Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout091599 PC AgendaIn compliance with the Ame~cer. s with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate In this meeting, plssss contact the office of the Community Development Department at (909) 694-6400. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure acc_et'__e~bllity to that meeting [28 CFR 35. t02.35.104 ADA Title II] TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION September 15, 1999, 6:00 P;vl 43200 Business Park Drive Council Chambers Temecula, CA 92590 Resolution Next In Order #99-033 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Guerriem FLAG SALUTE: ROLL CALL: Fahey, Guerriero, Mathewson, Naggar, 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 August 18, 1999 Minutes PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS Case No: Applicant: Location: Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Parcel Map) and PA99-0238 (Development Agreement). Scott Newcomb, Hiram-Hill Development Co., LLC 610 Newport Center Dr., Newport Beach, CA 92660 Located on the south side of Via La Vida between Margarita Road and Solana Way (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 911-170-078, 911- 170-085) Proposal: Planning Application No. PA98-0447 is a request to subdivide 6.31 acres of land into twenty-four (24) residential lots and Planning Application No. PA99-0236 is a request for a Development Agreement to allow a minimum five (5) foot side yard setback. Environmental Action: Mitigated Negative Declaration Case Planner: Thomas Thornsley Recommendation: Recommend Approval F:\DEPTS\pLANNING\WIMBERVG\PLANCOMM\AGENDAS\1999X9-15-99.doc Case No: Planning Application No. PA99-0273 (Development Agreement between Pala Rainbow LLC and the City of Temecula) Applicant: City of Temecula Location: South of State Highway 79 (South) at the intersection with Pala Road in the City of Temecula Proposal: To approve a Development Agreement with Pala Rainbow LLC Environmental Action:Adopt a Negative Declaration Planner: Dave Hogan Recommendation: Recommend approval of the Development Agreement to the City Council Case No: Planning Application No. PA99..0274 (Development Agreement between Eli Lilly and Company and the City of Temecula) Applicant: City of Temecula Location: Generally east of Ynez Road, south of Overland Drive, and west of Margarita Road in the City of Temecula Proposal: To approve a Development Agreement with Eli Lilly & Company Environmental Action:Adopt a Negative Declaration Planner: Dave Hogan Recommendation: Recommend approval of the Development Agreement to the City Council Case No: Planning Application No, PA99-0215 Applicant: Newland Communities Location: The project is located roughly northwest of the intersection of Butterfield Stage Road and State Highway 79(S), west of Sunny Meadows Drive, east of Meadows Parkway and south of McCabe Ddve. Proposal: Amendment No. 4 to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24187 (A subdivision of 72.9 acres into 256 single-family detached residential lots and nine open space lots. Environmental Action:The environmental impacts associated with this project have been addressed by an Environmental Impact Report which was previously certified for the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan (SP 219). Planner: John De Gange Recommendation: Approval 7. Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431) Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Specific Plan Amendment) Planning Application No. PA99-0283 (Development Agreement) Del Sol Investment Company, LLC North of State Highway 79 South, south of Montelegro Way, east of Margadta Road and west of Meadows Parkway 1. The design, construction and operation of 276,243 square feet of retail commercial uses, including a 132,646 square foot Home Depot Store, a 7,000 square foot automotive supply store, and 136,597 square feet of village shopping spaca; F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\WIMBERVG\PLANCOMMXAGENDAS\I999\9-15-99.doc 2 2. The subdivision of 66.828 gross acres into seven (7) lots; 3. Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), amending the following: land uses within Planning Areas 1,6 and 8; the realignment and reconfiguretion of Campanula Way between De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway; the allocation of acreage within Planning Area 1 from 32.3 acres to 35.0 acres; the allocation of acreage within Planning Area 6 from 36.3 to 34.3 acres; the division of Planning Area 6 into Planning Area 6A (22.3 acres, high density residential, 9-12 dwelling units per acre, with a maximum of 268 dwelling units) and Planning Area 6B (12 acres, very high density residential, 13-20 du/ac, with a maximum of 240 dwelling units), resulting in an overall reduction of units from 590 to 508 dwellings; the development of an active, private, gated senior community within Planning Area 8 that includes a private recreation area; and an update of Design Guidelines that incorporate the village vignettes and the senior amenities. 4. The request for approval of a Development Agreement between the City and del Sol Investment Co., LLC, a limited liability company Environmental Action:Addendum to previously certified Environmental Impact Repor~ No. 235 for Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol) Planner: Carole K. Donahoe Recommendation: Recommend Approval PLANNING MANAGERS REPORT COMMISSIONER REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: October 6, 1999, 6:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California, 92590 F:\DEPTS\PLANNING~WIMBERVG\PLANCOMM',AGENDAS\1999X9-15-99.doc 3 ITEM #2 CALL TO ORDER MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 1999 The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:03 P.M., on Wednesday August 18, 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 Mathewson. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Also Present: Commissioners *Fahey, Mathewson, Naggar, Webster, and Chairman Guerdero. None. Planning Manager Ubnoske, Deputy Director o~ Public Works Parks, Attorney Cudey, Senior Planner Fagan, Senior Planner Hogan, Associate Planner Donahoe, Assistant Planner Anders, Project Planner Thomsley, and Minute Clerk Hansen. *(Commissioner Fahey arrived at 6:07 P.M.) PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. COMMISSION BUSINESS 1, Al~l~roval of Agenda It was noted that Commissioner Fahey arrived at 6:07 P.M. MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to approve the agenda. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Webster and voice ~,ote reflected unanimous approval. PlanComm/mlnutes/08189e 2. AOOroval Of Minutes-July 21, 1999 It was noted that on page 6, with respect to the motion to reopen Agenda Item No. 6, that after the underlined text with the exceDtion of, the minutes should reflect Commissioners Fahey and Webster, in lieu of solely Commissioner Fahey. It was noted that on page 12, Item B, the word corresponded should be replaced with the phrase met in person, and with respect to Item D, the word Winchester should be replaced with the word Ynez. MOTION: Commissioner Naggar moved to approve the minutes, as amended. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Webster and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 3. Director's HearinQ Ul~date Planning Manager Ubnoske was available for questions and comments. FindinQ of Public Convenience or Necessity for Hiclh Society Billlard and Dart Club Commissioner Naggar advised that he would be abstaining with regard to this Agenda Item, and therefore left the dais. Via overheads, Associate Planner Donahoe provided a bdef overview of the staff report (of record), noting the expressed community concern regarding the use's sale of alcohol at this particular proposed location; referencing page 3 of the agenda material, with respect to sensitive uses in close proximity, listed the following: 1) Calvary Chapel Christian Academy, 2) the Royale College of Beauty, 3) the Temecula Valley Stars Cheedeading School, and 4) the Brentwood Montessod School; and for Commissioner Mathewson, specified the location of the aforementioned uses. Mr. Michael McMillen, the applicant, noted the glass frontage of the building in order for Law Enforcement to have visual access into the establishment; relayed that there is no smoking permitted at the use; noted the desire to maintain a family-centered business; for Commissioner Webster, provided additional information regarding the existing license, and the new application for license *o sell alcohol; specified the location of the existing facility; and for Commissioner Fahey, relayed that 25-30% of the gross sales of the business were generated from the sale of beer. Ms. Jan McMillen, representing the applicant, reiterated the goal to maintain a family- odentad business, noting the type of clientele the use currently attracts. The following individuals spoke in opposition to the project: Mr. Keith Maxcy Mr. Richard Mossa Mr. Rhon Walker Mr. Jeff Stepheson Mr. Nicholas Labdno Ms. Cathy Baysinger 27462 Enterprise Circle West 27462 Enterprise Circle West 25752 Nightview Circle 40117 San Ingasio 27462 Enterprise Circle West 27462 Enterprise Circle West 2 P~anCmmn/mlnutes/081899 z~ Mr. Don Coop 41755 Rider Way ~ Ms. Barbara Kruis 27485 Commerce Center Ddve z~ Mr. Paul Oglesby 30206 Via Corsica The above-mentioned individuals relayed the following concerns: .,' The proposes Iocetion of the use, noting that the existing location of the use was not in close proximity to schools Safety of children and women attending church activities Close proximity to church Fear of drunk drivers, and the behavior of patrons under the influence of alcohol -- Potential for drugs in the parking lot' · / Reduced feeling of safety -~ Neon signs promoting the sale of beer · ~ Conflict between church evening programs and the hours of operation of the proposed use .- Cars parked on the streets while pedestrians are utilizing the streets ~- Fear for minor-aged students attending the proximate schools · ~ The fact that 25-30% of the business is based on the sale of beer · ,'Incompatibility with the adjacent uses In response to Chairman Guerdero's querying, Mr. Maxcy relayed that although the Police Department provided a favorable report with respect to the use at the existing location, it was his opinion that this particular proposed location would not be compatible with the adjacent uses. For Chairman Guerdero, Mr. Mossa relayed the various times of the church evening activities, involving women and children. Ms. Kruis clarified, for Chairman Guerdero, the hours of minor's attendance to the adjacent Royale College of Beauty Cosmetology School. At this time, Chairman Guerdero closed the public comments. Initially, Planning Manager Ubnoske recommended continuing the matter off-calendar in order for staff to address the additional issues raised dudng the meeting; and for Commissioner Fahey, provided additional information with respect to the recommendation to continue the matter. 3 PlanComm/minutes/081899 Chairman Guerriero, echoed by Commissioner Fahey, relayed that he was willing to render a decision at this point in time due to .the substantial evidence that had been presented. Initially, Commissioners Mathewson and Webster relayed their opinion that it would be beneficial to continue the matter. Attorney Cudey relayed that due to the spacial issues with respect to the proximity of the schools and the church, there would be prudence in continuing the matter in order to gain accurate advisement, which would require additional research. Chairman Guerriero relayed that he could not support this particular project at this location. Commissioner Fahey expressed that although she was of the opinion that this was a fine establishment, due to the proposed location and the proximity to the sensitive uses, she could not support this particular project at this particular site. In concurrence with Commissioner Fahey, Commissioner Mathewson relayed concern with respect to the proximity of the sensitive uses. MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to deny the proposed project due to the incompatibility with the proximate sensitive uses. Commissioner Fahey seconded the motion. Commissioner Webster relayed that since a continuance would provide additional information with respect to factors regarding the proposal, it was his opinion that the matter should be continued. At this time voice vote was taken reflecting approval of the motion to deny with the exception of Commissioner Naggar who abstained, and Commissioner Webster who voted n__o. At 7:05 P.M. a short recess was taken, and the meeting reconvened at 7:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARINGS Plannincl Application No. PA99-0301 (Revisions to I~reviously al~Droved PA98-386 Develooment Plan) Request to design, construct and operate a 50,100 square foot speculative office building with associated parking and landscaping located on a parcel containing 4.01 gross acres. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission approve the request. By way of color renderings, Project Planner Anders provided a bdef overview of the project, specifying the significant revisions to the proposed project. 4 PlanComm'mlnutes/081899 For Commissioner Naggar, Project Planner Anders, echoed by Attomey Curley, clarified that the City has no jurisdiction with respect to enforcement of CC&R's. For the record, Chairman Guerdero relayed the Commission's receipt of a letter from Ms. Moralson wdtten on behalf of the Crystal Ridge Business Park Association's Board. At this time, Chairman Guerhere closed the public hearlng. Commissioner Fahey, echoed by Commissioners Guerdere and Mathewson, relayed her support of the project, noting the additional improvements (i.e., landscaping, parking. amhitecture.) Referencing his previous advisement, Commissioner Webster commended the applicant with respect to the modified proposed paint application; and relayed his support of this particular project. MOTION: Commissioner Naggar moved to approve the revisions with respect to this particular project. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Webster and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 6. Plannin¢l Al~l~lication No. PA98-0516 (Te~ttative Parcel Mal~ No. 29132) Request to subdivide 6.68 acres of land into five (5) lots zoned Office Professional. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission approve the request. By way of overheads, Assistant Planner Anders presented the staff report (of record); indicated that staffs research (inclusive of review of the applicant's submittal of two assessment letters from the Army Corps of Engineers, and Biologist Tom Dodson) revealed that the southern portion of the property had been incorrectly designated on the Zoning Map as Open Spaca (OS), while the General Plan Land Use Map correctly designated the site as Professional Office (PO); noted that staff would process the zoning change, in order to correct the zoning map error, relayed that due to the zoning change staff would recommend the addition of a Condition of Approval (COA) worded, as follows: The applicant shall not rile and the City shall not accept for action a final subdivision map for City Council approval unless and until the subject real properly is zoned with the zoning clistffct designated as Office Professional; relayed that due to the General Circulation Element Map's designation of Via Rio Temecula as a through street which would be traversing through an open-space conservation easement, the applicant has been required to reserve a 75-foot wide future easement for the purpose of maintaining consistency with the General Circulation Element; relayed that the project has been brought before the Planning Commission due to the expressed community concern associated with this particular project; for Commissioner Naggar, clarlfled that due to the referenced research, the southern portion of the properby would not remain zoned Open Spaca (OS); and for Commissioner Mathewson, provided additional clarification regarding the Corps' determination (via agenda material.) PlanComm/mlnutes~O81899 Mr. Raymond Schogley, representing the applicant, relayed concurrence with the findings of staff presented by Project Planner Anders. Mr. Larry Markham, representing the applicant, reviewed the history of the property and the zoning designation; and for Commissioner Webster, provided additional information regarding the west 25-foot easement. The following individuals spoke in opposition to the project: Mr. Ed Moore Mr. Bill Epp Ms. Lisa Booze 44684 Corte Verenos 44616 Via Luddo 44624 Corte Veranos The above-mentioned individuals relayed the foilowing concerns: ,,' Safety with respect to the dirt-fill of the canyon · -' Queded the future use of the development Reduction in property values Additional traffic Location of the driveways Quality of life negatively affected Safety of children within the proximity of the designated bus stop / For the record, relayed provision of a petition, encompassing 50 signatures denoting the individuals' opposition to the project For Commissioner Mathewson, Mr. Moore confirmed that it was his opinion that the zoning change would be detrimental to his quality of life. In response to Commissioner Mathewson's querying, Assistant Planner Andere relayed the results of the biological assessment with respect to the endangered spedes. In response to the community comments, Mr. Markham clarified the histodcal zoning of the area, the designated channel, and the environmental evaluation; for Chairman Guerdero, relayed that when the General Circulation Element is reviewed it is the applicant's desire (concurTent with community comments) that Via Rio Temecula does not become a through street, noting the following: 1) the traversing through the open spaca conservation area, and 2) the traffic analysis which revealed a low generation of traffic in the area which would not warTant the need for a through street; recommended that the additional COA, regarding the reservation of the 75-foot easement be terminated, or become effective after the Circulation Plan is updated; with respect to the bus stops, relayed that the potential uses' hours of operation would most likely not be evasive to the timing of school pick-up and drop-off times; relayed that the future PlenComm/minutes~O81899 development of these parcels would be brought back before the Planning Commission when the development site plans am submitted for approval, noting that the public could provide additional specific input at that time; relayed that the buildings would most likely not utilize the maximum height allowed for this particular zoning; for Commissioner Fahey, provided additional information regarding the area that would be filled for this particular project; recommended deleting Condition No. 36, regarding flood mitigation charges (denoted on page 36 of the agenda material) sinco it was not applicable; with respect to the additional COA read into the record by Assistant Planner Andera, relayed that the applicant would be agreeable; and reiterated that the COA requiring the reservation of the easement should take place or expire upon the approval of the Circulation Element Update. Commissioner Fahey relayed concem with respect to the subdivision of the parcels, and the precedent set for approval for the remainder of the property in the area. In response to Commissioner Fahey, Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that staff support was generated from the fact that the map is consistent with the zoning of the General Plan; noted that staff would make an effort to address the Commission's concern by recommending a comprehensive plan or larger parcels to applicants for future projects in the area, if that was the desire of the Commission. For Commissioner Mathewson, Attomey Cudey relayed that this particular issue could be viewed as a consistency action, in order to create the accuracy that should have existed previously. For informational purposes, Commissioner Mathewson reiterated that as each project is developed, there would be noticed public headngs at which time the community could address their concerns with respect to the size and scale of the uses. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that the traffic studies support removal of Via Rio Temecula as a through street, noting that the final Circulation Update would soon be completed; and relayed the potential for a crossing at Temecula Creek. Commissioner Naggar recommended that when the area is developed, that the applicant take into consideration contacting the School District to queW the possibility of relocating the bus stop. MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to approve staff recommendation. (This motion was withdrawn.) In response to Commissioner Mathewson, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed no objection to adding specific language stating if applicable to Condition No. 36. MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to approve staff recommendation to adopt the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. PA98-0171; adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application No. PA98-0171; and adopt Resolution No. 99-028 approving Planning Application No. PA98-0516 based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PlanComm/mlnutes/081899 RESOLUTION NO. PC 99-028 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0516 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29132), LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 AND AVENDIDA DE MISSIONS, AND KNOWN AS ' ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 950-120-04 Modify- The language of Condition No. 36 to include the wording if applicable. Add- The additional Condition of Approval recommended by staff, and read into the record by Assistant Planner Anders. (See the italicized wording on page 5 of the minutes.) Commissioner Webster seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. Amendments to the Development Code (PlanninQ ADDlication No. PA97- 0197) Request to amend the Development Code to do the following: Establish standards for Large Family Day care Home Facilities; Establish permitting requirements for the approval of Large Family Day Care Home Facilities; Re-categodzing temporary uses; Amend accessory structure setback requirements; Modify the senior housing, congregate care, and affordable housing provisions; Clarify pads of ~ne floor area ratio incentive bonus; and, Make numerous other minor changes to the Development Code. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission approve a resolution recommending adoption of an ordinance. Reviewing the proposed amendments in detail, Senior Planner Hogan presented the staff report (via agenda matedal); for Commissioner Fahey, provided additional clarification with respect to page 6, Section 2.b. regarding congregate care projects; for Commissioner Webster, provided additional information regarding the criteria for increases in Floor Area Ratio (FAR), specifically with respect to page 8, Section 3; for Commissioner Mathewson, relayed cladfication regarding the language denoted on page PlanComnVminute~O8189t 7, Section b; and for Commissioners Mathewson and Naggar, relayed that the Updated Housing Element would address Low Income Housing paremeters which would be brought before the Commission potentially at the end of September. Dudng the ensuing Commission discussion, the following revisions were presented: Chairman Guerdere relayed that Item Nos. 1 and 2 of the proposals for amendment would be pulled, and therefore would not be considered with respect to this Agenda Item, Regarding the unintentional omission on page 6, Section 1.a., after the phrase The maximum density, Senior Planner Hogan indicated that the text should reflect the same density incentives as denoted under senior housing. Commissioner Fahey recommended that the language on page 6, Section 2.b. be modified, deleting the phrase disttfbuted equally throughout the project in order to solely reflect The handicapped units shaft comply with the standards set forth in T/tie 24 of the Califomia Code of Regulation. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks advised that staff concurred with Commissioner Webster's recommendation (regarding the example denoted on page 8, Section 3) to delete the phrase off-site signalization due to the lack of need for provision of such spedfidty. Commissioner Mathewson indicated that on page 6, Section 3.a.ii. the numbers eighteen (20) should be corrected to reflect consistency. Mr. Larry Markham, 41750 Wanchester Road, recommended modifying page 8, Table 17.06.040 with respect to Sections HR, VL, and L-1 regarding the standard designation to reflect minimum gross lot area in lieu of minimum net lot area. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks advised that staff concurred with the modification, and would additionally, include L-2. With respect to Commissioner Mathewson's comments, and the Commission's concurrence, Senior Planner Hogan relayed that on page 6, Section 3.1 .iii. L-1 and L-2 would be deleted, and the number of units per acre would reflect eight (8) in lieu of the indicated twelve (12.) For Commissioner Naggar, Attomey Cudey provided the definition of Affordable Housing, which referenced the Health and Safety Code, and relayed that due to the Commission's request he would provide additional specifications at a future point in time. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that the Department of Redevelopment may be able to provide the low-income housing paremeters to the Commission. For Commissioner Fahey, Planning Manager Ubnoske recommended that the Commission move forward with Section Nos. 3-7 with respect to the proposals to amend the Development Code, and then have staff bring back at a future point in time with the proposed amendments to Section Nos. I and 2. PlanCom~'minutes/081899 In response to Commissioner Mathewson's querying with respect to the lack of specified limits regarding Temporary Use Permits, Planning Manager Ubnoske provided additional dadfication as to the process that staff utilizes when issuing Temporary Use Permits. For Mr. Anthony Maielta, 29747 Calle Palmas, Planning Manager Ubnoske provided clarification with respect to the variance between Medium and Low Medium Densities. Chairman Guerdero dosed the public headng. MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to approve the proposed amendments to the Development Code with respect to Section Nos. 3-7, as modified in the previous discussions (* all moved medifications are referenced in the minutes in detail, and denoted as bulleted items on page 9.) RESOLUTION NO. 99-29 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AMENDING THE SEVERAL CHAPTERS OF TITLE 17 TO ESTABLISH DETAILED STANDARDS FOR LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE HOME FACILITIES, RE-CATEGORIZE TEMPORARY USES, AMEND YARD AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES, CLARIFY FLOOR AREA RATIO BONUS PROVISIONS, AND MAKE NUMEROUS MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO TITLE 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE (PLANNING APPLICATION PA99-0197)" The motion was seconded by Commissioner Fahey and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. lo PlanComr~mlnutes/O818gl City-initiated General Plan Amendments and Zone Chanqes (Planning Application No. PA97-0291) Requests regarding Sites 1-3: Site I - Amend the General Plan Land Use and the Zoning Maps for the City of Temecula for a site identified as Assessor's Parcel Nos. 921-660-026, - 027, -041, and -042 located South of Via La Vida between Calta Palmas and Via Sevilla from Medium Density Residential to Low Medium Density Residential. Site 2 - Amend the General Plan Land Use Map for the City of Temecula for a site identified as Assessor's Parcel No. 944-330-019 and located between Rancho Highlands Drive and Interstate 15 from Open Space to Highway Tourist Commercial. Site 3 - Amend the General Plan Land Use and the Zoning Maps for the City of Temecula for the southerly portion of a site identified as Assessor's Parcel No. 950-120-004 and located west of Avenida de Missiones from Open Space-Conservation to Professional Office. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission approve a resolution recommending adoption of an ordinance. Senior Planner Hogan presented the staff report (of record), highlighting the proposed amendments; for Commissioner Webster, provided additional information regarding Site 2, and the rationale for inclusion in the General Plan, as amended. Mr. Anthony Maielta, 29747 Calle Palmas, relayed concem with respect to the amount of apartments in the Margarita area and the associated blighting. For Mr. Maielta, Senior Planner Hogan reiterated the rasults of modifying density form Medium to Low Medium. With regard to Commissioner Webster's concem regarding the Site No. 2 amendments and the lack of consistency with the Specific Plan with respect to the Land Use Map, specifically, the Open Space designated areas, Planning Manager Ubnoske recommended that this portion of the amendment be brought back to the Commission at a future point in time in order for staff due develop clarification. in response to the recommendation to continue the proposed amendments with respect to Site No. 2, Commissioner Webster recommended that staff further investigate the Prior to Approval Requirements with respect to Alternate Transportation Plans, denoted on page 43 of the Specific Plan. MOTION: Commissioner Fahey moved to close the public headng; and to approve the amendments proposed on Site Nos. I and 3; and to have staff bdng back to the Commission proposed amendments for Site No: 2 at a future point in time. PlanComm/mlnutes~081891, RESOLUTION NO. 99-30 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 ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 921-660-026, 921-660-627, 921-660-041, 921-660-042,944-330-019, AND 950-120-004 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-6291)" 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 KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 921-660-029, 921-660-027, 921-660-041, 921-660- 042,944-330-019, AND 950-120-004 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0291)" The motion was seconded by Commissioner Webster and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. PLANNING MANAGER'S REPORT Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that the Planning Department has added · new planner to the staff, Denise Thomas; and noted that she will be a great asset to the Planning Department. Planning Manager Ubnoske noted that the Wolf Creek Workshop will be held at the September 1, 1999 Planning Commission meeting; and advised, for Commissioners Naggar and Webster that she would relay their request concerning receiving the associated information pdor to the meeting. Chairman Guerriero advised that the pdmary concern expressed by the community regarding the Wolf Creek Prbject dudng the recnetly held community workshops was the impact of the Pala Road improvements. Planning Manager Ubnoske provided each Commissioner with a GIS exhibit, denoting each of their personal lots. COM M ISSIONER REPORTS Commissioner Fahey and Attomey Cudey relayed that they would not be able to attend the September 1, 1999 Planning Commission meeting due to vacation plans. 12 PlanComn~minutes~081899 ADJOURNMENT At 9:20 P.M. Chairman Guerdero formally adjoumed this meeting to Wednesday. September 1. 1999 at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. Ron Guerriero, Chairman Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager 13 ITEM #3 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION September 15, 1999 Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29036) Planning Application No. PA98-0238 (Development Agreement) Prepared By: Thomas Thomsley, Project Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff recommends the Planning Commission: ADOPT the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map) and PA99- 0238 (Development Agreement); ADOPT the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map) and PA99- 0238 (Development Agreement); and ADOPT Resolution No. 99- approving Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map) based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval ADOPT Resolution No. 99- . recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0238 (Development Agreement) based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report; APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Scott Newcomb, Hiram-Hill Development Co., LLC PROPOSAL: Planning Application No. PA98-0447 is a request for a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide 6.31 acres of land into twenty-four (24) residential lots. Planning Application No. PA99-0238 is a request for a Development Agreement to allow a minimum five (5) foot side yard setback. LOCATION: Located on the south side of Via La Vida between Margarita Road and Solana Way (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 921- 660-026, -027, -041, and -042) EXISTING ZONING: LM (Low Medium Density Residential) F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\447pa98.PC.dOe SURROUNDING ZONING: North: M (Medium Density Residential) South: LM (Low Medium Density Residential) East: LM (Low Medium Density Residential) West: M (Medium Density Residential) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LM (Low Medium Density Residential) EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Medium Density Residential South: Low Medium Density Residential East: Low Medium Density Residential West: Medium Density Residential BACKGROUND Planning Application No. PA98-0447 for Tentative Tract Map No. 29036, with 28 lots, was submitted on October 27, 1998. Development Review Committee (DRC) meetings were held on December 3, 1998 and April 27, 1999. As a result of those meetings the tentative tract map was found to be inconsistent with the development standards for the zoning designation of Medium Density Residential. The applicant reminded staff that this property had a previously approved subdivision, Tentative Tract No. 23990, with 30 lots, which had expired January 28, 1998, and questioned the inconsistencies between the zoning and the old map. A review of the expired map found that it had been designed under the County standards that were in use by the City at the time. Later when the General Plan's Land Use and Zoning standards were adopted the project site was designated for a higher density residential, which was inconsistent with the approved tract map. Realizing that the applicant had a land use dilemma, staff initiated a General Plan Amendment and Change of Zoning. Both amendments were recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on August 18, 1999 and have been scheduled for consideration by the City Council on September 14, 1999. After reducing the number of lots to 24 in an effort to comply with the Low Medium setback standards, the applicant was still unable to meet the side yard setback standard on several lots. In an effort to seek relief from the side yard setback requirements, the applicant and staff considered adopting a Planned Developinept Overlay to modify the standards. After consulting with the City Attorney, he advised use thl.t the proper mechanism for adjusting the side yard setback would be through a development Agreement. On June 17,1999 the applicant filed Planning Applicant No. PA99-0238 for a Development Agreement. ANALYSIS Access and Circulation The subdivision will have one point of access off of Via La Vida. There is one road into the subdivision with one short side street and both streets end in cui-de-sacs. All lots will take access from onto the two proposed streets. No lots will take access from Via La Vida. F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~44?pa98,PC.dOC 2 Development Standards Pursuant to Table 17.06.040, the minimum lot size for Low Medium Density Residential zoned parcels is 7,200 square feet. The proposed parcels range in size from 7,200 square feet to 15,981 square feet. The subdivision proposes to have 3.8 dwelling units per acre (du/ac), which is under to the target density of 4.5 du/ac contained with the Development Code but within the General Plan's range of 3-6 du/ac. Development Agreement A Development Agreement is being requested to modify the minimum side yard setback to allow for a minimum setback of five feet on both sides. The development standards for Low Medium Density Residential (Chapter 17, Table 17.06.040, Note 3.) require that "the combined side yard setback for both sides must equal at least fifteen feet with one side having at least ten feet to provide potential vehicular access to the rear of the property and shall be located on the same side as the driveway." Side yard setbacks shown on the expired map were all five feet and the same setback was the standard for the development in all the surrounding tracts. These surrounding subdivisions and the expired tract map were designated or developed under the old County standards that were used by the City until the current Development Code was adopted in 1995. In the applicant's effort to meet the current lot dimension standards the intended number of lots has dropped from 28 to 24. After reducing the number of lots and anticipating the typical homes that could be build on these lots there appear to be several lots that would not be able to comply with the side yard setback, To meet the setback with the typical homes envisioned would require the loss of three to four additional lots and is not considered economically feasible by the applicant. To achieve some flexibility to the standards the City Attorney recommended that the Applicant pursue a Development Agreement. State law permits minor alterations to development standards through the use of a development agreement. He felt this was a reasonable request (five foot side yards) and would be in consistent with the General Plan because the request would allow development that is consistent with the surrounding tracts. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION 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 Mitigation Monitoring Program and the Conditions of Approval that have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration is hereby granted. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS The proposed map provides adequate access, circulation and developable lots. The proposed lots comply with the minimum lot size requirements of the Low Medium Density Residential zoning classification pursuant to Chapter 17, Table 17.06.040 of the Development Cede. The parcels are consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map and the zoning map. Therefore, staff recommends approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 29036 based upon the following findings: FINDINGS. The proposed land division and the development agreement for this project are compatible with the General Plan designation and zoning. The site is physically suitable for the type F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\447pa98.PC.doc 3 and density of development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site is LM (Low Medium Density Residential). Tentative Tract Map No. 29036 proposes twenty-four (24) residential lots, which comply with the minimum lot size requirement of 7,200 square feet and the unit density of 3-6 units per acre. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with the City's General Plan, Development Code and Subdivision. The project proposes one street access to Via La Vida and is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. The project will take direct access from Via La Vida and will not obstruct any easements. The map as proposed, conforms to the logical subdivision of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The subdivision is compatible with the surrounding areas as the site is will be developed pursuant to the General Plan, the Development Code, and the Development Agreement, all of which regulate residential parcels and development. Future development of residential units will be compatible and sensitive to the surrounding residential development. In addition, the proposed subdivision provides adequate access and circulation for emergency vehicles and will not impact existing circulation or emergency vehicle access. The project as cenditioned, will comply with the City's Development Code, General Plan and subdivision requirements. Attachments: 1. PC Resolution No. 99- (Council Recommendation of PA99-0238) - Blue Page 5 Exhibit A - Ordinance No. 99- (Approving PA98-0447) - Blue Page 9 Exhibit A - Development Agreement - Blue Page 13 2. PC Resolution No. 99- - Blue Page 14 Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 17 3. Exhibits - Blue Page 27 A. Vicinity Map B. General Plan Map L;. Zoning Map D. Tentative Tract Map No. 29036 4. Initial Environmental Study - Blue Page 31 5. Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 32 F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFPILcT\447pa98.PC.doc 4 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION OF PA99-0238 F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRFF\447pa98.PC.doc 5 ATI'ACHMENT NO. I PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-__ RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND HIRAM-HILL, LLC FOR TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 29036 (PARCELS 14 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 13784 AND A PORTION OF LOTS 16-20 AND 26-28 OF TRACT MAP NO. 20882-3), LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE VIA LA VIDA BETWEEN VIA LA VIDA BETWEEN MARGARITA ROAD AND SOLANA WAY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula has received an application from Hiram-Hill, LLC for a Development Agreement (hereinafter "Development Agreement"); and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing on September 15, 1999, on the issue of recommending approval or denial of the Development Agreement; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA99-0238 on September 15, 1999, on the issue of recommending approval or denial of the Development Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES FIND AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt and approve the Ordinance approving the Development Agreement, Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and incorporated herein by this reference as set forth in full herein. Section 2. That in recommending adoption by the City Council of an Ordinance approving the Development Agreement, the Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: 1. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula's General Plan in that the Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for residential development and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation of Low- Medium Density Residential; and, 2. The project subject to the Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the Specific Plan Zone district in which the Property subject to the Development Agreement is located, and that this Development Agreement is consistent with good planning practices by providing for the opportunity to develop the Property consistent with the General Plan; and, F:',DEPTSXPLANNING\STAFFRFF\447pa98.PC.doc 6 3. The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; and, 4. The Development Agreement will not be detdmental to the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof; and, 5. Notice of the public headng before the Planning Commission was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the Planning Commission public headng, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days pdor to the headng to the project applicant and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, schools, police protection, and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; and, 6. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission included the date, time, and place of the public hearing, the identity of the headng body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description and text or diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing, and of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; and, 7. The Development Agreement complies with the goals and objectives of the Circulation Element of the General Plan and the traffic impacts of the development over the pedod of the Development Agreement will be substantially mitigated by the mitigation measures and conditions of approval imposed; and, 8. The Development Agreement complies with requirements of the zoning district in which the applicant proposes to develop in that the Low-Medium Density Residential is consistent with the Low-Medium Residential General Plan Land Use Designation; and, 9. The benefits that will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from this legislation and this Development Agreement are as follows: City and Owner acknowledge that development of the Project will result in the 1. Generation of municipal revenue; 2. Construction of public infrastructure facilities; 3. Acceleration of both the timely development of subject property as well as the payment of municipal revenue; 4. Enhancement of quality of life for surrounding residents with the timely development through the elimination of dust and nuisance of partially improved lots; 5, Payment of Public Facility Fees (fire, library, traffic signal mitigation, development and RSA); and, Section 3. The Secretary of the Planning Commission shall cause this Resolution to be transmitted to the City Council for further proceedings in accordance with State law. F:\DE~rS\PLANNING\STAFFP, J~447pa98.PC.doc 7 Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15t"day of September, 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 15t~ day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAINED: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary F:XDEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\447pa98.PC.doC 8 EXHIBIT A ORDINANCE NO. 99- APPROVING PA98-0447 F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\447pa98.PC.doc 9 EXHIBIT A ORDINANCE NO. 99- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND HIRAM- HILL, LLC FOR TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 29036 (PARCELS 1-4 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 13784 AND A PORTION OF LOTS 16-20 AND 26-28 OF TRACT MAP NO. 20882-3), LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE VIA LA VIDA BETWEEN MARGARITA ROAD AND SOLANA WAY WHEREAS, Section 65864 et sea. of the Government Code of the State of California and Temecula City Resolution No. 91-52 authorize the execution of agreements establishing and maintaining requirements applicable to the development of real property; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with the procedure specified in said Resolution, Hiram-Hill, LLC has filed with the City of Temecula an application for a Development Agreement which reflects an amendment the Development Standards that apply to side yard setbacks (hereinafter "this Agreement"), of a residential housing subdivision on its property, Tentative Tract No. 29036 with 24 lots (parcels 1-4 of Parcel Map No. 13784 and a podion of lots 16-20 and 26-28 of Tract Map No. 20882-3), hereinafter the "Subject Property" which application has been reviewed and accepted for filing by the Community Development Director; and, WHEREAS, notice of the City's intention to consider adoption of this Agreement with Hiram- Hill, LLC has been duly given in the form and manner required by law, and the Planning Commission and City Council of said City have each conducted public hearings September 15, 1999 (Planning Commission), and (City Council) at which time it heard and considered all evidence relevant and material to said subject. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. FINDINGS. The City Council hereby finds and determines, with respect to this Agreement by and between the City of Temecula and Hiram-Hill, LLC, that it: A. is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula's General Plan in that this Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for residential development consistent with the General Plan's land use designation of Low-Medium Density Residential; B. Is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the land use distdct in which the Subject Property referred to herein is located as this Agreement provides for residential development pursuant to a Specific Plan; C. Is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; D. Will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof; F:~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~447pa98.pC.dOC 10 E. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the Planning Commission public hearing, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days pdor to the hearing to the project applicant and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, schools, police protection, and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; F. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission included the date, time, and place of the public headng, the identity of the headng body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description in text or diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing, and of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; G. Notice of the public headng before the City Council was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days pdor to the City Council public headng, mailed at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing to the project applicant, to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, schools, police protection, and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; H. Notice of the City Council hearing included the date, the time, and place of the public hearing, the identity of the hearing body, the general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description in text or by diagram of the location of the Property that is the subject of the hearing, and the notice of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; I. City Council approved this Agreement by Ordinance based upon evidence and findings of the Planning Commission and new evidence presented at its headng on this Agreement, giving its reasons therefor and setting their relationship between this Agreement and the General Plan; J. The benefits that will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from this legislation and this Agreement are as follows: 1. Acceleration of both the timely development of subject property in an ordedy manner consistent with the surrounding tracts as well as the payment of municipal revenue; 2. Enhancement of quality of life for surrounding residents with the timely development through the elimination of dust and nuisance of unimproved lots; and 3. Payment of Development Impact Fees (tire, library, traffic signal mitigation, development and RSA). Section 2. APPROVAL. This Agreement, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit A is hereby approved. The Mayor is authodzed and directed to evidence such approval by executing this Agreement for, and in the name of, the City of Temecula; and the City Clerk is directed to attest thereto; provided, however, that this Agreement shall not be executed by the City until this Ordinance takes effect and the City has received from the applicant two executed originals of said Agreement. Section 3. SEVERABILITY. The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining pads of this Ordinance. F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTx447pagS.PC.doc Section 4. NOTICE OF ADOPTION. The City Clerk, shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law. Section 5. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days prior to the adoption of this Ordinance. Within 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance, together with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against the Ordinance, and post the same in the office of the City Clerk. Section 6. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula this __ day of ,1999. ATTEST: Steven J. Ford, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA) I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of ,1999, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE CityClerk F:\DEPTS\PLANNING',STAFFRPT\447pa98.PC.do~ EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX447pa98.PC.doc 13 Recorded At The Request Of And When Recorded Mail To: Susan Jones City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, Califomia 92589-9033 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. PROPERTY LOCATED AT TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA. CONCERNING THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the "Effective Date" set forth herein by and between HIRAM-HILL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC ("Developer") and the CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California ("City"). WITNESSETH: A. Recitals. (i) California Govemrnent Code Sections 65864, et seq. authorize cities to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property. (ii) Developer has a legal and equitable interest in and to that real property located entirely within City, the common and legal description of which is set forth in Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and hereinafter is referred to as "the Site." (iii) The Site is now designated on the City's Zoning Map. Developer and City desire to provide through this Development Agreement more specific development controls on the Site which will provide for maximum efficient utilization of the Site in accordance with sound planning principles. (iv) On ,1999, City adopted its Ordinance No. , thereby approving this Development Agreement with Developer and said Ordinance was effective on ,1999. L\TEMECULA\DEVAGRE 9/9/99 B. AGR F, EMENT. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless the context otherwise requires, the following terms shall have the following meaning: a. "City" is the City ofTemecula, Califomia. b. "Developer" is Hiram-Hill Development Company, LLC c. "Project" is that development approved for the Site as provided in this Development Agreement consisting of those uses and development standards set forth on Exhibit "B" attached hereto. The uses identified on Exhibit "B' are distributed into specific categories whereby the scope of development entitlement is specified. Where a use or a development standard is not expressly set forth herein, the standards of the applicable zoning district shall apply. d. "Effective Date" shall mean the 3 1 st calendar day following adoption of the Ordinance approving this Agreement by City's City Council. 2. Recitals. The recitals are part of the agreement between the parties and shall be enforced and enfomeable as any other provision of this Agreement. 3. Interest of Property Owner. Developer warrants and represents that he has full legal title to the Site, that he has full legal fight to enter into this Agreement and that the persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Developer and lienholder have been duly authorized to do SO. 4. Bindirlg Effect of Agreement. Developer hereby subjects the Project and the land described in Exhibit "A" hereto to the covenants, reservations and restrictions as set forth in this Agreement. The City and the Developer hereby declare their specific intent that the covenants, reservations and restrictions as set forth herein shall be deemed covenants running with the land and shall pass to and be binding upon Developer's successors and assigns in title or interest to the Project. Each and every contract, deed or other instrument hereinafter executed, covering or conveying the Project or any portion thereof shall conclusively be held to have been executed, delivered and accepted subject to the covenants, reservations and restrictions expressed in this agreement, regardless of whether such covenants, reservations and restrictions are set forth in such contract, deed or other instrument. City and Developer hereby declare their understanding and intent that the burden of the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth herein touch and concern the land in that the Developer's legal interest in the Project is rendered less valuable thereby. The City and L\TEMECULAXDEVAGRE 9/9/99 2 Developer hereby further declare their understanding and intent that the benefit of such covenants touch and concern the land by enhancing and increasing the enjoyment and use of the Development by Developer and the future occupants of the Project, the intended beneficiaries of such covenants, reservations and restrictions, and by furthering the public purposes for which this Agreement is adopted. Further, the parties hereto agree that such covenants, reservations and restrictions benefit all other real property located in the City of Temecula. 5. Relationship of Parties. It is understood that the contractual relationship between City and Developer is such that Developer is an independent party and is not the agent of City for any purpose whatsoever and shall not be considered to be the agent of City for any purpose whatsoever. 6. Term of Agreement. The duration of this Development Agreement shall be five (5) years following the Effective Date. Upon expiration of the term commencing immediately after the Effective Date, if the Developer has not performed construction work on the Site or any portion or portions thereof pursuant to a building permit or permits issued by City, that portion of the Site upon which construction work has not then been performed shall then be deemed to be subject to the development standard within the zoning district underlying this Agreement, and the development of such portion of the Site then and thereafter shall be govemed accordingly by that zoning category. Once a building permit is issued for any portion of the Site, Developer shall complete that construction for which a permit has been issued within one (1) year. For the foregoing purpose, construction work shall not include preparation of plans, engineering work or grading. The units constructed pursuant to the development standards set forth on Exhibit "B" shall considered conforming to applicable development standards. 7. Assignment. Developer shall have the righi to sell, mortgage, hypothecate, assign or transfer this Site or any lot or lots comprising the Site to any person or entity at any time during the term of this Development Agreement. Any such transfer shall be deemed to include an assignment of all rights, duties and obligations created by this Development Agreement with respect to all or any portion of the Site. The assumption of any or all of the obligations of Developer under this Agreement pursuant to any such transfer shall relieve Developer, without any act or concurrence by the City, of its legal duty to perform those obligations except to the extent that Developer is in default with respect to any and all obligations at the time of the proposed transfer. 8. General Standards and Restrictions Pertaining to Development of the Site. The following specific restrictions shall apply to the use of the Site and any portion or lot thereof, pursuant to this Development Agreement: a. Developer shall have the fight to develop the Project on the Site in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and City shall have the fight to control development of the Site in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. L\TEMECULA~DEVAGRE 9/9/99 3 b. The density and intensity of use, the uses allowed, the size of proposed buildings, provisions for the reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, the maximum height of proposed buildings and location of public improvements, together with other terms and conditions of development applicable to the Site, shall be as set forth in this Development Agreement. 9. Effect of City Regulations on Development of Project. Except as expressly provided in this Development Agreement, all substantive and procedural requirements and provisions contained in City's ordinances, specific plans, rules and regulations, including, but not limited to, the Zoning Ordinance, in effect as of the effective date of this Development Agreement, shall apply to the construction and development of the Site. a. The provisions of this paragraph shall not preclude the application to the development of the Site those changes in City Ordinances, regulations, plans or specifications which are specifically mandated and required by changes in state or federal laws or regulations as provided in Califomia Government Code Section 65869.5 or any successor provision or provisions. b. The payment of fees associated with the construction of the Project, including land use approvals, development fees, building permits, etc., shall be pursuant to those fees in effect at the time application is made for such approvals or permits. c. City may apply any and all new ordinances, rules, regulations, plans and specifications to the development of the Site after the effective date provided such new rules and regulations do not conflict with the terms of this Development Agreement as of the effective date. d. Nothing herein shall prevent the application of health and safety regulations (i.e., fire, building, seismic, plumbing and electric codes) that become applicable to the City as a whole. 10. p._gbiicBenefit. The direct and indirect benefits the CITY will receive pursuant o implementation of the Agreement include, but are not limited to the provision of comprehensive planning for a single family detached residential unit development that serves as an important transition between previously developed residential developments. 11. Permitted Uses. Those uses allowed on the Site shall be those uses permitted pursuant to this agreement and the applicable City of Temecula zoning district.. 12. Annual Review. During the term of this Development Agreement, City shall annually review the extent of good faith compliance by Developer with the terms of this Development Agreement. L\TEMECULA\DEVAGRE 9/9/99 4 13. Indemnification. Developer agrees to, and shall, hold City and its elected officials, officers, agents, consultants and employees harmless from liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injuries, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise from the direct or indirect operations of Developer or those of his contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee or other person acting on his behalf which relate to the construction and operation of the Project. Developer agrees to, and shall, defend City and its elected officials, officers, agents and employees with legal counsel of such defendants selection, with respect to actions for damages caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of Developer's activities in connection with the project. This hold harmless provision applies to all damages and claims for damage suffered or alleged to have been suffered by mason of the operations referred to in this Development Agreement regardless of whether or not the City prepared, supplied or approved the plans, specifications or other documents for the Project. 14. Amendments, This Agreement may be amended or canceled, in whole or in pan, only by mutual written consent of the parties and then in the manner provided for in Califomia Government Code Sections 65868. et seq., or successor provisions thereto, 15. Minor Amendments to Development Plan. Upon the written application of Developer, minor modifications and changes to the Development Plan may be approved by the Director of Community Development pursuant to the terms of City's Zoning Ordinance. 16. Enforcement. In the event of a default under the provisions of this Agreement by Developer, City shall give written notice reasonably detailing such default to Developer (or its successor) by registered or certified mail addressed at the address stated in this Agreement, and if such violation is not corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of City within thirty (30) days after such notice is given, or if not corrected within such reasonable time as may be required to cure the breach or default if said breach or default cannot be cured within thirty (30) days (provided that acts to cure the breach or default must be commenced within said thirty (30) days and must thereafter be diligently pursued by Developer), then City may, without further notice, declare a default under this Agreement and, upon any such declaration of default, City may bring any action necessary to specifically enforce the obligations of Developer growing out of the operation of this Development Agreement, apply to any court, state or federal, for injunctive relief against any violation by Developer of any provision of this Agreement, or apply for such other relief as may be appropriate. 17. Event of Default. Developer is in default under this Agreement upon the happening of one or more of the following events or conditions: a. If a material warranty, representation or statement is made or furnished by Developer to City and is false or proved to have been false in any material respect when it was made; b. If a finding and determination is made by City following an annual review pursuant to paragraph 15 hereinabove, upon the basis of substantial evidence, that Developer has L\TEMECULA\DEVAGRE 9/9/99 5 not complied in good faith with any material terms and conditions of this Agreement, after notice and oppommity to cure as described in paragraph 15 hereinabove; or c. A breach by Developer of any of the provisions or terms of this Agreement, after notice and oppommity to cure as provided in paragraph 15 hereinabove. 18. No Waiver of Remedies. City does not waive any claim of defect in performance by Developer if on periodic review City does not enforce this Agreement. Nonperformance by Developer shall not be excused because performance by Developer of the obligations herein contained would be unprofitable, difficult or expensive or because of a failure of any third party or entity, other than City. All other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement are available to the paxties to pursue in the event that there is a breach of this Development Agreement. No waiver by City of any breach or default under this Development Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach thereof or default hereunder. 19. Rights of Lenders Under this Agreement. Should Developer place or cause to be placed any encumbrance or lien on the Project, or any part thereof, the beneficiary ("Lender") of said encumbrance or lien shall have the fight at any time during the term of this Agreement and the existence of said encumbrance or lien to: a. Do any act or thing required of Developer under this Agreement, and any such act or thing done or performed by Lender shall be as effective as if done by Developer; b. Realize on the security afforded by the encumbrance or lien by exemising foreclosure proceedings or power of sale or other remedy afforded in law or in equity or by the security document evidencing the encumbrance or lien (hereinafter referred to as "a trust deed"); c. Transfer, convey or assign the title of Developer to the Project to any purchaser at any foreclosure sale, whether the foreclosure sale be conducted pursuant to court order or pursuant to a power of sale contained in a trust deed; and d. Acquire and succeed to the interest of Developer by virtue of any foreclosure sale, whether the foreclosure sale be conducted pursuant to a court order or pursuant to a power of sale contained in a trust deed. 20. Notice to Lender. City shall give written notice of any default or breach under this Agreement by Developer to Lender (if known by City) and afford Lender the opportunity after service of the notice to: a. Cure the breach or default within thirty (30) days after service of said notice, where the default can be cured by the payment of money; L\TEMECULA\DEVAGRE 9/9/99 b. Cure the breach or default within thirty. (30) days alter service of said notice where the breach or default can be cured by something other than the payment of money and can be cured within that time; or c. Cure the breach or default in such reasonable time as may be required where something other than payment of money is required to cure the breach or default and cannot be performed within thirty (30) days alter said notice, provided that acts to cure the breach or default are commenced within a thirty (30) day period after service of said notice of default on Lender by City and are therealter diligently continued by Lender. 21. Action by Lender. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, a Lender may forestall any action by City for a breach or default under the terms of this Agreement by Developer by commencing proceedings to foreclose its encumbrance or lien on the Project. The proceedings so commenced may be for foreclosure of the encumbrance by order of court or for foreclosure of the encumbrance under a power of sale contained in the instrument creating the encumbrance or lien. The proceedings shall not, however, forestall any such action by the City for the default or breach by Developer unless: a. They are commenced within thirty (30) days alter service on Developer of the notice described hereinabove; b. They are, after having been commenced, diligently pursued in the manner required by law to completion; and c. Lender keeps and performs all of the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement requiring the payment or expenditure of money by Developer until the foreclosure proceedings are complete or are discharged by redemption, satisfaction or payment. 22. Notice. Any notice required to be given by the terms of this Agreement shall be provided by certified mail, retum receipt requested, at the address of the respective parties as specified below or at any other such address as may be later specified by the parties hereto: To Developer: Hiram-Hill Development Company, LLC 610 Newport Center Drive Suite 1055 Newport Beach, Califomia 92660 Attention: Scott Newcomb To City: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Attention: City Manager With Copy to City Attomey L\TEMECULA\DEVAGRE 9/9/99 7 23. Attorneys' Fees. In any proceedings arising from the enfomement of this Development Agreement or because of an alleged breach or default hereunder, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its costs and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred during the proceeding as may be fixed within the discretion of the court. 24. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall bind, and the benefits and burdens hereof shall inure to, the respective paxties hereto and their legal representatives, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, wherever the context requires or admits. 25. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and govemed by the laws of the State of Califomia. 26. Partial Invalidity. If any provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to be invalid, illegal or unenfomeable, the validity, legality or enforceability of the remaining provisions hereof shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. 27. Recordation. This Agreement shall, at the expense of Developer, be recorded in the Official Records of the County Recorder of the County of San Bemardino within sixty (60) calendar days following the Effective Date. In the event this Agreement is not executed by all parties and recorded as of the date specified herein, this Agreement shall be null and void. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year dated below. Dated: ,1999 CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation By: Attest: Mayor Susan Jones, City Clerk, City of Temecula PENCO DEVELOPMENT Dated: By: L\TEMECULA\DEVAGKE 9/9/99 8 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SS. On before me, , a notary public in and for said State, personally appeared , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature LXTEMECULA\DEVAGRE 9/9/99 9 EXHIBIT" A" DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY L\TEMECULA\DEVAGRE 9/9/99 EXHIBIT "B" DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS LM Minimum lot area (square feet) Minimum average lot area per dwelling unit Dwelling units per acre 7,200 7.200 s.f. 4.5 LOT DIMENSIONS Minimum lot frontage at front property line Minimum lot frontage for a fiat lot at front property line Minimum width at required front setback area Minimum average width Minimum lot depth 30 ft. 20 ft. 30 ft. 50 ft. 80 ft. SETBACKS Minimum front yard Minimum comer side yard Minimum interior side yard Minimum rear yard Maximum height 20 ft. 15ft. 5ft. 20 ft. 35R. PROJECT SPECIFICS Parcels 1 through 4 of Parcel Map No. 13784 and a portion of lots 16 through 20 and 26 through 28 of Tract Map No. 20882-3 Tentative Tract Map No. 29036 Proposed Number of Lots: 24 Total Acres: 6.32 Acres L\TEMECULA\DEVAGRE 9/9/99 11 ATTACHMENT NO, 2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- F:\DEPTS\PLANNINGXSTAFFRFF\447pa98.PC.dOC 14 A'I'I'ACHMENT NO. 2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0447 FOR TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 29036 (PARCELS 1-4 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 13784 AND A PORTION OF LOTS 16-20 AND 26-28 OF TRACT MAP NO. 20882-3), LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE VIA LA VIDA BETWEEN VIA LA VIDA BETWEEN MARGARITA ROAD AND SOLANA WAY WHEREAS, Scott Newcomb filed Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29036) in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code and Riverside County Land Use and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29036) was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29036) on September 15, 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 opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission considered all facts relating to Planning Application No. PA98-0447; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated Section 2. Findin_as. That the Temecula Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29036), hereby makes the following findings as required in Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460. A. The proposed land division and the development agreement for this project are compatible with the General Plan designation and zoning. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site is LM (Low Medium Density Residential). Tentative Tract Map No. 29036 proposes twenty-four (24) residential lots, which comply with the minimum lot size requirement of 7,200 square feet and the unit density of 3-6 units per acre. B. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause sedous public health problems. The project has been reviewed for cenformance with the City's General Plan, Development Code and Subdivision. The project proposes one street access to Via La Vida and is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRFf\447pa98.PC.doc 15 C. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. The project will take direct access from Via La Vida and will not obstruct any easements, D. The map as proposed, conforms to the logical subdivision of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The subdivision is compatible with the surrounding areas as the site is will be developed pursuant to the General Plan, the Development Code, and the Development Agreement, all of which regulate residential parcels and development. Future development of residential units will be compatible and sensitive to the surrounding residential development. In addition, the proposed subdivision provides adequate access and circulation for emergency vehicles and will not impact existing circulation or emergency vehicle access, The project as conditioned, will comply with the City's Development Code, General Plan and subdivision requirements. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that although the proposed project could have a signfficant impact on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures descdbed 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 Temecuia Planning Commission hereby approves Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29036) located on the southwest corner of State Highway 79 and Via La Vida, and known as Assessor's Parcel No. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15t~day of September, 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 15t~ day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAINED: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRFrX447pa~,8.PC.doc EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX447pa98.PC.doc 17 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29036) Project Description: Assessor's Parcel No.: Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DIVISION The subdivision of 6.31 acres of land into twenty-four (24) lots zoned Low Medium Density Residential. 921-660-026, -027, -041, and -042 September 18, 1999 September 15, 2001 Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant/developer 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 One Thousand Three Hundred Twenty-Eight Dollars ($1,328.00) which includes the One Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty Dollar ($1,250.00) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(a) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer 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 tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request, if made 30 days prior to the expiration date. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this cdndition 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, cenceming the Planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\,I47pa98.PC.dec action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. If subdivision phasing is proposed, a phasing plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the projects Mitigation Monitoring Program. After grading all slopes shall be planted in accordance with the City's Slope Planting Guidelines. Jute netting will be required on all slopes greater than ten linear feet. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Division. 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. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 9. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes: a. This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations, Ordinance No. 655. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 10. The Department of Public Works recommends the following Conditions of Approval for this project. Unless stated otherwise, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any Government Agency. General Requirements 11. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative map all existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, ape their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. 12. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained read right-of-way. 13. 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. 14. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation 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. F:\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRFI~447pa98,PC.doc 19 Prior to Approval of the Final Map, unless other timing is indicated, the Developer shall complete the following or have plans submitted and approved, subdivision improvement agreements executed and securities posted: 15. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a) Rancho California Water Distdct b) Eastern Municipal Water Distdct c) City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau d) Planning Department e) Department of Public Works f) Riverside County Health Department g) Cable TV Franchise h) Community Services Distdct i) General Telephone j) Southern California Edison Company k) Southern California Gas Company 16. 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 Department of Public Works: a) Improve Via La Vida (Collector Road Standards - 66' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements plus twelve feet, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). b) Improve Streets "A" and "B" (Local Road Standards - 60' R/W) to include dedication of full-width street right-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). 17. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of the street improvement plans: a) Street centerline 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 Standard No. 207. F:\DEFfS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\447pa98.PC,dO~ 20 c) Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400 and 401. d) Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries to ensure adequate continuity of design with adjoining properties. e) Minimum centerline radii shall be in accordance with City Standard No. 113. f) All reverse curves shall include a lO0-foot minimum tangent section. g) All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. h) All units shall be provided with zero clearance garage doors and garage door openers if the driveway is less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk. i) 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. j) All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed through curb outlets per City Standard No. 301. Concentrated drainage directed towards Via La Vida shall be conveyed through an under sidewalk drain per City Standard No. 302, k) All utility systems including gas, electdc, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required where adequate right-of-way does not exist for installation of the facilities. All utilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. 18. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and reviewed by 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. 19. Relinquish and waive dght of access to and from Via La Vida on the Final Map with the exception of one opening, Street "A", as delineated on the approved Tentative Tract Map. 20. Corner property line cut off for vehicular sight distance and installation of pedestrian facilities shall be provided at all street intersections in accordance with Riverside County Standard No. 805. 21. All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public or other appropriate agency and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of Public Works. 22. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Final Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with the map. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The following information shall be on the ECS: a) Special Study Zones. F:\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~447pa98.PC.doc 21 b) Geotechnical hazards identified in the project's geotechnical report. c) Archeological resources found on the site. 23. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any undedying maps related to the subject property. 24. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. 25. The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements. 26. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted for review and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities located outside of road dght-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating "drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions." Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 27. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a) Planning Department b) Department of Public Works c) Riverside County Health Department d) Regional Water Quality Control Board e) Community Services District f) General Telephone g) Southern California Edison Company h) Southern California Gas Company 28. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City of Temecula standards and approved by the Department of Public Works pdor to commencement of any grading. The plan shall incorporate adequate erosion control measures to protect the site and adjoining properties from damage due to erosion. 29. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX447pa98.PC.dec 22 address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. 30. A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identify storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed off-site or on-site, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or pdvate property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. The basis for analysis and design shall be a storm with a recurrence interval of one hundred years. 31. 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. 32. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guarenteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. 33. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier's check or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 34. All lot drainage shall be directed to the driveway by side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 35. Final Map shall be approved and recorded. 36. A Precise Gradin¢l Plan shall be submitfed to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. ThP ~uilding pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 37. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Cede, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. 38. 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. F:\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRP~447pa98,PC,doc 23 Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 39. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive wdtten clearance from the following agencies: a) Rancho California Water District b) Eastern Municipal Water District c) Department of Public Works 40. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. 41. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 42. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken due to the construction operations of this project shall be rapaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. FIRE DEPARTMENT 43. 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 aro in force at the time of building plan submittal. 44. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for residential land division per UFC Appendix Ill.A, Table A-Ill-A-I. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 1500 GPM at 20 PSi residual operating pressure 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) 45. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per UFC Appendix Ill. B, Table A-Ill-B-1. Standard fire hydrants (6" x 4" x 2 1/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 500 feet apart and shall be located no more than 250 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (UFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B) 46. Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum tuming radius on any cul- de-sac shall be forty-five (45) feet. (UFC 902.2.2.2.3) 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) F:\DEFrS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~447pa98.pC.doc 24 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. Pdor to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface designed for 70,000 Ibs. GVVV with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. ( UFC sec 902 and Oral 95-15) Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13) feet six (6) inches, (UFC 902.2.2.1 and Ord 95-15) Prior to building construction, dead end road ways and streets in excess of one hundred and fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus. (UFC 902.2.2.4) Prior to 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 matedais being placed on an individual lot. (UFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1 ) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (UFC 901.4.3) COMMUNITY SERVICES 54. All common slope areas, parkway landscaping, walls, and drainage areas shall be maintained by a private homeowners association (HOA),~ Prior to Final Map Approval: 55. The developer shall satisfy the City's parkland dedication requirement through the payment of in-lieu fees equivalent to .31 acres of parkland. The fees shall be calculated by multiplying the required amount of parkland by the City's then current appraised land valuation as established by the City Manager. 56. The developer shall file a notice of intention with the TCSD to initiate election proceedings for the annexation and acceptance of residential street lighting and refuse collection services into the respective TCSD maintenance programs. All costs associated with this process shall be borne by the developer. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits: 57. Prior to installation of arterial and residential street lighting or issuance of building permits, whichever comes first, the applicant shall pay the appropriate fees for the dedication and transfer of said street lights into the TCSD maintenance program. F:\DEPTS\PLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX447pa98.PC.doc 25 Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy: 58, It shall be the developer's responsibility to provide wdtten disclosure of the existence of the TCSD and its service level rates and charges to all prospective purchasers. OTHER AGENCIES 59. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water Distdct's transmittal dated November 13, 1998, a copy of which is attached. 60. 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. 61. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside, Department of Environmental Health, transmittal dated November 17, 1998, 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. Applicanrs Signature Date Name printed F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX447pa98.PC.doc 26 John F. Hennigar November 13. 1998 Thomas Thornsley, Case Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY TRACT NO. 29036 APNS 921-660-026 THROUGH 921-660-037, 921-660-041, AND 921-660-042 PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0447 Dear Mr. Thornsley: 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 ./"~-C '~'~') ~ Steve Brannon, P.E. Development Engineering Manager 98/SB:mr136/F012-T6/FCF NOv: ~ ~3~38 c: Laurie Wiliiams, Engineering Services Supervisor Rancho California Water Dis~rlct The Gas Cemp/ 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 Vide 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 regulator~ 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 regnlatory 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 with revised conditions. Additionally, 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 information on billing questions, equipment replacement incentives, business se,'-,ices, air quality, new construction incentives and other energy and money saving programs and sere,ices. This one stop help or referral has trained program specialists who will respond quickly to your needs. The Gas Company is ready to take the extra steps to make natural gas your fuel of choice. Sincerely, Technical Supervisor Encl. i DEC B 1998 County of Riverside DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DATE: November 17, 1998 TO: CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT ATTN: Thomas Thomsley FROM:/GREGOR DELLENBACH, Environmental Health Specialist IV RE: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 29036 / PA98-0447 The Department of Envirom'nental Health has reviewed the Tentative Tract Map No. 29036 / PA98-0447 for this project and cannot make any recommendations until a sanitation letter if filed. The requirements for a SAN 53 letter are as follows: a) A satisfactory soils percolation test to prove the project feasible. b) A clearance letter from the appropriate California Regional Water Quality control Board. NOTE: For projects within the San Diego Water Quality Control Board sphere of influence, a written clearance shall be required PRIOR to issuance of a SAN 53. c) Two copies of the tract map. d) A "will-serve" leVter from the agency/agencies serving potable water. Should the project be served sanitary sewer services, this Department would need only: a) A "will-serve" letter from the agency/agencies serving potable water and sanitary SeWerS. b) One copy of the tentative map. GD:dr (9O9) 955-8980 stand7.doc A'!'I'ACHMENT NO. 3 EXHIBITS F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\447pa98.PC.dec CITY OF TEMECULA ZIP CODE ~' ~' ;~ ~/ Meadowview 92591 ~ ~ ' ~. - Q .-~"~.:: CASE NO. - Planning Application No. PA98-0~7 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29036) EXHIBIT A VICINI~ MAP PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - September 15, 1999 R:',STAFFRPT\447pa98.PC.doc CITY OF TEMECULA DESIGNATION - EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP PO (Low Medium Density Residential) \ ~ /\' EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION - O (Low Medium Density Residential) CASE NO. - PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map 29036) PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - September 15, 1999 R:\STAFFRPT\447pa98 ,PC.doc CITY OF TEMECULA EASEMEN T NO TES .~ ,... ,,,,. I ~JR NO. 22593 g,8 188/53-56 TR NO 20882-5 MB / / --© 1~ NO 20882-5 CASE NO. - Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29036) EXHIBIT D TENTATIVE TRACT MAP PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - September 15, 1999 F:\Depts\PLANNING~'TAFFRi~447pa98.1~C.do~ ATTACHMENT NO, 4 INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\447pa98.PC.doc City of Temecula Planning Department Notice of Proposed Negative Declaration PROJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: Planning Application No. PA98-0447, (Tentative Tract Map No. 29036) and Planning Application No. PA99-0238, (Development Agreement) Scott Newcomb, Hiram-Hill Development Co., LLC 610 Newport Center Dr. #1055, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Located on the south side of Via La Vida between Margarita Road and Solana Way (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 911-170-078, 911-170-085) A request to subdivide 6.31 acres of land into twenty-four (24) residential lots (PA98-0447) and a request for a Development Agreement to vary the setback standards to allow for a minimum five foot side yard setback form property line between homes (PA99-0238). The City of Temecula intends to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project described above. Based upon the information contained in the attached Initial Environmental Study and pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); it has been determined that this project as proposed, revised or mitigated will not have a significant impact upon the environment. As a result, the Planning Commission intends to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project. The mitigation measures required to reduce or mitigate the impacts of this project on the environment are included in the project design and/or the Mitigation Monitoring Program which is attached to this Notice and will be included as part of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project. The Comment Period for this proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is August 26, 1999, to September 15, 1999. Written comments and responses to this notice should be addressed to the contact person listed below at the following address: City of Temecula, P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589- 9033. City Hall is located at 43200 Business Park Drive. The public notice of the intent to adopt this Mitigated Negative Declaration is provided through: X The Local Newspaper. X Posting the Site. X Notice to Adjacent Property Owners. If you need additional information or have any questions concerning this project, please contact the Project Planner, Thomas ThornsIcy at (909) 694-6400. Prepared by: -"~',4v-,.~z ,7c'7 ;Tfi/ , <Signatu;e> Thomas K. Thornslev. Project PIanner (Name and Title) IXTEMEC_FSIOI\VOLIIDEPTS\PLANN[NG\CEQA\447pa98 NOP doe City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92889-9033 Environmental Checklist Project Title Lead Agency Name and Address Contact Person and Phone Number Project Location Project Sponsor's Name and Address General Plan Designation Tentative Tract Map No. 29036 (Planning Application No. PA98- 0447) and a Development Agreement (Planning Application No. PA99-0238) City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecuta, CA 92589-9033 Thomas Thornsley, Project Planner (909) 694-6400 Located on the south side of Via La Vida between Margarita Road and Solana Way (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 911-170-078, 911- 170-085) Scott Newcomb, Hiram-Hill Development Co., LLC 610 Newport Center Dr. #1055, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Low Medium Density Residential (LM) Zoning Low Medium Density Residential (LM) Description of Project Surrounding Land Uses and Setting Other public agencies whose approval is required PA98-0447 is a request to subdivide 6.31 acres of land into twenty- four (24) residential lots. PA99-0238 is request to vary the setback standards to allow for a minimum five foot side yard setback form property line between homes. North: Single family residential East: Single family residential South: Single family residential West: Single family residential None. \\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new IES.doc 1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use 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: 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 revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 1 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 "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact 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. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially impacts(a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing fur[her is required. Signature Date Printed name / %I, TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS%PLANNING\CEQA%447pa98 new tES.doc 2 1. Land Use and Planning. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Physically divide an established community? Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigation an environmental effect? Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact NO Comments: The project will not disrupt of divide the physical arrangement of an established community. The project site is vacant and surrounded by single family homes. The development of this site will be consistent with the surrounding properties, No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 1.b. The project will not conflict with applicable General Plan designation, environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan land use designation of LM (Low Medium Density Residential 3-6 du/acre) as well as the zoning of LM (Low Medium Density Residential 3-6 du/acre). Impacts from all General Plan land use designations were analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General Plan. Agencies with jurisdiction within the City commented on the scope of the analysis contained in the EIR and how the land uses would impact their particular agency. Mitigation measures approved with the EIR will be applied to this project where necessary. 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 policies. The project site has been not been previously graded; however, services are available into the area. There will be no impacts on adopted environmental plans or policies. 1.C. The proposed project will not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. This site was previously graded and is not within any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. \\TEMEC~FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new IES,doc 3 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: ja. Issues and Supporting Information Sources Induce substantial population growth in an area, either diractly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Potentialiy Significant Im0act Significant Impact No rmoact Comments: 2.a. The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designation of Low Medium Density Residential (LM). The proposed subdivision will eventually result in the development of new single family homes, which will cause some people to relocate to, or within Temecula. However, due to its limited scale, it will not induce substantial growth beyond what is projected in the City's General Plan. No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project. 2.b, c. The project will not displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing as the site is vacant property zoned Low Medium Density Residential. Therafore, the project will neither displace housing nor people necessitating the construction of replacement housing. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. ',\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEDTS\PLANNING%CEQA\447pa98 new IES.doc 4 3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project? Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Strong seismic ground shaking? Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Landslides? b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or ,/ that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence. liquefaction or collapse? Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1801-B of the Uniform Building Code (1998), creating substantial risks to life or property? Have soil incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? t=otenliafy Pomntially Significant Unless Significant Mitigation NO Impact i) ii) ,/ iii) iv) ,/ ,/ ,/ Comments: 3.a.i. There are no known or identified earthquake faults as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 3.a.ii, iii, b., and d. There may be a potentially significant impact from seismic ground shaking, ground failure, soil erosion or expansive soils. Although, there are no known fault hazard zones on the property, the project is located in Southern California, an area that is seismically active. Any potential significant impacts will be mitippted through building construction. which is consistent with the Uniform Building Cede standards. Further, the project will be conditioned to provide soil reports prior to grading and recommendations contained in this report are followed during construction. The soil reports will also contain recommendations for the compaction of the soil, which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure, liquefaction, subsidence and expansive soils. After mitigation measures are per-Formed, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 3.a. iv, The City's General Plan does not identify the subject site as being within an area of subsidence, landslides or liquefaction hazards. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 3.e. Septic sewage disposal systems are not proposed for this project. The project will be required to hook up to the existing public sewer system. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. \\TEMEC_FSI01\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new IES.doc 5 4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: C, Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pro-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? Race within a 100~year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Potentially Signi~canl IrnOact Potemeally SigniFicant Unless Mitigation Inc0nporated No Comments: 4,a. The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The subdivision, and subsequent development, will be required to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. By complying with the NPDES requirements, any potential impacts can be mitigated to a level less than significant. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 4.b.,f. The project will not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. The project will not have an affect on the quantity and quality of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or \\TEMEC_FS101\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA~447pa98 new IES.doc 6 4.c,d. 4,e. 4.j. excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability. Further, construction on the site will not be at depths sufficient to have a significant impact on ground waters or aquifer volume. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. The proposed project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation and/or flooding on- or off-site. Some changes to absorption rates. drainage patterns and the rate and amount of surface runoff is expected whenever development occurs on previously permeable ground. Previously permeable ground will be rendered impervious by construction of buildings, accompanying hard scape and driveways. While absorption rates and surface runoff will change, potential impacts shall be mitigated through site design. Drainage conveyances will be required for the project to safely and adequately handle runoff which is created. N no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Due to the small scale of the proposed subdivision, and ultimately the future single family residential development, the project will not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. The project will be conditioned to accommodate the drainage created as a result of the subject site. In addition, the project will be conditioned so that the drainage will not impact surrounding properties. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. The project will have no impact on people or property to water related hazards such as flooding because the project site is located outside of the 100 year floodway and the dam inundation area as identified in the City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. The project site will not be subject to inundation by sieche, tsunami, or mudflow as these events are not known to happen in this region. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: Issues and SupDo,ling tnformatjon Sources Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quaJity plan? Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? iCreate objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of beepie? Potentialiy Potentially Signi~cant Unless Signi~cant Mitigation Impact IncerOorated No Imoact Comments: The project will not conflict with applicable air quality plans nor violate air quality or pollution standards. The project proposes to subdivide a 6.31 acres into 24 residentia[ly zoned lots. The subdivision, and future development, are anticipated to be within the number of dwelling units threshold for potentially \\TEMEC_FS101%VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new ~ES.dOC 7 5.d. 5.e. significant air quality impact established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District as depicted in SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook (Source 3) page 6-10, Table 6.2. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. There are no known sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations in the immediate vicinity. The future development of the project for single family homes will create minor pollutants during the grading and construction phase of the project emanating from fugitive dust and small quantities of construction equipment pofiutants. These impacts will be of short duration and are not considered significant. The future residents are not likely to generate significant pollutants. Therefore, impacts will be less than significant as a result of this project. The project may create objectionable odors during the grading and construction of single family home, however, these impacts are anticipated to be of short duration and should have less than a significant impact. 6. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: Issues and Suol:~ng Information Sources Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections? Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Result in inadequate emergency access? Result in inadequate parking capacity? Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks? Potentially Potenlially Significant Unless Less Than Signilicant Mitigation Significant NO Impact Incoroom~ed linDact Imoact Comments: 6.a, b. There will be an increase in vehicle trips on adjacent streets once the proposed subdivision is developed. Due to the number of lots the vehicle trip count per, the City's Traffic Engineer and the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) estimates the total vehicle trips per day for approximately 24 single-family residences would be approximately 240 daily trips. The City's Traffic Engineer indicated that the future single family development will have a less than significant impact to the existing road system due to the maximum capacity of the existing road system. The existing roadways have been developed in anticipation of the proposed residential development. No further traffic studies were required for this project. The development of tract will be required to contribute traffic signal and public facility development impact fees prior to the issuance of any building permits. No significant impacts are anticipated. ',\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\QEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA%447pa98 new IES,dec 8 6.c 6.d 6.8. 6.f Neither the tract map nor the future development of this property will result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. This site is not within the French Valley Airport's flight overlay district and therefore will have no impact on the project. 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. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. The project will not result in inadequate emergency access or inadequate access to nearby uses. The project is designed to current City standards and has adequate emergency access. The project does not interfere with access to nearby uses but will help accommodate emergency access with the widening of Margarita Road. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. The proposed project is for the subdivision of land; therefore no parking is required. Subsequent development of the proposed parcels will be required to comply with the City's Development Code parking requirements for the residential use. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: Issues and SuOpor~ng Infonmation Sources Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans. policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other means ? interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? \\TEMEC_FS101%VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new IES.doc 9 Potenbally Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Signi~can~ NO Comments: 7.a-d. The project site for the tract map does not lie within in an area designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as potential habitat for any Fedorally listed endangered species. The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats, including, but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds. The project site has been previously disturbed and graded. Currently, there are no native species of plants, no unique, rare, threatened or endangered species of plants, no native vegetation on the site. Further, there is no indication that any wildlife species exist at this location. The project will not reduce the number of species, provide a barrier to the migration of animals or deteriorate existing habitat. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 7.e. The project will not result in an impact to locally designated species. Locally designated species are protected in the Old Town Temecula Specific Plan; however, they are not protected elsewhere in the City. Since this project is not located in Old Town, and since there are no locally designated species on site, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. The project site is located within the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat Fee Area. The project will be conditioned to comply with provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) which requires payment of the Stephens Kangaroo Rat fee. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Potentially Potenlially Sigm~canl Unless Signilicant Mitigation NO Impact Comments: 8.a,b. The project will not result in the loss of available, known mineral resources nor ~n the loss of an available, locally important mineral resource recovery site. The State Geologist has classified the City of Temecula a classification of MRZ-3a, containing areas of sedimentary deposits, which have the potential for supplying sand and gravel for concrete and crushed stone for aggregate. However, these areas are determined as not containing deposits of significant economic value based upon available data in reports prepared in accordance with the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) of 1975. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. ,/TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new IES,doc 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? For a project within the vicinity of a pdvate airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Potentially Signilicant Unless Mitigation Incorporated NO ,f ,f Comments: 9.a. The project is for the future development of single family homes in a residential area. The streets leading to this subdivision are not transportation routes designated for commercial haulers who may be transporting hazardous materials. Because the property and the surrounding area are and will be used for single family homes, this project is not likely to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Therefore. no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 9.b. The future development associated with this project will be single family homes. As such it is reasonably expected that residents will not will not store or house large quantities of hazardous material that would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. \\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new iES.doc 11 9.c. The future use of this project site is designated for single family homes. This site is not within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. The operation of construction equipment and machinery during the development of this site may emit some hazardous emissions and or handle some hazardous material. However, these emissions and material should be of limited quantities over a short duration of time. Since this project site in not within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. and will not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials. substances, or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste, no impacts are anticipated. 9.d. This project site is not nor is it located near a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 that would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 9.e, f. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public or private airstrip. No impact upon airport uses will result from this proposal. 9.g. The project will take access from maintained public streets and will therefore not impede emergency response or evacuation plans. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 9.h. This project site in an area entirely surrounded by existing single family homes and is not adjacent to any wildlands. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 10. NOISE. Would the project result in: Jr. Exposure of people to severe noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? For a project within the vicinity of a private aimtrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Potentially Significant Unless Less Than ,7 ,/ Comments: 10.a. This project site is designated for the development of single family homes. The site ~s 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. However, long-term noise generated by this project would be within the limits of the General Plan standards for residential development. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. //TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS%F~LANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new IES.dOC lO.b. 10.c. lO.d. 10.e. This project site is designated for the development of single family homes. There will be no activities on this site that would exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration o'r groundborne noise levels. No impacts are anticipated. The project will ultimately result in the development of 24 single family homes which will create some noise levels over that currently emanating from the vacant land. However, those noises will not be substantial nor permanent and are not anticipated to create a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Therefore, only less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. The project may result in temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels during construction. Construction machinery is capable of producing noise in the range of 100+ DBA at 100 feet which is considered very annoying. However, this source of noise from construction of the project will be of short duration and therefore would not be considered significant. Furthermore, construction activity will comply with City ordinances regulating the hours of activity in residential areas. No significant impacts are anticipated. This project is not within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, therefore, people residing in the project area will not be to excessive noise levels generated by an airport. 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: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associates with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services? Fire protection? c. Police protection? ,/ d. SChools? e. Parks? f. Other public facilities? Comments: 11 .a., b., c., e. and f. The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered fire, police, recreation or other public facilities. The project will incrementally increase the need for some services. However, the project will contribute its fair share through the City's Development Impact Fees to the maintenance or provision of services from these entities. Due to its small scale, less than significant impacts are anticipated. \\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\QEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA%447pa98 new iES.doc 13 11.d. 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. The cumulative effect from the project will be mitigated through the payment of applicable School Fees. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage 'facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less Than No Comments: 12.a., b. and e. The project will not exceed wastewater treatment requirements, require the construction of new treatment facilities, nor affect the capacity of treatment providers. The project w~ll have an incremental effect upon existing systems. However, the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's General Plan states: "implementation of the proposed General Plan would not significantly impact wastewater services." Since the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Moreover, the project will be conditioned to comply with the Regional Water Quality Control Board standards that will be monitored by the Department of Public Works. No significant impacts are anticipated. 12.c. The project will not result in the need for new storm water drainage facilities. The development of the tract will require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities on site that will connect to the existing system currently in place along Via La Vida and at the southwest corner of the site. The design of the existing system is sufficient handle this project and will not require the expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Drainage fees are required by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District to /\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS~PLANNlNG\CEQA\447pa98 new IES.doc 14 12.d. 12.f,g. reimburse the county for the Murrieta CreekjTemecula Valley Area Drainage Plan. No significant impacts are anticipated. The project will not significantly impact existing water supplies nor require expanded water entitlements. The project will have an incremental effect upon existing systems. While the project will have an incremental impact upon existing systems, the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's General Plan states: "both EMWD and RCWD have indicated an ability to supply as much water as is required in their services areas (p. 39).'" The FE[R further states: "implementation of the proposed General Plan would not significantly impact wastewater services (p. 40)." Since the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. There are no septic tanks on site or proximate to the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. The project will not result in a need for new landfill capacity. Any potential impacts from solid waster created by this development can be mitigated through participation in Source Reduction and Recycling Programs, which are implemented by the City. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 13. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Issues ancl Supporting Information Sources Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Potentially Less Than Signi~canl Impacl NO ImpaCt Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and historic building within a state scenic highway? Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? V' 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. The City does not have any designated scenic highways. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 13.b-c. The project site has no unique physical attributes, therefore the future development will not substantially degrade any scenic resources, or alter the visual character. When the residential structures are built, the design of the homes will be reviewed by the Planning Department to ensure compatibility with the surrounding area and a high quality architectural design. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 13.d. The project will have a potentially significant impact from light and glare. The project will produce and result in light and glare with the installation of new light sources. All light and glare has the potential to impact the Mount Palomar Observatory. The future development of the project site will be conditioned to comply with Ordinance No. 655 Ordinance Regulating Light Pollution. After mitigation is performed, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. \\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new IES.doc 15 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 1506.57 Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.5? Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? IrnOaCt Comments: 14 a thru d The site is'not located in an area that has high paleontological or archaelogical sensitivity pursuant to the General Plan (Source 1, Figures, 5-6 and 5-7). The Eastern Information Center of the University of California at Riverside has reviewed the project and has determined that the site should not have a potentially significant impact to paleontological resources. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 15. RECREATION. Would the project: Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the Potentially Potentially Signi~canl Unless Significant Mifigalion Less Than Signiflcam NO Comments; 15.a,b. The project will have an impact on the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities, or affect existing recreational opportunities. However, the project will be conditioned to pay in- lieu (Quimby) fees, which will be used for park land acquisition of future park land and/or improvements of existing parks. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. \\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS~PLANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new IES.doc 16 16. Agricultural Resources. Would the project: Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? Conflict with the existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland, to non-agricultural use? Less Than Significant linDact Comments: 16a,c. The projeci site is not currently in agricultural production and in the historic past has not ever formerly been used for agricultural purposes. In addition this property is not considered prime or unique of Farmland of statewide importance pursuant the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency or the City of Temecula's General Plan. Therefore. there are no impacts related to this issue. 16b. The project site does not have an agricultural zoning designation by the City of Temecula, and the site is not regulated by a Williamson Act contract. As a consequence there are no impacts related to this issue. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Does the project have impacts that are 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? Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? \\TEMEC_FS101~VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new IES.doc 17 Potentially Potentially Signil~cant Unless S~gnfficanl Mitiga~on NO ImpaCt Comments: 17.a. This site has been previously graded and is completely surrounded by residential development and does not contain any viable habitat for fish or wildlife species. This is an in-fill development and it does not have the potential to: degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat oi' a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten tO eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 17.b. The cumulative effects from the project are not considered significant because the subject site is being development in conformance with the City of Temecula's General Plan and Development Code. All cumulative effects for the various land uses of the subject site as well as the surrounding developments were analyzed in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report. Given the projects consistency with the General Plan and Development Code, the cumulative impact related to the development of the 24 residential lots will not have a significant impact. 17.c. The tract map and the future development of single family homes will not have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, directly or indirectly. The subdivision is designed and will be developed consistent with the Development Code and General Plan. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 18. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets. Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the above check list were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and ' the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 18.a. No earlier analyses specifically related to this project site were use. The City's General Plan and Final Environment Impact Report were used as a referenced source in preparing this Initial Study 18.b. There were no earlier impacts which affected this project. 18.c. The mitigation measures are addressed in the Mitigation Monitoring Program which is attached. SOURCES (Available in the Temecula Planning Department) City of Temecula General Plan. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact ReporL South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook. \\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1%DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA%447pa98 new IES.doc A'I'FACHMENT NO. 5 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\447pa98.pC.doc 32 GeoloGic Problems General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Mitigation Monitoring Program Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29036) Expose people to impacts from 'seismic ground shaking. Ensure that soil compaction is to City Standards. A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted tO the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. Building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer. Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits. Department of Public Works and Building and Safety Department. Expose people to impacts from seismic ground failure, including liquefaction. Ensure that soil compaction is to City Standards. A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. Building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer. Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits. Department of Public Works and Building and Safety Department. Expose people to risks to life or property due to expansive soils. Utilize construction techniques that are consistent with the Uniform Building Code. Submit construction plans to the Building and Safety Department for approval. Prior to the issuance of a building permit. Building and Safety Department. R:~CEQA\447pa98 MM, Pgm..doc 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 violate water quality or waste discharge requirements 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). The project will substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site 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). Transportation/Circulation General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion. Payment of Development Impact Fee for road improvements and traffic impacts. Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecuia Municipal Code. Prior to the issuance of buildin9 oermits. Building and Safety Department. Increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion. Payment of Development impact Fee for traffic signal mitigation. Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code. Prior to the issuance of building permit. Building and Safety Department. R:\CEQA\447pa98 M.M. Pgm..doc 2 Biolo~lical Resources General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Noise General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Public Services General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: R:\C~Q,A,\447pa98 M.M. Pgrn..(~oc 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 $250. per unit of disturbed area of Stephens Kangaroo Rat habitat. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Department of Public Works and Planning Department. Expose people to a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels. Construction activity shall comply with City ordinances regulating the hours of activity in residential areas. City inspectors shall periodically monitor the construction site to ensure compliance. During active construction of the site. Building & Safety Department and Department of Public Works. 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 pul31ic facilities, including roads. Payment of Development impact Fee for road improvements, traffic impacts, and public facilities. Payment of the PubJic Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by. and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code. Prior to the issuance of building permits. Building and Safety Department. Aesthetics General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: The creation of new light sources will result in increased light and glare that could affect the Palomar Observatory. Use lighting techniques that are consistent with Ordinance No. 655. Submit lighting plan to the Building and Safety Department for approval, Prior to the issuance of a building permit. Building & Safety Department. R:\CEQA\447pa98 M,M. Pgm..doc 4 ITEM #4 RECOMMENDATION: STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION September 15, 1999 Development Agreement with Pala Rainbow LLC (Planning Application PA99-0273) Prepared By: David Hogan, Senior Planner The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff recommends the Planning Commission: 1. ADOPT Resolution No. 9~.__ appreving/recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0273 based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; 2. ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. PA99-0273; APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: PROPOSAL: LOCATION: EXISTING ZONING: SURROUNDING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: EXISTING LAND USE: City of Temecula To make a recommendation to the City Council on the proposed Development Agreement between the City of Temecula and Pala Rainbow LLC South of State Highway 79 South, north of Temecula Creek along both sides of Pala Road 'Highway Tourist Commercial (HT) and Professional Office (PO) North: South: East: West: Very Low Density Residential (VL) Open Space-Conservation (OS-C) Professional Office (PO) Low Medium Density Residential (LM) Not Applicable Highway Tourist Commercial and Office Vacant R:~STAFFRPT~273PA99 PC,doc 1 SURROUNDINGLAND USES North: South: East: West: Single Family Residences and vacant Temecula Creek channel Vacant Single Family Residences BACKGROUND The proposed Development Agreement will resolve litigation caused by the fight-of-way acquisition for the new Pala Road bddge. The Development Agreement would allow the property owner to do the following: Develop the property in conformance with the requirements of the existing Highway Tourist Commercial and Professional Office zones; 2. Adjust the required building setbacks in conformance with the existing Development Code; Receive a partial site landscaping credit for open space areas adjacent to the Temecula Creek channel; 4. Pay the applicable Development Impact Fee at a rate that was in effect on January 1, 1999; 5. Receive a partial waiver of some required public improvement plan check fees; and Receive a financial centdbution from the City (not to exceed $100,000) toward the construction of extension of Jedediah Smith Road and related area drainage fadlities. In exchange, the property owner agrees to allow the immediate constnjction of the new Pala Road bddge and associated improvements. The Agreement conveys no additional land use development dghts not previously allowed or authorized under the Citys adopted Development Code (zoning ordinance). A copy of the Development Agreement in included in Exhibit A of Attachment No. 1. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Staff prepared and circulated an Initial Environmental Study for the Development Agreement. The Study indicated that the proposed Development Agreement would have no environmental impacts that had not been previously addressed in the Final Environms,'-tal h'npact Report for the General Plan and Development Code. As a result, staff recommends that a Negative Declaration be adopted for this project. Attachments: 2. 3. 4. PC Resolution No. 99- - Blue Page 3 Draft Ordinance No. 99- - Blue Page 7 Draft Development Agreement - Blue Page 11 Initial Study- Blue Page 12 R:~STAFFRP'D273PA99 PC,doe 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- R:~STAFFRPTt273PA99 PC,doe 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND PALA RAINBOW, LLC FOR PROPERTY LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 79.-SOUTH AND PALA ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0273) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, to resolve potential litigation resulting from the City's acquisition of property through eminent domain, the City of Temecula and the property owner, Pala Rainbow, LLC have agreed to enter into a development agreement; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the procedure specified in City Resolution 91-52 and the Development Code, the City of Temecula has initiated said Development Agreement with Pala Rainbow, LLC; Planning Application No. PA99-0273, (herainafter "Development Agreement"); and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a noticed public headng on September 15, 1999, on the issue of recommending approval or denial of the Development Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES FIND AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt and approve the Ordinance approving the Development Agreement contained in Attachment 'W' attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, Section 2. That in recommending adoption by the City Council of an Ordinance approving the Development Agreement, the Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: (a) The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula General Plan in that the Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for commercial and office development and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designations of Highway Tourist Commercial and Office Professional; and, (b) The Development Agreement complies with the goals and objectives of the Circulation Element of the General Plan and the traffic impacts of the development over the period of the Development Agreement will be substantially mitigated by the mitigation measures and conditions of approval imposed; and, (c) The project subject to the Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for the zoning distdct in which the Property subject to the Development Agreement is located, and that this Development Agreement is consistent with good planning practices by providing for the opportunity to develop the Property consistent with the General Plan; and, (d) The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience, R:~STAFFRPT'~273PA99 PC.d0C 4 general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; and, (e) The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof; and, (f) Notice of the public headng before the Planning Commission was published in a newspaper of general drculation at least ten (10) days before the Planning Commission public headng, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days pdor to the headrig to the project applicant and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, and police and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; and, (g) Notice of the public headng before the Planning Commission included the date, time, and place of the public hearing, the identity of the hearing body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description and text or diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the headng, and of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; and, (h) The benefits that will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from this legislation and this Development Agreement are the mutually agreeable resolution of eminent domain issues that could have otherwise resulted in litigation. Section 3. The Secretary of the Planning Commission shall cause this Resolution to be transmitted to the City Council for further proceedings in accordance with State law. R:%STAFFRP'r~'73PA99 PC.doc 5 Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of September, 1999. Ron Guerdero, 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 15th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:~STAFFRPT~273PA99 PC.doe 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 99~ R:~STAFFRP'I'%273PA99 PC.doc 7 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 ORDINANCE NO. 99- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND PALA RAINBOW, LLC FOR PROPERTY LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 79-SOUTH AND PALA ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0273) WHEREAS, Section 65864 et seq. of the Government Code of the State of Califomia and Temecula City Resolution No. 91-52 authorize the execution of agreements establishing and maintaining requirements applicable to the development of real property; and, WHEREAS, to resolve potential litigation resulting from the City's acquisition of property through eminent domain, the City of Temecula and the property owner, Pala Rainbow, LLC have agreed to enter into a development agreement; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the procedure specified in City Resolution 91-52 and the Development Code, the City of Temecula has initiated said Development Agreement with Pala Rainbow, LLC; and, WHEREAS, notice of the City's intention to consider adoption of this Agreement with Pala Rainbow, LLC has been duly given in the form and manner required by law, and the Planning Commission and City Council of said City have each conducted public hearings on September 15, 1999 (Planning Commission), and (City Council) at which time it heard and considered all evidence relevant and matedal to said subject. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. FINDINGS. The City Council hereby finds and determines, with respect to this Agreement by and between the City of Temecula and Pala Rainbow, LLC, that it: A. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula General Plan in that the Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for commercial and office development and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designations of Highway Toudst Commercial and Office Professional; and, B. The Development Agreement complies with the goals and objectives of the Circulation Element of the General Plan and the traffic impacts of the development over the pedod of the Development Agreement will be substantially mitigated by the mitigation measures and conditions of approval imposed; and, C. The project subject to the Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for the zoning district in which the Property subject to the Development Agreement is located, and that this Development Agreement is consistent with good planning practices by providing for the opportunity to develop the Property consistent with the General Plan; and, D. The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; and, R:~STAFFRP'R273PA99 PC.doe 8 E. The Development Agreement will not be detdmental to the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurancas for the protection thereof; and, F. Notice of the public headng before the Planning Commission was published in a newspaper of general drculation at least ten (10) days before the Planning Commission public hearing, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days pdor to the headng to the project applicant and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, and police and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; and, G. Notice of the public headng before the Planning Commission included the date, time, and place of the public headng, the identity of the headng body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description and text or diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the headng, and of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; and, H. The benefits that will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from this legislation and this Development Agreement are the mutually agreeable resolution of eminent domain issues that could have otherwise resulted in litigation. Section 2. APPROVAL. The Development Agreement, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit "1" is hereby approved. The Mayer is authorized and directed to evidence such approval by executing this Agreement for, and in the name ct, the City of Temecula; and the City Clerk is directed to attest thereto; provided, however, that this Agreement shall not be executed by the City until this Ordinance takes effect and the City has received from the applicant two executed originals of said Agreement. Section 3. SEVERABILITY. The City Council hereby decdares that the provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance. Section 4. NOTICE OF ADOPTION. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law. Section 5. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall pubfish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days prior to the adoption of this O~inance. Within 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance, together with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against the Ordinance, and post the same in the office of the City Clerk. R:%STAFFRPT%273PAit PC.doe 9 Section 6. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of ,1999. Steven J. Ford, Mayor ATTEST: Susan Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attomey STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) CITY OF TEMECULA) I, Susan Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. __ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of ,1999, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ASSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk R:~STAFFRP'i~T'73PAgg PC.doc 10 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT R:~STAFFRPT~273PA99 PC.doe 11 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is entered into as of the day of ,199__ ("Agreement Date"), by and between PALA RAINBOW, LLC., (hereinaf~er "OWNER"), and the CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of California (hereinafier "CITY"), pursuant to the authority of Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code (the "Development Agreement Legislation") and Article XI, Section 2 of the California Constitution. RECITALS This Agreement is predicated upon the following facts: A. These Recitals refer to and utilize certain capitalized terms which are defmed in this Agreement. The parties intend to refer to those definitions in conjunction with the use thereof in these Recitals. B. The Development Agreement Legislation authorizes CITY to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property in order to, among other matters: ensure high quality development in accordance with comprehensive plans; provide certainty in the approval of development projects so as to avoid the waste of resources and the escalation in the cost of housing and other development to the consumer; provide assurance to the applicants for development projects that they may proceed with their projects in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations and subject to conditions of approval, in order to strengthen the public planning process and encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the private and public economic costs of development; and provide for economic assistance to OWNER for the entitlements authorizing development related improvements. C. OWNER is the owner of certain real property within the County of Riverside, State of California (the "Property"), as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. OWNER desires to develop the Property in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, the applicable regulations of the City of Temecula and those regulations of other agencies exercising jurisdiction upon the project. The Scope of Development of the Property as contemplated by this Agreement is described in the Agreement in Section 1.15. D. OWNER has applied for, and CITY has granted this Agreement in order to create a beneficial project and a physical environment that will conform to and L\TEMECULAXPALARAINXDEVAGR 8/20/99 1 complement the goals of CITY, create a development project sensitive to human needs and values, facilitate efficient traffic circulation, and develop the Property. As pan of the process of granting this entitlement, the City Council of CITY (hereinafter the "City Council") has required the preparation of an environmental review and has issued a Negative Declaration as regards any significant effects arising fi'om the Project and has otherwise carded out all requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act CCEQA") of 1970, as amended. Project: The following actions were taken with respect to this Agreement and the 1. On , following a duly noticed and conducted public hearing, the City Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve this Agreement; 2. On , after a duly noticed public hearing and pursuant to CEQA, the City Council adopted the Negative Declaration for this Agreement and the Project; 3. On ,atter a duly noticed public heating, the City Council determined that the provisions of this Agreement are consistent with the General Plan of the CITY; 4. On , after a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council introduced Ordinance No. __ - approving and authorizing the execution of this Agreement and on , the City Council adopted the Ordinance, a copy of which is on file in the Development Services Department at the CITY, and adopted the findings and conditions pertaining thereto, including those relating to the environmental documentation for the Project. F. The CITY has engaged in extensive sPadies and review of the potential impacts of the Project as well as the various potential benefits to the CITY by the development of the Project and concluded that the Project is in the best interests of the City. G. In consideration of the substantial public improvements and benefits to be provided by OWNER and the Project, and in order to strengthen the public financing and planning process and reduce the economic costs of development, by this Agreement, CITY intends to give OWNER assurance that OWNER can proceed with the development of the Project for the Term of this Agreement pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and in accordance with CITY's General Plan, ordinances, policies, rules and regulations existing as of the Effective Date. In reliance on CITY's L\TEMECULAXPALAR,~INXDEVAGR 8/20/99 2 covenants in this Agreement concerning the Development of the Properly, OWNER has and will in the future incur substantial costs in site preparation and the construction and installation of major infrastructure and facilities in order to make the Project feasible. H. Pursuant to Section 65867.5 of the Development Agreement Legislation, the City Council has found and determined that: (i) this Agreement and the Existing Project Approvals implement the goals and policies of CITY's General Plan, provide balanced and diversified land uses and impose appropriate standards and requirements with respect to land development and usage in order to maintain the overall quality of life and the environment within CITY, (ii) this Agreement is in the best interests of and not detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare of CITY and its residents; (iii) adopting this Agreement is consistent with CITY's General Plan and constitutes a present exercise of the CITY's police power; and (iv) this Agreement is being entered into pursuant to and in compliance with the requirements of Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Legislation. I. CITY and OWNER agree that it may be beneficial to enter into additional agreements or to modify this Agreement with respect to the implementation of the separate components of the Project when more information concerning the details of each component is available, and that this Agreement should expressly allow for such contemplated additional agreements or modifications to this Agreement. NOW, THEEFOE, pursuant to the authority contained in the Development Agreement Legislation, as it applies to CITY, pursuant to Article XI, Section 2 of the California Constitution, and in consideration of the foregoing recitals of fact, all of which are expressly incorporated into this Agreement, the mutual covenants set forth in this Agreement and for the further consideration described in this Agreement, the parties agree as follows: 1. Definitions. The following words and phrases are used as defined terms throughout this Development Agreement and each defined term shall have the meaning set forth below. No. 1.1. Authorizing Ordinance. The "Authorizing Ordinance" means Ordinance __ approving this Agreement. 1.2. CITY. The "CITY" means the City of Temecula, a California municipal corporation, duly organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of Califomia, and all of its officials, employees, agencies and departments. L\TEMECULA\PALAKAIN',DEVAGR 8/20/99 3 1.3. City Council. "City Council" means the duly elected and constituted city council of the CITY. 1.4. Development. "Development" means the improvement of the Property for purposes consistent with the Project's land use authorization, including, without limitation: grading, the construction of infxastructure and public facilities related to the Off-site Improvements and On-Site Improvements, the construction of structures and buildings and the installation of landscaping. 1.5. Development Agreement Legislation. The "Development Agreement Legislation" means Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code as it exists on the Effective Date. 1.6. Development Fees. "Development Fees" means development impact and processing fees imposed on the Development as conditions of development as more particularly set forth in Section 4.2. 1.7. Development Plan. The "Development Plan" consists of this Agreement, the Existing Regulations, and those Future Development Approvals, if any, contemplated, necessary, and requested by OWNER to implement the land uses authorized by the Project. 1.8. Effective Date. "Effective Date" means the date the Authorizing Ordinance becomes effective. 1.9. Existing Regulations. "Existing Regulations" means those ordinances, roles, regulations, policies, requirements, guidelines, constraints or other actions of the CITY, other than site-specific Project Approvals, which purport to affect, govern or apply to the Property or the implementation of the Development Plans in effect on the Effective Date. Existing Regulations shall also include the text of the zoning district designations of any zoning district applicable to the site of the Project in effect on the Effective Date. 1.10. Future Development Approvals. "Future Development Approvals" means those entitlements and approvals contemplated, necessary, and requested by CITY or OWNER to cause the Development to occur upon the Property subsequent to completion of the Project and approved by the City currently upon or after the Effective Date. The parties hereto expressly anticipate Owner will institute mixed uses on the property that may include some combination of Business Park-Light Industrial, Office Professional, Residential and Commercial uses. 1.11. Off-site Improvements. "Off-site Improvements" means physical infirastructure improvements or facilities which are not and will not be located on the L\TEMECULAXPALARAINXDEVAGR 8/20/99 4 Property. Certain Off-site Improvements may be specifically addressed in this Agreement; all others will be dependent upon the Development and the required Future Development Approvals. 1.12. On-site Improvements. "On-site Improvements" means physical infrastructure improvements or facilities that are or will be located on the Property. Certain On-site Improvements may be specifically addressed in this Agreement; all others will be dependent upon the Development and the required Future Development Approvals. 1.13. OWNER. "OWNER" is initially PALA RAINBOW, LLC and all successors in interest, in whole or part, to this entity. 1.14. Planning Commission. "Planning Commission" means the duly appointed and constituted planning commission of CITY. 1.15. Project. "Project" means the adoption of this Agreement thus securing the scope and intensity of land uses to be developed upon the parcel which is approximately sixteen and four tenths (16.4) acres in area and which is generally located adjacent to State Highway 79 South at Pala Road. The uses permitted and scope of the Development shall be consistent with the development standards set forth in the [Please Identify] zones, in effect on the Effecftve Date (copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibit" "and incorporated herein by this reference) subject to the express limitations in this Agreement, 1.16 Project Approval. "Project Approval" means the accomplishment of the actions as described in Section 1.15. 2. General Provisions. 2.1. Binding Covenants. The provisions of this Agreement to the extent permitted by law shall constitute covenants which shall run with the Property for the benefit thereof, and the benefits and burdens of this Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties and all successors in interest to the parties hereto. 2.2. Interest of OWNER. OWNER represents that OWNER has a legal interest in the Property. 2.3. Term. The term (hereinat~er called "Ten") of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall extend for a period of five (5) years therea~er terminating at the end of the day preceding the tenth (10th) anniversary of the Effective LXTEMECULAXPALARAIN~)EVAGR 8/20/99 Date, subject to specific extensions, revisions and termination provisions of this Agreement. 2.4. Termination. This Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further effect upon the occurrence of any of the following events: 2.4. 1. If termination occurs pursuant to any specific provision of this Agreement; 2.4.2. Completion of the total build-out of the Development pursuant to the terms of this Agreement and the CITY's issuance of all required occupancy permits and acceptance of all dedications and improvements required to complete Development; Or 2.4.3. Entt3' after all appeals have been exhausted of a final judgment or issuance of a final order directed to the CITY as a result of any lawsuit filed against the CITY to set aside, withdraw, or abrogate the approval of the City Council of this Agreement for any part of the Project. The termination of this Agreement shall not affect any right or duty arising independently from entitlements issued by CITY or other land use approvals approved prior to, concurrently or subsequent to the approval of this Agreement. 2.5. Transfers and Assignments. 2.5.1. Right to Assign. OWNER shall have the right from time to time and on such number of occasions as it chooses to sell, assign or otherwise transfer all or any portion of its interests in the Property together with all its right, title and interest in this Agreement, or the portion thereof which is subject to transfer (the "Transferred Property") to any person or entity at any time during the Term of this Agreement; provided, however, that any such transfer or assignment must be pursuant to a sale, assignment or other transfer of the interest of OWNER in the Property, or a portion thereof. In the event of any such sale, assignment, or other transfer, (i) OWNER shall notify CITY within twenty (20) days of such event of the name of the transferee, together with the corresponding entitlements being transferred to such transferee and (ii) the agreement between OWNER and such transferee pertaining to such transfer shall provide that either OWNER or the transfeme shall be liable for the performance of those obligations of OWNER under this Agreement which relate to the Transferred Property, if any. Each transferee and OWNER shall notify CITY in writing which entity shall be liable for the performance of each respective obligations. L\TEMECULA~PALARAINXDEVAGR 8/20/99 6 2.5.2. Rights of Successors and Assigns. Any and all successors and assigns of OWNER shall have all of the same rights, benefits and obligations of OWNER under this Agreement. 2.6. Amendment of Development Agreement. 2.6.1. Initiation of Amendment. Either party may propose an amendment to this Agreement and both parties agree that it may be beneficial to enter into additional agreements or modifications of this Agreement in connection with the implementation of the separate components of the Project. 2.6.2. Procedure. Except as set forth in Section 2.6.4 below, the procedure for proposing and adopting an amendment to this Agreement shall be the same as the procedure required for entering into this Agreement in the first instance. 2.6.3. Consent. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, any amendment to this Agreement shall require the written consent of both parties. No amendment to all or any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless set forth in writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of each of the parties. 2.6.4. Operating Memoranda. The parties acknowledge that refinements and further development of the Project may demonstrate that changes are appropriate with respect to the details and performance of the parties under this Agreement. The parties desire to retain a certain degree of flexibility with respect to the details of the Development and with respect to those items covered in general terms under this Agreement. If and when the parties mutually find that changes, adjustments, or clarifications are appropriate to further the intended purposes of this Agreement, they may, unless otherwise required by law, effectuate such changes. adjustments, or clarifications without amendment to this Agreement through operating memoranda mutually approved by the parties, which, after execution, shall be attached hereto as addenda and become a part hereof and may be further changed and amended fi'om time to time as necessary, with further approval by City Manager, on behalf of the CITY and by any corporate officer or other person designated for such purpose in a writing signed by a corporate officer on behalf of OWNER. Unless otherwise required by law or by the Project Approvals, no such changes, adjustments, or clarifications shall require prior notice or hearing. 3. Description of Development. 3.1. Development and Control of Development. 3.1.1. Project. While this Agreement is in effect, OWNER shall have the vested right to implement the Development authorized by the Project pursuant to this L\TEMECULA~PALARAII~DEVAGR 8/20/99 7 Agreement and the Project Approvals and CITY shall have the right to control the Development in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement, the Existing Regulations shall control the design and development, Future Development Approvals and all On-Site Improvements and Off-Site Improvements and appurtenances in connection therewith. 3.1.2. Timing of Development. Regardless of any future enactment, by initiative, or otherwise, OWNER shall have the discretion to develop the Future Development in one phase or in multiple phases at such times as OWNER deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment. Specifically, CITY agrees that OWNER shall be entitled to apply for and receive permits, maps, occupancy certificates and other entitlemerits to develop and use the Property at any time, provided that such application is made in accordance with this Agreement and the Existing Regnlations. The parties hereto expressly reject the holding of Pardee Construction Company v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal. 3d 465 (1984) as regards any authority regulating the phasing of the Development. 3.1.3. Entitlements, Permits and Approvals - Cooperation. A. Procedure without a land use plan. Upon satisfactory completion by OWNER of all required preliminary actions, applications, studies, and payments of appropriate processing fees, if any, CITY shall, subject to all legal requirements, diligently process, and complete at the earliest reasonable time all required steps, and expeditiously act upon approvals and permits necessary for Future Development Approvals anticipated under this Agreement including, but not limited to, the following: (1) The prncessing of applications for and issuing of all discretionary approvals requiring the exercise of judgment and deliberation by CITY, including without limitation, the Future Development Approvals; (2) The holding of any required public hearings; (3) The processing of applications for and issuing of all ministerial approvals requiring the determination of conformante with Existing Regulations, including, without limitation, site plans, grading plans, improvement plans, building plans and specification, and ministerial issuance of one or more final maps, zoning clearances, grading permits, improvement permits, wall permits, building permits, lot line adjustments, encroachment permits, temporary use permits, certificates of use and L\TEMECULAXPALARAR~DEVAGR 8/20/99 8 occupancy approvals and entitlements and related matters as necessary for the completion of the development of the Property. B. Procedure with land use plan. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if OWNER elects, at its own sole cost, to prepare and process a comprehensive land use plan for the subject real property, then the further processing of such further approvals shall be done administratively and as set forth in the land use plan. The land use plan shall be reviewed and approved by the CITY by and through its Planning Commission and, if necessary, its City Council. An example of the nature and scope of the land use plan contemplated for the subject real property is the plan prepared for the regional mall project in the City of Temecula. 3.1.3.1. Further Mitigation. In connection with the completion of the Project, OWNER shall be responsible for the satisfaction of any mitigation measures that depend on, act upon, or relate to Future Development Approvals. In connection with the issuance of any Future Development Approvals which are subject to review under CEQA, unless required under CEQA, the CITY shall not impose any environmental land use alternatives or mitigation measures in addition to those referenced in the Project Approvals or deemed reasonably necessaxy in light of the development activity proposal. 3.1.3.2. Other Permits. CITY further agrees to reasonably cooperate with OWNER in securing any County, State and Federal p~nnits or authorizations which may be required in connection with development of the Project. This cooperation shall not entail any economic contribution by City. 3.2. Rules, Regulations and Official Policies. Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement and the Project Approvals, the rules, regulations and official policies governing the permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to Development of the Property shall be the Existing Regulations. In connection with any subsequent approval or action which CITY is permitted or has the right to make under this Agreement relating to the Project, CITY shall exercise its discretion or take action in a manner which complies and is consistent with this Agreement, the Existing Regulations and such other standards, terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. An overview and non-exhaustive list of Existing Regulations is listed in Exhibit "C". CITY has certified two copies of each of the documents listed on Exhibit "C" . CITY has retained one set of the certified documents and has provided OWNER with the second set. L\TEMECULAXPALARAINXDEVAGR 8/20/99 9 3.3. Reserved Authority. 3.3.1. Uniform Codes. This Agreement shall not prevent CITY from applying new rules, regulations and policies relating to uniform codes adopted by the State of Califomia, as State Codes, such as the Uniform Building Code, National Electrical Code, Uniform Mechanical Code or Uniform Fire Code, as amended, and the application of the aforementioned uniform codes is hereby approved including as the same may be amended by CITY from time to time. 3.3.2. State and Federal Laws and Regulations. In the event that State or Federal laws or regulations prevent or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such state or federal laws or regulations; provided, however, that this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CITY shall not adopt or undertake any regulation, program or action, or fail to take any action which is inconsistent or in conflict with this Agreement until CITY makes a finding that such regulation, program action or inaction is required (as opposed to permitted) to comply with such State and Federal laws or regulations after taking into consideration all reasonable altematives. 3.3.3. Regulation for Health and Safety. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, CITY shall have the fight to apply CITY regulations (including amendments to the Existing Regulations) adopted by the CITY after the Effective Date, in connection with any Future Development Approvals, or deny, or impose conditions of approval on, any Future Development Approvals in CITY's sole discretion if such application is required to protect the physical health and safety of existing or future occupants of the Property, or any portion thereof or any lands adjacent thereto. 3.4. Vested Right. By entering into this Agreement and relying thereupon, OWNER is obtaining vested rights to proceed with the Development anticipated by the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and in accordance with, and to the extent of, the Project Approvals. By entering into this Agreement and relying thereupon, CITY is securing certain public benefits which enhance the public health, safety and welfare, a partial listing of which benefits is set forth in Section 4.1. CITY therefore agrees to the folhiwing: 3.4.1. No Conflicting Enactments. Except as provided in Section 3.3 of this Agreement, neither the City Council nor any other agency of CITY shall enact a rule, L\TEMECULAXPALARAINXDEVAGR 8/20/99 10 regulation, ordinance or other measure (collectively "law") applicable to the Property which is inconsistent or in conflict with this Agreement. Any law, whether by specific reference to the Development Agreement or otherwise, shall be considered to conflict if it has any of the following effects: (i) Limits or reduces the density or intensity of the Development as regulated by the Existing Regulations or otherwise requires any reduction or increase in the number, size or square footage of lot(s), structures, buildings or other improvements; or (ii) Applies to the Property, but is not uniformly applied by the CITY to all substantially similar development within the CITY. 3.4.2. Consistent Enactments. By way of enumeration and not limitation, the following types of enactments shall be considered consistent with this Agreement and Existing Regulations and not in conflict: (i) Relocation of structures within the Property pursuant to an application firom OWNER; and (ii) Changes in the phasing of the development pursuant to an application ~'om OWNER. (iii) Any enactment authorized by this Agreement. 3.4.3. Initiative Measures. In addition to and not in limitation of the foregoing, it is the intent of OWNER and CITY that no moratorium or other limitation (whether relating to the development of all or any part of the Project and whether enacted by initiative or otherwise) affecting parcel or subdivision maps (whether tentative, vesting tentative or final), site development permits, precise plans, site development plans, building permits, occupancy certificates or other entitlements to use approved, issued or granted within CITY, or portions of CITY, shall apply to the Project to the extent such moratorium or other limitation would restrict OWNER's right to develop the Project in such order and at such rate as OWNER deems appropriate. CITY agrees to cooperate with OWNER in all reasonable manners in order to keep this Agreement in full force and effect. In the event of any legal action iustitoted by a third party or other governmental entity or official challenging the validity of any provision of this Agreement, the parties hereby agree to cooperate in defending such action. hi the event of any litigation challenging the effectiveness of this Agreement, or any portion hereof, this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect while such litigation, including any appellate review, is pending. L\TEMECULA~PALARAIN~EVAGR 8/20/99 l 1 3.4.4. Consistency Between This Agreement and Current Laws. CITY represents that at the Effective Date there axe no rules, regulations, ordinances, policies or other measures of the CITY in force as of the Agreement Date that would interfere with Development and use of all or any part of the Property according this Agreement. 3.5. Future Amendments to Development Plan. The following rules apply to future amendments to the Development Plan: 3.5.1. OWNER's Written Consent. Any Development Plan amendment to which OWNER does not agree in writing shall not apply to the Property or the Project while this Agreement is in effect. 3.5.2. Concurrent Development Agreement Amendment. Any Development Plan amendment requiring amendment of this Agreement shall be processed concurrently with an amendment to this Agreement. 3.5.3. Effect of Amendment. Except as expressly set forth within this Agreement, a Development Plan amendment will not alter, affect, impair or otherwise impact the fights, duties and obligations of the parties under this Agreement. 4. Obligations of the Parties. 4.1. Benefits to CITY. The direct and indirect benefits CITY (including, without limitation the existing and future residents of CITY) will receive pursuant to the implementation of the Agreement include, but axe not limited to, the following: effort; 4.1.1. Comprehensive Planning. Providing a comprehensive planning 4.1.2. Short Term Employment. Creating substantial employment opportunities through the construction and development phase; 4.1.3 Long Term Employment. Creating substantial employment opportunities subsequent to the Development; 4.1.4 Improvements. The development of the Property, including offsite infi'astructure improvements; and 4.1.5 Settlement of Litigation. The adoption of this Agreement shall result in the settlement of an eminent domain action between the parties. L\TEMECULAXPALARAIN~DEVAGR 8/20/99 12 4.2. Development Fees. Certain presently undefined development impact and processing fees will be imposed on the Future Development Approvals as conditions of approval. Owner shall be responsible for payment of such fees as they may become due at the charge then applicable. Notwithstanding the foregoing the fees charged by the City of Temecula shall be at the rate effective for such action on January 1, 1999. 4.3. Dedications and Exactions. Future Development Approvals will be reviewed in a manner consistent with the general review procedures of the CITY accorded the particular type of Future Development Approval being sought and necessary conditions imposed in a manner consistent with this Agreement. 4.3.1. Curb Cut Access to Subject Property. CITY agrees to process, in a reasonable and customaxy manner, the amendments to that certain Memorandum of Understanding with CulTruns and the County of Riverside (identified as .... ) as regards access to the subject property. CITY shall bear no costs other than those related to its reasonable ailoeation ofpersounel necessary to accomplish the amendment. Any and all costs shall be borne by OWNER. The area of the curb cut activity is as defined on Exhibit .... attached hereto [this exhibit was not included in the transmittal to me. I will need a copy in order to make this provision more specific.] 4.3.2 Jedediah Smith Road Extension South of Highway 79. A. Construction Component CITY agrees to contribute an amount equal to one-third of the total costs involved in the extension of the storm drain necessary to permit the extension of Jedediah Smith Road. Notwithstanding any of the contrary in no instance shall CITY's contribution to the construction component exceed One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00). The costs of which contributions are permissible include engineering costs, permit application costs, environmental studies and project specific professional services. CITY shall contribute its proportionate share of the construction monies at any time subsequent to OWNER's commencement of the storm drain construction process, as demonstrated by OWNER's obtaining a CITY building permit. Upon receipt of a detailed invoice from OWNER describing the basis of the funding request and showing the amount sought is one-third (1/3) of the total monies expended, CITY will promptly deliver the portion of the funds for the current stage of construction to OWNER. Exhibit .... attached hereto describes the general physical location of the storm drain in relation to Jedediah Smith Road within the public right-of-way. B. Plan Check and Permit Fee Waiver L\TEMECLILAXPALARAINNDEVAGR 8/20/99 13 CITY agrees to waive its routinely charged fees for plan check and permits for the storm drain construction described in Section 4.3.2A above. C. Further Cooperation CITY will reasonably cooperate in coordinating the storm drain project with the OWNER and County of Riverside to facilitate the efficient development of the facility, including, without limitation, the City's encouragement of the County to contribute its funds to the City, and commitment to administer such funds consistent with the procedures set forth in Section 4.3.2.A. 4.3.3 Administrative Discretion - Site Design and Planning. The OWNER and CITY recognize that certain on-site circumstances may require deviation from the strict application of CITY's zoning standards. The CITY desires to allow for the administrative discretion of certain of the design issues for the facilitation of OWNER's site planning purposes. The CITY hereby authorizes the City Manager, or his or her designee, to act on or to determine that such matter should be acted upon by the CITY Planning Commission, the following issues: A. Reduced Set Back on Highway 79 South and Pala Road The front yard set back may be reduced to zero, or any dimension less than the generally applicable front yard setback amount, in the discretion of the City Manager after consideration of the OWNER's proposals and subject to reasonably accepted planning principles. B. On-site Landscape Area Requirements Incorporating Wetlands Mitigation Area The parties recognize that a portion of land owned by OWNER is currently limited in its development potential because it is reserved as wetlands mitigation land. The City Manager, or his or her designee, may, in their reasonable discretion, allow all or some portion of the wetland mitigation area (as shown on Attachment .... ) to be calculated as a portion of OWNER's on-site landscaping requirements for the approximately 16.4 acre subject site. L\TEMECULAXPALARAINXDEVAGR 8/20/99 14 4.4 Limitation on Restaurant Uses. Concurrently with the quit claim referenced in Section 4.5(B)(1), OWNER agrees to impose, to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY, covenants and conditions upon that portion of the Property located west of Pala Road which serve to prohibit drive-in restaurant uses on such portion of the Property. The restricted area is shown on Exhibit .... The covenants shall insure that no diminuation or release of the land use limitation may occur without the prior written consent of CITY. 4.5 Related Real Property Conveyances; Conditions to Development A~reemenL A. Intent of the Parties The CITY and OWNER agree that the timely completion of the related real estate transactions described hereafter are a material component of the consideration each party has relied upon in its respective decision to enter into this Agreement. OWNER and CITY, individually and collectively, represent that neither party would have entered into this Agreement but for the promises of the other to transfer the interests in real property described hereunder to the other party. Further, OWNER and CITY, individually and collectively, agree that the failure of any one of the conveyances to be completed in a timely manner will be an event of default under Section 10 of this Agreement. B. Conveyances to OWNER from CITY 1. Easement Quit Claim CITY, pursuant to the deeding instrument recorded as previously was granted a nonspecific easement by OWNER over a portion of the property subject to the jurisdiction of this Agreement. This property is generally described on Exhibit" "hereto. CITY, agrees to, after the Effective Date of this Agreement and concurrently with the conveyance identified in Section 4.5(c)(1) below, deliver to OWNER a quit claim deed describing the interest presently held by CITY and conveying the same to OWNER. 2. Easement Quit Claim CITY has previously had dedicated to it, for public purposes, that certain real property described on Exhibit .... The CITY received its interest from the entity identified as "KIJFKLA." CITY will deliver a quit claim deed to OWNER quit claiming the interest identified on Exhibit .... concurrently with the delivery of the quit claim deed described in Section 4.5(B)(1) above. L\TEMECULA~PALARAII~DEVAGR 8/20/99 15 3. OWNER's Purchase of City of Temecula Real Property CITY presently owns fee title to that certain parcel of real property identified on Exhibit "__" OWNER has offered to purchase, and CITY has conditionally agreed to sell, subject to the satisfaction of its customarily required proceedings and conditions, the parcel for the sum of Four Dollars ($4.00) per square foot. C. Conveyances to CITY from OWNER 1. 6.9 Acre Portion of APN 950-110-022 OWNER, by its letter of October 21, 1998, accepted CITY's offer of June 18, 1998 to purchase the above-referenced real property for Thirty- seven Thousand Dollars ($37,000.00). The subject real property is specifically described on Exhibit .... hereto. It is anticipated that the CITY will obtain title to the subject property by a grant deed conveying fee simple title at a date not more than ninety (90) calendar days from the Effective Date of this Agreement. 2. 4.3 Acre Mitigation Parcel OWNER has agreed, by reference in paragraph 5 of OWNER's October 21, 1998 letter, to convey a 4.3 acre parcel of real property to the CITY for environmental mitigation purposes. This conveyance is anticipated to be completed on or before ninety (90) calendar days from the Effective Date of this Agreement have elapsed. 4.6 Termination of Eminent Domain Action. In addition to the other compensation in this Agreement, the entire deposit in the eminent domain action (Riverside County Superior Court Case No. RXC , referred to in' the rest of this section as the "Action") of Two Hundred Ninety-five Thousand Dollars ($295,000.00), plus any interest that accrued on the deposit, shall be immediately released to OWNER. Once OWNER receives such funds, OWNER shall, at CITY's option, either (a) stipulate to a final order of condemnation for the "subj eel property" defined in the Complaint in Eminent Domain in the Action, or (b) sign and deliver a deed transferring said "subject Property" to CITY, with CITY then dismissing OWNER from the Action. 5. Further Assurances to OWNER Regarding Exercise of Reserved Authority. L\TEMECULA~ALARAINXDEVAGR 8/20/99 16 5.1. Adoption of General Plan and Granting of Other Project Approvals. In preparing and adopting any general plan amendment, zoning district change and in granting the other Project Approvals, CITY reserves its right to and shall consider the health, safety and welfare of the residents of CITY. 5.2. Assurances to OWNER. The parties further acknowledge that the public benefits to be provided by OWNER to CITY pursuant to this Agreement are in consideration for and reliance upon assurances that the Property can be developed in accordance with the Project Approvals and this Agreement. Accordingly, while recognizing that the Development of the Property may be affected by exercise of the authority and rights reserved and excepted as provided in Sections 3.3.1 and 3.3.2. ("Reserved Authority") or this Agreement, OWNER is concerned that normally the judiciary extends to local agencies significant deference in the adoption of land use regulations which might permit CITY in violation of the Reserved Authority, to attempt to apply regulations which are inconsistent with the Project Approvals pursuant to the exercise of the Reserved Authority. Accordingly, OWNER desires assurances that CITY shall not and CITY agrees that it shall not further restrict or limit the development of the Property in violation of this Agreement except in strict accordance with the Reserved Authority. 5.3. Judicial Review. Based on the foregoing, in the event OWNERjudicially (including by way of a reference proceeding) challenges the application of a future land use regulation as being in violation of this Agreement and as not being a land use regulation adopted pursuant to the Reserved Authority, OWNER shall bear the burden of proof in establishing that such rule, regulation or policy is inconsistent with the Existing Regulations and the Project Approvals and CITY shall thereafter bear the burden of proof in establishing that such regulation was adopted pursuant to and in accordance with the Reserved Authority and was not applied by CITY in violation of this Agreement. 6. Indemnification. Except to the extent of the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties (as defined below), OWNER, and with respect to the portion of the Property transferred to them, the transferee agree: (i) to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the Indemnified Parties from and against each and every claim, action, proceeding, cost, fee, legal cost, damage, award or liability of any nature arising from alleged damages caused to third parties and alleging that CITY is liable therefor as a direct or indirect result of CITY's approval of this Development Agreement. OWNER's duties under this Section 6(i) are solely subject to and conditioned upon the Indemnified Parties' written request to OWNER to defend ancFor indemnify CITY. Without in any way limiting the provisions of this Section 6(i), the parties hereto agree that this Section 6(i) shall be interpreted in accordance with the provisions of California Civil Code Section 2778 in effect as of the Agreement Date. L\TEMECULA~ALARAIN~EVAGR 8/20/99 17 (ii) during the term of this Agreement, to defend CITY and its agents, officers, contractors, attorney, and employees (the "Indemnified Parties") from and against any claims or proceed'rag against the Indemnified Parties to set aside, void or annul the approval of this Development Agreement. CITY shall retain settlement authority with respect to any matter provided that prior to settling any such lawsuit or claim, OWNER shall provide CITY with a minimum ten (10) business days written notice of its intent to settle such lawsuit or claim. If CITY(in its reasonable discretion) does not desire to settle such lawsuit or claim, it may notify OWNER of the same, in which event OWNER may still elect to settle the lawsuit or claim as to itself, but CITY may elect to continue such lawsuit, but at OWNER's cost and expense, so long as the CITY's decision is predicated upon a legifunate and articulated threat to either the exercise of its police powers or a risk of harm to those present within the CITY. 7. Relationship of Parties. The contractual relationship between CITY and OWNER is such that OWNER is an independent contractor and not the agent or employee of CiTy. CITY and OWNER hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them, and agree that nothing contained in this Agreement or in any document executed in connection with the Project shall be construed as making CITY and OWNER joint venturers or partners. 8. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended or eanceled in whole or in part only by mutual consent of the parties in the manner provided for in Government Code Section 65868. No amendment or modification of this Agreement or any provision hereof shall be effective unless set forth in writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of each party hereto. This provision shall not limit CITY's or owner remedies as provided by Section 10. 9. Periodic Review of Compliance with Agreement. 9.1. Periodic Review. CITY and OWNER shall review this Agreement at least once every 12-month period from the date this Agreement is executed. CITY shall notify OWNER in writing of the date for review at least thirty (30) days prior thereto. Such periodic review shall be conducted in accordance with Government Code Section 65865.1. 9.2. Good-Faith Compliance. During each periodic review, OWNER shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement. OWNER agrees to furnish such reasonable evidence of good faith compliance as CITY, in the exercise of its reasonable discretion, may require. If requested by OWNER, CITY agrees to provide to OWNER, a certificate that OWNER or a Development Transferee is L\TEMECULAXPALARAiNM)EVAGR 8/20/99 18 in compliance with the terms of this Agreement, provided OWNER reimburses CITY for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by CITY with respect thereto. 9.3. Failure to Conduct Annual Review. The failure of the CITY to conduct the annual review shall not be an OWNER default. Further, OWNER shall not be entitled to any remedy for CITY failure to conduct this annual review. 9.4. Initiation of Review by City Council. In addition to the annual review, the CITY Council may at any time initiate a review of this Agreement by giving written notice to OWNER. Within thirty (30) days following receipt of such notice, OWNER shall submit evidence to the CITY Council of OWNER's good faith compliance with this Agreement and such review and determination shall proceed in the same manner as provided for the annual review. The City Council shall initiate its review pursuant to this Section 9.4 only if it has probable cause to believe the CITY's general health, safety or welfare is at risk as a result of specific acts or failures to act by OWNER. 9.5 Administration of Agreement. Any decision by CITY staff concerning the interpretation and administration of this Agreement and Development of the Property in accordance herewith may be appealed by OWNER to the City Council, provided that any such appeal shall be filed with the City Clerk within ten (I0) days ai~er OWNER receives notice of the staff decision. The City Council shall render, at a noticed public heating, its decision to affirm, reverse or modify the staff decision within thirty (30) days after the appeal was filed. 9.6. Availability of Documents. If requested by OWNER, CITY agrees to provide to OWNER copies of any documents, reports or other items reviewed, accumulated or prepared by or for CITY in connection with any periodic compliance review by CITY, provided OWNER reimburses CITY for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by CITY with respect thereto. CITY shall respond to OWNER's request on or before ten (10) business days have elapsed from CITY's receipt of such request. 10. Events of Default: Remedies and Termination. Unless amended or canceled as provided in Section 8, or modified or suspended pursuant to Government Code Section 65869.5 or terminated pursuant to this Section 10, this Agreement is enforceable by either party hereto. 10.1. Defaults by OWNER. If CiTy determines on the basis of a preponderance of the evidence that OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, CITY shall, by written notice to OWNER, specify the manner in which OWNER has failed to so comply and state the steps OWNER must take to bringitself into compliance. If, within sixty (60) days after the L\TEMECULA',PALARAIN~DEVAGR 8/20/99 19 effective date of notice from CITY specifying the manner in which OWNER has failed to so comply, OWNER does not commence all steps reasonably necessary to bring itself into compliance as required and thereafter diligently pursue such steps to completion, then OWNER shall be deemed to be in default under the terms of this Agreement. CITY may terminate this Agreement pursuant to Government Code Section 65865.1. OWNER agrees that its default hereunder is a conclusive representation that it is consenting to the cancellation of this Agreement. In event of default by OWNER, except as provided in Section 10.3, CITY's sole remedy for any breach of this Agreement by OWNER shall be CITY's right to terminate this Agreement. 10.2. Defaults by CITY. If OWNER determines on the basis of a preponderance of the evidence that CITY has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, OWNER shall, by written notice to CITY, specify the manner in which CITY has failed to so comply and state the steps CITY must take to bring itself into compliance. If, within sixty (60) days afier the effective date of notice from OWNER specifying the manner in which CITY has failed to so comply, CITY does not commence all steps reasonably necessary to bring itself into compliance as required and thereafter diligently pursue such steps to completion, then CITY shall be deemed to be in default under the terms of this Agreement and OWNER may terminate this Agreement and, in addition, may pursue any other remedy available at law or equity, includ'mg specific performance as set forth in Section 10.3. 10.3. Specific Performance Remedy. Due to the size, nature and scope of the Project, it will not be practical or possible to restore the Property to its natural condition once implementation of this Agreement has begun. After such implementation, OWNER may be foreclosed from other choices it may have had to utilize the Property and provide for other benefits. OWNER has invested significant time and resources and performed extensive planning and processing of the Project in agreeing to the terms of this Agreement and will be investing even more significant ftme and resources in implementing the Project in reliance upon the terms of this Agreement, and it is not possible to determine the sum of money which would adequately compensate OWNER for such efforts. For the above reasons, CITY and OWNER agree that damages would ' not be an adequate remedy if CITY fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement and that OWNER shall have the right to seek and obtain specific performance as a remedy for any breach of this Agreement. CITY and OWNER further acknowledge that, if OWNER falls to carry out its obligations under this Agreement, CITY shall have the right to refuse to issue any permits or other approvals which OWNER would otherwise have been entitled to pursuant to this Agreement. Therefore, CITY's remedy of terminating this Agreement shall be sufficient in most circumstances if OWNER fails to carry out its obligations hereunder. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if CITY issues a permit or other approval pursuant to this Agreement in reliance (explicitly stated in writing) upon a specified condition being satisfied by OWNER in the future, and if L\TEMECULAXPALARAINXDEVAGR 8/20/99 20 OWNER then fails to satisfy such condition, CITY shall be entitled to specific performance for the sole purpose of causing OWNER to satisfy such condition. CITY's right to specific performance shall be limited to those circumstances set forth above, and CITY shall have no right to seek specific performance to cause OWNER to otherwise proceed with the Development of the Project in any manner. 10.4. Institution of Legal Action. In addition to any other rights or remedies, OWNER or CITY may institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any default, to enfome any covenants or agreements herein, to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation hereof to recover damages for any default, or to obtain any other remedies consistent with the purpose of this Agreement. Such legal action shall be heard by a reference from the Riverside County Superior Court pursuant to the reference procedures of the California Code of Civil Procedure Sections 638, et seq. OWNER and CITY shall agree upon a single referee who shall then try all issues, whether of fact or law, and report a finding and judgment thereon and issue all legal and equitable relief appropriate under the circumstances of the controversy before him. If OWNER and CITY are unable to agree on a referee within ten (I0) days of a written request to do so by either party hemto, either party may seek to have one appointed pursuant to the California Code of Civil Procedure Section 640. The cost of such proceeding shall initially be borne equally by the parties. Any referee selected pursuant to this Section 10.4 shall be considered a temporary judge appointed pursuant to Axticle 6, Section 21 of the California Constitution. 10.5. Estoppel Certificates. Either party may at any time deliver written notice to the other party requesting an estoppel certificate (the "Estoppel Certificate") stating: 10.5. 1. The Agreement is in full fome and effect and is a binding obligation of the parties. 10.5.2. The Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing or, if so amended, identifying the amendments. 10.5.3. No default in the performance of the requesting party's obligations under the Agreement exists or, if a default does exist, the nature and amount of any default. A party receiving a request for an Estoppel Certificate shall provide a signed certificate to the requesting party within thirty (30) days after receipt of the request. The City Manager or any person designated by the City Manager may sign Estoppel Certificates on behalf of the CITY. Any officer of OWNER may sign on behalf of OWNER. An Estoppel Certificate may be relied on by assignees and mortgagees. L\TEMECULAXPALARAINXDEVAGR 8/20/99 21 10.5.4. In the event that one party requests an Estoppel Certificate fi'om the other, the requesting party shall reimburse the other party for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by such party with respect thereto. 11. Waivers and Delays. 11.1. No Waiver. Failure by a party to insist upon the strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement by the other party, and failure by a party to exercise its rights upon a default by the other party hereto, shall not constitute a waiver of such paxty's right to demand strict compliance by such other party in the future. 11.2. Third Parties. Non-performance shall not be excused because of a failure of a third person, except as provided in Section 11.3. 11.3. Force Majeure. OWNER shall not be deemed to be in default where failure or delay in performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement is caused by floods, earthquakes, other Acts of God, fires, wars, riots or similar hostilities, strikes and other labor difficulties beyond OWNER control, government regulations (including, without limitation, local, state and federal environmental and natural resource regulations), voter initiative or referenda, moratoria (including, without limitation, any "development moratorium" as that term is applied in Government Code Section 66452.6) or judicial decisions. 11.4. Extensions. The Term of this Agreement and the time for performance by OWNER or CITY of any of its obligations hereunder or pursuant to the Project Approvals shall be extended by the period of time that any of the events described in Section 11.3 exist and/or prevent performance of such obligations. In addition, the Term shall be extended for delays arising from the following events for a time equal to the duration of each delay which occurs during the Term: 11.4.1. Litigation. The period of time after the Effective Date during which litigation related to the Project Approvals or having the actual effect of delaying implementation of the Project is pending, including litigation pending on the Effective Date. This period shall include any time during which appeals may be filed or are pending. 11.4.2. Government Agencies. Any delay resulting from the acts or omissions of the CITY or any other governmental agency or public utility and beyond the reasonable control of OWNER. L\TEMECULAMPALARAINXDEVAGR 8/20/99 22 11.5. Notice of Delay. OWNER shall give notice to CITY of any delay which OWNER believes to have occurred as a result of the occurrence of any of the events described in Section 11.3. For delays of six months or longer, this notice shall be given within a reasonable time after OWNER becomes aware that the delay has lasted six months or more. In no event, however, shall notice of a delay of any length be given later than thirty days after the end of the delay or thirty days before the end of the Term, whichever comes first. 12. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Notices required to be given to CITY shall be addressed as follows: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, Califomia 92589-9033 Attn.: City Planner With a copy to: Richards, Watson & Gershon i-Eighth Floor 333 South Hope Street Los Angeles, California 90071-1469 Atm.: Peter M. Thorson, City Attomey Notices required to be given to OWNER shall be addressed as follows: Pala Rainbow, LLC 27349 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 102 Temecula, California 92590 Attn.: Michelle D. Schierberl, Managing Member With a copy to: Lorenz Alhadeff Cannon & Rose, LLP 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 203 Temecula, California 92591-4677 Arm.: Philip D. Oberhansley, Esq. Any notice given as required herein shall be deemed given only if in writing and upon delivery personally or by independent courier service. A party may change its address for L\TEMECULA~PALARAII'r~EVAGR 8/20/99 23 notices by giving notice in writing to the other party as required herein and thereafter notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. 13. Attorneys' Fees. If legal action is brought by either party against the other for breach of this Agreement, including actions derivative from the performance of this Agreement, or to compel performance under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of its costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, and shall also be entitled to recover its contribution for the costs of the referee referred to in Section 10.4 above as an item of damage and/or recoverable costs. 14. Recording. This Agreement and any amendment or cancellation hereto shall be recorded, at no cost to CITY, in the Official Records of Riverside County by the City Clerk within the period required by Section 65868.5 of the Government Code. 15. Effect of Agreement on Title. 15.1. Effect on Title. OWNER and CITY agree that this Agreement shall not continue as an encumbrance against any portion of the Property as to which this Agreement has terminated. 15.2. Encumbrances and Lenders' Rights. OWNER and CITY hereby agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit any owner of any interest in the Property, or any portion thereof, at any time or from time to time in any manner, at its or their sole discretion, from encumbering the Property, the improvements thereon, or any portion thereof with any mortgage, deed of trust sale and leaseback arrangement or other security device. CITY acknowledges that any Lender (as hereinafter defined) may require certain interpretations of ur modifications to the Agreement or the project and City agrees, upon request, from time to time, to meet with the property owner(s) and/or representatives of such Lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. CITY further agrees that it will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification to the extent such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purpose of this Agreement. A default under this Agreement shall not defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Lender. The mortgagee of a mortgage or beneficiary of a deed of trust or holder of any other security interest in the Property or any portion thereof and their successors and assigns, including without limitation the purchaser at a judicial or non~j udieial foreclosure sale or a person or entity which obtains title by deed-in-lieu of foreclosure ("Lender") shall be entitled to receive a copy of any notice of Default (as defined in Section 10. 1 hereof) delivered to OWNER and, as a pre-condition to the institution of legal proceedings or termination proceedings, the CITY shall deliver to all such Lenders written notification of any default by OWNER in the performance of its obligations under L\TEMECULAhuALARAINXDEVAGR 8/20/99 24 this Agreement which is not cured within sixty (60) days (the "Second Default Notice") and shall allow the Lender(s) an opportunity to cure such defaults as set forth herein. The Second Notice of Default shall specify in detail the alleged default and the suggested means to cure it. After receipt of the Second Default Notice, each such Lender shall have the right, at its sole option, within ninety (90) days to cure such default or, if such default cannot reasonably be cured within that ninety (90) day period, to commence to cure such default, in which case no default shall exist and the City shall take no further action. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if such default shall be a default which can only be remedied by such Lender obtaining possession of the Property, or any portion thereof, and such Lender seeks to obtain possession, such Lender shall have until ninety (90) days after the date obtaining such possession to cure or, if such default cannot reasonably be cured within such period, then to commence to cure such default. Further, a Lender shall not be required to cure any non-curable default of OWNER, and any such default shall be deemed cured if any lender obtains possession. 16. Severability of Terms. If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement shall be determined invalid, void or unenfomeable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby if the tribunal finds that the invalidity was not a material part of consideration for either party. The covenants contained herein are mutual covenants. The covenants contained herein constitute conditions to the concurrent or subsequent performance by the party bene~ted thereby of the covenants to be performed hereunder by such bene~ted party. 17. Subsequent Amendment to Authorizing Statute. This Agreement has been entered into in reliance upon the provisions of the Development Agreement Legislation in effect as of the Agreement Date. Accordingly, subject to Section 3.3.2 above, to the extent that subsequent amendments to the Government Code would affect the provisions of this Agreement, such amendments shall not be applicable to this Agreement unless necessary for this Agreement to be enforceable or required by law or unless this Agreement is modified pursuant to the provisions set forth in this Agreement and Government Code Section 65868 as in effect on the Agreement Date. 18. Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Terms. 18.1. Interpretation and Governing Law. The language in all parts of this Agreement shall, in all cases, be construed as a whole and in accordance with its fair meaning. This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The parties understand and agree that this Agreement is not intended to constitute, nor shall be construed to constitute, an irapermissible attempt to contract away the legislative and governmental functions of the CITY, and in particular, the CITY's police powers. In this regard, the L\TEMECULA~PALARAINXDEVAGR 8/20/99 25 parties understand and agree that this Agreement shall not be deemed to constitute the surrender or abnegation of the CITY's govemmental powers over the Property. 18.2. Section Headimls. All section headings and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect any construction or interpretation of this Agreement. 18.3. Gender. The singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes the feminine; "shall" is mandatory, "may" is permissive. 18.4. No Joint and Several Liability. At any time that there is more than one OWNER, no breach hereof by an OWNER shall constitute a breach by any other OWNER. Any remedy, obligation, or liability, including but not limited to the obligations to defend and indemnify CITY, arising by reason of such breach shall be applicable solely to the OWNER that committed the breach. However, CITY shall send a copy of any notice of violation to all OWNERS, including those not in breach. 18.5. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence regarding each provision of this Agreement of which time is an element. 18.6. Recitals. All Recitals set forth herein are incorporated in this Agreement as though fully set forth herein. 18.7. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and the Agreement supersedes all previous negotiations, discussion and agreements between the parties, and no parol evidence of any prior or other agreement shall be permitted to contradict or vary the terms hereof. 19. Extension of Maps. In accordance with Government Code Section 66452.6(a), any tentative map approved which relates to all or a portion of the Property shall be extended for the greater of (i) the Term of the Agreement or (ii) expiration of the tentatii, e map pursuant to Section 66452.6. 20. Not for Benefit of Third Parties. This Agreement and all provisions hereof are for the exclusive benefit of CITY and OWNER and its Development Transferees and shall not be construed to benefit or be enforceable by any third party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year dated below. Dated: ,199 "CITY" L\TEMECULA~PALARAINXDEVAGR 8/20/99 26 CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation ATTEST: By: Mayor City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Dated: ,199 "OWNER" PALA RAINBOW, LLC By: Its: By: Its: L\TEMECUD APALAR,A[NXDEVAGR 8/20/99 27 State of California ) ) SS County of ) On before me, personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. State of Califomia ) ) SS County of ) Signature of Notary On before me, personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary L\TEMECULAXPALARAIN\DEVAGR 8/20/99 28 CITY OF TEMECULA GRAPHIC SCATS CASE NO. - PA99-027,9 PROJECT SITE MAP EXHIBIT - PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - September 15, 1999 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 INITIAL STUDY R:~STAFFRPT~273PA99 PC.doc 12 City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Project Title Lead Agency Name and Address Contact Person and Phone Number Project Location Project Sponsors Name and Address Development Agreement between Pala Rainbow LLC and the City ot Temecula (PA99-0273) City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 David Hogan, Senior Planner (909) 694-6400 Southeast comer of State Route 79-South and Pala Road in the City of Temecula Pala Rainbow LLC and the City of Temecula General Plan Designation Highway Tourist Commercial and Open Space Zoning Description of Project Surrounding Land Uses and Setting Other public agencies whose approval is required Highway Toudst Commercial (HT) and Open Space-Conservation (OSC) Approval of a Development Agreement between Pala Rainbow LL( and the City of Temecula to allow the proper~y owner to do th~ following: 1. Develop the prcperty in conformance with the requirements of the existing Highway Tourist Commercial zone; 2. Adjust the required building setbacks in cenformance with the existing Development Code; 3. Receive a partial site landscaping credit for open space areas adjacent to the Temecula Creek channel; 4. Pay the applicable Development Impact Fee at a rate that was in effect on January 1, 1999; 5. Receive a partial waiver of some required public improvement plan check fees; and 6. Get a financial contribution from the City (not to exceed $100,000) toward the construction of extension of Jedediah Smith Road and related area drainage facilities. In exchange, the property owner agrees to allow the immediat construction of the new Pala Road bddge and associats improvements. The Agreement conveys no additional land us development dghts not previously allowed or authorized under th City's adopted Development Code (zoning ordinance). North: Vacant land and single family residences on 2 '~ acre lots. East: Vacant land. South: Channel/open space areas associated with Temecula Cree~ West: Vacant land. None. R:\CEQA~273PA99 IES.dOCR:\CEQAt273PA99 IES,doc 1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use 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 (To be completed by the lead agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant 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 revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project prol~onent. 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 "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed an eadier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the eadier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPOR' is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project cou!d nave a significant effect on the environment, b-.ceuse all po~.ntially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an eadier EIR or NEGAT'.VE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standaros, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EtR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Pdnted name R:~X:;EQA~273PA99 IES.d~R:M::;EQA~273PA99 IES.doc 2 1. Land Use and Planning. Would the project: Physically divide an established community? Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigation an environmental effect? Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Polentmlbf ~gllil'lca~l UnMll M,tig~ion 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Lee Titan Signirc~.l Iml2~cl No 3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project? ii) iii) iv) ....... : ' liana and Supporti~ig Info~'nalion Soume Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects. including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recant Alquist-Pdolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Strong seismic ground shaking? Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Landslides? Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, laterel spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? R:\CEQA%2.73PA99 IES.docR:\CEQA~73PA99 IES.doc Mitigation .. · :Signicant · · HO ::. de Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1801-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial dsks to life or property? Have soil incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or altarnative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUAUTY. Would the project: Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Substantially alter the existing drainage pattam of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or dver, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or sittation on- or off-site? Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Place housing within a lO0-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flc,~d Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? Place within a lO0-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? Expose people or structures to a significant dsk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? PolenliaUy aThae 5~nWm Im~ Im~ect R:%CEQA%273PA99 IES,docR:%CEQA~73PA99 IFS.dOC 4 AIR QUALITY. Would the project: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteda pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Pah,nim~f Slgnmcam Impall P~ensm.y Unless 6. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections? b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety dsks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks? Lees Than 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: :::::: E ..... ::::: Ilsuetsnd Supporltnghliz}~n: on Sources::: : E : : Impact ::: incoe~xated::: :::::lmpecl~!E :impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or ,/ through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in R:\CEQA%273PA99 IES.docR:~,CEQA%2.73PA99 IES.doc 5 local or .regional plans, polides, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Have a substantial adverse effect on any dpadan habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, polides, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? Have a substantial adverse effect of fedemily protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vemal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other means? Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biologicel resoumes, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Crate a significant hazard to the public or the environment through .reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? S~/n~'mnl Unleee R:~CEQA%273PA99 IES.d~CR:\CEQA~273PA99 IES.doc 6 Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely h=7=rdous materials, substances, or acutely hazardous matadals, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Be located on a site which is included on a list of h~TRrdous matadals sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? For a project within the vidnity of a pdvata airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Expose people or structures to a significant dsk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 10. NOISE. Would the project result in: a. Exposure of people to severe noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the pro!ect? d. A ~':,bstantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Signif:cam 5inFm Im~ R:%CEQA~273PA99 IES.dccR:\CEQA~73PA99 IES,d~c 7 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: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associates with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmentel impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services? Fire protection? SiO4vGcant Unle~a Le~e Thee Slg.ir, cera I I, NIg.dan slimItem Irnl~cl I ~led Impact c. Police protection? d. Schools? e. Parks? f. Other public facilities? ,/ ,/ t2. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: Ce Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Require or result in the consL, uction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansicn of existing facilities, the construction of which cuuld cause significant environmental effects? Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlemerits and resources, or are new or expanded entitlemerits needed? Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? ,/ ,/ ,/ ,/ R:%CEQA~273PA99 IES,docR:~CEQA~273PA99 IES.doc 8 13. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and histodc building within a state scenic highway? Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Sigmf~:~l knped ,/ ,/ ,/ 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a histodcel resoume as defined in Section 1506.5? Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.5? Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? No ,/ ,/ ,/ ,/ 15. RECREATION. Would the project: be Would the project increase the use of exisU~ sg neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? ,/ R:\CEQA~273PA99 IES.clocR:~CEQA%273PAgg IES,doc 9 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. ! Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major pedods of Califomia history or prehistory? 'b. Does the project have impacts that are individually ,/' limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable' means that the incremental effects of a project am considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects? Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? c. Comments: The proposed Development Agreement will not approve or result in any land use or other physical changes the local environment. Any future development proposals will need to conform with the approved General PI~ and Development Code and will receive apprepdate environmental review prior to their approval. Because tr agreement proposes to allow development that is consistent with the previously approved General Plan ar Development Code and no detailed development plans have been submitted, new environmental impacts a identifiable. All future development plans will receive the appropriate environmental review when speciT information is available. R:\CEQA~273PA99 IES.docR:\CEQA~273PA99 IES.doc 10 ITEM #5 RECOMMENDATION: STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION September 15, 1999 Development Agreement with Eli Lilly & Company (Planning Application PA99-0274) Prepared By: David Hogan, Senior Planner The Community Development Department - Plannin9 Division Staff recommends the Planning Commission: 1. ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0274 based upon the Analysis contained in the Staff Report, 2. ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. PA99-0274; APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: PROPOSAL: LOCATION: EXISTING ZONING: SURROUNDING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION EXISTING LAND USE: City of Temecula To make a recommendation to the City Council on the proposed Development Agreement between the City of Temecula and Eli Lilly & Company East of Ynez Road, south of Overland Drive, West of Margarita Road and north of Solana Way Business Park (BP) and Specific Plan (SP-7) North: South: East: West: Specific Plan (SP-7: Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan) Service Commercial (SC), Community Commercial (CC) and High Density Residential (H) High Density Residential (H) Light Industrial (LI) and Service Commercial (SC) Not Applicable Business Park Commercial, parking lot, and vacant F:\Depts\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~74pA99 PC,doc 1 SURROUNDING LAND USES North: South: East: West: Vacant Vacant, commercial and high density residential High density residential Commercial and industrial BACKGROUND The proposed Development Agreement will resolve litigation initiated by the right-of-way acquisition for the extension of Overland Drive between Ynez and Margadta Roads. The City of Temecula is initiating this agreement to resolve legal issues between the City and property owner relating to eminent domain proceedings required for the construction of Ovedand Road. The Development Agreement confirms the City's ownership and right to access the areas acquired for the extension of Ovedand Ddve and guarantees that the property owner can apply for, and receive appropriate consideration of, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change for approximately 37.4 acres. The timing and precise details of this General Plan Amendment and Zone Change have not been determined. As a result, the future land uses for the site have not been identified. A copy of the Development Agreement in included in Exhibit A of Attachment No. 1. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Staff prepared and circulated an Initial Environmental Study for the Development Agreement. The Study indicated that the proposed Development Agreement would have no environmental impacts that had not been previously addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan and Development Code. As a result, staff recommends that a Negative Declaration be adopted for this project Attachments: 2. 3. 4. PC Resolution No. 99- - Blue Page 3 Draft Ordinance No. 99- - Blue Page 6 Draft Development Agreement - Blue Page 10 Initial Study * Blue Page 11 F:\Dep~S\PLANNING\STAFFRP'R274PA99 PC.dec 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRP'F~.74PA99 PC.doc 3 A'FrACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO, 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0274 (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT) BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND ELI LILLY AND COMPANY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, to resolve potential litigation resulting from the City's acquisition of property through eminent domain, the City of Temecula and the property owner, Eli Lilly and Company have agreed to enter into a development agreement; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the procedure specified in City Resolution 91-52 and the Development Code, the City of Temecula has initiated said Development Agreement with Eli Lilly and Company; Planning Application No. PA99-0274, (hereinafter "Development Agreement"); and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing on September 15. 1999, on the issue of recommending approval or denial of the Development Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES FIND AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt and approve the Ordinance approving the Development Agreement contained in Attachment "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, Section 2. That in recommending adoption by the City Council of an Ordinance approving the Development Agreement, the Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: (a) The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula General Plan in that the Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for industrial, commercial and residential development; and, (b) The Development Agreement complies with the goals and objectives of the Circulation Element of the General Plan and the traffic impacts of the development over the period of the Development Agreement will be substantially mitigated by the mitigation measures and conditions of approval imposed; and, (c) The project subject to the Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for the zoning district in which the Property subject to the Development Agreement is located, and that this Development Agreement is consistent with good planning practices by providing for the opportunity to develop the Property consistent with the General Plan; and, F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~274PA99 PC.doc 4 (d) The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; and, (e) The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof; and, (f) Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the Planning Commission public hearing, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing to the project applicant and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, and police and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the properly as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; and, (g) Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission included the date, time, and place of the public headng, the identity of the hearing body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description and text or diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing, and of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; and, (h) The benefits that will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from this legislation and this Development Agreement are the mutually agreeable resolution of eminent domain issues that could have otherwise resulted in litigation. Section 3. The Secretary of the Planning Commission shall cause this Resolution to be transmitted to the City Council for further proceedings in accordance with State law. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of September, 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 15th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary F:\Depts\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~274PA99 PC.doc 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PROPOSED ORDINANCE F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~.74PA99 PC.doc 6 A'I'I'ACHMENT NO. 2 ORDINANCE NO. 99-__ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND ELI LILLY AND COMPANY FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF YNEZ ROAD, WEST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND SOUTH OF OVERLAND DRIVE (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0274) WHEREAS, Section 65864 et sea. of the Government Code of the State of California and Temecula City Resolution No. 91-52 authorize the execution of agreements establishing and maintaining requirements applicable to the development of real property; and, WHEREAS, to resolve potential litigation resulting from the City's acquisition of property through eminent domain, the City of Temecula and the property owner, Eli Lilly and Company have agreed to enter into a development agreement; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the procedure specified in City Resolution 91~52 and the Development Code, the City of Temecula has initiated said Development Agreement with Eli Lilly and Company; and, WHEREAS, notice of the City's intention to consider adoption of this Agreement with Eli Lilly and Company has been duly given in the form and manner required by law, and the Planning Commission and City Council of said City have each conducted public hearings on September 15, 1999 (Planning Commission), and (City Council) at which time it heard and considered all evidence relevant and material to said subject. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. FINDINGS. The City Council hereby finds and determines, with respect to this Agreement by and between the City of Temecula and Eli Lilly and Company, that it: A. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula General Plan in that the Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for industrial, commercial and residential development; and B. The Development Agreement complies with the goals and objectives of the Circulation Element of the General Plan and the traffic impacts of the development over the period of the Development Agreement will be substantially mitigated by the mitigation measures and conditions of approval imposed; and, C. The project subject to the Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for the zoning district in which the Property subject to the Development Agreement is located, and that this Development Agreement is consistent with good planning practices by providing for the opportunity to develop the Property consistent with the General Plan; and, F:\Depts\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.74PA99 PC.doc 7 D. The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; and, E. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof; and, F. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the Planning Commission public hearing, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing to the project applicant and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, and police and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; and, G. Notice of the public headng before the Planning Commission included the date, time, and place of the public headng, the identity of the hearing body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description and text or diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing, and of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; and, H. The benefits that will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from this legislation and this Development Agreement are the mutually agreeable resolution of eminent domain issues that could have otherwise resulted in litigation. Section 2. APPROVAL. The Development Agreement, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit "1" is hereby approved. The Mayor is authorized and directed to evidence such approval by executing this Agreement for, and in the name of, the City of Temecula; and the City Clerk is directed to attest thereto; provided, however, that this Agreement shall not be executed by the City until this Ordinance takes effect and the City has received from the applicant two executed originals of said Agreement. Section 3. SEVERABILITY. The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance. Section zL NOTICE OF ADOPTION. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law. Section 5. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days prior to the adoption of this Ordinance. Within 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance, together with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against the Ordinance, and post the same in the office of the City Clerk. F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~274PA99 PC,doc 8 Section 6. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of ,1999. Steven J. Ford, Mayor A'I'I'EST: Susan Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) CITY OF TEMECULA) I, Susan Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. __ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of ,1999, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan Jones, CMC/AAE CityClerk F:~Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~274PA99 PC.doc 9 A'i'I'ACHMENT NO. 3 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT F:\Depts\PLANNING%STAFFRPT~274PA99 PC.doc 10 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is entered into as of the day of ,199__ ("Agreement Date"), by and between ELI LILLY AND CO., (hereinafter "OWNER"), and the CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of California (hereinafter "CITY"), pursuant to the authority of Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code (the "Development Agreement Legislation") and Article XI. Section 2 of the California Constitution. RECITALS This Agreement is predicated upon the following facts: A. These Recitals refer to and utilize certain capitalized terms which are defined in this Agreement. The parties intend to refer to those definitions in conjunction with the use thereof in these Recitals. B. The Development Agreement Legislation authorizes CITY to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property in order to, among other matters: ensure high quality development in accordance with comprehensive plans; provide certainty in the approval of development projects so as to avoid the waste of resources and the escalation in the cost of housing and other development to the consumer: provide assurance to the applicants for development projects that they may proceed with their projects in accordance with existing policies. rules and regulations and subject to conditions of approval, in order to strengthen the public planning process and encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the private and public economic costs of development: and provide for economic assistance to OWNER for the entitlements authorizing development related improvements. C. OWNER is the owner of certain real property within the County of Riverside. State of California (the "Property"), as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. OWNER desires to develop the Property in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. the applicable regulations of the City of Temecula and those regulations of other agencies exercising jurisdiction upon the project. The Scope of Development of the Property as contemplated by this Agreement is described in the Agreement in Section 1.15. L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17/99 I D. OWNER has applied for, and CITY has granted this Agreement in order to create a beneficial project and a physical environment that will conform to and complement the goals of CITY, create a development project sensitive to human needs and values, facilitate efficient traffic circulation, and develop the Property. As part of the process of granting this entitlement, the City Council of CITY (hereinafter the "City Council") has required the preparation of an environmental review and has issued a Negative Declaration as regards any significant effects arising from the Project and has otherwise carried out all requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act CCEQA") of 1970, as mended. Project: The following actions were taken with respect to this Agreement and the 1. On , following a duly noticed and conducted public hearing, the City Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve this Agreement; 2. On , after a duly noticed public hearing and pursuant to CEQA, the City Council adopted the Negative Declaration for this Agreemere and the Project; 3. On , after a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council determined that the provisions of this Agreement are consistent with the General Plan of the CITY; 4. On . after a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council introduced Ordinance No. __ - approving and authorizing the execution of this Agreement and on , the City Council adopted the Ordinance, a copy of which is on file in the Development Services Departmere at the CITY, and adopted the f. ndings and conditions pertaining thereto, including those relating to the environmental ~ocumentation for the Project. F. The CITY has engaged in extensive studies and review of the potential impacts of the Project as well as the various potential benefits to the CITY by the development of the Project and concluded that the Project is in the best interests of the City. G. In consideration of the substantial public improvements and benefits to be provided by OWNER and the Project, and in order to strengthen the public financing and planning process and reduce the economic costs of development, by this Agreement. CITY intends to give OWNER assurance that OWNER can proceed with the development of the Project for the Term of this Agreement pursuant to the terms and L\TEMECULAXELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17/99 2 conditions of this Agreement and in accordance with CITY's General Plan, ordinances, policies, rules and regulations existing as of the Effective Date. In reliance on CITY's covenants in this Agreement concerning the Development of the Property, OWNER has and will in the future incur substantial costs in site preparation and the construction and installation of major infrastructure and facilities in order to make the Project feasible. H. Pursuant to Section 65867.5 of the Development Agreement Legislation, the City Council has found and determined that: (i) this Agreement and the Existing Project Approvals implement the goals and policies of CITY's General Plan, provide balanced and diversified land uses and impose appropriate standards and requirements with respect to land development and usage in order to maintain the overall quality of life and the environment within CITY. (ii) this Agreement is in the best interests of and not detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare of CITY and its residents; (iii) adopting this Agreement is consistent with CITY's General Plan and constitutes a present exercise of the CITY's police power: and (iv) this Agreement is being entered into pursuant to and in compliance with the requirements of Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Legislation. I. CITY and OWNER agree that it may be beneficial to enter into additional agreements or to modify this Agreement with respect to the implementation of the separate components of the Project when more information concerning the details of each component is available, and that this Agreement should expressly allow for such contemplated additional agreements or modifications to this Agreement. NOW. THEREFORE. pursuant to the authority contained in the Development Agreement Legislation. as it applies to CITY. pursuant to Article XI. Section 2 of the California Constitution. and in consideration of the foregoing recitals of fact. all of which are expressly incorporated into this Agreement. the mutual covenants set forth in this Agreement and for the further consideration described in this Agreement, the parties agree as follows: 1. Definitions. The following words and phrases are used as defined terms throughout this Development Agreement and each defined term shall have the meaning set forth below. No. 1.1. Authorizing Ordinance. The "Authorizing Ordinance" means Ordinance approving this Agreement. 1.2. CITY. The "CITY" means the City of Temecula. California a municipal corporation. duly organized and existing under its charter and the Constitution and laws of the State of California. and all of its officials. employees. agencies and departments. L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/17/99 3 1.3. City Council. "City Council" means the duly elected and constituted city council of the CITY. 1.4. Development. "Development" means the improvement of the Property for purposes consistent with the Project's land use authorization, including, without limitation: grading, the consreaction of infrastructure and public facilities related to the Off-site Improvements and On-Site Improvements, the construction of structures and buildings and the installation of landscaping. 1.5. Development Agreement Legislation. The "Development Agreement Legislation" means Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code as it exists on the Effective Date. 1.6. Development Fees. "Development Fees" means development impact and processing fees imposed on the Development as conditions of development and limited as more particularly set forth in Section 4.3. 1.7. Development Plan. The "Development Plan" consists of this Agreement, the Existing Regulations, and those Future Development Approvals, if any, contemplated, necessary, and requested by OWNER to implement the land uses authorized by the Project. 1.8. Effective Date. "Effective Date" means the date the Authorizing Ordinance becomes effective. 1.9. Existing Regulations. "Existing Regulations" means those ordinances, roles, regulations, policies. requirements, guidelines, constraints or other actions of the CITY, other than site-specific Project Approvals, which purport to affect. govern or apply to the Property or the implementation of the Development Plans in effect on the Effective Date. Existing Regulations shall also include the text of the zoning district designations of any combination of Community Commercial, Service Commercial. Office Professional or High Density Residential for the site of the Project. 1.10. Future Development Approvals. "Future Development Approvals" means those entitlements and approvals contemplated, necessary, and requested by CITY or OWNER to develop the Property subsequent to completion of the Project and approved by the City currently upon or after the Effective Date. The parties hereto expressly anticipate Owner will institute mixed uses on the property that may include some combination of Business Park-Light Industrial. Office Professional, Residential and Commercial uses. The CITY shall cooperate with OWNER, pursuant to Section 3.1.3., if OWNER undertakes to implement a Planned Development Overlay zoning district for the purposes of authorizing the intermixing of these uses. L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY'XDEVAGR 3/17/99 4 1.11. Off-site Improvements. "Off-site improvements" means physical infrastructure improvements or Facilities which are not and will not be located on the Property. 1.12. On-site Improvements. "On-site Improvements" means physical infrastructure improvements or facilities that are or will be located on the Property. 1.13. OWNER. "OWNER" is initially ELI LILLY AND COMPANY., an Indiana corporation. 1.14. Planning Commission. "Planning Commission" means the duly appointed and constituted planning commission of CITY. 1.15. Project. "Project" means changes in General Plan Land Use and City Zoning Map designations, as well as any associated specific plan amendments and environmental review for the approximately 37.4 acres located generally north of Solana Way, west of Margaxita Road, south of Overland Drive, and east of Ynez Road as depicted on Exhibit "B", that are necessary to allow some combination of Business Park, Light Industrial, Office Professional, High Density Residential, and/or Commercial uses thereon. This Agreement envisions that the following changes will be made so as to encourage a high quality development that enhances the City's economic base, complements other developments in the vicinity, responds to market demands as seen by OWNER, and that is compatible with the surrounding area. These changes could include the following: 1. That the southerly +/-20.7 acres may be redesignated to primarily High Density Residential. 2. That the western half of the northerly +- 16.7 acres may be redesignated to either Service or Community Commercial. 3. That the eastern half of the northerly +-16.7 acres may be redesignated to either Community Commercial or High Density Residential. 1.6 Project Approval. "Project Approval" means the accomplishment of the legislative land use amendments as described in Section 1.15. L\TEMECULAMELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/17/99 5 2. General Provisions. 2.1. Bindirlg Covenants. The provisions of this Agreement to the extent permitted by law shall constitute covenants which shall run with the Property for the benefit thereof, and the benefits and burdens of this Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties and all successors in interest to the panics hereto. 2.2. Interest of OWNER. OWNER represents that OWNER has a legal interest in the Property. 2.3. Term. The term (hereinafter called "Term") of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall extend for a period of twenty (20) years thereafter terminating at the end of the day preceding the twentieth (20th) anniversary of the Effective Date, subject to specific extensions. revisions and termination provisions of this Agreement. 2.4. Tennination. This Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further effect upon the occurrence of any of the following events: 2.4. 1. If termination occurs pursuant to any specific provision of this Agreement; 2.4.2. Completion of the total build-out of the Development pursuant to the terms of this Agreement and the CITY's issuance of all required occupancy permits and acceptance of all dedications and improvemems required to complete Development: OF 2.4.3. Entry after all appeals have been exhausted of a final judgment or issuance of a final order directed to the CITY as a result of any lawsuit filed against the CITY to set aside, withdraw, or abrogate the approval of the City Council of this Agreement for any p:.t of the Project. The termination of this Agreement shall not affect any right or duty arising independently from entitlements issued by CITY or other land use approvals approved prior to, concurrently or subsequent to the approval of this Agreement. 2.5. Transfers and Assignments. 2.5.1. Right to Assign. OWNER shall have the right from time to time and on such number of occasions as it chooses to sell, assign or otherwise transfer all or any portion of its interests in the Property together with all its right, title and interest in this Agreement. or the portion thereof which is subject to transfer (the "Transferred L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17/99 6 Property") to any person or entity at any time during the Term of this Agreement; provided, however, that any such transfer or assignment must be pursuant to a sale, assignment or other transfer of the interest of OWNER in the Property, or a portion thereof. In the event of any such sale, assignment, or other transfer, (i) OWNER shall notify CITY within twenty (20) days of such event of the name of the transferee, together with the corresponding entitlements being transferred to such transferee and (ii) the agreement between OWNER and such transferee pertaining to such transfer shall provide that either OWNER or the transferee shall be liable for the performance of those obligations of OWNER under this Agreement which relate to the Transferred Property, if any. Each transferee and OWNER shall notify CITY in writing which entity shall be liable for the performance of each respective obligations. 2.5.2. Rights of Successors and Assigns. Any and all successors and assigns of OWNER shall have all of the same rights, benefits and obligations of OWNER under this Agreement. 2.6. Amendment of Development Agreement. 2.6.1. Initiation of Amendment. Either party may propose an amendment to this Agreement and both parties agree that it may be beneficial to enter into additional agreements or modifications of this Agreement in connection with the implementation of the separate components of the Project. 2.6.2. Procedure. Except as set forth in Section 2.6.4 below, the procedure for proposing and adopting an amendment to this Agreement shall be the same as the procedure required for entering into this Agreement in the first instance. 2.6.3. Consent. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement. any amendment to this Agreement shall require the written consent of both parties. No amendment to all or any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless set forth in writing and signed by duly authorized represematives of each of the parties. 2.6.4. Operating Memoranda. The parties acknowledge that refinements and further development of the Project may demonstrate that changes are appropriate with respect to the details and performance of the parties under this Agreement. The parties desire to retain a certain degree of flexibility with respect to the details of the Development and with respect to those items covered in general terms under this Agreement. If and when the parties mutually find that changes, adjustments. or clarifications are appropriate to further the intended purposes of this Agreement, they may, unless otherwise required by law. effectuate such changes. adjustments, or clarifications without amendment to this Agreement through operating memoranda mutually approved by the parties, which. after execution. shall be attached hereto as L\TEMECULAXELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/I7/99 7 addenda and become a part hereof and may be further changed and amended from time to time as necessary, with further approval by City Manager, on behalf of the CITY and by any corporate officer or other person designated for such purpose in a writing signed by a corporate officer on behalf of OWNER. Unless otherwise required by law or by the Project Approvals, no such changes, adjustments, or clarifications shall require prior notice or hearing. 3. Description of Development. 3.1. Development and Control of Development. 3.1.1. Pro_iect. While this Agreement is in effect, OWNER shall have the vested fight to implement the Development authorized by the Project pursuant to this Agreement and the Project Approvals and CITY shall have the right to control the Development in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement, the Existing Regulations shall control the design and Development, Future Development Approvals and all On-Site Improvements and Off-Site Improvements and appurtenances in connection therewith. 3.1.2. Timing of Development. Regardless of any future enactment, by initiative, or otherwise, OWNER shall have the discretion to develop the Future Development in one phase or in multiple phases at such times as OWNER deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment. Specifically, CITY agrees that OWNER shall be entitled to apply for and receive permits. maps, occupancy certificates and other entitlements to develop and use the Property at any time, provided that such application is made in accordance with this Agreement and the Existing Regulations. The parties hemto expressly reject the holding of Pardee Construction ConlparW v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal. 3d 465 (1984) as regards any authority regulating the phasing of the Development. 3.1.3. Entitlements. Permits and Approvals - Cooperation. CITY shall accept and timely process, in the normal and legal manner for processing such matters, all applications for Future Development Approvals anticipated under this Agreement. CITY shall not withhold any building permit, final inspection or certificate of occupancy from OWNER if OWNER has satisfied all conditions and requirements of this Agreement and the Future Development Approval. In regards to the Project Approvals, CITY shall have the sole responsibility to apply for. if necessary, a revision to the City of Temecula General Plan, a change of zone from Business Park to any combination of Community Commercial, Service Commercial, Office-Professional or High Density Residential to facilitate the Project and necessary specific plan revisions. L\TEMECULAXELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17/99 8 CITY shall commit an amount, not to exceed Fourteen Thousand Dollars ($14,000.00), to pay its own processing and application fees needed to accomplish these revisions. OWNER shall bear no cost for any such application but shall have the right to participate in all stages of the consideration of such revisions. All other entitlements, permits. or approvals shall be obtained by OWNER at its own sole cost and expense. 3.1.3.1. Further Mitigation. In connection with the completion of the Project, CITY shall be responsible for the satisfaction of any mitigation measures that do not depend on, act upon, or relate to Future Development Approvals. In connection with the issuance of any Future Development Approvals which are subject to review under CEQA, unless required under CEQA, the CITY shall not impose any environmental land use alternatives or mitigation measures in addition to those referenced in the Project Approvals or deemed reasonably necessary. in light of the development activity proposal. 3.1.3.2. Other Permits. CITY also agrees to assist and cooperate with OWNER in securing any County, State and Federal permits or authorizations which may be required in connection with development of the Project. 3.2. Rules. Regulations and Official Policies. Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement and the Project Approvals, the rules, regulations and official policies governing the permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to Development of the Property shall be the Existing Regulations. In connection with any subsequent approval or action which CITY is permitted or has the right to make under this Agreement relating to the Project. CITY shall exercise its discretion or take action in a manner which complies and is consistent with this Agreement, the Existing Regulations and such other standards. terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. An overview and non-exhaustive list of Existing Regulations is listed in Exhibit "C'. CITY has certified two copies of each of the documents listed on Exhibit "C". CITY has retained one set of the certified documents and has provided OWNER with the second set. 3.3. Reserved Authority. 3.3.1. Uniform Codes. This Agreement shall not prevent CITY from applying new roles, regulations and policies relating to uniform codes adopted by the State of California, such as the Uniform Building Code. National Electrical Code, Uniform Mechanical Code or Uniform Fire Code, as amended. and the application of the aforementioned uniform codes is hereby approved including as the same may be amended by CITY from time to time. L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/17/99 9 3.3.2. State and Federal Laws and Regulations. In the event that State or Federal laws or regulations prevent or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such state or federal laws or regulations; provided, however, that this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CITY shall not adopt or undertake any regulation, program or action, or fail to take any action which is inconsistent or in conflict with this Agreement until CITY makes a finding that such regulation, program action or inaction is required (as opposed to permiRed) to comply with such State and Federal laws or regulations after taking into consideration all reasonable alternatives. 3.3.3. Regulation for Health and Safety. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, CITY shall have the right to apply CITY regulations (including amendments to the Existing Regulations) adopted by the CITY after the Effective Date, in connection with any Future Development Approvals, or deny, or impose conditions of approval on, any Future Development Approvals in C ITY's sole discretion if such application is required to protect the physical health and safety of existing or future occupants of the Property, or any portion thereof or any lands adjacent thereto. 3.4. Vested Right. By entering into this Agreement and relying thereupon, OWNER is obtaining vested rights to proceed with the Development anticipated by the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. and in accordance with. and to the extent of. the Project Approvals. By entering into this Agreement and relying thereupon, CITY is securing certain public benefits which enhance the public health. safety and welfare, a partial listing of which benefits is set forth in Section 4.1. CITY therefore agrees to the following: 3.4.1. No Conflicting Enactments. Except as provided in Section 3.3 of this Agreement, neither the City Council nor any other agency of CITY shall enact a rule, regulation, ordinance or other measure (collectively "law") applicable to the Property which is inconsistent or in conflict with this Agreement. Any law, whether by specific reference to the Development Agreement or otherwise, shall be considered to conflict if it has any of the following effects: (i) Limits or reduces the density or intensity of the Development as regulated by the Existing Regulations or otherwise requires any reduction or increase in the number. size or square footage of lot(s), structures. buildings or other improvements; or L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17/99 10 (ii) Applies to the Property, but is not uniformly applied by the CITY to all substantially similar development within the CITY. The above list is not intended to be comprehensive or to limit the types of action that would conflict with Existing Regulations and this Agreement. 3.4.2. Consistent Enactments. By way of enumeration and not limitation, the following types of enactments shall be considered consistent with this Agreement and Existing Regulations and not in conflict: (i) Relocation of structures within the Property pursuant to an application from OWNER; and (ii) Changes in the phasing of the development pursuant to an application from OWNER. 3.4.3. Initiative Measures. In addition to and not in limitation of the foregoing, it is the intent of OWNER and CITY that no moratorium or other limitation (whether relating to the development of all or any part of the Project and whether enacted by initiative or otherwise) affecting parcel or subdivision maps (whether tentative, vesting tentative or final), site development permits, precise plans, site development plans. building permits, occupancy certificates or other entitlements to use approved, issued or granted within CITY, or portions of CITY, shall apply to the Project to the extent such moratorium or other limitation would restrict OWNER's right to develop the Project in such order and at such rate as OWNER deems appropriate. CITY agrees to cooperate with OWNER in all reasonable manners in order to keep this Agreement in full force and effect. In the event of any legal action instituted by a third party or other governmental entity or official challenging the validity of any provision of this Agreement, the parties hereby agree to cooperate in defending such action. In the event of any litigation challenging the effectiveness of this Agreement. or any portion hereof. this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect while such litigation. including any appellate review, is pending. 3.4.4. Consistency Between This Agreement and Current Laws. CITY represents that there are no rules, regulations, ordinances, policies or other measures of the CITY in force as of the Agreement Date that would interfere with Development and use of all or any part of the Property according this Agreement. L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17/99 11 3.5. Future Amendments to Development Plan. The following rules apply to future amendments to the Development Plan: 3.5.1. OWNER's Written Consent. Any Development Plan amendment to which OWNER does not agree in writing shall not apply to the Property or the Project while this Agreement is in effect. 3.5.2. Concurrent Development Agreement Amendment. Any Development Plan amendment requiring amendment of this Agreement shall be processed concurrently with an amendment to this Agreement. 3.5.3. Effect of Amendment. Except as expressly set forth within this Agreement, a Development Plan amendment will not alter. affect, impair or otherwise impact the rights, duties and obligations of the paxties under this Agreement. 4. Obligations of the Parties. 4.1. Benefits to CITY. The direct and indirect benefits CITY (including, without limitation the existing and future residents of CITY) will receive pursuant to the implementation of the Agreement include, but are not limited to, the following: 4.1.1. Comprehensive Planning. Providing a comprehensive planning effort; 4.1.2. Short Term Entpioyment. Creating substantial employment opportunities through the construction and development phase: 4.1.3 Long Term Employment. Creating substantial employment opportunities subsequent to the Development; 4.1.4 Intprovements. The development of the Property, including offsite infrastructure improvements; and 4.15 Settlement of Litigation. The adoption of this Agreement shall result in the settlement of an eminent domain action between the parties. 4.2. Limitation on Development Fees. Certain presently undefined development impact and processing fees will be imposed on the Development as conditions of approval. In addition to the account described in Section 3. 1.3, CITY shall establish an account in the full sum of Seventy-eight Thousand Four Hundred Fifty Dollars ($78.450.00) to be used. from time to time, to satisfy the development impact and processing fees attributed to the Development or any portion thereof. Such account shall L\TEMECULA~ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/17/99 12 not accrue interest and shall not be subject to reimbursement to OWNER as to any unexpended sums. This principal sum reflects an amount that CITY would otherwise have transferred to OWNER as consideration for certain land acquisition necessary for CITY right-of-way. 4.3. Dedications and Exactions. At the appropriate points in the Development of the Property, OWNER shall irrevocably offer for dedication or reserve for acquisition by City or its designee the streets, rights-of-way, parkland and other areas as more fully set forth in the Future Development Approvals. In addition to and not in limitation of the foregoing, CITY shall not levy or require any further dedications on or along Margarita Road or Overland Drive, nor shall CITY levy or require any exactions in connection with Project Approvals or Future Development Approvals which would directly limit access to the Property. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Future Developmere Approvals will be reviewed in a manner consistent with the general review procedures of the CITY accorded the particular type of Future Developmere Approval being sought and necessary conditions imposed in a manner consistent with this Agreement. 4.4. Public Improvement Districts. CITY agrees not to, on its own initiative, undertake to include the Property in any public improvement district, assessment district and'or community facilities district (collective "Districts") which Dis~ct is not intended to have a city-wide or substantially city-wide effect. A substantially city-wide effect shall mean the District is applicable to not less than sixty percent (60%) of the land or owners within the City. 4.5 Existing Community Facilities District Assessments. CITY agrees to use its reasonable best efforts to maintain the level of the current tax rate and amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness. CITY shall. at all times. conduct its deliberations with the goal of satisfying the highest levels of benefit to CITY as a whole and shall base its decision on the best interests of CITY as a whole. Nothing herein shall require CITY to challenge, in any manner, decisions of superior levels of governmere that may affect the tax levels on the Property. 4.6 Termination of Eminent Domain Action. In addition to the other compensation in this Agreement, the entire deposit in the eminent domain action (Riverside County Superior Court Case No. RIG 314613, referred to in the rest of this section as the "Action") of Ninety-six Thousand Five Hundred Fifty-six Dollars ($96,556.00), plus any interest that accrued on the deposit, shall be immediately released to OWNER. If other person(s) claim any part of the deposit. CITY shall instead pay OWNER Ninety-six Thousand Five Hundred Fifty-six Dollars ($96,556.00) by check. Once OWNER receives such funds, OWNER shall, at CITY's option, either (a) stipulate to a final order of condemnation for the "subject property" defined in the Complaint in L\TEMECULAXELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/I 7/99 13 Eminent Domain in the Action, or (b) sign and deliver a deed transferring said "subject Property" to CITY, with CITY then dismissing OWNER from the Action. 5. Further Assurances to OWNER Regarding Exercise of Reserved Authori/y. 5.1. Adoption of General Plan and Granting of Other Project Approvals. In preparing and adopting a general plan amendment. zoning district change and in granting the other Project Approvals, CITY will consider the health, safety and welfare of the residents of CITY, 5.2. Assurances to OWNER. The panics further acknowledge that the public benefits to be provided by OWNER to CITY pursuant to this Agreement are in consideration for and reliance upon assurances that the Property can be developed in accordance with the Project Approvals and this Agreement. Accordingly, while recognizing that the Development of the Property may be affected by exercise of the authority and rights reserved and excepted as provided in Sections 3.3.1 and 3.3.2. ("Reserved Authority") or this Agreement, OWNER is concerned that normally the judiciary extends to local agencies significant deference in the adoption of land use regulations which might permit CITY in violation of the Reserved Authority, to attempt to apply regulations which are inconsistent with the Project Approvals pursuant to the exercise of the Reserved Authority. Accordingly, OWNER desires assurances that CITY shall not and CITY agrees that it shall not further restrict or limit the development of the Property in violation of this Agreement except in strict accordance with the Reserved Authority. 5.3. Judicial Review. Based on the ti~regoing, in the event OWNER judicially (including by way of a reference proceeding) challenges the application of a future land use regulation as being in violation of this Agreement and as not being a land use regulation adopted pursuant to the Reserved Authority, OWNER shall bear the burden of proof in establishing that such rule, regulation or policy is inconsistent with the Existing Regulations and the Project Approvals and CITY shall thereafte: 0ear the burden of proof in establishing that such regulation was adopted pursuant to and in accordance with the Reserved Authority and was not applied by CITY in violation of this Agreement. 6. Indemnification. Except to the extent of the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties (as defined below), OWNER, and with respect to the portion of the Property transferred to them. the transferee agree: (i) to indemnify, defend. and hold harmless the Indemnified Parties from and against each and every claim, action, proceeding, cost. fee, legal cost, damage, award or liability of any nature arising from alleged damages caused to third parties and alleging that CITY is liable therefor as a direct or indirect result of CITY's approval of this LXTEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17/99 14 Developmere Agreement. OWNER's duties under this Section 6(i) are solely subject to and conditioned upon the Indemnified Pro'ties' written request to OWNER to defend and/or indemnify CITY. Without in any way limiting the provisions of this Section 66), the parties hereto agree that this Section 6(i) shall be interpreted in accordance with the provisions of California Civil Code Section 2778 in effect as of the Agreement Date. (ii) during the term of this Agreement, to defend CITY and its agents, officers, contractors, attorney, and employees (the "Indemnified Parties") from and against any claims or proceeding against the Indemnified Parties to set aside, void or annul the approval of this Development Agreement. CITY shall retain settlement authority with respect to any matter provided that prior to settling any such lawsuit or claim, OWNER shall provide CITY with a minimum ten (10) business days written notice of its intent to settle such lawsuit or claim. If CITY(in its reasonable discretion) does not desire to settle such lawsuit or claim. it may notify OWNER of the same. in which event OWNER may still elect to settle the lawsuit or claim as to itself, but CITY may elect to continue such lawsuit, but at OWNER's cost and expense, so long as the CITY' s decision is predicated upon a legitimate and articulated threat to either the exercise of its police powers or a risk of harm to those present within the CITY. 7. Relationship of Parties, The contractual relationship between CITY and OWNER is such that OWNER is an independent contractor and not the agent or employee of CITY. CITY and OWNER hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them, and agree that nothing contained in this Agreement or in any document executed in connection with the Project shall be construed as making CITY and OWNER joint venturers or partners. 8. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended or canceled in whole or in part only by mutual consent of the parties in the manner provided for in Government Code Section 65868. No amendment or modification of this Agreement or any provision hereof shall be effective unless set forth in writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of each party hereto. This provision shall not limit CITY's or owner remedies as provided by Section 10. 9. Periodic Review of Compliance with Agreement. 9.1. Periodic Review. CITY and OWNER shall review this Agreement at least once every 12-month period from the date this Agreement is executed. CITY shall notify OWNER in writing of the date for review at least thirty (30) days prior thereto. Such periodic review shall be conducted in accordance with Govemment Code Section 65865.1. L~TEMECULA~ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/17/99 15 9.2. Good-Faith Compliance. During each periodic review, OWNER shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement. OWNER agrees to furnish such reasonable evidence of good faith compliance as CITY, in the exercise of its reasonable discretion, may require. If requested by OWNER, CITY agrees to provide to OWNER, a certificate that OWNER or a Development Transferee is in compliance with the terms of this Agreement, provided OWNER reimburses CITY for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by CITY with respect thereto. 9.3. Failure to Conduct Annual Review. ~he failure of the CITY to conduct the annual review shall not be an OWNER default. Further, OWNER shall not be entitled to any remedy for CITY failure to conduct this annual review. 9.4. Initiation of Review by City Council. In addition to the annual review, the CITY Council may at any time initiate a review of this Agreement by giving written notice to OWNER. Within thirty (30) days following receipt of such notice, OWNER shall submit evidence to the CITY Council of Owner's good faith compliance with this Agreement and such review and determination shall proceed in the same manner as provided for the annual review. The City Council shall initiate its review pursuant to this Section 9.4 only if it has probable cause to believe the CITY's general health, safety or welfare is at risk as a result of specific acts or failures to act by OWNER. 9.5 Administration of Agreement. Any decision by CITY staff concerning the interpretation and administration of this Agreement and Development of the Property in accordance herewith may be appealed by OWNER to the City Council, provided that any such appeal shall be filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) days after OWNER receives notice of the staff decision. The City Council shall render. at a noticed public hearing, its decision to affirm~ reverse or modify the staff decision within thirty (30) days after the appeal was flied. 9.6. Availabilit), ,q Documents. If requested by OWNER, CITY agrees to provide to OWNER copies c~; any documents, reports or other items reviewed, accumulated or prepared by or for CITY in connection with any periodic compliance review by CITY, provided OWNER reimburses CITY for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by CITY with respect thereto. CITY shall respond to OWNER's request on or before ten (10) business days have elapsed from CITY's receipt of such request. 10, Events of Default Remedies and Termination. Unless amended or canceled as provided in Section 8. or modified or suspended pursuant to Government Code Section 65869.5 or terminated pursuant to this Section 10~ this Agreement is enforceable by either party hereto. L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17/99 16 10.1. Defaults by OWNER. If CITY determines on the basis of a preponderance of the evidence that OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, CITY shall, by written notice to OWNER, specify the manner in which OWNER has failed to so comply and state the steps OWNER must take to bring itself into compliance. If, within sixty (60) days after the effective date of notice from CITY specifying the manner in which OWNER has failed to so comply, OWNER does not commence all steps reasonably necessary to bring itself into compliance as required and thereafter diligently pursue such steps to completion, then OWNER shall be deemed to be in default under the terms of this Agreement. CITY may terminate this Agreement pursuant to Government Code Section 65865.1. OWNER agrees that its default hereunder is a conclusive representation that it is consenting to the cancellation of this Agreement. In event of default by OWNER, except as provided in Section 10.3, CITY's sole remedy for any breach of this Agreement by OWNER shall be CITY's fight to terminate this Agreement. 10.2. Defaults by CITY. If OWNER determines on the basis of a preponderance of the evidence that CITY has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, OWNER shall, by written notice to CITY, specify the manner in which CITY has failed to so comply and state the steps CITY must take to bring itself into compliance. If, within sixty (60) days after the effective date of notice from OWNER specifying the manner in which CITY has failed to so comply, CITY does not commence all steps reasonably necessary to bring itself into compliance as required and thereafter diligently pursue such steps to completion, then CITY shall be deemed to be in default under the terms of this Agreement and OWNER may terminate this Agreement and, in addition. may pursue any other remedy available at law or equity, including specific performance as set forth in Section 10.3. 10.3. Specific Performance Remedy. Due to the size, nature and scope of the Project, it will not be practical or possible to restore the Property to its natural condition once implementation of this Agreement has begun. After such implementation, OWNER may be foreclosed from other choices it may have had to utilize the Property and provide for other benefits. OWNER has invested significant time and resources and performed extensive planning and processing of the Project in agreeing to the terms of this Agreement and will be investing even more significant time and resources in implementing the Project in reliance upon the terms of this Agreement. and it is not possible to determine the sum of money which would adequately compensate OWNER for such efforts. For the above reasons. CITY and OWNER agree that damages would not be an adequate remedy if CITY fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement and that OWNER shall have the right to seek and obtain specific performance as a remedy for any breach of this Agreement. CITY and OWNER further acknowledge that. if OWNER fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement, CITY shall have the right to refuse to issue any permits or other approvals which OWNER would otherwise L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17/99 17 have been entitled to pursuant to this Agreement. Therefore, CITY's remedy of terminating this Agreement shall be sufficient in most circumstances if OWNER fails to carry out its obligations hereunder. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if CITY issues a permit or other approval pursuant to this Agreement in reliance (explicitly stated in writing) upon a specified condition being satisfied by OWNER in the future, and if OWNER then falls to satisfy such condition, CITY shall be etuitled to specific performance for the sole purpose of causing OWNER to satisfy such condition. CITY's right to specific performance shall be limited tO those circumstances set forth above, and CITY shall have no right to seek specific performance to cause OWNER to otherwise proceed with the Development of the Project in any manner. 10.4. Institution of I ,egai Action. In addition to any other rights or remedies, OWNER or CITY may institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any default. to enforce any covenants or agreements herein, to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation hereof to recover damages for any default, or to obtain any other remedies consistent with the purpose of this Agreement. Such legal action shall be heard by a reference from the Orange County Superior Court pursuant to the reference procedures of the California Code of Civil Procedure Sections 638, et seq. OWNER and CITY shall agree upon a single referee who shall then try all issues, whether of fact or law, and report a finding and j udgmetu thereon and issue all legal and equitable relief appropriate under the circumstances of the controversy before him. If OWNER and CITY are unable to agree on a referee within ten (10) days of a written request to do so by either party hereto, either party may seek to have one appointed pursuant to the California Code of Civil Procedure Section 640. The cost of such proceeding shall initially be bome equally by the parties. Any referee selected pursuant to this Section 10.4 shall be considered a temporary, judge appointed pursuant to Article 6. Section 21 of the Califomia Constitution. 10.5. Estoppel Certificates. Either party may at any time deliver written notice to the other party requesting an estoppel certificate (the "Estoppel Certificate") Statihg: 10.5. 1. The Agreement is in full force and effect and is a binding obligation of the parties. 10.5.2. The Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing or, if so amended. identifying the amendments. 10.5.3. No default in the performance of the requesting party's obligations under the Agreement exists or, if a default does exist. the nature and amount of any default. A party receiving a request for an Estoppel Certificate shall provide a signed certificate to the requesting party within thirty (30) days after receipt of the request. The City Manager or any person designated by the City Manager may sign Estoppel L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/17/99 18 Certificates on behalf of the CITY. Any officer of OWNER may sign on behalf of OWNER. An Estoppel Certificate may be relied on by assignees and mortgagees. 10.5.4. In the event that one party requests an Estoppel Certificate from the other, the requesting party shall reimburse the other party for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by such party with respect thereto. 11. Waivers and Delays. ILl. No Waiver. Falltare by a party to insist upon the strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement by the other party, and failure by a party to exercise its rights upon a default by the other party hereto, shall not constitute a waiver of such party's right to demand strict compliance by such other party in the future. 11.2. Third Parties. Non-performance shall not be excused because of a failure of a third person. except as provided in Section 11.3. 11.3. Force Majeure. OWNER shall not be deemed to be in default where failure or delay in performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement is caused by floods, earthquakes, other Acts of God, fires, wars, riots or similar hostilities, strikes and other labor difficulties beyond OWNER control, government regulations (including, without limitation, local, state and federal environmental and natural resource regulations), voter initiative or referenda, moratoia (including, without limitation, any "development moratorium" as that term is applied in Government Code Section 66452.6) or judicial decisions. 11.4. Extensions. The Term of this Agreement and the time for performance by OWNER or CITY of any of its obligations hereunder or pursuant to the Project Approvals shall be extended by the period of time that any of the events described in Section 11.3 exist and/or prevent performance of such obligations. In addition, the Term shall be extended for delays arising from the following events for a time equal to the duration of each delay which occurs during the Term: 11.4.1. Litigalj~. The period of time after the Effective Date during which litigation related to the Project Approvals or having the actual effect of delaying implementation of the Project is pending, including litigation pending on the Effective Date. This period shall include any time during which appeals may be filed or are pending. 11.4.2. Government Agencies. Any delay resulting from the acts or omissions of the CITY or any other governmental agency or public utility and beyond the reasonable control of OWNER. LXTEMECULA\ELILILLYXDFVAGR 3/17/99 19 11.5. Notice of Delay. OWNER shall give notice to CITY of any delay which OWNER believes to have occurred as a result of the occurrence of any of the events described in Section I 1.3. For delays of six months or longer, this notice shall be given within a reasonable time after OWNER becomes aware that the delay has lasted six months or more. In no event, however, shall notice of a delay of any length be given later than thirty days after the end of the delay or thirty days before the end of the Term, whichever comes first. 12. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Notices required to be given to CITY shall be addressed as follows: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Attn.: City PIarmer With a copy to: Richards, Watson & Gershon Thirty-Eighth Floor 333 South Hope Street Los Angeles, Califomia 90071 - 1469 Attn.: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney Notices required to be given to OWNER shall be addressed as follows: Eli Lilly and Company Lilly Corporate Cemer Indianapolis, Indiana 46285 Attention: John J. Crisel Manager, Strategic Real Estate With a copy to: Hect, Solberg, Robinson & Goldberg, LLP 600 West Broadway, 8th Floor San Diego, California 92101 Attention: Paul E. Robinson L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/17/99 20 Any notice given as required herein shall be deemed given only if in writing and upon delivery personally or by independent courier service. A party may change its address for notices by giving notice in writing to the other party as required herein and thereafter notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. 13. Attorneys' Fees. If legal action is brought by either party against the other for breach of this Agreement, including actions derivative from the performance of this Agreement, or to compel performance under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of its costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, and shall also be entitled to recover its contribution for the costs of the referee referred to in Section 10.4 above as an item of damage and/or recoverable costs. 14. Kealox. aillg. This Agreement and any amendment or cancellation hereto shall be recorded, at no cost to CITY. in the Official Records of Riverside County by the City Clerk within the period required by Section 65868.5 of the Government Code. 15. Effect of Agreement on Title. 15.1. Effect on Title. OWNER and CITY agree that this Agreement shall not continue as an encumbrance against any portion of the Property as to which this Agreement has terminated. 15.2. Encumbrances and Lenders' Rights. OlgNER and CITY hereby agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit any owner of any interest in the Property, or any portion thereof, at any time or from time to time in any manner, at its or their sole discretion, from encumbering the Property, the improvements thereon. or any portion thereof with any mortgage, deed of trust sale and leaseback arrangement or other security device. CITY acknowledges that any Lender (as hereinafter defined) may require certain interpretations of or modifications to the Agreement or the project and City agrees. upon request, from time to time, to meet with the property owner(s) and/or representatives of such Lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. CITY further agrees that it will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification to the extent such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purpose of this Agreement. A default under this Agreement shall not defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Lender. The mortgagee of a mortgage or beneficiary of a deed of trust or holder of any other security interest in the Property or any portion thereof and their successors and assigns, including without limitation the purchaser at a judicial or non-judicial foreclosure sale or a person or entity which obtains title by deed-in-lieu of foreclosure ("Lender") shall be entitled to receive a copy of any notice of Default (as defined in Section 10. 1 hereof) delivered to OWNER and, as a pre-condition to the institution of L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17/99 21 legal proceedings or termination proceedings, the CITY shall deliver to all such Lenders written notification of any default by OWNER in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement which is not cured within sixty (60) days (the "Second Default Notice") and shall allow the Lender(s) an opportunity to cure such defaults as set forth herein. The Second Notice of Default shall specify in detail the alleged default and the suggested means to cure it. After receipt of the Second Default Notice, each such Lender shall have the right, at its sole option, within ninety (90) days to cure such default or, if such default cannot reasonably be cured within that ninety (90) day period, to commence to cure such ' default, in which case no default shall exist and the City shall take no further action. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if such default shall be a default which can only be remedied by such Lender obtaining possession of the Property, or any portion thereof, and such Lender seeks to obtain possession, such Lender shall have until ninety (90) days after the date obtaining such possession to cure or, if such default cannot masonably be cured within such period, then to commence to cure such default. Further, a Lender shall not be required to cure any non-curable default of OWNER, and any such default shall be deemed cured if any lender obtains possession. 16. Severability of Terms. If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement shall be determined invalid, void or tinenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby if the tribunal finds that the invalidity was not a material part nfconsideration for either party. The covenants contained herein are mutual covenants. The covenants contained herein constitute conditions to the concurrent or subsequent performance by the party bene~ted thereby of the covenants to be performed hereunder by such benefited party. 17. Subsequent Amendment to Authorizing Statute. This Agreement has been entered into in reliance upon the provisions of the Development Agreement Legislation in effect as of the Agreement Date. Accordingly, subject to Section 3.3.2 above, to the extent that subsequent amendments to the Government Code would affect the provisions of this Agreement, such amendments shall not be applicable to this Agreement unless necessary for t'.,zs Agreement to be enforceable or required by law or unless this Agreement is modified pursuant to the provisions set forth in this Agreement and Government Code Section 65868 as in effect on the Agreement Date. 18. Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Terms. 18.1. Interpretation and Governing Law. The language in all parts of this Agreement shall, in all cases, be construed as a whole and in accordance with its fair meaning. This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The parties understand and agree that this Agreement is not intended to constitute. nor shall be construed to constitute, an irapermissible attempt to contract away the legislative and governmental L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/17/99 22 functions of the CITY, and in particular, the CITY's police powers. In this regard, the parties understand and agree that this Agreement shall not be deemed to constitute the surrender or abnegation of the CITY's governmental powers over the Property. 18.2. Section Headings. All section headings and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect any construction or interpretation of this Agreement. 18.3. Gender. The singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes the feminine; "shall" is mandatory, "may" is permissive. 18.4. No Joint and Several Liability. At any time that there is more than one OWNER, no breach hereof by an OWNER shall constitute a breach by any other OWNER. Any remedy, obligation. or liability, including but not limited to the obligations to defend and indemnify CITY, arising by reason of such breach shall be applicable solely to the OWNER that committed the breach. However, CITY shall send a copy of any notice of violation to all OWNERS, including those not in breach. 18.5. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence regarding each provision of this Agreement of which time is an element. 18.6. Recitals. All Recitals set forth heroin are incorporated in this Agreement as though fully set forth heroin. 18.7. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. and the Agreement supersedes all previous negotiations. discussion and agreements between the parties. and no parol evidence of any prior or other agreement shall be permitted to contradict or vary the terms hereof. 19. Extension of Maps. In accordance with Government Code Section 66452.6(a), any tentative map approved which relates to all or a portion of the Property shall be extended for the greater of(i) the Term of the Agreement or (ii) expiration of the tentative map pursuant to Section 66452.6. 20. Not for Benefit of Third Parties. This Agreement and all provisions hereof are for the exclusive benefit of CITY and OWNER and its Development Transferees and shall not be construed to benefit or be enforceable by any third party. L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17/99 23 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year dated below. Dated: ,199 "CITY" CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation ATTEST: By: Mayor CityClerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Dated: ,199 "OWNER" ELI LILLY AND CO., a corporation By: Its: By: Its: L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/17/99 24 State of California ) ) SS County of ) On before me, , personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary State of Califomia ) ) SS County of ) On before me. personally appeared . personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted. executed the insu'ument. Witnessmy handand official seal. Signature of Notary LXTEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17/99 25 State of California ) ) SS County of ) On before me, personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose me(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the insgent the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the insgent. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary State of California ) ) SS County of ) On before me. personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their aumorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the pc, son(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17/99 26 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA99-027~, PROJECT SITE MAP EXHIBIT - PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - September 15, 1999 AI'I'ACHMENT NO. 4 INITIAL STUDY F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~,74PA99 PC.doc 11 City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Project Title Lead Agency Name and Address Contact Person and Phone Number Project Location Project Sponsors Name and Address Development Agreement between Eli Lilly and Company and the City of Temecula (PA99-0274) City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 David Hogan, Senior Planner (909) 694-6400 Generally east of Ynez Road, north of Solana Way, west of Margadta Road, and south of Ovedand Road in the City of Temecul~ Eli Lilly and Company and the City of Temecula General Plan Designation Business Park Zoning Description of Project Business Park (BP) and Specific Plan (SP-7) The Development Agreement proposes to allow the property owne to request, and the City to consider, a General Plan Amendment an~ Zone Change on approximately 37.4 acres in exchange for resolvin~ a disagreement between Eli Lilly and the City of Temecula. The General Plan Amendment to the Land Use Element Map woul~ be from the Business Park designation to either Business Park Office Professional, High Density Residential and/or Commercial. The Change to the Zoning Map would be from Business Park to a. undefined combination of the following zones: Business Park, Ligl' Industrial, Professional Office, High Density Residential andie Commercial. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting Other public agencies whose approval is required The Development Agreement does not specify what the future lan uses will be, only that the City agrees to consider changes at a futur date. North: East: South: West: None. Vacant land. Vacant land and single family and high density residential, Commercial land uses and high density residential. Commercial land uses. R:\CEQA~73PA99 IES.doc~TEMEC_FSI01\VOL1~)EPTS~PLANNING\CEQA~74PA99 IES.doc 1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least on~ impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use Planning Population and Housing Geologic Problems Water Air Quality Transportation/Ciroulation Biological Resources Energy and Mineral Resources Hazards Noise Public Services Utilities and Service Systems Aesthetics Cultural Resources Recreation Mandato~ Findings of Significance None Determination (To be completed by the lead agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant 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 revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. 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 "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact 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 eadier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPOR'i is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed prcject could have a sigqificant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have bP~.n analyzed adequately in an eadier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (D) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that eadier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. t S~gna ure Pdnted name Date R:~CEQA~73PA99 IES.doc~%TEMEC_FS101\VOL1%DEpTS~,~LANNING~CEQA~274PA99 IES.doc 2 Land Use and Planning. Would the project: Physically divide an established community? Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigation an environmental effect? Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Lell Than SignirK:ant 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Polenhall¥ 5;gmhcant Impact .. ,~ign~cant Unlm Mdjgation bcwpo;ated ,/ ,/ 3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project? ::::E: :~E!!!!!;: !: !E:!:!~! E::: :!!i!ii!~_~L_,~_ind SuPpoffin{3 I~formation Sources:::E: !!~i ::E :::~::!~!::~::~:E ;E~ I~npact;::E :: !E!Ekor~aled: :: ! !I~::E:E rapact a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial ,/ adverse effects, including the dsk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Pdolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? '/ iii)Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? ,/ iv) Landslides? '/ b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? '/ c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? R :\CEQA%273PA99 IES.dOC%\TEMEC_FS101 \VOLI %DEPTS~DLAN NING%CEQA~74PA99 tES.doc 3 Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1801-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Have soil incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net defttit in aquifer volume or a lowedng of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Substantially altar the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or dver, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or dver, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?. Other,wise substantially degrade water quality? I Place housing with=.n a lOO-year flood hazard area as .-.,~pped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? Place within a lOO-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or rediract flood flows? Expose people or structures to a significant dsk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Potenhaily 5igmfcant No ,/ 7' R:%CEQA~73PA99 IES.doc%\TEMEC_FS101~VOL1tDEPTS%PLANNING\CEQA~274PA99 IES.doc 4 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteda pollutant for which the project region is non- attainroent under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? 6. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections? Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety dsks? Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Result in inadequate emergency access? Result in inadequate parking capacity? Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks? 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: :~ : : :: :E :: :~::: ~:: ~ : ~i: :: ~ :i!~ighiticar~E::: ! :~:Mitgatice::: : 81gnif~canl~:i ::!No:~:: :: ::: ::~:~i!issueslndSuppordnql,,~.,ik~ationSources: :: ~:: ~ ':: E::lmpacl: :E:,.&.poraledE : mpect:~: impacl: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or '/ through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in R:\CEQA~273PA99 IES.doc%%TEMEC_FS101%VOLI%DEPTS%PLANNING\CEQA~274PA99 IES.doc 5 local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and W'ddlife Service? Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other means? Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife con'idors, or impede the use of native wildfife nursery sites? Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological rasourcas, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 8. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: ! !:: !!!!:~:~!!::::;~m:lSupporlinnlr~a-mafi~ Sources: : !:!::!::::~! !:: ! ::: :Impact; :!:!lncofperated::: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the ,/ environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Crate a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? R:%CEQA~73PA99 IES.doc%\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1~DEPTS~PLANNING\CEQA%274PA99 IES.doc 6 Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely h=~'=rdOuS materials, substances, or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Expose people or structures to a significant dsk or loss, injury or death involving wildland rites, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 10. NOISE. Would the project result in: Exposure of people to severe noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project'i A subsrant;all temporary or pedodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? I Im.J~a__~ ; incorporated Imgf3i ,/ ,/ ,/ R:%CEQA%2,73PA99 IES,doc%%TEMEC_FS101%VOL1%DEPTS%PLAN NING\CEQA%274PA99 I ES.doc 7 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: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associates with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered govemmentel facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmentel impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services? Fire protection? c. Police protection? d. Schools? e. Parks? f. Other public facilities? 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or eypansion of e>,;sting facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entifiements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment previder which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? R:\CEQA~73PA99 IES.doc\\TEMEC_FS101 \VOLt %DEPTS~LANNING\CEQA%274PA99 IES,doc 8 13. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and histodc building within a state scenic highway? Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Cream a new soume of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Signlr~enl NO 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Cause a substantial aaverse change ~n the s~gnificance of a histodcel resource as defined in Section 1506.5? Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.5? Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontologicel resource or site or unique geologic feature? Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? LMa Than Slgnlficlm Irnuecl Im_p~cl__ ,/ 15. RECREATION. Would the project: Would the pmje~ increase the use of existing neighbomood and regional pa~s or o~er recreational facilities such ~at substantial physical deterioration of ~e faciliW would oc~r or be ac~lemted? Does the proje~ include recreational facilities or require the constm~ion or expansion of recreational facilities whi~ might have an adverse physical effect on ~e environment? SlgnfficantUnles~ :Less~rha~i:~ ::~ : MiUgalion.. .Sighificenl. · No.: R:%CEQA%2.73PA99 IES.doc%~TEMEC_FS101\VOLI~:)EPTS~LANNING\CEQA%274PA99 IES,doc 9 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. be Ce Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major pedods of Califomia history or prehistory? Does the project have impacts that are 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? Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? $[gndlcem Unles& Than Signif maul Comments: The proposed Development Agreement does not approve any specific land use changes. The agreement on15 indicates that an appropriate change will be considered by the City at some later data on approximately 37.~ acres in exchange for resolving a disagreement between Eli Lilly and the City of Temecula. The Agreemen indicates that the future land uses could include any of the following: Business Park, Light Industrial Professional Office, High Density Residential and/or Commercial. Any future development proposals will receive appropriate environmental review prior to their approval Because the agreement is process rather than result oriented, it is not possible to evaluate what the future lan~ use changes might be. Because of the result is highly speculative, no detailed analysis is possible. Detaile~ environmental review will be performed and approved by the Lead Agency prior to the approval of any futur~ General Plan Land Use or Zoning Map changes. R:\CEQA~273PA99 IES.doc%%TEMEC_FSI01%VOL1~DEPTS%PLANNING\CEQA~274PA99 IES.doc 10 ITEM #6 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION September 15, 1999 Planning Application No. PA99-0215 (Amendment No. 4 to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24187) Prepared By: John De Gange, Project Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff recommends the Planning Commission: MAKE a Determination of Consistency With a Project for Which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was Previously Certified and Findings that a Subsequent EIR is not required; ADOPT Resolution No. 99- approving Planning Application No. PA99- 0215 (Amendment No. 4 to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24187), based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the staff report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Newland Communities (Dean Meyer) REPRESENTATIVE: Keith Companies PROPOSAL: To amend (Amendment No. 4) Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VT'I'M) 24187, a subdivision of 72.9 acres into 256 single-family residential lots and nine open space lots (the previously approved tentative map was approved for 363 single-family residential lots and 10 open space lots). LOCATION: The project site is within the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan (SP4) which is generally located northwest of Butterfield Stage Road and Highway 79(S). The proposed subdivision is specifically located south of McCabe Drive, east of Meadows Parkway and west of Sunny Meadows Drive, EXISTING GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS: Planning Area 23 of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan [SP-4] - Medium High Density Residential (5-8 dwelling units per acre maximum) F:\Dcpts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~215PA99.PC.doc SURROUNDINGZONING: North: South: West: East: Planning Area 29B of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan [SP-4] - Future Elementary School Site Planning Areas 13 and 14 of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan [SP-4] - Medium Density Residential (2-5 dwelling units per acre maximum) and Medium High Density Residential (5-8 dwelling units per acre maximum) Planning Area 22 of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan [SP-4] - Medium High Density Residential (5-8 dwelling units per acre maximum) Planning Area 26 of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan [SP4] - Medium Density Residential (2-5 dwelling units per acre maximum) EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant, partially graded land. SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Vacant South: Single-Family Residential Detached Development East: Vacant West: Single-Family Residential Detached Development PROJECTSTATISTICS Total Acreage for the Project (Gross) Total Acreage for the Project (Net) Number of Residential Lots Number of Open Space Lots Average Lot Size Minimum Lot Size Lot Density (Gross) Lot Density (Net) V I I NI 24187 AMENDMENT #4 (Proposed Project) 72.9 acres 67.8 acres 256 9 5,980 square feet 5,500 square feet 3.51 lots/acre 3.77 lots/acre V'I'FM 24187 AMENDMENT # 3 (Previously Approved Amendment) 72.9 acres 67.8 acres 363 10 5,000 square feet 4,500 square feet 4.98 lots/acre 5.35 lots/acre BACKGROUND Specific Plan 4 (Specific Plan No. 219, as designated by Riverside County) [Paloma del Sol] was originally approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on September 6, 1988. Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24187 was originally approved by the County Board of Supervisors in late 1988. The current version of the map, Amendment No. 3 for VTTM 24187, was approved by the City of Temecula on December 8, 1992. The current application was submitted to the Planning Department on June 1, 1999. A formal Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was held on July 1, 1999. The project was deemed complete on August 31, 1999. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This project is an amendment (Amendment No. 4) to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 24187 which proposes to subdivide 72.9 acres into 256 single family residential lots and 9 open spaca lots. This F:\Depts~PLANNING\STAFFRFl~215pA99.pC.doc 2 request represents a decrease in the total number of lots (from 362 to 256) and the overall density (from 4.98 to 3.51 lots per acre). The applicant has indicated that revisions to the previously approved map have been necessitated by a shift in the home market with a demand for larger size homes. Given that larger homes on smaller lots creates a less than ideal condition, it is the applicant's desire to provide for greater product segmentation with larger lots. The proposed larger lots also will allow the applicant to maintain a greater amount of diversity with respect to housing sizes. The smaller lots constrain the size and type of product that can be plotted. ANALYSIS The revisions proposed in this application are designed to increase lot sizes. This will ultimately result in significantly fewer lots and lower lot densities. The total amount of open space remains the same; however, minor modifications to the shape of some of the open space lots have been slightly altered. The circulation pattern of the tract is virtually identical with the exception that a cul- de-sac located within the north west corner of the tract (Street "F") has been converted into a knuckle (Street "E" and "F"). ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Environmental Impact Report No. 235 was prepared for Specific Plan No. 219 and was certified by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on September 6, 1988. This project is a decrease in the number of lots that the site was previously appmved for and the number of lots that was anticipated for this site within the specific plan. According to Section 21166 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report is required for the project unless one or more of the following events occurs: substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the EIR; substantial changes occur with respect to circumstance under which the project is being undertaken which will require major revisions in the EIR; or, new information, which was not known at the time of the EIR was certified and complete becomes available. None of these situations have occurred, In addition, the previously certified EIR addressed greater lot densities for the site than what is being proposed in this application,. therefore, the impacts associated with project are less. As a consequence no further environmental analysis is required. Staff is recommending that the Commission make a determination of consistency with a project for which an Environmental Impact Report was previously certified. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS The proposed amendment to V'I'FM 24187 results in a reduction in the number of lots from 363 to 256. This reduction in the number of lots should have an overall positive effect on subject site, the surrounding properties and the Paloma/Paseo del Specific Plan project as a whole. All revisions to the map are in compliance with the City's General Plan, Development Code, and are consistent with and meet the overall intent of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. F :\Depts\PLANN1NG\STAFFRPT\215PA99. PC ,doc 3 FINDINGS Planning Application No. PA99-0215 (Amendment No. 4 to VTTM 24187) The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the projects is consistent with the General Plan designation and Specific Plan No. 4. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site as specified in the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan (SP-4) is Medium High Density Residential (5- 8 dwelling units per acre). Planning Area 23 is approved for 363 residential parcels on 67.8 acres for a density of 5.35 units per acre. This project proposes 256 residential parcels on 67.8 acres for a density of 3.77 dwelling units per acre and is at a lower density than what is anticipated for Planning Area 23 and therefore is consistent with the Medium High density designation. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with Specific Plan No. 4, the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and Landscaping Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. The project will take access from Meadows Parkway, McCabe Drive and Sunny Meadows Drive, and will not obstruct any easements. The map as proposed, confon'ns to the logical subdivision of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The subdivision is compatible with the surrounding areas and the site will be developed pursuant to the General Plan, the Development Code, and the Development Agreement, all of which regulate residential parcels and development. Future development of residential units will be compatible and sensitive to the surrounding residential development. In addition, the proposed subdivision provides adequate access and circulation for emergency vehicles and will not impact existing circulation or emergency vehicle access. The project as conditioned, will comply with the City's Development Code, General Plan and subdivision requirements. The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoiaably injure fish or wildlib or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The project site has been previously graded and will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT',215PA99.PC.doc 4 Attachments: PC Resolution - Blue Page 6 Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 10 Exhibits - Blue Page 20 A. Vicinity Map B. Zoning Map C. General Plan Map D. Site Plan F:\DeptS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\215PA99,PC.doc 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRZF\215PA99.PC.doc 6 A'I'FACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0215 (AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 24187), GENERALLY LOCATED NORTHWEST OF BU'H'ERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND HIGHWAY 79(S) WITHIN THE PALOMA DEL SOL SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-4) (ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 955-030-009, -030, -and -028) WHEREAS, Newland Communities filed Planning Application No. PA99-0215 (Amendment No. 4 to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 24187) in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code and Riverside County Land Use and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0215 (Amendment No. 4 to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24187) 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. PA99-0215 (Amendment No. 4 to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24187) on September 15, 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 opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of be testimony, the Commission considered all facts relating to Planning Application No. PA99-0215; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated Section 2. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission, in appreving Planning Application No. PA99-0215 (Amendment No. 4 to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24187), hereby makes the following findings as required in Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460. A~ The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the projects is consistent with the General Plan designation and Specific Plan No. 4. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site as specified in the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan (SP-4) is Medium High Density Residential (5-8 dwelling units per acre). Planning Area 23 is approved for 363 residential parcels on 67.8 acres for a density of 5.35 units per acre. This project proposes 256 residential parcels on 67.8 acres for a density of 3.77 dwelling units per acre and is at a lower density than what is anticipated for Planning Area 23 and therefore is consistent with the Medium High density designation. B. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with Specific Plan No. 4, the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and Landscaping F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\215PA99.PC.doC 7 Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. C. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. The project will take access from Meadows Parkway, McCabe Drive and Sunny Meadows Drive, and will not obstruct any easements. D. The map as proposed, conforms to the logical subdivision of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The subdivision is compatible with the surrounding areas and the site will be developed pursuant to the General Plan, the Development Code, and the Development Agreement, all of which regulate residential parcels and development. Future development of residential units will be compatible and sensitive to the surrounding residential development. In addition, the proposed subdivision provides adequate access and circulation for emergency vehicles and will not impact existing circulation or emergency vehicle access. The project as cenditioned, will comply with the City's Development Code, General Plan and subdivision requirements. E. The design of the proposed land division is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. Therefore, the project is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. Section 3. Environmental ComDliance An Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 235) was prepared for Specific Plan No. 219. This EIR addressed and proposed mitigation for the impacts associated with this project. Since this proposal represents a decrease in the number of lots that the site was previously approved for and the number of lots that was anticipated for this site within the specific plan, it has been determined that no further environmental evaluation is required. In addition, the Planning Commission has made a determination that this proposal is consistent with a project (SP No. 219)for which an Environmental Impact Report was previously certified. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecu~a Planning Commission hereby approves Planning Application No. PAgg-0215 (Amendment No. 4 to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24187) generally located northwest of Butterfield Stage Road and Highway 79(s) within the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan (SP-4) (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 955-030-009, -030, -and -028), subject to Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference and made a part hereof. F:\DeptsXPLANNING\STAFFRPT\215PA99.PC.doc 8 Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this fifteenth day of September, 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 fifteenth day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAINED: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX215PA99,PC.doc 9 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL F:\DeptS\PLANNING\STAFFP, PTX215PA99.PC.doc EXHIBIT A CITY Of TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA99-0215 (Amendment No. 4 to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24187) Project Description: The subdivision of 72.9 acres into 256 single-family residential lots and nine open space lots. Assessor's Parcel No.: 955-030-009, -030, and -028 Approval Date: Expiration Date: September 15, 1999 September 15, 2001 PLANNINGDIVISION General Requirements 1. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of Califomia Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request, if made 30 days prior to the expiration date. 2. 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 appreved 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 ~n regards to such defense. 3. If subdivision phasing is proposed, a phasing plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director. 4. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures. 5. Comply with all applicable Conditions of Approval for Amendment No. 3 for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 24187 unless superceded by these conditions. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 6. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Division. F:',Dcpts~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~215PA99,PC.doc 11 7. 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. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 8. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes: 1 ) This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations, Ordinance No. 655. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Govemment Agency. All previous conditions of approval shall remain in force except as superseded or amended by the following requirements. All questions regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate staff person of the Department of Public Works. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative map or site plan all existing and proposed 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 10. 11. 12. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise (including all onsite flat work and improvements) construction shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained road right-of-way. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works pdor to cammencament of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits: 13. 14. 15. The final grading plan shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. All lot drainage shall be directed to the driveway by side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot, or other devices as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. (Amended by Planning Commission on November 16, 1992). Pdor to issuance of a grading permit, 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 has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~215PA99.PC.doc 16. Pdor to the issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall receive wdtten clearance from the following agencies: Planning Department Department of Public Works; 17. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered soils engineer and submitted to 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. 18. An erosion control plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 19, Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weedfree condition and shall be either planted with intedm landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures as appmved by the Department of Public Works. 20. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is payable to the Flood Control District pdor to issuance of permits. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has been already credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 21. The developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or easements for any offsite work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. 22. A drainage study shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The drainage study shall include, but not be limited to, the following criteria: a) Drainage and flood protection fadlities which will protect all structures by diverting site runoff to streets or approved storm drain facilities as directed by the Department of Public Works. b) Identify and mitigate impacts of grading to any onsite or offsite drainage courses. c) The location of existing and post development 100-year floodplain and floodway shall be shown on the improvement plan. 23. The subdivider shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the Department of Public Works permits the use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Section XI of Ordinance No. 460 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the subdivider shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Department of Public Works. 24. The subdivider shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities, including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement. 25. A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the drainage easement shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review prior to recordation. The location of the recorded easement shall be delineated on the grading plan. F:\I~p~s\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\215PA99.PC.dOC 13 Prior to the Issuance of Encroachment Permits: 26. All necessary grading permit requirements shall have been submitted/accomplished to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 27. Improvement plans, including but not limited to, streets, parkway trees, street lights, driveways, ddve aisles, parking lot lighting, drainage facilities and paving shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer on 24" x 36" mylar sheets and approved by the Department of Public Works. Final plans (and profiles on streets) shall show the location of existing utility facilities and easements as directed by the Department of Public Works. 28. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with Ordinance 461 and City of Temecula Standard No.'s 800, 801,802 and 803 with and shall be shown on the improvement plans as directed by the Department of Public Works. 29. The minimum centedine grade for streets shall be 0.50 percent or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. 30. All driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula standards and shall be shown on the street improvement plans in accordance with City Standard 207 and 208. 31. All driveways shall be located a minimum of two (2) feet from the side property line. 32. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. 33. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. 34. A construction area traffic control plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic drculation as required by the Department of Public Works. Prior to Recordation of Final Map: 35. The developer shall construct or post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements in conformanco with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. a) Street improvements, which may include, but are not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing and other traffic control devices as appropriate. o) Storm drain facilities c) Landscaping (slopes and parkways), d) Erosion control and slope protection. e) Sewer and domestic water systems. f) All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. g) Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Rancho California Water District; Eastern Municipal Water District; Riverside County Flood Control District; 36. F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX215PA99.pC.doc City of Temecula Fire Bureau; Planning Department; Department of Public Works; Community Services Department; Riverside County Health Department; CATV Franchise; General Telephone; Southern California Edison Company; and Southern California Gas Company 37. If phasing of the map for construction is proposed, legal all-weather access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract map boundary to a paved City maintained road. 38. Pedestrian access with sidewalk shall be provided from the cul-de-sac terminus of Streets "E", "G", "IC, "L", "M", "Q", "R", and "S" through the open space and paseo areas to adjacent streets. 39. Streets "A", "B", "C", and "D" shall be improved with 50 feet of asphalt concrete pavement with a raised 1 O-foot wide median, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with modified City Standard No. 104, Section A (66'/44'). 40. Streets "B", "C", "D" and "E" shall be improved with 50 feet of asphalt concrete pavement with a raised 1 (>-foot wide median, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with modified City Standard No. 104, Section A (70'/50'). 41. All remaining intedor local streets shall be improved with 40 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of- way in accordance with City Standard No. 104, Section A (60'/40'). 42. Sunny Meadows Ddve shall be improved with 44 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with City Standard No. 103, Section A (66'/44'). 43. Meadows Parkway shall be improved with 38 feet of half street improvement plus one 12-foot lane outside the median, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with City Standard No. 101, (100'/76'). 44. In the event that the required access improvements for this development are not constructed by Assessment Distdct No. 159 pdor to recordation of the final map, the developer shall construct or bond for all required access improvements per applicable City Standards. All Assessment District No. 159 improvements necessary for access to the development shall be constructed prior to occupancy. The Developer shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with the City of Temecula for construction of all offsite improvements necessary to serve the development as deemed appropriate by the Department of Public Works. 45. Cul-de-sacs and knuckles shall be constructed per the appropriate City Standards and as shown on the approved Tentative Map. 46. Left turn lanes shall be provided at all intersections on Sunny Meadow Drive and Meadows Parkway. 47. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the developer shall, prior to submittal of the final map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for F:\D~pts\PLANNING\STAFFRP~215PA99.PC.d~C payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site properly interests required in conr~ection with the subdivision. Secudty of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at the developers cost. The appraiser shall have been appreved by the City pdor to commencement of the appraisal. 48. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Sunny Meadows Ddve and Meadows Parkway and so noted on the final map with the exception of street intersections as shown on the appreved Tentative Map and as approved by the Department of Public Works. 49. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for Sunny Meadows Ddve and Meadows Parkway and shall be included in the street improvement plans. 50. Pdor to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering for the design requirements. 51. Bus bays will be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by the Department of Public Works. 52. Comer property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. 53. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 54. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, joint-use driveways, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted for review and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating "drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions." 55. Pdor to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identffied environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. 56. The developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 57. Pdor to recording the final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CA';~/Standards at time of street improvements. Prior to Building Permit: 58. A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 59. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. All grading shall also be in conformance with the recommendations of the County Geologist, dated May 15, 1989, for Tentative Tract ' Map 24186. F:\Depu{~PLANNING\STAFFRPT\215pA99.pC.doc 16 Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy: 60. All improvements shall be completed and in place per the approved plans, including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, ddve approaches, drainage facilities, parkway trees and street lights on all intedor public streets. 61. All signing and stdping shall be installed per the approved signing and s~ping plan. 62. The subdivider shall provide "stop" controls at the intersection of local streets with artedal streets as directed by the Department of Public Works. 63. All landscaping shall be installed in the comer cut-off area of all intersection and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance as directed by the Department of Public Works. 64. A 32' wide paved secondary access road for phased development shall be constructed within a recorded pdvate road easement as approved by the Department of Public Works per City of Temecula Standard 106 (60'/32'). 65. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied only as directed by the Department of Public Works for pavement joins and transition coatings. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. 66. In the event that the required improvements for this development are not completed by Assessment Distdct 159 pdor to certification for occupancy, the Developer shall construct all required improvements. The Developer shall also provide an updated traffic analysis as directed by the Department of Public Works to determine the construction timing and the Developer's percent of contribution toward any facilities not completed per the schedules of improvement, tables XV and XVI, for the Rancho Villages Assessment. The Developer shall also enter into a reimbursement agreement with the City of Temecula for the construction of any necessary improvements not completed by Assessment District 159 as determined by the approved traffic analysis. FIRE DEPARTMENT 67. 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 California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. 68. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for residential land division per CFC Appendix Ill.A, Table A-Ill-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 1500 GPM at 20 PSI residual operating pressure with a 2 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted dudng 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. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill.A) 69. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill.B, Table A-Ill-B-1. Standard fire hydrants (6" x 4" x 2 1/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 500 feet apart and shall be located no more than 250 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access read(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B) F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRFI'X215PA99.PC.doc 70. Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum turning radius on any cul- de-sac shall be forty-five (45) feet. (CFC 902.2.2.2.3) 71. If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection prior to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2) 72. 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 80,000 Ibs GVVV. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) 73. Pdor 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 80,000 Ibs. GVVV with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. ( CFC sec 902 and Ord 99-14) 74. 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. (CFC 902.2.2.1 and Ord 99-14) 75. 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. (CFC 902.2.2.4) 76. Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via il- weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1 ) 77. Pdor to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to installation. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1 ) 78. Pdor to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed tc identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3) 79. All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry system for emergency access by firefighting personnel. (CFC 902.4) TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT (TCSD) 80. If the landscaped median within Meadows Parkway is not constructed prior to approval of the first phased map, the developer shall provide landscape construction plans and post the appropriate securities to guarantee construction of said improvements. OTHER AGENCIES 81. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water District's transmittal dated June 15, 1999, a copy of which is attached. F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX215PA99,PC,doc 82. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District,, transmittal dated June 29, 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's Signature Date Name printed F:\Depts\PI_ANNING\STAFFRFFX215PA99,PC,doc 19 June 15,1999 John DeGange, Case Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY TRACT NO. 24187 APNs 955-030-009, 955-030-028 AND 955-030-030 PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0215 Dear Mr. DeGange: 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:mc148~F012-T5~FCF c: Laude Williams, Engineering Services Supervisor DAVID P. ZAPPE Genial Manager-Chief Engineer RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT City of Temecula Plannin De aftmerit Post 9033 Temecula, Califomia 92589-9033 A ention: H H m G ~dies and Gentlemen: 1995 MARKET STRE R/VERSIDE, CA 925 909/955 - 1200 909/788-9965 FAX~ 51180.1 Ra: VTT 'I 9-41 The Dis~ does not no~ally r~mmend ~ndffions for land divisions or other land use ~ses in in~omted ci~es. ~e Distd~ also does not lan ~ ~ land use ~ses, or provide S~te Division of Real Es~te leRem or other flood h~ard repo~s for su~ ~ses. Dis~ ~mment~m~mme~a~ons for su~ ~ses am no~ally limited to items of s~fic ~ntemst to the Disffi~ in~uaing Dis~ Master Dmina · Plan families, other r ional flood control and dmina · fa~li~es which ~uld be ~nsider~ a Iogi~l componenPor e~nsion of a ma~er~n s tern. a~ Distd~ Area ~minage Plan fees (developmere mitiga~on f~s). In add~on, i~o~a~on of a general n~re is provided. ~e Dis~ has not m~ ~e pro~s~ pmj~ in devil and ~e foiling ~ked ~mments do n~ in any way ~nstit~e or imOly Disffi~ approval or endomement of ~e pm~sed pmj~ ~th msp~ to fl~ h~, public healffi anO safeW or any other such issue: ~ ~is pmje~ ~uld not be im~ by Dis~ Master Drainage Plan families nor are other fa~lffies of r~ional roterest proposed. ~is pmj~ involves Dis~ Ma~er Plan fadli~es. ~e Dis~ ~11 a~ t o~emhip of su~ ~li~ on ~Ren request of the Ci~. Families mu~ be ~ns~ed to Dis~ stan~ffis, and Distd~ plan ~ and insp~on ~tl ~ r~ui~ for Dis~ a~p~n~. Plan ~e~, ins~on and adminisn~e f~s ~ll be r~uimd. ~i$ pmj~ ~ses ~annels, st~ drains 36 in~es or la~er in diameter, or offer fadrifles ~t ~uld ~nsde~ r~ionat in na~m an~or a I i~l e~e~ion of ~e adopt~ Master Dmi~ge Plan. ~e Dis~ ~ ~nsider a~ng ~emhie ~ su~ fa~lffies on ~en ~ue on ~ ~e C~ FaO fi~ must ~ ~ns~ to Di~ ~nda~s. and D~ plan ~ a~ i~ ~ ~ui~ for Dis~ a~ptan~. Plan ~, ins~on and adminis~flve fees ~11 be ~ui~. ~ s pmj~ s ~ted ~th n the im~ of ~e Disffi~'s ~a Dm nage P an for ~ ~ dm na e fe~ have been adoptS' a phiDie tees shoul0 be pard by ~shi~s ~eck or money diner only to tRe FIo~ Control Distd~ pd~r ~ issuan~ of building or gindin pe~its, whichever ~mes fi~. Fees to be paid should be at ~e rote in eff~ at the time of issuan~ ~?he a~al petit. GENE~L INFORMATION ......... from ~e S~te Water CiW has dete~ined .hat ~ pmj~ has ~n 0mnt~ a ~ or is sho~ to be exempt. f this pmj~ nvo ves a F~dem Emergen~ Management Age.~y (FE~ reaped flood plain, then the Ci~ should r~uire the appli~nt to pm~de all studies ~l~la~ons plans and o~er mfo~a~on refiuir~ to meet FE~ r~uimments, and s~uld fu~er r~uire that ~e appli~nt obtain a Conditional LeRer of Map Redsion CLOMR) p~or to grading. r~o~a~on or other final approval of the pmje~, and a LeRer of Map Revision (LOM~ pdor to o~upancy. If a natural water~ume or mapped flood plain is im a~ed by this proj~, the CiW should require the a li~nt to obtain a Se~on 1601/1603 Agreement from the Ca~}omia Department of Fish and Game and a Clean ~ater A~ Se~on 4~ Petit from the U.S. A~y Co~s of Engineer. or ~Ren ~spondence from thea aendes inditing the proj~ is exempt from these requirements. A Clean Water A~ Se~on 401 Water Quail Ce~on may be required from the Io~1 California Regional Water QualiW Control Board pdor to issuance of ~e Co~s 404 petit. ATTACHMENT NO. 2 EXHIBITS F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\215PA99.PC,dOc 20 CITY OF TEMECULA Project Site CASE NO. - PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0215 (AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 24187) EXHIBIT A PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 VICINITY MAP F:\Depts~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~215PA99.PC.doc 21 CITY OF TEMECULA VL EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP Project Site ' b W I~e VL lhI EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION CASE NO. - PA99-0215 (AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 24187) PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX215PA99.PC.dOc 22 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0215 (AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT EXHIBIT D PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 MAP 24187) SITE PLAN F:\Dep~s\PLANNING\STAFFRFI~15PA99.PC.doc 23 ITEM #7 SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER ITEM #7 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION September 15, 1999 Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) Planning ApplicaUon No. PA99-0286 (TentaUve Parcel Map No. 29431) Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Specific Plan Amendment No. 7) Planning Application No. PA99-0283 (Development Agreement) RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff recommends the Planning Commission: ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending that the City Council certify and adopt the Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report No. 235 for Specific Plan No. 219, based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431) based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219) based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0283 (Development Agreement entitled "Villages at Paseo del Sol Development Agreement') based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. F:%DEPTS~LANNING%STAFFRPTt284pa99,pc,doc 1 APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Allan L. Davis, del Sol Investment Company, LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Larry R. Markham, Markham & Associates PROPOSAL: The design, construction and operation of 276,243 square feet of retail commercial uses, including a 131,848 square foot Home Depot Store. a 7,000 square foot automotive supply store, and 137,395 square feet of village shopping space; 2. The subdivision of 66.828 gross acres into seven (7) lots; Amendment No. 7 to Spedtic Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), amending the following: land uses within Planning Areas 1,6 and 8; the realignment and reconfiguration of Campanula Way between De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway; the reallocation of acreage within Planning Area 1 from 32.3 acres to 35.0 acres; the reallocation of acreage within Planning Area 6 from 36.3 to 34.3 acres; the division of Planning Area 6 into Planning Area 6A (22.3 acres, high density residential, 9-12 dwelling units per acre, with a maximum of 268 dwelling units) and Planning Area 6B (12 acres, very high density residential, 13-20 du/ac, with a maximum of 240 dwelling units), resulting in an overall reduction of units from 590 to 508 dwellings; the provision to develop an active, private, gated senior community within Planning Area 8 that includes a private recreation area; and an update of Specific Plan Design Guidelines that incorporate the village vignettes and the senior amenities. The request for approval of a Development Agreement between the City and del Sol Investment Co., LLC, a Califomia limited liability company LOCATION: North of State Highway 79 South, south of Montelegro Way, east of Margarita Road and west of Meadows Parkway EXISTING ZONING: Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: Specific Plan No. 219 South: County - Commercial East: Spedtic Plan No. 219 West: VL Very Low Density Residential, PO Professional Office, and HT Highway Toudst Commercial PROPOSEDZONING: Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 7 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: CC Community Commercial, H High Density Residential, LM Low Medium Density Residential, and OS Open Spaca EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LANDUSES: Nodh: South: East: West: Residential Corninertial (Jack-in-the-Box, Texaco), vacant Vacant and residential Commercial (Lucky's, Siggy's Restaurant) F:~DEPTS~LANNING~.STAFFRPT~.pc.doc 2 PROJECT STATISTICS (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) Total Area: 23.65 acres 1,030,411 sq. ft. Building Area: Home Depot Retail Villages Total 131,848 sq.ft. 144,395 sq.ft. (Multi-story) 276,243 sq.ft. (27%) Max. Building Height: 50 feet Landscaped Area: Hardscaped Area: 4.90 acres 213,~.~.~. sq.ft. (21%) 16.38 acres 713,513 sq.ft. (69%) Parking Required: Parking Provided: 730 vehicular, 30 handicapped, 37 bicycle, 7 motorcycle ,094 vehicular, 32 handicapped. 37 bicycle, 7 motorcycle BACKGROUND Spedtic Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol) was approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on September 6, 1988. Subsequent to incorporation, the Temecula City Courtall approved the "Agreement regarding Paloma del Sol" and vadous amendments to the Specific Plan, from 1994 through 1998. Portions of the subjed application were submitted for Pre-Application review on June 16, 1999. On that same date the applicant presented their proposal to the Planning Commission, as a workshop item. Staff held a Pre-Application Meeting with the applicant and his development team on June 30, 1999. A formal submittal was received over a pedod of days between July 15, 1999 and July 22, 1999. The applicant conducted another workshop with the Planning Commission on July 21, 1999, obtaining comments from the Commissioners as to architectural design, location of land uses, pedestrian access, screening of loading docks, and the location of outdoor seasonal display. Second, third and fourth revised exhibits ware received by staff on August 11, 1999, August 16, 1999 and August 26, 1999 respectively. Staff held a Development Review Committee Meeting with the applicant and his development team on August 26, 1999. Subsequent meetings were held with vadous staff members regarding spedtic areas of concern, such as the traffic study, street design, village design, development agreement deal points, list of permitted uses, and bus turnouts. A fifth set of revised exhibits were received on September 7, September 8, and September 9, 1999. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant proposes to develop the east and major podion of Planning Area I of the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan. He offers to combine a 131,848 square foot Home Depot (including a garden center) alongside four (4) outlying pads and several "retail villages," for a total of 276,243 square feet of retail. The "retail villages" idea represents a unique interpretation of the Village Center Oreday that is placed on the site by the City's General Plan. However, the applicant has worked with staff to provide a courtyard layout as the focal point, has clustered retail uses, and has used architectural features that encourage pedestrians to move through the "retail villages.' The applicant has submitted a sedes of village vignettes that depict the style, design amenities and coordination of uses that are to be detailed within a design manual submitted at a later time for review and approval by the Planning Manager. The project is conditioned to provide and receive approval from the Planning Manager for the design manual and administrative development plan applications pdor to the consideration of any precise grading or building permit beyond the Home Depot building. F:%DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~284pe99,1X;.dOC 3 The applicant submitted the Deign Manual for the project on September 9, 1999. Unfortunately staff received this document at such a late date that adequate review and comment was infeasible. ANALYSIS Site Desicon The project will extend commercial uses already established at the northeast comer of Margadta Road and State Highway 79 South. Home Depot is proposed to be adjacent to the existing Lucky's Grocery Store. The "retail villages" buildings continue eastward to the desilting basin at the comer of Meadows Parkway and State Highway 79 South. A major component of the project is the recon~guration and realignment of Campanula Way from its existing specific plan designation as a major roadway with a 100-fcot right-of-way width. The applicant is proposing two traffic circles on Campanula, one near the courtyard, and the other behind Home Depot. The traffic circles represent a compromise design to decrease the vehicular speeds on Campanula, and encourage pedestrian access. The applicant also proposes parallel parking on some sections of Campanula, as well as a bike route and a combination of striped and raised landscaped medians. Delivery trucks are encouraged to use Meadows Parkway and Campanula Way to access the roar loading docks. Customer ac_~e_ss is through three (3) driveways off State Highway 79 South, and two (2) driveways off Campanula Way. The applicant shall be conditioned to provide a "Bike Rack Location Plan" to place the 37 required bicycle racks throughout the project area. Because the parking fields provided exceed City code requirements, the project fulfills motorcycle space needs by utilizing the excess vehicle spaces. Therefore, motorcycle spaces are not delineated on the plan. The Home Depot site provides for a customer pick up area, as well as an outdoor display area at the front of the storo. The project is conditioned for a maximum aroa of 2,300 squaro feet of outdoor finished product display, similar to other approved home improvement stores in the City. Home Depot also proposes a seasonal outdoor sales area of 7,650 square feet. Staff had requested that the seasonal sales area be internalized, however, the Home Depot representative did not concur with this request. Staff has conditioned Home Depot to obtain a Temporary Use Permit from the Planning Department for each and every occasion to setup seasonal sales. Seasonal sales areas shall be propedy screened and approved by the Planning Manager. Architecture, Color and Materials The Home Depot elevations roprosent the fourth revision to these plans. The vinyl coated steel wiro mesh originally proposed to screen the garden canter has been replaced with decorative wrought iron, and the rear (north) elevation has been broken up with signage. Columns have been enhanced with a stone veneer on all elevations where appropriate. However, staff had requested that the downspouts be internalized and that trellises be added over the cutdoor product display area. Both requests were not implemented. As stated proviously, the applicant shall be conditioned to provide a Design Manual that addresses the architecture, color and materials, and signage to be used throughout the balance of the project. The Design Manual shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Manager if it is consistent with the City's' Design Guidelines and the Paloma del Sol Specific Ran guidelines. Signage Home Depot proposes two monument signs, one at the State Highway 79 South entrance and another at the Campanula Way entrance. Both signs incorporate architectural features, colors and F:%DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT%2.64pagg.pc,doc 4 materials from the main building, and am six feet (6') in height. The Home Depot building is proposed to have a main sign at the front, with two additional spedairy signs for the indoor lumber yard and the nursery. They also propose signage with four foot (4') illuminated channel letters along the nodh and east elevations. The proposal is consistent with the signage program for the existing Lucky center and the Citys Sign Ordinance. Further, the Deign Manual for the Village at Pasao del Sol shall determine spedtic sign cdteda for the balance of the project. Landscapina The applicant is proposing that the ten foot (10') wide podmeter planters required within the Paloma del Sol Spedtic Plan be reduced to six foot (6') wide planters. He believes that his project provides more planter area and trees overall by interspersing finger planters to breakup the parking field, rather than implementing the clustering concept required by the specific plan. The applicant has revised the specific plan text to allow his design. The project shall be conditioned to add extensive turf mounding, shrubs and grouped trees along State Highway 79 South to screen the vehicle parking spaces fronting the highway. The applicant is proposing to screen the loading docks behind the Home Depot and Buildings "G" and "H" with a six foot (6') block wall atop a five to seven foot (5-7') berm. The wall is approximately seven feet (7') from the lumber loading dock, and twelve feet (12') from Building "H." Staff has conditioned that Construction Landscape Drawings submitted for Home Depot and Buildings "G" and "H" continue the row of evergreen trees already shown for the west half behind Home Depot. All evergreen trees planted in this area shall be a minimum 36-inch box size to provide a quick screen. The planting along the street side of the screen walls shall include wall vines and shrubs. The project shall be conditioned to racen~gura and enlarge the planter area on both sides of the main entry in order to install plantings that make an entry statement. The Design Manual submitted for the project shall include landscaping details required around buildings and within the courtyard. The manual shall also specify the type of furniture and rDdures in these areas. Tentative Parcel MaD No. 29431 The map proposed for this project was originally submitted as a tentative parcel map. Subsequently, the applicant resubmitted the map as a vesting map without providing the necessary detail to process the map under the vesting format in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. Furthermore, the exhibit submitted on September 8, 1999 remains inadequate. Conditions of approval from the Public Works Department require that the applicant resubmit a revised exhibit for Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431 prior to the C, ity Council headng. Should the applicant still desire to pursue a vesting map, he may at a later date, submit a vesting tentative parcel map in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, which if approved can overlay Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431. The Riverside Transit Agency has requested bus stops at this location. The parcel map delineates a bus turnout on the south side of Campanula, and has been conditioned to locate and include a westbound bus tumout pdor to the recordation of the final map. The Development Plan submitted for the multi-family project proposed for Parcel 6 may affect the ultimate location of this turnout. Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 The text for Amendment No. 7 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan and the Zoning Ordinance Amendment roquiro additional corrections. Howaver, due to the aggressive schedule that staff and the applicant has maintained in order to bdng this project forward to the Commission and Council, F:~DEPTS~°LANNING~STAFFRpT~,84pa99,pC.dOC 5 these corrections am not included in the text distributed to the Commission (dated September 7, 1999). In order to keep the project on track, staft is providing the Commission with a List of Changes which summadzes each of the amendments to the specific plan proposed by the applicant, and staff's recommendation regarding each amendment. The applicant shall be conditioned to resubmit Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 with the corrections needed to the text, including all recommendations by the Commission, before the text is distdbuted to the City Council for their consideration. Paloma del Sol Soecific Plan No. 219 Amendment No. 7 List of Changes~ Amendment No. 6 3 Density cateoodes - Medium, Medium-High, and Very High CamDanula Way - a 100 ft ROW between De Podola Road and Meadows Parkway. On-site roads include: Highway 79 South (142' ROW), Arterials (110' ROW), Majors (100' ROW), Secondades (88 ROW), Collectors (66' ROW), Local Streets (60 ROW), and Gateway Roads (108' ROW) Plannino Area 6 - Archaeological site mitigation program is required to be identified and possibly completed Plannin{3 Area 6 - pdvate recreation facilities include meeting rooms, wet bars, and kitchen facilities Amendment No. 7 4 Density categories - Medium, Medium-High, High (proposed for Planning Area 6A), and Very High Planning Area 1 is split into Planning Areas l(a) and l(b) Campanula Way - Use of traffic circles and on-street parking on 78 ft ROW between De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway. Addition of: Commercial Collectors with on-street parking and traffic circles (78' ROW), and Am. No. 7 no longer contains Gateway Roads (all other roads remain the same) (Language added) Commercial frontage landscapin.e- extensive turf mounding, grouped trees and shrubs to allow excellent visibility of village center and supporting retail villages Planning Area 6 - No longer required because the mitigation program has already occurred Planning Area 6 - these three facilities are deleted Recommendation Approval Approval Approval includes a 122 ft. ROW width at traffic circles Approval includes a 122 ft. ROW width at traffic circles Approval UCR requests mitigation if resources are found dudrig construction. Approval %%TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DE PTS%PLANNING~STAFFRpT~d~oa99.pc.doc 6 Planning Area 6 - "A minor project entry statement shall be provided at the comer of Meadows Parkway and Campanula Way at the southeastem comer of the Planning Area." Planninl3 Area 6 - Very High Density Residential (590 du max) with a target density of 16.2 du/ac Pedestdan linkaQe - between Planning Area 6 and park in PA 37 deleted Deny deletion Planning Area 6(a} - High Density Residential (268 du max) with a target density of 10.5 du/ac Planning Area 6(b) - Very High Density Residential (240 du max)with a target density of 16.5 du/ac Pedestrian linkage - between Planning Areas 6A and 6B Approval Approval as an added item. Retain park linkage to PA6. Planning Area 8 - medium density residential (2-5 dwelling units per acre) Neiahborhood Commercial Services - include general merchandising, cultural and entertainment opportunities, and general office uses Neighborhood Commercial Open areas - 15 to 50 feet in width Planning Area 8 - proposed as Approval medium density (2-5 dwelling units per acre) private gated active senior community (if not implemented as such, medium density family housing) If implemented as a Senior Community, this PA will contain 5 unique street/sidewalk treatments (which can be viewed on Figures 51A, 51B, 51C, 51D, and 51E in Amendment No. 7. (Language added) Residential Approval Neighborhood Associations in Senior Communitv- will be formed if Senior community is implemented and will assume maintenance responsibility for all common areas and fadlities therein Neighborhood Commercial Services - includes the same as Am. No. 6, but additionally includes home improvement, food and restaurant services Neighborhood Commercial Open Approval areas - 25 to 100 feet in width \\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI~DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRpT~.pc.doc 7 Amendment No. 6 Architecture - "Commercial units should van/in size. However, units which are directly adjacent may not differ in horizontal or vedicel frontage by more than 50 percent.' Architecture throuohout orciect - will conform to general criteda standards established within the Specific Plan design guidelines Roof Forms and Materials - "Fiat roof area is limited to 50 % of total roof area for any single unit or group of contiguous units." LandsceDe ReQuirements- minimum of 15% of the gross commercial site acreage shall be landscaped LandscaDinQ in Darkinc3 areas - Islands at the end of parking stalls have a minimum of 10' width of landscaping to allow planting and mounding, Amendment No. 7 Architecture- "Commercial units should van/in size with adjacency of scale considered.' Architecture within Senior Community Housino - conforms with design guidelines, however, to establish a unique character for seniors, architecture will be distinctive and designed/marketed toward active seniors Roof Forms and Matedais -"Flat roof area is limited to 50 % of total roof area for the overall site by planning area except in PA 1 (b) which may be 100%." Landscape ReQuirements - same as Am. No. 6, but with the addition of Home Depot site with minimum of 10% net acreage landscaped LandsceDinC3 in DarkinO areas - Islands at the end of parking stalls have a minimum of 6' width of landscaping to allow planting and mounding, and one tree per even/ ten (10) parking stalls (minimum) (Language added) Villaae Center DesiOn Guidelines - inclusion of medical/dental and/or general offices, a home improvement store, and fitness center (Language added) Appropriate Sionaoe - "blade signs which are pedestrian odented 90 degrees to pedestrian pathways" (Language added) "Existing uses in Planning Areas la and lb (commercial center) may be rebuilt for the term of the respective Development Agreement in the event of damage, destrudion or remodeling" Recommendation Approval Approval as an added item for senior housing. Deny Deny Deny ~TEMEC_FS10fiVOLl~DEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRPl~28~.pc.doc 8 Circulation - "The project preponent shall participate in the Treffic Signal Mitigation Pregrem as appreved by the City of Temecula (Added language follows) subject to certain reimbursements under Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement." ~ For a compadson list of acreage, land use and dwelling unit changes, please reference the Summary of Changes Table in Amendment No. 7. Development A~3reement The preposed Development Agreement for this project is being handled in a similar fashion to the Spedtic Plan Amendment. Staff has previded a list of Deal Points which specities those items that are either unresolved or incorrect within the text, and staff's recommendation regarding each item. The applicant shall be conditioned to resubmit the Development Agreement with the corrections and recommendations by the Commission before the text is distributed to the City Council for their consideretion. Deal Points: 1. Developer is requesting a Development Agreement life of 25 years (Section 4.1). Staff does not support a 25 year Development Agreement life. Staff suppods a 10 year Development Agreement life. Treffic medians and treffic drcies installed by the Owner in the public dght of way of Campanula Way shall be maintained by the TCSD as paffial consideretion for the annual assessment paid to the TCSD. (Section 12.3b) Staff does not support this. The Developer requests the City use all reasonable efforts to assist the Owner in amending the MOU between the City and Cal Trans and to assist Owner in obtaining all required encroachment permits from Cal Trans on a timely basis to allow Owner an additional dght tum in and dght tum out access point at a point approximately 660 feet west of the centedine of the intersection of Meadows Parkway and Highway 79S and the Main Access and Highway 79S. (Section 12.5) Staff supports this. 4A. Owner is purchasing $400,000.00 worth of DIF credits which will be available to either apply to capital or impact fee for mad improvements and public facilities or DIF otherwise payable by Owner. (Section 12.2) Staff supports this not to exceed 100% of the street\treffic signal DIF credit. 4B. Owner shall receive additional credits toward any DIF due related to the Project directly related to all road improvements installed under AD 159 in propodion to the total assessment assessed against the Property in the amount of $364,408.20 in accordance with Exhibit "H" prepared by City attached hereto and made a part hereof. (Section 12.2) \\TEMEC_FS101\VOLl~)EPTS~LANNING~STAFFRPT~284~.pc,doc Staff supports this not to exceed 100% of street\traffic signal DIF credit. Any building which suffers casualty damage, whether more than 50% or not, shall be allowed to be re-built and re-occupied by the use to which it was being used immediately pdor to the occurrence of the casualty, providing such re-construction is in compliance with the then current building codes in effect. (Section 13.2) Staff suppods this as long as the re-construction uses the currently adopted model codes. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 66452.6 of the Govemment Code, the tentative subdivision map(s) or tentative parcel map(s) (vested or regular) approved as part of implementing the Development Plan, shall be extended to expire at the end of the term of this Villages (~ Paseo del Sol Development Agreement. (Section 13.5) Staff suppods a life of 10 years. Development Aoreement - List of Permitted Uses (Villaoe Core area) The following uses are either repetitive or staff is requesting deletion: (22) This is the same use as (12) (23) This is the same use a (9) (26) This is the same use as (61) (35) Golf equipment store not to exceed 3,000 square feet. Delete (36) Health centers or similar personal service establishments, not to exceed 10,000 square feet in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. Delete (45) Laboratories, film, dental, medical, research or testing in Building J except for 1,600 square foot space on southeast comer on Plaza. Delete (46) Laundries and laundromats in Building B. Delete (49) Liquor stores. Delete Development Ag3roement - List of Permitted Uses (Retail VillaCles) The following uses are either repetitive or staff is requesting deletion: (31) This is the same use as (21) (39) Dollar store. Delete (83) Outlet stores. Delete ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 235) was approved and cedi~ed by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Since that date Addendure No. 1 was cedified in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 to the Specific Plan, which added a Development Agreement to the project. Addendure No. 2 was adopted on March 17, 1999 by the City of Temecula in conjunction with an evaluation of additional facilities and uses to the Specific Plan. The applicant has submitted for certification Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan. Addendure No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the recon~guration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-foot major street section to a 78-foot right-of-way with "rounded out" traffic circles. The Addendum document submitted September 9, 1999 is incorrect and does not contain the Traffic \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFR PT%284pa99.pc.doc 10 Study approved by the City Traff'm Engineer. The applicant is conditioned to revise the Addendum document pdor to distribution to the City Coundl for consideration. The analysis concludes, as noted in Table 1-Comparative Analysis of Impacts and Mitigation Measures, that changes in project impacts as a result of Amendment No. 7 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation measures are required. However, the Circulation and Traffic impact is affected by the project, and mitigation measures are recommended within the Traffic Study. These measures have either been incorporated in the project design or included in the Conditions of Approvals where appropriate. Staff acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards to air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors dudng the odginal codification of Environmental Impact Repod No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concorns regarding the project have been adequately addressed,. GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY The applicant proposes a unique interpretation of the Village Center Oveday that is placed on the site by the City's General Plan. The proposed changes to Specific Plan No. 219 remain consistent with the General Plan underlying designations and densities on the property. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 and Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance Amendment as conditioned will bdng the project into consistency with zoning. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Addendum No. 3 to Environmental Impact Report No. 235, and approve the project as conditioned. FINDINGS The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation and consistent with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment No. 7. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site includes CC Community Commercial, OS Open Space, LM Low Medium Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre) and H High Density Residential (13-20 dwelling units per acre). The proposal as designed and conditioned is consistent with these designations. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause sedous public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and Landscaping Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at targe, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. The proposal as designed and conditioned provides adequate access and cimulation. Future development plans for parcels within the project site will determine the suitability and location of all access points to those parcels. The map and development plan as proposed, conforms to the logical development of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and drculation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Fire Department has reviewed the Vehicle Plan submitted in conjunction with the Development Plan, for adequate emergency vehicle tuming radii. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project's Traffic Study with regards to public health and safety of the community. \~TEMEC_FS101~VOL1~DEPTS'~PLANNING~STAFFRpT~.84pagg.pc.doc 11 The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat There are no known f. eh, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitst off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an inffil site. Furthermore, grading has already occurred at the site, which is a portion of a larger specific plan. The project will not individually or cumuiatively have an adverse effed on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. \\TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1%.DEPTS~LANNING~STAFFRPT%2.84pagg,pc.doc 12 Attachments: PC Resolution recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) - Blue Page 14 Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval- Blue Page 18 PC Resolution recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431) - Blue Page 19 Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval o Blue Page 23 PC Resolution recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 - Blue Page24 Exhibit A: Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 - (Under Separate Cover) Exhibit B: Zoning Ordinance Amendment - (Under Separate Cover) PC Resolution recommending approval of Planning Application No. 99-0283 approving that certain development agreement entitled "Villages at Paseo del Sol Development Agreement" - Blue Page 30 Exhibit A: Villages as Paseo del Sol Development Agreement - (Under Separate Cover) PC Resolution recommending certification and adoption of Addendure No. 3 to Environmental Impact Report No. 235 for Specific Plan No, 219 - Blue Page 37 Exhibit A: Addendum No. 3 to EIR No. 235 - (Under Separate Cover) Exhibits - Blue Page 42 B, C. D, E. F. G, H. I, J. K. L. M, N. O. Vicinity Map Zoning Map General Plan Map Site Plan Grading Plan Monument Signage Plan Home Depot Elevations Home Depot Signage Home Depot Floor Plans Home Depot Landscape Plan Color and Material Board (To be displayed at the public headrig) Architectural Site Plan (Blueline only) Tentative Parcel Map No, 29431 Informational Exhibit - Retail Village Elevations Informational Exhibit - Colored Village Vignettes (Under Separate Cover) \\TEMEC_FSI 01 ~VOL1 ',DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFR P'r~lt4~.pc.doc 13 ATTACHMENT NO. I PC RESOLUTION NO. 99~ RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PA99.-0284 DEVELOPMENT PLAN F:~DEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRPT~2.64paft,pc,doc 14 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPUCATION NO. PA99-0284, DEVELOPMENT PLAN - THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF 276,243 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL COMMERCIAL USES, INCLUDING A 131,848 SQUARE FOOT HOME DEPOT STORE, A 7,000 SQUARE FOOT AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY STORE, AND t37,395 SQUARE FEET OF VILLAGE SHOPPING SPACE ON 23.65 ACRES, LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF CAMPANULA WAY, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 950-020-044 and 950-870-006 WHEREAS, del Sol Investment Company LLC filed Planning Application No. PA99-0284, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0284 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. PA99-0284, on September 15, 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 headng and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0284; 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. Findinos. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code; A. The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation and consistent with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment No. 7. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site includes CC Community Commercial, OS Open Space, LM Low Medium Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre) and H High Density Residential (13- 20 dwelling units per acre). The proposal as designed and conditioned is consistent with these designations. B. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause sedous public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and %\TEMEC_FSI 01 \VOL1%DEPTS%,DLANNIN G~STAFFRPT~.pc.doc 15 Landscaping Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. C. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. The proposal as designed and conditioned provides adequate access and circulation. Future development plans for parcels within the project site will determine the suitability and location of all access points to those parcels. D. The map and development plan as proposed, conforms to the logical development of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Fire Department has reviewed the Vehicle Plan submitted in conjunction with the Development. Plan, for adequate emergency vehicle tuming radii. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project's Traffic Study with regards to public health and safety of the community. E. The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. Fudhermore, grading has already occurred at the site, which is a podion of a larger specific plan. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. Section 3. Environmental Comollance. The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Environmental impact Report (EIR No. 235) was appreved and certified by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Since that date Addendum No. 1 was certified in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 to the Specific Plan, which added a Development Agreement to the project. Addendum No. 2 was adopted on March 17, 1999 by the City of Temecula in conjunction with an evaluation of additional facilities and uses to the Specific Plan. The applicant has submitted for certification Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overell reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-fcot major street section to a 78- foot right-of-way with "rounded out" traffic drcles. The Addendum document submitted September 9, 1999 is incorrect and does not contain the Traffic Study approved by the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant is conditioned to revise the Addendum document prior to distribution to the City Council for consideration. The analysis concludes, as noted in Table 1-Comparative Analysis of Impacts and Mitigation Measures, that changes in project impacts as a result of Amendment No. 7 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation measures are required. However, the Circulation and Traffic impact is affected by the project, and mitigation measures are recommended within the Traffic Study. These measures have either been incorporated in the project design or included in the Conditions of Approvals where appropriate. Staff acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards to air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors during the original certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concems regarding the project have been adequately addressed,. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) for the design, construction and operation of 276,243 square feet of retail commercial uses, including a 131,848 square foot ~\TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1%DE PTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP'r~.pC.doC 16 Home Depot Store, a 7,000 square foot automotive supply store, and 137,395 square feet of village shopping space on 23.65 acres, located north of State Highway 79 South, south of Campanula Way. west of Meadows Parkway and east of Margadta Road, and known as Assessor's Parcel Nos. 950- 020-044 and 950-870-006 subject to the project spedtic conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of September, 1999. Ron Guerdero, Chairperson I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at s regular meeting thereof, held on the 15th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary \\TEMEC_FS 101 \VOL1%DE PTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPTL-~84pa99.pC.dOC 17 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PA99-0284 DEVELOPMENT PLAN \\TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1 ~)EPTS~LANNING%.STAFFRPT~84pa99.pC.doc 18 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA99-0284 - Development Plan Project Description: The design, construction and operation of 276,243 square feet of retail commercial uses, including a 131,848 square foot Home Depot Store, a 7,000 square foot automotive supply store, and 137,395 square feet of village shopping space. Development Impact Fee Category: Home Depot - Retail Commercial Others - Various, to be determined with the submittal of Administrative Development Plans Assessor's Parcel Nos. 950-020-044 and 950-870-006 Approval Date: September 28, 1999 Expiration Date: September 28, 2001 PLANNING DIVISION Ten (10) Calendar Days Prior to the City Council Hearing The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division all revised exhibits and documents cunditioned herein for review and approval by the City Coundl. A revision to Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 shall be submitted correcting the text as well as incorporating the "List of Changes" as approved by the Planning Commission. A revision to the Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Specific Plan No. 219 shall be submitted correcting the text and incorporating revisions by the Planning Commission. A revision to the Development Agreement shall be submitted correcting the text as well as incorporating the "Deal Points' appreved by the Planning Commission. A revision to the Addendure to Environmental Impact Report No. 235 shall be submitted correcting the text, including the Traffic Study as approved by the City Traffic Engineer, and incorporating any changes requested by the Planning Commission. Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project by the City Council 2. 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 Dellam ($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 pedod the applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division the check as required above, \\TEMEC_FS101%VOL1~DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~284pagg. COA-DEVPLAN.dOC 1 the approval for the pmjed granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)). General Requirements The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgements, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its dght 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 pedod which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved Mitigation Monitoring Program for Spedtic Plan No. 219. The development of the premises shall substantially conform with the revised, stamped approved Exhibit "D" (Site Plan), as amended by these Conditions of Approval, and contained on file with the Community Development Depadment - Planning Division. Landscaping shall substantially conform with the revised, stamped approved Exhibit "J" (Home Depot Landscape Plan), as amended by these Conditions of Approval, and contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. 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 bdng the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest. Building elevations shall substantially conform with the revised, stamped approved Exhibit "G' (Home Depot Elevations), as amended by these Conditions of Approval, and 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. 10. The colors and materials for this project shall substantially conform to the following list of approved colors and materials and with Exhibit "K' (Home Depot Color and Material Board) contained on file with the Community Development Depadment - Planning Division. Any deviation from the approved colors and materials shall require approval of the Planning Manager, \\TEMEC_FS101%VOL1%DEpTS%PLANNING~,STAFFRP'r%284pa99.COA-DEVP LAN .doc 2 Matedal Color Building wails, man doom Towers, entry, canopies, porte c. oohem Wainscot, Columns, covers Soffits Comica Signs, trusses Stone veneer ICI Paint Co. #548 "Beachcomber" ICI Paint Co. #565 "Woodwind" ICI Paint Co. #462 "Westem Trail" ICI Paint Co, #685 "Grey Mountain" ICI Paint Co. #583 "Grey Headh" ICI Paint Co. #4208/9200 "Safety Orange" Emser Tile Co. #574 "Autumn Lilac' 11. A Design Manual shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Manager that is consistent with the City Design Guidelines, the Paloma del Sol spedtic Plan guidelines, and these Conditions of Approval, and that includes the following: Details of architectural style and design amenities as depicted in the "Village Vignettes" on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. b. Use of colors and materials, with samples of each. c. Comprehensive Sign Program for the entire site. d. Coordination of retail uses. Landscaping details around the buildings and within the courtyard areas, including the use of plant arbors. Fumiture and fixture specifications including but not limited to: planter boxes, Bating areas, benches, tables, chairs, shade structures, awnings, plaza lamps, hanging plants, trash recapfades, fountains and other water features, ad. sculptures, bollards, enhanced paving areas, archways, gateways, gazebos, outdoor vendor carts, heaters, fans, misters and docks. 12. An Administrative Development Plan application shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Manager for all buildings at the site excepting the 131,848 square foot Home Depot building. 13. A maximum area of 2,300 square feet of outdoor finished product display shall be allowed at the project site, in accordance with Exhibit "D" - Site Plan. 14. Seasonal sales areas shall be propedy screened. Temporary Use Permits shall include a screening plan that meets this condition, for review and approval by the Planning Manager. 15. Each and every temporary use of extedor area for retail sales, including seasonal sales, shall require a Temporary Use Permit, in accordance with the City's Development Code. 16. When bus service to the area is activated, the applicant shall install a bus shelter, amenities and appropriate landscaping and access, at the bus turnout located on the approved Exhibit "D" - Site Plan. Pdor to the Issuance of Grading Permits 17. 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. \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP~.COA-DEVPLAN 3 18. The applicant shell sign beth copies of the final conditions of approval thet will be provided by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and rotum one signed set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files. 19. The applicant shell revise Exhibits "D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, and L", (Site Plan, Grading Plan, Monument Signage, Home Depot Bevations, Home Depot Signage, Home Depot Floor Plan, Home Depot Landscape Plan, Color and Material Board, Architectural Site Plan) 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 pdnts. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 20. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. 21. 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 appmved Exhibit "J", or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The cover page shall identify the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. a. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. A row of evergreen trees shall be provided along the mar of the Home Depot building and Buildings G and H, which shall be a minimum 36-inch box size, that provide a quick screen for the loading docks in these areas. Plantings along the street side of the loading dock screen wall shall include vines and shrubs. Perimeter landscaped areas along State Highway 79 South shall include extensive turf mounding, grouped trees, and shrubs that screen vehicle parking spaces fronting the highway. Planter areas on both sides of the main entry driveway shall be reconfigured and enlarged to install plantings that make an entry statement. f. The plans shall be accompanied by the following items: 1) Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). 2) One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. 3) Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). 4) Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). \\TEMEC_FS 101 \VOL1 ~)EPTS~°LANNING~STAFFRP'D284pa99.COA-DEVPLAN.doc 4 22. The applicant shall submit a "Bike Rack Plan" that locates a minimum of 37 bike racks throughout the project site in accordance with the City's Development Code, and at locations that are convenient for employees and customers. Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits 23. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. 24. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the appmved constnJction plans and shall be in a condition a__~:eptable to the Planning Manager. The plants shaft be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The ir~gation system shall be propedy constructed and in good working order. 25. Performance secudties, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings, in accordance with the appreved 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. 26. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently affixed refiectodzed 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 fadlity, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, deady and conspicuously siting the following: "Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 909 696-3000." In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least 3 square feet in size. 27. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 28. 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 29. A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site fiat work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Depadment of Public Works pdor to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way. \\TEMEC_FS101%VOL1%DEPTS~PLANNING%STAFFRPT%284pa99. COA-DEVPLAN.doc 5 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 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. 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. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the California Depadment of Transportation pdor to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State right-of-way. Upon Caltrans approval of the proposed access opening onto Highway 79 South from the eastady cldveway, the existing Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Caltrans dated October 13, 1995 shall be amended. The centedine of the main access to the site on Highway 79 South shall be aligned with the centedine of the access to the southerly driveway on Highway 79 South. The vehicular movement for the following locations shall be restricted as follows: a. Highway 79 South at the eastedy access to the site shall be restricted to a dght in/fight out movement subject to approval by Caltrans. This access rastdction shall be emphasized with a raised median to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. Campanula Way along the frontage of Parcel 3 (westerly) access to the site shall be restricted to left in/dght out movement. Campanula Way along the frontage of Parcel 2 (westerly) access to the site shall be restricted to right in/right out movement. 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. The Developer shell 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. 38. 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. 39. 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 pdvate drainage radiities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify impacts to downstream propedies and provide specific recommendations to protect the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream facilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required improvements, shall be provided by the Developer. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES} permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. 41. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Depadment of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: \\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRP'I~284pa99.COA-DEVPLAN.doC 6 40. a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Planning Department c. Department of Public Works 42. 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 properly. 43. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Depadment and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 44. 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. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 45. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, Parcel Map No. 29431 shall be recorded. 46. 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: a. 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. c. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in ac,'_~_rdanca with Ordinance 461. d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400. 401and 402. e. All street and driveway canterline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. f. 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. 47. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula Public Works standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of the Department of Public Works: a. Highway 79 South (Urban Arterial Highway Standards - 134' R/W) i) Improve roadway to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Meadows Parkway (Major Highway Standards - 100' R/W) from Highway 79 South to Campanula Way Improve roadway to include installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), and raised landscaped median. ii) The raised landscaped median shall be continuous with one opening at the intersection of Meadows Parkway and Campanula Way. c. Campanula Way (Principal Collector Highway Standards - 78' R/W) i) Additional fight-of-way dedication for roundabouts ~TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~)EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP'r~.COA*DEVPLAN .doc 7 ii) Improve roadway to include dedication of half-width street fight-of-way plus six feet, installation of half-width street improvements plus six feet, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Construct raised landscaped median on Campanuia Way between De Portoia Road and Meadows Parkway exclude locations where on-street parking is permitted is shown on the approved Tentative Parcel Map. d. Install a traffic signal at the following intersections: Highway 79 South and the main access to the site to include signal interconnect on Highway 79 South between Meadows Parkway and Margarita Road. ii) Highway 79 South and Meadows Parkway. The Developer is eligible to receive credits for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems component of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee for 50% of the ultimate cost for the design and installation. iii) Campanula Way and Main Access to the site between Parcels 2 and 3 to include signal interconnect on Campanuia Way between Meadows Parkway and Main Access to the site. Margafita Road and De Portola Road. The Developer is eligible to receive credits for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems component of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee for 100% of the ultimate cost for the design and installation. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections. 48. 49. 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. a. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate b. Storm drain facilities c. Sewer and domestic water systems d. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines 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. A Signing and Striping Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Depadment of Public Works for the following roadways: a. Campanula Way b. Meadows Parkway c. De Portola Road \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFR PT~.COA-DEVPLAN.doc 8 51. Bus bays will be designed at all existing and proposed bus stops as directed by Riverside Transit Agency end approved by the Department of Public Works. 52. All access dghts easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of the Department of Public Works for dedication to the City where sidewalks meander through private properly. 53. All building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with the approved Predse Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 54. The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the adjacent property. 55. The Developer shall provide an easement for ingress and egress to the adjacent property. ,56. 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 57. Prior to issuance of the FIRST Cedificate of Occupancy: a. The Developer shall install a traffic signal at the following intersections in accordance with City Standards: i) Highway 79 South and the main access to the site to include signal interconnect on Highway 79 South between Meadows Parlwvay and Margadta Road. ii) Highway 79 South and Meadows Parkway iii) Campanula Way and Main Access to the site between Parcels 2 and 3 to include signal interconnect on Campanula Way between Meadows Parkway and Main Access to the site. iv) Margarita Road and De Podola Road with suffident improvements to suppod impacts from this development. 58. The existing Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Caltrans dated October 13, 1995 shall be amended to allow an access opening with a dght in/dght out vehicular movement onto Highway 79 South from the eastedy driveway. 59. As deemed necessary by the Depadment of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. Rancho California Water Distdct b. Eastern Municipal Water Distdct c. Department of Public Works 60. All public improvements, including traffic signals, shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Depadment of Public Works. 61. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Dirador of the Department of Public Works. \\TEMEC_FS101~VOLI~:)EPTS~.DLANNING~STAFFRp'D284pagg. COA-DEVpLAN.doc BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT 62. 63. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School Distdct shall be submitted to the Planning Depadment to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check approval and shall comply with the requirements of City Ordinance No. 655 regarding light pollution. Comply with applicable provisions of the 1998 edition of the Colifomia Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1998 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code. 65. Submit at time of plan review, a complete extedor site lighting plans showing compliance with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. 66. A receipt or ciearanca letter from the Temecula Valley School Distdct shall be submitted to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. 67. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 68. The Occupancy ciassffication for the proposed Home Depot buildings will be M/S-1 and the occupancy classification of the Village Center buildings will be NBIM. The proper classifications and construction types will be addressed at time of plan submittals and plan check by the Department of Building and Safety 69. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings pdor to submittal for plan review. 70. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access ragulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 71. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. 72. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. 73. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. 74. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of extedor lighting, fire alarm systems. 75. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1994 edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code, Appendix C. 76. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. 77. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with odginal signature on plans submitted for plan review. \\TEMEC_FSI 01 \VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.COA-DEVPLAN ,doc 10 78. Provide electrical plan incJuding load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 79. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. 80. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility. 81. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector pdor to the start of any building construction. 82. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls require separate FIRE DEPARTMENT The following are the Fire Department Conditions of Approval forthis project. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau. 83. 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 California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. 84. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC 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 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. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) 85. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC 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) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 450 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 a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B) 86. As required by the California 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. (CFC 903.2) 87. Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum turning radius on any cul-de-sac shall be forty-five (45) feet. (CFC 902.2.2.2.3 and Ord 460) 88. If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection prior to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2) \\TEMEC_FS101~VOLI~DEPTS~°LANNING~STAFFRP'i~.COA-DEVPLAN.doc 11 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 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 80,000 Ibs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface designed for 80,000 Ibs. GVV¢ with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. ( CFC sec 902) 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. (CFC 902.2.2.1) 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. (CFC 902.2.2.4) Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all-weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1) Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval 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 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. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, all commercial buildings shall display street numbers in a prominent location on the street side of the building. The numerals shall be minimum twelve (12) inches in height for buildings and six (6} inches for suite identification on a contrasting background. In strip centers, businesses shall post the suite address on the rear door(s). (CFC 901.4.4) 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. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9) 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. (CFC Article 10) \\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRpT~284pa99,COA-DEVpLAN.doc 12 99. 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. (CFC 902.4) 100. All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry system for emergency access by firefighting personnel. (CFC 902.4) 101. 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. (CFC Article 81) 102. 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, flammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau.(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) Soecial Conditions 103. Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report shall be submitted to and approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau addressing all items on the hazardous materials list. This report shall address, but not be limited to, all fire and life safety measures per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, NFPA - 13, 24, 72 and 231-C. COMMUNITY SER~CESDEPARTMENT Submitted Under Separate Cover. OTHERAGENCIES 104. Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control District's transmittal dated August 6, 1999, a copy of which is attached. The fee is made payable to the Riverside County Flood Control Water [:)istdct by either a cashier's check or money order, pdor to the issuance of a grading permit (unless deferred to a later date by the District), based upon the prevailing area drainage plan fee. 105. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho Califomia Water Districts transmittal dated July 21, 1999. a copy of which is attached. 106. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in Eastern Information Centers transmittal dated July 21, 1999, a copy of which is attached. \\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLt%DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.COA-DEVPLAN,doc 13 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_FS101\VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING~TAFFRPT~,COA-DEVPLAN.doc 14 DAVID P. ZAPPE General Manager-Chief Engineer  7~ 1995 MARKET STREET ' l i; .'l 909/955-1206 AUG I O t'-' wx By J ~1180.1 B OOD COCO: City o.f Temecula Temecula, California 92589-9033 Attention: Ladies and Gentlemen: R.: pa qq - og- q The District does not normally recommend conditions for lend divisions or other land use cases in incorporated cities. The District also does not lan check city land use cases. or provide State Division of Real Estate letters or other flood hazard reports for sucR cases. Disthct commen~recommendatlons for such cases are normally limited to items of specific ratarest to the District including District Master t}raina · Plan facilities. other re ional flood control and drains e facilities wi'~ich could be considered a logical componan~lor extension of a master ~%n s stem. and District Area ~rainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition. information of a general nsa~'usra is provided. The District has not reeviewed the proposed project in detail and the following checked comments do not in any way constitute or imply District approval or endorsement of the proposed project with respect to flood hazard, public health and safety or any other such issue: ~ This prpject would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of regional ~nterest proposed. This project involves District Master Plan facilities. The District will acce t ownership of such facilities on written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District stangrds and Dis~ct plan check and inspection will be required for District acceptance. Plan check inspection and administrative fees will be required. This project proposes channels, Storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter, or other facilities that could be conmdered regional in nature and/or a I ical extension of the adopted Master Dra'nage Plan. The District wo~jl°~ consider accepting ownershil} of such fac~,ties on wotten request of the City/Fadlities must be constructed to District startdab:Is, and District plan check and inspection will be required for Disffict acceptance. Plan check, inspection and admini,.b-~ive fees will be required. This project is located within the limits of the District's Area Drainage Plan for which draina · fees have been adopted a phcable fees should be prod by cashier's check or money order only to ~e Flood Control District pdor ~o~ issuance of building or gradin permits whichever comes first. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of issuance of ~e actua} permit. GENERAL INFORMATION This project ma re uire a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES permit from the State Water Resources ConSUl ~oard. Clearance for grading recordation or other final approval should not be given until the City has determ ned that the project has been granted a penn t or s shown to be exempt. If this pro'ect involves a Federal Emergengy Management Agency (FEMA mapped flood plain, then the Ci should require t~e applicant to provide all studies calculations plans and o~{~er ~nformatlon required to me~ FEMA requirements and should further require that the applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision CLOMR) pdor to grad rig, recordat on or other final approva of the project, and a Letter of Map Revis on (LOMR(~ pdor to occupancy. If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain is im acted by this project. the City should require the a licant to obtain a Section 1601/1603 Agreement from the Car~omia Department of Fish and Game and a Clean P~ater Act Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or written correspondence om these a encies indicating the project is exempt from these requirements. A Clean Water Act Section 401 Wate Quail Ce~t~cation may be required from the local California Regional Water Quality Control Board pdor to issuance of ~e Corps 404 permit. STUART E. MCKIBBIN Senior Civil Engineer Dat.: ~ - G - ~o} Phillip k Forbes C July 21, 1999 Carole Donahoe, Case Planner 'City of Temecula Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY PARCEL MAP NO. 29431 APN 950-020-044 PLANNING APPLICATIONS NO. PA99-0283, NO. PA99-0284, NO. PA99-0285 AND NO. PA99-0286 Dear Ms. Donahoe: 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:mc189V:012-T3~C F c: Laude Williams, Engineering Services Supervisor '. JUL z 2 i999 ~,, 0~, -- Page /-21-g9 ;11:41AN ARCH RESEARCH Uh,~'F'* 90969464??;# 2 CALIFORNIA '~.'.'!~..% Eastern InformaUon Center Department ot A,-~opolOgy H STORICA I L urdv~s~ of c,,aufo~a RESOURCES Rive~de. CA 92521-04;18 INFORMATION .' Phone (9o9) ze7-,s74s ,i~YSTEM '-"';'~'F~ (9o9) 787-s4os RE: Case Tran.smimd Re~e~nce Designzion: Records at the Eastern Infont&don Center of the California ;inorlcal Resources Information System have beea reviewed to determine ifthb project would Mvetsdy affec~ prehistoric or historic cgltm'll resou~e~: te~oufcc(s). AFtmmelmadybM ism:ommended. __ Al:~Mei~ulNnlmeoe~eeamdyOdFi __ Duclodmudaaolofieahcnaki'~Yofbarea, mtbmovqda~goulP"'*~'qdaeuldbcamn~bya~b~ MBaS......-.t bpom p,q;ecd 1989. m Ptmm II P!mamlV CoM~t~: If you have any quastions, plea~ contact ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-__ RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PA99-O286 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431 F:'{)EPTS~PLANNING~,STAFFRPT%2.64pa99.pc.do~ 19 A'I'I'ACHMENT NO. 2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99~ RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0286 - TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431, SUBDIVIDING 66.828 GROSS ACRES INTO SEVEN (7) LOTS, LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF MONTELEGRO WAY, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKINAY, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 950- 020-042 AND -044, AND 950-087-006 WHEREAS, del Sol Investment Company LLC filed Planning Application No. PA99-0286, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0286 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. PA99-0286, on September 15, 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 suppod or in opposition to this matter;, WHEREAS, at the contusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0286; 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 recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431) hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code; A. The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation and consistent with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment No. 7. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site includes CC Community Commercial, OS Open Space, LM Low Medium Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre) and H High Density Residential (13- 20 dwelling units per acre). The proposal as designed and conditioned is consistent with these designations. B. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to Cause sedous public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformanCa with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma tel Sol), the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and Landscaping Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~)EPTS%PLANNING~STAFFR PT~284pa99.pc.doc 20 C. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. The proposal as designed and conditioned provides adequate access and circulation. Future development plans for parcels within the project site will determine the suitability and location of all access points to those parcels. D. The map and development plan as proposed, conforms to the logical development of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Fire Department has reviewed the Vehicle Plan submitted in conjunction with the Development Plan, for adequate emergency vehicle turning radii. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project's Traffic Study with regards to public health and safety of the community. E. The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildllfe or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. Furthermore, grading has already occurred at the site, which is a portion of a larger specific plan. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. Section 3. Environmental Comcliance. The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Environmental impact Report (EIR No. 235) was approved and certified by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Since that date Addendum No. 1 was certified in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 to the Specific Plan, which added a Development Agreement to the project. Addendum No. 2 was adopted on March 17, 1999 by the City of Temecula in conjunction with an evaluation of additional facilities and uses to the Specific Plan. The applicant has submitted for certffication Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-foot major street section to a 78- foot dght-of-way with "rounded out" traffic circles. The Addendum document submitted September 9, 1999 is incorrect and does not contain the Traffic Study approved by the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant is conditioned to revise the Addendum document prior to distribution to the City Council for consideration. The analysis concludes, as noted in Table 1-Comparative Analysis of Impacts and Mitigation Measures, that changes in project impacts as a result of Amendment No. 7 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation measures are required. However, the Circulation and Traffic impact is affected by the project, and mitigation measures are recommended within the Traffic Study. These measures have either been incorporated in the project design or included in the Conditions of Approvals where appropdate. Staff acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards to air quality impacts made by the Riveraide County Board of Supervisors dudng the odginal certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concerns regarding the project have been adequately addressed,. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcol Map No. 29431) for the subdivision of 66.828 gross acres into seven (7) lots, located north of State Highway 79 South, south of Montelegro Way, west of Meadows Parkway and east of Margadta Road, and known as Assessor's Parcel Nos. 950-020-042, -044 and 950-870-006 subject to the project specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference. \~TEMEC_FS101\VOL1~DEPTS~c~LANNING~STAFFRP'I'~.B4pa99.pc.doc 21 Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of September. 1999. Ron Guerriem, 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 15th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary %%TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING%STAF FRpT%284pa99.pc.doc 22 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PA99-0286 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431 \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~DEPTS~LANNING~STAF FR PT~284pa99.pc.doc 23 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA99-0286 - Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431 Project Description: Assessor's Parcel No.: Approval Data: ExpiraUon Date: The subdivision of 66.828 gross acres into seven (7) lots 9504)20-042, 4)44 and 9504)874)06 September 28, 1999 September 28, 200t PLANNING DIVISION Ten Calendar Days Prior to the City Council Hearing The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division twenty (20) copies of a revised exhibit that includes corrections as required within these Conditions of Approval. The applicant shall remove reference to a "vesting" map. All requirements of the Public Works Department shall be met. Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant/developer 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 Collars ($78.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination with a DaMinimus Finding for the Mitigated or Negative Codaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and Califomia Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer 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 tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of Califomia Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request, if made 30 days pdor to the expiration date. 4. 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, conceming the Planning \\TEMEC_FS101%VOLl~:)EPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRP'r~'86pI99. COA-TENTMAP.dOC 1 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 furlher 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. If Subdivision phasing is proposed, a phasina plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Manager. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment No. 7. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be subject to Development Agreement No. PA99-0283. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures identified within EIR No. 235. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved Mitigation Monitoring Program. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 10. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Division. 11. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 12. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division: a. A copy of the Final Map. b. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes: 1) This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations, Ordinance No. 655. 2) Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 235 and Addendure No. 3 to Environmental Impact Report No. 235 were prepared for this project and is on file at the City of Temecula Community Development Department - Planning Division. 3) This project is within the Alquist-Pdoto Special Studies Zone. 4) This project is within a Subsidence Zone. c. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions. and Restrictions (CC&R's) 1) CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. The CC&R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining open ~\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1~EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP'I~.86pa99.COA-TENT MAP.doc 2 space, recreation areas, .oarking areas, pdvate roads, extedor of all buildings and all landscaped and open areas including parkways. 2) No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall he sold unless a corporation, assodation, property owners group or similar entity has been formed with the dght to assess all propedies individually owned or jointly owned which have any dghts or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City for provisions required as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the dty pdor to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. 3) Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such dwelling unit or lot, either (1) an undivided interest in the common areas and facilities, or (2) a share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association owning the common areas and facilities. 4) In addition to the other provisions described in this section which must be included in the CC&Rs, the applicant shall also include the following text in the CC&RS: Consent of City of Temecula Condition No. 15.C. 1) of the Conditions of Approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Treot Map No. 29431) require the City to review and approve the CC&Rs for the Tract. DecJarent acknowledges that the City has reviewed these CC&Rs and that its review is limited to a determination of whether the proposed CC&Rs propedy implement the requirements of the Conditions of Approval for the Tract. The City's consent to these CC&Rs does not contain or imply any approval of the appropriateness or legality of the other provisions of the CC&Rs, including, without limitation, the use restrictions, pdvate easements and encroachments, pdvate maintenance requirements, architecture and landscape controls, assessments procedures, assessment enforcement, resolution of disputes or procedural matters. In the event of a conflict between the Conditions of Approval of the land use entitlements issued by the City for the Tract or federal, state or local laws, ordinances, and resolutions and these CC&Rs, the provisions of the Conditions of Approval and federal, state or local laws, ordinances, and regulations shall prevail, notwithstanding the language of the CC&Rs. d. These CC&Rs shall not be terminated, amended or otherwise modified without the express written consent of the Planning Manager of the City of Tamecula. ~TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~)EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFR P'D286pagg. COA-TENT MAP ,doc 3 Consent of the City of Temecula Condition No. 15.C. 1) of the Conditions of Approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29431) requires the City of Temecula to review and approval the CC&Rs for the Tract. The City's review of these CC&Rs has been limited to a determination of whether the proposed CC&Rs propedy implement the requirements of the Conditions of Approval for the Tract. The City's consent to these CC&Rs does not contain or imply any approval of the appropriateness or legality of the other provisions of the CC&Rs, including, without limitation, the use restrictions, pdvate easements and encroachments, private maintenance requirements, architecture and landscape controls, assessments, enforcement of assessments, resolution of disputes or procedural matters. Subject to the limitations set fodh herein, the City consents to the CC&Rs. Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager Approved as to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney 13. The Final Map shall delineate a westbound bus tumout located on the north side of Campanula Way, as approved by the City Traffic Engineer and the Riverside Transit Agency. 14. Development of any parcel where bus turnouts are located shall include the installation of a bus shelter, amenities and appropriate landscaping when bus service is activated in the area. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 15. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division: Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans. 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: 1) Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). 2) One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. 3) Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance), 4) Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). %\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1~)EPTS~PLANNING%STAFFRPT~286pa99.COA-TENT MAP.doc 4 5) The locations of all existing trees that will be saved consistent with the tentative map. 6) Automatic irrigation for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from the view of the public from streets and adjacent property for. a) Front yards and slopes within individual lots prior to issuance of building permits for any lot(s). b) Pdvate common areas pdor to issuance of the any building permit. All landscaping excluding Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) maintained areas and front yard landscaping which shall include, but may not be limited to pdvate slopes and common areas. d) Shrub planting to completely screen perimeter walls adjacent to a public right-of-way equal to sixty-six (66) feet or larger. 7) Hardscaping for the following: a) Pedestrian trails within private common areas Wail and Fence Plans consistent with the Conceptual Landscape Plans showing the height, location and the following materials for all walls and fences: 1) Decorative block for the perimeter of the project adjacent to a Public Right-of- Way equal to sixty-six (66) feet or larger and the side yards for comer lots. 2) Wrought iron or decorative block and wrought iron combination to take advantage of views for side and rear yards. Precise Grading Plans consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements. 16. Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with Planning Diredor approval. Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits 17. If deemed necessary by the Planning Manager, the applicant shall provide additional landscaping to effectively screen vadous components of the project. 18. All required landscape planting and irrigation shaft be 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. 19. Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots shall be completed for inspection. 20. Pdvate common area landscaping shall be completed for inspection prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit. \\TEMEC_FS101~VOL1~DEPTS~PLANNING%STAFFRPT~286pa99.COA-TENT MAP.doc 5 21. Performance secudties, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to guarantee the maintenance of the ptantings within private common areas for a period of one year, in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irdgaticn plan, shall be filed with the Community Development Department - Planning Division for one year from final certif'r.,ate of occupancy. ARer that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Planning Manager, the bond shall be released. 22. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS The Department of Public Works recommends the following Conditions of Approval for this project. Unless stated otherwise, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any Govemment Agency. General Requirements 23. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative tract map all existing and proposed easements, topography, drainage facilities, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. 24. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works pdor to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained road dght-of-way. 25. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works pdor to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. 26. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Califomia Depadment of Transportation prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State right-of-way. 27. Upon Caltrans approval of the proposed access opening onto Highway 79 South from the easterly driveway, the existing Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Caitrans dated October 13, 1995 shall be amended. 28. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation 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. 29. The centedine of the main access to the site on Highway 79 South shall be aligned with the centerline of the access to the southerly driveway on Highway 79 South. 30. The vehicular movement for the following locations shall be restricted as follows: Highway 79 South at the easterly access to the site shall be restricted to a fight in/dght out movement subject to approval by Caltrens. This access restriction shall be emphasized with a raised median to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. Meadows Parkway from Campanula Way to De Portola Road shall be restricted to dght in/dght out movements. \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPTt286pa99.COA-TENT MAP ,doc 6 c. De Podola Road along the frontage of Parcel 5 is restricted to right in dght out movement. d. De Portola Road along the frontage of Parcel 7 shall have full movement and shall be aligned with Street "A" of Tentative Tract Map No. 24136. e. Campanula Way along the frontage of Parcel 3 (westerly) access to the site shall be restricted to left in/dght out movement. f. Campanula Way along the frontage of Parcel 2 (westerly) access to the site shall be restricted to dght in/dght out movement. Prior to Approval of the Par=el Map, unless other timing is indicated, the Developer shall complete the following or have plans submitted end approved, subdivision improvement agreements executed and securities posted: 31. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive wdtten clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Rancho Califomia Water District c. Eastem Municipal Water Distdct d. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District e. City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau f. Planning Depadment g. Depadment of Public Works h. Riverside County Health Department i. Cable TV Franchise j. Caltrans k. Community Services Distdct I. General Telephone m. Southern Califomia Edison Company n. Southern California Gas Company 32. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula Public Works standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. a. Highway 79 South (Urban Artedal Highway Standards - 134' R/W) \\TEMEC_FS101%VOLI',DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~'86pa99.COA-TENT MAP.d(X:: 7 Improve roadway to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). b. De Portola Road (Major Highway Standards - 100' R/W) i) Improve roadway to include installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), and raised landscaped median. ii) The raised landscaped median shall be continuous from Margafita Road to Meadows Parkway with openings at Campanula Way, Paloma Del Sol Park entrance and Parcel 7 (as approved on the Tentative Parcel Map). Meadows Parkway (Major Highway Standards - 100' R/VV) from Highway 79 South to De Portola Road i) Improve roadway to include installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage fadlities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), and raised landscaped median. ii) The raised landscaped median shall be cont!nuous with one opening at the intersection of Meadows Parkway and Campanula Way. d. Campanula Way (Pdndpal Collector Highway Standards - 78' R/W) i) ii) Additional fight-of-way dedication for roundabouts Improve roadway to include dedication of full width street fight-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Construct raised landscaped median on Campanula Way between De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway exclude locations where on-street parking is permitted as shown on the approved Tentative Parcel Map. e. Install a traffic signal at the following intersections: Highway 79 South and the main access to the site to include signal interconnect on Highway 79 South between Meadows Parkway and Margadta Road. ii) Highway 79 South and Meadows Parkway. The Developer is eligible to receive credits for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems component of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee for 50% of the ultimate cost for the design and installation. iii) Campanula Way and Main Access to the site between Parcels 2 and 3 to include signal interconnect on Campanula Way between Meadows Parkway and Main Access to the site. iv) Margadta Road and De Portola Road. The Developer is eligible to receive ~TEMEC_FS101\VOLl~DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT%2.86pa99.COA-TENT MAP.doc 8 credits for the Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems component of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee for 100% of the ultimate cost for the design and installation. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections. 33. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteda shall be observed in the design of the street improvement plans: Street centedine 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 Standard Nos. 207A and/or 208. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in accordance with Ordinance No. 461. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400 and 401. Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries to ensure adequate continuity of design with adjoining properties. f. Minimum centedine radii shall be in accordance with City Standard No. 113. g. All reverse curves shall include a 100-foot minimum tangent section. h. All street and driveway centedine 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 utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required where adequate fight-of-way does not exist for installation of the facilities. All utilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and reviewed by 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. 35. The existing alignment of Campanula Way shall be vacated. 36. Relinquish and waive fight of access to and from the following roadways: Meadows Parkway with the exception of one opening to Parcel 6 and one opening to Pamel 7. Locations to be determined upon submittal of future development plans. b. De Podola Road with the exception of two openings: i) One opening to Parcel 5. Location to be determined upon submittal of future development plan. ii) One opening on Parcel 7 as approved on the Tentative Parcel Map. \\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1~)EpTS~oLANNING%STAFFRpTL986pa99, COA-TENT MAP,dOC 9 c. The south side of Campanula Way on the Parcel Map with the exception of five openings as approved on the Tentative Parcel Map. The north side of Campanula Way with the exception of two openings as approved on the Tentative Parcel Map. 37. Comer property line cut off for vehicular sight distance and installation of pedestrian facilities shall be provided at all street intersections in a__c~:~_rdance w'dh Riverside County Standard No. 805 or as approved by the Depadment of Public Works. 38. All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public or other appropriate agency and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of Public Works. 39. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Pdor to City Council approval of the Parcel Map, the Developer shall make an application for reapportionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory agency. 40. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. 41. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Pamel Map to delineate identified environmental concems and shall be recorded with the map. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Depadment for review and approval. 42. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject properly. 43. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the intent to Develop, Conduit shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements. 45. Bus bays will be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by Riverside Transit Authority and approved by the Depadment of Public Works. 46. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated and noted on the final map. 47. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through pdvate property. 48. An easement for a joint use ddveway and/or reciprocal ingrass/egrass shall be provided pdor to approval of the Parcel Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. 49. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division boundan/. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted for review and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating 'drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions. · \\TEMEC_FS 101%VOL1 ~)EPTS~LANNING~STAFFRPT~.COA-TENT MAP .doc 10 Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit~ 50. As deemed necessaW by the Depadment of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written dearence from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Planning Department c. Department of Public Works d. C, altrans 51. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City of Temecula standards and approved by the Department of Public Works pdor to commencement of any grading. The plan shall incorporate adequate erosion control measures to protect the site and adjoining propedies from damage due to erosion. 52. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and submitted to the Depadment of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The repod shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. 53. A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identify storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed off-site or on-site, public or pdvate, drainage radiities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or pdvate property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as pad of development of this project. The basis for analysis and design shall be a storm with a recurrence interval of one hundred years. 54. 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. 55. The Developer shall post secudty and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Depadment of Public Works. The Developer shall obtain letters of approval or easements for any off-site work performed on adjoining properties, The letters or easements shall be in a format as directed by the Department of Public Works, Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 57. Parcel Map shall be approved and recorded. 58. A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. ~TEMEC_FS101\VOLl~)EPTS~PLANNING'~iTAFFRPT~86pa99.COA-TENT MAP.doc 11 59. Grading of the subject property shall be in ac~_~_rdance with the Uniform Building Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. 60. 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 Cortificetes of Occupancy 61. Upon the first Cedi~cete of Occupancy, the Developer shall install a traffic signal at the following intersections in accordance with City Standards: Highway 79 South and the main access to the site to include signal interconnect on Highway 79 South between Meadows Parkway and Margadta Road. b. Highway 79 South and Meadows Parkway Campanula Way and Main Access to the site between Parcels 2 and 3 to include signal interconnect on Campanula Way between Meadows Parkway and Main Access to the site. 62. Upon the first Cedfficate of Occupancy, the rodsting Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Calftans dated October 13, 1995 shall be amended to allow an access opening onto Highway 79 South from the eastedy driveway. 63, As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. Randno Califomia Water Distdct b. Eastem Municipal Water Distdct c. Department of Public Works All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as roquirod by the Department of Public Works. 65. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appudenance damaged or broken due to the construction operations of this project shall be ropairod or removed and raplaced to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. COMMUNITY SER~CES DEPARTMENT Subm~ed Under Separate Cover. \\TEMEC_FS 101 ~VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT%286pa99,COA-TENT MAP,doc 12 BUILDING AND SAFETYDEPARTMENT Prior to the Issuance of a Building Permit 67. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School Distdct shall be submitted to the Planning Depadment to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation fees. OTHERAGENCIES 68. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside Depadment of Environmental Health's transmittal dated July 20, 1999, a copy of which is attached. 69. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Eastem Municipal Water District's transmittal dated July 19, 1999, a copy of which is attached. 70. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho Califomia Water Distdct's transmittal dated, a copy of which is attached. 71. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in Eastern information Center's trensmittal dated July 21, 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 conforrnance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Depadment approval. Applicant Signature \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFR PT%2_8~__og. COA-TE NT MAP.doc 13 DP July 20, 1999 City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 ATTN: Ca. role Donahoe, AICP RE: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431 (PA99-0286): THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING PARCEL "B' OF LOTLINE ADJUSTMENT NO. PA93-0215 RECORDED DECEMBER 15, 1995 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 4166646 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS IN THE OFFICE OF COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID RIVERSIDE COUNTY. (5 lots) Dear Gentlemen: I. The Dep~Lrtment of Envirorm~ental Health has reviewed Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431 and recommends: A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the water company' and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the ~vater system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a minimttm scale not less than one-inch equal's 200 t~et. along with the original drawing to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of valves and fire hydrm~ts; pipe and joint specifications, ,and the size of the main at the junction of the new system to the existing system. The plans shall comply in all respects with Div. 5. Part 1, Lind Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety Code. Califbrnia Administrative Code, Title l I. Chapter 16. and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California. when applicable. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer ~d water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in Tentative Parcel Map No. 2943 I, is in accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the water services, storage, and distribution system will be adequate to provide water service to such Parcel Map". This certification does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to such Parcel Map at any specific quantities. flows or pressures for fire protection or any other purpose. This certification shall be signed by a responsible official of the water company. The plans must be submitted to the City of Temecula to review at least TWO WEEKS PRIOR to the request tbr the recordation of the final maD. Local Enforcement ASenc~ · PO. Box 1280, Riverside, CA 92502-1280" (909) 955-8982 ' FAX (909) 781-9653 * 4080 Lemon Street. 9th Boor, Riverside. CA 92501 Land Uie and Water EnSineertng · PO. Box 1206, Riverside, CA 9')509-1206 ' (909) 955-8980 · FAX (909) 955-8903 ' 4080 Lemon S~reet, 2nd Boor, Riverside. CA 92501 City ofTemecula Planning Dept. Page Two Attn: Carole Donahoe June 21, 1999 This subdivision has a statement from Rancho Califomia Water District agreeing to serve domestic water to eacli and every lot in the subdivision on demand providing satisfchctory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It ,,,,'ill be necessa~' tbr financial an'angements to be made PRIOR to the recordation of the final map. 4. This subdivision is within the Eastem Municipal Water District and shall be cormectcd to the sewers of the District. The sew-er system shall be installed according to plans ,and specifications as approved by the Eastem Municipal Water District, the City of Temecula and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the original drawing, to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location Of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint specifications and the size of the sewers at the junction of the new system to the existing system. A single plat indicating location of sewer lines and ~vaterlines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and the sewer district with the tbllowing certification: "I certify,' that the design of the server system in Parcel Map No. 29431, is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed Parcel Map". The plans must be submitted to the City of Temecula to review at least two weeks PRIOR to the request/br the recordation of the final map. 5. It will be necessary. for financial arrangements to be completely ~nalized PRIOR to recordation of the final map. 6. It will be necessar),' tZ~r the annexation proceedings to be completely finalized PRIOR to the recordation of the final map. 7. Additional approval from Riverside County Environmental Health Department will be required for all tenants operating a food facility or generating any hazardous waste. Sincerely. Gregor Dellenbach, Environmental Health Specialist IV GD:dr (909) 955-8980 cityswr.doc EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT Board of Directors Dav,d J, Slawson Vk-e President Clayton A. Record. Jr Marion V Ashley Richard R. Hall Rodget D, Sicins General 3Ianager John B. Br~din Director of the Metropolitan Water DistrictofSo. Calif. Clayton A. Record. Jn Joseph J Kuebler. CPA Legal Counsel Redwine and Shetrill July 19, 1999 RECEIVED 20F3<:j9 County of Riverside Health Sexyices Agency Depganent of Eavironmental Health P. O. Box 1206 4080 Lemon Sixeel, 2ND Floor Riverside, California 92502 MARKHAM & ASSOCIATE~ TEMECULA. CA 9239:) Sanitary Sewer Service Availability for Parcel Map 29431, located on Highway 79 South between Margarita Road and Meadows Parkway, City of Temecula, Riverside County, CA. Dear County: The District is writing to confro a "will serve" for the proposed subject property, consisting of Neighborhood Commergial and Rt. sidential Parcels on approximately 61 agres. The devclopermust make arrangemeaus with the District to resolv¢ sewer service issues and related fees. The availability of service will be contingent on limiting conditions existing beyond EMWD' s control, or a determination by the developer to be cost-ineffective. Should there be questions, please do not h~itate to contact the District's Customer Service Department at (909)928-3777. Sincerely, Warren A. Back Civil Engineer Customer Service Department WAB/jf CC: Patti Nahill Markham & Associates 41750 Winchester Road, Suite N Tamecula, CA 92590-4898 ,14, ilm~, .4dchz,vv.' Po,;t Office Box 8300 Pegis. CA 92572-8300 Tei (90% 92S-3777 Fa\ (909~ 928-ld77 Lucatton.' 2270 Trumble Road Perri~. CA 9257(I Wmr Phillip L~ Forbes July 19, 1999 RECEIVED Greg Dellenbach, REHS County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health Land Use Section 4080 Lemon Street, 2"d Floor Post Office Box 1206 Riverside, CA 92502 · ":' 2 0 1999 ~&J~KHA~v~ & ASSOClA~ I~MECtIt. A, CA SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY PARCEL MAP NO. 29431 APN 950-020-044 Dear Mr. Dellenbach: 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:mc183~012-C1 'J:CF c: Laurie Williams, Engineering Services Supervisor ll,/ednesday J;~'Ly 21, 1; I0:58am -- Fr(a: 'gO~7 ~' -- Page ZI SENT 8Y:UCR , f-21-g9 ;11:41AN; ARCH RESEARCH 909694647?;# 2 CALIFORNIA ".~::% ea~ern ~t~rm~on ce~r topertin of~enpo~;y HISTORICAL -o,o University of California RESOURCES . Riverside. CA 92521-0418 IN ORMATION F · Phone (909) naT..,r/45 ~YSTEM ~"~" 8x {gQO) 787-5409 CUL~ RESOURCE REVIEW Case Ttzmmitx~l Rr~e~atce Designation: __ Tbcpmje~tm~,orhudmlmoibifityofcomjnjnZ, oultmalrmourmu. Hov,,z~t,d~m basa~cott~c m:~mamm~. Duc to tim ~gimm Ioik4d 0~y of ~k~ ate~ ~ffhmovinz du=ing mnsmamion should ~ nmnbomd by · pmfesslond m COMMEJ~"r$: - ff you have any questions, piece COntact Ea.~em Information Center ATTACHMENT NO. 3 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99~ RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 99- AMENDING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 (PA99-0285) ~TEMEC_FSIOI~VOLIOEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRp~.pc.doc 24 A'I'I'ACHMENT NO. 3 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-.__ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0285 (AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219), TO CHANGE LAND USES WITHIN PLANNING AREAS 1,6, AND 6; TO REALIGN AND RECONFIGURE CAMPANULA WAY BETWEEN DE PORTOLA ROAD AND MEADOWS PARJG~AY; THE REALLOCATION OF ACREAGE WITHIN PLANNING AREAS 1 AND 6; THE DMSION OF PLANNING AREA 6 INTO PLANNING AREA 6A (22.3 ACRES, HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 9-12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, WITH A MAXIMUM OF 268 DWELLING UNITS) AND PLANNING AREA 6B (12 ACRES, VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 13-20 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, WITH A MAXIMUM OF 240 DWELUNG UNITS), RESULTING IN AN OVERALL REDUCTION OF UNITS FROM 590 TO 506 IN THESE AREAS; THE PROVISION TO DEVELOP AN ACTIVE, PRIVATE, GATED SENIOR COMMUNITY WITHIN PLANNING AREA 6; AND AN UPDATE OF DESIGN GUIDELINES; ON PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF MONTELEGRO WAY, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY WHEREAS, del Sol Investment Company LLC filed Planning Application No. PA99-0285, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0285 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. PA99-0285. on September 15, 1999, at a duly noticed public headng 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 headng and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0285; 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 recommending approyal of Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Development Plan) hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code; A. The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation and consistent with Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del \\TFMEC_FS'101 \VOL1 ~)EPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRPT~.pC.dOC 25 Sol), Amendment No. 7. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The General Ran Land Use designation for the site includes CC Community Commercial, OS Open Space, LM Low Medium Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre) and H High Density Residential (13- 20 dwelling units per acre). The proposal as designed and conditioned is consistent with these designations. B. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with Spedtic Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and Landscaping Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. C. The design of the preposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. The proposal as designed and conditioned provides adequate access and cimulation. Future development plans for parcels within the project site will determine the suitability and location of all access points to those parcels. D. The map and development plan as proposed, conforms to the logical development of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and dmulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Fire Depadment has reviewed the Vehicle Plan submitted in conjunction with the Development Plan, for adequate emergency vehicle tuming radii. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the pmject's Traffic Study with regards to public health and safety of the community. E. The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. Fudhermore, grading has already occurred at the site, which is a portion of a larger specific plan. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 235) was approved and certified by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Since that date Addendum No. I was certified in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 to the Specific Plan, which added a Development Agreement to the project. Addendum No. 2 was adopted on March 17, 1999 by the City of Temecula in conjunction with an evaluation of additional facilities and uses to the Specific Plan. The applicant has submitted for cedification Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the reconfiguretion and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-fcot major street section to a 78- foot right-of-way with "rounded out" traffic circles. The Addendum document submitted September 9, 1999 is incorrect and does not contain the Traffic Study approved by the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant is ccnditioned to revise the Addendum document pdor to distribution to the City Council for consideration. The analysis concludes, as noted in Table 1-Comparative Analysis of Impacts and Mitigation Measures, that changes in project impacts as a result of Amendment No. 7 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation measures are required. However, the Circulation and Traffic impact is affected by the project, and mitigation measures are recommended within the Traffic Study. These \\TEMEC_FS101~VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.S4pa99.pc.doc 26 measures have either been incorporated in the project design or included in the Conditions of Approvals where appropriate. Staff acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards to air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors dudng the odginal codification of Environmental Impact Repod No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concerns regarding the project have been adequately addressed,. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of September, 1999. Ron Guerdero, Chairperson I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at · regular meeting thereof, held on the 15th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary ~TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~DEpTS%PLANNING~TAFFRPT~284pa99.pC.dOC 27 EXHIBIT A AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO $PECIFIG PLAN I~O. 219 SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER ~\TEMEC_FS101\VOLl',DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP'~99.pc.doc 28 EXHIBIT B ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT (SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER) \\TEMEC_FS101~VOLl%DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRpT%284pa99.pC.dOC 29 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 PC RESOLUTION NO. RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PA99-0283 VILLAGES AT PASEO DEL SOL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT \\TEMEC_FSIOI\VOLI"DEPTS~LANNING~.STAFFRp~.pc.doc 30 A'FI'ACHMENT NO. 4 RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0283 (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT) APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "VILLAGES AT PASEO DEL SOL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, COVERING 23.75 ACRES LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF CAMPANULA WAY, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission hereby finds determines. and declares as follows: A. Section 65864 et seq. of the Govemment Code of the State of California and Temecula City Resolution No. 91-52 authorize the execution of development agreements establishing and maintaining requirements applicable to the development of real property; B. In accordance with the procedure specified in said statutes and Resolution, del Sol Investments, LLC. a California limited liability company ("Developer") have filed with the City of Temecula an application for a Development Agreement ("Development Agreement") for approximately 23.75 acres located north of State Highway 79 South, south of Campanula Way, east of Margadta Road and west of Meadows PatioNay ("Properly") for retail commercial uses consistent with Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 7, which application has been reviewed and accepted for filing by the Community Development Director; C. Notice of the City's intention to consider adoption of the Development Agreement and to consider the findings under the California Environmental Quality Act that a Supplemental EIR or Subsequent EIR is not required has been duly given in the form and manner require by law for both the public hearing before the Planning Commission and the public hearing before the City Council; (1) Notice of the public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the public hearings, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days prior to the hearings to the project applicants and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, schools, police protection, and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the Property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; (2) Notice of the public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council included the date, time, and place of the p, ublic headng. the identity of the hearing body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description in text or diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing. and notice of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; D. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Development Agreement on September 15, 1999 at which time the Planning Commission heard and \\TEMEC_FS101~VOLl',DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP'i'~99.pC.dOC 31 considered all of the wdtten material and oral comments presented to it on the proposed environmental findings and the proposed Development Agreement; Section 2. The Planning Commission hereby further finds and determines that the Project site has been the subject of extensive pdor environmental review: A. The Paloma del Sel Specific Plan Environmental Impact Repod (EIR No. 235) was approved and Cedified by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Since that date Addendum No. I was certified in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 to the Specific Plan, which added a Development Agreement to the project. Addendum No. 2 was adopted on March 17, 1999 by the City of Temecula in conjunction with an evaluation of additional facilities and uses to the Specific Plan. B. The applicant has submitted for certification Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-foot major street section to a 78-foot right-of-way with "rounded out" traffic circles. C. The Addendum document submitted September 9, 1999 is incorrect and does not contain the Traffic Study approved by the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant is conditioned to revise the Addendure document prior to distribution to the City Coundl for consideration. The analysis concludes, as noted in Table 1-Comparative Analysis of Impacts and Mitigation Measures, that changes in project impacts as a result of Amendment No. 7 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation measures are required. However, the Circulation and Traffic impact is affected by the project, and mitigation measures are recommended within the Traffic Study. These measures have either been incorporated in the project design or included in the Conditions of Approvals where appropdate. Staff acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards to air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors dudrig the odginal certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concerns regarding the project have been adequately addressed. D. The proposed Development Agreement incorporates the provisions of the City's General Plan, Spedtic Plan 219, the current zoning regulations for the Property, the Mitigation Plan of Environmental Impact Report No. 235 and such other ordinances, rules, regulations and official policies goveming permitted uses, density, design, improvement, development fees, and construction standards applicable to the Property on the effective date of the Development Agreement. E. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for the Amendment unless required by 14 Cal. Admin. Code Sections 15161 or 15163. Section 3. Based on the evidence in the record before it, and after careful consideration of the evidence, the Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that neither a Subsequent EIR a Supplemental EIR, nor further environmental review is required for the Development Agreement pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166, 14 Cal. Admin. Code Sections 15162 or 15163, based on the following findings of the Planning Commission: A. The elements of the Project as described in the Development Agreement were contemplated and fully and propady analyzed in the EIR certified and approved by the County of Riverside and the Addendums thereto, for the approval of Specific Plan 219 and subsequent Amendments; %~TEMEC_FS101~VOL1~DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP'F%284pa99.pC.dOC 32 B. There have been no subsequent changes to the Project which would require major revisions of the previous FEIR due to the involvement of new signh'icant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the sevedty of previously identified significant effects. C. Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous FEIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. D. There is no new information since the certification of the previous FEIR which would show or tend to show that the Project might have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous FEIR and Addendures. E. There is no new information sinca the certification of the previous FEIR and Addendums which would show or tend to show that significant effects previously examined might be substantially more severe than shown in the FEIR and Addendums. F. There is no new information sinca the cedificetion of the FEIR and Addendures which would show or tend to show that mitigation measures or alternative previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project. G. There is no new information since the certification of the FEIR and Addendures which would show or tend to show that mitigation measures or alternatives which are censidembly different from those analyzed in the previous FEIR and Addendures would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment. Section 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecuia further finds, determines and declares that: A. The 0evelopment Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula's General Plan in that: (1) The Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of the Property for commercial development consistent with the General Plan's land use designation of Community Commercial for the Properly which provide for commercial development; (2) The Development Agreement and development on the Property will provide for the creation of jobs within the City, enhance the balance of housing and jobs within the City as provided in the Growth Management/Public Facility, Land Use, and Economic Development Elements of the General Plan; B. The Development Agreement is consistent with Specitic Plan 219 in which the Property is located in that: (1) The Development Agreement provides for commerdal development pursuant to and in conformanca with the terms of Specific Plan 219; (2) The spedtic land uses proposed for the Project as set forth in the Development Agreement are specificeliy allowed by Specitic Ran No. 219; (3) The Development Agreement provides for the actual construction of the public improvements as described in Specific Ran 219; %\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS~LANNING%STAFFR PT~,pc.doc 33 (4) The Applicable Rules set forth in the Development Agreement do not change the provisions of the Specific Plan, but clarifies the uses to be allowed and standards to be imposed where the Specific Plan provides for altematives; C. The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; D. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to, and in fact enhances, the health, safety, or general elfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof through the implementation of the Applicable Rules; E. The Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council to approve of the Development Agreement is based upon evidence and findings of the Planning Commission and the evidence presented at the headngs before the Planning Commission on the Development Agreement; F. The following benefits, among others, will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from the Development Agreement: (1) Generation of municipal revenue; (2) Construction of needed public infrastructure facilities; (3) Acceleration of both the timely development of subject property as well as the payment of munidpal revenue; (4) Enhancement of quality of life for surrounding residents with the timely development through the elimination of dust and nuisance of partially improved lots and providing retail development necessary to serve the community; and (5) Payment of Public Facility Fees. Section 5. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that it make the environmental findings described herain and approve a Development Agreement between the City of Temecula and del Sol Investments, LLC (Planning Application No. PA 99-0283). Section 6. The Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. \~TEMEC_FS101\VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRPT~84pa99.pc.doc 34 Section 7. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of September, 1999. Ron Guerdero, 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 15th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary \\TEMEC_FS 101 \VOL1 ~DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.pC.dOC 35 EXHIBIT A VILLAGE~ AT PASEO DEL SOL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER) \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~DEPTS%PLANNING~TAFF R P'1'~264pa99.pc.doc 36 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-__ RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION AND ADOPTION OF ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO EIR NO. 235 FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 \\TEMEC_FS101~VOLIOEPTS%PLANNING',STAFFRP'D284pagg.pc.doc 37 ATTACHMENTNO. 5 PC RESOLUTION NO.g - RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY AND ADOPT ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 235 FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 (PALOMA DEL SOL) WHEREAS, del Sol Investment Company LLC submitted Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol); WHEREAS, Amendment No. 7 and Addendum No. 3 was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the time and manner proscribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Amendment No. 7 and Addendum No. 3 on September 15, 1999, at a duly noticed public headng as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in suppod or in opposition to this matter, WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended that the City Council approve Amendment No. 7 and Addendum No. 3; NOW, THEREFORF~ 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. Findinf:ls. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of Addendure No. 3 to hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code; A. The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation and consistent with Spedtic Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment No. 7. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site includes CC Community Commercial, OS Open Space, LM Low Medium Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre) and H High Density Residential (13- 20 dwelling units per acre). The proposal as designed and conditioned is consistent with these designations. B. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause sedous public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with Specffic Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), the Citys General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and Landscaping Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval have been placed on the project accordingly to assure that the development conforms to City Standards. C. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, properly within the proposed land division. The proposal as designed and conditioned provides adequate access and \\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 'OEPTS~'LANNING~STAFFRPT~284pa99.pC.dOC 38 cimulation. Future development plans for parcels within the project site will determine the suitability and location of all access points to those parcels. D. The map and development plan as proposed, conforms to the logical development of the site, and is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Fire Department has reviewed the Vehicle Plan submitted in conjunction with the Development Plan, for adequate emergency vehicle turning radii. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the project's Traffic Study with regards to public health and safety of the community. E. The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. Furthermore, grading has already occurred at the site, which is a portion of a larger spedtic plan. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. Section 3. Environmental Comoliance. The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 235) was approved and certified by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Since that date Addendum No. I was certified in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 to the Specific Plan, which added a Development Agreement to the project. Addendum No. 2 was adopted on March 17, 1999 by the City of Temecula in conjunction with an evaluation of additional radiities and uses to the Specific Plan. The applicant has submitted for certification Addendum No. 3 in conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Spedfic Plan. Addendum No. 3 considers the environmental impacts of an overell reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the reconfiguretion and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-fcot major street section to · 78- foot dght-of-way with "rounded out" traffic drdes. The Addendum document submitted September 9, 1999 is incorrect and does not contain the Traffic Study approved by the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant is conditioned to revise the Addendum document pdor to distdbution to the City Council for consideration. The analysis concludes, as noted in Table 1-Comparetive Analysis of Impacts and Mitigation Measures, that changes in project impacts as a result of Amendment No. 7 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation measures are required. However, the Circulation and Traffic impact is affected by the project, and mitigation measures are recommended within the Traffic Study. These measures have either been incorporated in the project design or included in the Conditions of Approvals where appropriate. Staff acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards to air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors dudng the odginal certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concems regarding the project have been adequately addressed,. ~\TEMEC_FSt 01 \VOLt %DEPTS~PLANNI NG~STAFFR P'h2.84pagg.pc .doc 39 Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of September, 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 15th day of September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary \%TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFR PT~284pa99.pc.doc 40 EXHIBIT A ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO ENVIROMENTMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO 235 (SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER) \\TEMEC_FS101~VOL10EPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~84pa99. pc.doc 41 ATTACHMENT NO. 6 EXHIBITS \\TEMEC_FS 101%VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING%.STAFFR PT%264pa99.pc.doc 42 CITY OF TEMECULA mrf. 79 VICINITY Mk"AiD~~PROJECT SITE NOT TO SCALE CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286 EXHIBIT - A PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 VICINITY MAP F:%DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP'r%284pa99.pC.dOC CITY OF TEMECULA EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP DESIGNATION - SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 (PALOMA DEL SOL) OS P LM L NC EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION - CC COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL, H HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, LM LOW MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AND OS OPEN SPACE CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 F:~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRpT~S4pa99.pC.dOC CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99..0286 EXHIBIT- D PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 SITE PLAN F:'OEpTS~pLANNING~STAFFRP'T'~84pagg,pc.~oc CITY OF TEMECULA VILLAGES @ PASEO del SOL ii _y :i CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99'.0286 EXHIBIT- E PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 GRADING PLAN F:I)EpTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP"i'~84pa99.pC.doc CITY OFTEMECULA CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286 EXHIBIT- F PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 MONUMENTSIGNAGEPLAN F:%DEpTS',PLANNING%STAFFRP~,~__og.pC.dOC CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286 EXHIBIT - G PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999- HOME DEPOT ELEVATIONS F:',DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP'i'~.84paBg.pC.dOC CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA99-.0283 THROUGH PA99-0286 EXHIBIT - H PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15~ 1919- HOME DEPOT SIGNAGE F:~DEpTS~PLANNING%STAFFRPl'~.64pa99.pc.doc CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA99~)283 THROUGH PA99-0286 EXHIBIT - I PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBFR 15, 1999 HOME DEPOT FLOOR PLANS F:%DEpTS%pLANNING~TAFFRPT~284pa99.Pc.doc CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. o PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99.-0286 EXHIBIT - J PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 HOME DEPOTLANDSCAPE PLANS F:~)EpTS~uLANNING~STAFFRP'D284pa99.pc,doc CITY OF TEMECULA CITY OP PLANN|NC APPUCATION NO 99-0286 VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431 CITY OF TEJ.{ECULA. COUNTY OP RIVERSIDE. STATE OF' CALIFORNIA V;,CINITY MAp CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286 EXHIBIT- M PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431 F:',DEPTS~LANNING~STAFFRPT~2.84pa99.pC.dOc CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-O286 EXHIBIT - N INFORMATIONAL EXHIBIT (RETAIL VILLAGE ELEVATIONS) PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 F:~DEPT$%PLANNING~STAFFRP'I'~2662~__o~,_,pC.dOC