The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project conforms to the current zoning for the site and to Ordinance No. 460, Schedule 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. S\Staffrpt\25408,PM 14 The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as determined in the Initial Study prepared for this project. The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future passive energy control opportunities in that all parcels have adequate southern exposure. All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic. 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. The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. These findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this applications and herein incorporated by reference. E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Tentative Parcel Map 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. S\Staffrpt%25408.PM 15 SECTION 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 25408 for the subdivision of a 36.2 acre parcel into 20 parcels and a 6.52 acre open space area located west of Diaz Road, and southwesterly of the future extension of Winchester Road and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 909-120-026 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. SECTION 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of October, 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 7th day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 16 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tentative Parcel Map No. 25408 Project Description: To create 20 parcels and a 6.52 acre open space area on a 36.2 acre site Assessor's Parcel No.: 909-120-026 Planninq Department The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule E, 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 460. The expiration date is Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the parcel map boundary to a City maintained road. 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. m 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. Subdivision phasing, including any proposed common open space area improvement phasing, if applicable, shall be subject to Planning Department approval. Any proposed phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular access to all lots in each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and purpose of the subdivision approval. S\Steffrpt\25408,PM 17 8. 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: 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. a. 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. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated March 21, 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 May 1, 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 460, 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 August 27, 1991, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the San Bernardino County Museum transmittal dated December 11, 1989, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the County Geologists letter of April 12, 1990. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho Water District transmittal dated November 14, 1989, a copy of which is attached. 16. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following: Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the development standards of the M-S-C 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, as soon as possible after grading. S\Steffrpt\25408.PM 18 17. 18. 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 recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the City Engineer. 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. 19. The following notes shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet: 20. "This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory outdoor lighting policy as outlined in the Southwest Area Plan. "Archaeological and paleontological monitoring of grading is required, and summary reports shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits. A CA-RIV number shall be assigned and shown on the environmental constraints sheet." Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: (1) Prior to the issuance of grading permits detailed common open space area landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval for the phase of development in process. The plans shall be certified by a landscape architect, and shall provide for the following: Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all landscaped areas requiring irrigation. Parkways shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or a transition into the primary use area of the site. Landscape elements shall include earth berming, ground cover, shrubs and specimen trees. Front yards shall be landscaped and street trees planted. Cm Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent trees at key visual focal points within the project. S\Staffrpt\25409,PM 19 Where street trees cannot be planted within right-of-way of interior streets and project parkways due to insufficient road right- of-way, they shall be planted outside of the road right-of-way. Landscaping plans shall incorporate native and drought tolerant plants where appropriate. All existing specimen trees and significant rock outcroppings on the subject property shall be shown on the project's grading plans and shall note those to be removed, relocated and/or retained. All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow growing trees shall be steel staked. Any oak trees removed with four (4) inches or larger trunk diameters shall be replaced on a ten (10) to one (1) basis as approved by the Planning Director. Replacement tress shall be noted on approved landscaping plans. If the project is to be phased, prior to the approval of grading permits, an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for approval. The plan shall be used as a guideline for subsequent detailed grading plans for individual phases of development and shall include the following: Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and sedimentation during and after the grading process. Cut slopes shall be landscaped as soon as possible after grading. Approximate time frames for grading and identification of areas which may be graded during the higher probability rain months of January through March. 3. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations. 4. Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase. 21. 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. A paleontologist shall be present to monitor grading operations. When necessary, the paleontologist or representative shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of fossils. $\Staffrpt\25408,PM 20 22. Prior to the issuance of grading permits a qualified archaeologist shall conduct a 100% surface collection of archaeological site WSP-2, soils testing, subsurface testing and mapping, and 3 to 5 cubic meters of excavation in order to determine the extent and significant of the site and whether further testing and/or collection is warranted. A report of findings shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of grading permits. A CA-RIV number shall be assigned to the site and shown on the environmental constraints sheet. 23. Prior to issuance of grading permits a certified stephens kangaroo rat biologist shall ascertain if stephens kangaroo rats inhabit the site and shall submit a report to the Planning Department. If any stephens kangaroo rats are found, a 10(a) permit for incidental take must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits. 24. Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval. The plans shall address all areas and aspects the tract requiring landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to, parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front yard landscaping. Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from view of surrounding property. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of twenty five (25) feet with at least 10 feet landscaped. Archaeological and paleontological summary reports shall be submitted to the Planning Department delineating cultural or fossil resources encountered during grading, recovery procedures and an inventory of recovered items, and a statement of their scientific significance. 25. Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with approved plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. If seasonal conditions do not permit planting, interim landscaping and erosion control measures shall be utilized as approved by the Planning Director and the Director of Building and Safety. Not withstanding the preceding conditions, wherever an acoustical study is required for noise attenuation purposes, the heights of all required walls shall be determined by the acoustical study where applicable. S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM 2 1 26. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Mitigation 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. 27. 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. 25408, which action is brought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. 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. 28. 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. Electrical lines rated 33 kv or greater shall be exempted from the requirement to be installed underground. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements: 29. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's shall be subject to the following conditions: a. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense. The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Planning, City Engineer and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents. S\Steffrpt\25408.PM 22 The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with the final map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City. The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas and facilities. The landscape and architecture standards shall be incorporated by reference into the CC&R's. The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. The declaration shall contain language prohibiting further subdivision of any lots, whether they are lettered lots or numbered lots. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by homeowner's association or other means acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to the Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to issuance of building permits. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. 30. No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group, or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 23 changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City of Provisions required by the City as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. 31. 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 (91,250.00) 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). Deoartment of Public Works The following are the Department of Public Works 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 appropriate staff person of the Department of Public Works. It is understood that the Developer has correctly shown on the tentative map all existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review. PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 32. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, 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; Department of Public Works; Riverside County Health Department; CATV Franchise; and Parks and Recreation Department. S\$taffrpt\25408.PM 24 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39, 40. 41. 42. 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 Department of Public Works. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Prior to recordation all appropriate Lot Line Adjustments and Street Vacations shall be processed and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. Via Industria shall be improved with 64 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right- of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 102, (88'/64'). Calle Consumidor shall be improved with 56 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 111, (78'/56'). Winchester Road shall be improved with 38 feet of half street improvement plus one 12 foot lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within a 64 foot dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 101, (100'/76'). Parcels 1, 5, 6 and 11 shall take access from Calle Consumidor. Parcels fronting Via Industria shall limit access to joint use access driveways as approved by the Department of Public Works. If construction is to be phased, the landowner/developer shall acquire sufficient public offsite rights-of-way to provide for secondary access road(s) to a paved and maintained road as may be needed. Said access road(s) shall be constructed in accordance with County Standard No. 106, Section B, (32'/60') at a grade and alignment approved by the Department of Public Works. In the event road or off-site right-of-way 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 developer's cost pursuant to Government Code Section 66462.5, which shall be at no cost to the City. S\staffrpt%25408.PM 25 43. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and so noted on the final map with the exception of one driveway opening as shown on the Tentative Map and public street intersections as approved by the Department of Public Works. 44. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. 45. Where applicable, an easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to approval of the Final Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. 46. Private drainage easements for cross lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated or noticed on the final map. Provisions shall also be made to provide for maintenance of all onsite drainage facilities as directed by the Department of Public Works. 47. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, 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 Department of Public Works. 48. 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 limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate. b. Storm drain facilities. c. Landscaping (street and parks). d. Sewer and domestic water systems. e. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. f. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. The street design, grading and improvement concept of this project shall be coordinated with Assessment District 155 and adjoining developments. 50. Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in accordance with the requirements of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the Department of Public Works. S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 26 51. Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department of Public Works 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. 52. Street names shall be subject to the approval of the Building and Safety Department. 53. The minimum centerline radii shall be 500 feet or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 54. All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 55. 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 Department of Public Works. 56. A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent. 57. All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards and shall be shown on the street improvement plans in accordance with County Standard 400 and 401 (curb sidewalk). 58. The subdivider shall submit two (2) prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the Department of Public Works. 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 24" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil Engineer. 59. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. 60. The subdivider shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report to the Department of Public Works. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. 61. A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the Department of Public Works. 62. On-site drainage facilities, located outside of road right-of-way, shall be contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating "Drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions." S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM 2 7 63. A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the recorded drainage easement shall be submitted to the City for review prior to the recordation of the final map. 64. A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control District for review. 65. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 66. 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. 67. Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of street improvements. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 68. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works. 69. A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of- way. 70. 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. 71. All Conditions of Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District letter dated May 1, 1990, shall be complied with. 72. During grading the slope should be geologically mapped by an Engineering Geologist to verify that the soils and geologic conditions encountered do not differ significantly from those assumed in the slope stability report prepared by Leighton and Associates March 8, 1990. If geologic conditions differ from those assumed, buttressing may be required to stabilize the slope. S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 28 PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT: 73. A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works 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. 74. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. 75. 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. The fee to be paid shall be 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. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer shall post security to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the security shall be ~ 2.00 per square foot, not to exceed ~ 10,000. 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). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; orovided that developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY: 76. Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on all interior public streets. 77. Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Traffic control plans shall be provided as directed by the Department of Public Works, and may be required to be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. 78. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 14 days following placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 29 Transportation Engineering PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 79. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works and shall be included in the street improvement plans. 80. Plans for traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of Winchester Road at Calle Consumidor and Via Industria at Calle Consumidor, and shall be included in the street improvement plans with the second plan check submittal. 81. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering for the design requirements. 82. The developer shall execute a Reimbursement Agreement for the design and construction of traffic signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz Road, Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle East. The percent of costs and the warrants for these signals shall be as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to recordation. 83. The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with the City of Temecula to contribute a pro-rata share to the construction of the extension of Diaz Road to Washington Street/Rancon Center Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland overcrossing, Winchester Road restriping to six lanes, and the western bypass corridor as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to recordation. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS: 84. 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 Department of Public Works. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS: 85. All traffic signals, signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan and as directed by the Department of Public Works per the approved focused traffic analysis. S\Staffrpt~25408,PM 30 86. All landscaping installation within corner cutoff areas at all intersections and adjacent to all driveways shall provide for adequate site distance. 87. Stop signs shall be installed within the project boundary at the intersection of local streets. S~Staffrpt\25408.PM 3 1 r n: IX ERSIDE O( NTY < DEPA RTM ENT a. " ~ec~oso~i~. 4065 COUNTY CIRCLE DRIVE~ ~.s~ .~,...~. R I VERS I DE COUNTY PLANN I NG DEPT. JNFANNING RS'MRA 40~0 Lemon Street s,~,:,,,. ~,v¢,s ATTN: John Ch i u RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANN)NG DFPARTMENi RE: Parcel Map 25408: Parcel I of Parcel MaD 6861. as shown by mad on file In book 30. Paoe 75 and 76. of Parcel Maps. records of Riverside. CA (23 lots) Dear Gentlemen: 3055RAMSEYSTREET The Department of Public Health has reviewed Parcel MaD BANNING' CA eg220 25400 . and recommends that: CAI& ILANCA 7240 MARGUERITA RIVERSIDE, CA 92504 A water system shall be Installed accordzna to mlans and sDecificatlon as aDDroved bY the water comPanY and the Health Department. Permanent Drlnts of the Plans of the water system shall be submitted in tF1Dllcate. with a minimum scale not less than one inch eauals 200 feet. alona with the orlalnal drawln~ to the County Surveyor. The Drlnts shall show the internal D1De diameter. location of valves and fire hydrants: D1oe and lolnt specifications. and the size of the main at the ~unct~on of the new system to the exlstln~ system. The plans shall comDlv resDects with Dlv. 5. Part l. ChaDter 7 of the California Health and Safety Code. California Administrative Code. Title 22. ChaDter 16. and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Comm~sslon of the State of Callfornxa. when applicable. The Dlans shall be sloned bv a reolstered enolneer and water CO~D~V with the followlnQ certification: "I certlfv that the design of the water system in Parcel MaD 25400 15 in accordance with the water system exDanslon plans of Pancho California Water District and that the water service. storaoe and distribution system will be adecruate to provide water service to such parcel. RIverside County Plannln~ Dept. PaGe Two ATTN: John Chlu March 21. 1990 This certification does not constitute a Guarantee that it will SUDDIV water to such parcel mad at any speclflc quantities, flows or pressures for fire protection or any OtheF purpose", This certification shall be signed by a responsible official of the water companY, The~aDSmuSt~ sUbm!~ ~o~he CQuD~,~ This subdivision has a statement from Rancho California Water D~strict aGreeln~ to serve domestic water to each and eveFV lot in the subdivision on demand Drovldln~ sat~sfactorv financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider, It will be necessary for financial arranoements to be made Drlor to the recordatlon of the final map. This subdivision Is within the Rancho California Water D~strict and shall be connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed according to plans and soeclflcatlons as aDDroved by the District, the County Surveyor and the Health DeDartment. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate. alono with the orl~lnai drawing. to the County Surveyor. The prints shall show the internal Dlpe diameter. location of manholes. comDlete profiles. D1De and ~o~nt specifications and the size of the sewers at the ~unctlon of the new system to the existin~ system. A s~nGle plat lndicating location of sewer lines and water lines shall be a oortlon of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be sl~ned bv a FeGlSteFed engineer and the sewer district with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the sewer system in Farcel MaD 25408 is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water E'rstFIct and that the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed parcel maD." RIverside County Planning Paoe Three ATTN: John Chlu Ma~ch 21. 1990 Dept. tt w~ll be necessary for financial arranoements to be comDletelv f~nal~zed Prior to recordat~on of the f~nal maD. Sincerely. Environmental Health Services SM:wdl KENNETH L EDWARD5 CHIEF ENGINEER 1995 MARKET STREET P.O. BOX 1033 TELEPHONE (714} 787'2015 FAX NO. (714) 788-9965 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92502 May 1, 1990 Riverside County Planning Department County Administrative Center Riverside, California Attention: Regional Team No. 5 John Chiu Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: Parcel Map 25408 Amended No. 1 This is a proposal to divide 40 acres for manufacturing and com- mercial use in the Murrieta area. The site is located on the northwest corner of Winchester Road and Calle Consumidor. The site lies at the base of steep hills. Several natural water- courses are tributary to the southwest property line. The developer proposes to collect offsite flows tributary to Lot 8 in a storm drain. The storm drain as proposed would need to be con- structed to Murrieta Creek by this development or by Assessment District 155. Storm flows tributary to Lot 6 and Lot 7 would be collected in storm drains and outletted to the street. This conflicts with the approved Assessment District 155 storm drain plans which would convey the offsite runoff to the storm drain in Calle Consumidor. The assessment district plans will need to be amen- ded to reflect this map. A storm drain in Winchester Road would collect the street flows and outlet to Murrieta Creek. Grading shown on the tentative map would require a considerable amount of offsite grading on adjacent properties. The grading proposed does not agree with the approved Assessment District 155 plans. Following are the District's recommendations: This parcel map is located within the limits of the Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been adopted by the Board. Drainage fees shall be paid ~s set forth under the provi- sions of the "Rules and Regulations for Administration of Area Drainage Plans", amended February 16, 1988: Drainage fees shall be paid to the Transportation 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 Riverside County Planning Department Re: Parcel Map 25408 Amended No. 1 -2- May 1, 1990 At the option of the land divider, upon filing a re- quired affidavit requesting deferment of the payment of fees, the drainage fees may be paid to the Build- ing Director at the time of issuance of a grading permit or building permit for each approved parcel, whichever may be first obtained after the recording of the subdivision final map or parcel map; provided however, this option to defer the fees may not be exercised for any parcel where grading or structures have been initiated on the parcel within the prior 3 year period, or permits for either activity have been issued on that parcel which remain active. Provisions should be made to collect the 100 year offsite runoff tributary to the site and, with onsite runoff, safely convey it to Murrieta Creek. This should be done by either this development or by amended Assessment District 155. Evidence of a viable maintenance mechanism should be submitted to the District and County for review and approval prior to recordation of the final map. In this case, this will probably be a property owners association. The property's street and lot grading should be designed in a manner that perpetuates the existing natural drainage patterns with respect to tributary drainage area, outlet points and outlet conditions, otherwise, a drainage easement should be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or di- verted storm flows. A copy of the recorded drainage easement should be submitted to the District for review prior to the recordation of the final map. Temporary erosion control measures should be implemented immediately following rough grading to prevent deposition of debris onto downstream properties or drainage facilities. Drainage facilities outletting sump conditions should be designed to convey the tributary 100 year storm flows. Additional emergency escape should also be provided. The 10 year storm flow should be contained within the curb and the 100 year storm flow should be contained within the street right of way. When either of these criteria is exceeded, additional drainage facilities should be installed. Riverside County Planning Department Re: Parcel Map 25408 Amended No. 1 -3- May 1, 1990 8. All lots should be graded to drain to the adjacent street or an adequate outlet. Offsite drainage facilities should be located within dedicated drainage easements obtained from the affected property owners. The documents should be recorded and a copy submitted to the District prior to recordation of the final map. 10. Onsite drainage facilities located outside of road right of way should be contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note should be added to the final map stating, "Drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions" 11. A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic cal- culations should be submitted to the District via the Transportation Department for review and approval prior to recordation of the final map. Grading plans should be approved prior to issuance of grading permits. Questions concerning this matter may be referred to Kris Flanigan of this office at 714/787-2333. c: Greiner Engineering ~er~oHiu~s ' · ' ~ Civil Engineer~ OH KF:pln 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 AUC, UgT 27, 19ql PLANNING & ENGINEERING 3760 12TH STREET RIVERSIDE, CA 92501 (714) 275-4777 TO: ATTN: RE: CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT PARCEL MAP 25408 - 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 The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 5000 GPM and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant shall be 2500 GPM for 2 hours duration at 20 PSI.residual operating pressure. Approved super fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2½"x2~") shall be located at each street intersection and spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction, with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. 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. 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 RiVERSiDE count.u iq.&nnin( DEP,, R;mEn TO: Assessor i!f ~ ~i~Commissioner Turner Building and Safety - Land Us~3~ ~iTemecula Town Association Building and Safety - Grading Temecula Chamber of Commerce Surveyor - Ken Teich DEC 1 Z~ 198'~ San Bernardino Museum Road Department Health - Ralph Luchs {~!VERS2DE CjUNTY Fire Protection :N.b'F~!~ P~PARFMENT Flood Control District Fish & Game U.S. Postal Service - Ruth E. Davidson U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services County Superintendent of Schools Rancho California Water District Southern California Edison - Doug Davies Southern California Gas Temecula Union School District Elsinore Union High School District UCR - ARU Community Plans PARCEL MAP 25408 - (Tm 51 - E.A. 34500 - Philip T. See - Gretnter, Inc., Merle G. Schulze - Temecula/Rancho California Area - First Supervisorial District - S of Cherry St., W of Murrieta Creek - M-SC Zone 34.94 Acres into 23 commercial/industrial lots - Schedule E - No Waiver - Mod 119 - A.P. 909-120-026 Please review the case described above, along with the attar, led case map. A Land Division Committee meetj~9 l~a.s .beeO tentatively scheduled ~for December 14, 1989. If it clears, it will then go to pUblic hearing. Your comments and recommendatil)ns are reqOested prior tO December 14, 1989 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 John Chiu at 787-6356. Planner COttMENTS: The parcel is located on the fossiliferous Pauba Formation. Construction excavation will impact nonrenewable paleontologic resources. The developer must retain a qualified vertebrate paleontologist to develop a program to mitigate impacts to paieontologic resources. This program should include: (1) monitoring of excavation by a qualified paleontologic monitor; (2) preparation of recovered specimens, including sediment processing for small vertebrate fossils; (3) curation of specimens into an established repository; and (4) a report of findings with A>t ete specimen Dr. Allan D. Griesemer~ Museums Director 4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 (714) 787'6181 46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304 INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201 (619) 342-8277 INTER-DEPARTMENTAL I, ETTER COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: April 12, 1990 TO: Devin Strand - Team 5 FROM: Steve A. Kupferman - Engineering Geologis RE: Tentative Parcel Map 25408 Slope Stability Report No. 230 The following report has been reviewed relative to slope stability at the subject site: "GeotechnicalAnalysis of Slope Stability, Tentative Parcel Map No. 25408, ±40 Acre Site, Proposed Industrial/Commercial Development, Winchester Road, Temecula, Riverside County, CA," by Leighton and Associates, dated March 8, 1990, and Response to County Review Letter, by Leighton and Associates, dated April 5, 1990. This report determined that: 1. Cut and fill slopes are planned at 2:1 (horizontal: vertical) with maximum heights of 20 and 80 feet, respectively. 2. Fill and fill-over-cut slopes will be stable against both deep-seated failure and su~ficial failure. Proposed cut slopes will expose fanglomerate facies of the Pauba formation. 4. Proposed cut slopes should be grossly and surficially stable under both static and seismic conditions. This report recommended that: Cut slopes shall be mapped by an engineering geologist during grading to verify the soil and geologic conditions. Cut and fill slopes shall be provided with appropriate surface drainage features and landscaped with drought-tolerant vegetation as soon as possible after grading. Berms shall be provided at the top of fill slopes and brow ditches shall be constructed at the top of cut slopes. 4. Lot drainage shall be directed such that surface runoff on the slope face is minimized. The outer portion of fill slopes shall be either overbuilt by 2 feet (minimum) and trimmed back to the finished slope or compacted in increments of 5 feet (maximum) by a sheepsfoot roller as the fill is placed and then trackwalked to achieve the final configuration. This report satisfies the General Plan requirement for a slope stability report. The recommendations made in this report shall be adhered to in the design and construction of this project. SAK:kcb Wa r Board of Directors: James A. Darby President Jeffrey L. Minktar St. Vice President Ralph Daily Doug Kulberg Jon A. Lundin T. C. Rowe Richard D. Steffey Officers: John F. Hennigar General Manager Phillip L Forbes Director of Finance- Thomas R. McAliester Director of Operations & Maintenance Edward P. Lemons Director of Engineering Linda M. Fregoso McCormick & Kidman November 14, 1989 Riverside County Division of Environmental Health Land Use Section Post Office Box 1370 Riverside, California 92502 Subject: Water and Sewer Availability Re: Parcel No. 25408 Gentlemen;, Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District. Water and sewer service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. Currently, the District has an inter-agency agreement with Eastern Municipal Water District to provide sewer service to your area. All plan check submittals will be made to Rancho California Water District. Water availability would be contingent Upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. If RCWD can be of further service to you, please contact Senga Doherty at (714) 576-4101. Very truly yours, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT /e'~/Steve Brannon, P.E. Engineering Manager 'SB:jkm227 cc: Senga Doherty R A N C H O C A L I F 0 R N I A W A T E R D I S T R I C T 28061 DIAZ ROAD · POST OFFICE BOX 174 o TEMECUI,A. CA 92:t9o-0174 · (714) 676-4101 · FAX {714) 676-0Gli'~ CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY Background 1. Name of Proponent: Greiner Engineering Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 28481 Rancho California Road #101 Temecula, CA 92591 (714) 676-8277 Date of Environmental Assessment: August 21, 1991 4. Agency Requiring Assessment: CITY OF TEMECULA Name of Proposal, if applicable: Parcel MaD 25408 Location of Proposal: SouthwesterIv of the future extension of Winchester Road 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 X X Disruptions, displacements, compac- tion or overcovering of the soil? Substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features? The destruction, covering or modi- fication of any unique geologic or physical features? X S\Steffrpt\25408,PM 32 Any substantial increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off site? 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? Cm Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X S\Steffrpt\25408.PM 33 Plant a. 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? 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? 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? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 3~t 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? Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? Exposure of people to severe noise levels7 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? Yes MaVbe No X X X X X X X X X X S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 35 10. 11. 12. 13. 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? Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking? Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X X S\Staffrpt%25408.PM 36 14. 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? b. Police protection? c. Schools? Parks or other recreational facilities? Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services: 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: 16. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM Communications systems? Water? Sewer or septic tanks? Storm water drainage? Solid waste and disposal? 37 X X X X X 17. 18. 19. 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 3otential impact area? Yes Maybe N._9o X X X X X X X X S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 38 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 S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 39 Ill Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation 1.a,b,c Yes. The project will involve 1,800,000 cubic yards of cut and 500,000 cubic yard of fill and will create 80-100 foot high 1.5:1 cut slopes in the southwesterly portion of the site. The Slope Stability Analysis prepared for this project states that the proposed cut slopes will be stable against deep seated failure, arcuate failure under seismic conditions, and surficial failure provided it is free of adverse geologic conditions. The Analysis recommends that an engineering geologist conduct geological mapping of the slopes during grading to verify that soils and geological conditions encountered during grading do not significantly differ from the assumptions of the Slope Stability Analysis. If significant differences are found, buttressing may be required to stabilize the slope. Cut and fill slopes should be provided with appropriate surface drainage and landscaped with drought tolerant vegetation as soon as possible after grading. The Tentative Map indicates bench drains at 30 foot intervals in the cut slope. All fill slopes have a slope ratio of 2:1 and should be stable due to their limited height. The project will involve exporting 1,300,000 cubic yards of earth from the site. It shall be a Condition of Approval for Parcel Map 25408 that information regarding the number of truckloads, the haul route, the destination point, and a stock pile permit or an approved grading plan for the recipient site shall be submitted and a haul route permit obtained from the City prior to issuance of grading permits. The final disposition of the export soil will be subject to environmental review in conjunction with the project which will use the export soil as fill. 1.d. No. There are no unique geologic or physical features on the site. 1.e. Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are replanted. The wind erosion impact is considered high and significant but will be mitigated through retention of natural vegetation whenever feasible, and use of watering trucks and landscaping disturbed areas after grading. After construction of the project, water run-off is likely to increase due to the addition of impermeable surfaces. Appropriate drainage control devices will have to be approved through the Engineering Department and will have to be designed in accordance with Temecula's standards and the Conditions of Approval. S\Staffrpt\25409 ,PM 40 1.f. 1.g. 2.a,b,c. 3.a,c,d,i. 3.b. 3.e, 3.f,g. 3.h. 4.a,b. 4.c. 4.d. 5.a. No. The subject site is not located near any channel, lake or ocean that would be impacted by deposition or erosion. Drainage improvements and landscaping will prevent soil erosion. No. The site is not located in a fault hazard zone or an area susceptible to liquefaction. Hazards due to groundshaking associated with a nearby fault are addressed by the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in any impacts to air quality or the climate. Subsequent development proposals will be assessed for potential impacts to air quality and the climate. No. There are no currents or bodies of water on the site. The site is not located in a flood plain. Therefore there will be no impact on the direction of water currents or flood waters or the amount of water in any water body. Neither people nor property will be exposed to flood hazards. Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in changes in the amount of surface runoff. The improvement of the site will provide for adequate drainage facilities as approved by the City Engineer. Yes. Grading may result in an increase in turbidity in local surface water. This impact is temporary and is not considered significant. No. Excavation is not expected to encounter groundwater. There will be no impact to the direction or flow of groundwater. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in any impact on public water supplies. No. The only plant specimen on the site worthy of note in the biological report is an engelmann oak. The oak tree shall be preserved, relocated, or replaced at a 10 to I ratio or as approved by the Planning Director. Maybe. Landscaping of the site may introduce some non-native species. This is not considered a significant impact. No. The site is not currently used as crop land. No. No evidence of rare or endangered species was found on the site. S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 41 5.b. 5.c. 6.a. 6.b. m 9.a,b. lO.a,b. Maybe. Although the biology survey encountered no sign of the presence of stephens kangaroo rats on the site, the biologist recommended that a certified stephens kangaroo rat biologist ascertain if they inhabit the site. A report by a certified specialist shall be required prior to issuance of grading permits. If any stephen kangaroo rats are found, a lO(a) permit for incidental take must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits. Yes. The project will result in loss of grass land and chaparral which typically provides foraging habitat for raptors, sparrows, rabbits, gophers, ground squirrels, and reptiles. The only sensitive vertebrate observed during the survey was a golden eagle soaring high above the site. The biologist recommended that a portion of the site abutting the upslope chaparral be maintained in a natural state in order to preserve some foraging habitat. Part of the open space slope at the southwesterly side of the site will be maintained in a natural condition. Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in increased noise levels during grading. This impact will be temporary and is not considered significant because the site is not near any noise sensitive land uses. No. Future development proposals will be reviewed for potential noise impacts and land uses which generate severe noise will be prohibited or required to provide adequate noise mitigation. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not cause new light or glare, and subsequent development of the site will be subject to standard conditions prohibiting lighting from impacting adjacent properties and requiring low-glare sodium rapor lights. No. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zone and the land use designation in which the property is located. No. The project will not involve a substantial increase in the rate of consumption of natural or non-renewable resources. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not involve the use of hazardous materials or interference with emergency response or evacuation plans. S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM 11,12. 13.a,d. 13.b. 13.c,e. 13.f. 14.a.-f. 15.a,b. No. The proposal is not likely to alter the distribution or growth rate of the population or create a demand for new housing. Future development of the site will help address the irabalance of local jobs in relation to existing and approved housing. Yes. Future development of the site is expected to generate approximately 1,730 vehicle trip ends per day. Via Industria is part of a western corridor bypass road which will alter present patterns of circulation. The purpose of the by-pass road is to relieve congestion on existing streets. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the project determined that intersections and roadways in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended improvements are implemented. The recommendations of the traffic study are incorporated as conditions of approval. No. Future development of the site will be required to provide adequate off-street parking as appropriate for the particular land use proposed. No. The project will have no impact upon existing transportation systems or upon water, rail, or air traffic. No. The streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended street improvements are implemented. The street improvements will be Conditions of Approval for the proposed Parcel Map. Parcels fronting Via Industria shall limit access to joint use driveways. No. The project will not result in a need for new public services. Future development will generate an increase in the need for public services in the areas of fire and police protection and road maintenance. Fire impact mitigation fee, the public facility fee, and taxes will fund the additional public services. No. The project will not result in a substantial use or increase in demand for fuel or other energy sources. 16.a.-f. 17.a,b. No. Future development of the site will require only hook up to or service by existing utility systems and will not result in a need for new or substantially altered utility systems. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in any potential health hazards. Future development will be assessed for potential health hazards. S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 43 18. 19. 20.a,b,c. 20.d. 21 .a. 21 .b,c. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in the obstruction of any scenic views. Future development will be reviewed in order to prevent the construction of aesthetically offensive structures or site lay outs. Cut slopes will be landscaped as soon as possible after grading. No. The site is not currently used for recreational purposes. Maybe. The site contains a lithic scatter encompassing approximately 200 square meters which yielded a projectile point and 6 pieces of basalt debitages during the archaeological survey. The Archaeological Assessments states that the site has low potential to be a small food processing site which could address limited archaeological research questions and recommends a 100% surface collection, soils testing, subsurface testing and mapping and 3 to 5 cubic meters of excavation. These procedures are expected to constitute final mitigation and shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 25408. No. There are no existing religious or sacred uses of the site or in the vicinity. No. Although the biology survey encountered no sign of the presence of stephens kangaroo rats on the site, the biologist recommended that a certified stephens kangaroo rat biologist ascertain if they inhabit the site. A report by a certified specialist shall be required prior to issuance of grading permits. If any stephens kangaroo rats are found, a 10(a) permit for incidental take must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits. Payment of kangaroo rat habitant mitigation fees is a Condition of Approval for the proposed parcel map. The project will result in loss of grass land and chaparral which typically provides foraging habitat for raptors, sparrows and reptiles. The only sensitive vertebrate observed during the survey was a golden eagle soaring high above the site. The biologist recommended that a portion of the site abutting the upslope chaparral be maintained in a natural state in order to preserve some foregoing habitat. Part of the open space slope at the southwesterly side of the site will be maintained in a natural condition. No. The long term and cumulative traffic impacts of the project will be adequately mitigated by the street improvements recommended by the traffic study which are Conditions of Approval for the proposed Parcel Map, Streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service. S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 44 21 .d. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not create any health hazards. Environmental review of future development of the site will address any potential health hazards and mitigations, if necessary, will be required. S~Staffrpt\25408 .PM 45 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. X Date For CITY OF TEMECULA S\Steffrpt\25408 .PM 46 CITY OF TEMECULA ) SITE ./ / VICINITY MAP r CASE NO. P.C. DATE CITY OF TEMECULA ~ .LI 'RLI SWAP MAP ~ CASE NO,ia.l'6,2.-SH(DO P,C, DATE ~,. /;,' e CITY OF TEMECULA ) \,,,7~Xx II % \,, e e VAC~/I~ \ // // // ZONE MAP ./' CASE NO. P~ C.C. DATE i ITEM # 13 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Gary Thornhill October 7, 1991 Change of Zone No. 18; and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 RECOMMENDATION: PROPOSAL: RECOMMEND ADOPTION of Negative Declaration for Change of Zone No. 18 and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2; ADOPT Resolution No. 91 - recommending approval of Change of Zone No. 18 and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2; and RECOMMEND Adoption of Ordinance No. 91- , entitled "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Temecula, California, Amending Zoning Ordinance No. 91-13 Pertaining to Ordinance No. 348,2919 (Specific Plan No. 219) as it Relates to Zoning." Change the zoning designation of the subject property from R-A-2 1/2 to Specific Plan; and, Amend the boundary of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 1 to include Planning Area No. 36, for the property located on the southeast corner of Margarita Road and De Portola Road. ~/oTAFFRPT\219SP-18.CZ BACKGROUND: On August 5, 1991, the Planning Commission considered the applicant's proposal. During the public hearing, the Los Ranchitos Homeowners Association expressed its opposition regarding the rezoning of the subject property due to its inconsistency with the Association's C,C & R's. In rebuttal to the Association's opposition, the applicant indicated that he has documentation stating that his property is not within the Los Ranchitos Homeowners Association. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission continued this item in order to allow Staff the opportunity to research this issue. The Commission also required that this item be renoticed. DISCUSSION: Since the Planning Commission meeting of August 5, the applicant and the City Attorney have had several conversations regarding this matter. Based on these conversations, the City Attorney directed the Planning Staff to schedule and advertise this item for the Planning Commission meeting of October 7, 1991, in which he will make a oral presentation to the Planning Commission during- the public hearing. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: RECOMMEND ADOPTION of Negative Declaration for Change of Zone No. 18 and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2; and ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending approval of Change of Zone No. 18 and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2; and RECOMMEND Adoption of Ordinance No. 91- , entitled "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Temecula, California, Amending Zoning Ordinance No. 91-13 Pertaining to Ordinance No. 348.2919 (Specific Plan No. 219) as it Relates to Zoning." vgw S\STAFFRPT\219SP-18.CZ 2 Attachments: 2. 3. 4. Resolution Draft Ordinance Conditions of Approval Planning Commission Staff Report (Dated August 5, 1991) Planning Commission Minutes (Dated August 5, 1991) Initial Study Exhibits ,~TAFFRPT\219SP-18.CZ 3 RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 18 AND SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219, AMENDMENT NO. 2 CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM R-A-2 1/2 TO SPECIFIC PLAN AND AMEND THE BOUNDARY OF SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219, AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO INCLUDE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS PLANNING AREA NO. 36 FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MARGARITA ROAD AND DE PORTOLA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 926-012-006. WHEREAS, Sam McCann filed Change of Zone No. 18 and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Change of Zone and Specific Plan Amendment applications were processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Change of Zone and Specific Plan Amendment on August 5, 1991, and October 7, 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 Change of Zone and Specific Plan Amendment; 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: S\STAFFRPT\219SP-18.CZ 4 (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. 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 Planning Commission in recommending approval of the proposed Change of Zone and Specific Plan Amendment, makes the following findings, to wit: a) There is a reasonable probability that Change of Zone No. 18 and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 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 subject request is consistent with the SWAP Designation of Specific Plan and is consistent with SP 219, Amendment No. 1. ~AFFRPT\219SP-18.CZ 5 b) There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future General Plan, if Change of Zone No. 18 and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 are ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact that an approval of such a zone change and amendment may be consistent with the goals and/or policies of the City's future General Plan. c) The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The project creates a compatible physical relationship with adjoining properties, due to the fact that the adjoining properties were designed as an overall concept for Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 1 and the proposed project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 1. d) The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the area, due to the fact that the proposed land use is consistent with the overall concept of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 1. D. The Change of Zone and Specific Plan Amendment are compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. SECTION 2. Environmental Comoliance. 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 EIR 235 and in the Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby recommended for adoption. S\STAFFRPT\219SP-18.CZ 6 SECTION 3. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Change of Zone No. 18 and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 changing the zoning designation of the subject property from R-A-2 1/2 to Specific Plan and amending the boundary of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. I to include the subject property as Planning Area No. 36 (Neighborhood Commercial) for the subject property located on the southeast corner of Margarita Road and De Portola Road and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 926-012-006. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of October, 1991. JOHN HOAGLAND 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 7th day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS _ ,~TAFFRPT\219SP-18.CZ 7 ORDINANCE NO. 91-13 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 91 ~13 PERTAINING TO ORDINANCE NO. 348.2919 (SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219) AS IT RELATES TO ZONING. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. City Ordinance No. 90-04 adopted by reference certain Non-Codified Riverside County Ordinances, including Ordinance No. 348, Article X, Section 10.4.b of Ordinance No. 348. SECTION 2. Article XVIla of Ordinance No. 348 is amended by adding thereto a new Section 17.36 to read as follows: SPECIFIC Section 17.36. SP ZONE REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS FOR PLAN NO. 219. SEE EXHIBIT "C" SECTION 3. Severability. The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance. and shall SECTION 4, The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance cause the same to be posted as required by law. SECTION 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage; and within fifteen (15) days after its passage, together with the names of the City Council Members voting thereon, it shall be published in a newspaper published and circulated in said City. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of ,1991. Ronald J. Parks, Mayor S\STAFFRPT~219SP-18,CZ 8 ATTEST: June S. Greek [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 91-__ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of , 1991, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of ,1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: June S. Greek, City Clerk _ ,,~TAFFRPT\219SP-18.CZ 9 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219, AMENDMENT NO. 2 Plannina Department 1. Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 shall consist of the following: a. Exhibit "A": Specific Plan Text b. Exhibit "B": Specific Plan Conditions of Approval c. Exhibit "C": Specific Plan Development Standards If any of the following conditions of approval differ from the specific plan text or exhibits, the conditions enumerated herein shall take precedence. The development of the property shall be in accordance with the mandatory requirements of all City of Temecula ordinances including Ordinance Nos. 348- and 460 and state laws; and shall conform substantially with adopted Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 as filed in the office of the Planning Department, unless otherwise amended. No portion of the specific plan which purports or proposes to change, waive or modify any ordinance or other legal requirement for the development shall be considered to be part of the adopted specific plan. The project shall comply with the conditions set forth in the following agency letters and/or the requirements set forth by these agencies at the development stage: Road Department Flood Control Fire Department Parks County Administrative Offices Water Agency Sewer Agency Temecula School District Department of Health June 2, 1988 May 26, 1988 January 8, 1988 and February 25, 1991 May 25, 1988 April 5, 1988 May 23, 1988 May 24, 1988 January 26, 1988 July 20, 1990 S\STAFFRPT\219SP-18.CZ 10 Impacts to the Temecula Valley Unified School District shall be mitigated at the development application stage in accordance with the District policies in effect at the time of tract submittal. Common areas identified in the specific plan shall be owned and maintained as follows: A permanent master maintenance organization shall be established for the specific plan area, to assume ownership and maintenance responsibility for all common recreation, open space, circulation systems and landscaped areas. The organization may be public or private. Merger with an area-wide or regional organization shall satisfy this condition provided that such organization is legally and financially capable of assuming the responsibilities for ownership and maintenance. If the organization is a private association then neighborhood associations shall be established for each residential development, where required, and such associations may assume ownership and maintenance responsibility for neighborhood common areas. Unless otherwise provided for in these conditions of approval, common- areas shall be conveyed to the maintenance organization as implementing development is approved or any subdivision is recorded. The maintenance organization shall be established prior to or concurrent with the recordation of the first land division, or issuance of any building permits for any approved development permit (use permit, plot plan, etc.) Development applications which incorporate common areas shall be accompanied by design plans for the common area. Such plans shall specify the location and extent of landscaping, irrigation systems, structures, and circulation (vehicular, pedestrian and/or equestrian). The following special studies/reports shall accompany implementing development applications in the planning areas listed below: Studv/Reoort Planning Areas Archeological Report Mitigation for Stephen's Kangaroo Rat (See Condition No. 16) As per the County Historian's requirements 1- and 25 ~i~TAFFRPT\219SP-18,CZ 11 10. A land division filed for the purposes of phasing or financing shall not be considered an implementing development application; provided that if the maintenance organization is a property owners association, the legal documentation necessary to establish the association shall be recorded concurrently with the recordation of the final map. 11. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the construction of any use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall first obtain clearance from the Planning Department that all pertinent conditions of approval have been satisfied with the specific plan for the phase of development in questions. 12. An environmental assessment shall be conducted for each tract, change of zone, plot plan, specific plan amendment, or any other discretionary permit required to implement the specific plan. At a minimum, the environmental assessment shall utilize the evaluation of impacts addressed in the EIR prepared for Specific Plan No. 219. 13. Prior to the recordation of a final map, the land divider shall submit to the Planning Department an agreement with the appropriate parks and recreation district which demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City that the land divider- has provided for the payment of fees and/or offer of dedication of lands in accordance with Section 10.35 (Parks and Recreation Fees and Dedications) of Land Division Ordinance No. 460. 14. Prior to the recordation of any final subdivision map or issuance of building permits in the case of use permits and plot plans, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Department the following documents which shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that individual appropriate owners associations will be established and will operate in accordance with the intent and purpose of the specific plan. a. The document to convey title. b. Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions to be recorded. Management and maintenance agreements to be entered into with the unit/lot owner of the project. The master property owners association, commercial property owners association, and the business park owners association shall be charged with the unqualified right to assess their own individual owners who own individual units for reasonable maintenance and management costs which shall be established and continually maintained. The individual owners association shall have the right to lien the property of any owner who defaults in payment of their S%STAFFRPT\219SP-18.CZ 12 15. 16. 17. assessment fees. Such lien shall not be subordinate to any encumbrance other than a deed of trust, provided such deed of trust is made in good faith and for good value, and is of record prior to the lien of the individual owners association. The applicant or its successor 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 Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2, which action is brought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the applicant or its successor 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 applicant or its successor of any such claim, action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant or its successor shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify~ or hold harmless the City of Temecula. Trapping studies have indicated the presence of existing habitat (occupied by- Stephen's Kangaroo Rat) for Planning Areas 10 and 25. Prior to issuance of grading permits for this planning area, the applicant shall provide mitigation for removal of the SKR habitat as follows: Memorandum of Understanding between the developer and the California Department of Fish and Game, or Compliance with an adopted County Program for the mitigation of removal of Stephen's Kangaroo Rat habitat. 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). ~5TAFFRPT\219SP-18,CZ 13 18. Prior to the issuance of grading permits and/or building permit, 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. S\STAFFRPT\219SP-qB.CZ 14 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION August 5,1991 Case No.: Change of Zone No. 18; and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 Prepared By: Oliver Mujica Recommendation: 1. RECOMMEND ADOPTION of Negative Declaration for Change of Zone No. 18 and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2; ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending approval of Change of Zone No. 18 and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2; and RECOMMEND Adoption of Ordinance No. 91- , entitled "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Temecula, California, Amending Zoning Ordinance No. 91-13 Pertaining to Ordinance No. 348.2919 (Specific Plan No. 219) as it Relates to Zoning." APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Sam McCann REPRESENTATIVE: Turrini & Brink PROPOSAL: Change the zoning designation of the subject property from R-A-2 1/2 to Specific Plan; and, Amend the boundary of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. I to include Planning Area No. 36. ~/STAFFRPT\219SP-18.CZ 15 LOCATION: Southeast corner of Margarita Road and De Portola Road. EXISTING ZONING: Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 1 SURROUNDING ZONING: North: R-A-2 1/2 South: East: Planning Area No. 1 West: R-A-2 1/2 (Residential Agricultural, 2 1/2 acre minimum lot size) Planning Area No. I ( C o m m u n i t y / Neighborhood Commercial) (Community/ Neighborhood Commercial) (Residential Agricultural, 2 1/2 acre minimum lot size) PROPOSED ZONING: Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant BACKGROUND: On September 6, 1988, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 88-470 approving Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma Del Sol, formerly the Meadows). In addition, the Board of Supervisors certified Environmental Impact Report No. 235, for Specific Plan No. 219, as an accurate and objective statement that complies with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Furthermore, a statement of overriding findings was made for the Air Quality Impacts. On April 9, 1991, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-36 approving Change of Zone No, 5621 and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 1 amending the boundaries and land use designations of Planning Areas 1, 2, 5 and 6 of Specific Plan No. 219. Subsequently, on April 23, 1991, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 91-13 amending Zoning Ordinance No. 90-04 pertaining to Ordinance No. 348.2919 (Specific Plan No. 219) as it relates to zoning. S\STAFFRPT~219SP-18,CZ 16 On June 10, 1991, the applicant filed Change of Zone No. 18 and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2. On June 20, 1991, Change of Zone No. 18; and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 was reviewed by the Formal Development Review Committee; and, it was determined that the Specific Plan document was acceptable to proceed with the Public Hearing process and that the project, as designed, can be adequately conditioned to mitigate the DRC's concerns. The DRC has forwarded a recommendation of approval subject to conditions. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: As noted above, Change of Zone No. 18; and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 proposes to change the zoning designation of the subject 2.5 acre site from R-A-2 1/2 to Specific Plan; and amend the boundary of Specific Plan No, 219, Amendment- No. I to include the subject property as Planning Area No. 36. ANALYSIS: Land Use Modifications Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 proposes to modify the Land Use Plan (see Figure 3 Approved and Amended - pages 17 and 18) by increasing the total commercial acreage from 51 acres to 53.5 acres. Circulation Plan Modifications As illustrated on Figures 4 and 15kk (pages 20-1 and 162-3 respectively), Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2, proposes to provide access to Planning Area No. 36 from both Margarita and De Portola Roads. However, it should be noted that these access points have been identified as "potential" access points only; and that the exact number and location of driveways for Planning Area No. 36 will be determined during the review of a plot plan application. 5TAFFRPT\219SP-18,CZ 17 SPECIFIC PLAN, GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY: Road ImProvements Margarita Road will be constructed by the project developer from east of the centerline to the curb, between Pauba Road and Highway 79. Traffic Imoacts The Transportation Engineering Staff has reviewed this project; and has determined that the proposed project is consistent with the traffic mitigation measures of EIR 235 adopted for Specific Plan No. 219 and there will be no additional adverse unmitigable significant traffic impacts resulting from the development of this proposed project. Develooment Standards Pursuant tot he request of the Planning Department Staff, the applicant has prepared detailed- Development Standards for Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2, as opposed to referencing Zoning Ordinance No. 348. These standards have been tailored to specifically address development within the Meadows by taking into consideration the lot sizes and adjacent land uses, within and surrounding the Specific Plan Area. The proposed project is consistent with the SWAP Land Use Designation of Specific Plan; and is consistent with the overall concept of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 1, in that the total number of commercial acreage has increased by only 2.5 acres and the adjacent Planning Area (No. 1 ) is also Neighborhood Commercial. In addition, Staff finds it probable that this project will be consistent with the new General Plan when it is adopted. S\STAFFRPT\219SP-18,CZ 18 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 EIR 235 and in the Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration has been recommended for adoption. FINDINGS: 1. There is a reasonable probability that Change of Zone No. 18 and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 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 subject request is consistent with the SWAP Designation of Specific Plan and is consistent with SP 219, Amendment No. 1. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future General Plan, if Change of Zone No. 18 and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 are ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact that an approval of such a zone change and amendment may be consistent with the goals and/or policies of the City's future General Plan. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony creates a compatible physical relationship with adjoining properties, due to the fact that the adjoining properties were designed as an overall concept for Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 1 and the proposed project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 219. ,rAFFRPT\219SP-18.CZ 19 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the area, due to the fact that the proposed land use is consistent with the overall concept of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 1. The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: RECOMMEND ADOPTION of Negative Declaration for Change of Zone No. 18 and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2; and ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending approval of Change of Zone No. 18 and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2; and RECOMMEND Adoption of Ordinance No. 91-' , entitled "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Temecula, California, Amending Zoning Ordinance No. 91 - 13 Pertaining to Ordinance No. 348.2919 (Specific Plan No. 219) as it Relates to Zoning." vgw Attachments: 2. 3. 4. 5. Resolution Draft Ordinance Conditions of Approval Environmental Assessment Exhibits: A. Vicinity Map B. Specific Land Use Map C. Planning Area No. 36 Map D. Planning Area No. 36 Standards Specific Plan Text S\STAFFRPT\219SP-18.CZ 20 It was move by Commissioner Blair, seconded by Commissioner Fahey to: 9.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 91-75 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OFTEMECULA APPROVING PUBLIC USE PERMIT NO. 3 TO PERMIT OPERATION OF A CHURCH AND RELATED USES LOCATED AT 41743 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTH, SUITES A101 AND A102. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Ford, Fahey, Chiniaeff, Hoagland NOES: 0 None 10. CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 18; AND SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219, AMENDMENT NO. 2 Proposal is to amend the boundary of the Paloma Del Sol (formerly the Meadows) Specific Plan to include planning area No. 36. The project is located at the southeast corner of Margarita Road and DePortola Road. Oliver Mujica provided staff report and reported it was consistent with the Meadow Specific Plan and felt it would maintain the continuity of the specific plan. Chairman Hoagland opened the public comment at 8:00 Keith L. McCann, Jr., agent for owner gave a summary of reasons he felt that this property should be zoned commercial, he stated that 35 acres around it were commercial and this home backs up to that commercial. He stated that the owner received a letter from Los Ranchitos Homeowner's Association several years ago stating this property was not in the Association. Mr. Donald Rohrobacker, 44281 Flowers Drive, President Los Ranchitos Homeowner's Association. Mr. Rohrobacker stated that this property was in the association and that they were very opposed to any zone change. He stated that they do not want to set precedent. He also wanted the Homeowner's Association notified of all hearings. He gave the address of the Homeowner's Association as: P.O. Box 471, Temecula, California 92593. Commissioner Chiniaeff was concerned about amount of Commercial in that area. Commissioner Blair was concerned about type of business that would be allowed. Chairman Hoagland asked if owner opposed Specific Plan 219, Mr. McCann answered no. Hermon Thorne, 30851 DePortola Rd., Temecula stated that this property is on lot 25, he lives on lot 32 felt CC&R's governed and that they should be followed as 2-1/2 acres single family residence. An approval of a change would require by 51% of owners to approve. He felt that there was enough commercial in neighborhood. Rebecca Weersing, 41775 Yorba Avenue, Los Ranchitos, opposed to violation of CC&R's, should be kept rural. Gary Thornhill stated that the Specific Plan designation rules apply to any development on that property and the City can extend boundaries. Chairman Hoagland asked city attorney if CC&R's vehicle attach to the land? Terry Kaufmann, representative, city attorney, stated that CC&R's are with property owners. Any problem is not problem with the City, but between homeowners and should not affect commission decisions. Commissioner Fahey made a motion to continue item until homeowner's issue is researched and documents produced if property is in association or not. Commissioner Blair seconded the motion. Commissioner Ford wanted record to reflect homeowner's conflict. Commissioner Chinlaeff felt issue should be reviewed by land use designation and if it was appropriate zoning, commission should not be concerned with civil matters. Commissioner Hoagland restated motion to continue item off calendar to renotice item. notify Los Ranchitos Homeowner's Association and have staff research if property was in Los Ranchitos Homeowner's association. Ib/PCMin/Oa0591 9 The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Hoagland, Ford NOES I COMMISSIONER: Chiniaeff 11. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 24172 Proposal is to subdivide 5 acres into 8 residential lots on the Eastside of Ynez Road between Pauba Road and Santiago Road. Oliver Mujica gave an overview of the project and recommended approval as it was consistent with SWAP. Commissioner Fahey raised concerns about drainage. Commissioner Chiniaeff and Ford raised concern about an earthquake fault in the area and if trenching was done. Doug Stewart said Condition//41 could be changed to ask for a Geologist report prior to recordation of map. Bob Righetti answered questions of 10 ft. right of way on No. side of "A" St. informing it would be maintained after original planting by developer by TCSD. Chairman Hoagland opened Public Comment at 8:25. Mike Lanni, 1907 Yachttruant, Newport Beach, applicant stated that there had been trenching for an earthquake fault previously and that it was cleared by the County Geologist, Steve Kupferman, after he inspected the trenches and found no fault. Chairman Hoagland asked if anyone else wanted to apeak on this item and seeing none the public comment was closed at 8:30. Commissioner Ford asked staff to address drainage and street lights. Bob Righetti said that there was not drainage across property it was surface drainage only and there was no substantial increase. Street lights would be in compliance with Ord. 460. Commissioner Chiniaeff would like staff to look at Geo. Report. Gary Thornhill said a condition would be added to have a Geo. Report before final map recordation. ib/PcMin/oeosel 10 CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY Background 1. Name of Proponent: 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: Sam McCann 43121 Margarita Road Temecula, CA 92390 Date of Environmental Assessment: 4. Agency Requiring Assessment: Name of Proposal, if applicable: Location of Proposal: (714) 676-7484 Julv 1. 1991 CITY OF TEMECULA Change of Zone No. 18 and Soecific Plan No.219. Amendment No.2 Southeast corner of MarQarita Road and De Portola Road. II. Project Description Change of Zone No. 18; and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 proposes to change the zoning designation of the subject 2.5 acre property from R-A-2 1/2 to Specific Plan and Amend the boundary of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 1 to include the subject property as Planning Area No. 36. S\STAFFRPT~219SP-18,CZ 32 III. Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation The following environmental impacts associated with Specific Plan No. 219 are insignificant in that the design of the project includes the necessary mitigation measures which have been adopted within EIR 235: Water and Sewer: The project will have an average daily consumption of domestic water of 1,683,300 gallons at 300 gallons/d.u./day. The project will generation between 1.81 and 3.08 million gallons per day of sewage flow. Onsite wastewater collection facilities will be constructed to tie into Eastern Municipal Water District's master planned facilities being constructed through the Rancho Villages Assessment District. Construction of all structures within the project will conform to state laws requiring water efficient plumbing fixtures. Utilities: Gas, electricity, and telephone service will be provided by respective purveyors of the service. Lines for electrical and telephone services, and mains for natural gas are located- along the project boundaries. Energy Resources: The project will increase consumption of energy for motor vehicle movement, space and water heating, air conditioning, use of home appliances, and operation of construction equipment. The project will adhere to State Code Title 24 energy conservation standards and will employ site design, when possible, for additional energy conservation. Non vehicular pathways are included within, and adjacent to, the project site. Commercial and employment centers are in proximity to the project site. Parks and Recreation: Project residents will create a demand for parks and recreation facilities, and for open space. The project design provides 242 +/- acres of recreation areas, parkway greenbelts, and paseo open space. The following environmental impacts associated with Specific Plan No. 219 are potentially significant, but will be avoided or substantially lessened by the identified mitigation measures which have been adopted within EIR 235: S\STAFFRPT\219SP-18.CZ 33 Seismic Safety 1. Impact: 2. Mitigation: Slopes and Erosion 1. Impact: 2. Mitigation: Although faults have been previously mapped on- site, they have been determined to be inactive and the risk of ground rupture due to faulting on the project is considered nil. Liquefaction potential exists along the entire flat alluviated area of Temecula Creek within the southern site boundary. During site development, additional geologic evaluation shall be continued in order to verify the extent and relative age of fault activity. Mitigation of the liquefaction potential within the southern portion of the site will occur as a result of project development, which will lower artificially high groundwater levels by removal of recharge ponds, as well as increase overburden as a result of site grading. The Meadows Specific Plan will unavoidably alter some of the existing landforms. Owing to the general granular nature of graded slopes, a moderate to severe erosion potential exists if slopes are unprotected. Removal and recompaction of portions of alluvial/colluvial soils within fill areas and shallow cut areas will be necessary. Temporary groundcover shall be provided to prevent erosion during the construction phase. Permanent vegetation shall be planted as soon as possible after grading. Specific requirements for alluvial/colluvial soils removal shall be developed during tentative map studies and incorporated into project grading. The three small possible landslide areas shall be investigated during design level studies and all mitigation measures identified as a result of that investigation will be incorporated into future development approvals. Remedial grading recommendations to provide for the long term stability will be provided based upon a finalized grading design. S\STAFFRPT~219SP-le,CZ 34 Flooding 1. Impact: 2. Mitigation: Noise 1. Impact: 2. Mitigation: Water Quality 1. Impact: Development of the Meadows Specific Plan will alter the existing drainage patterns and will increase runoff to Temecula Creek and, to a lesser extent, Murrieta Creek. A master drainage plan has been developed to respond to the hydrological constraints of the site. A more in-depth assessment of the Temecula floodplain shall be conducted during the final design and preparation of the tentative tract maps, and all mitigation measures identified as a result of that assessment will be incorporated into future development approvals. Erosion control devices shall be utilized in hillside development areas to mitigate the effect of increased runoff at points of discharge. If required, the project applicant will contribute Drainage Improvement Fees as appropriate. Noise generated from the project will derive from two sources, construction and vehicular traffic, but is not anticipated to result in unacceptable noise levels to existing or proposed off-site uses. Onsite areas adjacent to high volume roadways may be subject to noise impacts. A noise analysis shall be required in planning areas adjacent to high volume perimeter roads. If indicated, noise attenuation will be incorporated into project design. Implementation of the project will alter the composition of surface runoff by grading the site surfaces; by construction of impervious streets, roofs and parking facilities; and by the irrigation of landscaped areas. Runoff conveyed to Temecula and Murrieta Creeks will contain minor amounts of pollutants. S\STAFFRPT\219SP-18,CZ 35 2. Mitigation: The project will employ erosion control devices during grading, such as temporary berms, culverts, sand bagging or desilting basins. Urban runoff will be mitigated through implementation of a street cleaning program. Wildlife/Vegetation 1. Impact: As a consequence of grassland and coastal sage scrub vegetation removal, existing wildlife will either be destroyed or displaced. Impacts upon habitat containing a population of the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat will result. 2. Mitigation: The project applicant will participate in any in-place County program which provides for off-site mitigation of impacts to the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat, or enter into a Memorandum of Understanding wit the California Department of Fish and Game. Historic and Prehistoric Sites 1. Impact: Without proper mitigation, implementation of the Meadows Specific Plan could potentially destroy archaeological/historical sites on the property. 2. Mitigation: Prior to the approval of any additional implementing processes, the applicant/developer will meet with the County Historical Commission to determine appropriate measures to mitigate potential impacts to archaeological/historicalsites; all mitigation measures identified as a result of the meeting(s) will be incorporated into future development approvals. Circulation 1. Impact: The Meadows Specific Plan is anticipated to generate 47,600 vehicle trips per day at project completion. Approximately 40,000 of these trips would be external to the site. 2. Mitigation: Construction of the proposed circulation network will adequately service future on-site traffic volumes. Off-site improvements will be constructed as required by the County: Road Department and CalTrans. S\STAFFRPT\219SP-lS.CZ 36 I. Fire Protection 1. Impact: 2. Mitigation: J. Sheriff 1. Impact: 2. Mitigation: K. Schools 1. Impact: 2. Mitigation: L. Solid Waste 1. Impact: 2. Mitigation: The project site would be subject to Category II urban development requirements with regard to fire protection services. The project site will be served by a proposed fire station, to be constructed near Highway 79. The developer will pay mitigation fees as required by the Board of Supervisors. Project residents will impose increased demands on law enforcement and sheriff services. Project design will incorporate appropriate lighting, site design, security hardware and such design features as will promote optimal security. The developer will pay mitigation fees as required by the- Board of Supervisors. The project will generate an estimated 3,109 students in grades K-8 and 1,187 students in grades 9-12, impacting the Temecula Valley Unified School District. The project has designated four elementary school sites and one junior high school site. The developer will pay school mitigation fees as required. Project residents, estimated at 14,587, will generate approximately 58 tons per day of solid waste, incrementally shortening the life of County landfill sites. The County Solid Waste Management Plan includes programs for reducing the quantity of wastes being landfilled, including source reduction and business and residential separation of recoverables. These programs may be implemented by project residents and businesses. S\STAFFRPT\219SP-18.CZ 37 M. Libraries 1. Impact: The project's population will increase demand for library facilities and services. 2. Mitigation: The developer will pay library mitigation fees as required by the Board of Supervisors. The following environmental impact associated with Specific Plan No. 219 cannot be fully mitigated and a statement of overriding findings has been adopted within EIR 235: Air Quality 1. Impact: At project build-out, daily motor vehicle emissions for the project will total approximately 7,754 Ibs/day. Power plant emissions for electrical energy consumed on-site will total 175 Ibs/day. Natural gas emissions for project consumption will total 163.6 Ibs per day. Approximately 1 O0 Ibs of dust per acre- will be generated each day of construction in addition to an undetermined amount of motor emissions during site preparation an construction. 2. Mitigation: Because most of the project-related air pollution emissions are generated by automobiles, effective mitigation is limited. On-site provisions for schools, shopping, and recreation has been incorporated into project design. Sufficient acreage has been zoned for industrial use in the Rancho California/Temecula area to provide employment opportunities. project design includes a circulation plan designed for efficient and direct traffic flows and alternative transit modes including pedestrian, bicycle, and equestrian trails. The Rancho Villages Policy Plan, to which this project is subject, requires pedestrian and bus stop facilities for commercial areas. These requirements will be implemented at the development application stage. Particulate matter and other pollutants generated during grading and construction will be reduced through compliance with County Ordinance No. 457 which specifies watering during construction, and planting of ground Cover. S\STAFFRPT~ZlgSP-~S,CZ 38 IV. Conclusion The Riverside County Board of Supervisors certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 235 in conjunction with the approval of Specific Plan No. 219 and Change of Zone No. 5140. The EIR included mitigation measures to reduce environmental impacts to levels of insignificance. The Board of Supervisors also adopted statements of overriding considerations for the air quality impacts. Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 has increased the neighborhood commercial acreage by only 2.5 acres and proposes to modify the boundaries of Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 1 to include Planning Area No. 36; and will not result in additional impacts to the environment. The Conditions of Approval are adequate to mitigate any potential significant impacts to levels of insignificance. Pursuant to Section 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act and Condition of Approval No. 12 of Specific Plan No. 219, this Initial Study has been prepared to demonstrate that the changes resulting from the proposed Specific Plan Amendment will not result in new or substantially increased significant impacts, that there have been no changes in the circumstances surrounding the project that would require important revisions to the EIR due to new significant impacts, and that no new information has arisen which would indicate that the project will have significant- effects not previously discussed or underestimated, or that alternatives or mitigation measures not previously considered would substantially reduce any significant impacts. S\STAFFRPT\219SP-18.CZ 39 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, which were adopted for EIR 235, 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 July 1. 1991 Date Oliver Mujica, Senior Planner For CITY OF TEMECULA S\STAFFRPT\219SP-18.CZ 40 CITY OF TEMECULA ) LOCATION -MAP CASE NO. '~P=/~ P.C. DATE CITY OF T=,MECULA ) DU/5,A¢" ' 2-5 SWAP MAP CITY OF TEMECULA ) L R-A-5 R-4 ZONE MAP CASE NO, ....~-~.;./.f/.x.,.,,,/. P,C, DATE ITEM # 14 Prepared By: Recommendation: 1. STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 7, 1991 Case No.: Plot Plan No. 240 Scott Wright ADOPT Resolution No. 91- approving Plot Plan No. 240 APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PROPOSAL: LOCATION: EXISTING ZONING: SURROUNDING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: SURROUNDING LAND USES: Red Robin International, Inc. Same Construct a 6,300 square foot restaurant on an approved building pad location on the site of Plot Plan 18 Revised. Northwest corner of Rancho California Road and Lyndie Lane. General Commercial (C-1/C-P) N o rth: South: East: West: General Residential (R-3-4000) General Residential (R-3-4000) General Commercial (C-1/C-P) General Commercial (C-1/C-P) Not applicable. Vacant N o rth: South: East: West: General Commercial Office Commercial General Commercial General Commercial S\STAFFRPT\240 .PP BACKGROUND: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ANALYSIS: On November 19, 1990, the Planning Commission approved Plot Plan No. 18, a proposal to develop the a 5.1 acre site with a 46,613 square foot shopping center, as follows: Building "A" - Restaurant Building "B" - Bank Building "C" - Retail 6,500 sq.ft. 4,831 sq.ft. 35,282 sq.ft. On April 15, 1991, the Planning Commission approved Plot Plan No. 18, Revision No. 1. This plot plan was a request to increase the total square footage of the shopping center from 46,613 to 47,412 square feet and to change the uses as follows: Building "A" - Restaurant(PAD) Building "B" - Restaurant(PAD) Building "C" - Retail 7,203 sq.ft. 6,300 sq.ft. 33,909 sq.ft. Location Plot Plan No. 240 is a proposal to construct a 6,300 square foot restaurant on building pad "B" of Plot Plan No. 18, Revision No. 1. The proposed restaurant provides a total of 232 seats. Proiect Desian The architectural style of the proposed restaurant is compatible with the mediterranean style of the commercial center. The proposed building design provides variety of form, color, and building material, and each elevation is well articulated. Landscaping Landscaping is provided along the perimeter of the proposed building. The proposed landscaping is consistent with the planting pallet and conceptual landscape plan of the overall commercial center. S%STAFFRPT\240 .PP 2 Parkina The overall commercial center provides a total of 289 parking spaces. The total parking for the center was calculated on the basis of retail and restaurant floor areas. The parking for the whole center therefore meets or exceeds the applicable parking requirements. FUTURE GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY: The proposed project is consistent with the SWAP Land Use Designation of Commercial, which includes restaurant uses. In addition, Staff finds it probable that this project will be consistent with the new General Plan when it is adopted in that adjacent land uses are retail and office commercial uses. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: An Initial Study was performed for Plot Plan No. 18 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 mitigation measures were incorporated in the Conditions of Approval, and a Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission. Since Plot Plan No. 240 will not result in additional impacts to the environment, the Planning Department Staff has determined that the project is exempt from CEQA under Section 15061 (b)(3). FINDINGS: There is a reasonable probability that Plot Plan No. 240 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 proposed restaurant is consistent with the existing zoning and the SWAP Land Use Designation of Commercial. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately S\STAFFRPT\240,PP 3 inconsistent with the plan, in that the proposed restaurant is consistent with the existing zoning, the SWAP Land Use Designation of Commercial, and the permitted uses of the surrounding area. The proposed use or action complies with State planning and zoning laws, in that the proposed use complies with Ordinance No. 348. 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, in that the proposed restaurant complies with the standards of Ordinance No. 348. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or welfare, in that the Conditions of Approval include mitigation measures. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony in scale, bulk, height, intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with adjoining properties. 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 has acceptable access to dedicated rights-of-way which are open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic, namely Lyndie Lane and Rancho California Road. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural environment as determined in the expanded initial study performed for Plot Plan No. 18. 10. The design of the project and the type of S\STAFFRPT\240 .PP 4 11. improvements are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the property within the proposed project. Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: ADOPT Resolution No. 91-__ approving Plot Plan No. 240, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. vgw Attachments: Resolution Conditions of Approval Negative Declaration for the Underlying Plot Plan No. 18 Exhibits A. Vicinity Map B. Zone Map C. Land Use Map D. Site Plan S\STAFFRPT%240.PP 5 RESOLUTION NO. 91-30 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLOT PLAN NO. 240 TO CONSTRUCT A 6,300 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT (BUILDING PAD "B") ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 5.1 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AND LYNDIE LANE AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-310-011. WHEREAS, Red Robin International, Inc., filed Plot Plan No. 240 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 October 7, 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; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission Hearing, the Commission approved said Plot Plan; 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. S\STAFFRPT\240.PP 6 (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. (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 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 Plot Plan No. 240 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 S\STAFFRPT\240.PP 7 FINDINGS: 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 18.30(c), no plot plan may be approved unless the following findings can be made: a) 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) The Planning Commission, in approving the proposed plot plan, makes the following findings, to wit: There is a reasonable probability that Plot Plan No. 240 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 proposed restaurant is consistent with the existing zoning and the SWAP Land Use Designation of Commercial. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, in that the proposed restaurant is consistent with the existing zoning, the SWAP Land Use Designation of Commercial, and the permitted uses of the surrounding area. The proposed use or action complies with State planning and zoning laws, in that the S\STAFFRPT\240.PP 8 proposed use complies with Ordinance No. 348. 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, in that the proposed restaurant complies with the standards of Ordinance No. 348. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or welfare, in that the Conditions of Approval include mitigation measures. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony in scale, bulk, height, intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with adjoining properties. 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 has acceptable access to a dedicated rights-of-way which are open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic namely Lyndie Land and Rancho California Road. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural environment as determined in the expanded initial study performed for Plot Plan No. 18. The design of the project and the type of improvements are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the property within the proposed project. That said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein S\STAFFRPT\240.PP 9 incorporated by reference. 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 Plot Plan No. 18 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 was adopted by the Planning Commission on November 19, 1990. Plot Plan No. 240 will not result in additional impacts to the environment; therefore, the project is exempt from CEQA under Section 15061 (b)(3). SECTION 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves Plot Plan No. 240 to construct a 6,300 square foot restaurant(Building Pad "B") located on the northwest corner of Rancho California Road and Lyndie Lane and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 921-310-011 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. SECTION 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of October, 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 7th day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 4 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS PLANNING COMMISSIONERS PLANNING COMMISSIONERS S\STAFFRPT\240,PP 10 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Plot Plan No: 240 Project Description: 6,300 souare foot restaurant Assessor's Parcel No.: 921-031-011 Plannine Department The use hereby permitted by this plot plan is for the development of a 6,300 square foot restaurant(Building Pad "B") within a 5.1 acre site known as Plot Plan No. 18, Revision No. 1. 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. 240. 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 October 7, 1993. The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as shown on Plot Plan No. 240 marked Exhibit A, 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. S\STAFFRPT~240.PP 11 6. The applicant shall comply with the Fire Department's Conditions of Approval outlined in the County Fire Department's letter dated August 27, 1991. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. The applicant shall comply with the Engineering Department's Conditions of Approval which are included herein. The applicant shall comply with the requirements outlined in the Rancho California Water District letter dated August 27, 1991. The applicant shall comply with the requirements outlined in the Riverside County Department of Health letter dated August 30, 1991. All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with approved landscape, irrigation, and shading plans for Plot Plan 18 Revised 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 the issuance of building permits, the following additional plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval: Landscaping and Irrigation 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 B. Materials used in the construction of all buildings shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on Exhibit B (Color Elevations) and the Materials Board. Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from ground view. Screening material shall be subject to Planning Department approval. All trash enclosures shall be constructed prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. Each enclosure shall be six feet in height and shall be made with masonry block and a steel gate which screens the bins from external view. 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. S\STAFFRPT~240.PP 12 18. Unless previously paid, prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall comply with Ordinance No. 663 by paying the Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Mitigation fee required by that ordinance which is based on the gross acreage of the parcels proposed for development. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fees required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required under the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution. 19. 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 plantinge, 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. 20. 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. 21. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. Engineering Deoartment 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. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 22. 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; S\STAFFRPT\240.PP 13 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. Planning Department; Engineering Department; Riverside County Health Department; CATV Franchise; and Parks and Recreation Department. The developer shall submit two (2) 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 24"x36" mylar by a Registered Civil Engineer. The grading plan shall be coordinated with all plans related to Plot Plan No. 18. The developer shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report to the Engineering Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. 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. No grading shall take place prior to the improvement plans for Plot Plan No. 18 being substantially complete, appropriate clearance letters and approval by the City Engineer. If grading is to take place between the months of October and April, erosion control plans will be required. Erosion control plans and notes shall be submitted and approved by the Engineering Department. All site plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency with approved plans. Street improvement plans including parkway trees and street lights prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer shall be required for all public streets prior to issuance of an Encroachment Permit. Final plans and profiles shall show the location of existing utility facilities within the right- of-way. 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. S\STAFFRPT\240.PP 1 ~f 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. If construction for street, on-site parking, grading and drainage improvements for Plot Plan No. 18 has not begun, 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 limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate. b. Storm drain facilities. c. Landscaping (streets). d. Sewer and domestic water systems. e. Undergrounding of existing and proposed utility distribution lines. 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. A detailed drainage study will be required to be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. This study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall include existing, interim, and proposed conditions, including hydrology and hydraulic calculations. The drainage study shall also address the capacity of existing downstream systems within Parcel Map No. 23687, and a secondary overland drainage escape route. As determined from the drainage study, the developer shall construct or enlarge off-site drainage facilities to mitigate any increase or diversion of existing flows from the project site into adjacent downstream properties. Adequate drainage easements shall be secured if needed. Mitigation shall be as directed by the City Engineer. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. S\STAFFRPT\240.PP 15 38. All concentrated drainage directed toward the public street shall be diverted through the undersidewalk drains. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT: 39. 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. 40. 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. 41. 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. The fee to be paid shall be 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. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. 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). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. 42. Prior to building permit, the subdivider shall notify the City's C.A.T.V. Franchises of the intent to develop. Conduit shall be installed to C.A.T.V. Standards prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY: 43. An on-site improvement plan per City Standards for the private parking lot and drives shall be required for review and approval by the City Engineer. 44. All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards and S\STAFFRPT~240.PP 16 shall be shown on the street improvement plans in accordance with County Standard 400 and 401 (curb sidewalk). 45. Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the City Engineer. 46. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along all public street frontages in accordance with Riverside County Standard Nos. 400 and 401. 47. 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. 48. Construct full street improvements including but not limited to curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on all adjacent public streets. 49. Lyndie Lane shall be improved with a minimum of 37 feet of part-width street improvements within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 111 (56'/78'). 50. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. 51. The street design and improvement concept of this project shall be coordinated with adjoining developments. Transportation Enaineering PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: 52. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for Rancho California Road with transitions, and shall be included in the street improvement plans. 53. Plans for a traffic signal shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for the intersection of Rancho California Road and Lyndie Lane and shall be included in the street improvement plans with the second plan check submittal. 54. Plans for traffic signal interconnect shall be designed by a Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer and shown on the street improvement plans along Rancho California Road from Lyndie Lane east to Moraga Road. S\STAFFRPT\240.PP 17 55. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering for the design requirements. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS: 56. All signing and striping shall be installed per the City requirements and the approved signing and striping plan. 57. The traffic signal at Rancho California Road and Lyndie Lane shall be installed and operational per the City requirements, special provisions, and the approved traffic signal plan. 58. All traffic signal interconnects shall be installed per the City requirements and the approved plan. 59. The developer shall install the raised median on Rancho California Road from Via Las Colinas east to Lyndie Lane. 60. No median break for the main driveway on Rancho California Road shall be provided. 61. The developer shall design and construct the signal at the intersection of Rancho California Road and Lyndie Lane and may enter into a reimbursement agreement with the City for a percentage of the total cost of this signal, as determined by the City Engineer. The reimbursement agreement shall be based upon future development of the 6.12 acre parcel to the south of this intersection as specified in the addendum to the Traffic Study dated October 9, 1990 prepared by Robert Kahn, John Kain and Associates. Building and Safety Department 62. Comply with all applicable provisions of the 1988 edition of the Uniform, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes, 1990 edition of the National Electrical Code, California Administrative Code Title 24 Energy and Handicapped Provisions and the Code of the City of Temecula. 63. Obtain building address prior to Building plan review submittal. S\STAFFRPT\240.PP 18 DEPART NT 210 WEST SAN JACIN~ AVENUE · PERKS, CALIFORNIA 92~ ~ ' (714) 657-3183 GLEN J. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF August 27, 1991 TO: CITY OF TEMECULA ATTN: PLANNING DEPT RE: PLOT PLAN 240 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: The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all connnercial buildings using the procedure established in Ordinance 546. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 2500 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. Water improvement plans have been submitted and approved under Plot Plan 18. Hydrants needed for protection of this building must be installed prior to any combustible materials being placed on the job site. 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. Install a complete fire sprinkler system in all buildings. 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 waterfow monitoring fire alarm system. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation, as per UBC. 79-733 Count~ Club Drive, Suite F. lndio, CA 92201 {619) 342~886 · FAX (619) 775-2072 PLANNING DIVISION I~l RIVERSIDE OFFICE 3760 12th Sift. t, Rivehide, CA 92501 (714) 275~t777 * FAX (714) 369-7451 ~MECULA OFfiCE 41002 County Cente~ Drive, Suite 225, Temecala, CA 92390 (714) 694-5070 · FAX (714) 694-5076 ~ pdnted on recycled paper PLOT PLAN 240 PAGE 2 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. Low level Exit Signs, where exit signs are required by Section 3314(a). 9. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes. 10. Install portable fire extinguishers with a minimum rating of 2A-10BC. Contact a certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. 11. 12. Install a hood duct fire extinguishing system. Contact a certified fire protection company for proper placement. Plans must be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. 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. 13. 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¢ per square foot as mitigation for fire protection impacts. This amount must be submitted separately from the plan check review fees. 14. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed in the Building and Safety Office. All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to the Planning and Engineering staff. RAYMOND H. REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner By Laura Cabral, Fire Safety Specialist LC/tm Ran Water August 27, 1991 Mr. Scott Wright City of Temecula Planning Department 43180 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 SUB.IECT: Water Availability APN 921-031-011 Red Robin Restaurant Dear Mr. Wright: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Senga Doherty. Sincerely, R,'-"dNCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P. E. Manager of Development Engineering SB:SD:ajt201 cc: Senga Doherty, Engineering Technician Rancho California Water District FROM: RE: County of Riverside DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CITY OF TEMECULA ATT : ~ott Wric]ht .SAM MART . _I~ r onmen t a 1 PLOT PLAN 240 Health Specialist IV DATE: 0 ~J - 3 0 - 9 1 The Environmental Health Services has reviewed Plot Plan No, 240 and has no obTectlons. Sanitary sewer and water services should be available in this area. Prior to any bulldin~ plan review for health clearance, the following items are reGulred: "Will-serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies, A C.!.~a£~D~._!~.~E. from the Hazardous Services Material Management Branch (Jon Mohoroskl, 350-5055), will be required indicating that he Dro3ect has been cleared for: a. Underground storage tanks b. Hazardous Waste Generator Services c. Hazardous Waste DIsclosure fin accordance with AB 2105) d. Waste reduction management SM:dr cc: Jon Mohoroski, Hazardous Materials Branch CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY Background 1. Name of Proponent: Palmilia Associates Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 1,1530 Enterprise Circ)e South, Ste. 206 Temecula, CA 92390 {71~,) 676~7177 Date of Environmental Assessment: May 21, 1990 Agency Requiring Assessment: CITY OF TEMECULA Name of Proposal, if applicable: Plot Plan No. 18 6. Location of Proposal: Northwest corn er of R ancho Cal iforn ia Road and Lyndie Lane 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? 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\PP18 1 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, )andslldes, 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 STAFFRPT\PP18 2 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 lbirds, 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 existin9 fish or wildlife habitat? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X X STAFFRPT\PP18 3 10. 11. 13. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. increases in existing noise leveis? Exposure of people to severe noise levels? Light and Clare. 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 expiosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticicles, 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 STAFFRPT\PP18 4 Yes Maybe No b. Effects on existin9 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 lu,. 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\PP18 5 17. 18. 19. 20. b. Communications systems? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? Human Heaith. 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 pubiic 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 __ __ .× STAFFRPT\PP18 6 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 pro)ect have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environ- mental 9oais? {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 5TAFFRPT\PP18 7 Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation Earth 1.a,c. 1.b. 1.d. 1.e. 1.f. 1.g. Air 2.a. No. However, development on the site will require a substantial amount of grading and an overall change in topography will occur. Cut and fill slopes will occur as a result of the extensive grading. This impact is not considered significant. Manufactured slope will have to be properly landscaped. Yes. All development disrupts the soil profile to some degree and results in soil displacement, compaction and overcovering. Further analysis will determine if additional analysis will determine if mitigetions are required. No. There are no unique geologic or physical features on the site. Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the construction phase and remain high until disturbed ar-~ are replanted. The wind erosion impact is considered high and signiflca,~t but will be mitigated through replanting vegetation and use of watering trucks and hydro-seeding disturbed ar~-~ after grading. After construction of the project, water run-off is likely to increase due to the addition of impermeable surfaces. Appropriate drainage control devices will have to be approved through the Engineering Department and will have to be designed in accordance with Temecula's standards and the conditions d approval. No. The subject site is net located near any channel, lake or ocean that would be impacted by deposition or erosion. No. the subject site is net located within a fault hazard zone, liquefaction or subsidence area according to the Riverside County General Plan Geologic Map. Yes. The addition of approximately ~6,613 square feet of commercial space will generate a significant amount of new vehicle traffic to the site and area. The vehicle traffic will increase the amount of carbon monoxide and particulate emissions in the area. The proposed project will not by itself deteriorate the local area~s or regional air quality, but will add to the cumulative impact on air quality due to the substantial growth in the awea. No. The proposed project will not create any objectionable odors or alter the areass climate. STAFFRPT\PP18 8 Water 3.a,d-e, 3,b,cJ. 3.co 3.f. 3.h. 3.i. Plant Life ~,.a-d. Animal Life 5.a-c. Noise 6,a, 6.b. No. The proposed project will not impact any body of water. Yes Development of the subject site will increase the amount of impermeable surfaces which will decr-=-e the amount of water absorbed into the ground which will reduce the amount of ground water. Due to the vast amount of existing ground water in the area, this impact is considered insignificant. No. Flood waters will continue to be directed to the streets and flood channels. Drainage plans for the site will have to meet the requirements of the City's Engineer. No. The proposed project will not alter the rate of flow of ground water, No. The proposed project will not significantly affect the public water supply. No. The Riverside County General Plan Flood Management Map does not designate the site in a hazardous area. No. Although the development of the site will remove any of the plant species that currently exist on the site, no unique, rare or endangered species should be affected. New species Of plants will be introduced to the site as part of the landscape requirements for the project. The addition of the new species is not considered a negative impact. The site is not currently being used for agricultural purposes. No. The proposed project is located in an area that has been experiencing urbanization for a number of years. It is anticipated that the only animal life on or in th~ vicinity of the site includes squirrels, rabbits, lizards and other common animals. It is highly unlikely that an endangered specie habitat-- the site. Yes. On-site noise levels will increase temporarily durin9 construction. Long-term noise impacts will occur due to increased traffic volumes. This impact is not considered to be significant since the surrounding land uses are not noise sensitive. No. Severe noise will not be generated by the proposed project. STAFFRPT\PP18 9 Liqht and Glare Maybe. The proposed project is located within the Mr. Palomar Observatory Street Lighting Policy Area which recommends the use of low pressure sodium vapor (LPSV) lights to help avoid interference with the Mt. Palomar telescope known as ~'skygloWI'. The use of LPSV lights will reduce the light and glare produced by the proposed project. Land Use No. The Southwest Area Plan designates the subject site for commercial development. Natural Resources 9.a-b. No. The proposed commercial use will not increase the consumption rate of any natural or non-renewable natural resource. Risk of Upset 10.a-b. No. The proposed commercial uses on the subject site will not require the use of any hazardous substances. During construction, it should not be necessary to close any streets which would interfere with emergency vehicles. Population 11o No. The proposed L16,613 square foot commercial facility will generate some jobs but not a significant amount to alter the area's population. Housinq 12. No. The proposed ~,6,613 square foot commercial facility will not generate a significant number of jobs to create a demand fop additional housing. TransportationJ Circulation 13.a,d,f. Yes. The proposed project will generate a substantial amount of vehicle tr~[Fic to the site. This impact is considered significant due to the current traffic problems which exist in the vicinity of the site. Through traffic on Randno California Road, with one lane in each direction, is congested due to the traffic turning into the neighboring commercial facility and vehicle volume. Until Randno California Road is widened to four lanes at the subject site, traffic will continue to be bottle necked and traffic hazards will increase. A traffic study dated April 26, 1990, was conducted by Kunzman Associates. The study recommends widening Randno California Road and Lyndie Lane in conjunction with development of the project; a 200 foot left turn pockat in Rancho California Road; limited access to site and participation in STAFFRPT\PP18 10 traffic signal fees. With these recommendations, it is anticipated that 1991 traffic at the site will operate at LOS~D~. However, it is not clear if the future traffic inctudes the new residential developments east of the site and weekend traffic to the wineries. )f not, the traffic study should be reevaluated. 13.b. Yes. The proposed project will require the addition of parking space which should be consistent with the adopted parking cede for commercial uses. The proposed plot plan is consistent with the parking code except that the handicapped space should be designated along with the additional three toecling spaces for the project. 13.d-e. No. The proposed project will not effect the present pattern or circulation of goeds or people. Public Services lu,.a,b,e. Yes. The proposed u,6,613 square foot commercial facility will require public services in the areas of police, fire and maintenance of roads and public facilities. This impact is not considered significant. The incremental impact should be evaluated and the appropriate fees assessed. Property taxes should mitigate the impact and continuing ' need for services ~ver the long term. Energy 15.a-b. No. The proposed project will not result ~n the substantial use or j, increase in demand of fuel or energy. Utilities 16.a-f. No. The proposed pro}ect requires the use of utilities but will not require substantial alteration to the existing systems. Human Health 17 .a-b. No. The proposed project will not create a health hazard or increase human exposure to hazardous materials. Aesthetics No. Development of the subject site will not obstruct any scenic vista or view that is open to the public. Recreation 19, No. The subject site is not currently used for recreational uses. STAFFRPT\PP18 11 Cultural Resources 20.a. Maybe. The proposed project may impact an unknown cultural resource site. If a site is discovered during grading. an archaeologist or paleontologist should be called on site to supervise the digging and determine if the site is significant. 20.b-d. No. The proposed project will not impact any building of historic significance. affect unique ethnic cultural values or restrict sacred uses. Mandatory Findinqs of Siqnificance 21 .a-c. No. The proposed project will not have a significant impact of the quality of the area's natural environment nor will the project achieve short term environmental goals to the disaclvantage of Ion9 term goals. In addition. the project does not cumulatively considerable impacts. 21 ,d. Yes. The proposed project has the poterrtial of exposing human beings to increased traffic hazards. The location of the project is at the top of a blind hill and a bottle-neck where tr,rfic is already a concern. The additional traffic generated by the proposed project will significantly increase the potential for accidents at the subject location unl--- the mitigation measures as recommended in the supporting traffic study are implemented. STAFFRPT\PP18 12 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. ) find the proposed project MAY have a si9nificant effec;L/on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Z Date ' CiT/y///OF / For T~MECULA STAFFRPT\PP18 13 CITY OF TEMECULA ) SITE_ VICINITY MAP r CASE NO. P.C. DATE ;-p CZ 2555 CZ :;'409 Z CITY OF TEMECULA ) r'~-I / " cz 4386 / CZ 2757 / (;ENIERA;, R-3. CZ 1539 -- -- A2 20 -2- :5000 cz ~'R-3-3000 CZ 4724 CZ 4136 CZ 297; R-2 CZ 4433 CZ 4140 R-R ~',~CZ CZ 1026 SP ZONE CZ 5105 ZONE MAP CZ 9 R-2 R-R CASE NO. ?P 7_40 P.C. DATE ~o/"71~ ,) CITY OF TEMECULA ) SITE_ LAND CASE NO. .C. DATE