HomeMy WebLinkAbout111898 PC Agendain compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to parUclpate in this meeting, plea. contact the
office of the Community Development Oepamtment at (909) 814-640(l. NoUficaOon 48 hours Ixlor to a meeUng will enabb the CIty to make
reasonable arrangements to ensue accessibili~ to that meeUng [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II]
TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
November 18, 1998, 6:00 PM
43200 Business Park Drive
Council Chambers
Temecula, CA 92390
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Slaven
Reso Next In Order #98-041
ROLL CALL:
Guerriero, Naggar, Slaven, Soltysiak and Webster
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 no__t listed on the Agenda, a pink "Request to Speak"
form should be filled out and filed with the Commission Secretary.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name 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. Fire Department Presentation on "Hazardous Materials"
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
Case No.:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Planning Application No. PA98-0410 (Development Plan)
Randy and Gary Baker
Northeast comer of Rio Nedo and Calle Empleado
The design, construction and operation of two (2) industrial buildings,
20,385 square feet and
17,720 square feet respectively, on properties zoned LI (Light
Industrial)
Environmental Action: Mitigated Negative Declaration
Planner: Carole Donahoe, Project Planner
Recommendation: Approval
Case No.: Planning Application No PA98-0348 (Development Plan)
Applicant: Bdan Frenk, Saddleback and Associates
Location: Located at the knuckle of Enterprise Circle West (APN 921-480-015)
Proposal: A request to approve a Development Plan to construct and operate
a 22,668 square foot industrial speculative building.
Environmental Action: Mitigated Negative Declaration
Case Planner: John DeGange, Project Planner
Recommendation: Approval
Case No: Planning Application No. PA98-0386 (Development Plan)
Applicant: John Firestone
Location: On the southeast corner of Rancho California Road and Ridge Park
Ddve
Proposal: The design, construction and operation of a 51,289 square foot
speculative office building with associated parking and landscaping
located on a parcel containing 4.01 gross acres.
Environmental Action: Mitigated Negative Declaration
Planner: Patty Anders, Assistant Planner
Recommendation: Approval
Case No.: Planning Application No. PA98-0347 (Development Plan)
Applicant: Bdan Fronk, Saddleback
Location: On the west side of Commerce Center Ddve, adjacent to Murrieta
Creek.
Proposal: The design. construction and operation of 15 speculative industrial/
manufacturing/office buildings totaling 81,885 square feet with
assodated par~ing and landscaping located on two pamels consisting
of 6.02 acres.
Environmental Action: Mitigated Negative Declaration
Planner: Patty Anders, Assistant Planner
Recommendation: Approval
PLANNING MANAGERS REPORT
COMMISSIONER REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting:
December 2, 1998, 6:00 PM, City Council Chambers
43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California
R :\wimbervg\plancomm~agendas\ 11 - 18-98 .doc
ITEM #2
CITY OF TEMECULA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DMSION
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
November 18, 1998
Fire Department Hazardous Materials Chemical Classification and Quanti~cation
Packet
At the request of Commissioner Guerriero the Planning Staff has met with the Fire Department
regarding the on-site storage and use of hazardous materials in the industrial and commemial zones
within the City. The Fire Department has created and is currently using a Chemical Classification
and Quantification Packet (reference Attachment No. 1) to review the classifications of hazardous
materials used on project sites. Howard Windsor, Battalion Chief/Fire Marshall will attend the
November 18, 1998 hearing to provide an overview of the Chemical Classification and
Quantification Packet and address any comments the Commission may have.
Attachments:
1. Chemical Classification and Quanti~cation Packet - Blue Page 2
\\TEMEC_FS201XDATA~DEPTSXPLAhrNINGXPLANNINGXfd - hazardous pe.doc
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
CHEMICAL CLASSIFICATION AND QUANTIFICATION PACKET
\\TEM EC_FS201 \DATAXDEPTSXPLANNINGXPLANNINGXfd - hazardous pc .doc
2
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive - PO Box 9033 - Temecula, California 92589-9033
(909) 694-6439
FAX (909) 694-6478
PURPOSE:
The classification of hazards for chemicals stored, used, and handled at facilities is equired to
ensure that proper types of fire and life safety protection systems and procedures are in place. The
information supplied by the applicant is also required to determine application of Title 24 California
Code of Regulations (CCR), 1995 Edition, Part 2 California Building Code (CBC), and Part 9
California Fire Code (CFC) provisions and permit requirements.
SCOPE:
These requirements are applicable to any business storing, using, or handling hazardous materials
within the City of Temecula jusidiction. By completing a Chemical Classification and Quantification
Packet, the hazardous materials inventory statement requirement in Article 80 of the CFC is
satisfied.
GUIDELINES:
Applicability
A. A separate Chemical Classification Packet must be completed for each building,
control area, outside storage area, or other detached structure at a facility.
Specific instructions regarding the completion of this packet are detailed in the
following attached Chemical Classification Packet, Attachment I.
Page 1 of !9
,Atraehme~lll;
CHEMICAL CLASSIFICATION PACKET
ZV'EW OCCUPANCT AND/OR TENANT IMPROVEMENT
Dam: /__/._
Facility Name:
Address:
Dear Architect/Business Owner:
The classification of all chemicals stomf, used, or handled at your fm:ility is requited prior to
approval of any plans. This inform=tlon will be used to demrmi= application of Unifortn Fir~
Code provisions aml permit requirem~ms. This information is mtuimi regasdless of your
statJl$ with th~ l-l~7~rdous lVlar~rinlg Disclosure Office (th~ "Admini~l~rilg Agency" m~nd:~t~d
by Chapter 6.95 of the Cnlifornin Health and Safety Code which requires disclosure of
chemicals in quantities excreting sl~cific t~hold quantities). ff no chemicals or otl~
hazardous materials will be used, stored, or handled at th~ facility, a signca statement from
business owner or property mnnaZ~r will be a~:~pt.~i in liell Of rhi~ cla~sifiaction packet.
Attached are s~mple chemical classification forms and a list of definitions of h~Tnrd classes as
defm~d by tl~ 1994 Uniform Fir~ Co~. Tim chmnical classifications that can be ~ ar~
re,inhered 1 through 32; only these d-finitious can be used when d~lffi'rninin~ th~ classificatiolJ
of each of your ch~nicals. Other c!~finitious are included to assist you with completion of the
packet. Each building and/or control area, oui~ide storage area or other detached
structure at the facility requires a separate Chemical Classification Packet InClUdin~ a
Snrnmfry Sheet for each area. A sample layout of a facility'that requires 5 scparam Chemical
Classification Packets is shown in Figure 1 with th~ areas identified.
The sample stzets included in rhi~ pach:t should be used to classify all chemicals sinrot, used,
or handled at your facility regl~rdless of ql,nntities. Three scparam lists arc required to bc
completed for ~ Chemical Classification Paclmt. These are:
1. Classification Form
2. Classification Summary Sheet
3. Area Totals
hg~2ofl9
L~hs
(Conuol Area 2)
·
One-hour occupancy separa~on
Warehouse (Coou-ol Am 4)
(Coon~l Am 3)
Figurel
Use the snmples provided as a guideline in desj_tminE your own documents. The format used in
the samples must be m~inr=in,,d in your documents. All fields must be completed. Provide the
name of the facility, adds~s, ana area addressed by the packet (if applicable) on each page of
the Chemical Classification Packet. Use 9nlZ the definitions provided to classify your
chemicals into all applicable categories. The forms should be typed or printed in black ink
only. No incomplete forms will be accepted.
Classirw. ation Fo, m, sample #1, is a list of all the chemicais used, stored, or h~ndled at tile
facility (thi~ sample is for a single con~ol area within a building). Example chemicals have
been provided with all required fields completed. T1~ following list explains the information
required in each field.
Common or Trad~ Name: This is the n~m~ of tlz chemical as it appears on the
container label.
Chemical N~me(s) and %: This is the technical nnme for the ~ chemical. If the
chemical is a mixture, list the components of the mixture with their percentage
corr~poSition. l/it is a pure chemical, list the pereenl concentration, e.g., sulfuric acid-
50%.
CAS number: The Ctmm~ Abswact number can sometlm,s be found on the Material
Safety Data Sheet. If not. a chemical m~.~.~, should provide thi~ information (see
reference list on page 5). A CAS m2mber IllliSt be provided for each component of
mixtures.
Pap3ofl9
Mazcrial Form: Is che product a solid, liquid or gas? Solids sh,I! be reported in
pounds, Uquids repor~d in gallons, and gases reported in cubic feet, Liquefied
petrolearn gases and cryogenic liquids must be convened to gRliODS.
AerosoIs must be reported in pOnnd~ nntt ChSSilrle~l as Level I, 2, or 3 based on the
fJnmmnhillty Of the propellent nntt the product (see definition of aerosol). However, the
quantity of nonfiammable/combustible componems in the acrosol must be r,:poned in
gallons, e.g., .016 gallons (2 ounces) of ten~metiu-in in 'Combat Fogger', The .016
gallons of tewamerlLrin mus~ also be included in ~ Snmmnnf for thnr/those
class(es).
Qnanriry Sml~i: The ~mOL!//i in norage Within ~ COnrnlner~ in ~be building or
Quantity In use: The amoun~ in use in tbc process/dispeusing area(s) of d3c buitding.
Also, indicam whether the amoum in use is in an ~ or closed system(s) (see attached
defmifious).
· Location: Is the product in a cabinet, lab room, high-piled rack system, open vat, etc.
H~-~rd Class(es): All h~,nrd classifications for th~ chemical must be listed. Ther~
my be several applicable classifications.
It is important to list all applicable classificatious for each chemical because the code
requirements vary for different classificatious. ff ~ hazard camgory includes sub-classes,
such as Water-Ructive C/all,t, ensure that the appropriate sub-class is identLfied.
Classification Snmm~ry Sheet, sample f2, is a list of the chemicals from the Classification
Form. To develop this sheet r~organiz~ the information from the Classification Form ~nd_ list
it by h,7~rd class. The following is a list of the r~quired reformation:
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
Chemical Name
Amoum Stored
Open System Use Amount (O.S. Use)
Closed System Use Amoum (C.S. Use)
Location of Storage
Location of Use
Totals for Interior Swrage
Totals for Exterior Swra~e
Totals for Open System Use
To?~k for Closed System Use
Page4ofl9
.~'ea Totals, sample #3, is a list of the totals for the building and/or area.
If upon Fire Authority review, there ks any question as to the accuracy or completeness of the
information provide, a third party technical report may be requixed at the expense of your
business (1994 Uniform Fire Coae Sec. 103.1.1).
Please return the completed chemical classification forms antt .~umtnary as soon as possible so
t.h..at your plan review will not be delayed.. If you have any questions about these requirements
or me mfonnaUon provided, contact me at ( ) .-U. so, contact
mc Hazardous Materials Disclosure Office at ( ) to ensure you are m compliancc
with local, state, and federal Cornm,mriy Right-To-Know laws.
Respect'fuRy,
Fise Safer)' Specialist
REFERENCE BOOKS:
Tn~- M;rck Index. 10th eel.. Merck & Co. In~., Rahway. New Jersey 07065 (1983)
Sling. Masshall. Handtx~ok of Toxic and l-taTardous Chemicals and Carcino~ens. Noyes Publication.s. Mill Roacl. Patio
Rxagc, New Jersey 07856
:..ewts St.. Richard J., Sax's Dangerous P'ro~enies oflndusmal Materials, 8th e~.. Van Noscrancl Rein.hold Put~iicauons.
:'.5 Fif'.h Avenue, New York. New Yorl~ 10003
Hzn~t,nn~ ~,f Compresseel Gases. Compresseel Gas Association t. nc., 1225 Jcffersou Davis Highway, .~tin~on. Virgima
222~
:~r'. Prolecnon Guide to bla:,ardou~ Materials. 10th ed.. National FLrc Prou:cUon Association. 1 Bam:r-jmasch Paxlc.
.~.O, Box 9101 Quiney, Ma.sslehu.sem 02269
Fluer, L~"ry. Hanrdou~ Materials Classification Guide, ln~matiom~l Fire Coch: kastim~e, 5360 Worlanan Mill Roaa.
Whittier, California. 90601
Page 5 of 19
UNY~ORM FIRE CODR DEFYNTrIONS FOR ]:[AT, ARBOUS M~xTI~.RIAI.q
BOTH PHYSICAl. AI~rD I~.AT .TH tIAT. ARDS
1994 F-13ITION
1. ~ .OSIV~.: A chemical that causes a sudden, almost insmnmr~ous release of pressure,
gas and heat when subjects! W sudden shock, pressure, or high temperatures or (b) a material
or ch~lnical, other thgn blasting agent, that is commonly used or intended w be used for the
purpose of producing an explosive efteeL
CO1VfPI~SSk"]r) GA.q~.q
COMPRESSD GAS: A material or mixllLre Of materi,i, which is a gas at 68 °F (20°C) or less
at 14.7 psia (101.3 kPa) of pressure and has a boilinE point of 68°F (20°C) or less at 14.7 psia
(101.3 kPa) which is either liquefied, nonliquefied or hi solution, except those gases which
have no ottzr health or physical h,7-rd properties are not comidered to be COmpreSSed ,,nti{
the pressure in the packaging exc~ecls 41 psia (292.5 kPa) at 68°F (20°C). The states of a
compressed gas are categoriz=d as follows: (a) Nonliquefied compressed gases are gases, other
than those in solution, which are in a packa~inS under ttz charged pressure and are entirely
gaseous at a temperature of 68°F (20°C). (b) Liquefied compressed gases are gases which in a
packaging under the charged pressure are partially liquid at a temperature of 68°F (20°C). (c)
Compressed gases in solution are nonliquefied gases which are dissolved in a solvent. (d)
Compressed gas mixtures consist of a mi~CtlLr~ Of tWO Or illore compressed gases contained in a
packaging, the b~7~nt properties of which are represented by the properties of the miXnLre as a
whole.
2- FI ,AMMARI.R GAS: A material which is a gas at 680F (20°C) or less at 14.7 psia (101.3
kPa) of pressure [a material has a boiling point of 680F (20°C) or less at 14.7 psia (101.3
kPa)] which is (a) ignitable at 14.7 psia (101.3 kPa) when in a mixture of 13 percent or less by
volume with air or Co) hs_~ a flammable range at 14.7 psia (101.3 kPa) with air of at least 12
percent, regardless of the lower limit. Th~ limits specified Shmll be determined at 14.7 psia
(101.3 kPa) of pressure and a temperature of 68°F (20°C) in accordmru-e with nationally
recognized sinrid,his.
3. I.IQUI~.FIRD P~OLRUM GA.q H.PGh A material which is composed predominanfiy
of the foliowlnL, hydrocarbons or mixtures of them: pwpane, propylene, but~n~ (norms! butane
or isobutane) and butylenes.
Plg~6ofl9
FI.AMMAI~TJ~. nnd COMBUg-ri ,I.R T.IOUITIS
Classify flnmmnhie and combustible liquids according to
4. FLAMMARt .F, LTOUITI: A liquid having a flash point below 100°F and having a vapor
pressur~ not exceeding 40 psia at 100°F. Class I liquids shall include those having flash poixus
below 100°F and are subdivided as follows:
Class I-A liquids in~lud~ those havi-_a flash points below 730F and having a boiling
point below 100°F.
Cla~ I-B liquids include those having flash poiat~ below 73°I: and having a boiling
point at or above 100°F,
Class I-C liquids include those having flash points at or above 73°F and below 100°F.
5. COMBUSTTRL~.. T,IOl.rfD: A liquid having a flash point at or above 100°F. Combustible
liquids are subdivided as follows:
Class H liquids are those having flash points at or above 100°F and below 140°F.
Class IH-A liquids ar~ those having flash points at or above 140°F and below 200 °F.
Class I!I-B liquids are those liquids having flash polnr~ at or above 200 0F.
SOLIDS
6, FLAMMABI,E SOI.ID: A solid substance, other than ol~ which is defined as a blasting
agent or explosive, that is liable to cause f'u'e through friction or as a result of rezained heat
from manufacture, which has an ignition uern,~:rausre below 212 degrees F, , or which burns so
vigorously or persistently when.ignited that it creates a serious hazard. Flammable solids
include solid materials which when dispersed in air as a cloud may be ignited and cause an
explosion.
ORGANIC PEROXIDF. S
ORGANIC PEROXIDE: An organic compound that contains the bivalent -0-0- su-ucture and
which may be considered to be a structural derivative of hydrogen peroxide where one or both
of the hydrogen atoms have been replaced by an organic radical. Organic peroxides may
present an explosive ba~ant (dewnation or defiagration) or they may be shock sensitive. They
may also decompose into various --~table compounds over an exmnded period of time.
Clnssffica~on of organic peroxides accordln_a to ha~npdS:
?. CI.A.gS I: Class I peroxides are capable of de~agntion, but not detonation. These peroxides
present a high explosion ha~,~ci through rapid decomposition.
Psg~7ofl9
8. CI ,ASS II: Class H peroxides burn very rapidly aud present a severe reactivity bin--hi.
9. CI ,A,~S rH: Class 111 peroxides burn rapidly and present a moderate reactivity b,~nrd.
10. CIA,~S IV: Class IV peroxides burn in the sam. manner as ordinary combustibles and
present a minim.m reaEtivity h~?~rd.
11. CI,A,~S V: Class V peroxides do not burn or present a decomposition h,Tmrcl.
OXYDT77F..R,q
OXIDIZER: A chemical other than a blastin~ agent or explosive that initiates or promotes
combustion in other materials, thereby causing fire either of itself or through the release of
oxygen or other gases.
Classification of Hquid and solid oxjdl?ers according to
12. CLASS 4: An oxidizer that can undergo an explosive reaction du~ to contamination or
exposure to thermal or physical shock. In addition, the oxidizer wffi enhance the burning rate
and my cause spontaneous ignition of combustibles.
13. CI ,ASS 3: An oxidizer that can cause a severe increase in th~ burning rate of combustible
material with which it comes in contact or that will undergo vigorous serf-sustained
decomposition due to co~tion or exposure to heat.
14. CLA.~S 2: An oxidizer that wffi cause a moderate increase in tim burning rate or that may
cause spontaneous ignition of combustible materi~|~ with which it comes in comet.
1S. CI,A,~S h An oxidizer whose primary h,-~rd is that it slightly increases the burning rate
but does not cause spontaneous ignition when it comes in contact with combustible materials.
PYROPRORTC MATF,,RTAT,,~
16. PYROPHORIC: A chemical that will spontaneously ignite in air at or below a
temperature of I30°F.
UNSTARL;, (RW, AC'TfVE) CY,ARS~,S
UNSTABLE MATERIALS: A material, other th~n an explosive, which in the pure state or as
commercially produced will vigorously polymerize, decompose, condense or become serf-
reactive and undergo other violent chemical changes, including explosion, when exposed to
heat, friction or shock, or in the absence of an inhibiWr or in the presence of conr~minants Or
in contact with incompatible materials.
hie 8 of 19
Classffication of unstable reactlye cbfini~lc aCCOrdin,~ tO h~rd.
17. CI,A.~S 4: Materi.l~ which in themselves are readily capable of detonation or of explosive
decomposition or explosive reaction at normal temperatures nnd pressures. This class should
include materials which are sensitive to m~cbanicnl or localized thermnl shock at norrunt
temperatures and pressures.
18. CI .A,~S 3: Materlalg which in themselves are capable of detonation or of explosive
decomposition or' explosive reaction but which requl~ a stron~ initlatin~ sour~ or which must
be heated under confumment before initiation. This degree should include materials which are
sensitive to ttmnnal or ~lcChaniCal shock at elevated temperatures and prcasurcs.
19. CI,A,~S 2: Materials which ~ themselves axe normally ,,n~table and readily undergo
violent chemical change but do not detonate, This degree should include materials which can
undergo chemical chan~e with rapid release of energy at normal temperatures and pressures
and which can undergo violent chemical chan~e at elevated temperatures and pressures.
20. CI,A,~S h Materials which in themselves ar~ normally stable but which can become
unstable at elevated temperatures and pressures.
WATRR-RRAt~'i'iv~. CLARSRS
WATER-REACTIVE SOl ,m/LIQUID MATERIAL: A material which explodes; violently
reacts; produces fiammable, toxic or other baT~rdous gases; or evolves enough heat to cause
self-ignition of nearby combustibles upon exposure to water or moisture.
Classffication of water-rut'five Chomle~lc accordlnE to
21. CI,A,~S 3: Materials which react explosively with water without requiring heat or
confinemere.
22. CI,A,~S 2: Materials which may form potentially explosive mixtures with water.
23. CI,A,~S h Materlak which my react with water with some release of energy but
not violently.
24. CRYOGRNIC FT,LrI"DS: Those fluids that have a normal boiling point below (minns)-150
degrees F.
2S. HIGI41,Y TONIC MATERIAI,R: A material which produces a lethal dose or lerhn!
concentration which falls within any of the following categories:
hie 9 of 19
(a)
A chemicaJ that has a median lethal dose (LDso) of 50 mg/kg or less of body
weight when administered orally to albino rats wej~hin~ between 200 and 300
grams.
Co)
A chemical that has a median lethal dose (LD~ of 200 mg/kg or less of body
weight when administered by continuous contact for 24 hours, or less if death
occurs within 24 hours, with the bare skin of albino rabbits weirbin5 between 2
and3kgeach.
(C)
A chemical that has a median lethal concentration (LC_~ in air of 200 ppm by
volume or less of gas or vapor, or 2 rag/liter of rni~t, fume or dust, when
athninistered by consinuous inhalation for one hour, w albino rats weiEhin~
between 200 and 300 gr~m~ each.
Mixtures of these materials with ordinary materials, such as water, may not warrant
classification as highly toxic. While this syst~n is basically simple in application, any haTard
evaluation which is required for the precise categorization of this type of material shall be
performed by experienced, technically competent persons.
26. TOXIC MAT~.RTAI.: A material which produces a lethal dose or a lethal concernration
within ally Of the foLlowillg categories:
(a)
A chemical or substance that has a median lethal dose (LDso) of more than 50
mg/kg but not more than 500 mg/kg of body weight when srlmini~tered orally to
albino rats weirbinS between 200 and 300 grams each.
Co)
A chemical or substance that has a median letlnl dose (LDso) of more than 200
mg/kg but not more than 1,000 mg/kg of body weight when administered by
continuous contaa for 24 hours, or less if death occurs within 24 hrs., with bare
skin of albino rabbits wei~hin_v between 2 and 3 kilograms each.
(C)
A chemical or substance that has a median lethal concenwation (LCso) in air more
than 200 ppm but not more than 2,000 ppm by volume of gas or vapor, or more
than 2 zng/L but not more than 20 mgFL of mlsl;, f, rne or dust, when administered
by continuous inhalation for one hour, or less if death occurs wirhln O~ hour, tO
aJbino rats Wej~hln_e between 200 and 300 grams each.
27. RADIOAC'r~v'F, MAT$4',kTAT,: A material or combination of materials that spontaneously
emits ionizing radiation.
Pa~ 10 of 19
28. CORROSllr~.: A chemical that causes visible destruction of, or irreversible alterations in.
living tissue by chemical action at the site of COntact. A chemical is considered to be corrosive
if, when tested on the inrnct skin of albino rabbits by the method described in Appendix A to
C.F.R. 49 Pan 173, it destroys or changes irreversibly the swacnffe of the tissue at the site of
contact following an exposure p~riod of four houn. This term does not refer w action on
Lnnn~mnt. e surfaces.
29. CARCllqOGlq?N: A substance that caus~ th~ developmere of cancerous growths in Livin~
tissue. A chemical is considered w be a carcinogen if (a) it has been evaluated by th~
Internationsl Agency for Research on Canca (IARC) and found w be a carcinogen or poreDre1
carcmogcn, or Co) it is listed as a can:inogcn or potential can:inogcn in the latest edition of the
Annual Report on Cazcinogens published by the National Toxicology Prognm~ or (c) it is
regulated by OSHA as a caz~inogcn.
30. IRRrl'ANT: A chemical that is not corrosive. but which causes a reversible i~mmm~itOry
effect on living tissue by chemical action at the site of contact. A chemical is a skin irritant if.
when tested on the sicin of albino rabbits by the methods of 16 C.F.R. 1500.41 for four
hours' exposure or by other appropriate techniques, it results in an empirical score of 5 or
more. A chemical is an cyc in'jt~nr if so determined under the procedure listed in 16 C.F.R.
1500.42 or other approved teChniqlies.
31. SENSITmT, KR: A chemical thnt causes a subsr~ntl.! proportion of exposed people or
~nirn~l~ to develop an allcrgic reaction in normal tissue after repeated exposure to the
chemical.
32. OTI~,R Frlq',AT ,TF[ FIAT, ARt) MAT~,,RIA1, CFARGF,,T ORGAN TOXINSh A rn.t~rial
which affects target organs of the body, inClUdlnE, but not ]imited to, those materials which
produce liver damage, kidney damage, damage to the nervous system, act on the blood to
decrease hemoglobin function, deprive the body tissue of oxygen, or affect reproductive
capabilities, including mutations (chromosonal tt~m~Ec) or teratogens (effects on fcmses).
33. AF, ROSOI.S: A product which is dispensed from an aerosol container by a propellant.
For classification of aerosois, refer to the following table.
Pa2e 11 c
CLASSIFICATION OF AEROSOLSz
PROPELLANT
(percentage)~
Non~amm~ble
Nonfiammable
< 50 Flammable
l 50 tO < 80 Fl~mm~ble
~ 80 Flarere.hie
Non~nmm.ble
< 50 Fl~mm.ble
z 50 Flamm~ble
Nol:Lfiammable
( 50 Fhmm~ble
z 50 Flammable
Nonfiammable or ( 80
Fla~mable
~ 80 Flammable
FLAMMABLE CONSTITUENTS IN
BASE PRODUCT (percentage)z
25 and Nonwater Soluble
85 and Water Soluble
s25
s25
CLASSIFICATION
1
I
2
3
> 85 and Wmr Soluble 2
> 25 and Water Soluble 2
> 25 ~nd Water Soluble 3
> 25 to s 55 and Nonwaxer Soluble 2
> 25 to s 55 and Nonwater Soluble 2 .
> 25 to ~ 55 and Nonwater Soluble 3
> 55 ned Nonwater Soluble 3
< 20 ~nd Water Soluble or 3
Nonwater Soluble
The designation of an a~rosol's fiammabiliW shall not be based on the labeling of an asrosol cornairier.
When a flareramble propella~ equah or ez~_~eed_s 50 percem of ltz net wei~h~ of the COn'siet'T COIIL'DB, the classification System shall be
raised to the next higher level.
The base product is defined as the romeo. n, er~:h~dln_e the propelher A base produa r. omponem is considezed flsamm~hle if in flash
point is below 500°F. The percentage of ft=mmshie material in the base product is r. alc~s~p~ as follows:
Percentage of
Flammable Material
weiaht of ~ammshle comnonent~ X 100
(weight of comere- - wei~h~ of plOpelhnt)
· The percentage of propetlant is its proportion of the total conzenzs of the container, by weiglg. The pen:enrage of ptopellant is r. alc~,~.~'
~s follows:
P~n:,'ntage of
Propellain
weiaht of orooellant X 100
(weighz of nomP~rs)
s In unsprinldercd buildin[s, pwduas in this ca~epry shall be ~ a~ Level 2 aerosols.
Ps~ 12of
M],~c~;~ J .AN!?.OUS DIiIFrNri'!ON.q:
The following Definitions will assLst you in completing the Chemical classification forms. However these art
not haTard classes and should not appear on forms.
~ A material with a ~uidity greater than that of 300 penetration asphalt when tested in accordance
with approved s?anttards. The t~rm 'liquid* includes both flammable ~ combustible liquids.
RI~,ACTIVI~, MAT~,RI AT,: A r-a~-,,-ial which can enmr ~o a ha--~ou~ ~cal reaction with other stable
or Hn~abJe materials.
OPP, N ,~YSTI~M: Use of a solid or liquid b='-,rdous material in a vessel or system that is continuously open
to th~ atmosphere during normal operations and where vapors are liberate, or the product is exposed to the
atmosphere during normal operations. Examples of ope~ solids or llclulds i~lude dispensing from or into
open beakers or contai~rs, and dip rank ~ platinv tank operations.
CI.OSED SYSTV. M: Use of a solid or liquid ba-ardOns material in a closed system that remain,: closed
during normal opendons where vapors emitted by the product are not h'beTated outside of the vessel or
system and the product is not exposed to the atmosphere during normal operations, and all uses of
compressed gases. Examples of closed systems for solids and liquids include reaction process operations an
product conveyed through a piping system into a closed vessel, system or piece of equipment.
DETONATION: An exoth~mic reaction characterized by the presence of a shock wave in a material which
establishes and maintaln~ the reaction. The reaction zone progresses through the material at a rate greater
than the velocity of SO-hal. The principle heating moChanigh is one of shock compression. Detonations havt
an explosive effect.
DI~,FLAGRATION: An exothermic reaction, such as the extremely rapid oxidation of a fiammable dust or
vapor in air, in which the reaction progresses through the nnhgX'13~t materj~.l at a rate less than the Velocity 0
sound. A de~agradon can have an explosive effect.
CONTROL ARRA: A building or portion of a bUildlnS Within which the exempted mounts of haTardous
materials are allowed to be swred, dispensed, used or
hie 13 of
SA1VIPLE #3
Company Name:
Company Address:
Class I-B Flammable:
Interior Storage: 20 gal
Exterior Storage: 55 gal
Open System Use: 14 gill
Fhmmable C-sn: .
Interior Storage: 200 cf
Closed System Use: 200 cf
Cla~s I Water Reactlye:
Interior Storage: 55 gal, 50 lb
Open System Use: 0 gal, 7 Ib
Closed System Use: 15 gal, 0 lb
ToxiC;
Interior Storage: 55 gal
Exterior Storage: 110 gal
Open System Use: 55 gal
Closed System Use: 15 gal
Corrosive:
In~rior Storage: 455 gal, I00 Ib
Open Systezn Use: 2~ gal, 17 Ib
Closed System Use: 70 gal, 0 lb
Other Health Hazard:
Interior Swrage: 420 gal, 100 lb
Exterior Storage: 55 ffal, 0 lb
Open Symm Use: 29 gal, 17 Ib
Closetl System Use:70 gal, 0 lb
SensitiTer:
Exterior Swrage: I10 gal
Open System Use: 55 gal
AREA TOTALS (AREA #1)
Clans II Combustible:
h~rior Storage: 15 gal
F. xtefior Storage:110 gal
(~ Sys~n Use: 60 gal
Cln~s 10xidiTer:
Interior Storage: 55 gal, 50 lb
Open Sys~n Use: 10 gal, 10 Ib
Class 2 Un.~ble Reactive:
Interior Storage: 200 cf
Closed System Use: 200 cf
FI~ffhly Toxic:
Interior Smnge: 50 lb
Open System Use: 10 lb
Carci~ogen:
Interior Stonge:
Exterior Storage:
Open System Use:
35 gal, 50 Ib
110 gal, 0 lb
66 gal, 10 lb
Inmfior Storage: 20 gal
Exterior Storage: 165 gal
Open System Use: 69 gal
SAM~.~.
mz
.. ~
HIGH PH,~ STOCK INVENTORY
To be comple~l by the Business Owner or Manage~
List all products containing pl~ics stored over 6 f~t high, List all aerosol products. List ~11 oth~ produ~s stored over 12 feet high. List
ld| ~amm~lb[e atKl c, oRlbll$Iible liquids over I ~ ~
C~p~y N~:
Plm File No:
E~g Sp~ ~ ~:
To~ ~e f~ ~ ~l~g ~ ~d 15 f~t on ~ ~:
PRODUCTS S~O ~C~S-
SOB ~1'~
NON SOLD
PhoneNo.:
Ceiling I-kight:
Sprinklex I-Ie41d Temp.
STORAGE
pAT l ~TS CARTONS AISI, j~
ORRACKS BAGS WKYH-.I
OTHE:R
This informeRon is submitted fo~ detemdnation tithe type of fire protec~on devices that might be required. Any deviations may require
additional protection ~ building iS built or occupied.
I hereby certify all the storage of high pile stock will be limited as indicated above.
A. Commodity Classification:
B. SpnnldersinRac. ks:
C. Fig.:
D. Curves:
E. SprinlderDemity:
By:
F. Spriald~r Tcmp.:
O. Apply Fig 6-8.2:
H, Class H S/P:
I. 1% Hog:
I. Vent Ratio:
IC Veto Spacing:
L. Smoke Detect:
M Curtain Boards:
N. Cur, mBoards:
ITEM #3
RECOMMENDATION:
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
November 18, 1998
Planning Application No. PA98-O410 (Development Plan)
Prepared By: Carole K. Donahoe, AICP, Project Planner
The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff
recommends the Planning Commission:
1. ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Planning Application
No. PA98-0410 (Development Plan);
2. ADOPT the Mitigated Monitoring Program for Planning
Application No. PA98-0410 (Development Plan);
3. ADOPT Resolution No. 98- approving Planning Application
No. PA98-0410 (Development Plan) based upon the Analysis
and Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval.
APPLICATIONINFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
EXISTING LAND USE:
R:\STAFFRPT~410pa98.STAFFRPT.PC2.dOC
Randy and Gary Baker, Transducer Techniques.
Scott Buckles, Dekkon Development
To design, construct and operate two (2) single-story industrial
buildings, 20,375 square feet and 17,720 square feet respectively,
on Parcels 33 and 34 of Parcel Map No. 21382, totaling 2.28 acres.
Northeast comer of Rio Nedo and Calle Empleado
LI (Light Industrial)
North: LI (Light Industrial)
South: LI (Light Industrial)
East: LI (Light Industrial)
West: LI (Light Industrial)
Not requested
BP (Business Park)
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North: Vacant
South: Flow-Serve and Plant Equipment
East: Vacant
West: RDO Rentals
PROJECT STATISTICS
Total Area:
Total Building Area:
Landscape Area:
Paved Area
Lot 33
50,530 sq. ft.
20,375 sq. ft.
12,451 sq. ft.
17,704 sq. ft.
Lot 34
48,787 sq. ft.
(40%) 17,720 sq, ft. (36%)
(25%) 9,885 sq. ~. (20%)
(35%) 21,182 sq. ft. (43%)
Total
99,317 sq. ft.
38,095 sq. ft. (38%)
22.336 sq. ft. (22%)
38,886 sq. ft. (39%)
Parking Required:
Office use: 3,583 sq. ft.
Warehouse: 12,789 sq. ft.
Manufacture: 4,628 so. ft.
Total Vehicle: 21,000 sq. ft.
Total Bicycle:
Total Motorcycle:
12 2,000 sq. ft. 7
13 12,720sq. ft. 13
1_~2 3,000 sa. ft. 8
37 17,720 sq. ~. 28
4 4
1 1
5,583 sq. ft. 19
25,509 sq. ft. 26
7,628 sa. ft. 1_99
38,720 sq. ft. 64
8
2
Parking Provided: 39 44
Standard Vehicle 33 38
Compact Vehicle 6 (15%) 6
Handicapped Accessible 2 2
Bicycle Parking Provided: 5 5
Motorcycle Parking: 0 0
(14%)
83
71
12
4
10
0
Building Height: 30 feet 30 feet
BACKGROUND
A Pre-Application Meeting was held for this project on July 29, 1998. The application for land use
was formally submitted on October 1, 1998. The Development Review Committee Meeting
scheduled for October 15, 1998 was waived by the applicant because there were no further design
changes and corrections to exhibits were minor. The project was deemed complete on October
27, 1998.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant proposes to relocate and expand Transducers Techniques, an existing business
currently operating from facilities in the Rancho California Business Park. The applicant expects
to use the proposed 20,375 square foot building on Lot 33, and share access ddveways with Lot
34. A speculative industrial building is proposed for Lot 34 of 17,720 square feet. Lot 33 and the
two access driveways and drive aisles are proposed for construction in Phase 1, and Lot 34 is
proposed for construction in a later phase.
R:~STAFFRIx~410pa98,STAFFRPT.PC2.doc
2
ANALYSIS
Site Design and Circulation
The project site is located on two parcels at the northeast comer of Calle Empleado and Rio Nedo.
These parcels will share access from both Rio Nedo and Calle Empleado through a reciprocal
access and parking agreement, The main entrances to both buildings face each other, off Rio
Nedo, and provide customer parking areas at this location. Additional parking extends along the
building and along the north property line, .for employees. There are loading areas on the north
side of both buildings, as well as outdoor employee eating areas.
Landscapinq
Both parcels meet the Development Code requirement for 20% landscaping. Landscaping is
provided along all perimeter areas. Enhanced landscaping on both sides of the Calle Empleado
driveway screen loading areas which are a minimum 61 feet from the street on the north side of
the buildings. The applicant has provided landscaping to soften the effect of the handicapped
accessible ramp along Rio Nedo. Landscaping at the entryways of both buildings provide accent
and interest.
Eleven existing African Sumac street trees are proposed for removal in order to facilitate
construction. At the request of staff, African Sumac shall be replaced along Rio Nedo with eight
(8) Sumacs at 36" box size, and along Calle Empleado with six (6) London Plane trees at 36" box
size.
Amhitecture
The building architecture offers features that generate interest such as the rounded walls facing
the entrance to the site. Diagonal walls at the most visible corners can be seen from Rio Nedo
easterly and from the intersection of Calle Empleado and Rio Nedo. Additionally, the main doors
are recessed, which provide focal points as you approach the buildings. Although the sides and
backs of the buildings face Rio Nedo and Calle Empleado, the expanse of walls are broken up with
indents, the strategic use of glass, and differant bands of colors.
The applicant proposes monochromatic colors that are dean and compatible with each other. The
corporate logo has an outline of blue as a contrasting color. The reflective gray glass proposed at
the building fronts will offer an impressive "wall" of glass,
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
An Initial Study has been praparad for this project. The Initial Study determined that although the
proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not
considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and in the
Conditions of Approval. Any impacts will be mitigated to levels less than significant.
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS
The General Plan Land Use designation for the site is BP (Business Park). Existing zoning for the
site is LI (Light Industrial). Office/warehouse/manufacturing uses are permitted with the approval
R:~TAFFRPT%4101~98.~TAFFRFF.PC2.do~
3
of a development plan pursuant to Chapter 17.08 of the Development Code. The project as
proposed and conditioned is consistent with the policies contained in the General Plan and with the
requirements of the-Development Code and the City's Design Guidelines.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The project is proposed within an existing.business park that is partially developed. The project
is compatible in use and design with existing development in the area. Staff recommends approval
of the project.
FINDINGS
The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all
applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City, including Mt.
Palomar Lighting Ordinance and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance.
The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety and welfare. The project as proposed complies with all City Ordinances and meets
the standards adopted by the City of Temecula for the protection of the public health, safety
and welfare.
An Initial Study was prepared for the project and has determined that, although the project
could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not considered to be
significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and in the Conditions
of Approval added to the project.
The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species of their
habitats, including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds. The project site
has been previously disturbed and graded, and street improvements have already been
installed on site. There are no native species of plants, no unique, rare, threatened or
endangered species of plants, no native vegetation on or adjacent to the site. Further,
there is no indication that any wildlife species exist, or that the site serves as a migration
corridor. A DeMinimus impact finding can be made for this project.
R:\STAFFRPT~410pa98.STAFFRPT.PC2.dOC
4
Attachments:
PC Resolution - Blue Page 6
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval- Blue Page 9
Initial Study - Blue Page 21
Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 34
Exhibits - Blue Page 40
A. Vicinity Map
B, Zoning Map
C. General Plan Map
D. Site Plan
E. Landscape Plan
F. Floor Plans
G. Elevations
H. Color Rendering
I, Grading Plan
R:~STAPFRPT~410p~98.STA,cPIU~.PC2.doc
ATTACHMENT NO, 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 98-
R:~STAFFRPT~410pa98.STAFFRPT.PC2.doc
6
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 98-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA98-0410 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) FOR THE DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF TWO (2) INDUSTRIAL
BUILDINGS, 20,375 SQUARE FEET AND 17,720 SQUARE FEET
RESPECTIVELY, ON TWO (2) LOTS TOTALING 2.28 ACRES,
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 909-290-033 AND
909-290-034
WHEREAS, Randy and Gary Baker of Transducer Techniques filed Planning Application
No. PA98-0410 in accordance with the City of Temecuia General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA98-0410 was processed including, but not limited
to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA98-0410 on
November 18, 1998, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City
staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did, testify either in support or opposition
to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. PA98-0410;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
by reference.
That the above radtations are true and correct and are heraby incorporated
Section 2. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission, in approving Planning
Application No. PA98-0410, heraby makes the following findings as required in Section 17.05.010.F
of the Temecula Municipal Code:
A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with
all applicable raquiraments of State law and other Ordinances of the City, including Mr. Palomar
Lighting Ordinance and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance.
B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public
health, safety and welfare. The project as proposed complies with all City Ordinances and meets
the standards adopted by the City of Temecula for the ~rotection of the public health, safety and
welfare.
C. An Initial Study was prepared for the project and has determined that, although the
project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not considered to be
significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and in the Conditions of
Approval added to the project.
R:XSTAFFRPTN410pa98.STAFFRPT.PC2 .doc
7
The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species
of their habitats, including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds.
The project site has been previously disturbed and graded, and street
improvements have already been installed on site. There are no native species of
plants, no unique, rare, threatened or endangered species of plants, no native
vegetation on or adjacent to the site. Further, there is no indication that any wildlife
species exist, or that the site serves as a migration corridor. A DeMinimus impact
finding can be made for this project.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Study has been prepared for this
project. The Initial Study determined that although the proposed project could have a significant
effect on the environment, these effects are not considered to be significant due to mitigation
measures contained in the project design and in the Conditions of Approval. Any impacts will be
mitigated to levels less than significant.
Section 4. Conditions That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby
conditionally approves Planning Application No. PA98-0410 (Development Plan) for the design,
construction and operation of two (2) industrial buildings, 20,375 square feet and 17,720 square
feet respectively, on two (2) lots totaling 2.28 acres, located on the northeast corner of Calle
Empleado and Rio Nedo, as known as Assessors Parcel Nos. 909-290-033 and 909-290-034,
and subject to the project specific conditions set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and
incorporated herein by this reference.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this eighteenth day of November, 1998.
Marcia Slaven, Chairperson
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 eighteenth day of
November, 1998 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:~TAFFRPT~410pa98.STAFFRPT.PC2.doc
8
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
R:\STAFFRFF\410pa98.STAFFRFr. PC2,doc
9
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA98-0410 Development Plan
Project Description:
Assessor's Parcel No.:
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
To design, construct and operate two (2) industrial
buildings, 20,375 square feet and 17,720 square feet
respectively, on hvo (2) lots totaling 2.28 acres
909-290-033 and 909-290-034
November 18, 1998
November 18, 2000
PLANNING DIVISION
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of
Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file
the Notice of Determination with a DeMinimus Finding for the Mitigated or Negative
Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code
of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant has
not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division the check as
required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of
condition (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)).
General Requirements
The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to
indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own
selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or
instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees,
consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions,
awards, judgements, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek
monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the
approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal
board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning
the Planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner
of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further
cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all
action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such
defense.
3. This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall
become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction
contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year pedod which is thereafter diligently
R:\STAFFRP~410pa98.STAFFRPT.PC2.dOC
10
pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this
approval.
The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved Mitigation
Monitoring Program,
Outside storage of equipment or materials is not permitted with this development plan.
Should any outside storage be contemplated for the site, the applicant shall first file a
wdtten request to do so with a site. plan showing the location, size and screening of the
outside storage area, for review and approval by the Planning Manager.
The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "D"
Site Plan contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning
Division.
Landscaping shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "E" Landscape Plan.
Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable
satisfaction of the Planning Manager and the Temecula Development Code. If it is
determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Manager shall have
the authority to require the property owner to bdng the landscaping into conformance with
the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall
be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest.
Building elevations shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits "G-1 through G-4
Building Elevations, contained on file with the Community Development Department -
Planning Division.
The colors and materials for this project shall substantially conform to the following list of
approved colors and materials and with Exhibit "J" Color and Matedal Board, contained on
file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. Any deviation from
the approved colors and materials shall require approval of the Community Development
Director.
Matedal
Concrete walls - primary
Concrete walls - secondary
Concrete Walls - secondary
Glass
Aluminum window frames
Doors
Color
Frazee FZ001 "White"
Frazee FZ384 "Cadmium" (Light Grey)
Frazee FZ115 "Cape Cod Grey" (Dark Grey)
Reflective Grey
Dark bronzed "Black"
Frazee FZ384 "Cadmium" (Light Grey)
10.
All mechanical and roof equipment shall be screened from public view by architectural
features integrated into the design of the structure, as depicted in Exhibit "K" Roof-Mounted
Equipment Locations," on file in the Planning Department.
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
11.
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal
Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by
providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid.
R: ',STAFFRPT~410pa98.STAFFRPT. PC2.doc
11
12.
The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided
by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and return one
signed set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files.
13.
The applicant shall revise all Exhibits to reflect the final conditions of approval that will be
provided by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and submit
five (5) full size copies and a reduced copy. Additionally, two (2) 8" X 10" glossy
photographic color prints of approved Exhibit "J" (Color and Materials Board) shall be
submitted to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files.
All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be readable on the
photographic prints.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
14. A Consistency Check fee shall be per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
15.
Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department - Planning Division for apprevaL These plans shall
conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "E" Landscape Plan, or as amended by
these conditions. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants
shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The
cover page shall identify the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The
plans shall be accompanied by the following items:
a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal).
b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved
plan).
16.
The applicant shall pay Development Impact Fees in accordance with Ordinance No. 97-09.
The Planning Department has determined that the project shall pay Development Impact
Fees under the Business Park/Industrial type of land use.
Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits
16.
An Administrative Development Plan application for signage shall be required for any
signage not included on Exhibit "H" Color Rendedng or as amended by these conditions.
17.
A separate building permit shall be required for all signage identified on the approved
Exhibit "H" Color Rendedng or as amended by these conditions.
18.
All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the
approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Planning
Manager. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation
system shall be properly constructed and in good working order.
R:\STAFFRPT~410pa98.STAFFR.PT,PC2.dOC
12
19.
Performance secudties, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to
guarantee the maintenance of the plantings, in accordance with the approved construction
landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Community Development Department
- Planning Division for one year from final certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the
landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the
Planning Manager, the bond shall be released.
20.
Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently
affixed reflectodzed 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 intedor end of the parking space at a minimum
height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or
centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground,
or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the
off-street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously
stating the following:
"Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not
displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for
persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense.
Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 909 696-3000."
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.
21.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with pdor to occupancy or any use allowed
by this permit.
PUBLICWORKS DEPARTMENT
Unless othenNise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any
Government Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site plan all
existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and
drainage courses. and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review
and revision.
General Requirements
22.
A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site flat work and
improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way.
23.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works pdor to
commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way.
24.
All improvement plans, and grading plans, shall be coordinated for consistency with
adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted
on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars.
R:\STAFFRFT~410pa98.STAFFRPI'.PC2.doc
13
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
25,
A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and
appmved bythe Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary
erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private
property.
26.
The Developer shall post secudty and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading
and erosion control improvements. in conformance with applicable City Standards and
subject to approval by the Department of Public Works,
27.
A Soil Report shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and submitted to the
Director of the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report
shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the
construction of engineered structures and pavement sections.
28.
The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No
grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the
project is shown to be exempt.
29.
As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer
shall receive wdtten clearance from the following agencies:
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation Distdct
Planning Department
Department of Public Works
30.
The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an
Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the
subject property.
31.
The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site
work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works.
32.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier s check
or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan
fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this
property, no new charge needs to be paid.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
33.
Precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of Temecula Standards subject to
approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. The following design criteria
shall be observed:
Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C.
paving.
R: \STAFFRPT~410pa98.STAFFRPT.PC2 .doc
14
b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A.
Street light shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance
with Ordinance 461,
Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages
in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400 and 401.
e. All street and driveway cantedine intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed
through undersidewalk drains,
34.
The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula
General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by
the Director of the Department of Public Works:
Improve Calle Empleado (Principal Collector Highway Standards - 78' R/W) to
include installation of sidewalk, street light and utilities (including but not limited to
water and sewer).
Improve Rio Nedo (Pdncipal Collector Highway Standards - 78' R/W) to include
installation of sidewalk, relocation of existing street light, drainage facility and utilities
(including but not limited to water and sewer).
35.
The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with
the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer
shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
36. The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the adjacent property.
37.
The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as
required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and
all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06.
38.
The Developer shall record a written offer to participate in, and waive all dghts to object to
the formation of an Assessment District, a Community Facilities District, or a Bridge and
Major Thoroughfare Fee Distdct for the construction of the proposed Westem Bypass
Corridor in accordance with the General Plan. The form of the offer shall be subject to the
approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
39.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
wdtten clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water Distdct
Eastern Municipal Water District
Department of Public Works
40. All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and
R:\STAFFRPT~410pa98.STAFFRPT.PC2.dOC
15
City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works.
41.
The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall
be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department
of Public Works.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
42.
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted
to the Planning Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation
Fees.
43.
Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining
property or public rights-of-way. All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown
on electricel plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check
approval and shall comply with the requirements of City Ordinance No, 655 regarding light
pollution,
44.
Comply with applicable provisions of the 1994 edition of the California Building, Plumbing
and Mechanicel Codes; 1993 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title
24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code.
45.
Submit at time of plan review, a complete extedor site lighting plans showing compliance
with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other
outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building
and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly
upon adjoining property or public dghts-of-way.
46.
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted
to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School
Mitigation Fees.
47.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
48.
The Occupancy classification of the proposed buildings shall be B/S-I/F-1 .Construction
Type will be Type IIIN.
49. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
50.
All building and fadlities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations, Provide
all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
51. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building,
52. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
53. Provide path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
54. Provide house electdcal meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire
R:\STAFFRPT\410pa98.STAFFRPT.pC2.doc
16
alarm systems.
55.
Restreom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the previsions of the 1994
edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code, Appendix C.
56. Previde an approved automatic fire sprinkler system.
57.
Previde appropriate stamp of a registered prefessional with original signature on plans
submitted for plan review.
58.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic
and mechanical plan for plan review.
59.
Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer
engineer are required for plan review submittal, only if trusses are used.
60, Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility,
61.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
62.
Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls require separate
approvals and permits.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
The following are the Fire Department Conditions of Appreval for this project. All questions
regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau.
63.
Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by
the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the Uniform
Building Cede (UBC), Uniform Fire Code (UFC), and related codes which are in forca at the
time of building plan submittal.
64,
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commercial buildings per UFC Appendix Ill.A, Table A-Ill-A-I. The
developer shall previde for this project, a water system capable of delivedng 1500 GPM at
20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 1850 GPM for
a total fire flow of 3350 GPM with a 2 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted
during the appreval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic
fire pretection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as
given above has taken into account all information as provided. (UFC 903.2, Appendix
Ill.A)
65,
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per UFC
Appendix Ill.B, Table A-Ill-B-1. A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants (6"
x 4" x 2-2 "outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access reads and adjacent public
streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 400 feet apart and shall be located no more than 225
feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access read(s) frontage to a hydrant.
The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The
upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (UFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix III-
R:\STAFFRPTX410pa98.STAFFRFr,PC2.doc
I7
B)
66.
As required by the Uniform Fire Code, when any portion of the building(s) is in excess of
150 feet from a water supply on a public street, on site fire hydrants are required. For this
project on site fire hydrants are required. (UFC 903.2)
67.
If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection
prior to any building construction. (UFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2)
68.
Pdor to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire
Department vehicle access reads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any
portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access reads shall be an all
weather surface designed for 70,000 Ibs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet.
( UFC sec 902 and Ord 95-15)
69.
Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than
twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13)
feet six (6) inches. (UFC 902.2.2.1 and Ord 95-15)
70.
Prior to building construction, dead end road ways and streets in excess of one hundred
and fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of
accommodating fire apparatus. (UFC 902.2.2.4)
71.
Pdor to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water
system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to installation. Plans shall be:
signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature
block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards.
After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to
the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire
hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the apprepdate water agency prior to any
combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (UFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2
and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1 )
72.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers"
shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (UFC 901.4.3)
73.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, all commercial buildings
shall display street numbers in a prominent location on the street side of the building. The
numerals shall be minimum twelve (12) inches in height for buildings and six (6) inches for
suite identification on a contrasting background. In strip centers, businesses shall post the
suite address on the rear door(s). (UFC 901.4.4 and Ord 95-15)
74.
Pdor to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and
type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system.
Fire spdnkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to
installation. (UFC Article 10, UBC Chapter 9 and Ord 95-15)
75. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for
monitodng the spdnkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm
system monitored by an appreved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans
shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to installation. (UFC
R:XSTAFFRPT\410pa98.STAFFRPT.PC2.dOC
18
76.
77.
Article 1 O)
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be
provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be
located to the dght side of the main entrance door. The Knox-Box shall be supervised by
the alarm system. (UFC 902.4)
Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible
stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: an
automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage
arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department
access doors and Fire department access roads. Buildings housing high-piled combustible
stock shall comply with the provisions Uniform Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable
National Fire Protection Association standards. (UFC Article 81)
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
The TCSD has reviewed the aforementioned application and conditions the project as follows:
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits:
78. If additional arterial street lighting is required, the developer shall file an application with the
TCSD and pay the appropriate energy charges related to the transfer of said lights to the
OTHER AGENCIES
79.
Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control
Distdct's transmittal dated October 19, 1998, a copy of which is attached. The fee is made
payable to the Riverside County Flood Control Water District by either a cashiers check or
money order, prior to the issuance of a grading permit (unless deferred to a later date by
the District), based upon the prevailing area drainage plan fee.
80.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated October 7, 1998, a copy of which
is attached.
81.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health, Hazardous Materials Division's transmittal dated
October 9, 1998, a copy of which is attached.
82.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho Califomia
Water Districts transmittal dated October 7, 1998, a copy of which is attached.
R:\STAFFRPT~410pa98.STAFFRPT.pC2.dOC
19
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance
with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be
subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicanrs Signature
R:\STAFFRPT~I0pa98.STAFi~drF.PC2.doc
20
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
INITIAL STUDY
R:~STAFFR.F~410pa98.STAFFRFT.PC2.doc
21
CITY OF TEMECULA
Environmental Checklist
,
Project Title:
Lead Agency Name and Address:
Contact Person and Phone Number:
Project Location:
Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
General Plan Designation:
Zoning:
Description of Project:
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
Other public agencies whose
approval is required:
Planning Application No. PA98-0410 (Development
Plan)
City of Temecula, 43200 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, CA 92589
Carole K. Donahoe, AICP, Project Planner (909)
694-6400
Northeast comer of Rio Nedo and Calle Empleado
- Assessor Parcel No.'s 909-290-033 & 909-
290-034
Transducer Techniques, Inc., Randy and Gary
Baker, 43178 Business Park Drive, Suite B101,
Temecula, CA 92590
BP (Business Park)
LI (Light Industrial)
To design, construct and operate two (2) industrial
buildings,20385 square feet and 17,720 square
feet respectively, on two lots totaling 2.28 acres
The project site is within a partially developed
business park. It is surrounded on the south and
west with developed light industrial uses. Both
the north and east properties adjacent to the site
are currently vacant.
Riverside County Fire Department, Riverside
County Health Department, Temecula Police
Department, Eastern Municipal Water District,
Rancho California Water District, Southern
California Gas Company, Southern California
Edison Company, General Telephone Company,
and Riverside Transit Agency.
R:\STAFFRP1M10pa98.STAFFRPT.pC2.doC
22
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving
at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the
following pages.
[ ] Land Use and Planning [ ] Hazards
[ ] Population and Housing [ ] Noise
IX] Geologic Problems [ ] Public Services
IX] Water [ ] Utilities and Service Systems
[ ] Air Quality [X] Aesthetics
[ ] Transportation/Circulation [ ] Cultural Resources
[X] Biological Resources [ ] Recreation
[ ] Energy and Mineral Resources [ ] Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an
attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will
be prepared.
Date
R:\STAFFRPT~410pa98.STAFFRPT.PC2.doc
2~
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Pot~tially
Significant
pote~rldiy Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigalion Significant
Impact Incoqxwated In~ct
No
Impact
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
l.b.
l.e,
a. Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source 1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17) [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
b. Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
c. Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
(Source 1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17) [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
d. Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to
soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)?
(Source 1, Figure 5-4, Page 5-17) [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
e. Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established
community (including low-income or minority community)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
The project will not conflict with applicable environmental plans or polices adopted by agendes with jurisdiction over the project. The
project is consistent with the City's General Plan Land Use Designation of BP. Impacts from all General Plan Land Use Designations
were analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report for (EIR) the General Plan. Agerides with jurisdiction within the City commented
on the scope of the analysis contained in the EIR and how the land uses would impact their particular agency. Mitigatjon measures
approved with the EIR will be applied to this project Further, all agencies with jurisdiction over the project are also being given the
opportunity to comment on the project and it is anticipated that they will make the appropriate comments as to how the project relates
to their specific environmental plans or polices. The project site has been previously graded and services have been extended into
the area. There will be limited, if any environmental effects on environmental plans or polices adopted by agencies with jurisdiction
over the project. No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including low-income or minodty
community). The project site is vacant. Them is no established residential community (including low-income or minority community)
at this site. Furriermore, the site is a commercially zoned propert'/that does not allow residential developments. No significant effects
are anticipated as a result of this project.
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would be proposal:
2.8.
2.b.
a. Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
projects?
b. Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
indirecdy (e.g. through project in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)?
c. Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
The project will not cumulalively exceed offidal regional or local population projections. The project is a speculative industrial buiiding
that is consistent with the Cit]/s General Plan Land Use Designation of Business Park. Sinco the project is consistent with the City's
General Plan. and does not exceed the floor area ratio for Business Park, it will not be a significant contributor to population growth
that will comulatively exceed official regional or local population projections. No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this
project.
The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The project is consistent with the General Plan
Land Use Designation of Business Park. The project will not likely cause people to relocate to or within Temecuta, but will serve the
needs of existing residents. Therefore, the project will not induce substantial growth in the area, and no significant effects are
anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not displace any type of housing. The project site is vacant commercially zoned property; therefore no housing will be
displaced. No significant effects are antidpated as a result of this project.
R:\CEQA\,.348PA98.1as ll/i2,/9~jid 24
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Polemially Units Less Than
Sigui~cant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorponucd Impact
NO
Impact
3.b,c,
g,h.
3.d
3.e
3.f
3.i.
GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result
in or expose people t0 potential impacts involving?
a. Fault rupture? (Source 1, Figure 7-1, Pg. 7-6) [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
b. Seismic ground shaking? (Source 1, Figure 7-1, Pg. 7-6) [ ] IX] [ ] [ ]
c. Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
(Source 1, Figure 7-2, Pg. 7-8)
d. Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
e. Landslides or mudflows? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
f. Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
from excavation, grading or fill?
g. Subsidence of the land? (Source 2, Figure 7, Pg. 68) [ ] IX] [ ] [ ]
h. Expansive soils? [ ] IX] [ ] [ ]
i. Unique geologic or physical features? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
The project may have a potentially significant impact on people involving seismic ground shaking as the project is located in
Southern Califomia, an area which is seismically active. There may also be a potentially significant impact from seismic ground
failure, liquefaction, subsidence and expansive soils. Any potentially significant impacts will be mitigated through building
construc~on, which is consistent with Uniform ~ilding Code standards. In addition, a soils report shall be required to be submitted
prior to the issuance of grading permits. The conclusions and recommendations cenfained in this report will be utilized in the
development of this site, which will Serve to mitigate any potentially significant impocts from expansive soils. The soil reports will
also contain recemmendaljons for the compaction of the soil, which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from
seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure, liquefaction and subsidence. After mitigation measures are performed, no
significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not expose people to a Seiche, tsunami or volcanic hazard. The project is not located in an area where any of these
hazards could occur. No impacts are antidpated as a resu{t of this project.
The project will not expose people to landslides or mudflows. The Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Temecula
General Plan has not identified any known landslides or mudslides located on the site or proximate to the site. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will have a less than significant impact from erosion, changes in topography, grading or fi{{. The site has been
previously graded and the project does not propose significant grading beyond that which has already occorred. increased wind
and water erosion of soils beth on and off-site may occur dudng the construction phase of the project and the project may result
in changes in siltetion, deposition or erosion. Erosion control techniques will be indudad as a condition of approval for the project.
In the long-run, harriscape and landscaping will serve as permanent erosion control for the project. Since the amount of grading
will be the minimum necessary for the realization of the project, modification to topography and ground surface relief features will
not be considered significanL Potential unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill will be mitigated through the use
of landscaping and proper compactico of the soils. After mitigation measures are performed, no impacts are anfldpated as a result
of this project.
The project will not impact unique geologic or physical features. No unique geologic features or physical features exist on the site.
No impacts are antidpated as a result of this project.
4. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amotmt of surface runoff?.
[] [~ [] []
R:\CEQAX348PA98.1E$ ll/12Y98jki 25
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potendally
Significant
Potenddly Unless Le~s Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Inco~orat~d Impact
No
Impact
b. Exposure of people or property to water related haTards [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
such as flooding? '(Source 1, Figure 7-3, Pg. 7-10, and
Figure 7-4, Pg. 7-12)
c. Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface [ ] IX] [ ] [ ]
water quality (e.g. temperatore, dissolved oxygen or
turbidity)?
d. Changes in the an~ount of surface water in any water [ ] [ ] IX] [ ]
body?
e. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water [ ] [ ] IX] [ ]
movements?
f. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through [ ] [ ] IX] [ ]
direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial
loss of groundwater recharge capability?
g. Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
h. Impacts to groundwater quality? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
i. Substantial reduction in the mount of Foundwater [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
otherwise available for public water supplies?
(Source 2, Pg. 263)
The project will result in changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns and the rate and amount of surface ranoff. Previously
permeable ground will be rendered impervious by construction of buildings, accompanying hardscape, parking, and driveways. While
absorption rates and sun'ace runoff will change, petenfial impacts shall be mitigated through site design. Drainage conveyances will
be required for the project to safely and adequately handle runoff, which is created. After mitigation measures are performed, no
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
4.c. The project may have a potentially significant effect on discharges into surface warera and alterahon of surface water quality. Prior
to issuance of a grading permit for the project, the developer will be required to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System {NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until
an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. By complying with the NPDES requirements, any
potential impacts can be mitigated to a level less than significant. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
4.d,e. The project will have a less than significant impact in a change in the amount of surface water in any water body or impact currents,
or to the course or direction of water movements. Additional surface runoff will occur because previously permeable ground will be
rendered impervious by constmcfion of buildings, accompanying hardscape and driveways. Due to the limited scale of the project,
the additional amount of drainage will be incremental but will not be considered significant. No significant impacts are anticipated as
a result of this project.
4 .f,g ,hThe project will have a less than significant change in the quantity and quality of ground waters and alteration in the direction of the
flow of groundwater, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cots or excavations or
through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability. Limited changes will occur in the quantity and quality of ground waters;
however, due to the minor scale of the project, it will not be considered significant. Further. construction on the site will not be at depths
sufficient to have a significant impact on ground waters. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
4.i.
The project will not result in a substanlial reduction in the amount of groundwater water othenNise available for public water supplies.
According to information contained in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Temecuta Conersl Plan, "Rancho Catifomia
Water District indicate that they can accommodate eddiffi:mal water demands.* Water service correntiy exists in the immediate proximity
to the project and is provided by Rancho Catifomia Water District (RCWD). No impacts are antidpated as a result of this project.
R:XCEQA~348PA98.IES ll/12/ggjid 26
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Pommially
Significant
Potem'ially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
/taRact Incorlmrat~l Impact
No
Impact
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a, Violate any air quality standard or contribute m an [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
existing or projected air quality violation?
(Source 3, Pgs. 6-10 and 6-11, Table 6-2)
b. Expose sensitive receptors to pollntants? [ ] [ ] IX] [ ]
c. Alter air movement, moistore or temperature, or cause [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
any change in climate?
d. Create objectionable odors? [ ] [ ] IX] [ ]
5.a. The project will not violate any air quatity standards or COntribute to an existing or projected air quality violation. The project includes
the construction two industrial buildings toteling 38,105 square feet. This is below the rimshold for potentially significant air quality
impact established by South Coast Air Quality Management District (Page 6-11, Table 6-2 of the South Coast Air Quatity Management
CEQA Air Quatity Handbook). The project will have a leas lhan significant impact wiri respect to air quality standards.
5.b. The project may temporarily expose sensitive receptors to pollutants during grading and construction. There are no significant
pollutants in proximity to the project nor is it antidpated that the project will generate pollutants. Therefore the project will have a less
than significant impact on sensitive receptors with respect to exposure to pollutants.
5,c.
The project will not alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or Cause any change in climate. The limited scale of the project
precludes it from crealjng any significant impacts on tile environment in this area. No signifiCant impacts are anticipated as a result
of this project.
5.d The project may create objectionable odors dudng the COnstruction phase of the project. However, these impacts will be of short
duration and will be less than significant.
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
Would the proposal result in:
a. Increase vehicle trips or traffic congestion? [ ] [ ] IX] [ ]
b. Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
or dangerous intersection or incompatible uses)?
c. Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
d. Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
(Source 4, Table 17.24(a), Pg. 17-24-9)
e. Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
f. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
transportation (e.g. bus tornouts, bicycle racks)?
(Source 4, Chapter 17.24, Pg. 12)
g. Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
6.a.
The project will result in a less than significant increase in vehicle trips; however it will add to traffic COngestion. It is anticipated that
this project will conb'ibute leas than a five percent (5%) increase in existing volumes during the AM peak hour and PM peak hour time
frames to the intersections of Winchester Road and Diaz Road. The applicant will be required to pay development impact fees, to
mitigate their incrementel effect On traffic to eddrass rie future need for traffic signals and public facilities. The projects overall affect
and its mitigation COntributions give the project leas than a significant impact.
6.b.
The project will result in less rian significant impact with respect to hazards to safety from design features. The project is designed
to correnl City standards and does not propose any hazards to safety from design features. As a result there will be a less than
significant impact as a result of this project.
R:\CEQAM348PA98JES ll/12/98jid 27
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Pots~dly Unless Less Than
Si~i~cam Mitigation Significant No
Irnl~act Incorporatnt Impact Impact
6.c. The project will not result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses. The project is designed to cu~nt City standards
and has adequate emergency access. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.d. The project will have sufficient parking capadty on-sito because its design is in compliance with the City of Temecuta Development
Cede parking requirements. As a result, off-site parking will not be impacted. No impact is anticipated as a result of this project.
6.e The project will not result in hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicydists. Hazards or bardera to bicydists have not been included
as part of the project. No impact is anticipated as a result of this project.
6.f
The proiect will not result in conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation. The proposed development
encourages the utilization of alternative modes of transportation in its design by including spaces for motorcycles and bicycles. No
impacts are antidpated as a result of this project.
6.g. Thepr~jectwi~~n~tresu~tinirnpactstorai~~waterb~rne~rairtrafficsincen~neex~stscurrenfiyintheimmediateproxjmity~fthepr~ject`
No significant impacts are anficlpated as a result of this project.
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal
result in impacts to:
a. Endangered, threa~ned or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals
and birds)? (Source 1, Page 5-15, Figure 5-3) [ ] IX] [ ] [ ]
b. Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Source 1, Figure 5-3, Page 5-15)
c. Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
coastal habitat, etc.)? (Source 1, Figure 5-3)
d. Weftand habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool).'? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
(Source 1, Figure 5-3)
e. Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
7.a. The project will a potentially significant irnpact to endangered, threatened or reare species or their habitats, including, but not limited
to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds. However, the project site has been previously graded and there are currently no native
spedes of plants, no unique, reare, threatened or endangered spedes of plants, no native vegetation on or adjacent to the site. Further,
there is no indication that any wildlib species exist at this location. The project will not reduce the number of speczes, provide a barrier
to the migraljon of animals or deteriorate existing habitat. Because the project site is located within the Staphen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat
Fee Area, Habitat Conservation fees will be required to mitigate the effect of cumulative impacts to the species. After mitigation
measures are included, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
7.b. The project will not result in an impact to locally designated spedes. Locally designated species are protected in the Old Town
Ternecula Sbedfic Plan; however, they are not protected elsewhere in the City. Since this project is not located in Old Town, and since
there are no locally designated species on site, there will be no impacts as a result of this project.
7.c. The project will not result in an impact to locally designated natoral communities. Reference response 7.b. There will be no impacts
as a result of this project.
7. d. The project will not result in an impact to a wetland habitat. There is no wetland habitat on-site or within proximity to the site therefore,
no impacts are an~jcipatod as a result of this project.
7.e. The project will not result in an impad any known wildlib dispersal or migration corridors. The project site is a vacant lot within the
developed community and does not serve as pad of a migration corridor. There will be no irnpacts as a result of this project.
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Polemially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant MiUgaUon Significant
Impact Incorporaled Impact
No
Impact
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal:
a. Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
b. Use non-renewal resources in a wasteful and inefficient [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
manner?
c, Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
that would be of future value to the region and the residents
of the State?
8.8,
The project wilt not impact and/or conflict with adopted energy conservation plans. The project will be reviewed for compliance with
all applicable laws pertaining to energy conservation dudng the plan check stage. No permits will be issued unless the projest is found
to be consistent with these applicable laws. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
8.b,
The project will result in a less than significant impact for the use of non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner.
There will be an increase in the rate of use of natural resource dudng conslru~on (construction materials, fuels for the daily operation,
asphalt, lumber). The depletion of these nonrenewable resource(s) and the subsequent depletion of the non-renewable natural
resources is minimal. Due to the scale of the proposed development, these impacts are not seen as less than significant.
8.c. The project will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the
residents of the State. No known minerel resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State are located
at this project site. No significant impacts am antidpated as a result of this project.
9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a. A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemical or radiation)?
b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
or emergency evacuation plan?
c. The creation of any health hazard or potential health [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
hazard?
d. Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
hazards?
e. Increase fire hazard in areas with ~ammable brush, [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
grass, or trees?
The project will not result in a dsk of explosion, or the release of any hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset
conditions since none are proposed in the request The same is true for the use, storage, transport or disposal of any hazardous or
toxic materials. Large quanlffies of these types of substances will not be assodated with this use. The Department of Environmental
Health has reviewed the project and the applicant must receive their clearance prior to any plan check submittal This applies to
storage and use of hazardous materials. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9.b.
The project will not interfere with an emergency response plan or an emergency evaluation plan. The subject site is not located in an
area, which could impact an emergency response plan. The project will take access from a maintained street and will therefore not
impede any emergency response or emergency evacuation plans. No signfficant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9.c, The project will not re, suit in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard. The project will be reviewed for compliance
with all applicable health laws dudng the plan check stage. No permits will be issued unless the project is found to be consistent with
these applicable laws. No significant impacts are antidpated as a result of this project.
R:\CEQAx348PA98,1ES 11/12/98jid 29
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INPOPJVlATION SOURCES
Potentially
Signi~cam
Pok-uv~lly Unless Less Than
5igui~cant Mitigation Significant No
Impact lncorporau~d lmpac{ Impact
9.d. The project will not expose people to existing sources of potential hea~ hazards. No health hazards am known to be within proximity
of the project. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9.8.
The project will not result in an increase to fire hazard in an area with fiammable brush, grass,
or trees. The project is a commercial restaurant in an area that has been graded with existing
development to the south and north. The project is not located within or proximate to a fire
hazard area. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a. Increase in existing noise levels?
b. Exposure of people ~ severe noise levels?
[ ] [ ] Ix] [ ]
[ ] [ ] [x] [ ]
lO.a. The proposal will result in a less than significant increase to existing noise tevels. The site is currenfiy vacant and development of the
land logically will result in increases to noise levels dudng constyuction phases as well as increases to noise in the area over the long
run. Long-term noise generated by this project would be similar to or leas than the existing condo project to the east and the day cam
facility to the north, and proposed commercial uses in fie immediate area. No signfficant noise impacts are antidpated as a result of
this project in either the short or tong-term.
lO.b.
The project may expose people to severe noise levels dudng the development/construction phase (short run). Construclfun machinery
is capable of produring noise in the range of 100+ DBA at 1 O0 feet which is considered very annoying and can cause headng damage
from steady 8-hour exposure. This source of noise will be of short duration and therefore will not be considered significant. Them will
be no long-term exposure of people to noise. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project.
11.
PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police prorection?
c. Schools?
d. Mainteaance of public facilities, including roads?
e. Other governmental services?
[ I [ ] [x] [ ]
[ ] [ ] [x] [ ]
[ ] [ ] [ ] [x]
[ ] [ ] [x] [ ]
[ ] [ ] [x] [ ]
11a,b.
The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered fire or police protection. This project
will incrementally increase the need for tim and police protection; however, it will conthbute its fair share to the maintenance of service
provision from these entities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
11.c.
The project will not have an impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered school facilities. The project will not cause significant
numbers of people to relocate within or to the City of Temecula, therefore, will not result in a need for new or altered school facilities.
No impacts are anticipated as a result of this projecL
11.d.
The project will have a less than significant impact for the maintenance of public facilities, including roads. The impacts to current and
future needs for maintenance of roads as a result of development of the site will be incrementel, however. they will not be considered
significant. The Gasoline Tax is sufficient to cover any of the proposed expenses.
11 .e. The project will have a leas than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services. A less than
significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\CEQAx348PA98.IES ]l/12/98jid 30
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Polemially
Significant
Polmially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
12.
12.a.
12.b.
12.c.
12,d.
12.e.
12.f,
12.g
13.
13.a.
13.b
UTILI I'IES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial nltera~ons to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
b. Communications sysmms? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
c. Local or regional water treatment or distribution [ ] [ ] [ ] IX}
facilities?
d. Sewer or septic tanks? (Source 2, Pg. 39-40) [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
e. Storm water drainage? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
f. Solid waste disposal? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
g. Local or regional water supplies? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substanfial alterafions to power or natural gas. These systems are
currently being delivered in proximity to the site. No significant impacts are anfidpated as a result of this project.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to communication systems (reference
response No. 12.a.). No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not result in the need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to local or regional water treatment or
distribution facilities. While the project will have an incremental impact upon exjsting systems, the Final Environmental Impact Report
(FEIR) for the Cit'/s General Plan states: 'both EMWD and RCWD have indicated an ability to supply as much water as is required
in their services areas (p. 39)." No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to sanitary sewer systems or septic tanks,
The FEIR states: "implementation of the proposed General Plan would not significantly impact wastewater services (p. 40).' Since
the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. There are no
septic tanks on site or proximate to the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The proposal will result in a less than significant need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to storm water drainage,
The project will need to provide some additional on-site drainage systems. The drainage system will be required as a condition of
approval for the project and will tie into the existing system. A less than significant impact is antidpated as a result of this project.
The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to solid waste disposal systems. Any potential impacts
from solid waste created by this development can be mitigated through partidpation in any Source Reduction and Recycling Programs,
which are implemented by the City. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to local or regional water supplies. Reference
response 12.c. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
AE~,-FIIETICS. Would the proposal:
a. Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
b. Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?
c. Create light or glare?
[ ] [ ] [ ] ix]
[ ] [ ] ix] [ ]
[ ] [x] [ ] [ ]
The project will not have an impact on a scenic vista or scenic highway. The project is not located in an area where there is a scenic
vista. Furlher, the City does not have any designated scenic highways. No significant impacts are antidpated as a result of this project.
The project will not have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect. The site is in an area of existing industhal uses. The design review
process of the proposed development has mitigated the potential for significant visual impacts to the adjacent developments through
compliance with the City's Design Guidelines for industrial development and the use of materials, colors, and landscaping that are
compatible neighboring development. A less than significant impact is antidpated as a result of this project.
R:%CEQAL348PA98.1as ll/12fi)Sjid 31
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
SiSni~cant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
13.c
14.
14.a,c.
14.d.
14.e.
15.
b.
15 .a-c
16.
The project could have a potentially significant impact from light and glare. The pro~ect will produce and result in additional light/glare,
as do all developments of this nature. Because all light and glare has the potential to impact the Mount Palomar Ot~servaton/the project
will be conditioned to be censistenl with Ordinance No, 655 (Ordinance Regulating Light Polluljon). Therefore, no significant impacts
are anticipated as a result of this project.
CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a. Disturb paleontological resources? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Source 2, Figure 15, pg.70)
b. Disturb archaeological resources? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
(Source 2, Figure 14, pg. 67)
c. Affect historical resources? [ ] [ ] [ ] [×]
d. Have the potential to cause a physical change which would [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
affect unique ethnic cultural values?
e. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
impact area?
The project will not have an impact on palecntological, archaeological or historical resources. The s~te has been disturbed from pdor
grading activity and any impacts to these resources would have been mitigated dudng the grading process. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not have the potanljal to cause a physical Change whiCh would affect unique ethnic c~ltural values. Reference response
14.a,c. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project
The project will not restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area. No religious or sacred uses exist at the
site or are proximate to the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
RECREATION. Would the proposal:
Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or
other recreational facilities? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
Affect existing recreational opponunities? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
The project will have no impact and will not impact or increase demand for neighborhood, regional parks, other recreational facilities
or opportunities. The project will not cause significant numbers of people to relocate within or to the City of Temecula, but will primarily
serve the needs of the existing residents, No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a. Does the project have the potential m degrade the quality [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
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 plato or nnimal community, reduce the number of restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminnte
important examples of the major periods of California history
or prehistory?
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the [ ]
long-term, environmental goals?
[ ] [ ] [x]
R:~CEQA',348PA98.1ES ll/lZ/98jid 32
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Po~ally
Significant
Impact
Potentially
U~
Mitigation
Le~sThan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
17.
c. Does the project have impacts that area individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable7 ("Cttmulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future projects).
d. Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
EARLIER ANALYSES.
None.
[]
[}
[]
[]
[]
[]
[x]
[x]
SOURCES
1. City of Temecula General Plan.
2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report.
3. South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
4. City of Temecula Development Code
R:\CEQA~348PA98,IES ll/12/98jid 33
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
R:\CEQAX.348PA98.1ES ll/12/98jid 34
Geologic Problems
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Processes:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Mitigation Monitoring Program
PIDnning Application No. PA98-0410
(Development Plan)
3 .a. Expose people to impacts from fault rupture.
Ensure that soil compaction is to City Slaadards,
A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to the
Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. Building pads
shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineor.
Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits.
Deparlment of Public Works and Building and Safety Department.
3 .b,c. Expose people to impacts from seismic ground shaking and liquefaction.
Utilize construction and compaction techniques that are consistent with the Uniform
Building Code.
Submit construction plans to the Building and Safety Department for approval.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Building and Safety Depaxtment.
3.f. Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from
excavation, grading or fill.
Planting of slopes consistotu with Ordinance No, 457.
Submit erosion control plans for approval by the Department of Public Works.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Department of Public Works.
R:\CEQA'348PA98,1F_S ll/1288jid 35
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Processes:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
3.f. Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from
excavation, grading or f~l.
Planting of un-site landscaping that is consistent with the Development Code.
Submit landscape plans that include planting of slope to the Planning Deparunent
for approval.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Planning Department.
3.a-c, e. Exposure of people or property to seismic ground shaking, seismic
ground failure, liquefaction, landslides or mudflows, or earthquake hazards.
Ensure that soil compaction is to City standards.
A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to the
Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan cheek. Building pads
shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits and building pertnits.
Departmant of Public Works and Building & Safety Department.
3 .a--c, e, h. Exposure of people or property to seismic ground shaking, seismic
ground failure, landslides or mudflows, expansive soils or earthquake hazards.
Utilize censu'uction techniques that are consistent with the Uniform Building Code.
Submit construction plans to the Building & Safety Department for approval.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building & Safety Department
R:XSTAFFRPT\410pa98.STAFFRPT.PC2.dO~:
36
Water
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
4.a. The pwject will result in changes to absorption rates, drainage panems and
the rate and amount of surface runoff.
Methods of controlling runoff, f~om site so that it will not negatively impact
adjacent properties, including drainage conveyances, have been incorporated into
site design and will be included on the grading plans.
Submit Fading and drainage plan to the DeparUnent of Public Works for approval.
Prior to the issuance of grading permit.
DeparUnent of Public Works.
General Impact: 4.c.
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Transportation/Circulation
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality
(e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity).
An erosion control plan shall be prepared in accordance with City requirements
and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared in
accordance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
requirements.
The applicant shall submit a SWPPP W the San Diego Regional Water Quality
Conu'ol Board (SDRWQCB) for their review and approval.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Department of Public Works and SDRWQCB (for SWPPP).
6.a. Increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion.
Payment of Development Impact Fees for road improvements, traffic impacts, and
traffic signals.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in
accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building and Safety Department.
R:\STAFFRPT\410pa98.STAFFRPT.PC2.doc
37
BioloRical Resources
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Public Services
General Impact:
Mitigation Meastlre:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
7.a. Epdangercd, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not
limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds).
Pay Mitigation Fee for impacts to Stephens Kaugaroo Rat.
Pay $500.00 per acre of disturbed area of Stephens Kangaroo Rat habitat.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Department of Public Works and Planning Department
11. a. A substantial effect upon and a need for new/altered govemmemal services
regarding fire protection. The project incrementally increases the need
for fire protection.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for Fire Mitigation.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in
accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permit.
Building & Safety Department.
11 .c. A substantial effect upon and a need for new/altered schools. No
significant impacts are anticipated.
Payment of School Fees.
Pay current mitigation fees with the Temecula Valley Unified School District.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building & Safety Department and Temecula Valley Unified School District.
R:\STAFFRPTX410pa98.STAFFRPT.PC2.dO¢
38
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring party:
Aesthetics
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
11 .d. A substantial effect upon and a need for maintenance of public facilities,
including roads. This project will have an incremental affect on public
fac~ities.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for road improvements, traffic impacts, and
public facilities.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in
accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building and Safety Department.
13 .c . The creation of new light sourues will result in increased light and glare
that could affect the Palomas Observatory.
Use lighting techniques that are consistent with Ordinance No. 655.
Submit lighting plan to the Building and Safety Deparu-aent for approval.
Prior m the issuance of a building permit,
Building & Safety Department.
R:\STAFFRPTx410pa98.STAFFRPT.PC2.d~c
39
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
R:\STAFFRPT~410pa98.STAFFRFr. PC2.doc
40
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO, - Planning Application No. PA98-0410 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT- A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
VICINITY MAP
\\TEMEC FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFKPT\410na98.STAFFRPT.PC2.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
,~,
EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - LI Light Industrial
H
EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - BP Business Park
CASE NO. - Planning Application No. PA98-0410 (Development Plan)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - Planning Application No. PA98-0410 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -November 18, 1998
SITE PLAN
\\TEMEC FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\410oa98.STAFFRPT.PC2.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
· q/O NEDO
CASE NO. - Planning Application No. PA98-0410 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -
LANDSCAPE PLAN
\\TEMEC FS20i\D~'TA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT 410oa98.STAFFRPT.PC2.doc
\
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - Planning Application No. PA98-0410 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - F1 - Building on Lot 33
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
FLOOR PLANS
CITY OF TEMECULA
_'I
CASE NO. - Planning Application No. PA98-0410 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - F2 - Building on Lot 34
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
FLOOR PLANS
CITY OF TEMECULA
EAST ELEVATION
WEST ELEVATrON
NORTH ELEVATION
SOUTH ELEVA~ON
CASE NO. - Planning Application No. PA98-0410 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - G1 - Building on Lot 33
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- November 18, 1998
ELEVATIONS
CITY OF TEMECULA
'1
WEST ELEVATION
EAST ELEVATION
SOUTH ELEVATION
NORll-( ELEVA~ON
CASE NO. - Planning Application No. PA98-0410 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - G2 - Building on Lot 34
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
ELEVATIONS
w
0
o W
~ I.-
.-
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - Planning Application No. PA98-0410 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT -I
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -November 18, 1998
GRADING PLAN
~\TEMEC FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFR.PT\41Oua98.STAFFRPT.PC2.doc
ITEM #4
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
November 18, 1998
Planning Application No. PA98-0348 (Development Plan)
Prepared By: John De Gange, Project Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends the Planning
Commission:
APPLICATIONINFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
ADOPT a Negative Declaration with a Finding of DeMinimus
Impact for Planning Application No. PA98-0348;
ADOPT the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning
Application No, PA98-0348; and
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
ADOPT Resolution No. 98- recommending approval of
Planning Application No. PA98-0348 based upon the Analysis
and Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval.
Brian Fronk
Saddleback and Associates
The design, construction and operation of a 22,561 square foot
industrial speculative building.
At the knuckle of Enterprise Circle West (225 feet west of the
intersection of Enterprise Circle West and Commerce Center
Drive).
LI (Light Industrial)
North:
South:
East:
West:
SC (Service Commercial), BP (Business Park)
LI (Light Industrial), OS-C (Conservation/Open
Space)
BP (Business Park)
BP (Business Park)
BP (Business Park)
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
1
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Existing Service Commercial Building
Flood Control Channel
Existing Auto Repair Facility
Existing Light Industrial Building and Flood
Control Channel
PROJECT STATISTICS
Total Area:
Total Area:
Total Site Area:
Building Footprint:
Landscape Area:
Paved Area:
1.89 acres (gross)
1.33 acres (net)
57, 924square feet (1.33 net acres)
19,850 square feet
14,480 square feet
23,699 square feet
34%
25%
41%
Total Floor Area:
Floor Area Ratio:
22,561 square feet
0.39
Parking Required:
Office - 3,665 sq. ft.:
Manufacturing - 8,500 sq.fi.:
Warehousincl - 10,396 scl. ft.:
Total- 22,561 sq. ft.:
12 Vehicles
22 Vehicles
11 Vehicles
45 Vehicles, 3 Bicycles, 3Motorcycles
Parking Provided:
Standard Spaces: 51
Bicycles (not specified)
Motorcycles (not specified)
Total Parking Provided:51
Building Height: Twenty seven (27') feet
BACKGROUND
A pre-application meeting was held on May 27, 1998 with a formal application submitted on August
19, 1998. A Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was held on September 10, 1998, with
staff providing written comments on September 16, 1998. The project was deemed complete on
October 27, 1998.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project consists of the design, construction and operation of a two-story, 22,561 sq. ft.
speculative office, warehouse and manufacturing building on an 1.89 acre (gross) site with
associated improvements, such as hardscape, parking, landscaping and drive aisles. Landscape
improvements include parking lot landscape fingers, pedmeter planter areas, and streetscape
plantings.
2
ANALYSIS
Site DesiGn
The project is sited on a rectangular-shaped parcel with the building located on the eastem property
line. The parking area is sited primarily within the northwestern portion of the site and the loading
area is located at the southwest comer of the building. The design of the site is compatible with
existing development in the area. An employee outdoor lunch area has been located at the north end
of the site.
Access, Traffic and Circulation
The project takes access from a single driveway off of Enterprise Circle West. There is parking and
vehicular circulation on the west side of the building. Truck traffic is accommodated through the
main drive aisle with a truck turn around and a backing area in front of the loading docks which
provides more than adequate room for the maneuvedng and backing movements of trucks.
Customers and employees will utilize the parking at the northwest portion of the site. Emergency
vehicles have direct access to all portions of the site with the drive aisle and turn around along the
western portion of the site, and from the drive aisle on the adjacent property to the east.
Architecture
The building will be tilt-up concrete with smooth, painted panels and painted accent colors. The
applicant proposes to highlight the office entry with a projected entry statement, decorative paving
and the use of windows. The applicant is also adding visual interest and articulation to the
elevations, with the use of a vaded roof height along the front elevation, building recessions at the
northeast and southwest comers of the building, painted reveals, recessed accent features and
varying paint colors. These features provide a certain amount of interest and to some extent help
to break up the mass of the building walls. The placement of trees and shrubs within the landscape
planters around perimeter of the site on two sides, complement the building and help break up the
building's massing.
Because the east elevation is on the property line and the rear elevation backs up to Mumeta Creek
there will be no landscaping to help soften these elevations. The rearof the building and the loading
area is visible from Diaz Road from across Murrieta Creek. The applicant has screened this
elevation by adding trees to the landscape planter at the southwest comer of the lot. As proposed,
the structure is compatible with the existing buildings in the area in terms of colors, materials, height,
bulk and mass.
Landscaping
Twenty-five percent (25%) of the site has been landscaped which is consistent with the 25%
minimum landscaping requirement in the BP (Business Park) zone. The project provides a minimum
of 5 foot wide pedmeter landscaping planter around approximately 75% of the site. Significant
portions of this planter are as wide 10 feet. The frontage along Enterprise Circle West will have a
planter, which ranges from 15 to 35 feet. The applicant proposes to utilize existing Sycamore and
Pepper trees along the front of the property as street trees.
3
EXISTING ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
The General Plan Land Use designation for the site is BP (Business Park). Existing zoning for the
site is BP (Business Park). Manufacturing/office/warehouse uses are permitted with the approval
of a development plan pursuant to Chapter 17.05 of the Development Code. The project as
proposed, meets all minimum standards of and is consistent with the Development Code and the
General Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
An Initial Study has been prepared for this project. The Initial Study determined that although the
proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not considered
to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and in the Conditions
of Approval for the project. Any potentially significant impacts will be mitigated, In addition, the site
has previously been graded/disturbed, improvements have been installed and as a consequence the
project will not impact endangered, threatened or rare species, or the site will not serve as a
migration corridor. Therefore, staff is recommending that the Negative Declaration for PA 98-0348
be adopted for this project and a Finding of DeMiminimus impact be made.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The project is the design and construction of a two-stonj, 22,561 square foot speculative office,
warehouse and manufacturing building on a 1.89 acre (gross) site. The project is consistent with
the Design Guidelines, Development Code and the General Plan.
FINDINGS
The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all
applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The project is
consistent with all City Ordinances including: the City's Development Code, Ordinance No.
655 (Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance), and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping provisions.
The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety
and welfare. The project as proposed complies with all City Ordinances and meets the
standards adopted by the City of Temecula designed for the protection of the public health,
safety and welfare.
The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats, or to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The project site has been previously
disturbed and graded, and streetscape installed on site. There are no native species of
plants or vegetation at the site, nor any indication that any wildlife species exist, or that the
site serves as a migration corridor. A DeMinimus impact finding can be made for this project.
Attachments:
PC Resolution o Blue Page 6
A. Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 9
Initial Study - Blue Page 20
Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 21
Exhibits - Blue Page 22
A. Vicinity Map
B. General Plan Map
C Zoning Map
4
E.
F.
G.
H
I.
Site Plan
Landscape Plan
Elevations
Color Elevations (not included)
Colors and Materials Board (not included)
Floor Plan
5
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 98-__
PC RESOLUTION NO. 98-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-
0348 TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A 22,561 SQUARE FOOT
TWO-STORY SPECULATIVE OFFICE, WAREHOUSE AND
MANUFACTURING BUILDING WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING, AND
LANDSCAPING ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 1.89 GROSS ACRES,
LOCATED AT THE KNUCKLE OF THE INTERSECTION OF
ENTERPRISE CIRCLE WEST AND COMMERCE CENTER DRIVE,
APPROXIMATELY 225 FEET WEST OF COMMERCE CENTER
DRIVE AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-480-015.
WHEREAS, Saddleback and Associates filed Planning Application No. PA98-0348 in
accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA98-0348 was processed in the time and manner
prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA98-0348 on
November 18, 1998, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by Paw, at which time interested
persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or in opposition;
WHEREAS, at the public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the Commission considered all facts relating
to Planning Application No. PA98-0348;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
Section 2. Findin.qs. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No.
PA98-0348 makes the following findings; to wit:
A. The proposed use is in conformanca with the General Plan for Temecula and
with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The project is
consistent with all City Ordinances including: the City's Development Code, Ordinance No. 655 (Mt.
Palomar Lighting Ordinance), and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping provisions.
B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the
public health, safety and welfare. The project as proposed complies with all City Ordinances and
meets the standards adopted by the City of Temecula designed for the protection of the public
health, safety and welfare.
C. The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare
species or their habitats, or to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The project site has been
previously disturbed and graded, and streetscape installed on site. There are no native species of
plants or vegetation at the site, nor any indication that any wildlife species exist, or that the site
serves as a migration corridor. A DeMinimus impact finding can be made for this project.
'7
Section 3. Environmental Coml~liance. 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 Mitigated Negative Declaration with De Minimus
Findings, therefore, is hereby adopted.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves
Planning Application No. PA98-0348 to construct and operate a 22,561 square foot speculative
office, industrial, warehouse building, associated parking and landscaping on a parcel containing
1.89 gross acres, located approximately 225 feet west of the intersection of Enterprise Circle West
and Commerce Center Ddve and known as a portion of Assessor's Parcel No. 921-480-015 subject
to Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference and made a pad hereof.
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November, 1998.
Marcia Slaven, Chairperson
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 18th day of November,
1998 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
8
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Attachment- A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA98-0348 (Development Plan)
Project Description: The design and construction of a 22,561 square foot two-story,
speculative office/manufacturing building, associated parking and landscaping on an
1.86 gross acre site.
Assessor's Parcel No.: 921-480-015
Approval Date: November 18, 1998
Expiration Date: November 18, 2000
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money
order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00)
County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination with a
DeMinimus Finding required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(a) and California
Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the
applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check as required
above. the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition,
Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
General Requirements
The developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City and any
agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees and agents from any
and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentality
thereof, or any of its officers, employees and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek
monetan/damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality
thereof, advisonj agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the
voters of the City, concerning the Plot Plan which action is brought within the appropriate
statute of limitations pedod and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4 (Section
21000 et seq., including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167). City
shall promptly notify the developer/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought
within this time period. City shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action, Should
the City fail to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, developer/applicant shall not,
thereafter be responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency
or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents.
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall
become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction
contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter diligently
pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this
approval.
]0
The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved Mitigation
Monitoring Program.
The development of the promises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "D"
(Site Plan), contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning
Division.
Landscaping shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "E" (Landscape Plan).
Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable
satisfaction of the Planning Manager and the Temecula Development Code. If it is
determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Manager shall have
the authority to require the properly owner to bdng the landscaping into conformance with
the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be
the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest.
Building elevations shall conform substantially with Exhibit "F' and Exhibit "G" (color
elevations), or as amended by these conditions.
Colors and materials used shall conform substantially with Exhibit "H", or as amended by
these conditions (color and material board).
Materials
Concrete (main body of bldg.)
Concrete (vertical accenting)
Concrete (base of bldg.)
Recessed Accents
Accent Reveals
Metal (roll-up doors)
Glazing (Windows)
Aluminum Storefront
Colors
Misty Mica (Frazee 8711VV)
Kindling Wood (Frazee 8713W)
Wildcat(Frazee 87124M)
Kindling Wood (Frazee 8713VV)
Kindling Wood (Frazee 8713VV)
Kindling Wood (Frazee 8713W)
Solar Gray
Black (Arcadia 85)
9. The maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer.
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
10.
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal
Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropdate fee set forth in that ordinance or by
providing documented evidence that the fees have alroady been paid.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
11. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid.
12.
The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided
by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and return one signed
set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files.
11
13.
The applicant shall revise Exhibits "D, E, F. G", (Site Plan. Landscape Plan, Elevations,
Color and Matedal Board) to reflect the final conditions of approval that will be provided by
the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and submit five (5) full
size copies and two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of approved Exhibit "G"
(Color and Materials Board) and of the colored version of approved Exhibit "F", the colored
architectural elevations to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for
their files. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be readable on
the photographic prints.
14.
Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department - Planning Division for approval. These plans shall
conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "E", or as amended by these conditions. The
location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans
shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover page shall identify the total
square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be accompanied by the
following items:
a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal).
b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
d. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan).
15,
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School Distdct shall be submitted to
the Planning Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees.
Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits
16.
An Administrative Plot Plan application for signage shall be required if signage is proposed.
An application for signage shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Manager.
17. Roof-mounted equipment shall be inspected to ensure it is shielded from ground view,
18.
All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with approved landscape and irrigation
plans.
19.
All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed and be in a condition
acceptable to the Planning Manager. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease,
or pests. The irrigation system shall be propedy constructed and in good working order.
20.
Each parking spaca resen/ed for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently affixed
reflectodzed 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 spaca finished grade, or centered at
a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk.
A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-street parking
facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, deady and conspicuously stating the following:
"Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not
displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for persons
12
with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed
vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 909 696-3000.
21.
Performance securities, in amounts to be detem~ined by the Planning Manager, to guarantee
the maintenance of the plantings, in accordance with the approved construction landscape
and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Community Development Department - Planning
Division for one year from final certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping
and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Planning
Manager, the bond shall be released.
22.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed
by this permit.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
23.
Comply with applicable provisions of the 1994 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and
Mechanical Codes; 1993 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24
Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code.
24.
Submit at time of plan review, a complete extedor site lighting plans showing compliance with
Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other outdoor
lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and
Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon
adjoining property or public rights-of-way.
25.
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School Distdct shall be submitted to
the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation
Fees.
26.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
27. The Occupancy classification of the proposed buildings shall be B/S-I/F-1.
28. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
29.
All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
all details on plans. (Califomia Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
30. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building.
31. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
32 Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
33.
Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting,
fire alarm systems.
34.
Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1994
edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code, Appendix C.
35. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system.
36. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with odginal signature on plans
13
submitted for plan review.
37.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing
schematic and mechanical plan for plan review.
38.
Truss caicu|ations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer
engineer are required for plan review submittal.
39. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
40.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector pdor to the start of the
building construction.
41.
Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls require separate
approvals and permits.
PUBLICWORKS DEPARTMENT
Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any
Govemment Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site plan all existing
and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage
courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision.
General Requirements
42.
A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site fiat work and
improvements, shall be obtained from the Depadment of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way.
43.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way.
44.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Riverside County Flood Control and
Water Conservation Distdct prior to commencement of any construction within an existing
or proposed District Right-of-Way.
45.
All improvement plans and grading plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent
projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on
standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars.
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
46.
A copy of the grading plan, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations shall
be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation Distdct for
approval pdor to the issuance of any permit.
14
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52
53.
54.
55.
56.
A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and
approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary
erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private property,
The Developer shall post secudty and enter into an agreement guarenteeing the grading and
erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to
approval by the Department of Public Works.
A Soil Report shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and submitted to the
Director of the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report
shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the
construction of engineered structures and pavement sections,
The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in
accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and
upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private
drainage fadlities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify
impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect the
properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream facilities,
including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required
improvements, shall be provided by the Developer,
The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No
grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project
is shown to be exempt.
As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall
receive written clearance from the following agencies:
· San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
· Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
· Planning Department
· Department of Public Works
The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an
Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the
subject property.
Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and
the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site
work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashiers check or
money order, pdor to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee.
If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this
property, no new charge needs to be paid.
57.
The site is in an area identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map as Flood Zone AE. This
project shall comply with Chapter 15, Section 15.12 of the City Municipal Code, which may
include obtaining a Letter of Map Revision from FEMA. A Flood Plain Development Permit
shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
58.
Precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of Temecula Standards subject to
approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. The following design criteria
shall be observed:
Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C.
paving.
b. Driveway shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A.
Concrete sidewalk shall be constructed along public street frontage in accordance
with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400 and 401.
d. All street and driveway centedine intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
59.
The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula General
Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans_ shall be reviewed and approved by the
Director of the Department of Public Works:
Improve Enterprise Circle West (Collector Road Standards - 66' R/W) to include installation
of sidewalk. drainage facilities, and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer).
60.
The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with
the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer shall
issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
61.
The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required
by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all
Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
62
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District
Eastem Municipal Water District
Department of Public Works
63.
All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City
standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works.
64.
The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall
be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of
Public Works.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
The following are the Fire Department Conditions of Appreval for this preject. All questions regarding
the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72
Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the
Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the Uniform
Building Code (UBC), Uniform Fire Code (UFC), and related codes which are in fome at the
time of building plan submittal.
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commercial buildings per UFC Appendix Ill.A, Table A-Ill-A-1. The
developer shall previde or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 1500 GPM
for a 2 hour duretion at 20 PSI residual opereting pressure. The required fire flow may be
adjusted during the appreval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or
automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire
Flow as given above has taken into account all information as previded. (UFC 903.2,
Appendix Ill.A)
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per UFC
Appendix Ill. B, Table A-Ill-B-1. A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants (6"
x 4" x 2-2 []" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public
streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 500 feet apart and shall be located no more than 250
feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant.
The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The
upgrade of existing fire hydrents may be required. (UFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B)
As required by the Uniform Fire Code, when any portion of the building(s) is in excess of 150
feet from a water supply on a public street, on site fire hydrents are required. For this project
on site fire hydrents are required. (UFC 903.2)
Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have
appreved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent reads are
installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for
70,000 Ibs. GVVV. (UFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
Pnor to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire
Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any portion
of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather
surface designed for 70,000 Ibs. GVVV with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. ( UFC sec
902 and Ord 95-15)
Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than
twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearence of not less than thirteen (13) feet
six (6) inches. (UFC 902.2.2.1 and Ord 95-15)
Prior to building construction, dead end road ways and streets in excess of one hundred and
fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a tumaround capable of
accommodating fire apparatus. (UFC 902.2.2.4)
73.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall fumish one copy of the water system
plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to installation. Plans shall be: signed
by a registered civil engineer. contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block; and
conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. After the plans
are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Prevention
Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed
and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials
being placed on an individual lot, (UFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection
Association 24 1-4.1 )
74.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers"
shall be installed to identity fire hydrant locations. (UFC 901.4.3)
75.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, all commerdal buildings shall
display street numbers in a prominent location on the street side of the building. The
numerals shall be minimum twelve (12) inches in height for buildings and six (6) inches for
suite identification on a contrasting background. In stdp centers, businesses shall post the
suite address on the rear door(s). (UFC 901.4.4 and Ord 95-15)
76
Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and
type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system. Fire
sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to
installation. (UFC Article 10, UBC Chapter 9 and Ord 95-15)
77.
Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for
monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm
system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans shall
be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to installation. (UFC Article 10)
78.
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be
provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be located
to the right side of the main entrance door. (UFC 902.4)
79.
All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates
obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry
system for emergency access by firefighting personnel. (UFC 902.4)
80.
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, building final or occupancy, buildings
housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions of Uniform Fire Code
Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. The storage of
high-piled combustible stock may require structural design considerations or modifications
to the building. Fire protection and life safety features may include some or all of the
following: an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and
storage arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire
Department access doors and Fire department access roads. (UFC Article 81)
OTHER AGENCIES
81.
The applicant shall comply with all applicable or appropriate recommendations set forth in
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District transmittal dated
September 24, 1998, a copy of which is attached,
82.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations as set forth in the Riverside Transit
Authority (RTA) transmittal dated October 30, 1998, a copy of which is attached, to the extent
practical and not in conflict with conditions contained herein.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance
with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be
subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant Name
' DAVID P. ZAI'PE
General Marroger-Chief Engineer
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
September 24, 1998
1995 MARKET STREET
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
909/955-1200
909/788-9965 FAX
53910.1
City of Temecula
Planning Department
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Attention: John De Gange
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re: PA 98-0348
The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in
incorporated cities. The District does not plan check City land use cases, or provide State Division of
Real Estate letters or other flood hazard reports for such cases. District comments/recommendations
for such cases are normally limited to items of specific interest to the District including District
Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood control and drainage facilities which could be
considered a logical component or extension of a master plan system, and District Area Drainage
Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition, information of a general nature is provided.
The District has not reviewed the proposed project in detail and the following comments do not in
any way constitute or imply District approval or endorsement of the proposed project with respect to
flood hazard, public health and safety or any other such issues.
PA 98-0348 is a proposal to design and construct a 19,560 square foot industrial building on the
south side of Enterprise Cimle West, about 300 feet west of Commerce Center Drive. A small
portion of the southwest comer of the parcel is within the 100 year Zone AE flood plain limits for
Murrieta Creek as delineated on Panel No 060742-0005B of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps issued in
conjunction with the National Flood Insurance Program administered by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA). The elevation of the FEMA map for a flow rate of 30,900 cfs is
1018.00 at the upstream edge of the property. However, a District flood study determined the base
flood elevation for the master plan flow rate of 38,300 cfs to be 1018.71 at the upstream edge of the
property. The highwater mark during the flood of January 1993 was 1017.4. All the elevations are
based on 1929 NGVD.
Because of the extreme heard posed by Murrieta Creek, the City should consider not allowing
development to proceed adjacent to the creek until the ultimate improvement can be constructed.
Property within the flood plain should be conditioned to construct the required improvements to
Murrieta Creek Channel or participate in a financing mechanism such as an assessment district to
ensure necessary improvements are constructed.
City of Temecula '2-
Re: PA 98-0348
53910.1
September 24, 1998
If the City chooses to allow development to proceed, we recommend that the City require the
applicant to dedicate to the District a 25-foot wide access road adjacent to the top of channel bank,
which is basically coincident with the property line (see Exhibit "A"). The access road is necessary
for District forces to patrol Mumeta Creek. New buildings should be floodproofed by elevating the
finished floor a minimum of 12 inches above elevation 1018.71 which is the District's base flood
elevation for 38,300 cfs.
This project is located within the limits of the District's Mumeta Creek/Temecula Valley Area
Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been adopted, applicable fees should be paid by cashier's
check or money order to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of building or grading permits,
whichever comes first. Fees to be paid should be at the rate h~ effect at hhe time of issuance of the
actual permit.
Questions concerning this matter may be referred to me at 909/955-1214.
Very truly yours,
STUART E. MCKIBBIN
Senior Civil Engineer
Enclosure
c: City of Temecula Public Works
At'm: Jerry Allegria
Joe Kicak
sr&l:sU
October 30, 1998
Riverside 1Yahsit Agency
PO. Box 59968
Phone: (909) 684-0850
Fax: (909) 684-1007
John De Gange, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Temecula Piarkmng Depamnent
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Dear Mr. De Gange:
The Riverside Transit Agency has completed a review of the following project proposals:
Case No. PA98-0348
Case No. PA98-0349
We have no comments related to the above projects. The nearest regular bus service available
to provide access to the site is RTA Route 23, which stops approximately two to three blocks
away at the intersection of Winchester and Enterprise Circle.
The applicant is welcome to contact RTA for more information on existing and planned transit
service in the area.
Sincerely,
Transit Planner
#192&222/jsc
NOv 998
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
CITY OF TEMECULA
Environmental Checklist
Project Title:
Lead Agency Name and Address:
Contact Person and Phone Number:
Project Location:
Project Sponsors Name and Address:
General Plan Designation:
Zoning:
Description of Project:
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
10. Other public agencies whose
approval is required:
Planning Application No, PA98-0348
(Development Plan)
City of Temecula, 43200 Business Park Ddve,
Temecula, CA 92589
John De Gange, Project Planner (909) 694-
6400
At the knuckle of Enterprise Circle West (225
feet west of Commerce Center Drive -
Assessor Parcel No, 921-480-015
Brian Fronk, Saddleback, 2615 Orange Ave.,
Santa Ana, CA 9270
BP (Business Park)
BP (Business Park)
The design, construction and operation of a
22,561 square foot industrial speculative
building
The project site is located in an area that has
been previously graded, and within an area
which has almost completely been built out.
This property takes access to Enterprise
Circle West and all utilities are available. The
property is adjacent to developed sites to the
north and west and abuts flood control
channels to the east and south.
Riverside County Fire Department, Riverside
County Health Department, Temecula Police
Department, Eastem Municipal Water District,
Rancho California Water District, Southern
Califomia Gas Company, Southem Califomia
Edison Company, General Telephone
Company, and Riverside Transit Agency.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving
at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the
following pages.
[ ] Land Use and Planning [ ] Hazards
[ ] Population and Housing [ ] Noise
[X] Geologic Problems [ ] Public Services
[X] Water [ ] Utilities and Service Systems
[ ] Air Quality [X] Aesthetics
[ ] Transportation/Circulation [ ] Cultural Resources
[X] Biological Resources [ ] Recreation
[ ] Energy and Mineral Resources [ ] Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an
attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will
be prepared.
John De Gange,Project Planner Date
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Po~ntUally Unless Itss Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Inconporated Impact
No
impact
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
1.b.
a. Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Sourcel, Figure2-1, Page2-17) [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
b. Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project.'? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
c. Be incompatible with existing laud use in the vicinity?
(Source 1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17) [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
d. Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to
soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)?
(Source 1, Figure 5-4, Page 5-17) [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
e. Disrupt or divide the physical arrangernent ofan established
community (including low-income or minority community)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
The project will not conflict with applicable environmental plans or polices adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project. The
project is consistent with the Citys General Plan Land Use Designation of BP. Impacts from all General Plan Land Use Designations
were analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report for (EIR) the General Plan. Agendes with jurisdiction within the City commented
on the scope of the analysis contained in the EIR and how the land uses would impact their particular agency. Mitigation measures
approved with the EIR will be applied to this project. Further, all agencies with jurisdiction over the project are also being given the
opportunity to comment on the project and it is anticipated that they witi make the appropriate comments as to how the project relates
to their specific environmental plans or polices. The project site has been previously graded and services have been extended into
the area. There will be limited, if any environmental effects on environmental plans or polices adopted by agencies with jurisdiction
over the project. No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including low-income or minority
community). The project site is vacant. There is no established residential cemmunity (including low-income or minodty community)
at this site. Furthermore, the site is a commercially zoned property that does not allow recidential developments. No significant effects
are anticipated as a result of this project.
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would be proposal:
2.a.
2.b
2.c.
a. Cnmulatively exceed official regional or local population [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
projects?
b. Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
indirec~y (e.g. through project in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrasWacture)?
c. Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
The project will not cumulatively exceed offidal regional or local population projections. The project is a speculative indusb'ial building
that is consistent with the Citys General Plan Land Use Designation of Business Park. Since the project is consistent with the City's
General Plan, and does not exceed the fieor area ratio for Business Park, it will not be a significant contributor to population growth
that will cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections. No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this
project.
The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirecfJy. The project is consistent with the General Plan
Land Use Designation of Business Park. The project will not likely cause people to relocate to or within Temecula, but will serve the
needs of existing residents. Therefore, the project will not induce substantial growth in the area, and no significant effects are
anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not displace any type of housing. The project site is vacant commercially zoned property; therefore no housing will be
displaced. No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\CEQAX348PA98.1ES Final.doe
3
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitiaation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
No
Impact
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result
in or expose people to potential impacts involving?
a. Fault rupture? (Source 1, Figure 7-1, Pg. 7-6) [ ] [ ] IX] [ ]
b. Seismic ground shaking? (Source 1, Figure 7-1, Pg. 7-6) [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
c. Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
(Source 1, Figure 7-2, Pg. 7-8)
d. Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
e. Landslides or mudflows? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
f. Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
from excavation, grading or fill?
g. Subsidence of the land? (Source 2, Figure 7, Pg. 68) [ ] IX] [ ] [ ]
h. Expansive soils7 [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
i. Unique geologic or physical features? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
3.b,c.
g.h.
The project may have a potentially significant impact on people involving seismic ground shaking as the project is located in
Southem California, an area which is seismically active. There may also be a potentiatiy significant impact from seismic ground
failure, liquefaction, subsidence and expansive soils. Any potentially significant impacts will be mitigated through building
construction, which is consistent with Uniform Building Code standards. In addition, a soils report shall be required to be submitted
pdor to the issuance of grading permits. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report will be utilized in the
development of this site, which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from expansive soils. The soil reports will
also contain recommendations for the compaction of the soil, which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from
seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure, liquefaction and subsidence. After mitigation measures are performed, no
significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
3.d
The project will not expose people to a seiche, tsunami or volcanic hazard. The project is not located in an area where any of these
hazards could occur. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
3.e
The project will not expose people to landslides or mudflows. The Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Temecula
General Plan has not identified any known landslides or mudslides located on the site or proximate to the site. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
3.f
The project will have a less than significant impact from erosion, changes in topography, grading or fill. The site has been
previously graded and the project does not propose significant grading beyond that which has already occon'ed. Increased wind
and water erosion of soils both on and off-site may occur dudng the construction phase of the project and the project may result
in changes in siltation, deposition or erosion. Erosion control techniques will be included as a condition of approval for fie project.
In the long-run, hardscape and landscaping will serve as permanent erosion control for the project. Since the amount of grading
will be the minimum necessar'/for the realization of the project, modification to topography and ground surface relief features will
not be considered significant. Potential unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill will be mitigated through the use
of landscaping and proper compactjon of the soils. Afar mitigation measures are performed, no impacts are antidpated as a result
of this project.
3.i.
The project will not impact unique geologic or physical features. No unique geologic features or physical features exist on the site.
No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
4. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage paRems, or the
rate and amount of surface runoft?.
[ ] ix] [ ] [ ]
R:\CEQAX348PA98.1ES Final.doc
4
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potcntiany
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
In,pact lncoq~orat~d impact
No
impact
b. Exposureofpeopleorpropertytowaterrelatedhazards [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
such as flooding? (Source 1, Figure 7-3, Pg. 7-10, and
Figure 7-4, Pg. 7-12)
c. Dischargeintosurfacewatersorotheralterationofsurface [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or
turbidity)?
d. Changes in the amount of surface water in any water [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
body?
e. Changes in currents, orthecourseordirectionofwater [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
movements?
f. Changeinthequantityofgroundwaters, either through [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial
loss of groundwater recharge capability?
g. Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? [ ] [ ] IX] [ ]
h. Impacts to groundwater quality? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
i. Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
otherwise available for public water supplies?
(Source 2, Pg. 263)
4.a. The project will result in changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns and the rate and amount of surface runoff. Previously
permeable ground will be rendered impervious by construction of buildings, accompanying hardscape, parking, and driveways. While
absorption rates and surface runoff will change, potential impacts shall be mitigated through site design. Drainage conveyances will
be required for the project to safely and adequately handle runoff, which is created. After mitigation measures are performed, no
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
4.c. The project may have a potentially significant effect on discharges into surface waters and alteration of surface water quality. Prior
to issuance of a grading permit for the project, the developer will be required to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until
an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. By complying with the NPDES requirements, any
potential impacts can be mitigated to a level less than significant. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
4 .d ,e. The project will have a less than significant impact in a change in the amount of surface water in any water body or impact currents,
or to the course or direction of water movements. Additional surface runoff will occur because previously permeable ground will be
rendered impervious by construction of buildings, accompanying hardscape and driveways. Due to the limited scale of the project,
the additional amount of drainage will be incremental but will not be considered significant. No significant impacts are anticipated as
a result of this project.
4.f,g,hThe project will have a less than significant change in the quantity and quality of ground waters and alteration in the direction of the
flow of groundwater, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or
through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability. Limited changes will occur in the quantity and quality of ground waters;
however, due to the minor scale of the project, it will not be considered significanL Further, construction on the site will not be at depths
sufficient to have a significant impact on ground waters. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
4.L
The project will not result in a substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater water otherwise available for public water supplies.
According to information contained in the Final Environmental Irepact Report for the City of Temecula General Plan, "Rancho Califomia
Water Dis~ct indicate that they can accommodate additional water demands." Water sentice correntiy exists in the immediate proximity
to the project and is provided by Rancho California Water District (RCWD). No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:%CEQAX348PA98.1ES Final.doe
5
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
No
Impacl
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a. Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
(Source 3, Pgs. 6-10 and 6-11, Table 6-2)
b. Expose sensitive reeeptors to pollutants?
c. Alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause
any change in climate?
d. Create objectionable odors?
[ ] [ ] [x] [ ]
[ ] [ ] [x] [ ]
[ ] [ ] [ ] ix]
[ ] [ ] Ix] [ ]
6.a.
The project will not violate any air quality standards or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation. The project is a 22,561
square foot industrial building. This is below the threshold for potentially significant air quality impact established by South Coast Air
Quality Management District (Page 6-11, Table 6-2 of the South Coast Air Quality Management CEOA Air Quality Handbook). The
project will have a less than significant impact with respect to air quality standards.
5,b. The project may temporarily expose sensitive receptors to pellutants dudng grading and construction. There are no significant
pollutants in proximity to the project nor is it anticipated that the project will gonerata pellutants. Therefore the project will have a less
than significant impact on sensitive receptom with respect to exposure to potiutants.
5,c. The project will not alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause any change in climate. The limited scale of the project
precludes it from creating any significant impacts on the environment in this area. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result
of this project.
5.d. The project may create objectionable odors dudng the construction phase of the project. However, these impacts will be of short
duration and will be less than significant,
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
Would the proposal result in:
a. Increase vehicle flips or traffic congestion? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
b. Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves [ ] [ ] IX] [ ]
or dangerous intersection or incompatible uses)?
c. Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
d. Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Source 4, Table 17.24(a), Pg. 17-24-9)
e. Hazards or barriers for pedeslrians or bicyclists? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
f. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
(Source 4, Chapter 17.24, Pg. 12)
g. Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
6.a.
The project will result in a less than significant increase in vehicle tdps; however it will add to traffic congestion. It is anticipated that
this project will contribute less than a five percent (5%) increase in existing volumes during the AM peak hour and PM peak hour time
frames to the intersections of Jefferson Street and Winchester Road. The applicant will be required to pay development impact fees.
to mitigate their incremental effect on traffic to address the future need for traffic signals and public facilities. The projects overall affect
and its mitigation contributions give the project less than a significant impact.
6.b. The project will result in less than significant impact with respect to hazards to safety from design features. The project is designed
to current City standards and does not propose any hazards to safety from design features. As a result there will be a less than
significant impact as a result of this project.
R:\CEQAX348PA98.1ES Final.doc
6
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Inco~orated Impact Impact
6.c. The project will not result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearoy uses. The project is designed to current City standards
and has adequate emergency access. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.d. The project will have sufficient parking capacity on-site because its design is in compliance with the City of Temecula Development
Code parking requirements. As a result, off-site parking will not be impacted. No impact is anticipated as a result of this project.
6.e. The project will not result in hazards or bardera for pedestdans or bicyclists. Hazards or barriers to bicyclists have not been included
as part of the project. No impact is anticipated as a result of this project.
6.f.
The project will not result in conflicts with adopted policies supporting altemative transportation. The proposed development
encourages the utitization of alternative modes of transportation in its design by including spaces for motorcycles and bicycles. No
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.g. Thepr~jectwi~~n~tresu~tinimpactst~rai~~waterb~me~ralrtra~csincen~neexistacurrentiyintheimmediateprnximity~fthepr~ject~
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal
result in impacts to:
a. Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, anunals
and birds)? (Source 1, Page 5-15, Figure 5-3) [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
b. Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Source 1, Figure 5-3, Page 5-15)
c. Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
coastal habitat, etc.)? (Source 1, Figure 5-3)
d. Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, ripman and vernal pool)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Source 1, Figure 5-3)
e. Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
The project will a potentially significant impact to endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats, including, but not limited
to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds. However, the project site has been previously graded and there are currently no native
species of plants, no unique, rare, threatened or endangered spedes of plants, no native vegetation on or adjacent to the site. Further,
them is no indication that any wildlife species exist at this location. The project will not reduce the number of species, provide a barrier
to the migration of animals or detadorate existing habitat. Because the project site is located within the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat
Fee Area, Habitat Conservation fees will be required to mitigate the effect of cumulative impacts to the species. After mitigation
measures are included, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
7.b.
The project will not result in an impact to locally designated species. Locally designated species are protected in the Old Town
Temecula Specific Plan; however, they are not protected elsewhere in the City. Since this project is not located in Old Town, and since
there are no locally designated spedes on site, there will be no impacts as a result of this project.
7.c. The project will not result in an impact to locally designated natural communities. Reference response 7.b. There will be no impacts
as a result of this project.
7.d. The project will not result in an impact to a wefiand habitat. Them is no wetland habitat on-site or within proximity to the site therefore,
no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
7.e. The project will not result in an impact any known wildlife dispersal or rnigretion corridors. The project site is a vacant lot within the
developed community and does not serve as part of a migration corridor. There will be no impacts as a result of this project.
R:\CEQA~348PA98.1ES Final.doc
7
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
No
Impact
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal:
a. Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
b. Use non-renewal resources in a wasteful and inefficient [ ] [ ] IX] [ ]
manner?
c. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
that would be of future value to the ragion and the residents
of the State?
8.a.
The project will not impact and/or conflict with adopted energy conservation plans. The project will be reviewed for compliance with
all applicable laws pertaining to energy conservation dudng the plan chec~ stage. No permits will be issued unless the prejant is found
to be consistent with these applicable laws. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
8.b.
The project will result in a less than significant impact for the use of non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner.
There will be an increase in the rate of use of natural resource dudng construction (construction materials, fuels for the daily operation.
asphalt. lumber). The depletion of these nonrenewable resource(s) and the subsequent depletion of the non-renewable natural
resources is minimal Due to the scale of the proposed development, these impacts are not seen as less than significant.
8.c. The project will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the
residents of the State. No known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State are located
at this project site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a. A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemical or radiation)?
b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
or emergency evacuation plan?
c. Thecreationofanyhealthhazardorpotentialhealth [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
hazard?
d. Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
hazards?
e. Increase fire hazard in areas with ~aurmable brush, [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
grass, or ~'ees?
9.8.
The project will not result in a risk of explosion, or the release of any hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset
conditions since none are proposed in the request. The same is true for the use, storage, transporl or disposal of any hazardous or
toxic materiats. Large quantities of these types of substances will not be associated with this use. The Department of Environmental
Health has reviewed the project and the applicant must receive their clearance prior to any pian check submittal. This applies to
storage and use of hazardous materials. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project,
9.b.
The project will not interfere with an emergency response plan or an emergency evaluation plan. The subject site is not located in an
area, which could impact an emergency response plan. The project will take access from a maintained street and will therefore not
impede any emergency response or emergency evacuation plans. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9.c.
The project will not result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard. The project will be reviewed fur compliance
with all applicable health laws dudng the plan check stage. No permits will be issued unless the project is found to be consistent with
these applicable laws. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\CEQAX348PA98.1ES Final.doe
8
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Polemially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
9.d.
9.e.
The project will not expose people to existing sources of potential health hazards. No health hazards are known to be within proximity
of the project. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not result in an increase to fire hazard in an area with ~ammable brush, grass, or frees. The project is a commemial
restaurant in an area that has been graded with existing development to the south and north. The project is not located within or
proximate to a fire hazard area. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
lO.a.
10.b.
11.
11.a,b.
11.c.
11.d.
11.e.
a. Increase in existing noise levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
[ ] [ ] Ix] [ ]
[ ] [ ] [x] [ ]
The proposal will result in a less than significant increase to existing noise levels. The site is currently vacant and development of the
land logically will result in increases to noise levels dudrig cons~ction phases as well as increases to noise in the area over the long
run. Long-term noise generated by this project would be similar to or kiss than the existing condo project to the east and the day care
facility to the north, and proposed commercial uses in the immediate area. No significant noise impacts are anticipated as a result of
this project in either the short or long-term.
The project may expose people to severe noise levels dudng the development/consfructjon phase (short run). Construction machinery
js capable of produring noise in the range of 100+ DBA at 100 feet which is considered very annoying and can cause headrig damage
from steady 8-hour exposure. This soume of noise will be of short duration and therefore will not be considered significant. There will
be no long-term exposure of people to noise. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project.
PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
e. Other governmental services?
[ ] [ ] ix] [ ]
[ ] [ ] [x] [ ]
[ ] [ ] [ ] Ix]
[ ] [ ] Ix] [ ]
[ ] [ ] Ix] [ ]
The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered fire or police protection. This project
will incrementally increase the need for fire and police protection; however, it will contribute its fair share to the maintenance of service
provision from these entities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not have an impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered school fadlities. The project will not cause significant
numbers of people to relocate within or to the City of Temecula, therefore. wilt not result in a need for new or altered school facilities.
No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will have a less than significant impact for the maintenance of public facilities, including roads. The impacts to cun'ent and
future needs for maintenance of roads as a result of development of the site will be incremental, however, they will not be considered
significant. The Gasoline Tax is sufficient to cover any of the proposed expenses.
The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services. A less than
significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\CEQAX348PA98.1ES Final.doc
9
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potcntially
Significant
Unless L,css Than
Mitigation Significant No
Incorporated Impact Impact
12.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need
or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
for new systems or supplies,
a. Power or natural gas? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
b. Communications systems? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
c. Local or regional water treatment or distribution [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
facilities?
d. Sewer or septic tanks? (Source 2, Pg. 39-40) [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
e. Storm water drainage? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
f. Solid waste disposal? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
g. Local or regional water supplies? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
12.a.
12.b.
12.c.
12.d
12.e.
12.f.
12.g.
13.
13,a.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alteretions to power or natural gas. These systems are
currently being delivered in proximity to the site. No significant impacts are antidpated as a result of this project.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to communication systems (reference
response No. 12.a.). No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not result in the need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to local or regional water treatment or
distribution facilities. While the project will have an incremental impact upon existing systems, the Final Environmental Impact Repod
(FBR) for the City's General Plan states: 'both EMWD and RCWD have indicated an ability to supply as much water as is required
in their services areas (p. 39)." No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to sanitary sewer systems or septic tanks.
The FEIR states: "implementation of the proposed General Plan would not significantly impact wastewater services (p, 40)." Since
the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. There are no
septic tanks on site or proximate to the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The proposal will result in a less than significant need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to storm water drainage.
The project will need to provide some additional on-site drainage systems. The drainage system will be required as a condition of
approval for the project and will tie into the exisfing system. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project.
The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to solid waste disposal systems. Any potential impacts
from solid waste created by this development can be mitigatad through parfidpation in any Sourca Reductico and Recycling Programs,
which are implemented by the City. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to local or regional water supplies. Reference
response 12.c. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a. Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
b. Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?
c. Create light or glare?
[ ] [ ] [ ] [×]
[ ] [ ] [x] [ ]
[ ] [×] [ ] [ ]
The project will not have an impact on a scenic vista or scenic highway. The project is not located in an area where there is a scenic
vista. Further, the City does not have any designated scenic highways. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\CEQA~348PA98.IES Final.doe
10
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant MitiSation Significant No
Impact Incot~pora~ed Impact Impact
13.b.
13.c,
The project will not have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect. The site is in an area of existing industrial uses. The design review
process of the proposed development has mitigated the potsntjal for significant visual impacts to the adjacent developments through
compliance with the City's Design Guidelines for industrial development and the use of materials, colors. and landscaping that are
compatible neighboring development. A less than significant impact is antidpated as a result of this project.
The project could have a potentially significant impact from light and glare. The project will produce and result in additional light/glare,
as do all developments of this nature. Because all light and glare has the potential to impact the Mount Palomar Observatory the project
will be cenditioned to be consistent with Ordinance No. 655 (Ordinance Regulating Light Pollution). Therefore. no significant impacts
are anticipated as a result of this project.
14.
14.a,c.
14,d.
14.e.
15.
a.
15. a-c
CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a. Disturb paleontological resources? [ ] [ ] [ ]
(Source 2, Figure 15, pg.70)
b. Disturb archaeological resources? [ ] [ ] [ ]
(Source 2, Figure 14, pg. 67)
c. Affect historical resources? [ ] [ ] [ ]
d. Have the potential to cause a physical change which would [ ] [ ] [ ]
affect unique ethnic cultural values?
e. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential [ ] [ ] [ ]
impact area?
ix]
Ix]
Ix]
ix]
ix]
The project will not have an impact on paleontological, amhaeological or historical resources. The site has been disturbed from prior
grading activity and any impacts to these resoumes would have been mitigated dudng the grading process. No significant impacts am
anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values. Reference response
14.a.c. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area. No religious or sacred uses exist at the
site or are proximate to the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
RECREATION. Would the proposal:
Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or
other recreational facilities? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
b. Affect existing recreational opportunities? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
The project will have no impact and will not impact or increase demand for neighborhood, regional parks, other recreational facilities
or opportunities. The project will not cause significant numbera of people to relocate within or to the City of Temecula, but will primarily
serve the needs of the existing residents. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project,
R:\CEQAB48PA98.1ES Final.doe
11
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potcntially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
lncorporaled
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
16.
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIHCANCE.
a. 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 community, reduce the number of restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of Califomia history
or prehistory?
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the [ ]
long-term, environmental goals?
Does the project have impacts that area individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? CCumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future projects).
[]
[1
Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
Ix]
ix]
Ix]
ix]
17.
EARLIER ANALYSES.
None.
SOURCES
1. City of Temecula General Plan.
2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Enviromental Impact Report.
3. South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
4. City of Temecula Development Code
R:\CEQA~348PA98.1ES Final.doc
12
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Geolol~ic Problems
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Processes:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Planning Application No. PA98-0348
(Development Plan)
3.a. Expose people to irapacts from fault rapture.
Ensure that soil compaction is to City Standards.
A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to the Depamnent
of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. Building pads shall be certified by
a registered Civil Engineer.
Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits.
Department of Public Works and Building and Safety Department.
3 .b,c. Expose people to impacts ~'om seismic ground shaking and liquefaction.
Utilize construction and compaction techniques that are consistent with the Uniform
Building Code.
Submit conslruction plans to the Building and Safety Department for approval.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Building and Safety Department.
3.f. Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation,
grading or fill.
Planting of slopes consistent with Ordinance No. 457.
Submit erosion control plans for approval by the Department of Public Works.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Depament of Public Works.
R:\CEQAB48PA98.1ES Final.doe
14
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Processes:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
3.f. Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation,
grading or fill.
Planting of on-site landscaping that is consistent with the Development Code.
Submit landscape plans that include planting of slope to the Planning Deparlment for
approval.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Planning Deparanent.
3.a-c, e. Exposure of people or property to seismic ground shaking, seismic ground
failure, liquefaction, landslides or mudflows, or earthquake hazards.
Ensure that soil compaction is to City standards.
A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to the Department
of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. Building pads shall be certified by a
registered Civil Engineer.
Prior to the issuance of grading permiLs and building permits.
Departmere of Public Works and Building & Safety Department.
3 .a-c, e, h. Exposure of people or property to seismic ground shaking, seismic ground
failure, landslides or mudflows, expansive soils or earthquake hazards.
Utilize consreaction techniques that are consistent with the Uniform Building Code.
Submit construction plans to the Building & Safety Department for approval.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building & Safety Deparmient
R:\CEQAX348PA98.1ES Final.doc
15
Water
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Transvortation/Circulation
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
4.a. The project will result in changes to absorption rates, drainage panems and the rate
and amount of surface rimoff.
Methods of con~'olling runoff, from site so that it will not negatively impact adjacent
properties, inchring drainage conveyances, have been incorporated into site design and
will be included on the grading plans.
Submit grading and drainage plan to the Department of Public Works for approval.
Prior to the issuance of grading permit.
Department of Public Works.
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g.
temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity).
An erosion control plan shah be prepared in accordance with City requirements and a Storm
Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared in accordance with the
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements.
The applicant shall submit a SWPPP to the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control
Board (SDRWQCB) for their review and approval.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Department of Public Works and SDRWQCB (for SWPPP).
6.a. Increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion.
Payment of Development Impact Fees for road improvements, traffic impacts, and traffic
signals.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance
with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building and Safety Doparanent.
R:\CEQAB48PA98.IES Final.doe
16
Biological Resources
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Public Services
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
7.a. Endangered, threatened or ntre species or their habilats (including but not limited
to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds).
Pay Mitigation Fee for impacts to Stephens Kangaroo Rat.
Pay $500.00 per acre of disturbed area of Stephens Kangaroo Rat habitat.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Department of Public Works and Planning Department
11 .a. A substantial effect upon and a need for new/altered governmental services
regarding fire protection. The project incrementally increases the need for fire
protection.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for Fire Mitigation.
Payment of the Pubhe Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance
with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permit.
Building & Safety Department.
11 .c. A substantial effect upon and a need for new/altered schools. No significant
impacts are anticipated.
Payment of School Fees.
Pay current mitigation fees with the Temecula Valley Unified School District.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building & Safety Department and Temecula Valley Unified School District.
R:\CEQAX348PA98.IES Final.doe
17
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
ll.d. A substantial effect upon and a need for mamtenance ofpublic facilities. mcludmg
roads. This project will have an incremental affect on public facilities.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for road improvements, traffic impacts, and public
facilities.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and m accordance
with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building and Safety Department.
13 .c. The creation of new light sources will result m increased light and glare that could
affect the Palomar Observatory.
Use lighting techniques that are consistent with Ordinance No. 655.
Submit lighting plan to the Building and Safety Department for approval.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Building & Safety Dopartment.
R:\CEQAX348PA98.IES Final.doc
18
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0348 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT- A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
VICINITY MAP
R:'6'TAFFRPT~348PA98.FC ll/lO/98jici
CITY OF TEMECULA
EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - LI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL)
CC )'
OS
//
Project
EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - BP (BUSINESS PARK)
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0348 (Development Plan
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November t8, 1998
H
M
R:',STAFFRPT~348PA98,PC ll/10/98jid
CITY OF TEMECULA
ENTERPRISE
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0348 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT- D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
SITE PLAN
R:\STAFFRFI'~348PA98.R:' )l/10/98jid
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0348 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
LANDSCAPE PLAN
R:~STAFFRPTL~48PA98.K: ll/10/98jid
CITY OF TEMECULA
EAST ELEVATION
WEST ELEVATION
NORTH ELEVATION
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0348 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - F
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
ELEVATIONS
R:XSTAFFRPT',348PA98.FC ll/10/98jid
CITY OF TEMECULA
MEZZANINE
(OFFICE)
2.616 $f
SECOND FLOOR
BLDG !
19,850 SF
LOADING
TRUCK
ROLL-UP
DOOR
DOUBL[
TRUCK
WELL
24'x 60'
T
FIRS; '
FLOOR PLAN
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0348 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT- I
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
FLOOR PLAN
R:',STAFFRPT~348PA98.PC ll/lO/98jid
ITEM #5
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
November 18, 1998
Planning Application No. PA98-0386 (Development Plan)
Prepared By: Patty Anders, Assistant Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends the Planning
Commission:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Planning Application
No. PA98-0386;
ADOPT the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning
Application No. PA98-0386; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 98- recommending approval of
Planning Application No, PA98-0386 based upon the
Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report and
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
John F. Firestone
REPRESENTATIVE:
Markham and Associates
PROPOSAL:
The design, construction and operation of a two-story, 51,289
square foot speculative office building on a 3.05 acre (net)
site with associated parking and landscaping.
LOCATION:
On the southeast comer of Rancho Califomia Road and Ridge
Park Drive.
EXISTING ZONING:
LI (Light Industrial)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
BP (Business Park)
LI (Light Industrial) & BP (Business Park)
LI (Light Industrial)
BP (Business Park) & PO (Professional Office)
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: BP (Business Park)
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNINGxSTAFFRPT~386Ra981g..doc
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Light Industrial and Office Buildings
Existing Office Buildings
Office and Warehouse Buildings
Existing Office and Vacant Land
PROJECT STATISTICS
Total Area: 4.01acres (gross) 3.05 (net)
Total Area:
Total Site Area:
Building Footprint Area:
Landscape Area:
Paved Area:
132,858 square feet
26,033 square feet
50,558 square feet
55,800 square feet
20%
38%
42%
Parking Required:
Office = 50,233 sq. ft.: 167
Parking Provided:
Standard Spaces: 140
Compact Spaces: 26
Handicap Spaces: 6
Total Parking Provided: 172
Building Height:
Thirty-Nine feet (39')
BACKGROUND
A pre-application meeting was held on July 8, 1998. A formal application was submitted on
September 16, 1998. A Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was held on October 8,
1998, with staff providing written comments on October 8, 1998. The project was deemed
complete on October 26, 1998.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project consists of the design, construction and operation of a two-story, 51,289 square foot
speculative office building with some basement level parking on a three (3.05) acre site with
associated improvements, such as hardscape, parking, landscaping and drive aisles. Landscape
improvements include: parking lot planting, planter areas, landscaped slopes and streetscape
landscaping.
ANALYSIS
Site DesiGn
The proposed site is located at the southeast comer of Rancho California Road and Ridge Park
Drive. The building is an angular shaped and allows circulation around the entire structure. The
front of the building is oriented towards Ridge Park Ddve. Parking is located throughout the entire
site, including some basement level parking below the first level. The site design is compatible with
existing development in the area.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA~DEFrS\PLANN1NG\STAFFRFI'~86p~98pc..doc
2
Access, Traffic and Circulation
The project takes access from Ridge Park Drive. There is parking and vehicular circulation
throughout the entire site. The building is a speculative office building and the entire square
footage has been parked at office space requirements. Development Code requires this size of
building to provide 167 parking spaces; however, the applicant is providing 172 spaces. As
proposed, the site has sufficient and effected site circulation with ingress and egress that will not
conflict with the intereection of Ridge Park Ddve and Rancho California Road.
Architecture
The project is a two-story office building with some basement level parking below the first floor. The
building is an exceptional, contemporary architectural design. The building is proposed with an
angular shape; extensive use of detailed, recessed windows; a curved, tiered, covered entry;
rounded comere at both ends of the building, and a curved glass element at the rear of the building.
In addition, the building provides varying roof heights, extensive windows and railings. The design
has been carried out to all sides of the structure. There is an extensive amount of landscaping at
the main entrance and throughout the site. In addition, there is an interior atrium and waterfall
inside the building, and a skylight over the entry feature. There will be no roof mounted equipment,
as it is proposed behind the building screened by a concrete wall that is painted to match the
building.
No signage is being approved with this speculative building. As proposed, the structure is
compatible with the existing buildings in the area in terms of design, colors, matedais, height, bulk
and mass.
Landscapinq
Thirty-eight percant (38%) of the site has been landscaped. The landscaping provided exceeds
the twenty percent (20%) minimum landscaping requirement in the LI (Light Industrial) zone. The
landscaping is dispersed along the front elevation, specifically the main entry and on the sides.
There are landscaped planters throughout the parking area which will help to break up the parking
lot paving. The existing slope on the east side will be conditioned to be brought up to the original
approved planting standards. Half of the existing slope does not belong to the applicant, and
therefore will not be improved as part of this application.
The City's Landscape Architect has reviewed the landscape plan and the applicant has addressed
his comments on the plan. Staff feels the landscaping has been distributed very effectively
throughout the site and helps define the main entry feature.
EXISTING ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
The General Plan Land Use designation for the site is BP (Business Park). Existing zoning for the
site is LI (Light Industrial). Office buildings of over 50,000 square feet are permitted with the
approval of a Development Plan pursuant to Chapter 17.08 of the Development Code. The project
as proposed is consistent with the General Plan and Development Code.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
An Initial Study has been prepared for this project. The Initial Study determined that although the
proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not
',',TEMEC_FS20I ~DATA~DEFrS\PLANNING~STAFFRFI~386p~gSpc..doc 3
considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and in the
Conditions of Approval forthe project. Any potentially significant impacts will be mitigated to a level
of insignificance.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The project is the design and construction of a two-story, 51,288 square foot speculative office
building with parking at the basement level below the first floor, and associated parking and
landscaping on a 3.05 acre site. The project is consistent with the General Plan, Development
Code, and the Design Guidelines.
FINDINGS
The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all
applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The project is
consistent with all City Ordinances including: the City's Development Code, Ordinance No.
655 (Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance), and the City's Water Effident Landscaping provisions.
The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety
and welfare. The project as proposed complies with all City Ordinances and meets the
standards adopted by the City of Temecula designed for the protection of the public health,
safety and welfare.
The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats, or to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The project site has been previously
disturbed and graded, and streetscape installed on site. There are no native species of
plants or vegetation at the site, nor any indication that any wildlife species exist, or that the
site serves as a migration corridor. A DeMinimus impact finding can be made forthis project.
Attachments:
PC Resolution - Blue Page 5
A, Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 8
Initial Study - Blue Page 19
Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 36
Exhibits - Blue Page 43
A. Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C General Plan Map
D. Site Plan
E. Landscape Plan
F. Elevations
G. Colors and Materials Board
H. Floor Plan
R:\STAFFRPT~86pa98pc..doc
4
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 98-
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTSXPLANNING\STAFFRFI~86pa98pc..doc
5
PC RESOLUTION NO. 98-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA98-0386 TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A TWO-STORY,
51,289 SQUARE FOOT SPECULATIVE OFFICE BUILDING AND
ASSOCIATED PARKING, AND LANDSCAPING ON A PARCEL
CONTAINING A 3.05 (NET) ACRES LOCATED ON THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF RIDGE PARK DRIVE AND RANCHO
CALIFORNIA ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.
940-310-029.
WHEREAS, John F. Firestone filed Planning Application No. PA98-0386 in accordance with
the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA98-0386 was processed in the time and manner
prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA98-0386 on
November 18. 1998, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time interested
persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or in opposition;
WHEREAS, at the public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all persons desidng to be heard, the Commission considered all facts relating
to Planning Application No. PA98-0386;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
Section 2. Findin.qs. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No.
PA98-0386 makes the following findings; to wit:
A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula
and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The project is
consistent with all City Ordinances including: the City's Development Code, Ordinance No. 655
(Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance), and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping provisions.
B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the
public health, safety and welfare. The project as proposed complies with all City Ordinances and
meets the standards adopted by the City of Temecula designed for the protection of the public
health, safety and welfare.
C. The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare
species or their habitats, or to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The project site has been
previously disturbed and graded, and streetscape installed on site. There are no native species
of plants or vegetation at the site, nor any indication that any wildlife species exist. or that the site
serves as a migration corridor. A DeMinimus impact finding can be made for this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~86pa98pc..doe 6
Section 3. 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 Mitigated Negative Declaration with De Minimus
Findings, therefore, is hereby adopted.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves
Planning Application No. PA98-0386 for the design and construction of a two-story, 51,289 square
foot speculative office building with associated parking and landscaping on a parcel containing 3.05
acres located on the southeast comer of Ridge Park Ddve and Rancho Califomia Road, and known
as Assessor's Parcel No. 940-310-029 subject to Exhibit A, attached hereto. and incorporated
herein by this reference and made a part hereof.
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November, 1998.
Marcia Slaven, Chairperson
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting there of, held on the 18th day of
November, 1998 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
V, TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFR,F~386p~98pc..doc
7
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEFFS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX386pa98pc..do~
8
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OFAPPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA98-0386 (Development Plan)
Project Description: The design and construction of a two-story, 51,289 square foot
speculative office building with associated parking and landscaping on a 3.05 acre
site.
Assessor's Parcel No.: 940-310-029
Approval Date: November 18, 1998
Expiration Date: November 18, 2000
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicantJdeveloper shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or
money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Seventy-Eight Dollars
($78.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination
with DeMinimus Finding required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(a) and
California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the
applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check as required
above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition,
Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
General Requirements
The developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City and any
agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees and agents from any
and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentality
thereof, or any of its officers, employees and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek
monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality
thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions appmved by the
voters of the City, conceming the Specific Plan Amendment which action is brought within the
appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4
(Section 21000 et seq., including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167).
City shall promptly notify the developer/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought
within this time period. City shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. Should
the City fail to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, developer/applicant shall not,
thereafter be responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City. any agency
or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents.
3. This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall
become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction
contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter diligently
pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this
approval.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~86pa98pc, .doc 9
The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved Mitigation
Monitoring Program.
The development of the premises shall conform substantially with Exhibit D, or as amended
by these conditions.
a. Two (2) Class I lockers or Class II bicycle racks shall be provided.
b. A minimum of one hundred sixty seven (167) parking spaces shall be provided.
c. A minimum of six (6) handicapped parking spaces shall be provided.
Landscaping shall be provided in substantial conformance with Exhibit "E" (Landscape
Plan), or as amended by these conditions. Landscaping installed for the project shall be
continuously maintained to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager. If it is determined that
the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Manager shall have the authority to
require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved
landscape plan.
The maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the
developer.
The landscaping on the east slope shall be improved to the originally approved
condition.
Building elevations shall conform substantially to Exhibit F and Exhibit G (color elevations),
or as amended by these conditions.
Colors and materials used shall conform substantially with Exhibit H, or as amended by
these conditions (color and material board).
Materials
Exterior Wall Finish (Stucco)
Exterior Wall Finish (Stucco)
Exterior Wall Entry (Ceramic Tile)
Exterior Wall Entry Accent Strips (Ceramic Tile)
Base-Entry Course Accent (Black Granite Tile)
Glass (Solarcool)
Colors
La Habra-X50-Crystal White
La Habr-X56 French Grey
White
Grey
Zimbabwe
Grey Reflective
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal
Code (Habitat Conservation).
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
10. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid.
11. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department - Planning Division for approval, These plans shall
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRF~386pa981x:..doc 10
conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "E", or as amended by these conditions.
The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The
plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover page shall identify
the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be
accompanied by the following items:
Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of
submittal).
One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
C,
Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved
plan).
Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits
12.
An Administrative Development Plan application for signage shall be required if signage is
proposed. An application for signage shall be submitted and approved by the Planning
Manager.
13. Roof-mounted equipment shall be inspected to ensure it is shielded from ground view.
14.
All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with appmved landscape and irrigation
plans.
15.
All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed and be in a condition
acceptable to the Planning Manager. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds,
disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be propedy constructed and in good working
order.
16.
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 cantered at the intedor end of the parking spaca at a minimum
height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or
cantered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking spaca 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, cleady and censpicuously
stating the following:
"Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces
not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for
persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense.
Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 909 696-
3000".
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAF~RFI~386pa98pc..doc
~.!
17.
Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to
guarantee the maintenance of the plantings, in accordance with the approved construction
landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Community Development Department
- Planning Division for one year from final certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the
landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the
Planning Manager, the bond shall be released.
18.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with pdor to occupancy or any use allowed
by this permit.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
19.
Comply with applicable provisions of the 1994 edition of the California Building, Plumbing
and Mechanical Codes; 1993 National Electrical Code; Califomia Administrative Code, Title
24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code.
20.
Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance
with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other
outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building
and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly
upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way.
21.
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted
to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School
Mitigation Fees.
22.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals pdor to commencement of any construction
work.
23. The Occupancy classification of the proposed buildings shall be B/S-3.
24. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
25.
All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998).
26. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building.
27. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
28. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
29.
Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire
alarm systems.
30.
Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1994
edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code, Appendix C.
31. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system.
32. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\pLANNING~STAFFRpT~386pa98~c..doc 12
submitted for plan review.
33. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic
and mechanical plan for plan review.
34. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer
engineer are required for plan review submittal.
35. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility,
36. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
37. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls require separate
approvals and permits.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any
Government Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site plan all
existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and
drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review
and revision.
General Requirements
38. A Grading Permit for either rough and/or predse grading, including all on-site flat work and
improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way.
39. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way.
40. All improvement plans and grading plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent
projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on
standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars,
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
41. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and
approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary
erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and pdvate
property.
42.
The Developer shall post secudty and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading
and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and
subject to approval by the Department of Public Works.
43. A Soil Report shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and submitted to the
Director of the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA\DEFrS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~3861~t98pc..doc
shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the
construction of engineered structures and pavement sections.
44.
The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a ragisterad Civil Engineer in
accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and
upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or pdvate
drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and
identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect
the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream
facilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make
required improvements, shall be provided by the Developer.
45.
The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No
grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the
project is shown to be exempt.
46.
As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer
shall receive wdtten clearance from the following agencies:
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
Planning Department
Department of Public Works
47.
The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an
Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the
subject property.
48.
Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department
and the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
49.
The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site
work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works.
50.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier's check
or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan
fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this
property, no new charge needs to be paid.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
51.
Improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of
Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works.
The following design cdteda shall be observed:
Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C.
paving.
b. Driveway shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No, 207A,
~\TE MEC_FS201 ~DATA~DEIYrS\PLANNING~TAFFRpT~386pa98pc..doc
Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in
accordance with Ordinance 461.
Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages
in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400 and 401.
e. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
52.
The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula
General Plan standards unless otherwise noted, Plans shall be reviewed and approved
by the Director of the Department of Public Works:
Improve Rancho Califomia Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' R/W)
to include installation/reconstruction of existing drainage facility
Improve Ridge Park Ddve (Principal Collector Highway Standards - 78' R/W) to
include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, and utilities
(including but not limited to water and sewer).
Install an ADA access ramp per City of Temecula Standard No. 402 at the
northeast comer of Rancho California Road and Ridge Park Drive.
53.
The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance
with the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil
Engineer shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
54.
The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as
required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code
and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06.
55.
The Developer shall record a written offer to participate in, and waive all rights to object
to the formation of an Assessment District, a Community Facilities District, or a Bridge
and Major Thoroughfare Fee Distdct for the construction of the proposed Western
Bypass Corridor in accordance with the General Plan. The form of the offer shall be
subject to the approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
56.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District
Eastem Municipal Water Distdct
Department of Public Works
57.
All public improvements, shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans
and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works.
58. The existing improvements shall be reviewed, Any appurtenance damaged or broken
shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the
Department of Public Works.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRJYr~386pa98pC..do¢
FIRE DEPARTMENT
59.
Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by
the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the Uniform
Building Code (UBC), Uniform Fire Code (UFC), and related codes which are in force at the
time of building plan submittal.
60.
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commercial buildings per UFC Appendix Ill.A, Table A-Ill-A-1. The
developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivedng 1500 GPM at
20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 400 GPM for a
total fire flow of 1900 GPM with a 3 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted
during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic
fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau, The Fire Flow as
given above has taken into account all information as provided. (UFC 903.2, Appendix
Ill.A)
61.
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per UFC
Appendix Ill.B, Table A-Ill-B-1. A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants (6"
x 4" x 2-2 "outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public
streets, Hydrants shall be spacad at 350 feet apart and shall be located no more than 210
feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant,
The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The
upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (UFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-
B)
62.
As required by the Uniform Fire Code, when any portion of the building(s) is in excess of
150 feet from a water supply on a public street, on site fire hydrants are required. For this
project on site fire hydrants are required. (UFC 903,2)
63.
Pdor to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have
approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads
are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for
70,000 Ibs GVVV. (UFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
64.
65.
Pdor to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have appreved Fire
Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any
portion of an extedor wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all
weather surface designed for 70,000 Ibs. GVVV with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet.
( UFC sec 902 and Ord 95-15)
Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than
twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13)
feet six (6) inches. (UFC 902.2.2.1 and Ord 95-15)
66.
Prior to building construction, dead end road ways and streets in excess of one hundred
and fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of
accommodating fire apparatus. (UFC 902.2.2.4)
67. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water
system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to instellation. Plans shall be:
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING~TAFFRPT~86pa98pc..doc 16
signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature
block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards.
After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to
the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire
hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any
combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot, (UFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2
and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4, 1 )
68.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers"
shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (UFC 901.4.3)
69.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, all commercial buildings
shall display street numbers in a prominent location on the street side of the building. The
numerals shall be minimum twelve (12) inches in height for buildings and six (6) inches for
suite identification on a contrasting background. In stdp centers, businesses shall post the
suite address on the rear door(s). (UFC 901.4.4 and Ord 95-15)
70.
Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and
type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system.
Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to
installation. (UFC Article 10, UBC Chapter 9 and Ord 95-15)
71.
Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for
monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm
system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans
shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation, (UFC
Article 10)
72.
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be
provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be
located to the dght side of the main entrance door. The Knox-Box shall be supervised by
the alarm system. (UFC 902.4)
73.
All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates
obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry
system for emergency access by firefighting personnel. (UFC 902.4)
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
74.
Prior to installation of the arterial street lighting, the developer shall file an application
with the TCSD and pay the appropriate energy charges related to the transfer of said
lights to the City.
OTHER AGENCIES
75.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California
Water District's transmittal dated September 28, 1998, a copy of which is attached,
76.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside County
Flood Control Distdct trensmittal dated October 6, 1998, a copy of which is attached.
~\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~86pa98pc..doc
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance
with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be
subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant Name
\\TEMEC_FS201 \DATA\DEPTS~PLANNING~TAFFRPT~386pagSpc..doc
18
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA~DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRP~386pa98p~. ,doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
Environmental Checklist
6.
7.
8.
10.
Project Title:
Lead Agency Name and Address:
Contact Person and Phone Number:
Project Location:
Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
General Plan Designation:
Zoning:
Description of Project:
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
Other public agencies whose
approval is required:
Planning Application No. PA98-0386 (Development
Plan)
City of Temecula, 43200 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, CA 92589
Patty Anders, Assistant Planner (909) 694-5400
On the southeast comer of Rancho California Road
and Ridge Park Drive.
John F. Firestone, 3301 Hudnall, Dallas, TX 75235
BP (Business Park)
LI (Light Industrial)
The design, construction and operation of a two-
story, 51,289 square foot speculative office
building on a 4.01 acre site.
The project is located in a area that has been
previously graded, street improvements have been
made and water and sewer are within vicinity of
the project. Land to the north is light industrial and
offica development, to the south is existing office,
to the west is vacant land and existing office, and
to the east is office/warehouse development.
Riverside County Fire Department, Riverside
County Health Department, Temecula Police
Department, Eastern Municipal Water District,
Rancho California Water District, Southern
California Gas Company, Southern California
Edison Company, General Telephone Company,
and Riverside Transit Agency.
\\TEMEC_FS20I\DATA\DEFTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~386~a98~c..~oc
20
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages,
[ ] Land Use and Planning [ ] Hazards
[ ] Population and Housing [ ] Noise
[X] Geologic Problems [ ] Public Services
[X] Water [ ] Utilities and Service Systems
[ ] Air Quality [X] Aesthetics
[ ] Transportation/Circulation [ ] Cultural Resources
[ ] Biological Resources [ ] Recreation
[ ] Energy and Mineral Resources [ ] Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect m this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been
added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
Name Date
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNINGXSTAFFRFI~386pa98pc..do~
21
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
Potentially
Signi~eam
lmnact
a. Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source I, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17) [ ]
b. Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies
adoptedbyagencieswithjurisdictionovertheproject? [ ]
c. Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
(Source 1, Figure 2-I, Page 2-17) [ ]
d. Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to
soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)?
(Soume 1, Figure 5-4, Page 5-17) [ ]
e. Dismpt or divide the physical arrangement ofan established
community (including low-income or minority commumty)? [ ]
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would be proposal:
a. Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population
projects? [ ]
b. Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through project in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)? [ ]
c. Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? [ ]
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result
in or expose people to potential impacts involving?
Significant
[1
[]
[]
[1
[]
[]
[]
[]
Less Than
Signi~e. ant
Impact
[]
[]
[]
[1
[]
[l
[]
[]
No
Impact
Ix]
[x]
ix]
Ix]
Ix]
Ix]
[x]
ix]
a. Fault rupture? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
b. Seismic ground shaking? [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
c. Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
d. Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
e. Landslides or mudflows? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
f. Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions
form excavation, grading or fill? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
g. Subsidence of the land? [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
h. Expansive soils? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
i. Unique geologic or physical features? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
[l
ix]
[]
[]
[x]
Ix]
4. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage paRems, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff? [ ]
b. Exposureofpeopleorpropertytowaterrelatedhazards
such as flooding? (Source 2, Figure 13, Page 95 and
Source 2, Figure 30, Page 190; Source 1, Figure 7-4) [ ]
c. Dischargeintosurfacewatersorotheralterationofsurface
water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or
turbithty)? [ ]
d. Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body? [ ]
\XTEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRFE3861m98pc..doe
22
ix]
[]
[]
[]
[1
[1
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
e. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements?
f. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through
direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial
loss of groundwater recharge capability?
g. Altered direction or rate offlow ofgroundwater?
h. Impacts to groundwater quality?
i. Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies?
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a. Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
b. Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
c. Alter air movement, moistore or temperatore, or cause
any change in climate?
d. Create objectionable odors?
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
Would the proposal result in:
a. Increase vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
b. Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves
or dangerous intersection or incompatible uses)?
c. Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
d. Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
e. Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
f. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus tamouts, bicycle reeks)?
g. Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal
result in impacts to:
a. Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals
and birds)?
b. Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)?
c. Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest,
coastal habitat, etc.)?
d. Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)?
e. Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal:
a. Conflict with adopted energy conservation phns?
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRFI~86pa98pe..doc
23
Potentially
Significant
Iramet
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[1
[]
[]
[1
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[1
[]
[]
[]
[]
[1
[]
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incomorat~'d
[]
[1
[1
[]
[]
[1
[1
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[1
[1
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
Less Than
Sigm~eant
Immct
ix]
Ix]
ix]
ix]
[]
[]
[]
[1
Ix]
Ix]
[]
[]
[]
[1
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[1
[]
No
Impact
[]
[]
[3
[3
ix]
ix]
ix]
ix]
[]
[]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[x]
Ix]
Ix]
ix]
Ix]
Ix]
ix]
ix]
Ix]
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCE~
b. Use non-renewal resources m a wasteful and inefficient
manner?
c, Result m the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
that would be of future value to the region and the residents
of the State?
9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a. A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemical or radiation)?
b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan?
c. The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard?
d. Exposure ofpeople to existing sources ofpotential health
hazards?
e. Increase fire hazard in areas with fiammable brush,
grass, or trees?
10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a. Increase in existing noise levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
ll.
PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Maintenance ofpublic facilities, including roads?
e. Other governmental services?
12.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Local or regional water txeatment or distribution
facilities?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste disposal?
g. Local or regional water supplies?
Potentially
Significant
Imt~act
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incomorated
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[x]
[]
[x]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
Ix]
[]
[]
[]
ix]
[]
[x]
[x]
[x]
Ix]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[x]
[x]
Ix]
[x]
Ix]
[]
[x]
[x]
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFP, F~386paggpc..dec
14
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a. Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
b. Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?
c. Create light or glare?
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. WouLd the proposal:
a. Disturb paleontological resources?
b. Disturb archaeological resources?
c. Affect historical resources?
d. Have the potential to cause a physical change which would
affect unique ethnic cultural values?
e. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential
impact area?
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a. Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or
other recreational facilities?
b. Affect existing recreational opportunities?
16. 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 community, reduce the number of restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history
or prohistory?
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals?
Does the project have impacts that area individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? CCumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future projects).
Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
17. EARLIER ANALYSES.
None.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS~PLANNINGXSTAFFR.PT~386pagBpc..doc
25
Potentially
Significant
Ironact
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
It
[]
[l
Significant
Unless
Incorporated
[]
[1
ix]
[]
[]
[]
[l
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
Less Than
Significant
Impact
[]
ix]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
Ix]
Ix]
[]
[]
[]
[l
No
Iratact
ix]
[]
[1
ix]
Ix]
Ix]
[x]
[x]
[]
[]
Ix]
[x]
ix]
ix]
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Sigai~c~mt
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Signi~e, ant
Impact
No
lm~act
SOURCES
1. City of Temecula General Plan.
2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report.
3. South Coast Air Quality Management Dismet CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
4. City of Temecula Development Code
\XTEMEC_FS201\DATAXDEPTS\PLANNINGXSTAFFRFF\386paggpc..do~
26
DISCUSSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Land Use and Planning
1.b
The project will not conflict with applicable environmental plans or polices adopted by
agencies with jurisdiction over the project. The project is consistent with the City's General
Plan Land Use Designation of BP (Business Park). Impacts from all General Plan Land Use
Designations were analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General
Plan. Agencies with jurisdiction within the City commented on the scope of the analysis
contained in the EIR and how the land uses would impact their particular agency. Mitigation
measures approved with the EIR will be applied to this project. Furthermore, all agencies
with jurisdiction over the project are also being given the opportunity to comment on the
project and it is anticipated that they will make the appropriate comments as to how the
project relates to their specific environmental plans or polices. The site has been previously
graded and services within proximity of the project. There will be limited, if any
environmental effects on environmental plans or polices adopted by agencies with
jurisdiction over the project. No significant effects on the land use or environmental policies
are anticipated as a result of this project.
1.e
The project will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community
(including low-income or minodty community) or agricultural resources or operations. The
project is a speculative office building in an area surrounded by land that is developed with
similar office/commercial/warehouse uses, as well as vacant land that is zoned to
accommodate similar office/commercial/manufacturing/light industrial uses. There is no
established residential community (including low-income or minority community) at this site.
No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
Population and Housing
2.a.
The project will not cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections. The
project is a speculative office building that is consistent with the City's General Plan Land
Use Designation of Business Park. Since the project is consistent with the City's General
Plan, and does not exceed the floor area ratio for Business Park, it will not be a significant
contributor to population growth that will cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections. No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
2.b.
The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The
project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation of BP (Business Park),
The project will cause people to relocate to or within Temecula; however, due to its limited
scale, it will not induce substantial growth in the area. No significant effects are anticipated
as a result of this project.
2.c.
The project will not displace housing, especially affordable housing. The project site is
vacant; therefore no housing will be displaced. No significant effects are anticipated as a
result of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRFr',386pa98pc,.dec
Geologic Problems
3.a.
The project will result in a less than significant impact on people as a result of fault rupture.
The project is not located in a fault zone or within a fault setback area; therefore no
significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project may have a potentially significant impact on people involving seismic ground
shaking as the project is located in Southem California, an area which is seismically active.
There may also be a potentially significant impact from seismic ground failure, liquefaction
and subsidence. Any potentially significant impacts will be mitigated through building
construction which is consistent with Uniform Building Code standards. Further, preliminary
soil reports have been submitted and reviewed as part of the application submittal and
recommendations contained in this report will be used to determine appropriate conditions
of approval. The soil reports will also contain recommendations for the compaction of the
soil which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from seismic ground
shaking, seismic ground failure, liquefaction and subsidence. After mitigation measures are
performed, no significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
3.d.
The project will not expose people to a seiche, tsunami or volcanic hazard. The project is
not located in an area where any of these hazards could occur. No significant effects are
anticipated as a result of this project.
3.e,
The project will not expose people to landslides or mudflows. The Final Environmental
Impact for the City of Temecula General Plan has not identified any known landslides or
mudslides located on the site or proximate to the site. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
3.f.
The project will have a less than significant impact from erosion, changes in topography,
grading or fill. The site has been previously graded and the project does not propose
significant grading beyond that which has already occurred. Increased wind and water
erosion of soils both on and off-site may occur during the construction phase of the project
and the project may result in changes in siltation, deposition or erosion. Erosion control
techniques will be included as a condition of approval for the project. In the long-run,
hardscape and landscaping will serve as permanent erosion control for the project, Since
the amount of grading will be the minimum necessary for the realization of the project,
modification to topography and ground surface relief features will not be considered
significant. Potential unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill will be
mitigated through the use of landscaping and proper compaction of the soils. After
mitigation measures are performed, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
3.i.
The project will not impact unique geologic or physical features. No unique geologic
features or physical features exist on the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~386pa98pc..doc
28
Water
4,a.
The project will result in changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns and the rate and
amount of surface runoff; however, these changes are considered less than significant.
Previously permeable ground will be rendered impervious by construction of buildings,
accompanying hardscape and driveways. While absorption rates and surface runoff will
change, potential impacts shall be mitigated through site design. Drainage conveyances
will be required for the project to safely and adequately handle runoff which is created.
After mitigation measures are performed, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result
of this project.
4.b.
The project may have a potentially significant impact to people or property to water related
hazards because the project is located within a dam inundation area as identified in the City
of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report. impacts can be mitigated
by utilizing existing emergency response systems and by assuring that these systems
continue to maintain adequate service provision as the City develops. The project site is
outside of the 100 year floodplain pursuant to FEMA maps. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
4.c.
The project may have a potentially significant effect on discharges into surface waters and
alteration of surface water quality. Pdor to issuance of a grading permit for the project, the
developer will be required to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control
Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed or the
project is shown to be exempt. By complying with the NPDES requirements, any potential
impacts can be mitigated to a level less than significant. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
4.d ,e.
The project will have a less than significant impact in a change in the amount of surface
water in any waterbody or impact currents, or to the course or direction of water
movements. Additional surface runoff will occur because previously permeable ground will
be rendered impervious by construction of buildings, accompanying hardscape and
driveways. Due to the limited scale of the project, the additional amount of drainage will not
considered significant. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
4.f-h.
The project will have a less than significant change in the quantity and quality of ground
waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer
by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability.
Limited changes will occur in the quantity and quality of ground waters; however, due to the
minor scale of the project, it will not be considered significant. Further, construction on the
site will not be at depths sufficient to have a significant impact on ground waters. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
4.i.
The project will not result in a substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater water
otherwise available for public water supplies. According to information contained in the
Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Temecula General Plan, "Rancho
California Water District indicate that they can accommodate additional water demands."
Water service currently exists in the immediate proximity to the project. Water service will
need to be provided by Rancho California Water District (RCWD). This is typically provided
\~TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~86p~98pc..doc
29
upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Air Quality
5.a.
The project will not violate any air quality standard or contdbute to an existing or projected
air quality violation. The project (51,289 square feet of office space) is below the threshold
for potentially significant air quality impact (276,000 square feet) established by South
Coast Air Quality Management Distdct (Page 6-11, Table 6-2 of the South Coast Air Quality
Management CEQA Air Quality Handbook). No significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
5.b.
The project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. There are no significant
pollutants in proximity to the project. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of
this project.
5.c,
The project will not alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause any change in
climate. The limited scale of the project precludes it from creating any significant impacts
on the environment in this area. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
5.d.
The project will create objectional odors dudng the construction phase of the project. These
impacts will be of short duration and are not considered significant.
Transportation/Circulation
6.a.
While the project may result in an incremental increase in traffic congestion it will result in
a less than significant increase in vehicle trips. It is anticipated that this project will
contribute a less than significant increase in existing volumes during the AM peak hour and
PM peak hour time frames to the intersections of Rancho California Road and Diaz Road,
and the intersection of Front Street and Rancho California Road according to standard trip
calculation methodologies. The proposed development is in compliance with the land use
and development standards of this zone which was analyzed in the EIR for the General
Plan. Therefore, it is determined that the proposed development will not adversely affect
the LOS for this area, but was included in the EIR analysis. The applicant will be required
to pay traffic signal mitigation fees and public facility fees as conditions of approval for the
project. After mitigation measures are performed and development impact fees paid, no
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.b.
The project will not result in hazards to safety from design features. The project is designed
to current City standards and does not propose any hazards to safety from design features.
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.c.
The project will not result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses. The
project is a speculative office use in an area with existing and similar planned uses. The
project is designed to currant City standards and has adequate emergency access. The
project does not provide direct access to nearby uses; therefore, it will not impact access
to nearby uses. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA\DEPTS\PLANNINGXSTAFFRFF\386pa98pC..doc
30
6.d.
The project will have sufficient parking capacity on-site. Off-site parking will not be
impacted. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.e.
The project will not result in a less than significant impact from hazards or barriers for
pedestrians or bicyclists. Hazards or barriers to bicyclists have not been included as part
of the project. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.f.
The project will not result in conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation. The project was transmitted to the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and
based upon their response to similar projects in the area, it is not anticipated the project will
impact RTA facilities or services. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
6.g.
The project will not result in impacts to rail, waterborne or air traffic since none exists
currently in the immediate proximity of the project. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
Biological Resources
7.a.
The project will not result ~n an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats, including, but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds. The project
site has been previously graded. Currently, there are no native species of plants, no
unique, rare, threatened or endangered species of plants, no native vegetation on or
adjacent to the site. Further, there is no indication that any wildlife species exist at this
location. The project will not reduce the number of species, provide a barrier to the
migration of animals or deteriorate existing habitat. The project site is located within the
Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat Fee Area. Habitat Conservation fees will be required to
mitigate the effect of cumulative impacts to the species. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
7.b.
The project will not result in an impact to locally designated species. Locally designated
species are protected in the Old Town Temecula Specific Plan; however, they are not
protected elsewhere in the City. Since this project is not located in Old Town, and since
there are no locally designated species on site, no significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
7.c. The project will not result in an impact to locally designated natural communities. Reference
response 7.b. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project,
7.d.
The project will not result in an impact to wetland habitat. There is no wetland habitat on-
site or within proximity to the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
7.e.
The project will not result in an impact to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The
project site does not serve as part of a migration corridor. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\pLANNING~STAFFRPT'G86pa~)8pc..dec
Energy and Mineral Resources
8.a.
The project will not impact and/or conflict with adopted energy conservation plans. The
project will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable laws pertaining to energy
conservation during the plan check stage. No permits will be issued unless the project is
found to be consistent with these applicable laws. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
8.b.
The project will result in a less than significant impact for the use of non-renewable
resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner. While there will be an increase in the rate
of use of any natural resource and in the depletion of nonrenewable resource(s)
(construction materials, fuels for the daily operation, asphalt, lumber) and the subsequent
depletion of these non-renewable natural resources. Due to the scale of the proposed
development, these impacts are not seen as significant.
B.c.
The project will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resoume that would
be of future value to the region and the residents of the State. No known mineral resource
that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State are located at this
project site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Hazards
9.a.
The project will not result in a dsk of explosion, or the release of any hazardous substances
in the event of an acddent or upset conditions since none are proposed in the request, The
same is true for the use, storage, transport or disposal of any hazardous or toxic materials.
Large quantities of these types of substances are not anticipated with this use. However,
the Department of Environmental Health regulates the use, storage and removal of
hazardous or toxic materials. Moreover, the Fire Department and the Department of
Environmental Health have reviewed the project and the applicant must receive their
clearances prior to any plan check submittal. This applies to storage and use of hazardous
materials; therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9.b.
The project will not interfere with an emergency response plan or an emergency evaluation
plan. The subject site is not located in an area that could impact an emergency response
plan. The project will take access from a maintained street and will therefore not impede
any emergency response or emergency evacuation plans, No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
9.c.
The project will not result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard.
The project will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable health laws during the plan
check stage. No permits will be issued unless the project is found to be consistent with
these applicable laws. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9.d.
The project will not expose people to existing sources of potential health hazards. No
health hazards are known to be within proximity of the project. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
9.e,
The project will not result in an increase to fire hazard in an area with ~ammable brush,
grass, or trees. The project is an industrial/warehouse development in an area of existing
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNINGXSTAFFRPT\386pa98pc..doc
and future similar uses. The project is not located within or proximate to a fire hazard area.
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Noise
lO.a.
The proposal will result in a less than significant increase to existing noise levels. The site
is currently vacant and development of the land logically will result in increases to noise
levels during construction phases as well as increases to noise in the area over the long
run, Long-term noise generated by this project would be similar to existing and proposed
uses in the area. No significant noise impacts are anticipated as a result of this project in
either the short or long-term.
10.b,
The project may expose people to severe noise levels dudng the development/construction
phase (short run). Construction machinery is capable of producing noise in the range of
100+ DBA at 100 feet which is considered very annoying and can cause hearing damage
from steady 8-hour exposure. This source of noise will be of short duration and therefore
will not be considered significant. There will be no long-term exposure of people to noise.
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Public Services
11 .a,b. The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or
altered fire or police protection. The project will incrementally increase the need for fire and
police protection; however, it will contribute its fair share to the maintenance of service
provision from these entities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
11.c.
The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or
altered school facilities. The project will not cause significant numbere of people to relocate
within or to the City of Temecula and therefore will not result in a need for new or altered
school facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
11.d.
The project will have a less than significant impact for the maintenance of public facilities,
including roads. Funding for maintenance of roads is derived from the Gasoline Tax that
is distributed to the City of Temecula from the State of California. Impacts to current and
future needs for maintenance of roads as a result of development of the site will be
incremental, however, they will not be considered significant. The Gasoline Tax is sufficient
to cover any of the proposed expenses.
11 ,e . The project will not have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental
services. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Utilities and Service Systems
12.a.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations
to power or natural gas. These systems are currently being delivered in proximity to the
site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEFrS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT\386paggpc..doc
12.b.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations
to communication systems (reference response No. 12.a.). No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
12.c.
The project will not result in the need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations
to local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
12.d.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations
to sanitary sewer systems or septic tanks. While the project will have an incremental
impact upon existing systems, the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's
General Plan states: "both EMWD and RCWD have indicated an ability to supply as much
water as is required in their services areas (p. 39)." The FEIR further states:
"implementation of the proposed General Plan would not significantly impact wastewater
services (p. 40)." Since the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, no significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. There are no septic tanks on site or
proximate to the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
12.e.
The proposal will result in a less than significant need for new systems or supplies, or
substantial alterations to storm water drainage. The project will need to provide some
additional on-site drainage systems. The drainage system will be required as a condition
of approval for the project and will tie into the existing system. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
12.f.
The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to solid
waste disposal systems. Any potential impacts from solid waste created by this
development can be mitigated through participation in any Source Reduction and Recycling
Programs which are implemented by the City. No significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
12.g.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations
to local or regional water supplies. Reference response 12.d. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
Aesthetics
13.a.
The project will not affect a scenic vista or scenic highway. The project is not located in a
area where there is a scenic vista. Further, the City does not have any designated scenic
highways. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project,
13.b,
The project will not have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect. The applicant and
architect worked with City staff to ensure a design that complies with the City-Wide Design
Guidelines. The building is relatively consistent with other designs in the area. The
enhanced landscaping and additional architectural treatments will provide additional
aesthetic enhancement that will result in a quality designed building. Therefore, no adverse
visual impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
13.c. The project will have a potentially significant impact from light and glare. The project will
produce and result in a minimum amount of light or glare considering the scope of the
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFP, FI'X386pa98pc..doc
34
project. However, all light and glare has the potential to impact the Mount Palomar
Observatory; therefore the project will be conditioned to be consistent with Ordinance No.
655 (Ordinance Regulating Light Pollution). With the conditions of approval, no significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Cultural Resources
14.a-c. The project will not have an impact on paleontologicel, archaeological or historical
resources. The site has been disturbed from pdor grading activity and any impacts to these
resources would have been mitigated during the grading process. No significant impacts
are anticipated as a result of this project.
14.d.
The project will not have the potential to cause a physicel change which would affect unique
ethnic cultural values. Reference response 14.a-c~ No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
14.e.
The project will not restdct existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area.
No religious or sacred uses exist at the site or are proximate to the site. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Recreation
15.a,b. The project will have a less than significant impact or increase in demand for neighborhood
or regional parks or other recreational facilities. The project will not cause significant
numbers of people to relocate within or to the City of Temecula, However, it will result in
an incremental impact or in an increase in demand for neighborhood or regional parks or
other recreational facilities. The same is true for the quality or quantity of existing
recreational resources or opportunities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result
of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX386pa981x:.
35
A'R'ACHMENT NO. 3
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEFFS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX386pa98pc..doc
36
Geologic Problems
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Planning Application No. PA98-0386
(Development Plan)
Expose people to impacts from seismic ground shaking.
Ensure that soil compaction is to City Standards.
A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted
to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check.
Building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer.
Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits.
Department of Public Works and Building and Safety Department.
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Expose people to impacts from seismic ground failure, including
liquefaction.
Ensure that soil compaction is to City Standards.
A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted
to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check.
Building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer.
Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits.
Department of Public Works and Building and Safety Department.
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Expose people to impacts from seismic ground shaking.
Utilize construction techniques that are consistent with the Uniform
Building Code.
Submit construction plans to the Building and Safety Department for
approval.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Building and Safety Department.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEFrS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\386pa98pc. ,doc
37
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Processes:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Processes:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from
excavation, grading or fill.
Planting of slopes consistent with Ordinance No. 457.
Submit erosion control plans for approval by the Department of Public
Works.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Department of Public Works.
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from
excavation, grading or fill.
Planting of on-site landscaping that is consistent with the Development
Code.
Submit landscape plans that include planting of slope to the Planning
Department for approval.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit,
Planning Department.
Exposure of people or property to seismic ground shaking, seismic
ground failure, landslides or mudflows, expansive soils or earthquake
hazards.
Ensure that soil compaction is to City standards.
A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted
to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check.
Building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits and building permits.
Department of Public Works and Building & Safety Department.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEFFS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'~386pa98pc..doc
38
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Exposure of people or property to seismic ground shaking, seismic
ground failure, landslides or mudflows, expansive soils or earthquake
hazards.
Utilize construction techniques that are consistent with the Uniform
Building Code.
Submit construction plans to the Building & Safety Department for
approval.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building & Safety Department
Water
General impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
The project will result in changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns
and the rate and amount of surface runoff.
Methods of controlling runoff, from site so that it will not negatively impact
adjacent properties, including drainage conveyances, have been
incorporated into site design and will be included on the grading plans.
Submit grading and drainage plan to the Department of Public Works for
approval.
Prior to the issuance of grading permit.
Department of Public Works.
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality
(e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity).
An erosion control plan shall be prepared in accordance with City
requirements and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
shall be prepared in accordance with the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) requirements,
The applicant shall submit a SWPPP to the San Diego Regional Water
Quality Control Board (SDRWQCB) for their review and approval.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Department of Public Works and SDRWQCB (for SWPPP).
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX386pa98pc..doc
39
Transl~ortation/Circulation
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Biological Resources
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for road improvements and traffic
impacts.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by,
and in accordance with, Chapter 15,06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building and Safety Department.
Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site.
Provide on-site parking spaces to accommodate the use.
Install on-site parking spaces pursuant to the City's minimum
Development Code parking standards.
Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits.
Department of Public Works, Planning Department and Building & Safety
Department.
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but
not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds).
Pay Mitigation Fee for impacts to Stephens Kangaroo Rat.
Pay $500,00 per acre of disturbed area of Stephens Kangaroo Rat
habitat,
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit,
Department of Public Works and Planning Department,
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS',PLANNING\STAFFRPT~386pa98pc..doc
40
Public Services
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
A substantial effect upon and a need for new/altered governmental
services regarding fire protection. The project will incrementally increase
the need for fire protection; however, it will contribute its fair share to the
maintenance of service provision.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for Fire Mitigation.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by,
and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permit.
Building & Safety Department,
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
A substantial effect upon and a need for new/altered schools. No
significant impacts are anticipated.
Payment of School Fees.
Pay current mitigation fees with the Temecula Valley Unified School
District.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building & Safety Department and Temecula Valley Unified Schoor
District.
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
A substantial effect upon and a need for maintenance of public facilities,
including roads.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for road improvements, traffic
impacts, and public facilities.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by,
and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building and Safety Department.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\386pa98pc..doc
AESTHETICS
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
The creation of new light sources will result in increased light and glare
that could affect the Palomar Observatory.
Use lighting techniques that are consistent with Ordinance No. 655,
Submit lighting plan to the Building and Safety Department for approval,
Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Building & Safety Department.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRFf'u186pa98pc..dOC
42
A'R'ACHMENT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\386pa98pc..doc
43
CITY OF TEMECULA
NORTH
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0386 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT- A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
VICINITY MAP
~\TEMEC FS201\DATA\DEFrS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\386Da98oc,.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
-/
EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - LI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL)
~P
P .> ~P
/>
EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - BP (BUSINESS PARK)
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0386 (Development Plan)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
\\TEMEC FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX386oa98oc..doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0386 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT- D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
SITE PLAN
X\TEMEC FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\386Oa98nC..dOc
CITY OF TEMECULA
PRELIMINARY PLAN~NG PLAN
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0386 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
LANDSCAPE PLAN
\\TEMEC FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~386~a98~c..doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0386 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - F
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
ELEVATIONS
X\TEMEC FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\386~a98~c..doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
i
..... ,::
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0386 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - G
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
COLORS & MATERIALS
\\TEMEC FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\386~a98nc..doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
ROOF PLAN
I j-
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0386 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - H
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
FLOOR PLAN
R:\STAFFRPT\386Da98nc..doc
ITEM #6
RECOMMENDATION:
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
November 18, 1998
Planning Application No. PA98-0347 (Development Plan)
Prepared By: Patty Anders, Assistant Planner
The Planning Department Staff recommends
Commission:
1.
APPLICATIONINFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
the Planning
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Planning Application
No. PA98-0347;
ADOPT the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning
Application No. PA98-0347; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 98- approving of Planning
Application No. PA98-0347 based upon the Analysis and
Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval.
Architects Orange/David Boddy
Saddleback/Brian Fronk
The design, construction and operation of 15 speculative
industrial/manufacturing/office buildings totaling 81,885
square feet located on two parcels consisting of 6.02 acres
with associated parking and landscaping.
On the west side of Commerce Center Drive, adjacent to
Murrieta Creek, north of Via Montezuma.
LI (Light Industrial)
North: LI (Light Industdal)
South: LI (Light Industrial)
East: LI (Light Industrial) & CC (Community Commercial)
West: OS-C (Conservation)
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
EXISTING LAND USE:
R:~STAFFRPT~47PA98PC.FINAL,DOC
BP (Business Park)
Vacant
1
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: BP (Business Park)
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Existing industrial/commercial uses.
Vacant and existing industrial/commercial
development uses.
Existing and proposed industrial.
warehouse, commercial and office uses.
Mumeta Creek and variety of industrial,
office, warehouse uses.
PROJECT STATISTICS
Total Area:
6.02 acres (net and gross)
Total Area:
262,231 square feet
Total Site Area:
Building Area: 81,885 square feet 37%
Landscape Area: 52,476 square feet 20%
Paved Area: 112,759 square feet 43%
100%
Parking Required:
Office = 9,750 square feet:
Manufacturing = 50,585 square feet:
Warehouse = 21,520 square feet:
032
126
022
Total = 81,885 square feet:
180
Parking Provided: Standard Spaces: 197
Handicap Spaces: 015
Total = 212
Building Heights:
All Buildings are Twenty-Four feet (24') in height
BACKGROUND
A pre-application meeting was held on May 18, 1998. A formal application was submitted on
August 19, 1998. A Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was held on September
10, 1998, with staff providing wdtten comments on September 17, 1998. The project was
deemed complete on October 26, 1998.
R:\STAFFRPT~347PA98PC.FINALDOC 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project consists of the design, construction and operation of 15 speculative-
industrial/manufacturing/office buildings totaling 81,885 square feet located on two parcels
consisting of 6.02 acres with associated improvements, such as hardscape, parking,
landscaping and drive aisles. As proposed, the project straddles the existing property lines;
therefore, the project will be conditioned to receive approval of the parcel merger application
that is currently in processing (PA98-0411) to combine the two lots pdor to the issuance of a
building permit.
ANALYSIS
Site Desiqn
The proposed site is located at the west side of Commerce Center Ddve, immediately adjacent
to Mumeta Creek. The building sizes range from 4,375 square feet to 10,665 square feet. The
site plan shows a portion of buildings 4 and 5 within the 100-year flood plain; however, based on
a recent filed topographic survey (March of 1998), the project engineer states that these
structures are not within the flood plain as illustrated on the grading plan. The County Flood
Control's position is that the project is located within the 100-year flood plain and encroaches
onto the side slope of the Murrieta Creek based on 1987-88 topographic information from the
County (see attachment "l", County letter dated September 24, 1998, and the Engineers
response letter dated October 22, 1998). The City is accepting the applicant's position that the
buildings are outside of the 100 year flood plain and will not be encroaching into the bank of the
creek based on the more recent 1998 topographic survey from a licensed engineer.
The applicant is proposing wrought iron fencing throughout the entire project, in addition to what
is shown on the site plan (see attachment "J"). This additional fencing was added to the project
after staffs review and scheduling the project for public hearing; therefore staff was unable to
comment on the fences. Staff indicated that they could not support the addition of the fences to
create secured storage area because it would remove common parking that is required for the
approval of this project. In addition, staff has concerns that these areas would become unsightly
outdoor storage areas for old or used parts, equipment or vehicles. Therefore, staff is
recommending that the Planning Commission not allow the proposed storage areas (see
Condition No. 4d) and delete all fencing internal to the project.
With the removal of the wrought iron fences and the secured storage areas, staff feels the site
design is compatible with existing development in the area.
Access, Traffic and Circulation
The subject site proposes two driveways off of Commerce Center Drive, which provides circular
vehicular access and circulation to service the site. Parking is located throughout the site, which
provides access to all buildings. With the removal of the wrought iron fences which blocks off
common parking spaces required for the approval of this project, the site has sufficient parking
and ingress and egress.
R:~STAFFRPT\347PA98PC.FINAL.DOC 3
Architecture
This project offers four (4) different elevations with four (4) color schemes for the fifteen (15)
speculative buildings. Staff has worked closely with the architect to ensure a vadety of design
and colors, while maintaining continuity throughout the project. Building elevations and colors
were closely reviewed with the architect and to ensure a quality streetscape along the
Commerce Center Drive.
The proposed buildings offer raised, extended parapets at each entry, which cleady define the
entry as required by the City-W~de Design Guidelines. The main entries are further articulated
by heavy landscaping, extensive reveals, column features and painted architectural elements.
The buildings also have extensive reveal patterns and several accent paint colors to add visual
interest to the buildings and throughout the development.
No signage is being approved with this speculative building. As proposed, the structures are
compatible with the existing buildings in the area in terms of design, colors, materials, height,
bulk and mass,
Landscaping
Twenty percent (20%) of the site has been landscaped, which meets the minimum twenty
percent (20%) minimum landscaping requirement for the LI (Light Industrial) zone. The 20%
proposed landscaping includes the revegetation of the east slope of the Murrieta Creek, which
lies within the subject property. In order for this area to count toward the landscaping
requirement, the slope must be upgraded by planting native trees, shrubs and ground covers.
Because the Murrieta Creek is considered a significant wetland to the California Department of
Fish and Game (DFG), DFG is requiring the revegetation of the slope to be native species. DFG
is also requiring review and approval of the proposed plant palette for the slope, and is requiring
that all planting be installed by hand so that no damage will occur to the slope or the creek bed.
Therefore, the project will be conditioned to receive approval of the plant palette by DFG prior to
approval the final construction landscape plans, and all vegetation on the slope to be install by
hand (see condition No. 4a and 4b). Should any damage occur to the slope during construction
or revegetation of the slope, the project is conditioned to notify the DFG immediately to minimize
or mitigate any damage that may occur.
In addition, the City's Landscape Architect recommends that the east slope will be required to
have temporary irrigation for a minimum of three to five years to ensure the revegetation is
successful. Once the vegetation on the slope is growing in a healthy and thriving manner, the
City's Landscape Architect recommends that the temporary landscaping be removed. Staff feels
this is an appropriate request and has conditioned the project accordingly (see condition No.
4c).
The landscaping provided outside of the slope area was dispersed extensively along Commerce
Center Drive to create a quality streetscape into the project. There is landscaping proposed at
the front elevation of each building which also serves to help define the main entry of each
building. There are landscaped planters throughout the parking area and along most side
elevations which will help break up the parking lot paving and soften the elevations,
R:\STAFFRPT~347PA98PC.FINAL.OOC 4
With the above referenced conditions of approval, staff feels the landscaping will serve to
enhance the overall project and be a significant improvement to the east slope of the Mumeta
Creek.
EXISTING ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
The General Plan Land Use designation for the site is BP (Business Park). Existing zoning for
the site is LI (Light Industrial). Industrial/warehouse/office building are permitted with the
approval of a development plan pursuant to Chapter 17.08 of the Development Code. With the
approvai of the parcel merger currently in process, the project as proposed is consistent with the
General Plan, Development Code and City-Wide Design Guidelines.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
An Initial Study has been prepared for this project. The Initial Study determined that although
the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not
considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and in
the Conditions of Approval for the project. Any potentially significant impacts will be mitigated to
a level of insignificance.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The project consists of the design, construction and operation of 15 speculative
industrial/manufacturing/office buildings totaling 81,885 square feet located on two parcels
consisting of 6.02 acres with associated improvements, such as hardscape, parking,
landscaping and drive aisles. As proposed, the project straddles the existing property lines;
therefore, the project will be conditioned to receive approval of the parcel merger application
that is currently in processing (PA98-0411) to combine the two lots pdor to the issuance of a
building permit. The project, as conditioned, is consistent with the General Plan, Development
Code, and the Design Guidelines and will comply with the requirements of the California
Department of Fish and Game relative to the revegetation of the east slope of the Murrieta
Creek.
FINDINGS
The proposed use is in conformanca with the General Plan for Temecula and with all
applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The project is
consistent with all City Ordinances including: the City's Development Code, Ordinance
No. 655 (Mr. Palomar Lighting Ordinance), and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping
provisions.
The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety and welfare. The project as proposed complies with all City Ordinances and
meets the standards adopted by the City of Temecula designed for the protection of the
public health, safety and welfare.
R:\STAFFRPTL~47PA98PC FINAL.DOC 5
The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats, or to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The project site has been
previously disturbed and graded, and streetscape installed on site. There are no native
species of plants or vegetation at the site, nor any indication that any wildlife species
exist. or that the site serves as a migration corridor.
Attachments:
2
3
4.
PC Resolution - Blue Page 7
A. Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 10
Initial Study - Blue Page 23
Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 24
Exhibits - Blue Page 25
B.
C
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
Vicinity Map
General Plan Map
Zoning Map
Site Plan
Landscape Plan
Elevations
Colors and Materials Board
Floor Plan
County Flood Control Letter and Exhibit dated September 24, 1998 and the
Engineers response letter dated October 22, 1998.
Proposed Outdoor Secured Storage Areas
R:~STAFFRPTLt47PA98PC.FINAL.DOC 6
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 98-
R:\STAFFRPT\347PA98PC,FINAL.DOC 7
PC RESOLUTION NO. 98-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA98-0386 THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND
OPERATION OF 15 SPECULATIVE INDUSTRIAL/
MANUFACTURING/OFFICE BUILDINGS TOTALING 81,885
SQUARE FEET LOCATED ON TWO PARCELS CONSISTING
OF 6.02 ACRES WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING AND
LANDSCAPING LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF
COMMERCE CENTER DRIVE, ADJACENT TO MURRIETA
CREEK, NORTH OF VIA MONTEZUMA, KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-400-017 AND 921-400-044.
WHEREAS, Saddleback filed Planning Application No. PA98-0347 in accordance with
the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA98-0347 was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA98-0347
on November 18, 1998, at a duly noticed public headng as prescribed by law, at which time
interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or in opposition;
WHEREAS, at the public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the Commission considered all facts
relating to Planning Application No. PA98-0347;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
Section 2. Findinqs. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No.
PA98-0347 makes the following findings; to wit:
A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula
and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The project
is consistent with all City Ordinances including: the City's Development Code, Ordinance No.
655 (Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance), and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping provisions.
B. The overell development of the land is designed for the protection of the
public health, safety and welfare. The project as proposed complies with all City Ordinances
and meets the standards adopted by the City of Temecula designed for the protection of the
public health, safety and welfare.
R:\STAFFRPTL~47PA98PC.FINAL.DOC 8
C. The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare
species or their habitats, or to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The project site has been
previously disturbed and graded, and streetscape installed on site. There are no native species
of plants or vegetation at the site, nor any indication that any wildlife species exist, or that the
site serves as a migration corridor.
Section 3. 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 Mitigated Negative
Declaration, therefore, is hereby adopted.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby
approves Planning Application No. PA98-0347 for the design, construction and operation of 15
speculative industrial/manufacturing/office buildings totaling 81,885 square feet located on two
parcels consisting of 6.02 acres with associated parking and landscaping, and known as
Assessors Parcel No. 921-400-017 and 921-400-044 subject to Exhibit A, attached hereto, and
incorporated herein by this reference and made a part hereof.
Section 5, PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November, 1998.
Marcia Slaven, Chairperson
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting there of, held on the 18th day of
November, 1998 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:\STAFFRP'r~47PA98PC .FINALDOC 9
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
R:~STAFFRPT\347PA98PC,FtNAL.DOC 10
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA98-0347 (Development Plan)
Project Description: The design, construction and operation of 15 speculative
industrial/manufacturing/office buildings totaling 81,885 square feet located on
two parcels consisting of 6.02 acres with associated parking and landscaping.
Assessors Parcel No.: 921-400-017 and 921-400-044.
Approval Date: November 18, 1998
Expiration Date: November 18, 2000
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or
money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand Three
Hundred Twenty-Eight Dollars ($1,328.00) which includes the One Thousand Two
Hundred and Fifty Dollar ($1,250.00) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section
711.4(d)(3) plus the Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) County administrative fee, to enable
the City to file the Notice of Determination for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration
required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(a) and California Code of
Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour pedod the
applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check as required
above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition,
Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
General Requirements
The developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City and
any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees and agents
from any and all claims, actions. or proceedings against the City, or any agency or
instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees and agents, to attack, set aside,
void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any
agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body
including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Specific Plan
Amendment which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations pedod and
Public Resources Code, Division 13. Chapter 4 (Section 21000 et seq., including but not
by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167). City shall promptly notify the
developer/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought within this time pedod.
City shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. Should the City fail to either
promptly notify or cooperate fully, developer/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible
to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or instrumentality
thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents.
R:~STAFFRPTL347PA98PC.FINAL.DOC
11
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall
become null and void, By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction
contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year pedod which is thereafter diligently
pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this
approval.
The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved
Mitigation Monitoring Program.
The development of the premises shall conform substantially with Attachment D, or as
amended by these conditions.
a. Nine (9) Class I lockers or Class II bicycle racks shall be provided.
b. A minimum of one hundred eighty (180) parking spaces shall be provided.
c. A minimum of fifteen (15) handicapped parking spaces shall be provided.
d. A minimum of eighteen (18) motorcycle spaces shall be provided throughout the site.
There shall not be any internal fences or outdoor secured storage areas as shown on
Attachment J or any modification thereof.
The site plan shall be modified to illustrate the correct location of the 100 year flood
plain to be consistent with the grading plan.
Landscaping shall be provided in substantial conformance with Attachment "E"
(Landscape Plan), or as amended by these conditions. Landscaping installed for the
project shall be continuously maintained to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager. If it is
determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Manager shall have
the authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with
the approved landscape plan.
The east slope planting of the Murrieta Creek shall be upgraded with the planting
of native plants, trees, shrubs and ground cover that shall be reviewed and
approved by the City and the California Department and Fish and Game. The
final construction landscape plans shall consist of the plantings approved by the
City and the Department of Fish and Game.
All landscaping on the east slope of the Mumeta Creek shall be installed by hand
and shall not utilize equipment. If any damage should occur to the slope or creek
bed dudng revegetation of the slope or dudng construction of the project, all work
shall stop and the applicant or his employees, contractors or represents shall
notify the Department of Fish and Game immediately.
C,
Temporary irrigation shall be installed (by hand) on the east slope of the Murrieta
Creek for a minimum of three to five years to ensure that the revegetation is
maintained in a healthy. thdving condition satisfactory to the Planning Manager.
R:\STAFFRPT~347PA98PC,FINAL,DOC 12
7. Building elevations shall conform substantially to Exhibit F and Exhibit G (color
elevations), or as amended by these conditions.
Colors and' materials used shall conform substantially with Exhibit H, or as amended by
these conditions (color and matedal board).
Materials
Colors
Color Scheme #1
1A Concrete Tilt-Up Panel
1B Concrete Tilt-Up Panel
1C Concrete Tilt-Up Panel
1D Steel Beam/Steel Grill
Frazee "Sawyers Fence" 8231W
Frazee "Daplin" 8234M
Frazee "Cdsp Khaki" 8233M
Frazee "Elm Court" 8595D
Color Scheme #2
2A Concrete Tilt-Up Panel
2B Concrete Tilt-Up Panel
2C Concrete Tilt-Up Panel
2D Steel Beam/Steel Grill
Frazee "Clay Beige" 8721W
Frazee "Tumbleweed" 8723W
Frazee "Meadowlark" 8724M
Frazee "Brick Rose" 8385D
Color Scheme #3
3A Concrete Tilt-Up Panel
3B Concrete Tilt-Up Panel
3C Concrete Tilt-Up Panel
3D Steel Beam/Steel Grill
Frazee "Lombardi Mist" 8531W
Frazee "Summer Fog" 8533w
Frazee "Solid Gray" 8534W
Frazee '"VVinter Sea" 8565D
Color Scheme #4
4A Concrete Tilt-Up Panel
4B Concrete Tilt-Up Panel
4C Concrete Tilt-Up Panel
4D Steel Beam/Steel Grill
5 Aluminum Storefront and Glazing
Glazing
Storefront
6 Aluminum Storefront and Glazing
Glazing
Storefront
7 1" Recessed Accents
Frazee "European Gray" 8631W
Frazee "Smoky Candle" 8633W
Frazee "Dusty Miller" 8634W
Frazee "Pigeon Isle" 8875D
Solar Gray
Arcadia "Black"
Solar Bronze
Arcadia "Dark Bronze"
Adjacent Color
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula
Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation).
R:,,STAFFRPT~347PA98PC.FINAL,DOC 13
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
10.
The applicant shall submit evidence of native plant palette approval from the California
Department of Fish and Game and the City of Temecula.
11. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid.
12.
Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to
tt~e Community Development Department - Planning Division for approval. These plans
shall conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "E", or as amended by these
conditions. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall
be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover
page shall identify the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans
shall be accompanied by the following items:
Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of
submittal).
b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved
plan).
Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits
13.
An Administrative Development Plan application for signage shall be required if signage
is proposed. An application for signage shall be submitted and approved by the Planning
Manager.
14. Roof-mounted equipment shall be inspected to ensure it is shielded from ground view.
15.
All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with approved landscape and
irrigation plans.
16
All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed and be in a
condition acceptable to the Planning Manager. The plants shall be healthy and free of
weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in
good working order.
17.
Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently
affixed reflectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal,
displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70
square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a
minimum height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished
grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished
grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each
R:~STAFFRPT~347PA98PC.FINAL.DOC 14
entrance to the off-street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, cleady
and conspicuously stating the following:
"Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces
not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued
for persons with disabilities may be towed away at owners
expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 909
696- 3000".
18
Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to
guarantee the maintenance of the plantings, in accordance with the approved
construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Community
Development Department - Planning Division for one year from final certificate of
occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been
maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Planning Manager, the bond shall be
released.
19.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use
allowed by this permit.
BUILDING AND SAFETYDEPARTMENT
20.
Comply with applicable provisions of the 1994 edition of the California Building,
Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1993 National Electrical Code; California
Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the
Temecula Municipal Code.
21.
Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance
with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other
outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of
Building and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine
directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way.
22
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School Distdct shall be submitted
to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School
Mitigation Fees.
23.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any
construction work.
24. The Occupancy classification of the proposed buildings shall be B/S-I/F-1.
25, Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
26
All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations.
Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1,
1998).
27. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building,
R:\STAFFRPT~347PA98PC,FINALDOC 15
28 Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
29. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
30.
Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting,
fire alarm systems.
31.
Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1994
edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code, Appendix C.
32. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system.
33.
Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans
submitted for plan review.
34.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing
schematic and mechanical plan for plan review.
35
Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss
manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal.
36. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
37.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
38.
Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls require separate
approvals and permits.
PUBLICWORKS DEPARTMENT
Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any
government Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site plan all
existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and
drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further
review and revision.
General Requirements
39.
A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site fiat work
and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way.
40.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way.
41.
All improvement plans and grading plans shall be coordinated for consistency with
adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be
submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars.
R:',STAFFRPT\347PA98PC.FINAL.DOC 16
Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit
42.
No grading shall be permitted along the westedy property boundary from the top of slope
to the westerly property boundary.
43.
A permit from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is
required for work within their Right-of-Way.
44.
A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed
and approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all
necessary erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and
private property.
45.
The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading
and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and
subject to approval by the Department of Public Works.
46.
A Soil Report shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and submitted to
the Director of the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The
report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the
construction of engineered structures and pavement sections.
47.
A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and
submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The
report shall address special study zones and the geological conditions of the site, and
shall provide recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and
liquefaction.
48.
The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in
accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site
and upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or
private drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze
and identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to
protect the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of
downstream facilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary
to make required improvements, shall be provided by the Developer.
49.
The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No
grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the
project is shown to be exempt.
50.
As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer
shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
Planning Department of Public Works
R:~STAFFRPTL~47PA98PC,FINAL.OOC 17
51.
The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an
Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the
subject property.
52.
Permanent landscape and in'igation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department
and the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
53.
The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-
site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public
Works.
54.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation Distdct by either cashiers
check or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area
drainage plan fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already
been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid.
55
The site is in an area identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map as Flood Zone A. This
project shall comply with Chapter 15, Section 15.12 of the City Municipal Code which
may include obtaining a Letter of Map Revision from FEMA. A Flood Plain Development
Permit shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
56.
The Developer shall obtain approval of PA 98-0411, Certificate of Parcel Merger,
merging Lot 8 of Tract Map 16178-1 and Parcel A of Waived Parcel Map 28618. A copy
of the recorded parcel merger shall be submitted to the Planning Department and Public
Works Department.
57.
Improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of
Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public
Works. The following design criteria shall be observed:
Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over
A.C. paving.
b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A.
Landscaping shall be limited in the comer cut-off area of all intersections and
adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility.
d,
All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed
through undersidewalk drains.
58.
The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance
with the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil
Engineer shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
R:~STAFFRPTL347PA98PC.FINAL,DOC 18
59.
The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as
required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and
all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15,06.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
60.
The Developer shall dedicate an access and maintenance easement measured from the
top of slope the existing Mumeta Creek Channel bank to the westedy property line. The
easement shall provide for the ingress/egress and maintenance of Mumeta Creek. The
easement shall be granted to Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District. The term of the easement shall sunset upon completion of the Murrieta Creek
Channel Improvements adjacent to the property. A copy of the recorded easement shall
be submitted to the Planning Department and the Public Works Department.
61.
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
Department of Public Works
62.
The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken
shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the
Department of Public Works.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
63.
Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed
by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the
Uniform Building Code (UBC), Uniform Fire Code (UFC), and related codes which are in
force at the time of building plan submittal,
64.
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commercial buildings per UFC Appendix Ill. A, Table A-Ill-A-1. The
developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 1500 GPM
at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 1850 GPM
for a total fire flow of 3350 GPM with a 2 hour duration, The required fire flow may be
adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or
automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire
Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (UFC 903.2,
Appendix Ill.A)
65.
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per UFC
Appendix III. B, Table A-Ill-B-1. A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants
(6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and
adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 450 feet apart and shall be
located no more than 250 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access
read(s) frontage to an hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any
adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be
required. (UFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B).
R:~STAFFRPTL~47PA98PC.FINAL.DOC
19
66
67.
68.
69,
70.
71,
72
73.
74.
75.
As required by the Uniform Fire Code, when any portion of the building(s) is in excess of
150 feet from a water supply on a public street, on site fire hydrants am required. For
this project On site fire hydrants are required, (UFC 903.2).
If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection
prior to any building construction. (UFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2).
Pnor to building construction, alLlocations where structures are to be built shall have
approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent
roads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather
surface for 70,0001bs GVVV. (UFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2).
Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved
Fire Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or
any portion of an exterior wall of 'the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be
an all weather surface designed for 70,000 Ibs. GVVV with a minimum AC thickness of
.25 feet. ( UFC sec 902 and Ord 95-15).
Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than
twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13)
feet six (6) inches. (UFC 902.2.2.1 and Ord 95-15).
Prior to building construction, dead end road ways and streets in excess of one hundred
and fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of
accommodating fire apparatus. (UFC 902.2.2.4).
Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via
all-weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (UFC 902.2.1).
Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water
system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to installation, Plans shall
be: signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval
signature block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow
standards. After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be
presented to the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures, The required water system
including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency
prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (UFC
8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1 ).
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective
Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (UFC 901.4.3).
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, all commercial buildings
shall display street numbers in a prominent location on the street side of the building.
The numerals shall be minimum twelve (12) inches in height for buildings and six (6)
inches for suite identification on a contrasting background, In strip centers, businesses
shall post the suite address on the rear door(s), (UFC 901.4.4 and Ord 95-15).
R:~STAFFRPT~347PA98PC.FINAL.DOC 20
76
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a directory display
monument sign shall be required for apartment, condominium, townhouse or mobile
home parks. Each complex shall have an illuminated diagrammatic layout of the
complex which indicates the name of the complex, all streets. building identification, unit
numbers, and fire hydrant locations within the complex. Location of the sign and design
specifications shall be submitted to and be approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior
to installation.
77.
Prior to issuance of Certificate of .Occupancy or building final, based on square footage
and type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler
system. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for
approval prior to installation. (UFC Article 10, UBC Chapter 9 and Ord 95-15).
78.
Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement
for monitonng the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire
alarm system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station.
Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation.
(UFC Article 10).
79
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall
be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be
located to the right side of the main entrance door. The Knox-Box shall be supervised by
the alarm system. (UFC 902.4).
80.
All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates
obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry
system for emergency access by firefighting personnel. (UFC 902.4).
81.
Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled
combustible stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety
features: an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class
and storage arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains,
Fire Department access doors and Fire department access roads. Buildings housing
high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions Uniform Fire Code Article
81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. (UFC Article 81).
82,
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the
developer/applicant shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground
tank permits for the storage of combustible liquids, fiammable liquids or any other
hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention
Bureau.(UFC 7901.3 and 8001.3).
OTHER AGENCIES
83.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho Califomia
Water District's transmittai dated August 28, 1998, a copy of which is attached.
84. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of
Riverside Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated August 27, 1998, a
copy of which is attached.
R:\STAFFRPTL~47PA98PC.FINALDOC 21
85.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations as set forth in the Department of
Transportation transmittal dated September 8, 1998, a copy of which is attached, to the
extent practical and not in conflict with conditions contained herein.
86.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the
above Conditions of Approval, I further understand that the property shall be maintained
in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to
make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant Name
R:~STAFFRPT~47PA98PC.FINALDOC 22
Water
August28,1998
Ms. Patty Anders, Case Planner
City of Ternecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AVAILABILITY
LOTS NO. 8 AND NO. 9 OF TRACT NO. 16178-1
APN 921-400-017 & 921-400-044
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0347
Dear Ms. Anders:
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.
If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for
fees and requirements.
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 an Engineering Services
Representative at this office.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brannon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
98/SB:mc192/F012-T1/FCF
c: Laurie Williams, Engineering Services Supervisor
TO:
FROM
County of Riverside
' DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
DATE: August 27, 1998
CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Ande~Planner
CLARENCE HARRISON, Environmental Health Specialist III
PLOT PLAN NO. PA98-0347
The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the Plot Plan No. PA98-0347 and has no
objections. Sanitary sewer and water services may be available in this area.
PRIOR TO ANY PLAN CHECK SUBMITTAL for health clearance, the following items are
required:
a) "Will-serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies.
b)
Three complete sets of plans for each food establishment will be submitted, including a fixture
schedule, a finish schedule, and a plumbing schedule in order to ensure compliance with the
California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific reference, please contact Food
Facility Plan examiners at (909) 694-5022).
c) A clearance letter from the Hazardous Services Materials Management Branch (909) 358-5055
will be required indicating that the project has been cleared for:
· Underground storage tanks, Ordinance # 617.4.
· Hazardous Waste Generator Services, Ordinance # 615.3.
· Emergency Response Plans Disclosure (in accordance with Ordinance # 651.2.)
· Waste reduction management.
d) A letter from the Waste Regulation Branch (Waste Collection/LEA).
CH:dr
(909) 275-8980
NOTE: Any current additional requirements not covered, can be applicable at time of Building
Plan review for final Department of Environmental Health Clearance.
cc: Doug Thompson, Hazardous Materials
~.~?~-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT iI, 464 W. 4th STREET, Gffi FLOOR
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92401-1400
PETE W1LSON, GOvernor
September 8, 1998
08 Riv-15-5.97
Ms. Patty Anders
Assistant Planner
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Dear Ms. Anders:
Planning Application No. 98-0347
We have reviewed the above referenced document and request
consideration of the following:
Caltrans supports economic growth and orderly land use
development; however, new development must pay its fair
share for upgrading infrastructure facilities needed to
serve the development. This infrastructure includes State
highways and freeways. It also includes both direct and
cumulative traffic impacts. All jurisdictions should take
measures available to fund improvements and reduce total
trips generated. In view of the fact there are limited
funds available for infrastructure improvements, we
recommend the City of Temecula take the lead in developing
a fair-share mechanism in which each project can fund
improvements for the decrease in Level of Service (LOS) for
which it is responsible.
Please submit a copy of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration of the Planning Application No. 98-0347
(Development Plan) to this office at the earliest
possible convenience.
If you have any questions, please contact Garrett Miyahira
at (909) 383-6212 or FAX (909) 383-5936.
Sincerely,
LINDA GRIMES, Chief
Office of Regional Planning/
Forecasting/Public Transportation
cc: Hideo Sugita, RCTC
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
INITIAL STUDY
R:~STAFFRPT'G47PA98PC.FINAL,DOC 23
CITY OF TEMECULA
Environmental Checklist
Project Title:
Lead Agency Name and Address:
Temecula, CA 92589
Contact Person and Phone Number:
Project Location:
Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
General Plan Designation:
Zoning:
Description of Project:
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
Planning Application No. PA98-0347 (Development
Plan)
City of Temecula, 43200 Business Park Drive,
Patty Anders, Assistant Planner (909) 694-6400
The west side of Commerce Center Ddve, adjacent
to Murdeta Creek, north of Via Montezuma.
Bdan Frank, Saddleback, 2615 Orange Ave., Santa
Ana, CA 92707
BP (Business Park)
LI (Light Industdal)
The design, construction and operation of 15
speculative industrial/manufacturing/office
buildings totaling 81,885 square feet located on
two parcel consisting of 6.02 acre site. As
proposed, the project straddles the existing
property lines; therefore, the project will be
conditioned to receive approval of the parcel
merger application that is currently in processing
(PA98-0411 ) to combine the two lots pdor to the
issuance of a building permit.
The project is located in a area that has been
previously graded, street improvements have been
made and water and sewer are within vicinity of
the project, Land to the north and south is
industrial and commercial uses, to the west is
Murrieta Creek and further west is
industrial/office/warehouse uses, and to the east
is existing and proposed industrial, warehouse
and office uses.
R:\STAFRLr~347pagSpc..doc
15
10.
Other public agencies whose
approval is required:
Riverside County Fire Department, Riverside
County Health Department, Temecula Police
Department, Eastern Municipal Water Distdct,
Rancho Califomia Water District, Southern
Califomia Gas Company, Southern California
Edison Company, General Telephone Company,
and Riverside Transit Agency.
R:XSTAFFRPT'G47pa981X:..doc
16
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental facWrs checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
[ ] Land Use and PIning [ ] HaTards
[ ] Population and Housing [ ] Noise
[X] Geologic Problems [ ] Public Services
[X] Water { ] Utilities and Service Systems
[ ] Air Quality [X] Aesthetics
[ ] Transportation/Circulation [ ] Cultural Resources
[X] Biological Resources [ ] Recreation
[ ] Energy and Mineral Resources [ ] Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been
added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
Name Date
R:~STAFFRPTX3471~98pc..doc
17
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORh~A. TION SOURCES
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a. Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source 1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17)
b. Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project?
c. Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
(Source 1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17)
d. Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to
soils or farmlads, or impacts from incompatible land uses)?
(Source 1, Figure 5-4, Page 5-17)
e. Dismpt or divide the physical arrangement ofan established
community (including low-income or minority community)?
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would be proposal:
a. Curnulatively exceed official regional or local population
projects?
b. Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through project in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)?
c. Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing?
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result
in or expose people to potential impacts involving?
a. Fault rapture?
b. Seismic ground shaking?
c. Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
d. Seiche, tsunam. j, or volcanic hazard?
e. Landslides or mudflows?
f. Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soft conditions
form excavation, grading or fill?
g. Subsidence of the land?
h, Expansive soils?
i. Umque geologic or physical features?
4. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage paRems, or the
rate and mount of surface runoff?,
b. Exposure ofpeople or property to watcr related hazards
such as flooding? (Source 2, Figure 13, Page 95 and
Source 2, Figure 30, Page 190)
c. Discharge into stirface waters or other alteration of surface
water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or
turbidity)?
d. Changes in the mount of surface water in any water
body?
Potentially
Significant
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[1
[3
Po~mially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
IncorOorated
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[x]
[x]
[]
[]
[]
Ix]
[]
[]
[]
ix]
[x]
[]
L~s Than
s~fr. am
[x]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[x]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[x]
[]
Ix]
[]
[x]
[]
[3
[x]
NO
[]
[x]
[x]
[x]
Ix]
[x]
Ix]
Ix]
[]
[]
[]
Ix]
[x]
[]
[]
[]
[x]
[]
[]
[]
[]
R:xSTAFFRFIr~47pa98pc..doe
18
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
e. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements?
f. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through
direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial
loss of groundwater recharge capability?
g. Altereddirectionorrateoffiowofgroundwater7
h. Impacts to groundwater quality?
i. Substantial reduction in the mount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies7
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a. Violate any air quality standard or conn'ibute to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
b. Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
c. Alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause
any change in climate?
d. Create objectionable odors?
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
Would the proposal result in:
a. Increase vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
b. Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves
or dangerous intersection or incompatible uses)?
c. Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
d. Insuf~cient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
e. Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
f. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
g. Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal
result in impacts to:
a. Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, mls
and birds)?
b. Locally dasfgnated species (e.g. heritage frees)?
e. Locally designated natural communities (e .g. oak forest,
coastal habitat, etc.)?
d. Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)?
e. Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal:
a. Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
b. Use non-renewal resources in a wasteful end inefficient
R:\STAFFRPTL~Tpa98pc..doc
19
Potentially
Significant
Iml~ct
[]
[]
(]
(]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[ x]
[]
[]
[x]
[]
[]
Significant
Iramet
Ix]
[x]
ix]
(x]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[x]
[x]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
Ix]
[]
[]
[]
[]
No
[]
[]
[]
[]
[x]
(x]
Ix]
[x]
[]
[]
Ix]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[]
[]
[x]
[]
[x]
Ix]
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
potentially
Significant
manner? [ ]
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
that would be of future value to the region and the residents
of the State? [ ]
9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a. Ariskofaccidentalexplosionorreleaseofhazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pestleides,
chemical or radiation)?
b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan?
c. The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard?
d. Exposureofpeopletoexistingsoureesofpotenfialhealth
hazards?
e. Increase Fare hazard in areas with ~ammable brush,
grass, or trees?
10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
11.
a. Increase in existing noise levels?
b. Exposureofpeopletoseverenoiselevels?
PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
12.
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Maintenance ofpublic facilitles, including roads?
e. Other governmental services?
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Connnunicatlons systems?
c. Local or regional water txeamient or distn~butlon
facilities?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste disposal?
g. Local or regional water supplies?
[1
[1
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
Potentially
Significant
Units
Mitigation
Incor0orauxl
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[1
[1
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
Las Than
ix]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[x]
[x]
Ix]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[]
[3
[]
[3
[3
[x]
[]
[]
No
[]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
Ix]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[1
[x]
[x]
R:~STAFFR]rI~47pa98pc..doc
20
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a. Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
b. Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?
c. Create light or glare?
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a. Disturb paleontological resources?
b. Disturb archaeological resources?
c. Affect historical resources?
d. Have the potential to cause a physical change which would
affect unique ethnic cultural values?
e. Restrict existing religions or sacred uses within the potential
impact area?
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a. Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or
other recreational facilities?
b. Affect existing recreational opportunities?
16. 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 community, reduce the number of restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history
or prehiswry?
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals?
Does the project have impacts that area individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? CCumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed hi connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future projects).
Does the project have environmental effects, which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
Potentially
Significant
Imt~ct
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
Pot, mially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
[3
[]
[x]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
Le~sThan
Significant
Im~aet
[]
[x]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
No
[x]
[]
[]
[x]
[x]
ix]
[x]
ix]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[x]
[x]
R:\ST~71~981x..doc
21
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
17. EARLIER ANALYSES.
None,
Potentially
Significant
Imvact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
L~sThan
Significant
NO
SOURCES
1. City of Temecula General Plan.
2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report.
3. South Coast Air Quality Management Disuict CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
4. City of Temecula Development Code
R:\STAFFRPTX347pa98pc..doc
22
DISCUSSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Land Use and Planning
1.b
The project will not conflict with applicable environmental plans or polices adopted by
agencies with jurisdiction over the project. The project is consistent with the City's General
Plan Land Use Designation of BP (Business Park). Impacts from all General Plan Land Use
Designations were analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General
Plan. Agencies with judsdiction within the City commented on the scope of the analysis
contained in the EIR and how the land uses would impact their particular agency. Mitigation
measures approved with the EIR will be applied to this project. Furthermore, all agencies
with jurisdiction over the project are also being given the opportunity to comment on the
project and it is anticipated that they will make the appropriate comments as to how the
project relates to their specific environmental plans or polices. The site has been previously
graded and services within proximity of the project. As proposed, the project straddles the
existing property lines; therefore, the project will be conditioned to receive approval of the
parcel merger that is currently in processing (PA98-0411 ) to combine the two lots pdor to
the issuance of a building permit. There will be limited, if any environmental effects on
environmental plans or polices adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project. No
significant effects on the land use or environmental policies are anticipated as a result of
this project.
1.e
The project will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community
(including low-income or minodty community) or agricultural resources or operations. The
project is a speculative office building in an area surrounded by land that is developed with
similar industdal, manufacturing, office and warehouse uses, as well as vacant land that is
zoned to accommodate similar uses. There is no established residential community
(including low-income or minority community) at this site. No significant effects are
anticipated as a result of this project.
Population and Housing
2.a.
The project will not cumulativeiy exceed official regional or local population projections. The
project is a speculative office building that is consistent with the City's General Plan Land
Use Designation of Business Park. Since the project is consistent with the City's General
Plan, and does not exceed the floor area ratio for Business Park, it will not be a significant
contributor to population growth that will cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections. No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
2.b.
The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The
project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation of BP (Business Park).
The project will cause people to relocate to or within Temecula; however, due to its limited
scale, it will not induce substantial growth in the area. No significant effects are anticipated
as a result of this project,
2.c.
The project will not displace housing, especially affordable housing. The project site is
vacant; therefore no housing will be displaced. No significant effects are anticipated as a
result of this project.
R:\STAFFRPT~47pa98pC..dog
23
Geoloclic Problems
3.a.
The project will result in a less than significant impact on people as a result of fault rupture.
The project is not located in a fault zone or within a fault setback area; therefore no
significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
3.b,c,
g,h.
The project may have a potentially significant impact on people involving seismic ground
shaking as the project is located in Southern California, an area which is seismically active.
There may also be a potentially significant impact from seismic ground failure, liquefaction,
subsidence and expansive soils. Any potentially signfficant impacts will be mitigated through
building construction which is consistent with Uniform Building Code standards. In addition,
a soils report shall be required to be submitted pdor to the issuance of grading permits,
The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report will be utilized in the
development of this site which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from
expansive soils, The soil reports will also contain recommendations for the compaction of
the soil which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from seismic ground
shaking, seismic ground failure, liquefaction and subsidence. After mitigation measures are
performed, no significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
3.d.
The project will not expose people to a seiche, tsunami or volcanic hazard. The project is
not located in an area where any of these hazards could occur. No significant effects are
anticipated as a result of this project.
3,e.
The project will not expose people to landslides or mudflows. The Final Environmental
Impact for the City of Temecula General Plan has not identified any known landslides or
mudslides located on the site or proximate to the site. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
3.f.
The project will have a less than significant impact from erosion, changes in topography,
grading or fill. The site has been previously graded and the project does not propose
significant grading beyond that which has already occurred. Increased wind and water
erosion of soils both on and off-site may occur dudng the construction phase of the project
and the project may result in changes in siltation, deposition or erosion. Erosion control
techniques will be included as a condition of approval for the project. In the long-run,
hardscape and landscaping will serve as permanent erosion control for the project. Since
the amount of grading will be the minimum necessary for the realization of the project,
modification to topography and ground surface relief features will not be considered
significant. Potential unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill will be
mitigated through the use of landscaping and proper compaction of the soils. After
mitigation measures are performed, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
3.i.
The project will not impact unique geologic or physical features. No unique geologic
features or physical features exist on the site. No significant impacts are antidpated as a
result of this project.
Water
4.a.
4.b.
4.c.
4,d,e.
The project will result in changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns and the rate and
amount of surface runoff; however, these changes are considered less than significant.
Previously permeable ground will be rendered impervious by construction of buildings,
accompanying hardscepe and ddveways. While absorption rates and surface runoff will
change, potential impacts shall be mitigated through site design. Drainage conveyances
for the project will be designed and constructed to safely and adequately handle runoff
which is created. After mitigation measures are performed, no significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
The project could have an impact to people or property to water related hazards such as
flooding because of its proximity to the 100 year flood plain. Riverside County Flood
Control and Water Conservation Distdct and the applicant disagree as to the location of the
100-year flood plain. The County Flood Control's position is that the project is located
within the 100-year flood plain and encroaches onto the side slope of Mumeta Creek based
upon 1987-88 topographic information from the County. The applicant's engineer is stating
that the entire project is outside of the 100 year flood plain based upon a field topographic
survey dated March of 1998 conducted by a licensed engineer. The City is accepting the
applicanrs position that the buildings are outside of the 100 year flood plain and will not be
encroaching into the bank of the Murdeta Creek based on the more recent 1998
topographic survey from a licensed engineer. In addition, the project as proposed has the
finished floor of the buildings' elevated above the 100-year water surface elevation.
The project is also located within a dam inundation area as identified in the City of
Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report. Impacts can be mitigated by
utilizing existing emergency response systems and by assudng that these systems
continue to maintain adequate service provision as the City develops. Therefore, with the
incorporated conditions of approval, the finished floor building elevations, and the mitigation
monitoring program, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project may have a potentially significant effect on discharges into surface waters and
alteration of surface water quality. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the project, the
developer will be required to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control
Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed or the
project is shown to be exempt. By complying with the NPDES requirements, any potential
impacts can be mitigated to a level less than significant. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will have a less than significant impact in a change in the amount of surface
water in any waterbody or impact currents, or to the course or direction of water
movements. The project will not be allowed to drain into the adjacent Murrieta Creek, but
will be required to drain into the street. Additional surface runoff will occur because
previously permeable ground will be rendered impervious by construction of buildings,
accompanying hardscape and ddveways. Due to the limited scale of the project, the
additional amount of drainage will not considered significant. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
R:~STAFFRFF\M7pa98pc..doc
25
4.f-h.
The project will have a less than significant change in the quantity and quality of ground
waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer
by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability.
Limited changes will occur in the quantity and quality of ground waters; however, due to the
minor scale of the project, it will not be considered significant. Further, construction on the
site will not be at depths sufficient to have a significant impact on ground waters. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
4.i.
The project will not result in a substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater water
otherwise available for public water supplies. According to information contained in the
Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Temecula General Plan, "Rancho
California Water District indicate that they can accommodate additional water demands."
Water service currently exists in the immediate proximity to the project. Water service will
need to be provided by Rancho California Water District (RCWD). This is typically provided
upon completion of ~nandal arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Air Quality
5.a.
The project will not violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected
air quality violation. The project (81,885 square feet of office/manufacturing/warehouse
uses) is below the threshold for potentially significant air quality impact (276,000 square
feet) established by South Coast Air Quality Management Distdct (Page 6-11, Table 6-2 of
the South Coast Air Quality Management CEQA Air Quality Handbook). No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
5.b.
The project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. There are no significant
pollutants in proximity to the project. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of
this project.
5.c.
The project will not alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause any change in
climate. The limited scale of the project precludes it from creating any significant impacts
on the environment in this area. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
5.d. The project will create objectional odors during the construction phase of the project. These
impacts will be of short duration and are not considered significant.
Transportation/Circulation
6.a.
While the project may result in an incremental increase in traffic congestion it will result in
a less than significant increase in vehicle trips. It is anticipated that this project will
contribute less than a significant increase in existing volumes dudng the AM peak hour and
PM peak hour time frames to the intersections of Rancho California Road and and Front
Street, Overland Drive and Jefferson Avenure, and Winchester Road and Jefferson Avenue
according to standard trip calculation methodologies. The proposed development is in
compliance with the land use and development standards of this zone that was analyzed
in the EIR for the General Plan. Therefore, it is determined that the proposed development
will not adversely affect the LOS for this area, but was included in the EIR analysis. The
R:\STAFFRP'~347pa98pC..dOC
26
applicant will be required to pay traffic signal mitigation fees and public facility fees as
conditions of approval for the project. After mitigation measures are performed and
development impact fees paid, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.b.
The project will not result in hazards to safety from design features. The project is designed
to current City standards and does not propose any hazards to safety from design features.
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6,c.
The project will not result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses. The
project is a speculative office use in an area with existing and similar planned uses. The
project is designed to current City standards and has adequate emergency access. The
project does not provide direct access to nearby uses; therefore, it will not impact access
to nearby uses. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.d.
The project will have sufficient parking capacity on-site. Off-site parking will not be
impacted. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.e.
The project will not result in a less than significant impact from hazards or barriers for
pedestrians or bicyclists. Hazards or barriers to bicyclists have not been included as part
of the project. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.f.
The project will not result in conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation. The project was transmitted to the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and
based upon their response to similar projects in the area, it is not anticipated the project will
impact RTA fadlities or services. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
6.g.
The project will not result in impacts to rail, waterborne or air traffic since none exists
currently in the immediate proximity of the project. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
BioloQical Resources
7.a,
The proposed project may have a potentially significant effect on endangered, threatened
or rare species or their habitats, including, but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals
and birds dudng the construction phase of this project if damage occurs to the adjacent
Murrietta creek slope or creek bed. The proposed project consists of two (2) of the 15
buildings being located at the top of the slope of the Muraleta Creek, as well as revegetation
of the east side of the Creek. The project will be conditioned not to damage the side of the
creek or the creek bed dudrig construction or revegetation of the slope. All landscaping will
be approved by the California Department of Fish and Game and will be conditioned to be
installed by hand, not with any type of equipment, pursuant to the requirement of the
California Department of Fish and Game,
There are no native species of plants, no unique, rare, threatened or endangered species
of plants, or native vegetation on the site as the site was previously graded. Furthermore,
there is no indication that any wildlib species exist at this location. The project will not
R:~STAFFP,.PT~347pa9Bpc..doc
reduce the number of species, provide a barrier to the migration of animals or detedorete
existing habitat. The project site is located within the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat Fee
Area. Habitat Conservation fees will be required to mitigate the effect of cumulative impacts
to the species. With the conditions of approval, approval of the California Department of
Fish and Game regarding the plant palette, landscaping installation requirements, and
pretecting the Creek bed dudng construction, no significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
7.b.
The project will not result in an impact to locally designated species. Locally designated
species are protected in the Old Town Temecula Specific Plan; however, they are not
protected elsewhere in the City. Since this project is not located in Old Town, and since
there are no locally designated species on site, no signfficant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
7.c.
The preject will not result in an impact to locally designated natural communities. Reference
response 7.b. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
7.d.
It is anticipated that the project will result in a potentially significant impact to wetland habitat
unless mitigation measures are incorporated. The proposed project is adjacent to the
Murrieta creek and consists of two buildings to be built at the top of slope and the
revegetation of the east slope. The project will be conditioned to pretect the adjacent
Murrieta creek bed and the east side of the slope dudng construction. If the slope or creek
bed is damaged in any way during construction or revegetation of the east slope, the
applicant will be conditioned to require all necessary permits and or clearances from the
California Department of Fish and Game. The California Department of Fish and Game will
review and approve the plant palette pdor to receiving City approval to ensure appropriate
plantings will be utilized that are natural or native, and not evasive to the slope or the Creek
bed. With the approval of the plant palette by the Califomia Department of Fish and Game
and the conditions of approval placed on this project to protect the Creek bed and the east
slope, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
7.e.
The project will not result in an impact to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The
project site does not serve as part of a migration corridor, No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
Enerclv and Mineral Resources
The project will not impact and/or conflict with adopted energy conservation plans. The
project will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable laws pertaining to energy
conservation during the plan check stage. No permits will be issued unless the project is
found to be consistent with these applicable laws. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
8.b.
The project will result in a less than significant impact for the use of non-renewable
resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner. While there will be an increase in the rate
of use of any natural resource and in the depletion of nonrenewable resource(s)
(construction matedais, fuels for the daily operation, asphalt, lumber) and the subsequent
depletion of these non-renewable natural resources. Due to the scale of the proposed
development, these impacts are not seen as significant.
R:\STAFFRiq'XMTpa98pc..doc
28
8.c.
The project will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would
be of future value to the region and the residents of the State. No known mineral resource
that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State are located at this
project site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Hazards
9.a,
The project will not result in a dsk of explosion, or the release of any hazardous substances
in the event of an accident or upset conditions sinca none are proposed in the request. The
same is true for the use, storage, transport or disposal of any hazardous or toxic materials.
Large quantities of these types of substances are not anticipated with this use. However,
the Department of Environmental Health regulates the use, storage and removal of
hazardous or toxic materials. Moreover, the Fire Department and the Department of
Environmental Health have reviewed the project and the applicant must receive their
clearances prior to any plan check submittal. This applies to storage and use of hazardous
materials; therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9.b.
The project will not interfere with an emergency response plan or an emergency evaluation
plan. The subject site is not located in an area that could impact an emergency response
plan. The project will take access from a maintained street and will therefore not impede
any emergency response or emergency evacuation plans. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
9.c.
The project will not result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard.
The project will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable health laws during the plan
check stage. No permits will be issued unless the project is found to be consistent with
these applicable laws. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9.d.
The project will not expose people to existing sources of potential health hazards, No
health hazards are known to be within proximity of the project. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
9.e.
The project will not result in an increase to fire hazard in an area with flammable brush,
grass, or trees. The project is an industrial/warehouse development in an area of existing
and future similar uses. The project is not located within or proximate to a fire hazard area.
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Noise
10.a.
The proposal will result in a less than significant increase to existing noise levels. The site
is currently vacant and development of the land logically will result in increases to noise
levels during construction phases as well as increases to noise in the area over the long
run. Long-term noise generated by this project would be similar to existing and proposed
uses in the area. No significant noise impacts are anticipated as a result of this project in
either the short or long-term.
10.b. The project may expose people to severe noise levels during the developmentJconstruction
phase (short run). Construction machinery is capable of producing noise in the range of
R:\STAFFRl~TX347pa98pc..d~
29
100+ DBA at 100 feet which is considered very annoying and can cause headng damage
from steady 8-hour exposure. This source of noise will be of short duration and therefore
will not be considered significant. There will be no long-term exposure of people to noise.
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Public Services
11 .a,b. The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or
altered fire or police protection. The project will incrementally increase the need for fire and
police protection; however, it will contribute its fair share to the maintenance of service
provision from these entities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
11.c.
The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or
altered school facilities. The project will not cause signfficant numbers of people to relocate
within or to the City of Temecula and therefore will not result in a need for new or altered
school facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
11.d.
The project will have a less than significant impact for the maintenance of public facilities,
including roads. Funding for maintenance of roads is dedved from the Gasoline Tax that
is distributed to the City of Temecula from the State of California. Impacts to current and
future needs for maintenance of roads as a result of development of the site will be
incremental, however, they will not be considered significant. The Gasoline Tax is sufficient
to cover any of the proposed expenses.
11 .e. The project will not have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered govemmental
services. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Utilities and Service Systems
12.a.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations
to power or natural gas. These systems are currently being delivered in proximity to the
site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
12.b.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations
to communication systems (reference response No. 12.a.). No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
12.c.
The project will not result in the need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations
to local or 4'egional water treatment or distribution facilities. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
12.d.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations
to sanitary sewer systems or septic tanks. While the project will have an incremental
impact upon existing systems, the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's
General Plan states: "both EMWD and RCWD have indicated an ability to supply as much
water as is required in their services areas (p. 39)." The FEIR further states:
"implementation of the proposed General Plan would not significantly impact wastewater
services (p. 40)." Since the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, no significant
R:~STAFFRFf'~347pn98pc..doc
3O
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. There are no septic tanks on site or
proximate to the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
12.e.
The proposal will result in a less than significant need for new systems or supplies, or
substantial alterations to storm water drainage. The project will need to provide some
additional on-site drainage systems, The drainage system will be required as a condition
of approval for the project and will tie into the existing system. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
12.f.
The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to solid
waste disposal systems. Any potential impacts from solid waste created by this
development can be mitigated through participation in any Source Reduction and Recycling
Programs, which are implemented by the City. No significant impacts are anticipated as
a result of this project.
12.g.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations
to local or regional water supplies. Reference response 12.d. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
Aesthetics
13.a.
The project will not affect a scenic vista or scenic highway. The project is not located in a
area where there is a scenic vista. Further, the City does not have any designated scenic
highways. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
13.b.
The project will not have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect. The applicant and
amhitect worked with City staff to ensure a design that complies with the City-Wide Design
Guidelines. The building is relatively consistent with other designs in the area. Therefore,
no adverse visual impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
13.c.
The project will have a potentially significant impact unless mitigation measures for light and
glare is incorporated. The project will produce and result in a minimum amount of light or
glare considering the scope of the project. However, all light and glare has the potential to
impact the Mount Palomar Observatory; therefore the project will be conditioned to be
consistent with Ordinance No. 655 (Ordinance Regulating Light Pollution). With the
conditions of approval, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Cultural Resources
14.a-c. The project will not have an impact on paleontological, archaeological or historical
resources. The site has been disturbed from pdor grading activity and any impacts to these
resources have been mitigated dudng the grading process. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
14.d.
The project will not have the potential to cause a physical change, which would affect
unique ethnic cultural values. Reference response 14.a-c. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\STAFFRFI'Lt4?p~g8pc..doc
31
14.e.
The project will not restdct existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area.
No religious or sacred uses exist at the site or are proximate to the site. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Recreation
15.a,b. The project will have a less than significant impact or increase in demand for neighborhood
or regional parks or other recreational facilities. The project will not cause significant
numbers of people to relocate within or to the City of Temecula. However, it will result in
an incremental impact or in an increase in demand for neighborhood or regional parks or
other recreational facilities. The same is true for the quality or quantity of existing
recreational resources or opportunities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result
of this project.
R:~TAFFRPTX347pa98pc..doc
32
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
R:\STAFFRPT'G47PA98PC.FINAL. DOC 24
Geoloqic Problems
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Planning Application No. PA98-0347
(Development Plan)
Expose people to impacts from seismic ground shaking.
Ensure that soil compaction is to City Standards.
A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted
to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check.
Building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer.
Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits.
Department of Public Works and Building and Safety Department.
Expose people to impacts from seismic ground failure, including
liquefaction.
Ensure that soil compaction is to City Standards.
A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted
to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check.
Building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer.
Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits.
Department of Public Works and Building and Safety Department.
Expose people to impacts from seismic ground shaking.
Utilize construction techniques that are consistent with the Uniform
Building Code.
Submit construction plans to the Building and Safety Department for
approval.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Building and Safety Department.
R:\STAFFRPTLMTpa98pc, .doc
34
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Processes:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Processes:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from
excavation, grading or fill.
Planting of slopes consistent with Ordinance No. 457.
Submit erosion control plans for approval by the Department of Public
Works.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Department of Public Works.
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from
excavation, grading or fill.
Planting of on-site landscaping that is consistent with the Development
Code.
Submit landscape plans that include planting of slope to the Planning
Department for approval.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Planning Department.
Exposure of people or property to seismic ground shaking, seismic
ground failure, landslides or mudflows, expansive soils or earthquake
hazards.
Ensure that soil compaction is to City standards.
A soils report praparad by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted
to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check.
Building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits and building permits.
Department of Public Works and Building & Safety Department.
R:\STAFFRPT\347pa98pc..doc
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Par'b/:
Water
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone,'
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Exposure of people or property to seismic ground shaking, seismic
ground failure, landslides or mudflows, expansive soils or earthquake
hazards.
Utilize construction techniques that are consistent with the Uniform
Building Code.
Submit construction plans to the Building & Safety Department for
approval.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building & Safety Department
The project will result in changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns
and the rate and amount of surface runoff.
Methods of controlling runoff, from site so that it will not negatively impact
adjacent properties, including drainage conveyances, have been
incorporated into site design and will be included on the grading plans.
Submit grading and drainage plan to the Department of Public Works for
approval.
Prior to the issuance of grading permit.
Department of Public Works.
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality
(e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity).
An erosion control plan shall be prepared in accordance with City
requirements and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
shall be prepared in accordance with the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) requirements.
The applicant shall submit a SWPPP to the San Diego Regional Water
Quality Control Board (SDRWQCB) for their review and approval.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Department of Public Works and SDRWQCB (for SWPPP).
R:\STAFFRF~347p~98pc..doc
36
TransnortationlCirculation
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for mad improvements and traffic
impacts.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by,
and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building and Safety Department.
Increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for traffic signal mitigation.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by,
and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permit.
Building and Safety Department.
Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site.
Provide on-site parking spaces to accommodate the use.
Install on-site parking spaces pursuant to the City's minimum
Development Code parking standards.
Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits.
Department of Public Works, Planning Department and Building & Safety
Department.
R:',STAFFRPT~347pa98pc..doc
37
Biological Resources
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but
not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds).
Pay Mitigation Fee for impacts to Stephens Kangaroo Rat.
Pay $500.00 per acre of disturbed area of Stephens Kangaroo Rat
habitat.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Department of Public Works and Planning Department.
Impact to the existing, native and/or environmentally sensitive plantings
on the Murrieta Creek slope or creek bed.
Plant palette approved by the California Department of Fish and Game.
Submit conceptual landscaping plans to the California Department of Fish
and Game for review and approval.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Planning Department/California Department of Fish and Game.
Impact on slope stability or existing vegetation of the Murrieta creek slope
or creek bed.
Notify the California Department of Fish and Game when revegetation of
the slope occurs.
All landscaping shall be installed by hand. No equipment shall be utilized
to revegetate the slope.
During the revegetation of the east slope of the Murrieta Creek.
Planning Department/California Department of Fish and Game.
R:~STAFFRPTX347pa98pc..doc
38
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Public Services
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Impacts to wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)
On-site monitoring during construction and slope revegetation.
Contact the California Department of Fish and Game if any damage to
the Murrieta Creek bed or the east slope occurs during construction or
revegetation of the slope.
Obtain all necessary permits and/or clearances from the California
Department of Fish and Game and all applicable agencies.
Planning Department/Califomia Department of Fish and Game.
A substantial effect upon and a need for new/altered governmental
services regarding fire protection. The project will incrementally increase
the need for fire protection; however, it will contribute its fair share to the
maintenance of service provision.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for Fire Mitigation.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by,
and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permit.
Building & Safety Department.
A substantial effect upon and a need for new/altered schools. No
significant impacts are anticipated.
Payment of School Fees.
Pay current mitigation fees with the Temecula Valley Unified School
District.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building & Safety Department and Temecula Valley Unified School'
District.
R:\STAFFR.FTL~47pa98pc..doc
39
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
AESTHETICS
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
A substantial effect upon and a need for maintenance of public facilities,
including roads.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for mad improvements, traffic
impacts. and public facilities.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by,
and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building and Safety Department.
The creation of new light sources will result in increased light and glare
that could affect the Palomar Observatory.
Use lighting techniques that are consistent with Ordinance No. 655,
Submit lighting plan to the Building and Safety Department for approval.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Building & Safety Department.
R:~STAFR~I~34?I~L~SpC..doc
4O
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
R %STAFFRPT\347PA98PC FINAL.DOC 25
CITY OF TEMECULA
VICINITY MAP - NTS ~)
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0347 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT- A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- November 18, 1998
VICINITY MAP
R:\STAFFRPT~270PA~}g. PC 11/12/98pa
CITY OF TEMECULA
EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - LI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL)
BP
BP
BP
') BP
EXHIBIT C · GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION. BP (BUSINESS PARK)
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0347 (Development Plan)
_ PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
CC
R:',STAFFRPT~270pA98.pC 11/12/98pa
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0347 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT- D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- November 18, 1998
SITE PLAN
R:xSTAFFRpT~70pA98.FC ll/l/J98pa
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0347 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT- E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
LANDSCAPE PLAN
R:~STAFFRFTX270PA98.PC 11112/98 in
CITY OF TEMECULA
NORTH ELEVATION
SOUTH ELEVATION
........
WEST ELEVATION
SADDLEBACK - COMMERCE CENTER DRIVE, TEMECULA
A R C H I r E C T S ORANGE
SOUTH ELEVATION
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0347 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - F
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
ELEVATIONS
R:'6'TAFFRPTX270PA98.PC 11/1:2~98pa
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0347 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - G
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
COLORS & MATERIALS
R:~STAFFRFF~270PA98.PC 11/12/98pa
CITY OF TEMECULA
UNIT 14
4,375 SF
so' '~
UNIT 15
5,400 SF
UNIT 12
4,375 SF
I/NIT !3
5,400 SF
70'
UNIT 10
4,955 SF
·
~UNIT 11
6,150 SF
UNIT g
5,410 5F
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0347 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - H
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
FLOOR PLAN
R?~STAFFRPl~7OPA~8.PC ll/1Z/c)Spa
CITY OF TEMECULA
UNIT 3
I0,665 SF
UNIT _2
4,735 SF
6o'
UNIT I
5,410 SF
UNIT 5
5,475 SF
UNIT 6
4,735 SF ~
UNIT 7 ! UNIT 8
4,735 SF t~ 4,735 SF ~,
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98o0347 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - H
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 18, 1998
FLOOR PLAN
R:~TAFFRPTX270PA98.PC 11/12/98pa
ATTACHMENT I
COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL LETTER
DAVID P. ZAPPE
General Manager-Chief Engineer
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
September 24, 1998
1995 MARKET STREET
RIVERSIDE. CA 92501
909/955-1200
909/788-9965 FAX
53912.1
City of Temecula
Planning Department
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Attention: Patty Anders
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re: PA 98-0347
The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in
incorporated cities. The District does not plan check City land use cases, or provide State Division of
Real Estate letters or other flood hazard reports for such cases. District comments/recommendations
for such cases ~re normally limited to items of specific interest to the District including District
Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood control and drainage facilities which could be
considered a logical component or extension of a master plan system, and District Area Drainage
Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition, information of a general nature is provided.
The District has not reviewed the proposed project in detail and the following comments do not in
any way constitute or imply District approval or endorsement of the proposed project with respect to
flood hazard, public health and safety or any other such issues.
PA 98-0347 is a proposal to construct 15 light industrial building ranging from 4,375 square feet to
10,665 square feet with associated parking and landscaping on a 6.02 acre lot located at the west side
of Commerce Center Drive adjacent to Murrieta Creek.
The side slopes on the southwestern portion of the site is within the 100 year Zone AE flood plain
limits for Murcieta Creek as delineated on Panel No 060742-0005B of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps
issued in conjunction with the National Flood Insurance Program administered by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). According to District topography, it appears Building
Units 4 and 5 are beyond the channel bank and would be in the floodplain. The water surface
elevation for the FEMA flow rate of 30,900 cfs is 1015.00 at the upstream edge of the property. A
District flood study determined the base flood elevation for the master plan flow rate of 38,300 cfs to
be 1016.57 at the upstream edge of the property. The highwater mark during the flood of January
1993 was 1016.17. All the elevations are based on 1929 NGVD.
Because of the extreme hazard posed by Murrieta Creek, the City should consider not allowing
development to proceed adjacent to the creek until the ultimate improvement can be constructed.
Property within the floodplain should be conditioned to construct the required improvements to
Murrieta Creek Chatreel or participate in a financing mechanism such as an assessment district to
ensure necessary improvements are constructed.
53912.1
City of Temecula -2-
Re: PA 98-0347
September 24, 1998
If the City chooses to allow development to proceed, we recommend that the City require the
applicant to dedicate the existing Murrieta Creek Channel and a 25-foot wide access road adjacent to
the top of channel bank to the District (see Exhibit "A"). The access road is necessary for District
fomes to patrol Mumeta Creek, and the District will not accept the channel dedication without the
access road. In order to protect the public's health and safety, the City, at a minimum, should require
the applicant to redesign the project to set back Building Units 4 and 5 an appropriate distance from
the top of channel bank. New buildings should be floodproofed by elevating the finished floor a
minimum of 12 inches above the District's base flood elevation for 38,300 cfs.
This project is located within the limits of the Dist~ct's Mumeta Creek/Temecula Valley Area
Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have be~n adopted, applicable fees should be paid by cashier's
check or money order to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of building or grading permits,
whichever comes first. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of issuance of the
actual permit.
Questions concerning this matter may be referred to me at 909/955-1214.
Very truly yours,
STUART E. MCKIBBIN
Senior Civil Engineer
Enclosure
c: City of Temecula Public Works
Arm: Jerry Allegria
Joe Kicak
SrdV :slj
;H--
COMMERCE CENTER
!
MARKHAM & ASSOCIATES
Development Colx~t~mt~
October 22, 1998
Mr. Smart E. McKibben
Senior Civil Engineer
Riverside County Flood Control
and Water Conservation District
1995 Market Street
Riverside, Ca. 92501
Re: Flood Letter dated 9-24-98 for City of Temecula case
PA98-0347 along Murrieta Creek (Saddleback 861 )
Dear Smart:
Pursuant to our meeting of September 24, 1998, I offer this letter as documentation of the
applicant's position and to offer additional information in the form of a field topographic
survey performed by S and A Surveying dated 3-98 to substantiate our claim that the
FEMA floodplain exists as portrayed on the site plan for PA98-0347 and not as shown on
the Flood Letter Exhibit "A".
The Flood Exhibit "A" is based on the 1987-88 topographic survey and does not reflect
the existing condition. This fact is based on the grading that was done by the City of
Temecula/Flood Control as a part of the Restoration Permit for Muraleta Creek that was
accomplished after the flooding in early 1993.
Buildings 4 and 5 do not encroach into the FEMA floodplain as plotted by elevation and
do not encroach onto the side slopes of the creek bank. Additionally, the subject buildings
are flood proofed to elevations 1020.0 and 1020.9. These elevations provide flood
proofing for both the FEMA and Master Plan flows.
I find the comment in paragraph 5 curious in the extreme in that Flood Control is
requesting the dedication of right of way, construction of the ultimate improvements that
Flood Control cannot define at this time and to participate in an as yet to be defined
funding mechanism. Additionally, the preliminary plans showing the ultimate
improvements and right of way do not impact the subject property. All of these issues
are in a state of flux due to the ongoing Corp of Engineers Reconnaissance and
Feasibility Studies which will not be complete until 2001.
41750 Winchester Road, Suite N · Temecula, California 92590 · (909) 676-6672 FAX (909) 699-1848
MARKHAM & ASSOCIATES
The Flood Control Distfi~t owns the entire Murrieta Creek channel from the west
property line of the subject property to the Diaz road right of way. The regulatory permits
for the annual mowing operation does not allow the mowing of the side slopes and
restricts the mowing to the bottom only. The District utilizes Diaz Road to access the
channel with the equipmere for mowing. The further request to dedicate a 25 foot
easement/road to patrol an area that the district has no permit to maintain is totally
unnecessary. Furthermore, the District has access to the creek in four locations along this
reach: namely Via Montezuma, both sides of the intersecting 100 foot channel and at the
south end of the constructed Murrieta Creek Channel.
By way of precedent, the two most recently approved and now constructed projects
(PA97-0341 and PA97-0409) have not been required to comply with these requirements.
To summarize, we are flood proofed above the FEMA elevations and will not dedicate
easements or fight of way to the Flood Control district.
Sincerely,
Markham and Associates
Principal
cc: Patty Anders- City of Temecula Planning
Gerald Alegila- City of Temecula Public Works
Jack Selman- Architects Orange
Ray Smith- Saddleback Associates
41750 Winchester Road, Suite N · Temecula, California 92590 * (909) 676-6672 FAX (909) 699-1848
ATTACHMENT J
PROPOSED OUTDOOR SECURED STORAGE AREAS
10/27/1998 11:87 714-639-5286 ARCHITECTS ORANGE PAGE 02
3ALSO ~31N3~3 3383~1~03