HomeMy WebLinkAbout040799 PC AgendaIn complhncewjththeAnler~vd~DilaU~M, If)~u lmd ipedal auMil~to par~i kl thk Mng,~N~h
ohofh~ommunlyD, ve~Depm~tdlgOq6e4~Q. NollficatbnilmwsWbrtoamaetlngwilimnkktheC~femdm
reasonsiNe arrangements to ensure accaslblllty to that meeUng {28 CFP, 35.102_35,t04 ADA Tltb II]
TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
April 7, 1999, 6:00 PM
43200 Business Park Drive
Council Chambers
Temecula, CA 92390
Reso Next In Order #99-0010
CALL TO ORDER:
FLAG SALUTE:
ROLL CALL:
Chairperson Guerdero
Fahey, Guerriero, Naggar, 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 not 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. Approval of Minutes from:
February 17, 1999
March 3, 1999
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
3. Case No:
Applicant;
Location:
Proposal:
Environmental Action:
Case Planner:.
Case Engineer:
Recommendation:
Planning Application No. PA98-0462 (Development Plan)
Milgard Manufacturing
26879 Diaz Road (at the southwest comer of Diaz Road and
Dendy Parkway [formerly Winchester Road])
To construct a 108,000 square foot industrial building on 7.5 acre
site.
Mitigated Negative Declaration
John De Gange, Project Planner
John Pourkazemi, Associate Engineer
Approval
R:%WIMBI~,VG~PLANcoMM~AGENDAS\1999\4-7-99 .do~
1
4. Ca~e No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Environmental Action:
Planner:.
Recommendation:
PLANNING MANAGERS REPORT
COMMISSIONER REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting:
Planning Application No. PA99..0038 (Development Plan
Lowe's Real Estate Western Division/Donn Winn (PA99-0038)
The southeast comer of Winchester and Margarita Roads (within
Planning Area 4 of the Campos Verdes Specific).
The design, construction and operation of a 129,462 square foot
home improvement store with a 32,981 square foot garden
shop, and associated parking and landscaping on a parcel
containing approximately 17.52 acres.
A finding on consistency with the previously certified
Environmental Impact Report No. 348 adopted for the Campos
Vetdes Specific Plan.
Patty Anders, Assistant Planner
Approval
April 21, 1999, 6:00 PM, City Council Chambers
43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California
R:~WI~IBERVG~PLANCOIVlId\AGENDAS\1999\4-7-99.do~
2
ITEM #2
MINUTES FROM
FEBRUARY 17, 1999
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 17, 1999
CALL TO ORDER
The City of Ternecule Pinning Commissioi~ convened in a regular meeting at 6:00 P,M., on
Wednesday, February 17, 1999, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Flag salute by Commissioner Webster.
ROLL CALL
Present
Absent
Also Present
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No comments.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
1, ADDrOyal Of Ageride
Commissioners Nagger, Webster, end Chairman Guerriero.
Commissioner Soltltsiak.
Planning Manager Ubneske,
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks,
Attorney Cudey,
Senior Planner Fagan,
Assistant Planner Andere, and
Minute Clerk Hensen.
MOTION: Commissioner Nagger moved to approve the agenda. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Webster and voice vote reflected unanimous approval with the exception of
Commissioner Soltysiak who was absent.
Z ADDrOvel of Minutes - January 20, 1999
It was noted that page 7, paragraph 2 should reflect Commissioner Naggar's recommendation,
that in addinn to staff, additional review of the Citys Impact Development Monitoring Program
be solely reviewed by the Planning Commission.
MOTION: Commissioner Nagger moved to approve the minutes, as amended, The motion was
seconded by Commissioner Webster end voice vote reflected unanimous approval with the
exception of Commissioner Soltysiak who was absent.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. Planning AnDIiCatiOn NO. PA984)446 (Conditional Use Permit)
Request to design, construct, and operate an 22,007 square foot altemaUve
seniors living services and A!zheimer care facility with associated parking and
landscaping on a 3. 22 acre lot.
RECOMMENDATION
it is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission
approve the request.
By way of overheads end color renderings, Assistant Planner Andera presented the staff report
(per agencla material); highlighted architectural design, relaying that staff was pleased with the
design idling a msidentlaNcok verses en insUtuUnnal-type visual appearance; referenced
proposed landscaping, relaying that 58% of the site is proposed to be landscaped, achieving a
park-like setting; advised that staff was in agreement with the applicant's request to have
Condition No. 87 deleted, regarding Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) recommendations; for
Commissioner Webster, specified the stucc~ coloring, regarding the tim, windew treatment` and
building colors; for Commissioner Nagger. noted that the vest amount of deliveries received at
this site will be mall-scala truck deliveries; relayed that since the applicant does not own the
adjacent property, this peffisular project cannot be corffiitioned to landscape the open-space
area adjacent to the site; and clarified the fenring on the site plan.
Mr. David Lutich, representing the applicant, presented the 17-year history of the applicant's
role in assisted-living care facilities, specifying what assisted-living encompasses; clarified the
preference to develop this type of fadlib/in 8 residential ares in order to create a home-like
seffing for the guest; speclrted the interior end exterior designs; relayed, for Commissioner
Nagger, the IocsUnn, dimensions, and type of lighting at the site; noted that with regard to the
open space ares. it is the applicsnt's desire that this pafficular area be landscaped; for
Commissioner Webster, disrifled that the roof material would be concrete Ules; for Chairman
Gueffiero, nnled that, generally, the medicinal administration wauld be self-administered,
relaying that licensing will determine whether injectinns will be administered; clarified the
disposal of the injectinn r~'_.-"Jles, end the laundering procedures at the facility; and relayed the
specific building design and staff training designed to eliminefa the wandering of residents.
Chairman Guerriero, echoed by Commissioner Nagger, commended the applicant for bringing
this much-needed type of facility to the City of Temecula.
Deputy Director of Public Works Perks confirmed, for Commissioner Webster, that Margarite
and Pauba Roads are surrenUy developed to full wiclffi along this property. and that there is a
proposed light to be installed at Peuba end Margarita Roads; noted that this parUcular project
has been conditioned to pafficlpale in the funding of the raised median on Margarita Road
fronting the site; for Commissioner Nagger, clarified that although there will be no designated
left-turn into this project, there will be a dedicated leit-tum motinn from Margarile Road to Paube
Road, noting that at Pauba Road there will be a full-length intersection; and relayed that
currenUy, there is consideration to design Margarita Road to full width (from Pauba Road to 79
South), nnUng, hovaver, that currentJy funding for this project is unavailable.
2
Mr. Richard Valdez, engineer representing the applicant, relayed that he was available for
questions.
Chairman Gueffiero opened the public hearing it this tim.
Mr. Mike Eglar, 31300 Cals Carrssco, expressed opposition to the project due to the following
concerns: uncovered trash area, the r~cd for traffic conboi pdor to the onset of construction,
lighting, odors (associated with cooking st the facility), end noise.
In response to Mr. Egler's comments, Commissioner Nagger specified the location of the 24-
inch boxed trees lining the perimeter of the trash area. Mr. Eglar relayed a desire to be assured
that there would be complato screening of the trash area.
Mr. Richard Redcot, 31320 Corta Rimola, commended the developer for his efforts to address
the concerns of the community; expressed concern regsrding, the following: the landscaping of
the aforementioned openspica ares, the fendrig-off of the greenbelt, maintaining the existing
trees at the site; and relayed his primary concam as the negative visual effect of the roof
equipment from his property.
Assistant Planner Andere relayed sssursnca, for Mr. Racecot, regarding the enclosure of the
roof equipment
Commissioner Nagger recommended that there be no provision for access to this site from
Mamarite Rood, per the Traffic Engineer recommendation; with regard to lighting,
recommended that there be sseurenca the glare would not be intrusive to the adjacent
neighbors; and with regard to deliveries, relayed s desire to restrict the timing of deliveries.
Commissioner Webster commented with respect to the raised issues of concern, as follows:
regarding the lighting, relayed that the existing Mount Palomar lighting restrictions adequately
address the issue; regarding the trash area, noted that the Design Guidelines adequately
address this issue; regarding the pperhspece easement ares of concern, relayed that this
particular ires is an off-site issue, recommending that no conditions be placed upon this project;
regarding the traffic signel, relayed that since the signal is currently proposed, the issue does
not need to be re-addressed; noted that adequate treffic measures have been provided in the
area, relaying that the primary traffic problem in the area of discussion is poor ddving; regarding
the roof, (specifically the height and slope) noted that the design is consistent with the Specific
Plan, recommending that no modifications be made; regarding the decaleration lane on
Margarita Rood, further clarified the current provisions providing adequate traffic access; and
regarding deliveries to the tedlit.l, relayed that since there is no high traffic impact associated
with the project, recommended that no restrictions be placed upon the project, regarding
deliveries.
Chairman Guerriero recommended modifying the languega in Condition 36(b) to reflect the word
when insteed of the word/~, relayed s desire for · traffic investigation to determine whether or
not s laft-tum (westbound) on Pauba Road is necessary; and concurred with Commissioner
Naggar's comments, that s time restziction be enforced with regard to deliveries.
In response to Commissioner Naggar's comments, the applicant's representative expressed
that the applicant would be agreeable to the restriction of commerdal vehicle deliveries
(spedfically, larger than 24 feet) before 7:00 A. M. and after 9:00 P. M.
Chairman Guerriero thanked the public for their input.
Assistant Planner Arttiers advised the since the project is going to be permitted by the City, that
the timing of the Conditions be modified, per City policy.
MOTION: Commissioner Naggar moved to close the public hearing; adopt Resolution No. 99-
005 el}proving Pinning Application No. PA98-0446 based upon the Analysis and Findings
contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; and adopt
Environmental Addendum No, 2 to the previously certified 'Environmental Impact Report (EIR
No, 235), and make the finding that a subsequent EIR is not required pursuant to the Califomia
Environmental Quality Act Section 15162,
RESOLUTION NO. PC 99005
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPUCATION NO. PA98-0446
(DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF
A UVING SERVICES AND ALZHEIMER CARE FACILITY WITH
ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCAPING ON A PARCEL
CONTNNING 3.22 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEST CORNER
OF MARGARITA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOWS PARCEL NO. 955-150-027.
Ad~l
modify the language in Condition 36(b) to reflect the word when instead of the
word/f
that the trash enclosure area comply wiel the Design Guidelines
that bike lane striping be added, per the City Traffic Engineer recommendation
that commercial deliveries (larger than 24 feet) be restricted after 9:00 P. M. and
before 7:00 A. M
Delete
- Condition No, 87 (regarding Riverside Transit recommendations)
that the Conditions of Approval be amended, regarding the Public Works porton
of the Conditions, per City policy
The moUon was seconded by Commissioner Webster and voice vote reflected unanimous
approval with the exceotion of Commissioner Soltysiak who was absent.
PLANNING MANAGER'S REPORT
Pinning Manager Ubnoske relayed, for Commissioner Naggar, that the crosswalk at Margadta
Road was scheduled to be removed on February 16, 1999.
COMMISSIONER REPORTS
Commissioner Nagger introduced his family to the Commission.
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:23 P.M. Chairman Guerriero formally adjourned this meeting to Wednesday, March 3,
' 1999, at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Ddve, Temecula.
Chairman Run Guerdero
Planning Manager Debbie Ubnoske
MINUTES FROM
MARCH 3, 1999
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 3, 1999
CALL TO ORDER
The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:00 P.M., on
Wednesday, March 3, 1999, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200
Business Park Ddve, Temecula, California.
ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Flag salute by Commissioner Soltysiak,
ROLL CALL
Present:
Absent:
Also Present:
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No comments.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
1. Approval of Agenda
Commissioners Naggar, Soltysiak, Webster, and Chairman
Guer~ero.
None.
Planning Manager Ubnoske,
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks,
Attorney Cudey,
Senior Planner Hogan, and
Minute Clerk Hansen.
MOTION: Commissioner Naggar moved to approve the agenda. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Webster and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
2. Approval of Minutes - February 3. 1999
MOTION: Commissioner Naggar moved to approve the minutes. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Webster and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. Planning ADI)lication No. PA99-0022 (General Plan Amendment and Zone
Chan_ael
Request to amend the City General Plan Land Use and Zoning Maps in the
following manners:
Site 1: Community Commercial to Highway Tourist Commercial.
Site 2: Very Low Density Residential to Low-Medium Density Residential
Site 3: Business Park to Open Space (Zoning: Open Space-Conservation),
Service Commercial and Public Institutional,
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission
approve the request,
Commissioner Webster relayed that he would be abstaining with regard to the S/te 3 portion of
Agenda Item No. 3, So, it was the consensus of the Commission to consider the Sites
separately.
A. Site 1: Former Norm Reeves location on Jefferson Road
By way of overheads and maps, Senior Planner Hogan presented the staff report (per agenda
material); for Commissioner Naggar, dadfled that the amended Site 1 Zone Change had been
proposed, not for the storage of Recreational Vehicles, but to facilitate the continuation of selling
Recreational Vehicles; advised for Commissioner Webster, that the proposed amendment was
necessary to establish legal conformity for the continuation of the use as currently permitted
under the existing conditional use permit; and relayed that at a future point in time if an alternate
property owner desired to obtain a zoning change that that particular proposal would be based
on that particular use on its own medt and would be unrelated to this particular proposal.
B. Site 2: Portions of Kahwea Road and Avenlda Del Reposo and Nob Court
Senior Planner Hogan presented the staff report (of record); clarified the rationale for the zoning
proposal, relaying that the current zoning does not reflect the existing development; and advised
for Commissioner Naggar, that with the exception of two lots, currently the area was fully
developed.
MOTION: Commissioner Naggar moved to dose the public hearing; approve staffs
recommendation with regard to Site 1 and 2; and adopt Resolution No, 99-006 approving
Planning Application No. PA99-0022 based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in
the Staff Report,
RESOLUTION NO, PC 99-006
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A
RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE GENERAL PALN LAND USE MAP
FOR VARIOUS AREAS THROUGHOUT THE CITY KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NOS. 910-310-O07, 957-291-001 THROUGH 030, AND 957-292-001
THROUGH 004 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0220)" AND ADOPT
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA CITY KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'$ PARCEL NOS. 910-310-007,
957-291-001 THROUGH 030, AND 957-292-001 THROUGH 004 (PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA99-0220)"
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Soltysiak and voice vote reflected unanimous
approval.
C. Site 3: Future detention basin along north Jefferson Road
Commissioner Webster advised that he would be abstaining with regard to this portion of
Agenda Item 3.
Senior Planner Hogan presented the proposed zoning change with regard to Site 3 (per staff
report); advised that the proposed zoning modification would reduce the number of vehicle trips
to and from this area by approximately 27,000 trips a day; for Commissioner Soltysiak, specified
that the additional 200 feet to be rezoned in the area of discussion was for the purpose of flood
control provisions; relayed the process of amending the General Plan and the Zone change;
specified the permitted uses for the open space conservation area, clarifying the amending
process if at a future point in time there was agreement to amend the use of the open space
area; relayed that this proposed zoning change would not eliminate the need to address
regional issues with regard to traffic; for Chairman Guerdero, relayed that the area of discussion
was located northwest of the fairgrounds facility; and for Commissioner Naggar, reiterated that
the proposed zoning change would more accurately reflect the actual development pattem in
the area of discussion.
MOTION: Commissioner Naggar moved to dose the public hearing; approve staffs
recommendation with regard to Site 3; and adopt Resolution No, 99-007 appreving Planning
Application No. PA99-0022 based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report.
(This motion was withdrawn.)
For Commissioner Soltysiak, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks further clarified that the
open space area would potentially be utilized for a Bypass Retention Basin, which would
prevent the use being utilized as a Park or Recreational Facility with the exception of a Wildlife
Conservation; and further relayed for Commissioner Naggar, the potential use of the
aforementioned area for Wetland Mitigation.
With regard to Commissioner Naggar's comment to enter the zone change solely for modeling
purposes, Attorney Cudey relayed that while being useful for numerous purposes, the insertion
of hypothetical information could dilute the validity of the matter and could, additionally, have
potential legal complications.
With regard to Commissioner Soltysiak's concern regarding the proposal's impact upon Traffic
Modeling with the potential of further inhibiting necessary traffic improvements by the City of
Mumeta, Planning Manager clarified that while impacting the modeling by reflecting a lowered
trip generation count, the zoning change would more accuretely reflect the actual use of the
property, ergo, staffs recommendation to approve the zoning change; and specified that this
zone change would not alleviate the need to further address traffic.
MOTION: Chairman Guerdero moved to close the public hearing; approve staffs
recommendation with regard to Site 3; and adopt Resolution No. 99-007 approving Planning
Application No. PA99-0022 based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report.
RESOLUTION NO. PC 99-007
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE
A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE MAP FOR VARIOUS AREAS THROUGHOUT THE CITY
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 909-120-036, 909-120-046,
AND 909-281-016 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0022)" AND
ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CITY KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NOS. 909-120-036, 909-120-046 AND 909-281-016
(PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0022)"
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Soltysiak and voice vote reflected unanimous
approval with the exception of Commissioner Webster who ~,
PLANNING MANAGER'S REPORT
Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that Ms, Linda Fahey would be coming back to
serve on the Planning Commission, noting that she would begin serving on the
Commission at the March 17, 1999 Planning Commission meeting.
Ms. Ubnoske presented the proposed water feature for the Mall comer treatment (per
supplemental agenda material); and queded the Commission for their input. The
Gommissioner's comments were, as follows:
· Commissioner Soltysiak advised that the painted material in the water area could
potentially be a maintenance problem.
Commissioner Guerriero, echoed by Commissioner Naggar, relayed a desire for staff
to ensure that the design is proportional to the project; and advised that further detail
be added to the design,
Ms. Ubnoske relayed that the Commission's comments would be forwarded to Senior
Planner Fagan.
Ms Ubnoske advised that if the Planning Commissioners had a desire to attend the
upcoming Richards, Watson, & Gershon Seminar, being held on March 30, 1999 in the
Inland Empire, April 12, 1999, in Los Angeles, and on April 26, 1999 in Orange County,
that they forward that information to her. In response, Chairman Guerriero noted his
desire to attend the March 30t" Seminar; and Commissioner Naggar expressed a desire
to attend the April 26th Seminar, relaying that he would confirm his plan to attend after he
returns from vacation on April 12, 1999.
D,
For Chairman Guerdero, Ms. Ubnoske relayed that the meeting of the
Murrieta/Temecula group would be Friday, March 5, 1999 at the Thornton Winery, noting
that breakfast would be served, followed by a speaker.
COMMISSIONER REPORTS
Chairman Guerriero, echoed by Commissioner Naggar, expressed thanks to staff for the
provision of additional material regarding lighting regulations contained in their agenda
packets.
Commissioner Naggar noted that he would be on vacation from Maroh 26, 1999 to April
12, 1999; and relayed his desira for provision of the agenda packet for the meeting he
would not be able to attend.
With regard to the proposal to have chairpersons of the City's Commissions attend the
City Council meetings, Chairman Guerriero relayed that he would be in favor of the
proposal if it was for the purpose of voicing the comments and concerns of the
Commission.
With regard to the Winchester Road Median Project, Chairman Guerriero relayed his
disappointment with the recent modifications to the original proposed plan.
With regard to the Farmer Boys restaurant, Mr. Guerriero recommended that staff
address the need to temporarily install delineators until the proposed median on
Winchester Road has been completed, as the project was conditioned.
Mr. Guerriero commended staff for their diligent efforts associated with the Margarita
Median Project.
For Chairman Guerriero, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks advised that he would
further investigate the matter of Law Enforcement addressing the numerous parked
vehicles on the public right-of-way (parked for the purpose of selling the vehicles),
specifically at Meadows Parkway and Rancho California Road.
ADJOURNMENT
At 6:50 P.M. Chairman Guerfiero formally adjourned this meeting to Wednesday. March 17.
1999, at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula.
Ron Guerdero, Chairwoman
Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager
ITEM #3
RECOMMENDATION:
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
April 7, 1999
Planning Application No. PA98-0462
(Development Plan, Milgard Manufacturing)
Prepared By: John De Gange, Project Planner
The Community Development Department, Planning Division Staff
recommends the Planning Commission:
1. ADOPT the Negative Declaration making a finding of
DeMiminimus Impact for Planning Application No. PA98-
0462 (Development Plan);
2. ADOPT the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning
Application No. PA98-0462 (Development Plan);
3. GRANT a Minor Exception in accordance to Section
17.03.060 of the Development Code for a reduction in the
amount of required parking.
4. ADOPT Resolution No. 99- approving Planning
Application No. PA98-0462 (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:
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
Milgard Manufacturing
RDS and Associates
The design, construction and operation of a 132,883 square
foot industrial building with associated landscaping,
hardscape and improvements on a 7.5 acre site.
26879 Diaz Road (at the southwest comer of Diaz Road and
Dendy Parkway [formerly Via IndustriaNVinchester Road])
BP (Business Park)
LI (Light Industrial)
Vacant
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP'F~462PA98.PC.dOc
1
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
PI (Public Institutional)
LI (Light Industdal)
OS-C (Conservation)
LI (Light Industrial)
PROPOSED ZONING:
Not requested
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
City owned property (commonly referred to as
the Northwest Sports Park)
Vacant
Vacant (Murrieta Creek)
Vacant
PROJECT STATISTICS
Total Area:
Building Area:
Building Footprint:
Landscape Area:
Paved Area:
Floor Area Ratio (FAR):
Parking Required:
Parking Provided:
Building Height:
7.5 acres (326,700 square feet)
132,883 square feet
115,807 square feet (35 % of total site)
65,400 square feet (20% of total site)
145,493 square feet (45% of total site)
0,4 (40%)
224 spaces
211 auto spaces, 2 motorcycle spaces, and 12 bicycle spaces
31 feet (partial 2-story)
BACKGROUND
This project was submitted as a pre-application on April 28, 1998. The applicant was provided
comments following a meeting to discuss preliminary issues on May 12, 1998. A formal
application, Planning Application No. PA98-0462, was submitted to the Planning Department on
November 10, 1998. A Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was held on December
3, 1998, The application was deemed complete on March 16, 1999.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project is the design and construction of a 132,883 square foot office/light manufacturing
building for Milgard Manufacturing, a window manufacturing operation that is proposing to relocate
from their existing operation within the City. The project will be constructed on a 7.5-acre site and
will have associated parking, landscaping and hardscape. Operations within this building will
consist of the manufacture and assembly of windows and associated window products. Products
to be assembled will be brought to the site where they are processed into finished window
products, packaged, and then distributed.
Approximately 27% of the building will be used for manufacturing, 61% of the building for
warehousing and storage and 12% for office use. The office component of the operation will
occupy the front of the building along Diaz Road. The office elevation will be 14 feet high while the
overall height of the building will be 31 feet. The footprint of the building will cover 115,807 square
feet. Approximately 17,076 square feet of the building will be on a second floor.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~462pA98. pC.doc
2
ANALYSIS
Site Desiqn
The project site is located at the southwest comer of Diaz Road and Dendy Parkway (previously
referred to as Via Industria and/or Winchester Road). Ingress and egress to the project will be
taken from two driveways on Dendy Parkway and a single driveway off of Diaz Road. Vehicular
circulation encircles the building, with parking located pdmadly along the front and southeast corner
of the site with a lesser number of spaces along the western side of the property. Truck traffic will
be taking access from the ddveways on both Dendy Parkway and Diaz Road. Delivery trucks will
access the western most driveway on Dendy Parkway and back into the loading doors along the
northern side of the building. Finished product will be loaded and distributed from the loading
docks along the southern side of the building.
The applicant has taken steps to screen the loading areas on the northern side of the building with
increased landscaping and berming. The loading areas on the southern side of the building will
initially be screened in part by a landscape planter, which ranges in width from between 12 to 35
feet along the southern property boundary. Any building that will be constructed on the adjacent
site will ultimately screen the majodty of this elevation. Additional plantings have been added
within the landscape planter at the southeast corner of the property to help screen the loading
areas even after the adjacent site develops. The applicant has also provided a large outdoor
employee patio area located at the southeast corner of the site.
Architecture and Colors
The proposed building will be constructed of tilt-up concrete. Due to the property's location at the
corner of two streets, the project is highly visible from the public right-of-way. The building, by
virtue of its size and shape presents large expansive walls extending as much as 360 feet. The
architecture of these walls includes: solid canopies over each of the loading doors along the north
and south elevations, scoring and reveals, and a color scheme which utilizes alternating, bands of
color and painted vertical stripes to present the illusion of columns. The applicant has broken up
the building's massing by utilizing cutouts along the top of the parapet wall to coincide with the
painted vertical stripes. Staff had requested that additional articulation be provided along the long
expansive walls. The applicant responded by adding a series of two foot by two foot (2' x2')
painted medallions along portions of the front, rear and one of the side (north) elevations. The front
elevation has been articulated in the following manner: the office portion of the building projects out
at a lower level from the main building, and windows and sloped roof areas are being used to
delineate the main entrance. This helps break up the massing of front of the building (west
elevation).
Landscapinc~
Approximately 20% of the site have been landscaped which meets the minimum requirement in the
LI (Light Industrial) zone. The project provides a large landscape planter ranging in width from
between 12 and 25 feet along the southern portion of the site, a 12-foot wide planter along the rear
(west) property line, and a 25-foot wide planter along the Diaz Road and Dendy Parkway frontages.
To help screen the loading areas from Dendy Parkway, the applicant has added berming in these
planters and provided additional plantings. The planters on Diaz Road and Dendy Parkway contain
London Plane trees as the street tree, a maximum of 30 feet on center. The applicant is also
providing wide tuff areas on either side of the entrance of the building facing Diaz Road. The City's
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~462PA98.PC.dOC 3
Landscape Architect has reviewed the landscape plan and the applicant has addressed these
comments on the plan.
Traffic Analysis
The Public Works Department has reviewed and calculated the expected traffic impacts associated
with this project. It has been concluded that daily tdps generated will not exceed what was
anticipated by the General Plan Circulation Element for this site given that the project's Floor Area
Ratio (FAR) is roughly what has been anticipated by the General Plan. To address the impacts
associated with increased traffic on Winchester Road and at the intersection of Winchester and
Diaz Road, the applicant will be required to pay traffic signal mitigation fees and development
impact fees as conditions of approval for the project. After mitigation measures are performed, no
major negative impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Compatibility with Surroundinq Development
The building will have a footprint of 115,807 square feet and extends 31 feet high. The project is
consistent with existing development in the area in terms of height, bulk and scale (MDC Concepts,
the Four-Sher speculative building and Zevo Golf to the north and east are also large buildings).
Minor Exception
This application requires a Minor Exception for a reduction in the amount of required parking for
industrial uses. The applicant is providing 211 spaces and based on the breakdown of uses
associated with the project, this project requires 224 spaces. The amount of the requested
reduction falls within the amount of deviation permitted in Section 17.03.060 of the Development
Code (15%). Staff feels that this request should be granted, given the nature of the development.
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). 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 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.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The project consists of the design and construction of a 132,883 square foot industrial building,
associated parking, landscaping and hardscape on 7.5 acres. The building will be tilt-up concrete.
The applicant has attempted to provide articulation through the use of reveals, the use of a color
scheme employs varying colors, painted medallions, and increased landscaping along the more
visible elevations. The Public Works Department has analyzed the traffic impacts generated by
this project and concluded that traffic signal mitigation fees and development impact fees contained
within the Conditions of Approval for the project will mitigate the associated impacts. Landscaping
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRpTt462pA98.pC.dOC 4
provided is consistent with the 20% minimum landscaping requirement in the LI (Light Industrial)
zone. The project as proposed is consistent with the Development Code and the General Plan.
The Initial Study prepared for the project has 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.
FINDINGS (For Minor Exception)
The overall project is consistent with the General Plan and Development Code and as a
consequence, the granting of the Minor Exception will not impact the public health, safety
and general welfare of adjacent properties and the City of Temecula as a whole.
The project proposes to provide 216 parking spaces and is required to provide 224 spaces.
This reduction is tar less than a 15% reduction which is required by the Development Code.
Due to site constraints resulting from the project's proximity to a major storm drain facility
additional portions of the site are forcad to be left undeveloped. As a consequence, there
are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships created by the strict application of the
code due to the physical characteristics of the property.
Due to the constraints associated with the site, the granting of a Minor Exception for this
project does not represent the granting of a special privilege, which is not otherwise
available to surrounding properties, and will not be detrimental to the public welfare or to
the property of other persons located in the vicinity.
This proposal is consistent with the zoning district in which it is located, therefore the
granting of the Minor Exception to reduce the amount of required parking will not permit
uses, which are otherwise not allowed in the zone, and adequate safeguards have been
built into the approval of the project to protect surrounding properties.
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 DeMiminimus impact finding can be made for this
project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~62PA98.PC.dOC
5
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
PC Resolution - Blue Page 7
A. Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 11
Initial Study - Blue Page 22
Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 38
Exhibits - Blue Page 44
A. Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C. General Plan Map
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS'J:>LANNING\STAFFRPT~462PA98.PC.doc
6
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRp'~462pA98.pC.doc
7
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA98-0462 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) TO CONSTRUCT AND
OPERATE A 132,883 SQUARE FOOT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING,
ASSOCIATED PARKING, LANDSCAPING, HARDSCAPE AND
IMPROVEMENTS ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 7.5 ACRES
LOCATED AT 26879 DIAZ ROAD (AT THE SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF DIAZ ROAD AND DENDY PARKVVAY [FORMERLY
WINCHESTER ROAD]) AND KNOWN AS A PORTION OF
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-037-009
WHEREAS, Milgard Manufactudng filed Planning Application No. PA98-0462 (Development
Plan) in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA98-0462 (Development Plan) was processed in
the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA98-0462
(Development Plan) on April 7, 1999, 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. PA98-0462 (Development Plan);
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.
PA98-0462 (Development Plan) makes the following findings; to wit:
Findings for Minor Exception
1. The overall project is consistent with the General Plan and Development
Code and as a consequence, the granting of the Minor Exception will not impact the public health,
safety and general welfare of adjacent properties and the City of Temecula as a whole.
2. The project proposes to provide 216 parking spaces and is required to
provide 224 spaces. This reduction is far less than a 15% reduction which is required by the
Development Code.
3. Due to site constraints resulting from the project's proximity to a major storm
drain facility additional portions of the site are forced to be left undeveloped. As a consequence,
there are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships created by the stdct application of the code
due to the physical characteristics of the property.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA%DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRpT, A62pA98.pC.doc 8
4. Due to the constraints associated with the site, the granting of a Minor
Exception for this project does not represent the granting of a special privilege, which is not
otherwise available to surrounding properties, and will not be detrimental to the public welfare or
to the property of other persons located in the vicinity.
5. This proposal is consistent with the zoning district in which it is located,
therefore the granting of the Minor Exception to reduce the amount of required parking will not
permit uses, which are otherwise not allowed in the zone, and adequate safeguards have been
built into the approval of the project to protect surrounding properties.
Project Findings
1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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 DeMiminimus impact finding can be made for this project.
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 Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby
granted.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves
Planning Application No. PA98-0462 (Development Plan) to construct and operate a 132,883
square foot industrial building, with associated parking, landscaping and hardscape and
improvements on a parcel containing 7.5 acres located at 26879 Diaz Road (at the southwest
corner of Diaz Road and Dendy Parkway [formerly Winchester Road]) and known as a portion of
Assessor's Parcel No. 909-037-009 subject to Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein
by this reference and made a ~art hereof.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRpT~462pA98.pC.dOC
9
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of April, 1999.
Ron Guerriero, 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 7th day of April, 1999
by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~462PA98.PC.doc
10
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~62PA98.PC.dOC
11
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA98-0462 (Development Plan)
Project Description:.
Assessor's Parcel No.: 909-037-009
Approval Date: April 7, 1999
Expiration Date: April 7, 2001
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
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
indemnity, 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 notity 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.
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~462PA98.PC.dOC
12
The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved Mitigation
Monitoring Program.
The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the appmved 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 appmved 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 Exhibit "F" (Building
Elevations), contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning
Division. All mechanical and roof equipment shall be screened from public view by
architectural features integrated into the design of the structure.
The colors and materials for this project shall substantially conform to the following list of
approved colors and materials and with Exhibit "G" (Color and Material 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.
Materials Colors
Concrete (walls) - Main Body
Concrete (walls) - Top Painted Band
Concrete (walls) - Middle Painted Band
Concrete (walls) - Painted Vertical Stripes
Diamond Accent Medallions - Painted Accents
Metal (roll-up doors)
Concrete Tile Roofing
Parker 5401 (Turtle Dove)
Parker 5403M (Otter)
Parker 5404D (Colonnade)
Parker 5403M (Otter)
Parker 5404D (Colonnade)
Parker 5401 (Turtle Dove)
U.S. Tile (Carmel Blend)
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) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by
providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid.
10.
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. The applicant shall revise Exhibits "D, E, F, G", (Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations,
Color and Material 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
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'D462PA98.pC.dOC 13
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.
12.
The applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
for permanent filing 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. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations
shall be readable on the photographic prints.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
13. A Consistency Check fee shall be per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
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).
Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the appreved
plan).
Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits
15.
An Administrative Development Plan application for signage shall be required for any
signage not included on Exhibits "D" and "F", or as amended by these conditions.
16. Roof-mounted equipment shall be inspected to ensure it is shielded from ground view.
17.
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.
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.
%%TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~462PA98,PC.dOC
19.
Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently
affixed re~ectorized 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 interior 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
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 spacas 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 surfaca 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.
20.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed
by this permit.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
21.
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.
22.
Submit at time of plan review complete exterior site lighting plans in compliance with
ordinance number 655 for the regulation of light pollution.
23. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
24.
All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1994)
25
Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire
alarm systems.
26. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system.
27.
Provide electrical plan including load calcs and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and
mechanical plan for plan review.
28. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
29.
A preconstruction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING%STAFFRPT~462pA98.pC.dOC
15
PUBLICWORKS DEPARTMENT
30,
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
31.
The OwnedApplicant shall comply with all the approved Conditions of Approval of the
underlying Tentative Parcel Map 28657 and subsequent approved phasing application.
32.
Approval of the vehicular full tum access (dght in, fight out, left in, left out) into the site from
Diaz Road should not be construed as a perpetual right of access. The City reserves the
rights to restrict this access to right in/fight out if the conditions prove to be unsafe and
certain vehicular controls are warranted (i.e. installation of raised median). Subsequently,
the OwnedDeveloper shall incur all associated design and construction costs for the
modifications.
33.
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,
34.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City fight-of-way.
35.
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
36.
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.
37,
A permit from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is required
for work within their right-of-way,
38,
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.
39.
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 reporL
shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the
construction of engineered structures and pavement sections.
40. 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
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~62PA98,PC,dOC
address special study zones and the geological conditions of the site, and shall provide
recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction.
41.
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.
42.
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.
43.
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
44.
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.
45.
Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department
and the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
46.
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.
47.
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 ceshier'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.
48.
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
49.
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:
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~462PA98.pC.dOC
17
Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C, and 1.00% minimum over
A.C. paving.
Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A,
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. 400,401 and 402.
All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
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.
All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed
through undersidewalk drains.
50.
The Developer shall construct the following public improvements in conformance with
applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the Department of
Public Works.
Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: sidewalks, drive
approaches, street lights, signing, striping and other traffic control devices as
appropriate
Storm drain facilities
Sewer and domestic water systems
Under grounding of proposed utility distribution lines
51.
A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil or Traffic
Engineer and reviewed by the Director of the Department of Public Works for any street
closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department
of Public Works.
52
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,
53.
This development must enter into an agreement with the City for a "Trip Reduction Plan"
in accordance with Ordinance No. 93-01.
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 District 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:
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFF{p'r~462pA98.pC.dOC
18
· Rancho Califomia Water Distdct
· Eastern 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.
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 subroittal.
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-I, The
developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 2000 GPM at
20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a
total fire flow of 2850 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)
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 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and
adjacent to 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 road(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).
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.
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)
64.
Prior 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)
65. 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
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEFTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~462pA98.pC.dO¢ 19
weather surface designed for 70,000 Ibs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet.
( UFC sec 902 and Ord 95-15)
66.
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)
67.
Prior to building construction, dead end roadways 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)
68.
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 )
69.
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 )
70.
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)
71.
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)
72.
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)
73.
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)
74.
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)
75. 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
\',TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~62PA98.PC.dOc 20
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 reads. (UFC Article 81)
OTHER AGENCIES
76.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated December 2, 1998, a copy of which
is attached.
77.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside Transit
Agency transmittal dated December 2, 1998, a copy of which is attached.
78.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California
Water District transmittal dated November 24, 1998, a copy of which is attached.
79.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the California Department
of Transportation (CALTRANS) transmittal dated December 4, 1998, a copy of which is
attached.
80.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Southern California
Gas Company transmittal dated November 24, 1998, a copy of which is attached.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, I understand and I accept all the above
mentioned 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 Planning Department approval.
Applicant Name
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA'OEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT%462PA98.PC.dOC
21
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
DATE: December 2. 1998
TO:
FROM:
CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ATTN: John De Gm~ge
~/fldREGOR DELLENBACH, Environmental Health Specialist IV
PLOT PLAN NO. PA98-0462 ( PARCEl_ 6 OF TPM 28657-1)
The Department of Enviromnental Health has reviewed the Plot Plan PA98-0462 and has no
objections. Sanita~ sewer and water services may be available in this area.
PRIOR TO ANY PLAN CHECK SUBNIITTAL for l,calth clearance, the following items are
required:
a) "Will-serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies.
b) Tl~ree 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 RetaiI Food Facilities Law. For specific reference, please contact Food
Facility Plan examiners at (909) 694-5022.
ct A clearance letter from the Hazardous Services Materials Management Branch (909) 694-5055
will be required indicating that the project has been cleared for:
· Underground storage tanks. Ordinance #617.4.
· Hazardous Waste Generator Services, Ordinance #615.3.
· Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with Ordinance #651.2).
· Waste reduction management.
3. Waste Regulation Branch (Waste Collection/LEA).
GD:dr
(gOq) 955-8980
NOTE:
CC:
Any current additional requirements not covered, can be applicable at time of Building
Plan review for final Department of Environmental Health clearance.
I)oug Thompson i' i'g! g ~ ~] r
i DEC
stand3b doc
December 2. 1998
'!998
Riverside Transit Agency
1825 Third Street
P.O Box 59968
Riverside, CA 92517
Phone: (909) 684-0850
Fa×: (909) 684-1007
Mr. John De Gange
City of Temecula Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
RE: PA98-0462
Dear Mr. De Gange:
We do not currently provide service to the site mentioned above but based on the size of the
project and our own plans for future growth. we are requesting that a bus turnout or a pad for a
bus stop be incorporated into the general design. To ensure accessibility to the available transit
services for residents and visitors of this development, RTA would like to suggest that the
following transit amenities should be provided by the owner/applicant to mitigate transportation
impacts.
Transit stops located at: Southwest corner of Diaz Road farside Dendy Parkway
A bus turnout. should be provided at the above stop location, if determined by City Traffic
Engineer to be necessary based on roadway cross section, travel volumes and speeds. I can
provide an exact location for the turnout/bus stop as the project progresses.
We appreciatd the opportunity to review this project. Your efforts to keep us updated on the status
of this request will be very much appreciated. Please do not hesitate to call me at (909)684-0850
should you need additional information or specifications.
Sincerely,
~Fina S. Clemente
Transit Planner
#232~sc
Kancho
W ter
Jeffrey L, ,%linklet
George ~I. Woods
November 24, 1998
John DeGange, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
NOV 2 F 7998
SUBJECT:
WATER AND SEWER AVAILABILITY
PARCEL NO. 6 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 28657-1
A PORTION OF APN 909-370-009
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0462
Dear Mr. DeGange:
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within
the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water and
sewer service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial
arrangements (including all in-tract facilities) 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:mc305/F012-T51FCF
c: Laurie Williams, Engineering Sewices Supervisor
STATE OF CAUFORNIA * BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PETE WILSON. Governor
Mr. John DeGange
AICP, Project Planner
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Dear Mr. DeGange:
December 4, 1998
08~Riv-15-6.62
Planning Application No. PA98-0462
We have reviewed the above referenced document and request consideration of the following comments:
Caltrans has concerns regarding the traffic impacts this proposal may have on our State Route 15/79.
We would like to see the Negative Declaration for this project as well as a copy of the site plan.
· 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 should 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.
If you have any questions. please contact Jim Belt3, at (909) 383-4473 or FAX (909) 383-5936.
cc:
Hideo Sugita, RCTC
Sincerely,
~,~"'LINDA GRIMES, Chi;~'~'
Office of Forecasting/
Development Review
DEC 9
The Gas Companp
November 24, 1998
Gas Co. Reference No. 98-274-OM
City. of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Attention: Development Review Committee
Re: Project Case Numbers: PA98-0462, PA98-0447, & PA98-0469
Area: SW Comer of Dendy Parkway & Diaz Road, SE Side of Via La Vida S/O
Solana Way, & Colt Ct. S/O Winchester Rd.
Location: Services can be supplied by extending our existing utilities or from existing
gas mains
We greatly appreciate the fact that you are intending to use natural gas in your next project. The
intent of this letter is for information only and to notify you that The Gas Company has facilities
in the area where the above-named project is proposed. Gas service to the project would be
provided from the nearest existing gas mains without any significant impact on the
environment. The service provided would be in accordance with the California Public Utilities
Commission at the time contractual arrangements are made.
The availability of natural gas service, as set forth in this letter, is based upon present conditions
of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility. The Gas Company is under the
jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission. We can also be affected by actions
of federal regulatory agencies. Should these agencies take any action which affects gas supply
or the conditions under which service is available, gas service will be provided in accordance
xvith revised conditions.
Additionall>', to better serve our customers. The Gas Company has a one call support center for
our future commercial and industrial customers. You can reach them Monday through Friday, 7
a.m. to midnight; Saturday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.. at 1-800-GAS-2000. We provide customers with
assistance.and info,."mation on billing questions, equipment replacement incentives. business
services. air quality, new construction incentives and other energy and money saving programs
and services. This one stop help or referral has trained program specialists who ~vill respond
quickly to your needs.
The Gas Company is ready to take the extra steps to make natural gas your fuel of choice.
Southern California
Gas Company
Sincetel,,,,
Technical Supervisor
Encl.
BEe 8 1998
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRp'r~62pA98.pC.dOC
22
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
: ~s required
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Environmental Checklist
PA98-0462 (Development Plan, Milgard Windows)
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
John De Gange, Project Planner
(909) 694-6400
26879 Diaz Road (at the southwest corner of Diaz Road and Dendy
Parkway [formerly Winchester Road])
RDS & Associates 30519 Walilea Ct., Temecula, CA 92592
BP (Business Park)
LI (Light Industrial)
To construct a 108,000 square foot industrial building on 7.5-acre
site.
The project is located in an area that has been recently graded,
street improvements, water and sewer are currently being
constructed within the vicinity of the project. Land is vacant to the
north, west, east and south.
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_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'R462PA98.PC.dOC
23
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.
X
X
Land Use Planning
Population and Housing
Geologic Problems
Water
Air Quality
Transportation/Circulation
Biological Resources
Energy and Mineral Resources
Hazards
Noise
Public Services
Utilities and Service Systems
Aesthetics
Cultural Resources
Recreation
Mandatory Findings of Significance
None
Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
X
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared
I find that although the proposed project could have a 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.
' I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required
! I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one
effect 1 ) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,
and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on
', attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless
mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects
that remain to be addressed.
~ 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 all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated
pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project.
Signature Date
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'I~,62PA98.PC.dOC
24
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
1.a.
1.b.
1.c.
1.d.
1.e.
Issues and Supporting Informatio~ Sources
Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source
1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17)
Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project?
Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
(Source 1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17)
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)
Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
estabiished community (including low-income or minority
community)?
Po(enlial~y
s~ra~cam
Irnpa~
potenf~ally
Significant Unless
Mmgauon
Incorporated
Lsss 'man
Significant
Impact
No
Impac~
X
X
X
X
X
Comments:
l.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) and the zoning designation of LI (Light Industrial). Impacts from all General Plan
Land Use Designations were analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report for (EIR) 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. 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 effects 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 minority community). The project is an industrial building that has been designed to
accommodate handle manufacturing and warehousing uses, and is surrounded by some currently
developed similar uses. There is no established residential community (including low-income or minority
community) at this site. No effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING%STAFFRPT~462PA98.PC,dOC
25
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would be proposal:
2.a.
2.b.
Issues and Supporting Inbrmaffi:m SOUrces
Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population
projects?
Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through project in an undeveloped area or
extension of major infrastructure)?
Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing?
Potentially
Signify:ant
Impact
Potenljally
Signfficant Unless
Incorporated
Less Than
Signi6cant
Impact
NO
Impact
X
X
X
Comments:
The project will not cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections. The project is an
industrial building for manufacturing and warehousing consistent with the City's General Plan Land Use
Designation of LI (Light Industrial). Since the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, and does
not exceed the floor area ratio for Light Industrial, it will not be a significant contributor to population growth
that will cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections. No 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 Light Industrial. 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 effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'r%462PA98.PC.dOC
26
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts
involving?
3.a.
~3.e.
~3.f.
;3.g.
i3.i.
Issues and Suppoffing In~ S~jrces
Fault rupture? (Source 1, Page 7-1, Figure 7-6)
Seismic ground shaking? (Source 1, Page 7-1, Fig. 7-6)
Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (Source 1,
Page 7-2, Figure 7-8)
Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard?
Landslides or mudflows?
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions form excavation, grading or fill?
Subsidence of the land? (Source 1, Page 7-2, Figure 7-8)
Expansive soils?
Unique geologic or physical features?
Potentiatly
Potentlally Significant Unless Less Than
S~gnificant Mitiga~on Significant
X
X
X
X
X
No
Impact
X
X
x
X
Comments:
3.b.c,
g,h.
The project may have a significant impact on people involving seismic ground shaking, seismic ground
failure (including liquefaction and subsidence of the land) and expansive soils, and will have a less than
significant impact to erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading
or fill. The project is located in Southern California, an area that is seismically active. Any potentially
significant impacts will be mitigated through building construction that is consistent with Uniform Building
Code standards. Further. preliminary soil reports have been submitted and reviewed as par~ of the
application submittal and recommendations contained in this report will be used to determine appropriate
conditions of approval. The soils 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 (including liquefaction and subsidence of the land), erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading or fill and expansive soils. After mitigation measures are performed,
no significant impacts 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.
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 forthe project. Modification to topography and ground
surface relief features will not be considered significant since modifications will be consistent with the
surrounding development. Potential unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill will be
mitigated through the use of landscaping and proper compaction of the soils as recommended in the soils
report. After mitigation measures are performed, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~62PA98.PC.doC
27
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.
WATER. Would the proposal result in:
4.8.
4.c.
4.d.
issues and Supl~ling Infon~atjon Sources
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate
and mount of surface runoff?
Exposure of people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding? (Source 1, Pg. 7-10, Fig. 7-3 and Pg.
7-12, Figure 7-4)
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen
or turbidity)?
Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body?
Potentially
PotentiaMy Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mlgation Signfficant NO
Impact Incoq)o~ted impact impact
X
X
X
X
4.e. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
Movements?
4.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?
4.g. Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
4.h. Impacts to groundwater quality?
4.i. Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater.
Otherwise available for public water supplies? (Source 2,
~ Page 263)
X
X
X
X
X
Comments:
The project will result in potentially significant 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 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 that is created. After mitigation measures are
performed, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
4.b The project may expose people or property to water related hazards such as flooding. According to
the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, the project site is subject is in
area which is subject to severe flood hazard from Murrieta Creek. Further, the site is located within
the limits of the 100 year Zone AE floodplain/floodway 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)o The site; however, has
recently been graded and elevated above the floodplain/floodway and a Conditional Letter of Map
Revision (CLMR) has been issued. A mitigation charge will be paid to the Murrieta Creek/Temecula
Valley Drainage Plan. The developer will be required to file a flood plain development permit with the
appropriate approvals from the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. A
hydraulic analysis was conducted to address the impacts of filling within the limits of the floodway
in accordance with section 15ol 2.200 of the Temecula Municipal Code. The project is also located
within a dam inundation area as identified in the City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~62PA98.PC.doc
28
4.c.
4.d,e.
4.f-h.
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.
After mitigation measures are incorporated, 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. 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 less than significant level. 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 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, parking and driveways. Due to the limited scale of the project, the additional
amount of drainage into Murrieta Creek will not be considered significant. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
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.
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
5.a.
Potentially
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Signi~cant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
No
Impact
X
Issues and Supporting Information Sources
Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? (Source 3, Page
6-11, Table 6-2)
Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
Alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause
any change in climate?
Create objectionable odors?
5.b. X
5.c. X
X
Comments:
5, b. The project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. There are no significant pollutants or sensitive
receptors in proximity to the project. No 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 impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
5.d.
The project will create objectionable odors during the construction phase of the project. These impacts
will be of short duration and are not considered significant over the long term. No other odors are
anticipated as a result of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTtA62PA98.PC.dOC
29
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in:
6.a.
6.b.
6.c.
6.d.
6.e.
!6.f.
Issues and Supporting Infoffnaffi)n SOUrces
increase vehicle tdps or traffic congestion?
Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves
or dangerous intersections or incompatible uses)?
Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby
USES?
Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? (Source 4,
Table 17.24)a), Pg. 17-24-9)
Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Source
4, Table 17.24, Pg. 12)
Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
Potenua.y
Significant
Impact
Less~n
S~ffi~t
~mpact
X
No
Impact
X
X
X
X
X
x I
Comments:
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 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
Winchester Road and Diaz Road. 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, 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 impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
The project will not result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses. The project is an
industrial building for manufacturing and warehouse use in an area with existing similar uses and planned
Business Park/Light Industrial uses. The project is designed to current City standards and has adequate
emergency access. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6,6,
The project will not result in hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists. Hazards or barriers to
bicyclists have not been included as part of the project. No 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 impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~462PA98,PC.doc
30
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the proposal result in impacts to:
7,a.
7.b.
7.c.
!7.d.
Issues and Supporting InlotmaUon Souices
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals
and birds)? (Source 1, Pg. 5-15, Figure 5-3)
Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? (Source
1, Pg. 5-15, Figure 5-3)
Localty designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest,
coastal habitat, etc.)? (Source 1, Pg. 5-15, Figure 5-3)
Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)?
(Source 1. Pg. 5-15, Figure 5-3)
WildJife dispersal or migration corridors?
No
Impact
X
x
X
x
X
Comments:
7.6.
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.
8.a.
ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
Issues and Suppoffing Informatjon Sources
Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
Use non-renewal resources in a wasteful and inefficient
maDDer?
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?
Potent jelly
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Signffic~nt Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
X
No
Impact
X
X
Comments:
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 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 during 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 seen as less than significant.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~462PA98.PC.dOC
31
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 impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
9.a.
9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
9.c,
Issues and Supl)offing information Sources
A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemical or radiation)?
Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan?
The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard?
Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health
hazards?
increase fire hazard in areas with flammabie brush,
grass, or trees?
Potenffillly
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Sign/~cant MiUgation Significant No
Irapat/ incorporated Impact Impact
X
X
X
X
X
Comments:
The project will result in a less than significant impact due to risk of explosion, or the release of any
hazardous substances in the event of accident or upset conditions. The Fire Department reviewed this
project according to the information provide by the applicant/tenant and found that there should be minimal
hazards if designed, built, and used according to the submitted plans. While the tenant will have
hazardous substances on the premises, both the Fire Department and the Department of Environmental
Health will regulate them. Both entities will review the project during plan check for compliance with
applicable codes and regulations and may require further mitigation measures based on the construction
drawing and internal layout. The mitigation of potential impacts will be mitigated prior to the issuance of
building permits. The applicant must receive clearance from the Fire Department prior to the issuance of
a building permit. 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 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 impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9,c.
The project will result in a less than significant impact 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. Reference response 9.a. 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 (Reference 9.a. & 9.c.). No 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.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~62PA98.PC.dOC
32
The project is an industrial building for manufacturing and warehousing in an area of similar uses and
proposed Business Park/Light Industrial uses. 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:
Issues and Supporting Inforrnati~n Sources
10.a. Increase in existing noise levels?
10. b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Impant incorporated trapact Impact
X
X
Comments:
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.
lO.b.
The project may expose people to severe noise levels during 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. The manufacturing
operations to be located within this facility may expose people to sever noise but the extent and duration
will be within industry standards. There will be no long-term exposure of people to noise. No significant
impacts are 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:
Potentially
Potentjally Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant NO
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Inconporated impact Impact
11 .a. Fire protection? X
11. b. Police protection? X
11 .c. Schools? X
11 .d. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X
~ 11 ,e. Other governmental services? X
Comments:
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 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.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING%STAFFRPT~62PA98.PC.dOC
33
11.d.
11.e.
The project will have a less than significant impact for the maintenance of public fadlities, including roads.
Funding for maintenance of roads is derived from the Gasoline Tax, which is distributed to the City of
Temecula from the State of California. impacts to cu~Tent 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. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services.
No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS: Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or
supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
Issues and Supp~ting Information Sourues
12 .a. j Power or natural gas?
12. b. Communications systems?
12.c. Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities?
Potefltially
Potenljally Signfficant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
No
Impact
X
X
X
12.d. Sewer or septic tanks? (Source 2, Pgs. 39-40)
12.e. Storm water drainage?
12.f. Solid waste disposal?
12.g. Local or regional water supplies?
X
X
X
X
Comments:
12.a-c
&g.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to: power or
natural gas; communication systems; water treatment or distribution facilities; local or regional water
supplies. These systems are currently being delivered in proximity to the site. No 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 have a less than significant impact with respect to the 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
that are implemented by the City. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~462PA98.PC.dOC
34
B13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
13.a.
13.b.
] 13.c.
issues and Suppo~ng Informalion Sources
Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
Create light or glare?
Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic affect?
Potenlially
Significant
Impact
Significant Unless
Mitigation
Irated
LessThan
Significant
Iragaol
X
X
No
impact
X
Comments:
13.a.
The project will not affect 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 impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
13,b.
The project will have a less than significant aesthetic effect in that the project is an industrial building in an
area of existing uses and the proposed Business Park/Light Industrial. Consequently the use will not have
a demonstrable negative impact on aesthetics. The building is consistent with other designs in the area
and the proposed landscaping will provide additional aesthetic enhancement. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
13.c.
The project will have a less than a significant impact from light and glare. The project will produce and
result in light/glare, as all development of this nature results in new light sources. All light and glare has
the potential to impact the Mount Palomar Observatory. The project will be conditioned to be consistent
with Ordinance No. 655 (Ordinance Regulating Light Pollution). No significant impacts are anticipated as
a result of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING%STAFFRPT~A62PA98.PC.dOC
35
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
issues and Suppodjng Infomlation Sources
14.a. Disturb paleontological resources? (Source 2, Fig. 15,
Pg. 70)
14.b. Disturb archaeological resources? (Source 2, Fig. 14, Pg.
67)
14.c. Affect historical resources?
14 .d. Have the potential to cause a physical change that would
affect unique ethnic cultural values?
14.e. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
Potentially
Potentleliy Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Signfficant
NO
impact
X
X
x I
X
Comments:
14.c.
The project will not have an impact on historical resources. The site has been previously graded and
resources would have been disturbed at that time. No historic resources exist at the site or are proximate
to the site. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
14.d. The project will not have the potential to cause a physical change that would affect unique ethnic cultural
values. Reference response 14.a.c. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
14.e.
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 impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
15.a.
15.b.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources
Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks
or other recreational facilities?
Affect existing recreational opportunities?
Potentially
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigatjon Significant No
X
X
Comments:
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\STAFFRP'PA62PA98.PC.dOC
36
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
Issues and Suppo~ng Inbtmatjo~ Sources
16.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 or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
16.b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term,
to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals?
16.c. Does the project have impacts that area individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
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).
16.d. Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Comments: None.
Potentlelly
Significant
impact
Pmlly
Significant Unless
Mitigation
incorporated
Significant
impact
No
Impact
X
X
X
X
EARLIER ANALYSES.
None.
SOURCES
2.
3.
4.
City of Temecula General Plan.
City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report.
South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
City of Temecula development Code
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~462pA98.pC.dOC
37
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~462PA98.PC.doc
38
Geoloqic Problems
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Processes:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Planning Application No. PA97-0462
(Development Plan, Milgard Windows)
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.
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Processes:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
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.
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.
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\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRp'DA62pA98.pC.doc
39
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:
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 centrolling 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).
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'r~462PA98.PC.doc
40
Transportation/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 Fees which contribute to mad
improvements and traffic signal installations.
Pay fees as computed by the Building Department.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Department of Public Works.
Increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion.
Payment of Traffic Signal Mitigation Fee.
Pay pro-rata share for traffic impacts to be determined by the
Director of Public Works.
Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits.
Department of Public Works.
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\DI=PTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~462PA98.PC.doc
41
Public Services
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:
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 Fees,
Pay current mitigation fees with the Riverside County Fire
Department.
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.
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.
Pay fees computed by the Department of Public Works.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Department of Public Works.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~462PA98,PC.dOC
42
Aesthetics
General impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
A potentially significant negative aesthetic effect.
Add landscaping throughout the project to screen views of the
building. Add further articulation to the building that will
provide aesthetic enhancement to the building.
Submit building construction plans, elevations, and landscape
plans which are consistent with the approved site plan
elevations, and landscape plans for review and approval.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Planning 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.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~462pA98.pC.doc
43
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~462PA98.PC.dOC
44
CITY OF TEMECULA
Project Site
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0462 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT- A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - APRIL 7, 1999
VICINITY MAP
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~462PA98.PC.dOC
CITY OF TEMECULA
EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - LI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL)
BP
'%'."r~
,,,,,>
EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - BP (BUSINESS PARK)
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0462 (Development Plan)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - April 7, 1999
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'R462PA98.PC.cioc
ITEM #4
RECOMMENDATION:
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
April 7, 1999
Planning Application No. PA99-0038 (Development Plan)
Prepared By: Patty Anders, Assistant Planner
The Community Development Department, Planning Division Staff
recommends the Planning Commission:
1. ADOPT Resolution No. 99- approving Planning
Application No. PA99-0038 (Development Plan) based
upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff
Report subject to the attached Conditions of Approval;
2. ADOPT the finding of environmental consistency with the
previously certified Environmental Impact Report No. 348
for the Campos Verdes Specific Plan.
APPLICATIONINFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVES:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING GENERAL
PLAN DESIGNATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
Lowe's Companies, Inc.
MCG Architects/Robert Bein, William Frost Inc.
The design, construction and operation of a 135,694 square foot
home improvement store with a 26,995 square foot garden shop,
and associated parking and landscaping on a parcel containing
approximately 17.52 acres.
The southeast corner of Winchester and Margarita Roads (within
Planning Area 4 of the Campos Verdes Specific Plan).
CC (Community Commercial)
SP (Campos Verdes Specific Plan - Commercial)
North:
South:
East:
West:
EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant
CC (Community Commercial)
C (Commercial)
LM (Low Medium Density Residential)
SP (Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan No. 263)
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~38PA99PCStaffRpt.doc
1
SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Existing commercial and retail uses
Single-family residential currently under construction and
(OS) open space
Vacant single-family residential parcels
Temecula Regional Mall currently under construction
BACKGROUND
A pre-application meeting was held on January 13, 1999, with written comments provided to the
applicant on January 28, 1999. Planning Application No. PA99-0038 (Development Plan) was
submitted to the Planning Department on February 3, 1999. A Development Review
Committee (DRC) meeting was held on February 25, 1999, with written comments provided to
the applicant on March 1. 1999.
The subject parcel is located within Planning Area 4 of the recently amended Campos Verdes
Specific Plan. The Campos Verdes Specific Plan Amendment No. 1 (PA99-0015) and the
corresponding General Plan Amendment (PA 99-0016) were approved by the Planning
Commission on February 3. 1999. and went before the City Council on March 23, 1999 with
Council Member Ron Roberts abstaining. The City Council approved both applications with a
4-0 vote on March 23, 1999. The Campos Verdes Specific Plan Amendment increased
Planning Area 4 from 12 acres to 17.5 acres of commercially zoned property. The General Plan
Land Use Map was also amended (PA99-0016) to correspond with the portion of Planning Area
5 that was changed from Low Medium Density Residential to a Commercial zoning
classification for consistency with the Specific Plan Land Use Amendment.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The design, construction and operation of a 135,694 square foot home improvement store with
a 26,995 square foot garden shop, and associated parking and landscaping on a parcel
containing approximately 17.52 acres.
The applicant provided Design Guidelines (Exhibit I) to comply with condition of approval No. 9
for the Campos Verdes Specific Plan. The Design Guidelines will be applicable for future
commercial projects within the Campos Verdes Specific Plan.
ANALYSIS
Site Design and Landscaping
The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Winchester and Margarita Roads.
The site has one point of ingress/egress off of Winchester Road that is restricted to a right-
in/right-out turning movement, and one point of access off of Margarita Road that allows a
northbound right-in/right-out and a southbound left-in turning movement. The project provides
circulation around the entire building, with parking located on the south, east and west sides of
the structure.
Staff had initial concerns regarding the siting of the loading docks on the west side of the
building along Winchester Road. Staff has worked with the applicant to screen the loading
docks off of Winchester Road as much as possible without impeding site-distance visibility at
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'R38PA99PCStaffRpt.doc
2
the driveway. The applicant added a landscape planter on the north side of the loading dock
screen wall, and has provided landscaping on both sides of the driveway to help screen this
area, In addition, the loading dock is over 1,700 feet back from the property line along
Winchester Road. The applicant also provided line-of-sight exhibits illustrating the view of the
loading dock when traveling north on Winchester Road (Perspective No. 1 ), traveling south on
Winchester Road (Perspective No. 2), and looking directly north into the loading dock area from
Winchester Road (see line-of-sight exhibits). Staff has determined that this area is adequately
screened and, as a result, will not be highly visible from Winchester Road.
The outdoor display area has been limited to the area under the canopy, west of the main entry
(as delineated on the site plan). The type of material to be displayed was recommended by the
applicant to be limited to finished products only. The intent is to keep this area clean and
uncluttered, and not have piles of small bags or unassembled products.
The customer pick up area is located at the southeast corner of the building, away from the
main entry. This area provides a large, shaded, blue awning that matches the awnings at the
main entry. The flow of traffic is one-way through the pick up area.
Landscaping is being provided around the entire development and the west building elevation.
Extensive landscaping is also provided along the north and east property lines to provide an
appropriate landscape buffer between the subject site and the future detached single family
residential lots. The project also provides a thirty-seven (37) foot Landscape Development
Zone (LDZ) along Winchester Road, and a thirty-two (32) foot Landscape Development Zone
along Margarita Road which provides a landscaped streetscape along the south and west
elevations consistent with the Campos Verdes Specific Plan.
Landscaping is also used throughout the parking area to break up and soften the asphalt of the
parking lot. The project is providing 27.2% landscaping which far exceeds the 15% landscaping
requirement of the Campos Verdes Specific Plan. Special attention was given to the slopes
along the north and east elevation due to the adjacent future residential parcels. The northern
slope ranges in width from 60 to 80 feet, and the east slope varies in width from 60 to 90 feet.
Staff feels these landscaped slopes are large enough and have been heavily landscaped so
that they will serve as an adequate buffer and interface between the subject site and the future
residential development. The project is conditioned to reserve the right for additional comments
by staff at the time of final construction landscape documents because the small scale provided
on the conceptual landscape plan did not provide a level of detail in some areas that is typically
required.
Traffic
The traffic impacts associated with this project were analyzed in the original Campos Verdes
Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) dated September 13, 1994. The EIR
analyzed not only the Campos Verdes traffic impacts, but all the approved Specific Plans and
the surrounding area of influence. In addition, the EIR analyzed significant planned projects
such as the Temecula Regional Center, Winchester Hills Specific Plan, and Winchester
Meadows. The original EIR for Campos Verdes estimated 16, 184 daily trips with the proposed
elementary school. The school has since been changed to a middle school which required the
site to double in size. As a result of the school site doubling, the average daily tdps have been
estimated to be reduced to 12,070 (see Exhibit J, traffic letter dated December 22, 1998). The
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~38PA99PCStaffRpt.doc
3
Campos Verdes Specific Plan Amendment and subsequent Environmental Addendum were
approved by the Planning Commission on February 3, 1999.
The proposed project was anticipated and previously analyzed in the Campos Verdes EIR. The
project is consistent with the Campos Verdes Specific Plan Amendment No. 1, the EiR and
subsequent Environmental Addendures subject to the zone change becoming effective. The
overall traffic impact of the Campos Verdes Specific Plan is less than originally anticipated and
mitigated for in the Campos Verdes EIR. Therefore, no additional analysis or mitigation
measures are required.
Architecture
The building is proposed as a concrete block structure with a mixture of smooth and exposed
painted block and varying building colors. Staff worked with the applicant to break up the mass
of the building and provide architectural relief to the elevations. However, because the north
and east elevations back to large, heavily landscaped slopes and will not be highly visible, staff
determined that these elevations would not need the same level of architectural detail as the
north and west elevations. The north and east elevations will, however, be broken up with
varying concrete blocks that are both smooth to exposed, varying building paint colors and
accent trim colors,
The building also provides varying roof heights and paint colors. The ma~n entry (south
elevation) is clearly defined with an extended, covered parapet and blue metal awnings on each
side of the entry. The south elevation was enhanced with additional windows and awnings; a
metal trellis; and square columns along the entire elevation with blue accent tile to match the
blue metal awning. The covered garden area is an open and bright area that incorporates a
different architectural style into the building, providing visual interest and more architectural
detail to the building. The garden area consists of decorative metal trellises, wrought iron and
block walls, and a metal seam roof to blend with the metal awnings. Given the large building
size, staff feels the applicant has met the intent of the design standards of the Campos Verdes
Specific Plan and that the structure will be compatible with the surrounding development in
terms of materials, bulk and mass, colors and overall design.
Parking
The parking standards for the Campos Verdes Specific Plan do not provide parking ratios for
various uses. The Campos Verdes Specific Plan only provides one parking ratio of 1 space per
250 square feet of building area for every use type. However, the Specific Plan does have an
"Exceptions to Development Standards" clause which gives staff the flexibility to determine if a
standard is inappropriate for a proposed use. Based on this permitted exception, staff is not
applying the Specific Plan parking requirement of I space per 250 square feet, and is applying
the City's Development Code parking requirements that is specifically for home improvement
uses which is I space per 500 square feet of building area. Based on the Development Code
requirements, the project would be required to provide 325 spaces, and the applicant is
providing 639 parking spaces. The Campos Verdes standard would require 651 spaces;
however, staff feels the 639 spaces provided is more than adequate for the proposed use.
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION AND EXISTING ZONING
The current General Plan land use designation is CC (Community Commercial) based upon
approval of the General Plan Amendment (PA99-0016). The zoning classification is SP
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~38pA99pCSIafI~pt.doc
4
(Campos Verdes Specific Plan) Commercial, pursuant to the recently adopted Campos Verdes
Specific Plan Amendment subject to the zone change becoming effective. The proposed use is
consistent with both the Land Use Designation of Community Commercial and the Campos
Verdes Specific Plan zoning classification of Commercial.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
A finding of consistency with the previously certified Environmental Impact Report No. 348 and
Addendums 1-4 adopted for the Campos Verdes Specific Plan has been made. All mitigation
measures contained in the original EIR No. 348 and associated Addendums are incorporated
herein and made a part of this approval.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
Planning Application No. PA99-0038 (Development Plan) is for the design, construction and
operation of a 135,694 square foot home improvement store with a 26,995 square foot garden
shop, and associated parking and landscaping on a parcel containing 17.52 acres. With
adoption of the Campos Verdes Specific Plan Amendment No. I (PA99-0015) and the
corresponding General Plan Amendment (PA99-0016), the project is consistent with the
Campos Verdes Specific Plan and the General Plan in terms of land use and development
standards.
FINDINGS
The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula, the Campos
Verdes Specific Plan and with all applicable requirements of State law and other
ordinances of the City. The proposed use is a permitted use in the Commercial zoning
classification of the Campos Verdes Specific Plan and has been designed in
conformance with the development standards of the Specific Plan.
The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety and general welfare. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan
for Temecula, the Campos Verdes Specific Plan and with all applicable requirements of
State law and other ordinances of the City.
The previously certified Environmental Impact Report No. 348 and Addendums 1-4
addressed all potential impacts associated with any environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, or on wildlife
resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~38PA99PCStaffRpt.doc
5
Attachments:
PC Resolution No. 99- - Blue Page 7
Exhibit A- Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 10
Traffic Letter dated December 22, 1998 - Blue Page 23
Design Guidelines - Blue Page 24
Exhibits - Blue Page 25
A. Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C. General Plan Maps
D. Site Plan
E. Elevations
F. Floor Plan
G. Landscape Plan
H. Line-of-Site
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~38pA99pCStaffRpt.doc
6
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT%38PA99PCStaffRpt.dOc
7
ATTACHMENT NO, 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0038 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) FOR THE DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 135,694 SQUARE
FOOT HOME IMPROVEMENT STORE WITH A 26,995 SQUARE
FOOT GARDEN SHOP AND ASSOCIATED PARKING AND
LANDSCAPING ON A PARCEL CONTAINING
APPROXIMATELY 17.52 ACRES AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 910-130-056, 910-130-059 AND
910-130-060.
WHEREAS, Lowe's Companies Inc., filed Planning Application No. PA99-0038, in
accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0038 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. PA99-0038,
on April 7, 1999, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City
staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in
opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of
the testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. PA99-0038;
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 and are hereby incorporated
by reference.
Section 2. Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application
No. PA99-0038 (Development Plan) hereby makes the following findings as required by Section
17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code;
A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula, the
Campos Verdes Specific Plan subject to the zone change becoming effective and with all
applicable requirements of State law and other ordinances of the City. The proposed use is a
permitted use in the Commercial zoning classification of the Campos Verdes Specific Plan and
has been designed in conformance with the development standards of the Specific Plan.
B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public
health, safety and general welfare. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Ran
for Temecula, the Campos Verdes Specific Plan subject to the zone change becoming effective
and with all applicable requirements of State law and other ordinances of the City.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTL'38PA99PCStaftRpt.dOC
8
C. The previously certified Environmental Impact Report No. 348 and Addendums
1-4 addressed all potential impacts associated with any environmental damage or substantially
and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, or on wildlife resources, as defined in
Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. A finding of consistency with the previously
certified Environmental Impact Report No. 348 and Addendums 1-4 adopted for the Campos
Verdes Specific Plan has been made. All mitigation measures contained in the original EIR No.
348 and associated Addendums are incorporated herein and made a part of this approval.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby
conditionally approves Planning Application No. PA99-0038 (Development Plan) for the design,
construction and operation of a 135,694 square foot home improvement store with a 26,995
square foot garden shop, and associated parking and landscaping on a parcel containing
approximately 17.52 and known as Assessor's Parcel Nos. 910-130-056, 910-130-059 and 910-
130-060, and subject to the project specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto,
and incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of April, 1999.
Ron Guerriero, 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 7th day of April,
1999 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~38PA99PCStaffRpt.doc
9
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
~\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~38PA99PCStaffRpt.doc
10
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA99-0038 (Development Plan)
Project Description:
The design, construction and operation of a 135,694
square foot home improvement store with a 26,995
square foot garden shop, and associated parking and
landscaping on a parcel containing approximately 17.52
acres.
Development Impact Fee Category: Retail Commercial
Assessor's Parcel No.: 910-130-056, 910-130-059, and 910-130-060
Approval Date: April 7, 1999
Expiration Date: April 7, 2001
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
General Requirements
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 Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code
Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15062. If within said forty-
eight (48) hour period the applicant has not delivered to the Community Development
Department o 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
2. 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
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~aPA99PCStaffRpt.dOC 11
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.
The proposed project is subject to the zone change of the Campos Verdes Specific Plan
Amendment No. 1 in Planning Area 5 becoming effective.
The Development Plan and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all
mitigation measures identified within EIR No. 348 and all the subsequent Addendums 1
through 4.
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.
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. 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 continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the
developer or any successors in interest. All existing trees shall be relocated behind the
proposed sidewalk.
The retaining wall at the northeast corner is proposed at a maximum height of
fifteen feet (15'). This wall shall be either a vegetated crib wall, or screened with
landscaping at the base of the wall so that the only visible portion of the wall is six
(6) feet in height.
Building elevations shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "F" (Building
Elevations), contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning
Division. All mechanical and roof equipment shall be screened from public view by
architectural features integrated into the design of the structure or painted the same
color as the roof.
The colors and materials for this project shall substantially conform to the following list
of approved colors and materials and with Exhibit "G" (Color and Material Board),
contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. Any
deviation from the approved colors and materials shall require approval of the Planning
Manager.
Material Color
Smooth or split face
Split-Face Concrete Block (Primary Color)
Smooth Concrete Block (Secondary Color)
Beige (RCP Block)
White (RCP Block)
%\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRpTG8pA99pCStaffRpt.dOC
12
Columns
Metal Coping and Metal Awning
Accent Stripe Color
Glazing
Metal Awnings
Tile Accent
Wrought Iron Fencing at Garden Area
Metal Roof at Garden Area
White To Match White RCP Block
Lowe's Blue
Lowe's Accent Red
Tinted Light Grey
Lowe's Blue
Lowe's Blue
Black
Translucent White
10.
Due to the small scale of the conceptual landscape plan, staff reserves the right to
provide additional comments and/or requirements (if applicable) to ensure that the
landscaping is consistent with the Campos Verdes Specific Plan landscaping
requirements.
11.
The outdoor storage area shall be limited to the area under the canopy on the south
elevation (west of the main entry) as labeled on the site plan. The material displayed
shall be limited to ten (10) feet in height, and shall be limited to finished products only.
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
12.
The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures in the previously certified
Environmental Impact Report No. 348 and all the subsequent Addendums I through 4.
13.
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.
14.
The applicant shall revise Exhibits "D, E, F, G", (Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations,
Color and Material 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.
15.
The applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department - Planning
Division for permanent filing 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. All labels on the Color and Materials
Board and Elevations shall be readable on the photographic prints.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
16.
No building permits shall be issued until the zone change of the Campos Verdes
Specific Plan Amendment No. 1 (PA99-0015) in Planning Area 5 becomes effective.
17. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
\\TEMEC_FS201%DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~8PA99PCStaffRpt.doc
13
18.
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:
Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of
submittal).
b. 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
19.
An Administrative Development Plan application for signage shall be required for any
signage not included on Exhibits "D" and "F", or as amended by these conditions. A
separate building permit shall be required for all signage identified on the approved
Exhibits "D" and "F", or as amended by these conditions.
20.
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.
21.
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.
22.
Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently
affixed re~ectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal,
displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than
70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space
at a minimum height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space
finished grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space
finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place,
at each entrance to the off-street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches,
clearly and conspicuously stating the following:
"Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces
not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~38pA99pCStaffRpt.doc
14
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.
23.
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
24.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with pdor to occupancy or any use
allowed by this permit.
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.
25. 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.
26. 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.
27. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any
construction work.
28. The Occupancy classification of the proposed buildings shall be M.
29. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
30. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations.
Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1,
1998)
31. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building.
32. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
33. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
34. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting,
fire alarm systems.
35. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1994
edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code, Appendix C.
36. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~38PA99PCStaftRpt.dOC 15
37. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with odginal signature on plans
submitted for plan review.
38.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing
schematic and mechanical plan for plan review.
39.
Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss
manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal.
40. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
41.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
42,
Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls require separate
approvals and permits.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
The following are Fire Department Conditions of Approval for this project. All questions
regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau.
43.
Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when the Fire Prevention Bureau
reviews building plans. 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.
44.
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 2000 GPM
at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 1850 GPM
for a total fire flow of 3850 GPM with a four (4) 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)
45.
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 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and
adjacent to public streets. Hydrants sl~all be spaced 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 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).
48.
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)
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~38PA99pCStaffRpt.dOC
16
47.
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)
48.
Prior 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. GVW. (UFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
49.
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. GV~N with a minimum AC thickness of
.25 feet. ( UFC sec 902 and Ord 95-15)
50.
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)
51.
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)
52.
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 )
53.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water
system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior 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 local water company signs the plans, 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 )
54.
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)
55.
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)
56.
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)
57.
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
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~38PA99PCStaffRpt.dOC
17
58.
59.
60.
61.
alarm system monitored by an appmved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station.
Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to installation.
(UFC Article 10)
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)
All manual and electronic gates on raquirad 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)
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 )
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, ~ammable liquids or any other
hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention
Bureau.(UFC 7901.3 and 8001.3)
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
62.
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
63.
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.
64.
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.
65.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the California Department of
Transportation prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or
proposed State Right-of-Way.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRp'F~38pA99pCStaffRpt. CiOC
18
66.
All improvement plans, grading plans, and raised landscaped median 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.
67.
The vehicular movement for the driveway on Margarita Road is restricted to a right
in/right oufJleft in.
The vehicular movement for the driveway on Winchester Road is restricted to right
in/right out.
69.
Approval of the median opening configuration on Margarita Road to allow a left turn into
the project site should not be construed as a perpetual right of access. The City
reserves the rights to close the proposed median opening if the existing conditions
prove to be unsafe and warrant the median closure. Subsequently, the
Owner/Developer shall incur all associated design and construction costs for the median
closure.
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
70.
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.
71.
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.
72.
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.
73.
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.
74.
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.
75.
The Developer shall obtain an encroachment permit from Caltrans prior to
commencement of any construction, including the proposed driveway, within the existing
State Right-of-Way.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRpT~38pA99pCStaffRpt.doc
19
76. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer
shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
b. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
c. Planning Department
d. Department of Public Works
77.
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.
78.
Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning
Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
79.
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.
80.
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 ceshier's
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.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
81.
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.
Ce
Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages
in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400, 401, and 402.
d. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and
adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility.
82.
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:
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS~c~LANNING\STAFFRpT~38pA99pCStaffRpt.doc
20
Improve Winchester Road (Urban Arterial Highway Standards - 134' PJW) to
include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, utilities (including
but not limited to water and sewer).
Improve Margarita Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' R/W) to include
installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, utilities (including but not
limited to water and sewer), and raised landscaped median.
83.
The City of Temecula is in the process of constructing the widening of Margarita Road
as pad of the Capital Improvement Project No. PW97-07. If any of the improvements
installed by the City are to be modified to accommodate the improvements proposed for
this development, the OwnedDeveloper shall incur all cost associated with design
modifications and construction cost. Including but not limited to the following items:
Revise raised landscaped median design to accommodate a minimum 150 foot
long 10 foot wide left turn pocket to the project entrance on Margarita Road.
Relocate street light in conflict with the proposed entry driveway on Margarita
Road.
Relocate any other appurtenances in conflict with this projecrs proposed
improvements.
84.
The Developer shall construct the following public improvements in conformance with
applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the Department of
Public Works.
Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: pavement, curb and
gutter, median, sidewalk, drive approach, and storm drain facilities
b, Sewer and domestic water systems
c. Under grounding of proposed utility distribution lines
85.
A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil or Traffic
Engineer and reviewed by the Director of the Department of Public Works for any street
closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department
of Public Works.
86.
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.
87.
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
88. The existing Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Caltrans dated
October 13, 1995 shall be amended to allow a right in/right out vehicular movement onto
Winchester Road.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING%STAFFRPT~38PA99PCStaffRpt.doc 21
89. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
a. Rancho California Water District
b. Eastern Municipal Water District
c. Department of Public Works
90. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805.
91. 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.
92. 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.
OTHER AGENCIES
93. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of
Riverside Department of Environmental Health's trensmittal dated February 22, 1999, a
copy of which is attached.
94. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California
Water Districts transmittal dated February 17, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
95. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Department of
Transportation transmittal dated March 12, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
96. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District transmittal dated March
22, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
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\STAFFRPT~38PA99PCStaffRpt.dOC
22
General Manager-Chief Engineer
1995 MARKET STREET
ILIVERSIDE, CA 92501
909/955-1200
909/788-9965 FAX
51180 I
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
City of Temecula
Temecula. Galifomia g2580-g038
Attention:
Ladies and Gentlemen:
The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in incorporated
cities. The District also does not lan check city land use ~ses, or provide State Division of Real Estate le~ers or
other flood hazard repo~s for sucg ~ses. Dis~ ~mment~recommeneations for such cases are no~ally limited
to items of specific ~nterest to the Dist~ includin~ Dist~ct Master Draina · Plan facilities, other re ionat flood
control and dmina e facilities which ~uld be ~nsidered a logical componenPor e~ension of a master ~an s stem,
and Dist~ Area 8rainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition, info~ation of a general n~re is
provided.
The Dist~ct has not reviewed the proposed proje~ in detail and the followin~ checked comments do not in any way
constitute or imply Dist~ approval or endo~ement of the proposed proje~ ~th respe~ to flood h~ard, public
health and safe~ or any other such issue:
/ This project would not be impaled by Dist~ Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of
re~ional ~nterest proposed.
This proje~ involves Dist~ct Master Plan facilities. The Dis~ict will acce t ownership of such facilities on
w~en request of ~e Ci~. Facilities must be constructed to Dist~ct stan~rds. and Dist~ plan check and
inspe~ion will be required for Distfl~ a~ptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be
required.
This project proposes channels sto~ drains 36 inches or lar~er in diameter, or other facilities that could be
considered regional in nature an~or a Io i~l e~ension of the adopted
Master Drainage Plan. ~e Distdct woul~ consider a~epting ownemhip of such fa~hbes on wn~en request
of the Ci~. Facilities must be constructed to Distdct standards, and Distri~ plan check and inspection wirl
be required for Dist~ acceptance. Plan check, inspe~ion and administrative fees ~11 be required.
/ This project is Io~ted ~thin the limits of ~e Distd~'s ~ ~R~ ~ ~C~ ~ ~ Area
I T f K ~ ~
whichever comes ~rst. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effe~ at the time of issuance of ~he actual
permit.
GENERAL INFORMATIOB
This project ma re uire a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES permit from the State Water
Resources Con~ol Board. Clearance for ~radin~, recordalton, or other final approva?should not be given until the
Ci~ has determined that the project has been ~ranted a permit or is shown to be exempt.
If this pro ect involves a Federal Emergency Management A~ency (FEMA) mapped flood plain, then the Ci~ should
require t~e applicant to provide all studies ~lculations, plans and other ~nfo~ation required to meet FEMA
requirements and should furlher require that ~e appli~nt obtain a Condi~onal Le~er of Map Revision CLOMR)
p~or to ~radin~. recordation or other final approva of the proje~, and a LeRer of Map Revsion (LOMRS pror to
occupancy.
If a natural watercou~e or mapped fio~ plain is im acted by this proje~, the Ci~ should require the a light to
obtain a SeXton ]60]/~603 A~reement from the Ca~mia Depaflment of Fish and Game an~ a Clean ~ater Act
Section 4~ Pe$it from the U.S. Asy Co~s of Engineers. or ~Ren coffesponden~ from these a encies
indicatin~ the project is exempt from these requirements. A Clean Water A~ Se~on 40~ Water Quail Cefl~cation
may be required from the local California Re~ional Water Quali~ Control Board prior to issuance of ~e Co~s 404
permit.
Very truly yours,
STUARTE. MCKIBBIN
Senior Civil Engineer
Date:
JMonday February 22, 1~ 4:18pm -- From ~' "~03' -- Page 21
82/22/1 )99 15:59 95589m CAC
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
DATE: February 22, 1999
FROM:
RE:
CITY OF TEMECI~A PLANNING DEPARTMENT
A tty Anders, Assistant Planner
~dE HARRISON, Environmental Health Specialist III
PLOT PLAN NO. PA99-0038
PAGE 82/83
1. The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the Plot Plan No. PA99-0038 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 establi.ghment 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 examineas at (909) 694-5022.
c) A clearance letter from the Ha:~rdous Services Materials Management Branch (909) 694-5055
will be required indicating that the project has been cleared for:
· Underground storage tanks, Ordinance#617.4.
· Hazardous Waste Generator Services, Ordinance #6153.
· HaTardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with Ordinance #651.2).
· Waste reduction management.
3. Waste Regulation Bxanch (Waste Collection/LEA).
CH:dr
(909) 955-8980
NOTE:
Any current additional requirements not covered, can be applicable at time of Buildi,g
Plan review for final Department of Environmental Health clem-ance.
cc: Doug Thompson
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, TRANRPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT 8, 464 W. 4th STREET, 6th FLOOR
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92401-1400
GRAY DAVIS, Governor
March 12, 1999
08-Riv-79-R3.300
Ms. Patty Anders
Temecula Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
PA 99-0038 (Lowe's Home Center)
Dear Ms. Anders:
We recently received the development plans for the above project from MCG Architects
and we request consideration of the following comments.
1. Additional and more detailed cross-sections perpendicular to and starting from
Winchester Road easterly curb flowline and extending at least 15 meters easterly
preferably prepared at 1:100 horizontal and 1:50 vertical are needed.
Proposed entrance/exit from Winchester Road should be utilized for fight-in and
fight-out vehicle movement only.
K17B "No Left Turn" from Caltrans Uniform Sign Chart should be utilized
at the exit to Winchester Road.
Area drains sufficient to fully intercept the storm water on the area between the
easte~y curb on Winchester Road and the westerly curb on the proposed
development are required.
Storm drain line and additional catch basins to intercept the storm water generated
by the areas located northerly and easterly of the proposed downstream catch basin
along Margarita Road are required.
Hydrology and hydraulics calculations are required to verify that the proposed
drainage system will work prope~y. Also please verify that the existing 24" RCP,
which is proposed as the downstream connection facility, will be able to handle
the development storm flow.
Caltrans Standard Plan A88 "Case E' shall to be used for the handicap ramps
at the curb return locations.
All numerical information or dimensions within the state right-of-way shall be
shown in metric units only.
Some dimensions shown are not consistent from one sheet to another sheet.
For example, the halffight-of-way width of Winchester Koad is shown with
varying widths and we believe that the correct dimension is 67 feet or 20.43
meters. Plans need to be checked for accuracy and consistency.
10. The landscaping at the vicinity of the entrances/exits should be checked to not
interfere with sight distance for motorist.
,
,
Ms. Patty Anders
March 12, 1999
Page 2
If you have any questions, please contact Romy Balanza, Development Reviewer, at (909)
383-6212 or FAX (909) 383-5936.
Sincerely,
LINDA GRIMES, Chief
Office of Forecasting~
IGRJCEQA Review
cc: Bill Keller, RBF Engineers
Water
February 17, 1999
Ms. Patty Anders, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AVAILABILITY
A PORTION OF LOT 141 OF MAP BOOK 8, PAGE 359
APN 910-130-056, APN 910-130-059 AND APN 910-130-060
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0038
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
99\SB :mc033~F012-T1 ~FCF
c: Laurie Williams, Engineering Services Supervisor
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
TRAFFIC LETTER DATED DECEMBER 22, 1998
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'F~8pA99pCStaffRpt.dOC
23
E0-22-S8 TIlE GB:5] PM S lltt ASSOCIATES FAX N0. 7]4 78II29
WILBUR
SMITH
ASSOCIATES
5NGINEk'RS · PLANN-3I, S
Decemb~ 22. 1998
P. a2
Mr. Nate Pugsl~
Project Manager
Wood.si&e Homes of Cal:fomia. inc
3D213 Band~, Sujm 130
P,~zcho SanmMm'g:,.rim, CA 92688
CanTpos Verdes Specific Plan Update - CiW Planni=g Departmere Quadons Concerning
Ccmsi~ency With The Specific Plan 'EIK Traffic Study Findings
Dem' Mr. Pugsley:
in response to questions raised by City of Temecu/a Planning Depm',mnem surf, Wilbur Smith
Associ~e~ (WSA) k:t~ prepared the following discussion of consistency between potential traffic
impacts associated with ~e cu~rea~tly .m'x:rpc~ed Campos Vetdes Specific Pbm ~ traffic inlpacts
ad~'e,,~ed in the cri~nal Campos Vcrcles Specific Plan .e. aK Traffic Study. The i.s~sues :,xtdressed
herein include: 3 cnm,~--a'anve analysis of the land use com~one-nLs; traffic g~-ner~tion impaz':s; and
an asscsr, nent of cen~i steucy, 2ore a potential traffic impa~-t perspcc=ve.
Overvicar of Spec{'i2c Plan .~]R Traffic Impac"z Stud),
The Cza~.~s Verde~ Specific Plan EER Traffic impact Srady prepared for Specific Plan t ;nclude2
an analysis of the proje~ imp. acts at f'ull deve/uprnent of the ~i~e The analysis ass'ume, d an
apm'o,'crm. a~e nine-year develc~ment schedule for Cae Campos Verdes project. l)m'ing this
deveLopmen.'. l:enod, it was conserwadvely assumed that all of the appraved Specific Pla~s wilt:in
the Cir/of Tem~ala and surrcu~ding area of influtmee wouad aleo build out. Additionally, the
magic study assre'ned bail d o~ of a12 plmmed (bu~ not yet %,lax oved) proj eels wi~hln an i_.ap~ oximal e
t~x~-mfie r',~dius of the ptojet:t This included sigaificant planned projecm ,suszlx as W'mchesler Hills
(52.22~, Temecula Regional Center (.q.P. 263), and Winchester Meado,ns. Although these off-
si~ c~'-velol:ar~g a~oms actually ,'e~eser. azd a forecast year which was well beyond the nine-
year ume flame Cvear 2000) identified in the study, it was important tc ccmsider the ~,im,re
cumulative effects of these projets nn Iraroe flows in the study area. It is clear at this time that
~ome of these proj ec't,s w~ not likely be built-out for another ten years.
.~.~-, Naze
De"ember ~",
P~g~ 2
WILBUR
SMITH
ASSOCIATES
The S2eci~c Plan El ~raffic m,,l?~is employed the ~e of a ~fmed vemior, of ~e SWA?
~pu~--b~ ~c fcrec~ model w~ch later w~ mobfled ~d m~cd ~ the Ci~ of
T~a ~ P~ C~afion H~ Tr~c Mo~I. ~e ~c f~e~g model ~owed
tbr a ~cr: ~e ~s~m~ of lmg-t~n c~ve ~lopm~t U'~c ~mp~u m ~e ~cm~
,~e C~s V~d~ proice. ~e ~c ~ysis mclu~d ~ ~.~u~on of weekly ~1)', ~m.
p~-hou', ~ p-re. p~-ho~ c~didss.
Land ~se assnmt~ons and associated ~:~p generanero es-tirm~t~s for ~e o~ly ~roved C~os
V~ Specific Pl~ ~e ~v~ ~ ~e ~n~ Tables [ ~rough 3. T~p ~,~ ra~ ~ed
· e specific pl~ ~dy w~e b~ed ~ "~ic~" ~y m~ d~eloped ~' ~e ln~m~ of
T~ En~s for ~he in~vid~ i~d use ca:~i~. Pe~-lm~ ~p ~a~on for
Fcject sire w~ ~u~ly ~l~ed ~thm ~e ~c for~t modeSrig pro~
Curtenth' Proposed Campos P~rdes Specific Plan
TabIe 4 summarizes me currently Froposed laud use for sh: Campos V~des Specific Ham Bvild-
ous of the l~oj ect is expected to occm' within a five to six-year period Cc~' 2oo5). Trip generaxion
for the curretrdy preFosed C~cn~cs Vetdes Speckle Plan is based on the m~h-t current edition of tSe
Ins~mte ofTranqm:ic~x Engaee~ Trip Getxcradon. Daily and peak-hour mp generation for the
Froposed Foje~, is presented m Table 5.
Cons~tency wi;h the Ca. mpos Vetdes Spec~c Plan E[R Traffic Study
The uly, k'ued la',~.~c generation study. has maintam~ consistency. with the original Soeeific Plma
Traffic Study The up&~erd traffic ge:lera~on study differs from r.h.e earlier ~2d,] m that it
DEC-22-98 TUE GE:52
~'. Nate PugsIcy
December 22, 1998
Pag~ 3
~4!LBOR SrlITH ,~SOCIfiTES F~ ND. 714.:791109
WILBUR
SMITH
ASSOCIATES
P. a4
zncomcrazes nexv tri? g~-nera~on res-~'ch data and reflects actual developmere ~ope~als
pw.~scd home i~,',~, ovcrncn~/har:iwarz superstore within C~e con~:ner~ center) which
:his
The me,': ~.'?Aopn~-.~e measure of conmime2..', fi-c~n a traffic impact p~'A:aective. ~houj. d be based on
a comparison of traffic generation. Tab]e~ 2 and 3 pro'vide a sumram7 of vehicle wip generation
~su.n:pti~ms included in the original Spec~ 8c Plan RIP. TraPfi c Stud'/. The referscod devel opalcot
ate. as are de~:'at, d in Figure 1- A.l~mugk the con~gura:/~ of'land use develop. ~en: areas wi~bm the
Specific Plan h~ ben modified in the cutTeat de~'elopment proposal, the modiScations are
relaU~'el7 minor and roll aij. ow for a comp~-~.~n of trg~c generanon impacts on a sub-area baxts,
Toe c~g:nal EIR Traffic S~udy wa~ ~ased on atctal 7, ip generation of ]6, i. 84 daft3· wips, 997 a.m.
pex&-ho~ raps, ar, d 1,179 p.m. peak-hm~r tops
As shown in Table 5, ~ip g~neradon for the currently proposed Campos Verdes Specific Plan f--Als
within the ~y at~d p-re. peak hour mp gcn~.-r'adon tw.a~ included in ~c original Speck tic Plan E]R
7.'-gEc Study DaiLy vehicle wip geaerau. cn is esur~mt-d at 12,070 vehxcle trips and evening peak-
hour :Tip g~cra~on is e~-j'mated to be I,I23 vehicle :rips During me race'mug peak hoax, the
carte:fly proposed Specific Plan ~s esumated to g~era~ a total cf 1:067 vehicle rlps. This is 70
~'ehicle ~s ~eater th~ was estixtnted ~n the or/Sinai Specific Plan ErR Traf~c Stt~dy k shoulci
be noted fl~t the c'm'rendy prcrposed middle school in Ar~a 6, with a typical ~nrolh'ncnt of 1,050
suedend: results in a su,h.'k'mually ~gb. cr morning peak hoax top generation than was esrimamd for
the residential use ~sumed in the orignal ~:affic sru~ and has a higher top generation than the
elementary ~cbool mclud~ in the ~Fpt oved Spedtic Plan. Although '.he total rncrrning peak hour
trip generaion is slightt?' higher for -.he current pro~ect, the mp gmeraticrn e~-n.m_-t- should be
c~nsidered as $ve since no tr.p recinct:c~ has been assumed fc~ interna~ trip making or pass-
by ~rips associated with school trafEc.
of the recom'meed~ access ccc~.gur~c'n, the upda~d Sp~c PI= is gm~ly ~ui~t
od~al S~c H= ~ ~ d~ ~ be nowd ~ ~ of ~e m~ ~-~
zirc~a~ layout howeve m~ ~c~sibilib, b~ ~ m~n~ed. ~is ~ ~pc~t to fie
~on ot'~ec~s~ ~c ~,1,~ on the ~jac~t ~e~ wh~ ~avel~g b~c~
afe~ wjth~ ~e Spcd~c PI~ site.
DEC-22-9~ TEE_ :~:S3 ~
D~ce'mbcr '>' 1998
Pzge ,1
Wi1RUR SMITH ~SOC[fiTES F~ NO. 714~781109
WILBUR
SMITH
ASSOCIATES
p.
Mos: of ~e ~commend~ roadway improvemeats m the vici.~t3' of ~he site are eith~ comp~ed c:
· are c.Ji.'r,.-'nd) uuder cor~trucljcm. X new slgnaj vciJl be insta~cd at the mtersecuan of Mazgaci::
Road and North Gainoral Keamy by the fourr. b. q~az~er of I999, wh~ the ,~:om~'~d: Mail olo~ns
A new sigaa} ca Mazga'ita 'z Campos Verdcs Lane would be timed to eorr?.spond to exkhcr tke
d~eiop. rnem of ~ae Powr. Center compo=eut of the Regional Cent= properD' (ca the we~ side of
Marganm Rcxad) c~ the Car~cs Vetdes cc, m~,.lal center ~itc (ol: ~c ea~z rode of Mm-gaz~ta Road).
The ~denmg of Not'da Gtencr. tl Kearny Road would ILkely bc accemplished in two phases. Fint
the intersection aproach would bc widened to coincide with the opcn~n~ of th~ Pr~ Mall
and thin the r~m3ainde:r office Ncct. h General Kcamy (aluag the project frontage) would be 'widea~
a~ :h¢ Cam?os Vcrct~ project ia ci=vciopccL
Sheaid you or City of n/eme:ula Planning D~partmem s~aff have any clue~tions coacerzmg f. nis
¢\,aj uzdon. please feel flee to cont. azt m~
Sinc:r=ly,
V~'H RL"R SMITI:t ASSOCI~.TIES
Rob~.-n A. Davis
Ptincipa2 Tr~mspormtion
I:L~.D: rad
Enclosure
DEC-22-.gB lIFE_ .".E:53 ?ll WILBUR SMII'H ~SOOIATES FP, X NIl 7149781109 P. 3~
Table 1
Assumed Land Use
Campas Verdes
A. BY PLANNING ARE~
DevelopmgmF~atat~ G~ S/2z Un/~
~ 1 Pacel 8 & 9 13.5
~ 2 P~t 7 10.4 93 Net Ac
~ 3 ~14r5 & 6 ~ 3~ D.U.'s*
~ea 4 P~ 1 13.5 10
A~a 5 P~ 2 & 3 ~i7 267
~ 6 ~4 27.1 141 D.U.'s
i ~ 7 '~215 2~ 6fi D.U.'s
To~
Open Space
Cc.rft~er~al Office
Multi Fanfly R~idenfial
Neighlx~nood Rcm~ Center
Multi Farofly Residential
Sir4le Family Residential
Single F~nily Residential
B. BY I, AND USE CATEGORY
Land Use
Single Family Residential
Multi Family Rrsid~ntia!
Ncighborhoai Retail Ccmer
Commer~i~ Offjc~
Unit
~ D.U.'s
644 D.U.'s
13.5 Ac.
10.4 A~
DEC-2b915 TLE :E:53 Prl t~!LBUR SrlITH .~5CCiATES F~ NO, 7147,-781109 P. O7
Table 2
Vehicle Trip Generation Rates
Campos Verdes
USE
Residential:
Single F~mi/y
Multi-Fam.~
Retail:
Nei~borhoecl Center (A12~r,ax. 110 Bf "*) Net Ac
Net Ae :~ 7~~~
LOCATION OF
LAND USE
pla.~in~ Are. as 6 & 7
Ptanni~,,, Areas 3 & 5
Platmin~4
~anning .4a"ea 2
· DEC-,p_p-9~ lOS C,~:54
DEC-~2-96 l'(JE_ ~6:54 FH ~ZLBUR SNITH ~SOCIATES FP.X NO. 714~78)109 P. O~
Uj
r,~
rr
,,,
UJ
}-
09
'l-
Z
I
n ~
--..
. DEG-22-~ ~ ~;D~ ~ ~Lu~u~ S~Th ~SOGI~TES F~X NO. 714~7811:9 P. 11
p
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
DESIGN GUIDELINES
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~38PA99PCStaffRpt.doc
24
DESIGN GUIDELINES:
LOWE'S HOME IMPROVEMENT
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
THE PURPOSE OF THESE GUIDELINES IS TO ENSURE UNIFORMITY AND
CONFORMANCE TO THE CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC PLAN AND THE
SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT AND THE GENERAL COMMUNITY DESIGN
GUIDELINES.
This project is located at the Southeast corner of Winchester Road and Margarita
Road. The Site consists of 763,171 Gross S.F. and 720,046 Net S,F., or 16.56 Acres.
BUILDING DESIGN: NOTE: All designs shall be in accordance wiffi ~e Campos Verdes Specific Plan
Design Guidelines. Issues NOT addressed in the Campos Verdes Specific Plan Design Guidelines shah be in accordance
with the Ci~ of Temecula Design Guidelines.
Materials shall consist of earth toned materials which can include split face
concrete block and white smooth faced and split faced concrete block.
(EIFS) Type exterior insulation and finish system may also be utilized provided it
is of a complimentary, earth-toned palette. Roof elements shall be of
standing seam metal or other material such as slate which would
compliment the rough texture of the masonry and add a counterpoint to th~
color scheme.
Building facades shall incorporate the same materials and trim treatment
used on the front facade. Care should be taken to enhance all elevations of
the building, which would be visible from the roadways and adjacent homes.
If the rear of the buildings are not screened from view by very high slope
banks and planrings, those elevations will be treated in the same manner as
the front of the buildings.
[] Accent trim color shall be incorporated on all sides of the building.
Wrought iron screening and all fencing shall be black, or of a color which
tends to blend into the background, or "disappear" by the use of color
complimentary to its surroundings.
Retail. Enlertainment, Hosgitality. Office ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- ~ ~- ~
City of Temecula
Design Guidelines
Lowe's Home Improvement Center
Page 2
Roof mounted equipment shall be painted out to match color of roof.
a Downspouts or roof access ladders shall not be visible from any street.
a All enclosures shall incorporate similar or complimentary materials used in the
main building
SITE DESIGN: NOTE: AH designs shall be In accordance with the Campos Verdes Specific Plan Design
Guidelines. Issues NOT addressed In the Campoe Verdes Specific Plan Design Guidelines shah be In accordance with
the City of Temecuia Design Guidefines.
[] Site shall be designed to meet all ADA standards.
Site and parking lot lighting for security and flood lighting of building facades,
signs or landscaping shall conform with applicable Mount Palomar lighting
restricted zone requirements.
[] Parking shall conform to City of Temecula standards.
[] Enhanced paving will be incorporated into the front/entry hardscape.
[] Design for fire truck access and proper radii shall be incorporated into all fire
access lanes.
LANDSCAPING: NOTE: All designs shall be in accordance with the Campos Verdes Specific Plan Design
Guidelines. Issues NOT addressed In the Campos Verdes Specific Plan Design Guidelines shah be In accordance with
the City of Temecula Design Guidefines.
-n
Enhanced landscaping setbacks along Margarita Road and Winchester
Road shall conform to the Campos Verdes Specific Plan Guidelines for these
Roads. These Roads are designated as "major community streetscenes" and
serve as the major access and egress into the Campos Verdes community.
The landscaping shall emulate and reinforce the proposed streetscene
treatment along the Regional Center.
Winchester Road will continue the grand boulevard thematic landscape
treatment proposed along the adjacent Temecula Regional Center, as
Winchester road is the Main access to Campos Verdes. A minimum thirty-
seven foot {37') wide LDZ and a parking setback of thirty-seven feet (37')
from the curb will be maintained.
ca Landscaping in the vicinity of fire lanes shall be of appropriate species, to
ensure planting material does not infringe upon truck/ladder movement.
City of Temecula
Design Guidelines
Lowe's Home Improvement Center
Page 3
SIGNAGE: NOTE: Atl designs sbui] be in accordance With the Campos Verdes Specific Plan Design
Guidelines, Issues NOT addressed in the Campos Verdes Specific Plan Design Guidefines sba]] be in accordance With
the Cit7 of Temecuia Design Guidefines.
Q
One free-standing monument sign shall be located at each entry drive,
and/or one monument sign may be located as a corner I.D. sign on the
corner of Margarita road and Winchester Road.
a Sign illumination is to be from a concealed source.
a Signs shall be of materials compatible with the building materials and color
scheme.
EXHIBIT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~38PA99PCStaffRpt.doc
25
CITY OF TEMECULA
PROJECT SITE
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
CASE NO. - PA99-0038
EXHIBIT- A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- APRIL 7, 1999
VICINITY MAP
CITY OF TEMECULA
9\ SP
SP
CASE NO. - PA99-0038
EXHIBIT- B
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - APRIL 7, 1999
ZONING MAP
CITY OF TEMECULA
CC
BP
SC
CASE NO. - PA99-0038
EXHIBIT- C
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- APRIL 7, 1999
GENERAL PLAN MAP
Z
×
LId
il; -~'.
.! s, amal
II
,I
Z
X
t-..
,{ ,i
Z
rn
X
iii
UJ
I--
zn
~z
Z