HomeMy WebLinkAbout092999 PC Agenda__ m;onabb a,angeemts t~ ee~,e ~-:_--_-~blley to eat nesting [28 C.cR H.I~..SS.IH ADA Tie II]
CALL TO ORDER:
FLAG SALUTE:
ROLL CALL:
TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
Septereber 29, f999 Q 6:00 PM
43200 Business Park Ddve
Council Chambers
Tamecain, CA 92590
Chailperson Guardere
Resolution Next In Order #99-035
Fahey, Gueniero, Mathewson, Naggar, and Webster
PUBUC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is previded so members of the public can address the sommissicnem on items that are not listed on
the Ageride. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes eadn. If you desire to speak to the Commissioners about an item
not listed on the Agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" fon~ should be rdled out and filed with the Commission Secretary,
When you are called to speak, please come forward and Mate your name and address.
For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be fled with the Ranning Secretary before Commissbn gets
to that item. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
1. Approval of Agenda
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
m
Case NO:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Environmental Action:
Case Planner:
Recommendation:
Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Parcel Map) and
PA99-0238 (Development Agreement).
Scoff 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)
Planning Application No. PA98-0447 is a request to subdivide 6.31
acres of land into hNenty-four (24) residential lots and Planning
Application No. PA99-0238 is a request for a Development
Agreement to allow a minimum five (5) foot side yard setback.
Mitigated Negative Declaration
Thomas Themslay
Recommend Approval
m
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 eyedand Ddve, and west of
Margadta 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
\%TEMEC_FS 101WOL 1 \DEFI'S\PLANN]NG\WIM BERVG\PLANCOMM%AGENDAS % 1999\9-29-99 .doc
4. Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Environmental Action:
Planner.
Recommendation:
PLANNING MANAGERS REPORT
COMMISSIONER REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting:
Planning ApplicaUon No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan)
Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (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 corninertial 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 space;
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 overell reduction of units
from 590 to 508 dwellings; the development of an active, private,
gated senior community within Planning Area 8 that includes a
pdvate recreation area; and an update of Design Guidelines that
incorporate the village vignettes and the senior amenaries.
4. The request for approval of a Development Agreement between
the City and del Sol Investment Co., LLC, a limited liability
company
Addendure to previously certified Environmental Impact Report
No. 235 for Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol)
Carole K. Donahoe
Recommend Approval for Planning Application No. PA99-0285 and
Planning Application No. PA99-0283
Approve Planning Application No. PA99-0284 and Planning
Application No. PA99-0286
Oct 6, 1999, 6:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, California, 92590
ITEM #2
CITY OF TEMECULA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning Commlssl~C?/Fs
Debbie Ubnoske,~Planning Manager
September 29, 1999
Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29036) and
Planning Application No. PA99-0238 (Development Agreement) for a 24 lot
subdivision off of Via La Vida.
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
BACKGROUND:
Thomas Thomsley, Project Planner
Recommend that the Planning Commission recommend that the City
Coundl approve PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29036) and
Planning Application No. PA99-0238 (Development Agreement).
These projects were continued at the September 15, 1999, Planning
Commission Meeting due to a lack of a quorum. Staff has updated
the resolutions and the Conditions of Approval to reflect the
continuance. A copy of the odginal staff report package, with
revisions, is attached to this memorandum.
F:\DEPTS~PLANNING~TAFFRPT~447PA98 PC memo 9-29.doc
1
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 Margadta
Road and Solana Way (Assessor's Parcel Numbera 921-
660-026, -027, -041, and -042)
EXISTING ZONING:
LM (Low Medium Density Residential)
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~447pa98.PC.doc
1
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 appreved
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 tim. 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 Development Oreday to modify the standards. After consulting
with the City Attorney, he advised use that 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 cul-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~447pa98.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, drculation 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 Code. 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
1. 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:\DEIYFS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\447pa98.pC.dOc
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
sedous public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with the
Cib/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 conditioned, will comply
with the City's Development Cede, 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
C. Zoning Map
D. Tentative Tract Map No. 29036
4. Initial Environmental Study - Blue Page 31
5~ Mitigation Monitodng Program - Blue Page 32
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING',STAFFRPT~44?Da98.PC.dOC
4
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION OF PA99-0238
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP~447pa98.PC.doc
5
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, PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA99-0238, 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 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 Planning Application No. PA99-0238 (Development Agreement); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission was scheduled to hold a noticed public hearing on
September 15, 1999, on the issue of recommending approval or denial PA99-0238 (Development
Agreement); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, due to a lack of a quorum, continued Planning
Applications No. PA99-0238 (Development Agreement) to a special Planning Commission Headng
on September 29, 1999;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA99-0238
(Development Agreement) on September 29. 1999, 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 recommended to the City Council that they approve Planning
Application No. PA99-0238 (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
\\'EEMEC_FS101\VOL1~Depts~PLANNING~STAFFRP'T~147pa98.PC 9-29.doc
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,
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 detrimental to the health, safety, or
general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof; and,
5. 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, 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 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,
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 period
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
%\T~SMEC_FS101%VOL1\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~47pa98.PC 9-29.doc
7
development through the elimination of dust and nuisance of Da~ially 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.
Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 29t~ 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:
NOES:
ABSTAINED:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
\\T_EMEC_FS101\VOL1\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~447pa98.PC 9-29.doc
8
EXHIBIT A
ORDINANCE NO. 99-
APPROVING PA98-0447
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\447p~98.PC.doc
9
EXHIBIT A
ORD!NANCE 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 Planning Application No, PA99-0238 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. 13764 and a portion of lots
16-20 and 26-28 of Tract Map No. 20882~3), hereinafter the "Subject ProperLy" 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 taw, and the Planning
· Commission and City Council of said City have each conducted public headngs September 29,
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 district 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;
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRP'F~447pa98.PC 9-29.doc
l0
E. 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
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, 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 hearing, 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 of the need to exhaust administrative remedies;
G. Notice of the public hearing before the City Coundl was published in a newspaper
of general circulation at least ten (10) days prior 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 hearing 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 orderly
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 (fire, 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 appmved. 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 Coundl 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.
F:\DEPTS~PLANNING~TA~44?pR98.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 pdor 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.
A'FFEST:
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~STAFFRPTX447pa98.PC.dOc
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, California 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 Government 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 imerest 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 hereinafier 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 1
B. AGREEMENT.
NOW, THEEFOE, 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 of Temecula, California.
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 1st calendar day following adoption of
the Ordinance approving this Agreement by City's City Council.
2. ~. The recitals are part of the agreement between the parties and shall be
enforced and enforceable 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 right 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. Binding 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 end be binding upon Developcr's successors and assigns in title or interest to the
Project. Each and every contract, deed or other instrument hereina~cr executed, coveting 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\TEMECULA~DEVAGRE 9/9/99 2
Developer hereby fiather declare their understanding and inter,~ 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 resWietions, 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 Temeeula.
5. Relationshil> 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 AFeement. 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 governed accordingly by
that zoning category. 0nee 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 fight 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 right to develop the Project on the Site in
accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and City shall have the right to
control development of the Site in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement.
L\TEMECULAXDEVAGRE 9/9/99
b. The density and intensity of use, the uses allowed, the size of proposed
buildings, provisions for the reservation or d~lication of land for public purposes, the maximum
height of proposed buildings and location of public improvements, together with other tunus 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 California 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 p~xudts, 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. Public Benefit. 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.
1 l. Permitted Uses. Those uses allowed on the Site shall be those uses petitted
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\TEMECULAXDEVAGRE 9/9/99 4
13. Indemnification. Developer agrees to, and shall, hold City and its elected
officials, officers, agents, consultants and employees harmless fxom liability for damage or
claims for damage for personal injuries, including death, and claims for property damage which
may arise fi'om the direct or indirect operations of Developer or those of his contractor,
subconWactor, 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 reason 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 part,
only by mutual written consent of the parties and then in the manner provided for in California
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. IntheeventofadefaultundertheprovisionsofthisAgreementby
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
LWEMECULA~nEVAGRE 9/9/99 5
not complied in good faith with any material terms and conditions of this Agreement, after notice
and opportunity 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 opportunity 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 enfome 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 parties 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 Hen shall have the right 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 exercising
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 (hereinafier 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 6
b. Cure the breach or default within thirty (30) days after 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 after 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 thereafter cliligently 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 defauR 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 requiting 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, return 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, California 92660
To City:
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, California 92589-9033
Attention: City Manager
With Copy to City Attorney
LWEMECUEA\DEVAGRE 9/9/99 7
23. Attomeys' Fee~. In any proceedings arising from the enforcement 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 parties hereto and their legal representatives, executors,
adminisl~cators, successors end assigns, wherever the context requires or admits.
25. Al>l>licable Law. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and
governed by the laws of the State of California.
26. Partial Invalidity. If any provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to be
invalid, illegal or unenforeeable, 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 Bernarclino 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 paxties hereto have executed this Agreement on
the day and year dated below.
Dated: ,1999
CITY OF TEMECULA,
a municipal corporation
By:
Mayor
Attest:
Susan Jones, City Clerk,
City of Temecula
PENCO DEVELOPMENT
Dated: By:
L\TEMECULA\DEVAGRE 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 insmmaent 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
L\TEMECULA\DEVAGRE 9/9/99
EXHIBIT" A"
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
L\TEMECULA\DEVAGRE 9/9/99
EXHIBIT "B"
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Minimum lot area (square feet)
Minimum average lot area per dwelling unit
Dwelling units per acre
LM
7,200
7.200 s.f.
4.5
LOT DIMENSIONS
Minimum lot frontage at front property line
Minimum lot frontage for a flat lot at front property line
Minimum width at required front setback area
Minimum average width
Minimum lot depth
30 fL
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.
15R.
5ft.
20 ft.
35 ft.
PROJECT SPECIFICS
Parcels 1 through 4 of Parcel Map No. 13784 and a portion of lots 16 through 20 and 26 ttLrough
28 of Tract Map No. 20882-3
Tentative Tract Map No. 29036
ProposedNumberofLots: 24
Total Acres: 6.32 Acres
L\TEMECULA\DEVAGRE 9/9/99
A'F!'ACHMENT NO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
F:\DEpTS\pLANNING\STAFFRPT~447pa98.PC.dOC
ATTACHMENT 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, the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula has received an application
from Hiram-Hill, LLC for Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29036);
and,
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 was scheduled to hold a noticed public hearing on
September 15, 1999, on the issue of recommending approval or denial PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract
Map No. 29036); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, due to a lack of a quorum, continued Planning
Applications No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29036) to a special Planning Commission
Hearing on September 29, 1999;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA98-0447
(Tentative Tract Map No. 29036) on September 29, 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. Findings. 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
\\TJEMEC_FS101WOL1\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRP"r~47pa98.PC 9-29.doc
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 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.
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 forthis'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 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 Temecula 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 29t~ day of September, 1999.
Ron Guerdere, 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:
ABSTAINED:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
\\T~EMEC_FS101\VOL1\Depts~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~47pa98.PC 9-29.doc
]6
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
F:\DEPTSXPLANNING\STAFFRPT~447pa98.PC .dec
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 29, 1999
September 29, 2001
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicantJdeveloper 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 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, judgemerits, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek
monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the
approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal
board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning
the Planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner
of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further
cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all
\\T_EMEC_FSi01\VOLl\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\447pa98.PC 9-29.doc
19
action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such
defense.
If subdiwsion 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, and
their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision.
12.
A Grading Permit for either rough or predse grading shall be obtained from the Department
of Public Works pdor to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained
road 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 irdgation 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~PLANN~NGLVl'AFFRPT%447pa98.PC.doc
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 District
b) Eastern Municipal Water District
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 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 No. 207.
F:\DEPTSLPLANNING\STAFFRPT~47pa98.1~C.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 boundades 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 100-foot minimum tangent section.
g) All street and driveway centedine intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
h)
All units shall be provided with zero clearance garage doors and garage door
openers if the ddveway 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 ddveways 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, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall
be provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required where
adequate dght-of-way does not exist for installation of the fadlities. All utilities shall
be designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider.
Telephone, cable TV, and/or secudty 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.
Comer property line cut off for vehicular sight distance and installation of pedestdan
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 concems 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~STAFFRFI'~47pe98,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 underlying 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 secudty 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 fadlities 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."
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
27.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Worlds, 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 Distdct
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\STAFFRP~447p~98.PC.doc
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 tc the
Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identity
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 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
private 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 guaranteeing 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 Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review
and approval. The building pad shall be certffied 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 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.
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:\DP, PTS\pLANNING~STAFFRP~4471~98.PC.doc
23
Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy
39.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public W;rks, the Developer shall receive
wdtten clearance from the following agencies:
a) Rancho California Water Distdct
b) Eastern Municipal Water Distdct
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 repaired 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 are 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-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. (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 upgrede 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:\DEPTS\PL~NNING~I'AFFRP~447pa98.PC.doc
24
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
Pnor to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire
Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any
portion of an extedor wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all
weather surface designed for 70,000 Ibs. GVVV with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet.
( UFC sec 902 and Oral 95-15)
Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than
twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed verlicel clearance of not less than thirteen (13)
feet six (6) inches. (UFC 902.2.2.1 and Ord 95-15)
Pdor 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 dvil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature
block; and cenferm 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 pdor 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 )
Pdor 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 homeowner's 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 cellection
services into the respective TCSD maintenance programs. All costs associated with this
process shall be borne by the developer.
Pdor to Issuance of Building Permits:
57.
Pdor to installation of artedal 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.
Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occ~LOancy:
58.
It shall be the developers responsibility to provide written 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.
Applicant's Signature
Date
Name printed
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING~TAF~cP, PT~447pt98.PC.do¢
26
Wmr
John F. Hennigar
Phillip L. Forbes
Best liest & Krleger LLp
November 13, 1998
Thomas Thomsley, 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 (RCVVD). 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 q.uestiGns, please contact an Engineering Services
Representative at this office.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brannon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
98/SB:rnr136/F012-T6/FCF
NO',t :- u IB98
c: Laurie Williams, Engineering Services Supervisor
The Gas Camp
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 Corner of D~ndy Parkway& Diaz Road, SE Side of Via La Vida S/O
Solann Way, & Colt Ct. S/O Winchester Rd.
Location: Services can b~ 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 infonnatinn 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 cc~ntractual arrangements are made.
The availability of natural gas service, as set forth in this letter, is based upon present conditions
of gas supply and regnlatury 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
services, air quality, new construction incentives and other energy and money saving programs
and services. This one stop help or referral has trained program specialists who 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.
Count>' of Riverside
DEPARTMENT OF ENVlRONlVlENTAL HEALTH
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE: November 17, 1998
CITY OF TEI~tECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT,
ATTN: Thomas ThornsIcy
~GREGOR DELLENBACH, Environmental Health Specialist IV TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 29036 / PA98-0447
The Department of Environmental 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" letter from the agency/agencies serving potable water.
2. 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
(909) 955-8980
stand7.doc
A'I'I'ACHMENT NO. 3
EXHIBITS
F:\DEpTSXpLANNINGxSTAFFRFI~44'/p~98.PC.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
ZIP CODE
92591
Meadowview
Rd
Ave V
Idersey Ct <
'
'The Levamde Pl
Tower
C
CASE NO. - Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29036)
EXHIBIT A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - September 15, 1999
VICINITY MAP
R:\STAFFRPT)447pa98.PC.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - 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~447p~98.PC.doc
CITY OF TEMFCULA.
EASEMENT 'NOTES
~"~" ~ NO. 2259~
MB 185/55-56
12 /
TR NO 20882-3
MB
/
=85 t' 'iT
CASE NO. - Planning Application No. PA98-0447 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29036)
EXHIBIT D TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - September 15, 1999
F:~)~pI~PLANNINGL~TAFI;RF~447pag8 .I~C .tlo¢
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
F:\DEpTS\pLANN1NG\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 Ivlap 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: -"~ 7( 5~.~-
Thomas K. Thornslev, Project Planner
(Name and Title)
\~TEMEC_FSI01\VOLI\DEPTSXPI_ANNING\CEQA\447Da98
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 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,
Temecula, 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.
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 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 further is required.
Signature
Date
Printed name /
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS'~c>LANNING\CEQA~447pa98 new IES.doc
2
Land Use and Planning. Would the project:
C,
Issues _-rid Suppealing Informalion 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, Qr 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
Potent~iafiy
Significant Unless
Mitigatxon
Incorporated
Less Than
Signfficant
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 am 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:
"b.
Issues and Supporting Inlo~mation Sour, es
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?
NO
Impact
Comments:
2.a.
The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The project ~s
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 Temecuta. 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. Therefore, 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\DEPTS\PI_ANNING%CEQA\447pa98 new IES.doc
4
,3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project?
In~es and Suolx~ting Infotmalio~ Sources
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 AIquist-Pfiolo 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?
i)
ii)
iii) ,/'
iv)
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?
d. 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?
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 mitigated through building construction, which is consistent with the Uniform Building Code
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 performed, 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_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS~PLANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new IES.doc
5
4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
Issues and Sup~:~tjng Information Sources
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 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?
Place 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
Significant Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
,/
,/
,/
./
.r
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 shatl 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\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA',A47pa98 new IES.doc
6
4.c,d.
4.e,
4j.
excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge caoabi!ity. F,.:,.'!.he~. co"str'.z'ctEcr~ cn the
site wilt not be at depths sufficient to have a significant impact on ground waters or aqulfer 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 wilt 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.
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
Potentially Signi~cam Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Signi~ican( No
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable ,/
air quality plan?
b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially
to an existing or projected air quality violation?
c. 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?
Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number
of people?
Comments:
5.a-c. 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 residentially 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 IES.doc
?
5.d.
5.e.
significant air quality impact established by the South C,-=st Air Quality Management District as
depicted in SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbcck (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 crea,- minor pollutants during the grading and
construction phase of the project emanating from fugitive dust and small quantities of construction
equipment pollutants. 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 Supporting InfarmaUon 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
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Signs~cant
Impact Incorooramd linDact
NO
,/
,/
,r
,/
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~VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new IES.doc
8
6.c
6.d
6.e.
6.f
Neither the tract map nor the future development of this proper~y will result in a change in air
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 currenl
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 Supl~rting Information 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 dparian 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 fedorally 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 movemerit 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?
Potentially
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Signi~cant Mitigation Signiticanl
NO
,/
,/
,/
,/
\\TEMEC_FS101WOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new IES.doc
9
:
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 resull 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 a[
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.
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.
7.f.
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:
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?
Pctentiatly
Potentlilly Significant Unless
Significant Mitigation
Impact Incorporated
No
Impact
,f
Comments:
8.a,b.
The project will not result in the loss of available, known mineral resources nor in 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\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new IES.doc
10
{ 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
Issues and Supponjng Infornm~jon Sources
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?
c. 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?
f. 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?
g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an ,/'
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h. 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?
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 hauters who may be
transporting hazardous materials. Because the properly and the surroundi. ng 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',~47pa98 new IES.d~c
11
g.c.
9.d.
9.e,f.
9.g.
9.h.
The future use of this project site is designated for single family homes. This sffe 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-qua;tar mile of an existing or proposed school,
and will not emit hazardous emissions or handle haz,,dous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or acutely hazardous mataria!s, substances, or waste, no impacts are anticipated.
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.
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.
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.
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:
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 airstrip, would
the project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
Potentially
Potentialiy Significant Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Signiflcant No
Comments:
lO.a.
This project site is designated for the development of single family homes. The site is currently vacant
and development of the land logically will result in increases to noise levels during construction phases
as well as increases to noise in the area over the long run. 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\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new IES.doc
12
10.b.
10.c.
10.d.
10.e.
This project site is designated for the development of single family homes. There wif! be no activities
on this site that would exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
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 sig0ificant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project may result in temporary or pedodic 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 o~:
altered Government services in any of the following areas:
Issues and Supporting Inbrm~tion Sources
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?
PotenTially
Potentially Significant Unless Less Than
Significant MitjgaTion Significant NO
Police protection?
SChools?
Parks?
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\DEPTS~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:
Potenbally
Polentially Sigm~cant Unless
Significant Mitigation
Less Than
NO
,/
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?
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 will 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\PLANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new IES.dOC
14
12.d,
12.f,g.
reimburse the county for the Murfieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan. No s~.;nif;csnt
impacts are anticipated.
The project wi!! not significantly impact existing water supplies nor require expanded water entitlements.
The project will have an incremental effect upon existing systems, Whde the project will have an
incremental impact upon existing systems, the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's
General Plan staies: "both EMWD and RCWD have indicated an ability to supply as much water as is
required in their services areas (p. 39)." The FEIR further states: "implementation of the proposed
General Plan would not significantly impact wastewater services (p, 40)." Since the project is
consistent with the City's General Plan, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
There are no septic tanks on site or proximate to the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
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:
Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Potentially Signillcant Unless
Signir~cant Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
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?
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 resoumes, 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:
Issues arid Suppo41ing Information Sources
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 1506,57
Directly or indirectly destroy a unique pateontologicai
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
Potentially
Significant Unless
Mitigation
Incor1:~orated
NO
ImpacI
,/
./
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?
b. 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?
Potentially
Potentially Significant Unless Lss$ Than
Signi~cant Mitigatjon Significant 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?
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.
a,
Potentially
Potentially Significant Untess Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
impact Incoq~orateci Impact
Issues anU Supl~tjng Information Sources
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?
b. 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~47pa98 new IES.cioc
17
NO
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 environn~ent, substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to r,,op 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 Report.
South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\CEQA\447pa98 new IES.dOC
18
ATTACHMENT NO, 5
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\447pa98.PC.doc
32
Geolo<lic 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.
Pdor to the issuance of a building permit.
Building and Safety Department.
R:\CEQA\447pa98 M,M, 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 cJischarge 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).
Transl3ortation/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 Temecuta Municipal Code,
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building and Safety Department.
Increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for traffic signal mitigation.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by,
and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permit.
Building and Safety Department.
R:\CEQA~47pa98 M.M. Pgm,.doc
2
Bioloqical Resources
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Noise
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Pan'y:
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:\CEQA\447pa98 M.M. Pgm..cioc
Endangered, threatened or rare sl}ecies or their habitats (including but
not limited to plants, fish, insects, an;mals 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 en~ure
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 public facilities,
including roads.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for road improvements, traffic
impacts, and public facilities.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by,
and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building and Safety Department.
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 Obse~'ator~.
Use lighting techniques that are consistent with Ordinance No. 655.
Submit lighting plan to the Building and Safety Department for approval.
Pdor to the issuance of a building permit,
Building & Safety Department.
R:\CEQA\447pa98 M,M, Pgm..doc
4
ITEM #3
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
September 29, 1999
Development Agreement with Eli Lilly & Company
(Planning Application PA99-0274)
Prepared By: David Hogan, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department - Planning Division
Staff recommends the Planning Commission:
ADOPT Resolution No. 9L recommending approval of
Planning Application No. PA99-0274 based upon the
Analysis contained in the Staff Report.
ADOPT the Negative Dedaretion for Planning Application
No. PA99-0274;
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
City of Temecula
PROPOSAL:
To make a recommendation to the City Coundl on the proposed
Development Agreement between the City of Temecula and Eli
Lilly & Company
LOCATION:
East of Ynez Road, south of Ovedand Drive. West of Margadta
Road end north of Solana Way
EXISTING ZONING:
Business Park (BP) and Specific Plan (SP-7)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East
West:
Spedtic Plan (SP-7: Temecula Regional Center
Specific Plan)
Service Corninertial (SC). Community Commercial
(CC) and High Density Residential (H)
High Density Residential (H)
Light Industrial (LI) and Service Commemial (SC)
PROPOSED ZONING: Not Applicable
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION
Business Park
EXISTING LAND USE: Commerdal, parking lot, and vacant
F:%DelXs%PLANNING%STAFFRPT%274PA99 PC2.doc
1
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant
Vacant, commercial end high density residen~_-~
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 Ovedand Drive between Ynez and Margarita 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 Overland 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.
This item was originally scheduled for the September 15, 1999 Planning Commission meeting
but had to be continued due to a lack of quorum.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Staff prepared and circulated an Initial Environmentel 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. 9~__- Blue Page 3
Draft Ordinance No. 99- - Blue Page 6
Draft Development Agreement- Blue Page 10
Initial Study - Blue Page 11
\~TEMEC_FS101~VOLIM:)epts%PLANNING~STAFFRpT~274PA99 PC2.doc
2
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
F:%Depts%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~274PA99 PC2.doc
3
ATTACHMENT 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) BETVVEEN 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 heedng on September 29,
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
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,
F:%Depts~LANNING~TAFFRP'D274pA99 PC2,doc
' 4
(d) The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public
convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice beceuse 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 dethmentl to the health, safety,
or general welfare because it provides adequal 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 hearing, and mailed or delivered at least tan (10) days prior to the headng to
the project applicent and to each agency expected to provide watar, sewer, and police and fire
protaction, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the property as shown on
the latast equalized assessment roll; and,
(g) Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission included the
data, 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 proparty that is the subject of the headng, and of the need to exhaust
administrative remedies; and,
(h) The bener~s 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 ceuse this Resolution
to be transmitted to the City Council for further proceedings in accordance with Site law.
Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 29th 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 29th 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 PC2.doc
5
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
F:%Depts~LANNING~STAFFRP'r'~'74PA99 PC2.doc
6
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 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 e_t 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, 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 headngs on
September 29, 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 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
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,
F:~)epts%PLANNING%STAFFRPT%274PA99 PC2.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 competibRe 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 circulation at least ten (10) days before the Planning
Commission public headng, and mailed or delivered at least ton (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 Pinning Commission included the
date, time, and place of the public headng, the identity of the headng body, a general
explanation of the matter to pe considered, a general description and text or diagram of the
location of the real property that is the subject of the headrig, 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 heroby 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 pe 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 heraby 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 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 pdor to the adoption of this Ordinance.
W~in 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:%DeptstPLANNING%STAFFRPTQ.74PA99 PC2.doc
8
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 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, CMCIAAE
City Clerk
F:~DeptS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~274PA99 PC2.dOC
9
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
F:~)epts~LANNING~STAFFRPT~74PAlt PC2,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 Califomia (hereina~er
"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\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 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 Cotmoil 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 Califomia 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 , after 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 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 CIT ."'a 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. Authori,ing 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 construction 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 I ,egislation. 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\TEMECULAXELILILLYXDEVAGR 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 Intprovements. "On-site Improvements" means physical
infrastructure improvements or facilities that are or will be located on the Property.
1.13. OWNE~ "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. pro_iect. "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 Margarita 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
encotkrage 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 Commemial.
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\TEMECULAXELILILL¥~DEVAGR 3/17/99 5
2. General Provisions.
2.1. Bindig 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 (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. 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 ofthe total build-out ofthe 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. 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 part of the Project.
The termination of this Agreement shall not affect any fight 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 fight, title and interest in
this Agreement, or the portion thereof which is subject to transfer (the "Transferred
_ L\TEMECULAXELILILLYXDEVAGR 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 (it) the
agreement between OWNER and such lransferee 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.
2.5.2. Rights of Successors and Assigns. Any and all successors and
assigns of OWNER shall have all of the same fights, 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. ~. 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. Operatitlg 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, at~er execution, shall be attached hereto as
_ L\TEMECULA~ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17/99 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_ieet. 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 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. 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\TEMECULA~ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/17/99 8
CITY shall commit an amotmt, 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 fight 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.
3.13.1. 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 rules, 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~ELILILLY~DEVAGR 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 ~'mding that such regulation, program action or inaction is
required (as opposed to permitted) to comply with such State and Federal laws or
regulations after raking 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 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 following:
3.4.1. No Con~ictillg 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 mquims any
reduction or increase in the mtmber, size or square footage of lot(s), structures, buildings
or other improvements; or
' L\TEMECULA~ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/I 7/99 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 entitiements 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\TEMECULAXELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/17/99 11
3.5. Future Amendments to Development Plen. The following rules apply to
future amendments to the Development Plan:
3.5.1. OWNF, R'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 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 are not limited to, the following:
effort;
4.1.1. Contprehensive Planning. Providing a comprehensive planning
4.1.2. Short Term Enti>loyment. Creating substantial employment
opportunities through the construction and development phase;
4.1.3 Lollg Term Entpioyment. Creating substantial employment
opportunities subsequent to the Development;
4.1.4 Inlprovements. 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~ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17,99 12
not accrue int~est and shall not be subject to reimbursemere 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 fight-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 slzeets, 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 Margaxita 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 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.
4.4. Public lnlprovement Districts. CITY agrees not to, on its own initiative,
undertake to include the Property in any public improvement district, assessment disWict
and/or community facilities district (collective "DisWicts") which District 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 government 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. RIC 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 condeumation for the "subject property" defined in the Complaint in
L\TEMECULA~ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/17/99 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 Regardi~Xg Exercise of Reserved Authority.
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 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 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 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
_ L\TEMECULA~ELILILLYXDEVAGR 3/17/99 14
Development Agreement. OWNER's duties under this Section 6(i) are solely subject to
and condifioned upon the Indemnified Parties' written request to OWNER to defend
and/or 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.
(ii) during the term of this Agreement, to defend CITY and its agents, officers,
contractors, attomey, 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 exemise of its police powers or a risk
of harm to those present within the CITY.
7. Relationship of Parties. The conlxactual 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 Govemment 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 Contpliance 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.
L\TEMECULA~ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17/99 15
9.2. Good-Faith Contpliance. 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 ofth~s 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 (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 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 I0, 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 slate 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 ofthis 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 slate 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\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 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 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
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 judgment thereon and issue all legal and equitable relief appropriate under
the circumstances of the controversy before him. If OWNER and CITY am 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 borne 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 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 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
o L\TEMECULAXELILILLYXDEVAGR 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.
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
parcy'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. IAligalj.oJl. 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\TEMECULA~ELILILLY~DEVAGR 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 Planner
With a copy to:
Richan:Is, Watson & Gershon
Thirty-Eighth Floor
333 South Hope Street
Los Angeles, California 90071 - 1469
Arm.: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
Notices required to be given to OWNER shall be addressed as follows:
Eli Lilly and Company
Lilly Corporate Center
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\TEMECULAXELILILLYXnEVAGR 3/17/99 20
Any notice given as required herein shall be deemed given only if in writing and upon
deliveW personally or by independent comer service. A party may change its address for
notices by giving notice in writing to the other party as required herein and thereat~er
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. Rf, f, lzr. djng. 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 hereinafier 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 fight, 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
ai%r 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. Severabilily of Terms. If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this
Agreement shall be determined invalid, void or unenforceable, 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 benefited thereby of the covenants to be performed
hemunder 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 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 impermissible attempt to contract away the legislative and governmental
- L\TEMECULAXELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17/99 22
functions of the CITY, and in particular, the CITYs police powers. In this regard, the
paxties 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.
183. 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 vinlation 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 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 tentative
map pursuant to Section 66452.6.
20. Not for Benefit of Third Parties. This Agreement and all provisions hereof arc
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\TEMECULAXELILILLYXDEVAGR 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 Attomey
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 emily upon behalf of which the
person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
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 authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their
signature(s) on the instntment the person(s), or the emity upon behalf of which the
person(s) acted, executed the instntment.
Witness my hand and official seal.
Signature of Notary
_ L\TEMECULA\ELILILLYXDEVAGR 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 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 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
- L\TEMECULA\ELILILLY~DEVAGR 3/17/99 26
QTYOF TEMECULA
-/
CASE NO. - PA99-027~1.
PROJECT SITE MAP EXHIBIT -
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - September 15, 1999
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
INITIAL STUDY
F:'~Depts%PLANNING'~STAFFRP'D274PA99 PC2.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 Sponsor's 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 Temecula
Eli Ully 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 owner
to request, and the City to consider, a General Plan Amendment and
Zone Change on approximately 37.4 acres in exchange for resolving
a disagreement between Eli Lilly and the City of Temecula.
The General Plan Amendment to the Land Use Element Map would
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 an
undefined combination of the following zones: Business Park, Light
Industrial, Professional Office, High Density Residential and/or
Commercial.
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
Other public agencies whose approval
is required
The Development Agreement does not spec'~y what the future land
uses will be, only that the City agrees to consider changes at a future
date.
North: Vacant land.
East Vacant land and single family and high density residential.
South: Commercial land uses and high density residential.
West: Commercial land uses.
None.
R:\CEQA%273PA99 IES.doc\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI~DEPTS~PLANNING%CEQA%274PA99 IES.do¢
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 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 ea~ier 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 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 significant effects (a) have been 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.
Date
Signature
Pdnted name
R:~CEQA~73PA99 IES.doc%~TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1 ~DEPTS~PLANNING~CEQA~74PA99 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 judsdiction over the projed
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific
plan, local coastal pmgrem, 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 Sigri'mant Udees Lass
SlgnY, cam ~u..~ 8sg~,'l',canl
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a. 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)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Lea Titmr;
Signif gall
Imp~cl
3o GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project?
~a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the dsk of loss. injury, or death
I 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?
Polentxally
Impacl
S~m~r~:mm
~mpmm~
,/
Be located on expansive soil, as definecl in Tab!e 1801-B
of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial
dsks to life or properb/?
Have soil incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or altamatjve waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste
water?
4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
je
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 Iowedng 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 fie course of a
stream or dver. in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
Substantially altar the existing drainage pattam 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?
Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Place housing with=.n a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a fede,-al Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
Place within a 100-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?
LNs'rh~n
R:~CEQA~273PA99 iES.dOC\\TEMEC_FS101~VOLl~DEPTS~PLANNING~CEQA~.74PA99 IES.do~
4
AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
I
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 recaptors to substantial poliutant
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 risks?
Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersentions) 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 altamative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks?
Unless
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
~ end Suppolling Informal:on Sources
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%2,73PA99 IES.doc%~TEMEC_FSI 01 \VOLt ~DEPTS~PLANNING~CEQA%2.74PA99 IES.doc
5
PntenllBIItt
Significant Unless
Im~
Impact
local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish aria
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 Califomia
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, 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
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?
~/
8. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
~ end sup~xa.u .,b,.~k=, So~m
Result in the loss of availability of a known m~neral
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?
~nd
,/
9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
lestms end Suppo~ng In/WTnahon Sources
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?
Poeentially
$ignirlcenl
R:%CEQA%273PA99 IES.doc~TEMEC_FS101\VOL1%DEPTStPLANNING%CEQA~274PA99 IES.doC
6
de
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hn~:~rdous materials, substances, or acutely
h=~=rdous 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 dsk or toss,
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:
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 substan'.;dl 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 pdvate airstrip, would
the project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
Lee11111~.
./
,/
,/'
R:%C;EQA%273PAg9 IES.doc%%TEMEC_FS101~VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING~CEQA%274PA99 IES.doc
7
I11. PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or
altered Govemrnent sePtices 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 faciliUes, 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?
Other public facilities?
-I
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 ex;sting 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 prcvider'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%2.73PA99 IES.doc%%TEMEC_FS101%VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING~CEQA~74PA99 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?
p~ed~e~
~eeqx~ted
,/
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 amhaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.57
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?
Mitigation 81ntfici~t
keoqxxmted ImDec~
,f
,/
,f
,/
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
environment?
R:\CEQA~.73PA99 IES.dOC%~TEMEC_FS101%VOL1~DEPTS%PLANNING~CEQA~74PA99 IES.deC
9
t
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 spedes, cause a fish or wildlife population
to drop below serf-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal community, reduce the number of
resffict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important examples of the major pedods 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?
Comments:
The proposed Development Agreement does not approve any specific land use changes. The agreement only
indicates that an appropdata change will be considered by the City at some later data on approximately 37.4
acres in exchange for resolving a disagreement between Eli Lilly and the City of Temecula. The Agreement
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 pdor to their approval.
Because the agreement is process rather than result oriented, it is not possible to evaluate what the future land
use changes might be. Because of the result is highly speculative, no detailed analysis is possible. Detailed
environmental review will be performed and approved by the Lead Agency pdor to the approval of any future
General Plan Land Use or Zoning Map changes.
R:~CEQA%273PA99 IES,doc~TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1%DEPTS~LANNING~CEQA%274PA99 IES.doc
10
ITEM #4
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
September 29, 1999
Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan)
Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 2943'1)
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;
ADOPT Resolution No. 99- appmving 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- approving 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.
PROJECT STATUS
The project was set for headng before the Planning Commission on September 15, 1999. However,
the applicant requested and was granted a continuance to a special meeting of the Planning
Commission on September 29, 1999. In the interim, staff met with the applicant and his
development team to discuss the conditions of approval, the project exhibits, the terms of the
F:%E)EPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~.84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99.,doc
1
Development Agreement, and the text changes to the Specific Plan Amendment, Zoning Ordinance
and Addendum to the EIR.
As a result of these meetings, the following issues were resolved to the satisfaction of staff and the
applicant:
VestinQ Map: Additional language was inserted in the Development Agreement allowing
for the complete reconstructjon of buildings for a pedod of 25 years in the event of casualty
damage. This language removes bhe need for a vesting map, and the tentative parcel map
is recommended for approval.
TCSD: The Temecula Community Services Distdct shall maintain the medians and traffic
circles in Campanula Way.
Sianalization: The applicant has accepted the condition to install a traffic signal at the main
entry intersection to the Villages from Campanula Way for the safety of pedestrians. The
applicant has accepted the condition to install a traffic signal at the intersection of De Portola
Road and Margarita Road prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for the
project.
Access Points and Turnina Movements: The applicant has accepted the condition that
access points and turning movements from all parcels within Tentative Parcel Map No.
29431 are subject to review and approval based upon future development plans and traffic
studies.
Addendum to EIR: The text of the Addendum has been reviewed by staff and
recommended for certification and adoption.
Specific Plan Amendment: The text of the Specific Plan Amendment has been reviewed
by staff and recommended for approval as conditioned.
Zoning Ordinance: The text of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment has been reviewed by
staff and recommended for approval.
Development Aareement: The Deal Points of the Development Agreement entitled
"Villages at Paseo del Sol" have been reviewed by staff and recommended for approval as
conditioned.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant proposes to construct Home Depors 131,848 square foot building (with garden
center) in combination with an additional 276,243 square feet of commercial buildings that form
"retail villages." This combination of commercial uses provides an opportunity to attract a large
number of consumers to the site, and to offer reasons to linger and enjoy a variety of shopping,
dining, exercise and social activities. While not employing all the elements of the City's Village
Center Design Guidelines, the project has made major efforts to odent the project toward a
redesigned and reconfigured Campanula Way that is more inviting to pedestrians and bicycles.
Two traffic circles and sections of on-street parallel parking are proposed as traffic calming
devices. Transit access is provided by a bus turnout near the plaza area, and a bicycle lane is
proposed. These design elements encourage the pedestrian linkage between this commercial
development and the multi-family residential proposed directly across Campanula.
The focal point for the retail villages is the plaza area, where building siting and configuration,
architectural elements and fixture features, and specificity of uses are designed to attract
pedestrian activity. The applicant has provided vignettes that illustrate the style and amenities
F:%D.EPTS%PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
2
that are detailed within the Villages at Paseo del Sol Design Manual. The Design Manual will be
reviewed and approved by the Planning Manager. Subsequent construction at the site beyond
the Home Depot building shall require Administrative Development Plan applications and
approvals in confermance with the approved Design Manual.
Unresolved Issues
There are four areas of concern where staff and the applicant could not reach agreement:
1)
2)
3)
4)
The amount and appearance of permanent outdoor display area.
The occurrence, duration and appearance of temporary seasonal sales.
Architectural enhancement to the Home Depot building.
The proposed landscape concept for the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan.
Outdoor Display
The project has been conditioned by staff for a maximum of 2,300 square feet of permanent
outdoor display of finished product, similar to other home improvement stores within the City.
Home Depot desires, and has shown on their plans, four separate areas totaling 2500 square
feet. Additionally, Home Depot has proposed two scenarios for their building, one with a Tool
Rental Center and one without. If the Tool Rental Center is constructed, the front elevation wall
will be broken up with a "pop out" portion, between the Indoor Lumber porte cochere and the
main entry. This area would have columns that extend beyond the building wall by 12 inches
and replace the main outdoor display area proposed at this location. However, should the Tool
Center not be constructed, this wall will be a long expanse with display area. The applicant has
agreed to add trelliswork over this outdoor display area and the project is so conditioned. Should
the Tool Center be constructed, Home Depot still wishes to have 2,500 square feet of display,
without proposing another location at this time. Staff has conditioned the project to comply with
locations as shown on exhibits on file with the department, and to submit suitable, alternate
locations for review and approval by the Planning Manager prior to their use.
Seasonal Sales
Staff has asked the applicant to intemalize the 7,650 square feet proposed for seasonal sales,
similar to other home improvement stores within the City. However, the applicant located this
area within the parking lot in front of the garden center. Home Depot's Statement of Operations
indicates that they intend to use the Seasonal Sales Area up to three (3) times per year for a
period of 45 days each, Christmas tree sales start at the end of November, and spring foliage
start around the end of March. They propose temporary, portable fencing for security reasons.
The City's Development Code allows Christmas tree sales lots in the City from NOvember 1=
through December 31't. Christmas tree lots and other seasonal sales are permitted by
Temporary Use Permit and the entire project has been conditioned to follow Code, Home Depot
wishes to be exempted from applying for a TUP for each event because their seasonal sales
displays are ongoing, year after year.
Elevations
Staff has asked the applicant to internalize the downspouts on the rear elevation. Due to the
location of the Home Depot building, the rear elevation will be visible from adjacent residential
homes, the park site and Campanula Way. Consistent with other developments in the City, staff has
conditioned the applicant to revise his plans. The applicant feels that he has addressed the concern
voiced by staff and Commissioners by berming, providing a screen wall and landscaping at the rear
of Home Depot. The berm height is not noted on the cross-sections shown on Exhibit "F"
(Monument Signage Plan), but the applicant indicated that the berm proposed is two to three
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99,.doc
3
feet high. The applicant is conditioned to revise Exhibit "F" to show a berm height dimensioned at
five to seven feet measured from the grade of the loading area.
Landscape Concept
The applicant is proposing that the ten foot (10') wide perimeter planters required within the Paloma
del Sol Specific 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 spedtic plan text to allow his design. The project has been conditjoned to add extensive
tuff mounding, shrubs and grouped trees along State Highway 79 South to screen the vehicle
parking spaces fronting the highway. However, staff believes that the change to the specific plan
landscape concept is unnecessary.
Corrections to the Staff Report of September 15, 1999
Signage
Staff incorrectly stated that Home Depot's proposed signage was consistent with the sign program
for the existing Lucky center. Upon closer review, the staff found that the Lucky center is
conditioned for wall signs no larger than four (4) feet for capital letters and thirty (30) inches for
lower case letters. Furthermore, signage length is limited to 75% of the store frontage.
The Home Depot building is proposed to have main signage at the front entry, with two additional
specialty signs for the indoor lumber yard and the nursery. Signage is comprised of all capital
letters, either at five or two feet in height, all totaling 549 square feet. The length of all three signs
combined is 100.5 lineal feet. With a building frontage of 418 lineal feet, the proposed signage
length falls below the 75% limitation. They also propose signage with four foot (4') illuminated
channel letters along the north and east elevations. Staff concurs with the applicent that; given the
size of the Home Depot building, neady twice the length of Lucky's, their sign proposal is
appropriate. Staff believes that the elevations of the building, showing the proposed signage,
supports that statement.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
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. Sinca 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 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 traffic circles.
The Addendum 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. 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 concerns regarding the project have been adequately addressed.
F:\D_EPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
4
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
serious 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 large, for access through, or use of, property within the
proposed land division. The proposal as designed and cenditioned 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
The map and development plan as proposed, conforms to the logicel 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.
The design of the proposed land divisior, ,~r proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably 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 site is surrounded by development and
is an in~ll 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.
F:\qEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99,pc revised 9-29-99..doc
5
Attachments:
PC Resolution approving Planning Application No. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) - Blue
Page 7
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 11
PC Resolution approving Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No.
29431) - Blue Page 12
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 16
PC Resolution recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment
No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 - Blue Page 17
Exhibit A: Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219, dated September 21, 1999 - (Under
Separate Cover)
Exhibit B: Zoning Ordinance Amendment, dated September 21, 1999 - (Under Separate
Cover
Exhibit C: Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 23
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 24
Exhibit A: Villages as Paseo del Sol Development Agreement, dated September 20, 1999
- (Under Separate Cover)
Exhibit B: Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 31
PC Resolution recommending certification and adoption of Addendum No. 3 to
Environmental Impact Report No. 235 for Specific Plan No. 219 - Blue Page 32
Exhibit A: Addendum No. 3 to EIR No. 235, dated September 21, 1999 - (Under Separate
Cover)
6. PC Staff Report dated September 15, 1999 - Blue Page 37
Informational Exhibit - Presentation Brochure from del Sol Investments, LLC, dated
September 21, 1999 (Under Separate Cover)
Exhibits - Blue Page 39
I-1 Home Depot Outdoor Display Plan
M Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431 (Revised September 21, 1999)
F:\D, EPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~84pa99.pC revised 9-29-99..doc
6
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
APPROVING PA99-0284 DEVELOPMENT PLAN
F:\~EPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
7
ATTACHMENT NO. I
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISS:ON OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION 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 137,395 SQUARE FEET OF
VILLAGE SHOPPING SPACE ON 23.74 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, and September 29, 1999, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by
law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either
in support or in opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. PA99-0284;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above redtations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by
reference.
Section 2. Findinos. The Planning Commission, in approving 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 Commerdal, 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
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
F:\QEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
8
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 conjuncfion 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. 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 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. 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 evaluatjon 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 overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to 5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit
difference), and the recenfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100~foot major
street section to a 78-foot right-of-way with traffic circles.
The Addendum 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. Staff acknowledges
the overriding consideration with regards to air quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board
of Supervisors dudng the original certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Staff
concludes that environmental cencems regarding the project have been adequately addressed.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves
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 Home Depot
Store, a 7,000 square foot automotive supply store, and 137,395 square feet of village shopping
space on 23.74 acres, located north of State Highway 79 South, south of Campanula Way, west
of Meadows Parkway and east of Margadta Road, and known as Assessors Parcel Nos. 950-020-
044 and 950-870-006 subject to the project specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached
hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference.
F:\D, EPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRFT~84pa99,pC revised 9-29-99..doc
9
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 29th 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 special meeting thereof, held on the 29th day of
September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
F:\DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
10
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PA99-0284 DEVELOPMENT PLAN
F:\D~EPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRP'F~.84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
11
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Revised by Staff
Planning Application No. PA99-0284 - Development Plan
Project Description:
The design, construction and operation of 276243 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.
DIF Category:
Home Depot - Retail Commercial
Others - Various, to be determined with the submittal of
Administrative Development Plans
Assessor's Parcel Nos.
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
950-020-044 and 950-870-006
September 28, 1999
September 28, 2001
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project by the City Council
The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of
Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file
the Notice of Determination with a DeMinimus Finding for the Mitigated or Negative
Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code
of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour pedod the applicant has
not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division the check as
required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of
condition (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)).
General Requirements
The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to
indemni~, 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 notlty the both the applicant and landowner of any
claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate
\\TEMEC FS101WOL1\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~284pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc,doc.doc
1
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.
This approval shall take effect only after the effective date of Planning Application No. PA99-
0285 (Specific Plan Amendment No. 7) by the City of Temecula City Council.
The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with all measures recommended by the
Traffic Study dated September 7, 1999, by Wilbur Smith Associates, which have been
incorporated and conditioned to be incorporated into the project. A written report shall
be submitted to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
summarizing the obligations of the developer and how the obligations have been met,
prior to the issuance of permits.
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 Department - Planning Division.
All mechanical and roof equipment shall be screened from public view by architectural
features integrated into the design of the structure.
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 Specific Plan guidelines, and
these Conditions of Approval, including the following:
Details of architectural style and design amenities as depicted in the "Village
Vignettes" on file with the Community Development Deparrnent - 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,
seating areas, benches, tables, chairs, shade structures, awnings, plaza lamps,
hanging plants, trash receptacles, fountains and other water features, art,
sculptures, bollards, enhanced paving areas, amhways, gateways, gazebos, outdoor
vendor carts, heaters, fans, roisters and clocks.
9. To ensure compliance with the Design Manual, an Administrative Development Plan
application shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Manager for all buildings
with uses permitted at the site excepting the 131,848 square foot Home Depot building,
which shall be approved by this application. Uses that are permitted by conditional use
permit shall require the application for a CUP in accordance with the City's Development
Code.
\\TE_MEC_FS101~VOLl\DEFTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc.doc.doc 2
10.
A maximum area of 2,300 square feet of outdoor finished product display shall be allowed
at the project site, in accordance with revised Exhibit "1-1" - Home Depot Outdoor Display
Plan. A re-submittal of this exhibit is required to modif~ the !ocation of outdoor display, for
review and approval by the Planning Manager.
11.
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.
12.
Each and every temporary use of exterior area for retail sales, including seasonal sales,
shall require a Temporary Use Permit, in accordance with the City's Development Code.
13.
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.
Building "F" (Home Depot)
14.
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
bring the landscaping into confermance with the approved landscape plan. The continued
maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any
successors in interest.
15.
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.
In the event that the Tool Center is not constructed, the applicant shall submit for
review and approval by the Planning Manager, a revised elevation showing
trelliswork along the front wall, over the permitted outdoor product display area
between the Indoor Lumber porte cochere and the main building entrance.
16.
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 Department - Planning Division. Any
deviation from the approved colors and materials shall require approval of the Planning
Manager.
Material Color
Building walls, man doors
Towers, entry, canopies, porte cochere
Wainscot, Columns, covers
Soffits
Cornice
Signs, trusses
Stone veneer
ICI Paint Co, #548 "Beachcomber"
ICI Paint Co. #565 "Woodwind"
ICI Paint Co. #-462 "Western Trail"
ICI Paint Co. #685 "Grey Mountain"
ICI Paint Co. #583 "Grey Hearth"
ICI Paint Co. #4208/9200 "Safety Orange"
Eraser Tile Co. #574 "Autumn Lilac"
\\TEMEC_FS101~VOL1\DEpTS\pLANNING~STAFFRPT~84pa99,COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc.doc.doc
3
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
17.
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapt,,r 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal
Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriatc f=e set forth in that ordinance or by
providing documented evidence that the fees have alreGdy been paid.
18.
The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided
by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and return one signed
set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files.
19.
The applicant shall revise Exhibits "D, E, F, G, H, I, I-1, J, K, and L", (Site Plan, Grading
Plan, Monument Signage, Home Depot Elevations, Home Depot Signage, Home Depot
Floor Plan, Home Depot Landscape Plan, Color and Matedal 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 appreved Exhibit "G" (Color and
Materials Board) and of the colored version of approved Exhibit "F', the colored architectural
elevations to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files. All
labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be readable on the'
photographic prints.
The applicant shall correct plan legends, where applicable, to reflect accurately the
gross and net acreage, the gross and net square footage, and the percentage to
total gross acreage of landscape and hardscape.
b. The applicant shall add the height of berms to all applicable exhibits.
The applicant shall revise Exhibit "F" to show a berm height of five (5) to seven (7)
feet measured from the grade of the loading area.
The applicant shall revise Exhibit "1-1" decreasing the allowable area of outdoor
product display to a maximum of 2,300 square feet.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
20. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecuia 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 approved 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 rear 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.
\\TE~MEC_FS101~VOL1\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRpT~284pa99.COA. DEVpLAN revised for pc.doc.doc
4
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 recon~gured and
enlarged to install plantings that make an entry statement and complement entry
signage.
Extensive tuff mounding, shrubs and grouped trees shall be provided along State
Highway 79 South to screen vehicle parking spaces fronting the highway.
g. 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).
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
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.
25.
Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to guarantee
the maintenance of the plantings, in accordance with the approved construction landscape
and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Community Development Department - Planning
Division for one year from final certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping
and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Planning
Manager, the bond shall be released.
26.
Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently
affixed re~ectodzed sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying
the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square
inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum
height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or
centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground,
or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-
street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously
stating the following:
\\TE_MEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS',PLANNING\STAFFRpT~84pa99.COA-DEVpLAN revised for pc.doc.doc
5
"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 pdor 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 predse grading, including all on-site flat work and
improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works pdor to
commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way.
30. 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.
31. 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.
32. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Califomia Department of Transportation
prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State right-of-
way.
33. 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
Caltrans dated October 13, 1995 shall be amended.
34. 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 ddveway on Highway 79 South or as approved by
the Director of Public Works.
35. The vehicular movement for the following locations shall be restricted as follows:
a. Highway 79 South at the easterly access to the site shall be restricted to a dght
in/right out movement subject to approval by Caltrans. This access restriction 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/right out movement.
Campanula Way along the frontage of Parcel 2 (westerly) access to the site shall be
restricted to right in/dght out movement.
\\TE_MEC_FS101~VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc.doc.doc
6
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 gra,.;ing plan shall include all necessary
erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and pdvate property.
37. The Developer shall post secudty and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and
erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject
to approval by the Department of Public Works.
38. A Soil Report shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and submitted to the
Director 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 identity all existing or proposed public or private
drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and
identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect
the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgreding or upsizing of downstream facilities,'
including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required
improvements, shall be provided by the Developer.
40. 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 Public Works, the Developer shall receive wdtten
clearance from the following agencies:
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 property.
43. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department
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 propedies 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. Unless otherwise approved on the tentative parcel map, all improvement plans and/or
precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of Temecula Standards subject to
approval by the Director 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
accordance with Ordinance 461.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\DEPTS%PLANNING',STAFFRPT~.84pa99.COA-DEVpLAN revised for pc.dQc.doc
7
47.
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 centerline 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.
The Developer shall design and post securities for the following public improvements to City
of Temecula Public Works standards unless otherwise noted on the approved development
plan. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Director 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 as required to serve this development).
Meadows Parkway (Major Highway Standards - 100' R/W) from Highway 79 South
to Campanula Way
i)
Improve roadway to include installation of half-width street improvements,
paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing
and stdping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), and raised
landscaped median.
ii)
The raised landscaped median shall be continuous with an opening at the
intersection of Meadows Parkway and Campanula Way or as approved by
the Director of Public Works upon submittal of future development plans.
Campanula Way (Principal Collector Street Standards - 78' PAN) from De Portola
Road to Meadows Parkway
i) Additional right-of-way dedication for roundabouts
ii)
Improve roadway to include dedication of half-width street right-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).
iii)
The raised landscape median shall be continuous with the exception of
median breaks and areas where on-street parking is permitted as shown on
the approved Tentative Parcel Map.
d. Traffic signals at the following intersections:
i)
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 or as otherwise allowed in the Public Facilities
Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement dated July 14, 1998.
\\T~MEC_FS101WOL1\DEPTS%PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc.doc.doc
8
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.
Margadta 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 or as otherwise allowed in the Public Facilities
Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement dated July 14, 1998.
All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement
transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections.
48. The Developer shall design and post securities for the following public improvements in
conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Director of
Public Works.
a. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: pavement, curb and
gutter, medians, sidewalks, ddve 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. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground
49. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil or Traffic
Engineer and reviewed by the Director of Public Works for any street closure and detour or
other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works.
50. A Signing and Stdping Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved
by the Department of Public Works for the following madways:
a. Campanula Way
b. Meadows Parkway between Highway 79 South and Campanula Way
c. De Portola Road associated with signal improvements at the intersection of
Margarita Road and De Portola Road
51. Bus bays will be designed at all existing and proposed bus stops as directed by Riverside
Transit Agency and 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 Public Works for dedication to the City where sidewalks meander through
private property.
53. All building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with
the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer
shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
54. The Developer shall 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 as otherwise modified in the Villages @ Paseo
Del Sol Development Agreement.
\\TEMEC_FS101~VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'F~84pa99.COA*DEVPLAN revised for pc.doc.doc
9
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
57. Pdor to issuance of the FIRST Certificate of Occupancy
a. The Developer shall install a traffic signal at the fc!!owing intersections in accordance
with City Standards:
1) Highway 79 South and the main access to the site to include signal
interconnect on Highway 79 South between Meadows Parkway and
Margarita Road.
2) Highway 79 South and Meadows Parkway
3) Campanula Way and Main Access to the site between Parcels 2 and 3 to
include signal interconned on Campanula Way between Meadows Parkway
and Main Access to the site.
4) Margadta Road and De Portola Road with sufficient improvements to support
impacts from this development within the existing right-of-way.
58. Upon the first Certificate of Occupancy for Parcel 2, 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/right out vehicular movement onto Highway 79
South from the eastedy driveway.
59. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
a. Rancho California Water District
b. Eastern Municipal Water District
c. Department of Public Works
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 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 Director of Public Works.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
62.
Comply with applicable provisions of the 1998 edition of the California Building, Plumbing
and Mechanical Codes; 1998 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title
24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code.
63.
Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance
with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other outdoor
lighting shall be shown on electricel 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.
64.
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to
the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School
Mitigation Fees.
65.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals pdor to commencement of any construction
work.
66. The Occupancy classification for the proposed Home Depot buildings will be M/S-1 and the
occupancy classification of the Village Center buildings will be AIB/M. The proper
\\TE. MEC_FS101~VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRpT~284pa99.COA-DEVpLAN revised for pc.doc.doc 10
classifications and construction types for each building will be addressed at time of plan
submittals and plan check by the Department of Building and Safety
67. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
68.
All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
69, Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building.
70. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
71, Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
72.
Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of extedor lighting,
fire alarm systems.
73,
Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the <. 99~.
1998 edition of the California Building Code, Appendix 29.
74. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system,
75.
Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans
submitted for plan review.
76.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic
and mechanical plan for plan review.
77.
Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer
engineer are required for plan review submittal.
78. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
79.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of any
building construction.
80.
Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls, if not on the approved
building plans, will require separate approvals and permits.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
The following are the Fire Department Conditions of Approval for this project. All questions
regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau.
81.
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.
82. 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-I. The
developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 2000 GPM at
20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 1850 GPM for a
total fire flow of 3850 GPM with a 2 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted
\\TE_MEC_FS101~VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRpT~284pa99.COA-DEVpLAN revised for pc.doc.doc 11
dudng ihe approval process to reflect changes in design, construc~on 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)
83.
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)
84.
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)
85.
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)
86.
If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection pdor
to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2)
87.
Pdor to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have
approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent reads
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)
88.
Pdor to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire
Department vehicle access reads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any
portion of an extedor wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all
weather surface designed for 80,000 Ibs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet.
( CFC sec 902)
89.
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)
90.
Prior to building construction, dead end mad 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)
91.
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 )
92. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water
system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to installation, Plans shall be:
signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature
block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards.
After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to
the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire
hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any
combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2
and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1 )
\\TE~MEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~84pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc.doc.doc 12
93.
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)
Pdor to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, all commerdal buildings shall
display street numbers in a prominent location on the street side of the building. The
numerals shall be minimum twelve (12) inches in height for buildings and six (6) inches for
suite identification on a contrasting background. In stdp centers, businesses shall post the
suite address on the rear door(s). (CFC 901.4.4)
95.
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)
96.
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 Underwdters Laboratory listed central station. Plans shall
be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to installation. (CFC Article 10)
97.
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be
provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be located
to the dght side of the main entrance door. The Knox-Box shall be supervised by the alarm
system. (CFC 902.4)
98.
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)
99.
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 spdnkler 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)
100.
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developer/applicant
shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the
storage of combustible liquids, fiammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from beth
the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau.(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3)
Special Conditions
101.
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.
\~TE.MEC_FS101\VOL1\DEFTS',PLANNING\STAFFRPT~.84pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc.doc.doc
13
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
General Comments:
102.
Prior to the installation of the arterial street lighting, the developer shall file an application
with the TCSD and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of said street
lighting into the respective TCSD maintenance program.
103. Landscape plans for the proposed raised medians and traffic circles shall be reviewed and
approved by the Director of Community Services.
104.
Installation of the landscape impmvementa within the medians and traffic circles shall
commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the TCSD Maintenance Superintendent
and monitored in accordance with the TCSD inspection process.
105. All perimeter landscaping and parkways within the commercial development shall be
maintained by the property owner.
Prior to Certificate of Occupancy:
106. The landscape improvements within the raised landscape medians and traffic circles shall
be completed to TCSD standards prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy.
OTHER AGENCIES
106. 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.
107. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California
Water Districts transmittal dated July 21, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
108. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in Eastern Information
Centers transmittal 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 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
\\TE, MEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~.84pa99.COA-DEVPLAN revised for pc,doc.doc
14
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99°
APPROVING PA99-0286
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING%STAFFRPT~284pa99,pC revised 9-29-99..doc
12
ATFACHMENT NO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING 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 PARKWAY, 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, and September 29, 1999, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by-
law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either
in support or in opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. PA99-0286;
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 heraby incorporated by
reference.
Section 2. Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving 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 designatjon 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
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.
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
F:\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
13
circulation. Future development plans for parcels within the project site will determine the suitability
and !ocation 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, wildlib or habitat on the project site, and the project will not
affect any fish, wildlib 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 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 Addendure No. 1 was certified 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 6,246 (an 82 dwelling unit
difference), and the recon~guration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-foot major
street section to a 784oot right-of-way with treffic circles.
The Addendum 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. 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 concerns regarding the project have been adequately addressed.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves
Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel 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 Margarita 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.
F:\D_EPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT%284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99,.doc
14
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 29th 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 special meeting thereof, held on the 29th day of
September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
F:\D_EPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT',284pa99,pc revised 9-29-99..doc
15
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PA99-0286 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431
F:\_DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
16
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Revised by Staff
Planning Application No. PA99-0286 - Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431
Project Description:
Assessor's Parcel No,:
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
The subdivision of 66.828 gross acres into seven (7) lots
950-020-042, -044 and 950-087-006
September 29, 1999
September 29, 1999
PLANNINGDIVISION
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 Dollars ($78.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination with a DeMinimus Finding for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration
required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations
Section 15075. tf 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.
The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to
indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own
selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or
instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees,
consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions, awards,
judgements, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek monetary
damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval
of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof. advisory agency, appeal board or
legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the
Planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner of any
claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate
fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all action the
City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense.
4. If Subdivision phasing is proposed, a Phasina plan shall be submitted to and approved by
the Planning Manager.
\\TE_MEC_FS101~VOL1\DEPTS'J:>LANNING\STAFFRPT~86pa99.COA*TENT MAP revision for pcl.doc 1
10.
11.
This approval shall take effect only af~er fie effective date of Planning Application No. PA99-
0285 (Specific Plan Amendment No. 7) by the City of Temecula City Council.
This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Plan
No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), Amendment No. 7.
Parcel 1 shall be required to provide a major community entry statement at the comer of
Meadows Parkway and State Highway 79 South and a minor project entry statement at the
corner of Campanula Way and Meadows Parkway in conformance with Specific Plan No.
219. These improvements, along with appropriate landscaping and streetscape, shall be
completed pdor to the first certificate of occupancy upon Parcels 2, 3 and 4.
The owner of Parcel 1 shall provide evidence that CC&Rs or another suitable instrument is
in place that guarantees the ongoing maintenance of landscaping at the site.
All projects within Parcels 2, 3, and 4 shall be subject to Development Agreement No. PA99-
0283. The balance of parcels covered by this map shall be subject to the Amendment and
Restatement of Development Agreement Paloma del Sol recorded February 18, 1993 and
as subsequently amended.
The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation
measures identified within EIR No. 235.
The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with all measures recommended by the
Traffic Study dated September 7, 1999, by Wilbur Smith Associates, which have been
incorporated and conditioned to be incorporated into the project. A written report shall
be submitted to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
summarizing the obligations of the developer and how the obligations have been met,
pdor to the issuance of permits.
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
12.
A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning
Division.
13.
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
14. 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 Addendum No. 3 to
\%TE_MEC_FS101 ~VOLI\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~286pa99,COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .doc 2
Environmental Impact Report No. 235 were prepared for this project and are
on file at the City of Temecula Community Development Department -
Planning Division.
3) 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
space, recreation areas, parking areas, pdvate roads, exterior of all buildings
and all landscaped and open areas including parkways.
2)
No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation,
association, property owner's group or similar entity or other equivalent
instrument has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually
owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the
common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment
power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority
to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of
the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which
shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling
units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance,
repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the
City for provisions required as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall
submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive
approval of, the city prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not
apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes.
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.16.C.1) of the Conditions of Approval of Planning
Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431)
requires the City to review and approve CC&Rs for the map.
b. Declarant acknowledges that the City has reviewed these CC&Rs
and that its review is limited to a determination of whether the
proposed CC&Rs properly implement the requirements of the
Conditions of Approval for the map. The City's consent to these
CC&Rs does not contain or imply any approval of the
appropdateness or legality of the other provisions of the CC&Rs,
including, without limitation, the use restrictions, private easements
and encroachments, private maintenance requirements, architecture
and landscape controls, assessments procedures, assessment
enforcement, resolution of disputes or procedural matters,
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~86pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .doc 3
In the event of a conflict between the Conditions of Approval of the
land use entitlements issued by the City for the map or federal, state
or local laws, ordinances, and resolutions and these CC&Rs, the
provisions of the Conditionc of Approval and federal, state or local
laws, ordinances, and regulations shall prevail, notwithstanding the
language of the CC&Rs.
These CC&Rs shall not be terminated, amended or otherwise
modified without the express written consent of the Planning
Manager of the City of Temecuia.
Consent of the City of Temecula
Condition No. 15.C.1) of the Conditions of Approval of Planning
Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431)
requires the City of Temecula to review and approve CC&Rs for the
map. 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 map. 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, private
easements and encroachments, pdvate maintenance requirements,
architecture and landscape controls, assessments, enforcement of
assessments, resolution of disputes or procedural matters. Subject
to the limitations set forth herein, the City consents to the CC&Rs.
Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager
Approved as to Form:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
15.
The Final Map shall delineate a westbound bus turnout located on the north side of
Campanula Way, as approved by the City Traffic Engineer and the Riverside Transit
Agency.
16.
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
17. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division:
a. 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 Eftdent 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:
\\TE_MEC_FS101\VOL1~DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT'C286pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .doc 4
1 ) Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of
submittal).
18.
19.
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).
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 prior to issuance of the any building permit.
c)
All landscaping excluding Temecula Community Services Distdct
(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 soften pedmoter walls adjacent to a public right-of-
way equal to sixty-six (66) feet or larger.
7) Plans for hardscaping for pedestrian trails within private common areas.
b=
Wall 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 corner lots.
2)
Wrought iron or decorative block and wrought iron combination to take
advantage of views for side and rear yards.
C=
Precise Grading Plans consistent with the approved rough grading plans including
all structural setback measurements.
Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the residential
subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted
with Planning Director approval.
All mechanicel and roof-mounted equipment within commerdal areas shall be screened from
public view by architectural features integrated into the design of the structure.
\\TE+MEC_FS101~VOL1\DEpTS\pLANNING~STAFFRP~286pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .don
5
Pdor to Issuance of Occupancy Permits
20.
If deemed necessary by the Planning Manager, the applicant shall provide additional
landscaping to effectively screen vadous components cf the project.
21.
All required landscape planting and irrigation shall 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
propedy constructed and in good working order.
22. Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots shall be completed for inspection.
23.
Private common area landscaping shall be completed for inspection pdor to issuance of the
first occupancy permit.
24.
Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to guarantee
the maintenance of the plantings within pdvate common areas for a period of one year, in
accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with
the Community Development Department - Planning Division for one year from final'
certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been
maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Planning Manager, the bond shall be released.
25.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed
by this permit.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
The Depaf[ment 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
26.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative parcel 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.
27.
A Grading Permit for either rough or predse grading shall be obtained from the Department
of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained
road right-of-way.
28.
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.
29.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Califomia Department of Transportation
prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State right-of-
way.
30.
Upon Caltrens approval of the proposed access opening onto Highway 79 South from the
easterly driveway, the existing Memorandum of Understanding between the City and
Caltrans dated October 13, 1995 shall be amended.
\~TE, MEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~86pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pcl.doc
6
31.
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.
32.
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 ddveway on Highway 79 South or as approved by
the Director of Public Works.
33. 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 dght
in/dght out movement subject to approval by Caltrans. This access restriction shall
be emphasized with a raised median to the satisfaction of the Department of Public
Works.
Meadows Parkway from Campanuia Way to De Portola Road shall be determined
upon submittal of future development plans.
De Portola Road along the frontage of Parcel 5 shall be determined upon submittal'
of future development plans.
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.
Campanula Way along the frontage of Parcel 3 (westerly) access to the site shall be
restricted to left in/right out movement.
Campanula Way along the frontage of Parcel 2 (westedy) access to the site shall be
restricted to dght in/dght out movement.
Prior to Approval of the Parcel 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:
34.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
b. Rancho California Water Distdct
c. Eastern Municipal Water District
d. City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau
e. Planning Department
f. Department of Public Works
g. Riverside County Health Department
h. Cable TV Franchise
i. Caltrans
\\TE~MEC_FS101\VOL1~DEpTS\pLANNING\STAFFRPT~86pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .doc
7
j. Community Services District
k. General Telephone
I. Southem California Edison Company
m. Southern California Gas Company
35.
The following public improvements shall be designed to City of Temecula Public Works
standards unless otherwise noted.
a. Highway 79 South (Urban Arterial Highway Standards - 134' RAN)
1)
Improve madway to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage
facilities, signing and striping, and utilities (including but not limited to water
and sewer as required to serve this development).
b. De Portola Road (Major Highway Standards ~ 100' R/VV)
1)
Improve roadway to include installation of half-width street improvements,
paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing
and stdping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), and raised
landscaped median.
2)
The raised landscaped median shall be continuous from Margadta 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' RRV) from Highway 79 South
to De Portola Road
1)
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.
2)
The raised landscaped median shall be continuous with an opening at the
intersection of Meadows Parkway and Campanula Way or as approved by
the Director of Public Works upon submittal of future development plans.
Campanula Way (Principal Collector Street Standards - 78' R/W) from De Portola
Road to Meadows Parkway
1 ) Additional right-of-way dedication for roundabouts
2)
Improve roadway 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).
3)
The raised landscape median shall be continuous with the exception of
median breaks and areas where on-street parking is permitted as shown on
the approved Tentative Parcel Map
\\TE. MEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRpT~286pa99. COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .doc
8
e. Traffic signals at the following intersections:
1)
Highway 79 South and the main access to the site to include signal
interconnect on Highway 79 South between Meadows Parkway and
Margadta Road.
2)
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 Fadlities Development Impact Fee for 50% of the ultimate cost
for the design and installation or as otherwise allowed in the Public Facilities
Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement dated July 14, 1998,
3)
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.
4)
Margadta 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 or as otherwise allowed in the Public Facilities
Development Impact Fee Reduction Agreement dated July 14, 1998.
All street improvement design shall provide adequate dght-of-way and pavement
transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections.
36.
Unless otherwise approved on the tentative parcel map, the following minimum cdteda shall
be observed in the design of the street improvement plans subject to approval by the
Director of Public Works:
Street centedine grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum
over A.C. paving.
b. Ddveways 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,
401, and 402.
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 centerline 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 centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and
adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility.
j. All utilities except electrical lines rated 33 kV of greater shall be provided
underground. Easements shall be provided as required where adequate right-of-
\\TEMEC_FS101~VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~286pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .doc 9
37.
38,
39,
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
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 mcjistered 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.
The existing alignment of Campanula Way shall be vacated.
Relinquish and waive right of access to and from the following roadways:
Meadows Parkway with the exception of one opening to Parcel 6 and one opening
to Parcol 7. Locations to be determined upon submittal of future development plans.
b. De Portola Road with the exception of two openings:
1)
One opening to Parcel 5. Location to be determined upon submittal of future
development plan.
2) One opening on Parcel 7 as approved on the Tentative Parcel Map.
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 appreved
on the Tentative Parcel Map.
Comer 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 or as approved by the Department of Public Works.
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,
Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of an
existing Assessment Distdct 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.
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid.
An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Parcel
Map to delineate identified environmental concems and shall be recorded with the map. A
copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval.
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,
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.
\~TE_MEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~286pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .doc
10
47. Bus bays will be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by Riverside
Transit Authority and approved by the Department of Public Works.
48,
Pdvate drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated
and noted on the final map.
49.
Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks
meander through pdvate property.
50,
An easement for a joint use ddveway and/or reciprocal ingress/egress shall be provided
prior to approval of the Parcel Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first.
51.
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 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."
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
52.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
b. Planning Department
c. Department of Public Works
d. Caltrans
53.
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 prior 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.
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 address all
soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered
structures and preliminary pavement sections.
55,
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 private property.
The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any
upgreding or upsizing of drainage fadlities 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.
~\TEMEC_FS101~VOL1\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~286pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .dec
11
56.
The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State W3ter 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.
57.
The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and
erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject
to approval by the Department of Public Works.
58.
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
59. Parcel Map shall be approved and recorded.
60.
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.
61.
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.
62.
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 or as otherwise modified in the Villages @
Paseo Del Sol Development Agreement.
Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy
63.
Upon the first Certificate 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 Margarita 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.
64.
Upon the first Certificate of Occupancy for Parcel 2, the existing Memorandum of
Understanding between the City and Caltrans dated October 13, 1995 shall be amended
to allow an access opening onto Highway 79 South from the easterly driveway.
65. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
\\TE_MEC_FS101\VOL1~DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~286pa99,COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 ,doc 12
a. Rancho California Water Distdct
b. Eastem Municipal Water District
c. Department of Public Works
66.
All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public
agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works.
67.
All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City
standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
68,
The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken due
to the construction operations of this project shall be repaired or removed and replaced to
the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
General Conditions:
69.
All perimeter landscape and parkway areas within the commercial development shall be
maintained by the property owner.
70.
Proposed landscape improvements within the raised medians and traffic circles shall be
installed in accordance with TCSD standards.
71.
Prior to the installation of artedal street lighting, the developer shall file an application with
the TCSD and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of said street lighting
into the respective TCSD maintenance program.
72.
Installation of the landscape improvements within the medians and traffic circles shall
commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the TCSD Maintenance Superintendent and
monitored in accordance with the TCSD inspection process.
Prior to approval of the Final Map:
73.
Landscape construction plans for the raised medians and traffic circle shall be reviewed and
approved by the Director of Community Services.
Prior to Certificate of Occupancy:
74.
The landscape improvements within the raised landscape medians and traffic circles shall
be completed to TCSD standards prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
Prior to the Issuance of a Building Permit
75.
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to
the Planning Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation fees.
\\T~MEC_FS101~VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~86pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .doc
13
OTHER AGENCIES
76.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated July 20, 1999, a copy of which is
attached.
77.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Eastern Municipal
Water Distdct's transmittal dated July 19, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
78.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California
Water District's transmittal dated, a copy of which is attached.
79.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in Eastem Information
Center's transmittal 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 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 Signature
\\TE~MEC_FS101~VOL1\DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~286pa99.COA-TENT MAP revision for pc1 .doc
14
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 99-
AMENDING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 (PA99-0285)
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
17
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 8; TO REALIGN AND
RECONFIGURE CAMPANULA WAY BETWEEN DE PORTOLA
ROAD AND MEADOWS PARKWAY; THE REALLOCATION OF
ACREAGE WITHIN PLANNING AREAS 1 AND 6; 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 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, WITH A
MAXIMUM OF 240 DWELLING UNITS), RESULTING IN AN
OVERALL REDUCTION OF UNITS FROM 590 TO 508 IN THESE
AREAS; THE PROVISION TO DEVELOP AN ACTIVE, PRIVATE,
GATED SENIOR COMMUNITY WITHIN PLANNING AREA 8; 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 PARIG~/AY
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, and September 29, 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 testih/either
in support or in opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headrig 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 approval 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 Sol), Amendment No. 7. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development.
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'F~.84pa99,pc revised 9-29-99..doc
18
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 proposa! 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
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.
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 wildlib or
their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not
affect any fish, wildlib or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an in~ll 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 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. 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 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 traffic circles.
The Addendum 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. 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 concerns regarding the project have been adequately addressed,.
F:\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPTt284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..d0c
19
Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED l. his 29th 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 29th day of
September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~284pa99,pc revised 9-29-99..dec
20
EXHIBIT A
AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO, 219
DATED SEPTEMBER 23, 1999
SUBMITtED UNDER SEPARATE COVER
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'T~284pa99,pc revised 9-29-99..doc
21
EXHIBIT B
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
DATED SEPTEMBER 21, 1999
(SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER)
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
22
EXHIBIT C
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
F:\E~EPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~284pa99.pC revised 9-29-99..doc
23
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA99-0285 - Specific Plan Amendment No. 7
Project Description:
To amend Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol) as follows: 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 I 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 pdvate recreation area; and
an update of Specific Plan Design Guidelines that incorporate the
village vignettes and the senior amenities.
Approval Date:
October 26, 1999
PLANNING DIVISION
Ten Calendar Days Prior to the City Council Hearing
The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
twelve (12) copies of a revised Specific Plan Amendment No. 7 and Zoning Ordinance that
includes corrections as required within these Conditions of Approval and as required by the
Planning Commission in their recommendation for approval.
General Requirements
The applicant and owner of the real properly 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 notity the both the applicant and landowner of any
claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate
fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all action the
City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense.
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~285pa99,COA-Spa.doc
1
The applicant shall comply with all undedying Conditions of Approval for Specific Plan No.
219 and its amendments unless superceded by these Conditions of Approval.
The text of Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 shall conform with Exhibit No. 3A,
"Paloma del Sol Specific Plan, Amendment No. 7" dated September 23, 1999, or as
amended by these conditions.
The text of Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 Zoning Standards shall conform with
Exhibit No. 3B, "Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Zone Ordinance, Amendment No. 7" dated
September 21, 1999, or as amended by these conditions.
Within Thirty (30) Days From the Second Reading of the Ordinance Approving the
Amendment
The applicant shall submit the amended Specific Plan text to the Community Development
Department - Planning Division.
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 Signature
F:~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'F~.85pa99.COA-spa.dOc
2
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PA99-0283
VILLAGES AT PASEO DEL SOL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'F~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
24
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
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 23.74 ACRES
LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF
CAMPANULA WAY, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST
OF MEADOWS PARKVVAY
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 Government Code of the State of Califomia 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 Califomia 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 Parkway ("Property") 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 public hearing, 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 notice of the need to exhaust
administrative remedies;
C. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the
Development Agreement on September 15, 1999 and on September 29, 1999, at which time the
F:\DEPTS\PL/~NNING\STAFFRP'F~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
25
Planning Commission heard and considered all of the written material and oral comments
presented to it on t.he 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 exiensive pdor environmental review:
A. 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. 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.
B. 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 reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula
Way from a lO0-foot major street section to a 78-foot right-of-way with traffic circles.
C. The Addendure 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. 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 concerns regarding the project have
been adequately addressed.
D. The proposed Development Agreement incorporates the provisions of the
City's General Plan, Specific 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 governing 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 propedy 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;
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 significant environmental effects
or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
C. Substantial changes have not ocourred with respect to the circumstances
under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous FEIR due
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~284pa99.pC revised 9-29-99..doc
26
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 Addendums.
E. There is no new information since the certification of the previous FEIR and
Addendures which would show or tend to show that significant effects previously examined might
be substantially more severe than shown in the FEIR and Addendures.
F. There is no new information since the certification 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
considerably different from those analyzed in the previous FEIR and Addendums would
substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment.
Section 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula further finds,
determines and declares that:
A. 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:
(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 Commerdal for the Property which provide for commerdal 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 Specific Plan 219 in which
the Property is located in that:
(1) The Development Agreement provides for commercial development
pursuant to and in conformanca with the terms of Specific Plan 219;
(2) The specific land uses proposed for the Project as set forth in the
Development Agreement are specifically allowed by Specific Plan No. 219;
(3) The Development Agreement provides for the actual construction of
the public improvements as described in Specific Plan 219;
(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 alternatives;
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'F~84pa99,pc revised 9-29-99..doc
27
C. The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience,
general we!fare, 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 welfare 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 hearings 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 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 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 herein 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.
F:\D_EFTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
28
Section 7. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 29th 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 special meeting thereof, held on the 29th day of
September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'D2.84pa99.pC revised 9-29-99..doc
29
EXHIBIT A
VILLAGES AT PASEO DEL SOL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
DATED SEPTEMBER 20, 1999
(SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER)
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99, .doc
30
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT%284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
31
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA99-0283 - Development Agreement
Project Description: The request for approval of a Development Agreement
between the City and del Sol Investment Co., LLC, a
California limited liability company
PLANNINGDIVISION
Ten Calendar Days Prior to the City Council Hearing
The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
twelve (12) copies of a revised Development Agreement that includes corrections as
required within these Conditions of Approval and as required by the Planning Commission
in their recommendation for approval.
The document shall correctly refer to Title 17, as previously requested by the City
Attorney.
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 Signature
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~283pa99.COA-da.doc
1
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION AND ADOPTION OF ADDENDUM NO. 3
TO EIR NO. 235 FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'I~284pa99.pC revised 9-2~-99..doc
32
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
PC RESOLUTION NO. 9 -
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 prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Amendment No. 7 and Addendure No.
3 on September 15, 1999, and September 29, 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 Amendment No. 7 and
Addendum No. 3;
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
Addendum 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 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 serious 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.
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
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~84pa99,pC revised 9-29-99..doc
33
circulation. Future development plans for parcels within the project site wilt determine the suitability
and location of ail 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 proDosed 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 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. 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. 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 reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula Way from a 100-foot major
street section to a 78-foot right-of-way with traffic circles.
The Addendum 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. 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 concerns regarding the project have been adequately addressed.
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~,84pa99,pc revised 9-29-99..doc
34
Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 29th 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 29th day of
September, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
35
EXHIBIT A
ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO ENVIROMENTMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO 235
DATED SEPTEMBER 21, 1999
(SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER)
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~,84pa99,pc revised 9-29-99..doc
36
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
PC STAFF REPORT DATED
SEPTEMBER 15, 1999
(UNDER SEPARATE COVER)
F:\[~EPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
37
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
September 15, 1999
Pinning 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. 9~.__ 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%PLANNING%STAFFRP'I'~284pa,.qg.pC.dO¢
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, · 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 Specir~ Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), amending the following: land
uses within Planning Areas 1,6 and 8; the realignment and reoonfiguration of Campanula
Way between De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway; the reallocation of acreage within
Planning Area I 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 California 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: Specific Plan No. 219
West: VL Very Low Density Residential, PO Professional Office, and
HT Highway Tourist Commercial
PROPOSED ZONING: 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 Space
EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant
SURROUNDINGLAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Residential
Commercial (Jack-in-the-Box, Texaco), vacant
Vacant and residential
Commercial (Lucky's, Siggy's Restaurant)
F:~)EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.84pa99.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 acj'es 713,513 sq.ft. (69%)
Parking Required:
Parking Provided:
730 vehicular, 30 handicapped, 37 bicycle, 7 motorcycle
1,094 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 Council 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 ex~hibits were 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 concam. 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 1 of the Paloma del
Sol Specific Plan. He offers to combine a 131,848 square foot Home Depot (including a garden
canter) 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 Ovaday
that is placed on the site by the Citys 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~.pc.doc
3
The applicant submitted the Design 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 Desian
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 madway with a 100-fcot right-of*way width. The
applicant is proposing two trafrc drcles on Campanula, one near the courtyard, and the other behind
Home Depot. The traffic circles mprasent 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 mute and a combination of stdped and raised
landscaped medians.
Delivery trucks are encouraged to use Meadows Parkway and Campanula Way to access the rear
loading docks. Customer ac~_ess 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 store. The project is conditioned for a maximum area of 2,300 square feet of outdoor
finished product display, similar to other appmved 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 intemalized, 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 pmpedy screened and approved by the Planning Manager.
Architecture, Color and Materials
The Home Depot elevations represent the fourth revision to these plans. The vinyl coated steel wire
mesh originally proposed to screen the garden center has been replaced with decorative wrought
iron, and the rear (nodh) 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 intemalized and that trellises be added over the outdoor product display area. Both
requests were not implemented.
As stated previously, the applicant shall be conditioned to provide a Design Manual that addresses
the amhitectura, color and materials, and signage to be used throughout the balance of the project.
The Design Manual shall be reviewed and appmved by the Planning Manager if it is consistent with
the City's' Design Guidelines and the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan 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%264pagg,pc.doc
4
materials from the main building, and are six feet (6') in height.
The Home Depot building is proposed to have a main sign at the front. with two additional specialty
signs for the indoor lumber yard and the nursery. They also propose signage with four foot (4')
illuminated channel letters along the north and east elevations.
The proposal is consistent with the signage program for the existing Lucky center and the City's Sign
Ordinance. Further, the Deign Manual for the Village at Paseo del Sol shall determine spedtic sign
criteda for the balance of the project.
LandscapinQ
The applicant is proposing that the ten foot (10') wide perimeter planters required within the Paloma
del Sol Specific Plan be reduced to six foot (6') wide planters. He believes that his pmjeot provides
more planter area and trees overall by interapereing 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') barre. 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 rocenfigure 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 fDdures
in these areas.
Tentative Parcel MaD No. 29431
The map proposed forthis 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 ac-c.n_rdance with the Subdivision Map Act. Furthermore,
the exhibit submitted on September 8, 1999 remains inadequate. Conditions of approval from the
Public Works Depadment require that the applicant resubmit a revised exhibit for Tentative Parcel
Map No. 29431 pdor to the City 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 tumout on the south side of Campanula, and has been conditioned to locate and include a
westbound bus turnout prior 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.
Soecific Plan Amendment No. 7
The text for Amendment No. 7 to the Paloma del Sol Specific Plan and the Zoning Ordinance
Amendment require 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%PLANNING%STAFFRPTL~84pagg.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, staff is providing the Commission with a List of Changes
which summarizes each of the amendments to the specific plan proposed by the applicant, and
stars recommendation regarding each amendment. The applicant shall be conditioned to resubmit
Spedtic Plan Amendment No. 7 with the corrections needed to the text, including all
recommendations by the Commission, before the text is distributed to the City Council for their
consideration.
Paloma del Sol
Specific Plan No. 219 Amendment No. 7
List of Chances~
3 DensiN categories - Medium.
Medium-High, and Very High
Campanula Way - a 100 ft
ROW between De Portola Road
and Meadows Parkway.
On-site roads include: Highway
79 South (142' ROW), Artedals
(110' ROW), Majors (100'
ROW). Secondades (88 ROW),
Collectors (66' ROW), Local
Streets (60 ROW), and
Gateway Roads (108' ROW)
Planning Area 6 -
Archaeological site mitigation
program is required to be
identified and possibly
completed
Planning Area 6 - pdvate
recreation facilities include
meeting rooms, wet bars, and
kitchen facilities
4 Density cateoodes - Medium,
Medium-High, High (proposed for
Planning Area 6A), and Very High
PlanninQ Area I is split into Planning
Areas 1 (a) and 1 (b)
Campanula Way - Use of traffic
circles and on-street parking on 78 ft
ROW between De Podola 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)
Approval
Approval
Approval includes
a 122 ft. ROW
width at traffic
circles
Approval includes
a 122 ft. ROW
width at traffic
drdes
(Language added) Commercial
frontaQe landscalDing- extensive turf
mounding, grouped trees and
shrubs to allow excellent visibility of
village center and suppealing retail
villages
Planning Area 6 - No longer required
because the mitigation program has
already occurred
Plannine Area 6 - these three
facilities are deleted
Approval
UCR requests
mitigation if
resources are
found dudng
construction.
Approval
\\TEMEC_FS101~VOLI~DEPTS~c~LANNING~STAFFRpT~.pc.doc
6
Plannine Area 6 - "A minor
project entry statement shall be
provided at the comer of
Meadows ParloNay and
Campanula Way at the
southeastem comer of the
Planning Area."
Planning Area 6 - Very High
Density Residential (590 du
max) with a target density of
16.2 du/ac
Pedestrian linkaae - 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
Plannino Area 6(bl - 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)
Neighborhood Commercial
Services - include general
merchandising, cultural and
entedainment opportunities,
and general office uses
Neiclhborhood 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 Community - will be formed if
Senior community is implemented
and will assume maintenance
responsibility for all common areas
and facilities therein
Neighborhood Commercial Services
- includes the same as Am. No. 6,
but additionally includes home
improvement, food and restaurant
services
NeiGhborhood Commercial Olden Approval
areas - 25 to 100 feet in width
\\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS~ LANNING~STAFFRPT~.pC.dOC
7
Amendment No. 6
Architecture - "Commerdal
units should vary in size.
However, units which are
directly adjacent may not differ
in horizontal or vertical frontage
by more than 50 percent.'
Architecture throuQhout proiect
- will conform to general criteria
standards established within
the Specific Plan design
guidelines
Roof Forms and Materials -
"Flat roof area is limited to 50 %
of total roof area for any single
unit or group of contiguous
units.'
Landscape Requirements -
minimum of 15% of the gross
commercial site acreage shall
be landscaped
Landscaping in parking 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 - "Commerci-*_~ units
should vary in size with &~;acenc'y of
scale considered.'
Architecture within Senior
Community Housing - 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 Materials -"Flat roof
area is limited to 50 % of total roof
ares for the overell site by planning
area except in PA l(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
Landscaping in parkinq 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 every
ten (10) parking stalls (minimum)
(Language added) Village Center
Design Guidelines - inclusion of
medical/dental and/or general
OffcoS, a home improvement store,
and fitness center
(Language added) Appropriate
Sianaae - "blade signs which are
pedestrian oriented 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, destruction or
remodeling"
Recommendation
Approval
Approval as an
added item for
senior housing.
Deny
Deny
Deny
~\TEMEC_FS101WOL1 ~DEPTS~DLANNING~STAFFRPT%264pa99.pc.doc
8
Circulation - "The project proponent
shall participate in the Traffic Signal
Mitigation Program as approved by
the City of Temecula (Added
language follows) subject to certain
reimbursements under Development
Impact Fee Reduction Agreement."
~ For a comparison list of acreage, land use and dwelling unit changes, please reference
the Summary of Changes Table in Amendment No. 7.
Development Afireement
The proposed Development Agreement for this project is being handled in a similar fashion to the
Specitic Plan Amendment. Staff has provided a list of Deal Points which specities those items that
are either unresolved or incorrect within the text, and staffs 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
consideration.
Deal Points:
1. Developer is requesting a Development Agreement life of 25 years (Section 4.1 ).
Staff does not suppod a 25 year Development Agreement life. Staff supports a 10 year
Development Agreement life.
Traffic medians and traffic circles installed by the Owner in the public dght of way of
Campanula Way shall be maintained by the TCSD as partial consideration 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 right
turn 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 wodh of DIF credits which will be available to either apply
to capital or impact fee for road improvements and public facilities or DIF otherwise payable
by Owner. (Section 12.2)
Staff suppods this not to exceed 100% of the street\traffic 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~VOL1~)EPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRP'r~284pa99.pc,doc
9
Staff supports this not to exceed 100% of street\traffic signal DIF credit.
Any building which suffers casualty darnage, whether more than 50% or not, shall be allowed
to be re-built and mid 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 deI8ol Development Agreement. (Section 13.5)
Staff supports a life of 10 years.
DeveloPment AQreement - List of Permitted Uses (Village 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 spaca 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 AClreement - List of Permitted Uses (Retail Villaaesl
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 Spedtic Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 235) was approved and
cedified by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Since that date Addendum No. I was
cedified 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 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-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
\\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~EPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP'D284pa99.pC.dOC 10
Study approved by the City Treff'~c Engineer. The applicant is ;~nditioned to revise the Addendum
document prior to distribution to the City Coundl for consideratic,,~. 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 measure 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 original codification of Environmental
Impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concerns regarding the project have
been adequately addressed,.
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY
The applicant proposes a unique interpretation of the Village Center Overlay 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
serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed for conformance with
Specific Ran 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 large, for access through, or use of, properly 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.
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 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 project's Traffic Study with
regards to public health and safety of the community.
%\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~DEPTS'~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.pc.doc
11
The design of the proposed lend division or proposed irr~orovements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially end unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or
their habitaL Them are no knovm 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 podion of
a larger spedtic plan. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect
on wildlife resources, es defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code.
~\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP'I'~.IaC.dO¢
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 - 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 Spedtic 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 certif'|cation and adoption of Addendum 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 ('T'o 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_FS101~VOL1%DEPTS~c~LANNING~STAFFRP'r~,pC.dOC
13
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PA99-0284 DEVELOPMENT PLAN
F:~DEPTS~LANNING~STAFFRp"D284pI99,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
APPLICATION 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 headrig 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 Applicetion 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. Findinfqs. 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 Ran designation and consistent with Specif'lc 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 projed has been reviewed for conformance with Specific
Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), the City's General Plan, Development Code, Subdivision and
\\TEMEC_FS101%VOL1~DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPl'%284pagg.pc,doc
15
Landscaping Ordinances. The project is consistent with these documents and conditions of approval
have been placed on the project according;y 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 ec~_ess through, or use of, properly within the
proposed land division. The proposal as designed end conditioned provides adequate access and
drculation. 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
drculation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The Fire Depadment has reviewed me 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 am 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 effed 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 Repod (EIR No. 235) was approved and cedi~ed 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 Spedtic 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-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 Study approved by the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant is conditioned to revise the
Addendure 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
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 cedification
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. PA99-0284 (Development Plan) for the design, construction
and operation of 276,243 square feet of retail commercial uses, including a 131,848 square foot
\\T_EMEC_FS101%VOL1~DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPTL~84pagg,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 Margarita 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
hemto, and incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 5. 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, Secreta~/
%~TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~EPTS~LAN N ING~STAFFRPT%284pagg.pc.doc
17
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PA99-0284 DEVELOPMENT PLAN
\\TEMEC_FS101WOL1~)EPT$%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~84pa99.pC,dOC
18
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Pinning ApplicaUon No. PAg9-0284 - Development Plan
Project Description: The design, construcUon 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
{:)there - Various, to be determined with the submittal of Administrative
Development Plans
Assessor's Parcel Nos.
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
950-020-044 and 950-870-006
September 28, 1999
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 conditioned herein for review and approval by the City
Council.
A revision to Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 shall be submitted con'ecting
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' approved by the Planning Commission.
A revision to the Addendure to Environmental Impact Repod No. 235 shall be
submitted correcting the text, including the Traffic Study as appmved 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 Depadment - Planning Division
a ceshier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of
Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination with a DeMinimus Finding for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration
required under Public Resources Code Sealion 21108(b) and Califomia Code of Regulations
Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant has not delivered to
the Community Development Depadment - Planning Division the check as required above,
\\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFR Pl'%284pa99.COA-DEVPLAN .doc 1
the approval for the project granied 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 shell 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, concoming 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 Specific 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 Department - 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 bring the
landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued
maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any
successors in interest.
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 Metedal Board)
contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. Any
deviation from the approved colors and matsdais shall require approval of the Planning
Manager.
\\T_EMEC_FSI 01 WOL1 ~DEPTS%PLANNI NG~STAFFR PT~284pa99.COA-DEVPLAN .doc
2
Matedal
Color
Building walls, man doors
Towers, entry, canopies, porte cochera
Wainscot, Columns, covers
Soffats
Comics
Signs, trusses
Stone veneer
ICI Paint Co. #548 "Beachcomber'
ICI Paint Co. #565 "Woodwind"
ICI Paint Co. #462 "Westam Trail"
ICI Paint Co. #685 "Grey Mountain"
ICI Paint Co. #583 "Gray Hearth"
ICI Paint Co. #-4208/9200 "Safety Orange'
Ernser 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 antira site.
d. Coordination of retail uses.
Landscaping details around the buildings and within the coudyard araas, including
the use of plant arbors.
Fumitura and fixture specif'mations including but not limited to: planter boxes, seating
araas, benches, tables, chairs, shade structuras, awnings, plaza lamps, hanging
plants, trash racaptacles, fountains and other water features, art, sculptures,
bollards, enhanced paving araas, archways, gateways, gazebos, outdoor vendor
cads, heaters, fans, misters and clocks.
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 araas shall be propedy scraened. 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 araa 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 araa is activated, the applicant shall install a bus shelter, amenities
and appropriate landscaping and access, at the bus tumout located on the approved Exhibit
"D" - Site Plan.
Prior 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 fodh in that ordinance or by
providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid.
%%TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRPT%284~.COA-DEVPLAN .doc
3
18.
The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided
by the Community Development Department - Planning Division sift, and return one signed
set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files.
19.
The applicant shall 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 Matedal 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 Depadment - Planning Division for their files. All labels on the
Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be roadable 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 approved Exhibit "J', or as amended by these conditions. The
location, number, genus, spades, 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 rear of the Home Depot building
and Buildings G and H, which shall be · minimum 36-inch box size, that provide a
quick screen for the loading docks in these areas.
Planrings 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 rnounding, grouped trees, and shrubs that screen vehicle parking spaces fronting
the highway.
Planter areas on both sides of the main entry ddveway shall be recon~gured 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 planrings and irrigation (in accordance with the
approved plan).
\%TE_MEC_FStOl\VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP'F~.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.
P~ortothelssuanceofOccupancy Permits
23. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage.
24.
All raquirad landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the
appmved construction plans and shall be in a condition e__cceptable to the Planning Manager.
The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall
be propedy constructed and in good working order.
25.
Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to guarantee
the maintenance of the plantinge, in accordance with the appmved 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
re~ectodzed sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the
International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches
in area and shall be cantered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height
if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or cantered at
a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking 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 pdor 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
Govemment Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site plan
all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints
and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for
further review and revision.
General Requirements
29.
A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site flat work and
improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works 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. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works pdor to
commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City dght-of-way.
31. All improvement plans, grading plans, and raised landscaped median plans shall be
coordinated for censistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to
the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars.
32. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the California Department of Transportation
pdor to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State right--of-way.
33. 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 Caltrans
dated October 13, 1995 shall be amended.
34. The centedine of the main access to the site on Highway 79 South shall be aligned with the
centadine of the access to the southerly ddveway on Highway 79 South.
35. The vehicular movement for the following Iocetions shall be restricted as follows:
a. Highway 79 South at the eastedy access to the site shall be restricted to a dght
in/right out movement subject to approval by Caltrans. This access restriction 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
rostdcted to left in/dght out movement.
Campanula Way along the frontage of Parcel 2 (westerly) access to the site shall be
restricted to dght 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 pdvate property.
37. 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.
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 fadlies intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify
impacts to downstream propedies and provide spedtic recommendations to protect the
properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream fadlities,
including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required
improvements, shall be provided by the Developer.
40. 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 Department of Public Works, the Developer shall
receive written clearance from the following agencies:
%%T_EMEC_FSlO1\VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.COA-DEVpLAN.doc 6
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 property.
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 propedies as directed by the Department of Public Works.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
45. Pdor to issuance of the first building permit, Parcel Map No. 29431 shall be recorded.
46. Improvement plans and/or predse grading plans shall confomq to applicable City of Temecula
Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. The
following design criteda shall be observed:
a. Flowfine 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~_~_rdance
with Ordinance 461.
d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in
accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400. 401 and 402.
e. All street and ddveway centedine 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 Aderial 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 radiities, 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. Campanuia Way (Principal Collector Highway Standards - 78' R/W)
i) Additional right-of-way dedication for roundabouts
%%TEMEC_FS101~VOLl%DEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRP'D284~,~__Q~_,COA-DEVpLAN.dOC 7
ii)
Improve roadway to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way plus
six feat, installation of half-width street improvements plus six feet, paving,
curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities= signing and
stdping, 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.
d. Install a traffic signal at the following intersections:
i)
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 Podola 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 Depadment of Public
Works.
a. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: pavement, curb and
gutter, medians, sidewalks, ddve 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 Depadment of Public Works for any street
closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Depadment 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\VOLI~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.COA-DEVPLAN.doc
8
51. Bus bays will be designed at all existing and proposed bus stops as directed by Riverside
Transit Agency and approved by the Department of Public Works.
52. All a__,~_ss rights 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 pdvate property.
53. All building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with
the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer shall
issue a Final Soil Repod 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 Fadlities 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 Parkway 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) Marganta Road and De Podola Road with sufficient improvements to support
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
wdtten clearance from the following agendes:
a. Rancho California Water Distdct
b. Eastern Municipal Water District
c. Depadment 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 Department of
Public Works.
The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appudenance damaged or broken shall
be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfadion of the Director of the Department of
Public Works.
61.
%%TEMEC_FS101\VOL1~DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP~,COA-DEVPLAN.doc
9
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
62.
63.
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School Distdct shall be submitted
to the Planning Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation
Fees.
Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining
property or public dghts-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 Califomia Building, Plumbing and
Mechanical Codes; 1998 California Electrical Code; Califomle 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 electdcal plans submitted to the Depadment of Building and
Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon
adjoining property or public dghts-of-way.
66.
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to
the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from Schoni Mitigation
Fees.
67.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
68.
The Occupancy classification for the proposed Home Depot buildings will be M/S-1 and the
occupancy classification of the Village Center buildings will be AIBIM. 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 regulations. Provide
all details on plans. (Colifomia 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 dose 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 original signature on plans
submitted for plan review.
\\TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1M:)EPTS~°LANNING~STAFFR PT%284pagg. COA-DEVPLAN.doc
10
78.
79,
80.
81.
82.
Provide electrical plan including load celculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic
and mechanical plan for plan review.
Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer
engineer are required for plan review submittal.
Provide predse grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector pdor to the start of any
building construction.
Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls require separate
FIRE DEPARTMENT
The following are the Fire Deparlment Conditions of Approval for this 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%VOLl~)EPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~gg. 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. GVW 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)
\\T_EMEC_FS101%VOLItDEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.COA-DEVPLAN.doc
12
99.
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy ~. building final, a "Knox-Box" shall
be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minim,,m of six (6) feet in height and be
located to the right side of the main entrance door. [he 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 SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Submitted Under Separate Cover.
OTHERAGENCIES
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 Distdct by either a cashiers 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 California
Water Districts transmittal dated July 21, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
106. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in Eastem Information
Centers transrnittal dated July 21, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
~TEMEC_FS101\VOLl~)EPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT%284pagg,COA-DEVPLAN,doC
13
By placing my signature below, I con~n-n that I have mad, understand and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I furlher 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~TAFFRP~.COA-DEVPLAN.doc
14
DAVID P- ZAPPE
Gcncral Manager-Chief Engineer
~" -,~ ~ ~-~ 1995MARKETSTREET
;~ ~ ~ ~ '~" ~ II1: RJVEKSIDE, CA 92501
~ ...... aC i;i' ! 909/955- 200
i~t~ h:Uk: ~ G ~ ~ ~';909fiSg-9965FAX
511g0.1
FLOOD COBOL
WA R CONSERVATION DIS CT
City or Temecula
Temecula, California 92589-9033
Attention:
Ladies and Gentlemen:
ra: qq - O2 q
The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in incorporated
cities. The Distdct also does not lan check city land use cases, or provide State Division of Real Estate letters or
other flood hazard reports for suchp cases. Disffict comments/racommendations for such cases are normally limited
to items of specific nnterest to the District indudin District Master Draina e Plan facilities, other re ional flood
control and draina e facilities which could be consicnlgered a logical componenPor extension of a master ~n s stem
and District Area Brainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition, information of a general ns-[usre is
provided.
The Oistdct has not reviewed 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:
t./This prpject would not be impacted by Distdct Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of
regional nnterest proposed.
This project involves Disthct Master Plan facilities. The District will acce t ownership of such facilities on
written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District stanc~c~rds and District plan check and
inspedion will be required for District acceptance. Plan check inspection and administratnve fees will be
requ red.
This project proposes channels, storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter, or other facilities that could be
consdered regional in nature and/or a Io icel extension of the adopted
Master Drainage Plan. The District would consider acceptirtg ownership ot such fac~lffies on wntten request
of the City. Facilities must be constnJcted to District standaids and D~strict plan check and inspection will
be requ r~l for D strict acceptance. P an check, nspection and adm n strative fees wi be mqu red.
This project is located within the limits of the District's Area
Drainage Plan for which draina e fees have been adopted; a phcable tees should be prod hy cashiers
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 actual
permit.
GENERAL INFORMATION
This project ma re uira a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES permit from the State Water
Resources Con~:~l ~oard. Clearance for grading rscordation or other final approval should not be given until the
City has determined that the project has been granted a permit or s shown to be exempt.
If this pro'ect involves a Federal EmergenCy Management Agency (FEMA mapped flood plain, then the Ci should
require tRe applicant to provide all studies, calculations, plans and o~er nnformation ra_quired to me~ FEMA
requirements and should further require that the applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision CLOMR)
pdor to grading, recordat on or other final approva of the project, and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMRI 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 Caff~rnia Department of Fish and Game and a Clean P~ater Act
Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, o written correspondence from these a enc'es
indicating the prdject is exempt from these requirements. A Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quail Cer~cat'on
r i4
may be required from the local California Regional Water Quality Control Board pdor to issuance of ~e Corps 0
permit.
STUART E. MCKIBBIN
Senior Civil Engineer
Date: ~ ' G - ~>
r'
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:mc189~c012-T3~FCF
c: Laude Williarns, Engineering Services Supervisor
[kle~hesday J;~'ty 21, 1999 10:58am -- From 'gOaP7 09' -- Page 21
SENT BY:UCR , 1-21-99 ;11:41AN; ARCH RESEARCH
90969484??;# 2
CALIFORNIA -',,'~!~,';% sa;tem Information center
HISTORICAL ,,o.o Depemnent ~ Anmmpok:~
University of California
RESOURCES PJver~d~,CA 92521-04;18
INFORMATION Phor. e (9o9) 7eT..s74s
~JYSTEM m,,,, ax (sos) 787-5409
CULTURAL RESOURCE
Case Tr'anmimd Rcfercr. ce Designado,,:
Records at dxe Eastmru Informszion Center of the California :-lisxorlcal ResourcM luform3tion Systmu have
been reviewed 1o deem"mine ifthLm project would advermdy affect prehLmtorjc or historic cultural resom'ces:
ruom*cc(s), Ablw,.dyb~ecemme~
__ APhueleultunlmmamoMsmdyk~4FI
M Io dmm, daeo&olicel acadfiviLy of tim ~ ~r*J~novla$ du~ m should b.c mon~h:nd by a p~ok~lioad
m
m
Pluae il
P'rmm I11
lisaseW
COMMENTS:
· If you have auy questiota, plea.v.e contact
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PA99-0289
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431
F:',DEPTS'~PLANNING~STAFFRP~,pC.dOC
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-O286 -
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
PARKWAY, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOWS 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 headng as prescribed by law, at which time the City
staff and interested persons had an oppodunity 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.
PA99-0286;
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. Findin;is. 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 Tamecula 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 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.
\~TEMEC_FS101~VOL1~:)EPTS~DLANNING~STAFFRPT~84pagg.pC.dOC
20
C. The design of the proposed I~nd dMsion or the type o; improvements will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access threu'2.h, or use of, property within the
proposed lend division. The proposal as designed and conditioned provides adequate access and
drculafion. Future development plans for parcels within the project site will determine the suitability
and location of all ac~_ess 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 conjuncttion with the Development Plan, for adequate emergency vehicle turning radii.
The City Treff'ec 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.
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 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 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 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-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 Study approved by the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant is conditioned 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
measures have either been incorporated in the project design or included in the Conditions of
Approvals where appropriate. Staff acknowledges the overTiding 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,.
Section 4. Conditions= That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends
approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel 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 Nee. 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~VOLI~DEPTS~PLANNING~,STAFFRPT~.pc.doC
21
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 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~STAFFRPT~284pa99.pc,doc
22
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PA99..0286 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1%DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP'D284pa99.pC.dOC
23
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA99-0286 - Tentative Parcel Map No, 29431
Project DescripUon:
Assessor's Parcel No.:
Approval Data:
Expiration Date:
The subdivision of 66.828 gross acres into seven (7) lots
950-020-042, -044 and 950-087-006
September 28, 1999
September 28, 2001
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 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 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 Requiramenta
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 C, ity'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_FSI 01 \VOL1 ~)EPTS%PLANNING~STAFFR P'I'~.COA-TENT MAP.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 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.
If Subdivision phasing is proposed, a OhasinCl Olan shall be submitted to and approved by the
Planning Manager.
This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Ran
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 fodh 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 appmved 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 Repod (EIR) No. 235 and Addendum No. 3 to
Environmental Impact Repod No. 235 were prepared for this project and is
on file at the City of Temecula Community Development Depadment -
Planning Division.
3) This project is within the Alquist-Priolo 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
\\T~MEC_FS101~VOLILOEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP~,COA-TENT MAP.doc 2
space, recreation areas, parking areas, pdvate roads, exterior of all buildings
and all landscaped and open areas including parkways.
2)
No lot or dwelling unit in the devedopment shall he sold unless a corporation,
association, property owner's group or similar entity has been formed with the
dght to assess all propedies individually owned or jointly owned which have
any figMs or interest in the use of the common areas and common fadlities
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 ownera 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 city 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
assodation 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 Tract Map No. 29431) require
the City to review and approve the CC&Rs for the Tract.
Dedarsnt 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 othenNise
modified without the express written consent of the Planning Manager
of the City of Temecula.
\\TEMEC_FSt 01 \VOL1 ~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP'I~.COA-TENT MAP,doc 3
Consent of the City of Temecula
Condition No. 15.C. 1) of the Conditions of Approvai of Planning
Application No. PA99-0286 ~entative Tract Map No. 29431) requires
the City of Temecula to review and approval the CC&Rs for the Tract.
The Citys 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 appropdateness or legality of the other provisions of
the C,C&Rs, including, without limitation, the use restrictions, pdvate
easements and encroachments, pdvate maintenance requirements,
architecture and landscape controls, assessments, enforcement of
assessments, resolution of disputes or procedural matters. Subject
to the limitations set forth herein, the City consents to the CC&Rs.
Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager
Approved as to Form:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attomey
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 rumouts 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 plantinge and irrigation (in accordance with the
approved plan).
~\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1~DEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRPTt286pa99.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 properly fort
a)
Front yards and slopes within individual lots prior to issuance of
building permits for any lot(s).
b) Pdvate common areas prior to issuance of the any building permit.
All landscaping excluding Temecula Community Services Distdct
(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 Fenca 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 Director
approval.
Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits
17o
If deemed necessary by the Planning Manager, the applicant shall provide additional
landscaping to effectively screen various components of the project.
18.
All required landscape planting and irrigation shall 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
propedy 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 pdor to issuance of the
first occupancy permit.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI~)EPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRPT~.COA-TENT MAP.doc
5
21.
Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to guarantee
the maintenance of the planrings within private common areas for a period of one year, in
accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with
the Community Development Department - Planning Division for one year from final
certif'mate of occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been
maintained in a condition satisfacton/to the Planning Manager, the bond shall be released.
22.
All of the foregoing conditions shell be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed
by this permit.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
The Depadment 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 fadlities, 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 fight-of-way.
25.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City fight-of-way.
26.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Califomia Depadment of Transpodation
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
easterly driveway, the existing Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Caltrans
dated October 13, 1995 shall be amended.
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
centedine 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/right out movement subject to approval by Caltrans. This access restriction shall
be emphasized with a raised median to the satisfaction of the Depadment of Public
Works.
Meadows Parkway from Campanula Way to De Podola Road shall be restricted to
dght in/dght out movements.
\\TEMEC_FS101 \VOLt ~EPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP'D286pa99.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 PaP. el 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 Parcel 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:
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 California Water Distdct
c. Eastern Munidpal Water District
d. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation Distdct
e. City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau
f. Planning Depadment
g. Depadment of Public Works
h. Riverside County Health Depadment
i. Cable 'IV Franchise
j. Caltrans
k. Community Services Distdct
I. General Telephone
m. Southem Califomia Edison Company
n. Southem Califomia 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%VOL1~)EPTS~PLANNING~TAFFRPT~.COA-TENT MAP.do~
7
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).
b. De Podola 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 Margadta Road to
Meadows Parkway with openings at Dempanula Way, Paloma [:)el Sol Park
entrance and Parcel 7 (as approved on the Tentative Parcel Map).
Meadows Parkway (Major Highway Standards - 100' R/W) from Highway 79 South
to De Portola Road
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.
The raised landscaped median shall be continuous with one opening at the
intersection of Meadows Parkway and Campanula Way.
d. Campanula Way (Principal Collector Highway Standards - 78' R/W)
i) Additional right-of-way dedication for roundabouts
ii)
Improve roadway 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).
iii)
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 interconned on Campanula Way between Meadows Parkway
and Main Access to the site.
iv) Margadta Road and De Podola Road. The Developer is eligible to receive
\\T_EMEC_FS101\VOLI~DEPTS~PLANNING%STAFFRPI. COAoTENT 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 end installation.
f. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement
transitions per Caitrans 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:
a. Street contedine 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.
c. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in
accordance with Ordinance No. 461.
d. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400
and 401.
e. Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project
boundaries to ensure adequate continuity of design with adjoining propedies.
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 ddveway centedine intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
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 utility systems including gas, electric, 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.
34. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
reviewed by the Depadment of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other
disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Depadment of Public Works.
35. The existing alignment of Campanula Way shall be vacated.
36. Relinquish and waive dght of access to and from the following roadways:
a. Meadows Parkway with the exception of one opening to Parcel 6 and one opening
to Parcel 7. Locations to be determined upon submittal of future development plans.
b. De Portola 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%VOLl%DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP'D286pagg. 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 nodh 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 fadlilies
shall be provided at all street intersectons in accordance with Riverside County Standard No.
805 or as approved by the Department 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 shaft continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as appreved by the Depadment
of Public Works.
39.
Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of an
exjsting Assessment Distdct must comply with the requirements of said section. Pdor to City
Council approval of the Parcel Map, the Developer shall make an application for
reappodionment 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 Parcel
Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shaft be recorded with the map. A
copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department 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 property.
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 Citys cable 'I'V 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 Department of Public Works.
46,
Private drainage easements for cress-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 ingress/egress 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
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. '
\\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.COA-TENT MAP.dOC 10
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
50.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public V'vorks, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
b. Planning Depadment
c. Department of Public Works
d. Caltrens
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 prior 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.
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 private, drainage radiities
intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable
of receiving the storm water ranoff without damage to public or pdvate property. The study
shall include a capadty 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.
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 Department of Public Works.
The Developer shall obtain letters of approval or easements for any off-site work performed
on adjoining propedies. The letters or easements shall be in a format as directed by the
Department of Public Works.
Pdor to Issuance of Building Permits
57. Parcel Map shall be appreved and recorded.
58. A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Depadment 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 Repod addressing compaction and
site conditions.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLl~DEPTS~LANNING~STAFFRPT~286pa99.COA-TENT MAP.doC 11
59.
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
conformanco 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 Munidpal Cede and all
Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06.
Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy
61.
Upon the first Certificate of Occupancy, the Developer shall install a traffic signal at the
following intersections in accordance with City Standards:
Highway 79 South and the main ac_~e_ss 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 Certificate of O~pancy, the existing Memorandum of Understanding between
the City and Caltrans 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. Rancho Califomia Water Distdct
b, Eastern Municipal Water Distdct
c. Depadment of Public Works
All necessary codifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public
agencies shall be submitted as required by the Depadment 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 appurtenance damaged or broken due
to the construction operations of this project shall be repaired or removed and replaced to
the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Submitted Under Separate Cover.
%%TEMEC_FS101%VOL1%DEPTS~LANNING~STAFFRPI.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 Depadrnent to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation fees.
OTHER AGENCIES
68.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside
Department 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 Eastern Municipal
Water Distdct's trensmittal dated July 19, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
70.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California
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 transmittal 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 conformance
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~STAFFRP'D286pa99.COA-TENT MAP.doc
13
July 20, 1999
City of Temecula Planning Department
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
ATTN: Carole 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:
1. The Department of Environmental 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 water system shall be
submitted in triplicate, with a minimtm~ 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 dian~eter,
location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and joint specifications, and the size of the main at the
junction of the new system to the existing system. The plans shall comply in all respects with Div.
5. Part 1, and Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety Code, Califbrnia Administrative Code,
Title l 1, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of
California, ~vhen applicable. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and water company
with the fbllowing certification: "I certify, that the design of the water system in Tentative Parcel
Map No. 29431, 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 gu~antee 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 recntest fbr the recordation of the final maD.
, , JUL 2 7 i999
By
Local Enforcement Agency * I?0. Box 1280, Riverside, CA 92502-1280 * (909) 955-8982 * FAX (909) 781-9653 * 4080 Lemon Street, 9~h floor, Riverside, CA 92501
Land Use and Water Engineering * RO. Box 1206, Riverside, CA 92502-1206 * (9(;9) 955-8980 * FAX (909) 955-8903 * 4080 Lemon Sneer, 2rid Floor, Riverside, CA 92501
City of Temecula Playruing Dept.
Page Two
Attn: Carole Donahoe
June 21, 1999
This subdivision has a stmement from Rancho Califomia Water District agreeing to se~we domestic
water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand providing satis/hctory financial
arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It will be necessary tbr financial arrangements to
be made PRIOR to the recordation of the final map.
This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be connected to the
sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed according to pl,'ms and specifications as
approved by the Eastern 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 or' the
sewers at the junction of the new system to the existing system. A single plat indicating location of
sewer lines and ~vate~ines 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 tbllo~x4ng certification: "I certify
that the design of the sewer system in Parcel Map No. 29431, is in accordance with the sewer
system expar~sion 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 fbr
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 necessary' Ibr the annexation proceedings to be completely ~nalized PRIOR to the
recordafion of the final map.
7. Additional approval from Riverside County Enviromnental 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
cit~swrdoc
EASTERN 1VI:UNI( :IPAL
WATER DISTRICT
Board of Directors
V~ce Presidetit
Clayton A. Record. Jr
Marion V. Ashley
Richard R. Hall
Rodger D. Sicins
General Manager
John B. Brudin
Director of the
Metropolitan Water
District of So. Cali]:
Clayton A. Record. Jr.
Joseph J. Kuebler. CPA
Legal Counsel
Redwine and Shervill
July 19, 1999
RECEIVED
2 o 1999
County of Riverside
Health Services Agency
Deparmaent of Environmental Health
P. O. Box 1206
4080 Lemon S~xeet, 2ND Hoor
Riverside, California 92502
MARKHAM & ASSOCJATEI
TEME~ CA 923.~)
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 confirm a "will serve" for the proposed subject property, consisting
of Neighborhood Commercial and Rtsidendal Parcels on approximately 61 acres. The
devdoper must make arrangemenm with the District to resolve sewer service issues and related
fees.
The availability of service will be contingent on limiting conditions existing beyond EMWD' s
centrot, or a determination by the developer to be cost-ineffective. Should there be questions,
please do not hesitate to contact the Distriet's Customer Service Department at (909)928-3777.
Sincerely,
Warren A. Back
Civil Engineer
Customer Service Department
WASOf
CC:
Patti Nab. ill
Markham & Associates
41750 Winchester Road, Suite N
Temecula, CA 92590-4898
Mailing,, Addre.v.v: Post Office Box 8300 Pen'is. CA 92572-8300 Tel ~909) 928-3777 Fax 19()9) '-)28-6177
LocutU, l: 2270 Trumble Road Perris. CA 92570
Wa r
July 19, 1999
RECEIVED
Greg Dellenbach, REHS
County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health
Land Use Section
4080 Lemon Street. 2'~ Floor
Post Office Box 1206
Riverside, CA 92502
2131999
MARKHAM & ASSOCtA/il
'rEMECUI.A, CA 923?)
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
~ ~//~..2~~
Steve Brannon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
99~SB:rncI83%c012-Cf, FCF
C: Laude Willjams, Engineering Services Supervisor
Iwedr~sda~ J~ty 21, 1999 10:58am -- From '9097 09' -- Page 2~
SENT 8Y:UCR , 1-21-99 ;11:I1AN; ARCH RESEARCH bh:T~
90969484??;#
CALIFORNIA
HISTORICAL
RESOURCES
INFORMATION
{YSTEM
MONO
Eastern Intorma~on Center
Uriverstty of California
Riverside, CA 92521-0418
CULTURAL RESOURCE REVIEW
Phone (gog) 787-574,5
Fax (9(~) 787-,5409
Case Tnmmiual Referee; Designation:
Records u ehe E.~tern Information Center of the California :-l'modcal Resources Informsion System bare
beta reviewed To dete, n~.e if ~ls project would Mveady affect pr~btodc or hixedc cultutaJ resou~c,-:
mm~c(I). ARa~elmd~immmmmdd.
Duc Nm tim mzobamobgical mP.m.~y oftha ~pcs. 4aabnoving du 'ing oonstnmdon dtouid bc manlaand by · pmfumland
· mms~meoi~imC
'Foe subafiuiom of · udim~ ~ -----,-easeat report 'b roecommended following guidelined for Adr. baaobg~
!tumarcc Mana~t P.,ep~as pgizn:d by tIM Cafifon~ Offw,~ · f Himtoda Prmeaadma. Ptmn.et;me PZamda&, b
4(~), D, ea~b~ IMg.
m
Pkue il
Pkue 111
ItsmeW
Ra=oaimmmmdmmadk/dmurvay
T-*Jq llivmlum moureg :i~ni~ popme maipdon mum rot "signirnnt' mitaa
Mliptioa IDm recovcrybymuavmtiee. pmuervmtionkaplacc, ormmxnblnadoaofthctwo.!
ffyouhaveanyquesfions, pleuecont~tus.
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 99-
AMENDING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 (PA99-0285)
~TEMEC_FS 101%VOL1 ~)EPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRP'1'~284p199.pc.doc
24
AI']'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 8; TO REALIGN AND RECONFIGURE
CAMPANULA WAY BETWEEN DE PORTOLA ROAD AND
MEADOWS PARKVVAY; THE REALLOCATION OF ACREAGE
WITHIN PLANNING AREAS 1 AND 6; 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
DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, WITH A MAXIMUM OF 240
DWELLING UNITS), RESULTING IN AN OVERALL REDUCTION OF
UNITS FROM 590 TO 508 IN THESE AREAS; THE PROVISION TO
DEVELOP AN ACTIVE, PRIVATE, GATED SENIOR COMMUNITY
WITHIN PLANNING AREA 9; 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 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 headrig 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 t. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by
reference.
Section 2. Findin~s, 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
\\TEMEC_FS 101 \VOL1 ~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFR PT~2.84;a99.pc.do;
25
Sol), Amendment No. 7. The site is physically suitable for the tyue and densHy of development. The
General Plan Land Use designation for the site includes CC Community Commercial, OS Open
Space, LM Low Medium Residential (3-6 owelling units per acro,~ ~_nd H High Density Residential (13-
20 dwelling units per acre). The proposal as designed and =.~nditioned 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 confom~ance with Specific
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, 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 weftare 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 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. Sinca 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 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 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.
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
~\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~DEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRPT~S4paiXI.Ix:.doc
26
measures have either been incorporated in the project design or incJuded 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. Staft 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 Temecule 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
~\TEMEC_FS101~VOLI~)EPTS~oLANNING~TAFFRPT~,~__og.pc.doc
27
EXHIBIT A
AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO 8PEGIFIC PLAN NO. 219
SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER
\\T_EMEC_FS101 ~VOL1 ~)EPTS~LANNING~TAFFRPT%284pa99.pc.doc
28
EXHIBIT B
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
(SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER)
~TEMEC_F$101 ~VOL1 ~EPTS%PLANNING~STAFFR PT%284pagg.pc.doc
29
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- __
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PA99-0283
VILLAGES AT PASEO DEL SOL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
\\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFR pl.pc.doc
30
A'F~'ACHMENT NO. 4
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE PLANNING APPUCATION 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 t. The Planning Commission hereby finds determines. and declares as
follows:
A. Section 65864 at esq. of the Govemment Code of the State of Califomia 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 Califomia 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 Ma~garita Road and west of Meadows Parkway ("Property") 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 headng before the Planning Commission and the public hearing
before the City Council;
(1) Notice of the public headngs 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 pdor to the headngs 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 headngs before the Planning Commission and
City Council 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 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 \VOL1 ~DEpTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~284pa99.pC.dOC
31
considered all of the written matedal and oral comments presented to it on the proposed
environmental findings and the proposed Development Agreement;
Section 2. The Planning Commission hereby furlher finds and determines that
the Project site has been the subject of extensive prior environmental review:.
A. The Poloroe del Sol Specifm Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 235)
was approved and certified 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 fadlities 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 Courtall for consideration. The analysis
concludes, as noted in Table 1-Comparstive 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, end 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. Staft acknowledges the oveffiding consideration with regards to air
quality impacts made by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors dudng the odginal certification
of Environmental Impact Repod No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concerns regarding the
project have been adequately addressed.
D. The proposed Development Agreement incorporates the provisions of the
Citys General Plan, Specific Plan 219, the cun'ent zoning regulations for the Properly, the Mitigation
Plan of Environmental Impact Report No. 235 and such other ordinances, rules, regulations and
official policies governing permitted uses, density, design, improvement. development fees, and
construction standards applicable to the Property on the effective date of the Development
Agreement.
E. Therafora, no further environmental review is raquirad 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 15182 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 propedy analyzed in the EIR certified and approved by the County
of Riverside and the Addendures thereto, for the approval of Spedtic Plan 219 and subsequent
Amendments;
\~TEMEC_FSlOl\VOLItDEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRP'I'%264pa99.pC.dOC
32
B. There have been no subsequent change-,. to the Project which would require
major revisions of the previous FEIR due to the involvement of rmw significant environmental effects
or a substantial inorease in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
C. Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the circumstances
under which the Project is undertaken which will roquire major revisions of the previous FEIR due
to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the sevedty
of previously identified significant effects.
D. There is no new information sinca 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 since the certification of the previous FEIR and
Addendures which would show or tend to show that significant effects previously examined might
be substantially more severe than shown in the FEIR and Addendures.
F. There is no new information since the certification of the FEIR and
Addendums 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
considerably different from those analyzed in the previous FEIR and Addendures would s~bstantially
reduce one or more significant effects on the environment.
Section 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula furlher finds,
determines and dectares that:
A. 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:
(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 Q'eation of jobs within the City, enhance the balance of housing and jobs within the
City as provided in the Growth Management/Public Fadlity, 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 cornmartial development
pursuant to and in conformance with the terms of Specific Plan 219;
(2) The specific lend uses proposed for the Project as set fodh in the
Development Agreement are specifically allowed by Specific Plan No. 219;
(3) The Development Agreement provides for the actual construction of
the public improvements as described in Spedtic Plan 219;
\\TEMEC_FS101 ~VOL1 ~DEPTS%i}LANNING~STAFFR PT~.pc.doc
33
(4) The Applicable Rules sei forth in the Development Agreement do not
change the provisions of the Spedfic Plan, but cJad~es the use~ to be ellowed and standards to be
imposed where the Specific Plan provides for alternatives;
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 cletdmental to, and in fact enhances,
the health, safety, or general welfare 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 Coundl to approve
of the Development Agreement is based upon evidence and findings of the Planning Commission
and the evidence presented at the hearings 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 municipal revenue;
(4) Enhancement of quality of fife for surrounding residents with the timely
development through the elimination of dust and nuisance of padially 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 herein 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 cadify the adoption of this Resolution.
~\TEMEC_FS101%VOL1 ~DEPTS%PLANNING~STAFFRPT~,pC,doC
34
Section 7. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of September, 1999.
Ron Guerdem, 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, Secretan/
~T_EMEC_FS101~VOLl~DEPTS~LANNINGISTAFFRPT~841~.pc.doc
35
EXHIBIT A
VILLAGES AT PASEO DEL SOL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER)
\\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT'~284pagg.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
\\T_EMEC_FS101%VOL1 ~EPT$~LANNING%STAFF R PT'%264pagg.pc.doc
37
A'I'I'ACHMENT NO. 5
PC RESOLUTION NO. 9z
RESOLU~ONOFTHEPLANNINGCOMMISSIONOFTHE CITY OF
TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
CERTIFY ANDADOPTADDENDUM 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 prescribed 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 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 Amendment No. 7 and
Addendum No. 3;
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
Addendum 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 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
Spaca, 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 projed has been reviewed for conformance with Specific
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, property within the
proposed land division. The proposal as designed and conditioned provides adequate access and
\~T_EMEC_FS101 \VOL1%DEPTS%PLAN NI NG~STAFFRPT~.pc.~oc 38
drculation. Future development plans for parcels within the pm;ed 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 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.
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 Compliance. The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Environmental
Impact Repod (EIR No. 235) was approved and cedified by the County of Riverside on September
6, 1988. Since that date Addendure 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 Spedtic Plan. Addendure 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 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 conditioned 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 am either unchanged or decj'eased, and
no additional mitigation measures are required. However, the Circulation and Traffic impact is
affected by the project, and mitigation measures am 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 cedification
of Environmental Impact Report No. 235. Staff concludes that environmental concerns regarding
the project have been adequately addressed..
\%TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ~DEPTS~LANNI NGisTAFFR PT~84pegg.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~STAFFRPT~264pa99.1X;,dOC
40
EXHIBIT A
ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO ENVIROMENTMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO 235
(SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER)
\\TEMEC_FS101 \VOL1 ',DEPTS~LANNING~TAFFRPT~2.B4p~99.pc.doc
41
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
EXHIBITS
%\TEMEC_FS10t \VOL1 tDEPTS%PLANNING%STAFFRP'T~.pc,doc
42
CiTY OF TEMECULA
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
aROJECT SITE
CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286
EXHIBIT - A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999
VICINITY MAP
F:~DEPTS~LANNING~STAFFRPT~?84pa99.pc.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 (PALOMA DEL SOL)
OS
P ~
L
LM
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~LANNING~.STAFFRP'D284pa99.pc.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286
EXHIBIT- D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999
SITE PLAN
F:~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPTt284pa99.pc.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
'1
VILLAGES @ PASEO del SOL
,_- ..... ~ _. 'f
CASE NO. - PA99..0283 THROUGH PA99-0286
EXHIBIT- E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999
GRADING PLAN
F:~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP"I'~.84pa99.pc,doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. o PA99.-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286
EXHIBIT- F
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999
MONUMENTSIGNAGEPLAN
F:~DEPTS',PLANNING~TAFFRPT~284pa99.pc,6~c
CiTY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-O286
EXHIBIT - G
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 150 1999-
HOME DEPOT ELEVATIONS
F:~DEpTS~,PLANNING~STAFFRp'fi284p~99.pc.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA99,-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286
EXHIBIT - H
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999-
HOME DEPOT SIGNAGE
F:~)EpTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~84pa,99.pc.do¢
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286
EXHIBIT - I
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE o SEPTEMBER 19~ 1999
HOME DEPOT FLOOR PLANS
F:~EpTS~pLANNING~STAFFRP~.PC-doC
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA99-O283 THROUGH PA99.-0286
EXHIBIT - J
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999
HOME DEPOT LANDSCAPEPLANS
F:~)EPTS'~PLANNING'tSTAFFRPT~284pa99.pc.doc
CiTY OF TEMECULA
,~L~J_~ CiTY OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 99-0286
: VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431
CITY OF TE}.IRCULA. COUNTY O'P RIVERSIDE, STATE OP CALIFORNIA
CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286
EXHIBIT- M
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431
F:',DEpTS%,DLANNING',STAFFRpT%2.84pa99.pc.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA99-.0283 THROUGH PA99-0286
EXHIBIT - N INFORMATIONAL EXHIBIT (RETAIL VILLAGE ELEVATIONS)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999
F:~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRp'Tt284pagg.pc.doc
A'I'FACHMENT NO. 7
INFORMATIONAL EXHIBIT - PRESENTATION BROCHURE
FROM DEL SOL INVESTMENTS, LLC DATED
SEPTEMBER 21, 1999
(UNDER SEPARATE COVER)
F:\D_EPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~284pa99.pC revised 9-29-99..doc
38
ATTACHMENT NO. 8
EXHIBITS
F:~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'F~284pa99,pc revised 9~29-99..doc
39
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286
EXHIBIT - I-1
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 29, 1999
OUTDOOR DISPLAY PLAN
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~.84pa99.pC revised 9-29-99,.doc
40
CITY OF TEMECULA
UNDER SEPARATE COVER
CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0286
EXHIBIT - M
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 29, 1999
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'F~284pa99,pC revised 9-29-99..doc
41