HomeMy WebLinkAbout021600 PC AgendaIn eomlllnee wilh the Amedesrl v/4h I::)isabiklie= Ac~ if you need special assistance to psdicipste in this
meating, please eontmclthe office ofthe City Cled~ (909) 694-8444. Noliflcation 48 hours pdorto ameating will
enable the City to make reasonable arrengements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR
35.10235.104 ADA T~le II]
AGENDA
TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
A REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
FEBRUARY 16, 2000- 6:00 P.M,
CALL TO ORDER:
Flag Salute:
Roll Call:
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Commissioner Guerriero
Fahey, Mathewson, Telesio, Webster, Guerriero
Next in Order:
Resolution: No, 2000-008
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Commission
on items that are listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes each.
If you desire to speak to the Commission about an item not on the Ageride, a pink
"Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the Commission Secretary.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record.
For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the
Commission Secretary pdor to the Commission addressing that item. There is a three
(3) minute time limit for individual speakers.
CONSENT CALENDAR
NOTICETO THEPUBLIC
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will
be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless
Members of the Planning Commission request specific items be removed from the
Consent Calendar for separate action.
Approval of Aaenda
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the Agenda of February 16, 2000.
R:~plancomm~agendas~000%2-16-O0.doc
1
2 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve Minutes from December 15, 1999
2.2 Approve Minutes from January 5, 2000
3 Director's HeadnQ Update
RECOMMENDATION
3.1 Receive and File
4 Finding of Public Convenience or Necessity for the Hioh Sodetv Billlard and Dart Club,
located at 28950 Front Street, Suite 102-105
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Support Finding of Convenience or Necessity
COMMISSION BUSINESS
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before a public
hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of
the project(s) et the time of hearing. If you challenge any of the projects in court, you
may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public
hearing or in written correspondences delivered to the Commission Secretary at, or
prior to, the public hearing.
5 Plannina Application No. 99-0239 (Development Plan) and PlanninQ Application No.
PA99-0373 (Tentative Parcel Map 29406). located at the knuckle of Enterodse Circle
West (225 feet west of the intersection of Entarpdse Circle West and Commerce Center
Ddve) - Project Planner John DeGanQe
RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0239 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) FOR THE DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF TWO INDUSTRIAL
SPECULATIVE BUILDINGS TOTALING 14,593 SQUARE FEET
ON A 1.87 ACRE SITE LOCATED AT THE KNUCKLE OF
ENTERPRISE CIRCLE WEST (225 FEET WEST OF THE
INTERSECTIO OF ENTERPRISE CIRCLE WEST AND
COMMERCE CENTER DRIVE) AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NO. 909480-015;
R:%plancomm%agendas~000%2-16-00,doc
2
6
7
5.2 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0239 pursuant to
Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines;
5.3 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0373, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29406 TO
SUBDIVIDE A 1.97 ACRE PARCEL INTO TWO (2) PARCELS
WITHIN THE BUSINESS PARK ZONE GENERALLY LOCATED
AT THE KNUCKLE OF ENTERPRISE CIRCLE WEST (225 FEET
WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF ENTERPRISE CIRCLE
WEST AND COMMERCE CENTER DIRVE) ON AND KNOWN
AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-480-015:
5.4 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Applicetion No. PA99-0373 pursuant to
Section 15315 of the CEQA Guidelines
Planning ADplicetion No. PA99-0472 (Development Plan), located on the southwest
comer of Diaz Road and Reminoton Road (41906 Reminclton Road) -Planner Carole
Donahce
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0472 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN), TO CONSTRUCT
AND OPERATE A 62,1000 SQUARE FOOT MINI-SELF
STORAGE FACILITY WITH A 2-STORY OFFICE AND
RESIDENT MANAGER'S QUARTERS AND A COVERED R.V.
STORAGE SPACES ON 3.92 ACRES LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DIAZ ROAD AND REMINGTON
ROAD (41906 REMINGTON ROAD), AND KNOW AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-370-014
PlanninCa Aoolication No. PA99-0476 (Develooment Plan) 5 & Diner, located on the east
side of Ynez Road south of Winchester Road north of the north mall entrance
RECOMMENDATION
7.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
R:~lancomm%agerKlas~2000~2-16-00. doc
3
7.2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PALNNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0476 A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN
AND CONSTRUCTION OF A 3,205 SQUARE FOOT
RESTAURANT (5 & DINER), ON A .73 ACRE LOT LOCATED
ON THE EAST SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD NORTH OF THE NORTH
ENTRANCE TO THE PROMENADE MALL SOUTH OF
WINCHESTER ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.
910-320-037, AND LOT "N" OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PA98-
0495;
Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0476 (Development
Plan) based on the Determination of Consistency with a project for which an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was previously certified pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15162 -Subsequent EIR' and Negative Declarations
8
Plannin{3 Application No. PA99-0382 (Tentative Parcel Map 28627) Mamadta Canyon,
located adjacent to Interstate 15, southwest of the intersection of Old Town Front Street
and Hiahwav 79 South/future Westem Bypass - John DeGanae
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PALNNING APPLICATION
NO. PA97-0307 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 28627, A
REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE A 37 ACRE PARCEL INTO 11
COMMERCIAL LOTS AND ONE OPEN SPACE LOT LOCATED
ADJACENT TO INTERSTATE 15, SOUTHWEST OF THE
INTERSECTIO OF OLD TOWN FRONT STREET AND
HIGHWAY 79 (S) I FUTURE WESTERN BYPASS CORRIDOR
(ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 922-210-047);
8.2 Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. PA97-0307
(Tentative Parcel Map 28627);
8.3 Adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application No. PA97-0307
Tentative Parcel Map 28627)
COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: To be determined at the March 16, 2000 meeting.
R:~plancornm%agendas%2000~2-16-O0.doc
4
ITEM #2
MINUTES FROM
DECEMBER lS, 1999
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 15, 1999
CALL TO ORDER
The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:03 P.M.,
on Wednesday December 15, 1999, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City
Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Flag salute by Commissioner Fahey.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Absent:
Also Present:
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No comments.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
1. Approval of Aclenda
Commissioners Fahey, Mathewson, Webster, and
Chairman Guerriero.
None.
Planning Manager Ubnoske,
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks,
Attorney Diaz,
Senior Planner Fagan,
Project Planner Griffin,
Project Planner Thornsley, and
Minute Clerk Hansen.
MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to approve the agenda. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner Fahey and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
2. Director's Hearing Update
Planning Manager Ubnoske was available for questions and comments from the
Commission.
3. Criteria for Determininq Public Convenience or Necessity FindinQ for
Alcohol Servinq Uses
Via an overhead map, Senior Planner Fagan provided an overview of the staff report (of
record), relaying that the map denoted the existing facilities within the City of Temecula
PlanComrruminute~121599
which sold alcohol; specified the areas where the uses were concentrated (referencing
the buUeted items on page 2 of the staff report); noted the provision of the criteria data,
justifying the Findings of Public Convenience of Necessity (PCN) in the agenda material;
and queried the Commission for input.
Commissioner Webster recommended that the Census Tract boundaries be placed on
the map.
In response to Commissioner Fahey's queries regarding a clear definition of the term
Convenience, Attorney Diaz relayed the general scope of the term in relation to the
Finding, confirming that the issue was based on a subjective determination, clarifying the
rationale for the applicant's request for a PCN Finding being brought to the Commission
for a determination on a case-by-case basis; for informational purposes, sited an
example, as follows: if there was a request for an off-site alcohol license for a Greek
delicatessen which would have provision of the sale of special Greek items, and unusual
Greek liquors, that even though there might be a concentration of existing licensed
alcohol establishments in the particular area, due to the specialty of the Greek items,
and if there was a large Greek community within the City, the Finding of Convenience
could apply since the availability of the special items offered might not be accessible
within a hundred miles; and further clarified that the term Convenience usually referred
to accessibility, and that the issue of convenience was related to the sale of alcohol and
not related to the convenience of the use itself (i.e., the convenience of a gas station in a
certain area).
For Commissioner Mathewson, Attorney Diaz provided additional information regarding
the policies determined by the Planning Commission.
Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that the Planning Department viewed the criteria of
PCN Finding in relation to the public, and not in relation to the convenience or necessity
of the associated business.
Commissioner Mathewson requested staff to compile past decisions of the Planning
Commission, with respect to approvals and denials of PCN Findings, and to additionally,
include data as to whether those decisions had been overturned. In response, Senior
Planner Fagan relayed that staff could provide the requested information to the
Commission.
in response to Chairman Guerriero's comments, Attorney Diaz relayed that although the
Findings would be determined on a case-by-case basis, that the burden of meeting the
criteria for the Findings could be placed on the applicant; and provided additional
information with respect to the development of a more specific, standardized criteria;
relayed that ABC's denial to grant requests for alcohol licenses was based on objective
criteria (i.e., the over-concentration of existing uses), and the local governing body's
charge was to approve or deny the PCN Findings based on subjective criteria, and was
to be determined on a case-by-case basis.
With respect to the criteria for the PCN Findings, Commissioner Webster queried
whether the criteria could be differentiated between PCN Findings for off-site licenses
verses on-site licenses, noting that he would more readily approve an on-site sales
license.
planComrnJminutel/121599
Commissioner Fahey commented on the restrictions of businesses being established in
the City of Temecula with respect to the denial of a PCN Finding; and queried whether
the business itself should be examined, specifically, as to whether it was standard for
that particular use to sell alcohol.
While concurring with Commissioner Fahey's comments regarding the desire to
accommodate businesses in order not to exclude a use if the alcohol license was an
integral part of the business, Commissioner Mathewson noted that, however, it would
not benefit the public to have a proliferation of mini-marts or convenience stores that
sold alcohol; recommended that there be a differential in the approving criteria for gas
station, tavern, and night club uses verses restaurant, and grocery store uses; and
commended staff for the provision of the map, clarifying the areas of concentration.
In response to Commissioner Mathewson's comments with respect to applying different
criteria standards to variant uses, Attorney Diaz provided additional information
regarding the legal restrictions associated with the matter; recommended not revising
the criteria based on policy decisions, specifically, with respect to amending the criteria
for the Findings between a liquor store use verses a grocery store use, reiterating the
recommendation that the uses be evaluated on a case-by-case basis; relayed that the
Constitution placed restrictions on Local Government from regulating the consumption or
sales of alcohol, except for the certain instances denoted in the State Statute; provided
additional information regarding the City regulating the number of permitted uses within
District divisions due to the State Legislature's authority; and advised that she would
further investigate the issue in order to provide the Commission with updated rulings on
these matters.
Commissioner Fahey relayed her concerns with respect to the issue, as follows: the
desire to restrict the incidents of drunk driving, and to prevent teen accessibility to
alcohol; and noted the varied subjective thinking each Commissioner brought to the
issue.
Chairman Guerriero relayed the dangers associated with a proliferation of alcoholic
establishments (i.e., the Los Angeles area); noted that if ABC granted the local
governing body the authority for the PCN determinations, that the Planning Commission
should ensure that there would not be an over-concentration of these uses within the
City of Temecula
For Commissioner Fahey, Planning Manager Ubnoske advised that if it was the
Commission's desire, staff would relay to the City Council that the Commission
continues to struggle with the alcohol establishment issue and would request direction
from the City Council; and noted that the matter could be agendized for a City Council
meeting.
Due to the existing concentration of such uses in the City of Temecula, Commissioner
Fahey relayed that if the business entity itself was not a consideration, she could not
make a Finding of Convenience or Necessity for any additional alcohol establishments,
reiterating the request for input from the City Council; and noted for community
information purposes, that the request for alcohol sales permits was market-driven,
relaying that if the citizens of Temecula were opposed to additional alcohol
establishments it should be noted that the supply (or request for additional licensed
uses) was dependent upon the demand for such uses.
planCornmlrninute$1121599
Commissioner Mathewson relayed that it was his opinion that The Planning
Commission's determination with respect to the PCN Findings should be distinct, and
that the Planning Commission not base its decision on City Council direction.
While concurring with Commissioner Mathewson's comments, Planning Manager
Ubnoske relayed that it might be helpful to obtain the City Council's direction regarding
this issue in order for an applicant to have a clear idea of the City's direction on this
matter prior to applying for the request, or appealing a denied request.
Chairman Guerriero was opposed to soliciting the City Council's direction,
acknowledging that the Council could provide guidelines if it desired; and requested that
the public provide their input regarding this issue (i.e., via phone calls, or letters).
For Commissioner Mathewson, Attorney Diaz clarified the legal issues associated with
this matter.
Since this Agenda Item was solely an informational matter, the Planning Commission
took no formal action.
For the record, Chairman Guerriero noted the Commission's receipt of a letter (dated
December 13, 1999) from Ms. Pamela L. Miod, expressing her opposition to the Wolf
Creek Project, requesting the Planning Commission to oppose this particular
development. It was noted that the attachments to the letter were inclusive of over 50
signatures of residents, who were also in opposition to the project.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Plannincl Application No. PA99-0378 {Development Plan and Conditional
Use Permit))
Request to design, construct and operate a 12,825 square foot Saturn
automobile dealership with associated automobile display and storage
areas on 2.61 acres planned and zoned for Service Commercial (SC) use.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning
Commission approve the request.
Project Planner Griffin provided a detailed overview of the project (per agenda material);
relayed the corrections to the Conditions of Approval with respect to Condition No. 7
(regarding materials and colors), and Condition No. 10 (regarding a landscape island),
as indicated on the supplemental agenda material; specified the site location, landscape
plan, surrounding uses, location of the display areas, and the glass enclosed canopy
area; provided additional information regarding the architectural design, relaying that
staff recommended that the raised half-round red accent bands proposed on the front of
the building at the canopies, and service entrance areas, be replaced with a red accent
stripe.
PlanComrn/mlnutes1121599
For Commissioner Webster, with respect to the reference in the staff report to a
condition recommending the applicant replace the red accent band with a red stripe,
Project Planner Griffin indicated that the condition had been inadvertently omitted.
In response to Commissioner Webster's queries regarding Attachment No. 3 (per
agenda material), Project Planner Griffin relayed that the traffic analysis report pertained
to three dealerships, and not solely to this project.
For Commissioner Webster, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks noted that numerous
recommended mitigating measures denoted in the above-mentioned traffic analysis had
been included in the proposed raised Median Project on Ynez Road and Solana Way.
For Commissioner Mathewson, Project Planner Griffin provided additional information
with respect to the light standards; clarified the elevation variation between this site and
the residential use (apartment complex) to the east of the project, noting the location of
the carports, and the 7-10 foot drop in the elevation of the dealership site; relayed that
the proposed plan was not inclusive of security fencing around the dealership, noting
that there would be gates at the vehicular entry points; and provided additional
information regarding the required landscape standards.
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that there was a six-foot block wall on top
of the slope, adjacent to the residential use.
For Commissioner Mathewson, Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that there was a
designated portion of the Development Code applicable to automobile dealers
landscape standards. Senior Planner Fagan provided additional information regarding
the landscape requirements, clarifying that the twenty percent (20%) standard did not
apply to automobile dealership uses.
Commissioner Mathewson relayed that in his opinion the language of the Development
Code did not clarify that the twenty percent (20%) landscape standard was not required.
Mr. Darrold Davis, representing the applicant, specified that the lighting standards were
consistent with the Palomar Outdoor Lighting Ordinance, and the City standards, noting
the utilization of low pressure sodium security lighting due to the restrictions associated
with the observatory; and for Chairman Guerriero, relayed that there was no chained-
linked fencing proposed on this site.
In light of the right-in/right-out only driveway, Commissioner Webster recommended
relocating the monument sign from the south side of the driveway to the north side of the
driveway in order to prevent negative visibility impacts for vehicles exiting the driveway.
For Commissioner Mathewson, Mr. Davis provided additional information regarding the
visibility of the service bays, noting the placement of planters which would partially block
the view of that area; and relayed the restrictions associated with the applicant's desire
to relocate the driveway further south due to the Fire Department's requirement for
provision of an adequate turning radius for fire truck access. Project Planner Griffin
noted the distance of the service area from the entry area.
Commissioner Mathewson recommended that the applicant work with staff to make
efforts to place a lower, fuller tree in the middle landscape planter area in order to aid in
5
planComfrl/minute$1121599
the screening of the service bays, acknowledging that there may be restrictions
regarding the type of trees appropriate for an auto dealership.
For Chairman Guerriero, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that the Ynez
Road and Solana Way Median Projects would be constructed in conjunction with the
Paradise Chevrolet Dealership construction project. Mr. Davis specified that the
construction of that project would begin in January.
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks provided clarification of Condition No. 42
(regarding the median project) for Mr. Davis.
With respect to Commissioner Webster's querying with respect to staff's
recommendation to replace the half-round red band with a red accent stripe, Mr. Davis
retayed the applicant's desire to achieve an application similar to the steel canopies that
were omitted from the design plans, which was a standard image design element for
Saturn Dealership uses; specified that the half-round accent bands would extend out
eight inches at the maximum distance; for Commissioner Mathewson, relayed that the
material utilized for this particular application was efis (a high quality stucco-type
material); and noted that the applicant would work with staff regarding this issue.
The Commission relayed their concludinq remarks, as follows:
Commissioner Fahey relayed that she had no preference with respect to the red accent
articulation elements on the building (between the proposed design and staff's
recommendation to replace the efis treatment with a red stripe).
Commissioner Mathewson noted his support of the proposed project; requested that
staff investigate the inconsistencies between the landscaping denoted on the landscape
plan on the legend, and the landscape map, ensuring that adequate landscaping was
installed; and reiterated his request that the applicant work diligently with staff to attempt
to further screen the line-of-sight of the service bay area with landscaping.
Commissioner Webster specified that the Development Code requires the installation
of a minimum of 15-gallon size trees, noting that the proposed landscape plan denoted
5-gallon size trees: and concurred with Commissioner Fahey's comments, regarding the
architectural enhancements.
Chairman Guerriero welcomed Saturn to the City of Temecula.
MOTION: Commissioner Fahey moved to close the public hearing; and to approve
staff's recommendation, with the attached Conditions.
planComm~mln utes/121599
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-051
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA99-0378 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT) FOR THE DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 12,825
SQUARE SATURN AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP ON
2.61 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF YNEZ
ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 1,200 FEET SOUTH OF
SOLANA WAY, AND ALSO IDENTIFIED AS PARCEL 3
OF PARCEL MAP 28809.
Add-
That the applicant work with staff regarding the architectural enhancements,
specifically with respect to the red half-round e~s treatments.
That the applicant work with staff to make efforts to screen the service bay
area with a modified landscape plan.
· That Commissioner Webster's recommendation regarding the relocation of
the monument sign be considered. (See page 5 of the minutes.)
That the trees installed be a minimum of 15-gallon size (per Development
Code standards), rather than the 5-gallon size denoted on the landscape
proposed plan.
That the corrections with respect to Condition No. 7 (regarding materials and
colors), and Condition No. 10 (regarding a landscape island) be
implemented, as specified in the supplemental agenda material.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Webster and voice vote reflected
unanimous approval.
it was noted that at 7:22 P.M. the meeting recessed, reconvening at 7:35 P.M.
5. Planninq Application No. PA99-0345 (Development Plan)
Request to construct a 137-room, 59,950 square foot, 3-story Holiday Inn
Express Hotel on 3.37 acres planned and zoned for Highway/Tourist (HT)
commercial use.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning
Commission approve the request.
Via overheads. Project Planner Griffin apprised the Commission of the project plan (of
record), as follows:
PlanComm/minutes1121599
Relayed the location of the site, the access points, the site design, the proposed
landscape plan, the entry design, and specified the architectural articulation.
Presented the material board.
Specified the architectural screening of the air conditioning units.
Noted the criteria the project had met with respect to qualifying for the request for a
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) increase, as follows: 1) the employment, fiscal, and
economic benefits of the project, 2) the enhanced architectural and landscape
design, and 3) the availability of meeting rooms for non-profit service or charitable
organizations at little or no cost.
In response to Chairman Guerriero's concerns, provided clarification with respect to
the letter from the Department of Transportation (per agenda material).
For informational purposes, Chairman Guerriero requested staff to provide the
documents associated with the previously approved Rosa's Caf~ use, referenced in the
staff report.
For Chairman Guerriero, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that the issues
referenced in the letter from the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District (via agenda material) would be addressed prior to the Issuance of any Grading
Permits on the site, specifying that the project had been conditioned with respect to this
matter.
In response to Commissioner Webster's queries, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks
provided additional information regarding the area drainage fee applicable for properties
that drain into Murrieta Creek, noting that this site falls within that requirement; and
advised that there was no proposed Assessment District that the project would be
required to participate in, noting that the sole Assessment District that staff had
addressed was participation in the Western Bypass Corridor, if, and when an
Assessment District was formed for that project.
In response to Commissioner Webster's queries with respect to the north access road
improvements, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed the restrictions related to
conditioning the adjacent development to widen the adjacent portion of the driveway
since there was no pending development; relayed the restrictions regarding conditioning
this project to widen that portion of the driveway; and noted that since this project had an
easement to utilize the driveway, the project could be conditioned to modify the signal in
order to allow improved turning motions out of the driveway. Project Planner Griffin
relayed that the Rosa's Caf~ use would complete the improvements on the northerly
drive up to this project's easement.
For Commissioner Webster, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks clarified Condition
No. 46 (regarding an additional right-of-way on Jefferson Avenue), noting that the
applicant had agreed to complete this project.
In response to Commissioner Webster's comments, Project Planner Griffin provided
additional information regarding the traffic analysis (of record), advising that although the
Level of Service (LOS) was at Level F during peak periods, that this particular project
PianComrntminutes1121599
would not impact the LOS. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks advised that the peak
traffic volumes generated from this project would vary from the peak hours at the heavily
impacted intersections reported in the traffic analysis.
For Commissioner Mathewson, Project Planner Griffin relayed that although there was
no proposed plan the applicant would be permitted to install freeway signage; and with
respect to the roof, specified the location of the tile application, and the metal-ribbed
material on the canopy treatment.
For Chairman Guerriero, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks advised that there
would be adequate provision for stacking on Front Street; and noted that the future
proposed Creek Crossing would be located further north of this area.
Mr. Larry Levoff, developer representing the applicant, introduced the members of the
development team, noting their availability to answer questions of the Commission; and
provided a brief overview of the project, as follows:
Noted that the additional amenities the project proposed contributed to the FAR
increase.
Advised that the flood plain issues would be addressed prior to the onset of
construction.
Relayed that the signage plan would be developed at a future date under a separate
permit.
With respect to the raised median project on Jefferson Avenue, referencing
Condition No. 46, requested that the phrase in the second bullet that reads the
Developer can receive Development Impact Fee credits be replaced with the
Developer will receive Development Impact Fee credits.
Advised that the project would be developed in two phases, requesting that the
Planning Commission allow administrative approval regarding the phasing of the
construction; noted that the first phase would be inclusive of 101 units, and the
second phase would be the completion of the project, inclusive of 36 units, which
was scheduled to be constructed in two years; provided additional information
regarding the phasing; and specified that the rationale for phasing the project was
due to financial issues.
Project Planner Griffin clarified that he had initially relayed to the applicant that if it was
their desire to construct the project in two phases that there should be provision of two
plans in order for the Planning Commission to review the project as it would be initially
constructed.
Planning Manager Ubnoske clarified that the project proposed was for the entire 137
units, noting the presented site pan; relayed concern with moving forward with phasing
without the provision of a site plan reflecting the phasing, in order to evaluate how the
phasing would affect the landscaping, and the symmetry of the entire site; relayed that if
it was the Commission's desire, the project could be approved, as proposed (the 137
units); and noted that there was a process denoted in the Development Code referenced
plancomm/rnlnutei1121599
as a Minor Development Plan, which allows minor alterations, advising that this could be
handled on a staff level, if that was the Commission's direction.
In response to Commissioner Mathewson, Mr. Levoff addressed the matter of the
condensation from the air conditioning units potentially staining the stucco of the
building; with respect to future signage, specifically, whether the applicant would be
agreeable to installing a sign on the east elevation rather than a freestanding sign along
the freeway corridor, advised that there was no sign plan at this point in time, noting that
the matter had not been investigated, and that he could not address the issue at this
time.
For Commissioner Webster, Mr. Levoff specified that the width of the driveway on the
south side of the project would be 25 feet; provided additional information regarding the
landscaping on the southern boundary; with respect to the color of the retainer wall
(located adjacent to the freeway right-of-way), advised that the applicant would work with
Caltrans regarding that issue; and provided additional information regarding the
landscaping in that area.
Mr. Dan Hansin, architect representing the applicant, provided additional information
regarding the design element of the project, for Commissioner Webster; addressed how
this particular design addressed the Design Guideline requirements with respect to the
building design being comprised of three portions (i.e., a base, a middle, and a top);
specified the enhanced architectural detailing; with respect to Commissioner Webster
comments, regarding adding stone or brick veneer for accenting, relayed that the
applicant attempted to achieve an accenting affect with paint color variation; and
provided additional information regarding the ease of modifying paint application at a
future date, verses attempting to change a stone or brick application.
For informational purposes, Project Planner Griffin relayed that due to the lack of
specificity regarding the depth of the recessing on the window treatments, staff would
not be opposed to the Commission conditioning the project with respect to a certain
specified depth (i.e., six inches) in order to ensure provision of a vertical element on that
elevation.
In response to Project Planner Griffin's comments, Mr. Levoff relayed the long-term
maintenance issues associated with increasing the width of the window treatment
recessing, noting that the applicant would ensure a positive visual appearance; and
noted that the applicant would prefer not to condition the project with respect to a
specified depth, allowing the architect to make this determination.
Chairman Guerriero relayed the importance of the visual appearance of this building due
to the proximity to the freeway, and the prominent location within the City.
In response to Commissioner Mathewson's queries, Mr. Hansin provided additional
information regarding the design elements.
The Commissioner relayed their conclusionarV comments, as follows:
Commissioner Webster relayed that he concurred with staff's recommendation to
condition the project with respect to the landscaping modifications (page 4 of the staff
report, last paragraph), recommending the following revisions: 1) with respect to the
10
ptanComt'Nminutes1121599
eastern boundary (at the location of the ten-foot landscaping strip, adjacent to the
freeway right-of-way), recommended denser tree planting in that area, as well as, 2)
adding a larger evergreen species in the landscaping plan to correspond to the scale of
the buildings; with respect to the traffic access along the northern reciprocal access
easement, recommended conditioning the project requiring completion of the
improvement project Prior to Occupancy; with respect to the phasing issues,
recommended that the applicant re-submit a proposed project plan presenting the
phasing elements; recommended that there be additional architectural enhancements on
all of the elevations (i.e., window treatments, veneer materials), and that the architectural
plan be revised to reflect the detailed enhancements; and recommended continuing this
Agenda item.
Concurring with Commissioner Webster's comments, Commissioner Fahey
recommended that the applicant provide a phasing plan, add additional detailed building
articulation, and that the landscape plan be modified per Commissioner Webster's
comments; relayed concern with the application of the metal roofing material proposed
at the entry rather that tile, recommending that the applicant provide a sample of the
material or a photograph reflecting the metal material application; relayed that she
approved of the overall project, and that if the applicant addressed the previously-
mentioned issues, she would support the project; and concurred that the matter should
be continued, in order for the applicant to address the issues.
Commissioner Mathewson relayed concurrence with the previous Commission
comments: recommended that a condition be added with respect to the request for a
FAR increase, stating that the applicant would provide a meeting room space for non-
profit or community groups at no cost or at a significantly discounted rate, requesting
staff to develop the specifics of that condition; noted the inconsistency of the landscape
plan between the legend, and what was actually reflected on the map, requesting staff to
work with the applicant to correct the matter; with respect to the signage, relayed his
opposition to freestanding signs along the freeway corridor, acknowledging that the
Development Code makes provision for freestanding signage; recommended that the
applicant investigate placing the sign on the east elevation rather than along the freeway
corridor, and recommended that the sign issue be a condition of the project.
In response to Commissioner Fahey's queries as to whether the above-referenced sign
placement could qualify towards the applicant's request for an increase in FAR, Planning
Manager Ubnoske relayed that she would investigate the matter; provided additional
information regarding the freestanding sign issue, advising that the Sign Ordinance
permits this type of signage; and relayed that the applicant would have to be agreeable
to not placing a sign along the freeway corridor.
Chairman Guerriero recommended that staff investigate the rewording the language of
Condition No. 46, in order to accommodate the applicant's request for revision (See
page 9 of the minutes, under Mr. Levoff's comments, 4th bullet).
MOTION: Commissioner Fahey moved to close the public hearing; to continue Agenda
Item No. 5 to the January 5, 2000 Planning Commission meeting. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner Mathewson. (This motion ultimately passed. See page
12.)
PlanComm~mlnutes/121599
In response to Planning Manager Ubnoske's queries, the applicant relayed his
preference to bring the matter back to the Commission as soon as possible.
Chairman Guerriero reiterated the issues that would need to be addressed by the
applicant, as follows:
The variant roofing materials (i.e., metal, tile).
The addition of additional architectural elements on the elevations.
The landscaping issues.
The signage issue.
The provision of phasing plans.
The applicant relayed that if the Commission would be agreeable to the applicant
providing pencil sketch drawings in lieu of color renderings, that the applicant would be
prepared for presentation; and requested that the matter be continued to the January 5,
2000 Planning Commission meeting.
Concurring with Chairman Guerriero's comments, Planning Manager Ubnoske clarified
that if all the documentation was not provided, that the matter would be continued again
to the January 19, 2000 Planning Commission meeting.
At this time voice vote was taken reflecting unanimous approval.
6. Plannin.q ADPlication No. PA99-0308 (Minor Conditional Use Permit))
Request to operate an Indoor Skateboard Park with optional use as a
Paintball Arena occupying 14,666 square feet of a 26,161 square foot
industrial building.
RECOMMENDATION
it is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning
Commission approve the request.
Relaying that this project had been presented at the October 21, 1999 Director's
hearing, Project Planner Thornsley noted that there had been expressed opposition to
the project (via fax and public comments) by two proximate property owners, Mr. Michael
Wilkinson, and Mr. Howard Reimer; advised that after consideration of the comments
and concerns raised by the two parties, the project had been approved; relayed that
subsequent to the Director's Hearing approval, Mr. Wilkinson, and Mr. Reimer had filed
formal appeals; specified the primary issues of concern (documented in the staff report),
as follows: 1) the impact of attracting children to an industrial area in light of the
proximate storage of hazardous materials, 2) the impact of the additional generation of
traffic, 3) the hazards associated with children in the area due to truck traffic, and 4) the
lack of adequate parking; addressed the expressed concerns (as outlined in the agenda
material); read into the record a letter dated December 9, 1999, form Mr. Wilkinson,
rescinding his appeal (per supplemental agenda material); and for Commissioner
Webster, provided additional information regarding the applicant's security plan, which
had been reviewed and approved by the Temecula Police Department.
12
RanComm/minutes1121599
Mr. Chuck R. Lacy, representing the applicant, specified the monetary investment with
respect to this project; noted the installation of surveillance cameras; reiterated that the
security plan associated with this project had been reviewed by the Temecula Police
Department; reviewed the rules and regulation procedures developed by the applicant,
inclusive of an patron identification program; for Commissioner Fahey, relayed that the
average age of the patrons would be 15 years old; provided additional information
regarding the security cameras, and the process of enforcing the rules and regulations of
the skateboard park; acknowledged that although there were no sidewalks in this area,
patrons could potentially access the site via walking; for Commissioner Mathewson, with
respect to the paintball facility use, relayed that there had been consideration to restrict
the paintball gun use by solely allowing rental paintball gun use; provided additional
information regarding alternate paintball facilities; relayed that the applicant would be
agreeable to being held responsible for paintball cleanup on the adjacent property; for
Chairman Guerriero, confirmed that the patrons would be restricted from leaving the
premises with a loaded paintball gun; in response to Chairman Guerriero's queries,
relayed that the applicant was in the process of developing a procedure of protecting the
exit signs from paintball paint, per the Fire Department's direction.
The Commission relayed their concludinq remarks, as follows:
Commissioner Fahey relayed her opposition to these types of facilities being located
within industrial areas.
Commissioner Mathewson noted that he would suppor~ the project, with the added
conditions, restricting paintball gun use to rentals only, and that the applicant would be
responsible for paintball paint cleanup within 300 feet of the site.
Chairman Guerriero requested the applicant develop a procedure, ensuring that the
patrons did not leave the site with paintballs.
MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to close the public hearing; to deny the
appeal, upholding the Planning Director's decision to approve the project, with the
attached conditions:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-052
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING THE APPEAL OF
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0308 (MINOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPEAL), UPHOLDING
THE PLANNING DIRECTOR'S DECISION TO APPROVE
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0308, (MINOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT) A REQUEST TO
OPERATE AN INDOOR SKATEBOARD PARK WITH
PAINTBALL ARENA WITHIN A 14,666 SQUARE FOOT
PORTION OF A BUILDING WITHIN AN EXISTING
BUSINESS PARK, LOCATED AT 42188 RIO NEDO,
UNIT A, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.
909-254-006,
planCornr~'mlnutes/121599
Add-
, A Condition stating that the applicant would restrict paintball gun use to
rental-use only.
A Condition stating that the applicant would be responsible for cleanup of
any vandalism-related paintball activities within 300 feet of the site.
A Condition stating that patrons would be restricted from leaving the
premises with paintballs.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Webster and voice vote reflected approval
with the exception of Commissioner Fahey who voted no.
PLANNING MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that there would be a Planning Commission
Forum heid on February 26, 2000.
B. Planning Manager Ubnoske expressed her wishes for a Happy Holiday Season
for all.
COMMISSIONER REPORTS
A For Commissioner Mathewson, Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that staff
worked with applicants to expedite the process of presenting a proiect to the
Planning Commission if there was urgency with respect to the timing of the
project.
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that prior to a project being
presented to the Commission, staff works diligently with the applicant on the
proposed plan.
B. In response to Commissioner Webster's comments, Planning Manager Ubnoske
noted the general concerns related to staff's initial review of the Draft impact
Report for the Morgan Hills Specific Plan.
Noting that he had read the 600-page document, Commissioner Webster relayed
that in his opinion the project did not conform to the Southwest Specific Plan.
Planning Manager Ubnoske advised, for Commissioner Webster, that she would
provide copies of staff's response to the document to the Commission.
C. For informational purposes, Chairman Guerriero noted that he had attended the
EPA Legislature Update meeting, relaying that the City would benefit from the
issues that had been updated.
D. Chairman Guerriero recommended that the Fire and Police Departments be
required to report noted realfunctioning signals.
PlanCornnvrnln utes/121599
E. Commissioner Fahey commended the development of the Lowe's Building.
For Chairman Guerriero, Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that staff was in the
process of addressing the screening issues at the Power Center.
ADJOURNMENT
At 9:15 P.M. Chairman Guerriero formally adjourned this meeting to Wednesday,
January 5, 2000 at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park
Drive, Temecula.
Ron Guerriero, Chairman
Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager
MINUTES FROM
JANUARY S, 2000
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 5, 2000
CALL TO ORDER
The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:05 P.M., on
Wednesday, January 5, 2000. in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200
Business Park Ddve, Temecula. California.
ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Flag salute by Commissioner Webster.
ROLLCALL
Present: Commissionem Fahey, Mathewson, Webstar, and Chairman
Gue~ero.
Absent: None.
Also Present:
Planning Manager Ubnoske,
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks,
Attorney Cudey,
Senior Planner Fagan,
Project Planner Gdffin,
Project Planner Thomas, and
Minute Clerk Hansen.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mr. Bob Lopshire, 40244 Atmore Court. representing the Parent/Teacher Association (PTA) for the
Temecula Valley District Council, and Nicholas Valley Elementary School, relayed his desire for the
City to adopt a more stringent criteria with respect to the approval process of licensed applications
for the sale of alcohol; on behalf of the PTA leadership, applauded the City of Temecula, and the
Temecula Police Department for closely monitoring licensed uses that currently sell alcohol,
specifically gas station, and convenience store uses; commended the Planning Commission for its
decision to deny the findings of Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN) with respect to the AM/PM
Convenience store at Winchester Road/Nicholas Road, and the use within the Plaza on Margadta
Road, due to the proximity of both uses to local high schools; and relayed support to the Planning
Commission with respect to its efforts to restrict the number of additional alcohol establishments
within the City of Temecula.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
Approval of Aaenda
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the Agenda of January 5, 2000.
R:%PlanCornrn~ninutes%010500
MOTION: Commissioner Webster moved to approve the agenda. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Fahey. (This motion ultimately passed. See below.)
For Commissioner Webster, Planning Manager Ubnoske provided clarification with respect to a
letter included in the agenda packet regarding reconsideration of a Tentative Tract.
At this time voice vote was taken reflecting unanimous approval.
2 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes of November 17, 1999.
MOTION: Commissioner Webster moved to approve the minutes, amended as follows. The
motion was seconded by Commissioner Fahey.(Thie motion ultimately passed. See below.)
Commissioner Webster relayed the following revisions:
Indicated that on page 5, under Recommendation, the word deny should be replaced with
the word approve.
Noted that on page 9, in the 3r~ bullet, the phrase replacing the vertical circles with tile
detail should be replaced with the addition ofe roof element, and relayed a desire to add
the word *storage to the phrase shopping cart *provisions in order to reflect shopping cart
t
storage provisions; and with respect to the 4 h bullet, in the last sentence, indicated that the
phrase a Transportation Systems Plan should be added after the phrase a Systems
Management Program (in the list of specified concerns).
Advised that on page 12, in the 4th paragraph, in the last sentence, the phrase per staff
recommendation be deleted.
At this time voice vote was taken reflecting unanimous approval.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
3
Planning Application No. PA99-0345 (Development Plan) - VCL Construction (located at
the east side of Jefferson Avenue, approximately 1,000 feet north of Rancho California
Road - portions of Parcels 1, 2, 3, & 6 of Parcel Map 23882 - Project Planner Steve
Gdffin)
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Continue this item to the Planning Commission meeting of January 19, 2000.
Senior Planner Fagan relayed that due to the additional time needed to addross the concerns
expressed by the Planning Commission at the December 15, 1999 Planning Commission
meeting, staff recommended that this Agenda Item be continued to the January 19, 2000
Planning Commission meeting.
MOTION: Commissioner Fahey moved to continue this matter to the January 19, 2000
Planning Commission meeting. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Webster and voice
vote reflected unanimous approval.
R:~PlanCornrn~minutes~010500
2
4
Plannin.cl Application No, PA99-0379 (Conditional Use Permit) - Willin.~ (Buck) & Lynne
Ramsey (located at the south side of W~nchester Road, midway between Ynez Road and
Mar{ladta Road, on Pad E at the Promenade Mall- APN910-320-028 - Project Planner
Thomas Thomslev)
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA0379 A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL
BUILDING ON 1.2 ACRE AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
TO OPERATE A GAS STATION/CONVENIENCE STORE WITH
DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANT SERVICE LOCATED ON THE
SOUTH SIDE OF WINCHESTER ROAD BETWEEN
MARGARITA ROAD AND YNEZ ROAD KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 910-320-028 AND LOT E OF LOT
LINE ADJUSTMENT PA98-0495 AND PARCEL MERGER PA99-
0007
4.2 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0379 (Conditional
Use Permit) pursuant to Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines.
Mr. Ron Bradley, representing the applicant, requested that this Agenda Item be continued to
the January 19, 2000 meeting.
MOTION: Commissioner Fahey moved to continue this matter to the January 19, 2000
Planning Commission meeting. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Webster. (This
motion was ultimately passed. See below.)
In response to Commissioner Webster's comments regarding CEOA issues, Attorney Cudey
provided clarification.
Commissioner Webster recommended that with respect to the staff report, on page 1, under
Recommendation No. 2, that in lieu of the recommendation to adopt a Notice of Exemption with
respect to the CEQA issues, that staff recommend a Finding of Consistency with the EIR that
was completed regarding this project.
At this time voice vote was taken reflecting unanimous approval.
5
Planning Application No. PA99-0277 (Development Plan) - Tim Shook Company, Inc.
(located oenerallv east of the Jefferson Avenue/Bueckincl Drive intersection on the north
side of BueckinQ Ddve - 41437 Bueckincl Ddve - in the City of Temecula) - Associate
Planner Denice Thomas
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
R:~PlanCommVninutes~010500
3
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-001
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0277, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION, AND OPERATION OF A 13,064 SQUARE
FOOT COMMERCIAL SPECULATIVE BUILDING ON 1.01
ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BUECKING
DRIVE (41437 BUECKING DRIVE) AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 910-272-020-1
5.2 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0277 pursuant to
Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines;
5.3 Recommend approval of the Development Plan to the City Council.
Via overhead site plans, Project Planner Thomas provided an overview of the project (of
record), highlighting the access, parking area, loading area, and landscape plan; specified the
enhanced articulation utilized to break up the massing on the building; for Commissioner
Mathewson, provided additional information regarding the applicant's odginal proposal to build
two identical buildings, and the revisions that had been implemented into this particular project
due to staffs recommendation to add elements to render a unique visual appearance from the
adjacent building.
Mr. Tim Shook, representing the applicant, for Commission Mathewson, provided additional
information regarding the modifications to the original project plan in order to implement
architectural features to provide a unique appearance between the two buildings; specified the
enhanced articulation which had been added, as follows: additional glass elements, inset
diamond tiles, crown molding, and a sandblasted treatment; clarified that the smooth recessed
wall area would not be utilized for doors, noting that the recessed area was a design element
intended to create continuity with the adjacent building; and provided additional information
regarding the proposed plan to screen the roof-mounted equipment.
For Commissioner Mathewson, Project Planner Thomas relayed that due to the concern
regarding the view from Jefferson Avenue, staff was in the process of working with the applicant
to develop a revised design plan to totally screen the roof-mounted equipment with architectural
elements.
The Commissioners relayed their concluding remarks, as follows:
Commissioner Fahey recommended that the project be conditioned to ensure that the roof-
mounted equipment was adequately screened with appropriate architectural modifications.
Commissioner Mathewson concurred with Commissioner Fahey's comments; and
recommended that the applicant add additional treatments to the recessed wall area (i.e., a
trellis) per staff recommendation.
Commissioner Webster advised that Condition No. 6 adequately addressed the issue of
screening the roof equipment; and relayed no opposition to the addition of a treatment element,
such as trelliswork, in the area of the recessed wall.
Chairman Guerdero commended the applicant for a job well done with respect to the design of
the buildings.
R:~PlanComm%minutes~010500
4
In response to Commission comment, Mr. Shook relayed that the applicant would be agreeable
to adding a trellis element to the recessed wall area; and noted that the applicant would work
with staff with respect to this particular treatment,
MOTION: Commissioner Fahey moved to approve staff recommendation, {This motion was
amended.)
Planning Manager Ubnoske clarified that the Recommendation reflected on the Agenda
(referencing 5.3) should be corrected to indicate the recommendation to approve rather than the
recommendation to recommend approval of the Development Plan to the City Council, noting
that this action would be the final approval.
MOTION: Commissioner Fahey moved to close the public headng; and to approve the project,
as proposed, with the following added Condition:
Add
That the applicant work with staff to incorporate an additional treatment to the
arched recessed wall area.
Commissioner Mathewson seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
6
Plannincl APPlication No. PA99-0278 (Development Plan) - Tim Shook ComPany, Inc.
(located ~lenerally east of Jefferson Avenue/Bueckina Ddve intersection. on the north side
of Bueckin~l Ddve - 41397 Bueckina Drive - in the City of Temecula) - Associate Planner
Denice Thomas
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-002
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0278, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION, AND OPERATION OF A 13,064 SQUARE
FOOT COMMERCIAL SPECULATIVE BUILDING ON 1.01
ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BUECKING
DRIVE (41397 BUECKING DRIVE) AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 910-272-021-2
6.2 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0278 pursuant to
Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines;
6.3 Recommend approval of the Development Plan to the City Council.
By way of color renderings, Project Planner Thomas presented the staff report (via agenda
material), relaying that this particular project was adjacent to the building that was previously
approved, proposed by the same applicant; apprised the Commission of the differentiated
architectural elements of this building design in comparison to the adjacent building.
R:~PlanComm~minutes~010500
5
Mr. Tim Shook, representing the applicant, pointed out the architectural treatments which
created a unique visual appearance for this particular project, while the building footprint was
the same as the adjacent building (the previously appmved project); and advised that the
applicant would be agreeable to adding trelliswork to the elevation with the archway and the
recessed wall.
MOTION: Commissioner Fahey moved to close the public headng; and to approve the project,
as proposed, with the following added Condition:
Add
That the applicant work with staff to incorporate an additional treatment to the
arched recessed wall area.
Commissioner Webster seconded the motion. (This motion ultimately was passed. See
below)
In comparison to the adjacent building, Chairman Guerriere commented on the omission of the
inset diamond tile treatments on the particular project.
At this time voice vote was taken reflecting unanimous approval.
PLANNING MANAGER'S REPORT
Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that staff was going to take a tour in Orange County
with the Lennar Development representatives on Thursday, January 13, 2000 from
approximately 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. to view small lot developments, similar to the
proposals in the Sweetwater Specific Plan; and queried whether any of the
Commissioners would be interested in attending the tour.
Chairman Guerriero relayed an interest in attending the tour.
Commissioners Webster, Fahey, and Mathewson noted that they would be unable to
attend.
For informational purposes, Planning Manager Ubnoske noted that the Agenda format
was being revised; provided sample copies of a modified Agenda to the Commission;
and relayed that the format would be similar to the City Council Agenda.
For Commissioner Mathewson, Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that she was in the
process of obtaining additional information regarding the landscape requirements for
auto dealerships.
In response to Chairman GuerTiero, Planning Manager Ubnoske noted that she would
contact the Police Department in order to obtain data regarding the results of the Sting
Operations within the City.
COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS
No comments.
R:%PlanComm~,ninutes~010500
6
ADJOURNMENT
At 6:41 P.M. Chairman Guerdero formally adjourned this meeting to a regular meeting on
Wednesday. January 19. 2000 at 6:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park
Ddve, Temecula, California.
Ron Guerdero, Chairman
Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager
R:~PlanComm~ninutes~010500
7
ITEM #3
CITY OF TEMECULA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission
Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager
February 16, 2000
Director's Hearing Case Update
Planning Director's Agenda items for January, 2000
Date Case No.
January 13, 2000 PA99-0463
Proposal
The construction of an
additional single-family
detached residential model
for the Buie Communities
Quintana project.
Applicant Action
Buie Approved
Communities
Attachments:
1. Action Agendas - Blue Page 3
F:\DeptS\PLANNING\DIRHEAR\MEMO\2000~January 2000.memo.doe
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
ACTION AGENDAS
F:\Depts\pLANNING\DIRHEAR\MEMOX200OXJanuary 2000.memo.doe
2
ACTION AGENDA
TEMECULA DIRECTOR'S HEARING
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 13, 2000 1:30 PM
TEMECULA CITY HALL MAIN CONFERENCE ROOM
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula. CA 92590
CALL TO ORDER: Matthew Fagan, Senior Planner
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address to the Senior
Planner on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3)
minutes each. [f you desire to speak to the Senior Planner about an item not listed on
the Agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the
Senior Planner.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address.
For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Senior
Planner before that item is heard. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual
speakers.
PUBLIC HEARING
1. Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Environmental Action:
Case Planner:
Recommendation:
Planning Application No. PA99-0463 (Development Plan for
Product Review)
Buie Communities LLC
Tract 24183 within the Paloma/Paseo del Sol Specific Plan
at the intersections of Campanula Way, Meadows Parkway,
and De Portola Road (see below)
The construction of an additional single-family detached
residential model (a single-story 1,914 square foot structure)
for the Buie Communities Quintana project. Previously three
models ranging in size from 2140 to 2283 square feet were
approved on the 156 lets within Tract 24183. This model will
be appropriately interspersed with the other three previously
approved models.
This project is exempt from further evaluation under CEQA
due to a prior finding of no significant environmental effect
and the resulting from the certification of the EIR for the
Paloma del Sol Specific Plan.
John De Gange
Approval
ACTION: APPROVED
ADJOURNMENT
,,TEr',tEC_FSi0hVOLI\USERpij~L'ipLANNiNGiDiRIqEARx20OOXI,i3a30.AGENDA.doc
1
ITEM #4
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMCULA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM
Planning Commission
Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager
February 16, 2000
Finding of Public Convenience or Necessity for the High Society Billlard and Dart
Club located at 28950 Front Street, Suite 102-105.
Prepared by:
Carole Donahoe, AICP, Associate Planner
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Service Commercial (SC)
SURROUNDING GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATIONS: North:
South:
East:
West:
Service Commercial (SC)
Service Commercial (SC) and Highway Tourist Commercial
(HTC)
Interstate I-15
Service Commercial (SC) and Open Space (OS)
EXISTING ZONING:
Service Commercial (SC)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
BACKGROUND
Service Commercial (SC) and Highway Tourist Commercial
(HTC)
The applicant is requesting the Temecula Planning Commission make a finding of public
convenience or necessity in order to sell beer at their proposed new billlard hall located on the east
side of Front Street, between State Highway 79 South and Santiago Road. The billlard hall has
been in existence since 1993 at 27309 Jefferson Avenue, and currently possesses a Type 40 (on
sale beer only) permit from the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC). The
applicant is relocating to a larger location. According to the owner, Michael Dean McMillen, he will
immediately surrender the current permit upon issuance of the new permit. State law requires a
local finding of public convenience or necessity before a beverage sales license will be
transferred/issued by the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board,
Selection of an Alternate Site
Mr. McMillen appeared before the Planning Commission on August 12, 1999, with a similar request
for a site at 27496 Commerce Center Drive. The Commission denied his request based upon the
proximity of both church facilities and a beauty college that serves students from the Regional
Occupational Program. The Commission encouraged Mr. McMillen to seek another, suitable site
within the City.
\\TEMEC_FS I01\VOLI\DeptS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~113PA99 PC Front St..doc
Planning Application No. PA99-0113 (Minor Conditional Use Permit)
On February 10, 2000, the conditional use permit required for a billlard parlor in the Service
Commercial zone wilt be heard at a Director's Hearing. Staff is recommending approval of the
Minor Conditional Use Permit in an existing building,
ANALYSIS
The Planning Commission has developed criteria to determine whether or not a finding of public
convenience or necessity can be made. The criteria and staffs preliminary responses are as
follows:
Criteria to Justify Making a Finding of Public Convenience or Necessity
Q. Does the proposed establishment have any unique features, which are not found in other
similar uses in the community (i.e. types of games, types of food, and other special services)?
A. Yes. High Society Billlard and Darts Club is unique because it is one of a few Billlard and Dart
Clubs represented in the Temecula Valley. Moreover, the Club offers Billiard and Dart league
representation at the national and international level, with tables and equipment at
championship specifications. The Club also offers retail sales and service of dartboard
accessories to other locations throughout the area.
Q. Does the proposed establishment cater to an under-served population (i.e., Patrons of a
different socio-economic class) ?
A. Yes. Males generally dominate the billlard and dart industry. However, the Club offers free
lessons and play for women everyday from 11:00 AM to 7:00 PM.
O. D~es the pr~p~sed estab~ishment previde entertainment that w~u~d fi~~ a niche in ~e c~mmunity
(Le. comedy club, jazz club, etc)?
A. Yes. The High Society Billlard and Dart Club focuses on providing a clean and wholesome
atmosphere and seeks to attract families and their children. The establishment fills a niche in
the community by offering a family oriented entertainment facility.
Q. Are there any geographical boundaries (i.e. rivers, hillsides) or traffic barriers (i.e. freeways,
major roads, major intersections) separating the proposed establishment from other
establishments ?
A. Yes. The High Society Billlard and Dart Club will be located on the west side of the Interstate
15 Freeway, which separates it from the majority of entertainment centers of the City, such as
movie theaters, regional mall, skate park, community recreation center and duck pond, all
located on the east side of the freeway.
Q. Is the proposed establishment located in an area where there is a significant influx of population
during certain seasonal periods?
A. No. The proposed establishment is itself a semi seasonal operation, according to its owner.
The seasonal periods that will result in increased patronage of the establishment are the fall
\\TEMEC_FS101WOLI\DeptsXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPT~113PA99 PC Front St_doe
2
and winter months. As a result of colder temperatures combined with shorter days a greater
need for inside entertainment is created. However, its location is an area of relatively stable
population.
Criteria to Not Justify Making a Finding of Pubic Convenience or Necessity
Is there a proliferation of licensed establishments within a quarter mile of the proposed
establishment?
A. No. Currently there is one off-sale license and three (3) on-site licensed establishments within
a quarter mile of the proposed business, on the records at ABC. The singular off-sale license
was issued to the Sunshine Market, the former tenant at the proposed site.
Q. Are there any sensitive uses (i.e. schools, parks, hospitals, churches) in close proximity (600
feet) to the proposed establishment?
A. No. There are no churches nor schools within 600 feet of the proposed site.
Q. Would the proposed establishment interfere with the quiet enjoyment of their property by the
residents of the area?
A. No. There are no residences in the area, which is comprised of businesses and industry.
Q. Will the proposed establishment add to law enforcement problems in the area?
A. No. According to the Police Department, the High Society Billlard and Dart Club is not expected
to create or exacerbate law enforcement problems in the area.
Number of Similar uses within the City
One (1) other establishment in the City of Temecula, the "Q" Club, located at 27911 Front Street
offers billiards and dads. However, according to the applicant, their tables and equipment is not of
championship dimensions and they do not offer international dart leagues. A few bars in the City
provide small, coin-operated tables and no international darts.
Number of other licensed establishments within I Mile and 3 miles
There are six (6) off-sale and fourteen (14) on-sale licenses within a one (1) mile radius of the
subject establishment. These licensed establishments include restaurants, bars, mini-marts and
grocery stores. The three mile (3) radius encompasses the remainder of the licensed
establishments within the City of Temecula.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends the Planning commission review the information included in this report and make
the finding of public convenience or necessity based upon the limited sale of alcohol to beer only,
the fact that the applicant will be transferring an existing license along with the relocation of his
business, and the unique nature of the business itself.
\\TEMEC_FS10I WOL I\Depts~PLANNING~STAFFRPTq 13PA99 PC Front St..doc
3
Attachments:
1. A. Vicinity Map - Blue Page 5
B. Zoning Map
C. General Plan
D. Radius Map for ¼ Mile, 1 Mile and 3 Miles
2. Correspondence from The High Society Billlard and Dart Club - Blue Page 6
3. Director's Hearing Staff Report dated February 10, 2000 - Blue Page 7
~NTEM EC_FS101\VOLI\DeptsXPLANNINGXSTAFFRP'B113PA99 PC Front St..doc
4
A'H'ACHMENT NO. I
VICINITY MAP
ZONING MAP
GENERAL PLAN
RADIUS MAP
'/\TEMEC FSI01\VOLI\DeptSXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX! 13PA99 PC Front St,.doc
5
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - High Society Billards and Dart Club
EXHIBIT - A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - February 16, 2000
VICINITY MAP
F:~DEPTS~PLANNINGTORMS~STAFFRPT.PC.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - Service Commercial (SC)
EXHIBIT C o GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - Service Commercial (SC)
CASE NO. - High Society Billiards and Dart Club
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - February 16, 2000
F:~DEPTS%PLANNING~=ORMS%STAFFRPT.PC.~oc
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - High Society Billards and Dart Club
EXHIBIT - D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - February 16, 2000
RADIUS MAP
F:~)EPTS~PLANNING~cORMS~STAFFRPT.PC.doc
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CORRESPONDENCE FROM
THE HIGH SOCIETY BILLlARD AND DART CLUB
\\TEM ECFFS101 \VOL I\Depts~PLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX113PA99 PC Front St..doc
6
The High Society Billiard and Dart Club
27309 Jefferson Ave. Ste 101-103
Temeeula Ca. 92590
Proposed New location: 29850 Front St. Temecula CA 92590
January 3, 2000
Planning Comnussion City of Temecula
Re: Public Convenience or Necessity
Dear Conumssioners
This letter has been composed to address the High Society Billiard and Dan Club's need for a letter of
convenience and/or necessity for our type 40 (on sale beer only) permit, from the City of Temecola.
I am aware of the criteria to justify making a finding for this letter as well as the criteria that would not
justify. that finding The is one issue, however, not addressed in that infomm~on handout. That is that v~
already. possess a type 40 permit at our current location. Beer sales constitute anDroximatelv 25 to 30% of
the establishments moss income. We will surrender that permit immediately upon the issuance of the new
pernut so that there will be no lapse in business and only one penrot will ever be in use. We are planning
to open the new location at the same time we close the current one.
I will address each issue, in order. from the criteria handout as follows:
Criteria to Justify Making a Finding of Public Convenience or Necessity.
I The proposed establishment is very umque. It is the only true Billiard and Dart Club in the Temecula
Valley. It is responsible for dart beards located throughout the area at many other locations as well as
billiard supplies and services. Leagues are at the national level.
2. The proposed estabhshment not only differs. butisveryumqueandoneofakind. Weoffer
championship 4 Vz x 9 regulation tables. Tottrnaments, leagues etc. There are other places where one can
play pool. The "Q Club" all 4x8 tables. (the type found in houses because of space restrictions). (1- 4/12 x
9) but no international dan leagues. There are a couple of bars that have small coin operated tables but
again no international darts.
3. The proposed establishment does cater to an under served socio-economic class. That being women.
The Billiard and Dart Induslry has been dominated by males. We offer free lessons and play for women
everyday from 11:00 am to 7:00 pro.
4. The proposed establishment fills a niche in the conunumty by the very nature of it being a family
oriented entertainment facility.
5. There is. as you know a freeway that divides Temecula This estab ishment would be ocated in the
extreme South Western portion of Temecula.
6. The proposed establishment is a semi seasonal operation and would contribute to an influx of patxons
dunng certain seasonal periods. Mainly the cold and rainy days and when it starts to get 'dark early thus
creating a need for entertamment inside.
Criteria to Not Justif'v Makine a Findine of Public Convenience or Necessity
1, Them are not any licensed establishments of this kind within a quarter wile of the proposed facility..
2. Them are no churches or schools xvithin 600 fi of the proposed site.
3, There are no residents in the area. This area is all businesses and industry.
4. The proposed establishment will not add to law enforcemere problems in the area. In fact it will
reduce potential crime in the area by giving people something to do and a way to spend them pent up
aggressive behavior in a fun family competition. This establishment is run by a former police officer who
will not and has not tolerated disorder. The High Society. Billlard Club has a clean reputation and has
proven to be an asset to the Cit3' of Temecula.
A'R'ACHMENT NO. 3
DIRECTOR'S HEARING STAFF REPORT
DATED FEBRUARY 10, 2000
\'!TE M EC_FS t 01 \VOL I XDepts~P LANNINGXSTAFFRPTX 113PA99 PC Front St, .doc
Planning Application No. PA99-0113 (Minor Conditional Use Permit)
For High Society Billiards and Dart Club
February 10, 2000
Director's Hearing
Planning Application No. PA99-0113 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) is a request to operate a
billiard and dart club at 28950 Front Street, Suites 102-105, which is located on the east side of
Front Street between Santiago Road and State Highway 79 South. The High Society Club
currently operates a facility at 27309 Jefferson Avenue and wishes to relocate in order to
expand retail sales of related supplies and equipment. The Club seeks to provide clean and
wholesome entertainment for families and their children. The applicant also desires to transfer
his existing license to dispense alcoholic beverages at the proposed facility and is concurrently
requesting that the City Ptanning Commission make a Finding of Public Convenience and
Necessity in order that he may obtain a new license for the proposed location. The Planning
Commission shall consider the request at their February 16, 2000 headng.
The Planning Director previously approved the relocation of High Society Billiards and Dart Club
to a proposed location on Commerce Center Ddve. However, the Finding of Public
Convenience and Necessity was not made for that site. Therafora, the applicant has
resubmitted this proposal with an alternative site on Front Street.
The proposal, as conditioned, is consistent with the City's General Plan and Development Code.
The site is designated by the General Plan and zoned SC Service Commercial. Billlard padors
are permitted in this zone upon approval of a conditional use permit. City Departments have
reviewed the site plan and floor plan and have provided conditions of approval for the project.
The Police Department indicates that there have been no calls to the existing facility. A Notice of
Public Headng was published and mailed to adjacent property owners.
The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act in accordance with Section
15301 Class 1, because the project is proposed to be housed in an existing commercial building
with no exterior alterations or additions. The proposed use does not involve an expansion of
uses beyond those previously approved for the site.
Staff recommends that the Planning Director approve Planning Application No, PA99-0113
(Minor Conditional Use Permit) based upon the findings and attached conditions of approval.
This concludes staff's presentation. Staff is available to answer any questions.
R:~C U P~q~-O113~STAFFRPT.DH.doC
1
Planning Application No. PA99-Ot 13 (Minor Conditional Use Permit)
FINDINGS:
The proposed conditional use permit is consistent with the General Plan and the
Development Code. The site is designated by the General Plan and zoned SC Service
Commercial. Billlard padors are permitted in this zone upon approval of a conditional use
permit. City Departments have reviewed the site plan and floor plan and have provided
conditions of approval for the project.
The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development
of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will not
adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures. The uses in the vicinity are a
mixture of service commercial businesses, small retail shops, offices, auto and
motoroyde repair. Uses, such as the retail shops, offices and auto repair would generally
be closed dudng the peak business hours of the project.
The site for a prcpesed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate
the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and
other development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the
Planning Commission or Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the
neighborhood. The proposed use will be housed in an existing structure which already
provides the required features prescribed by Code.
The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and
general welfare of the community. The project has been conditioned to comply with
measures that ensure the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The
project proposes to offer family entertainment. Police records indicate no cells have
been made to the existing facility.
That the decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a
conditional use perTnit be based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a
whole.
R:\C U P~99-O113~STAFFRPT, DH.doc
2
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
R:~ U P',99-0113%STAFFRPT.DH.doc
3
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA99-0113 (Minor Conditional Use Permit)
The use hereby permitted is for the operation of a billlard and dart club with retail
sales and service of supplies and equipment, in a 7,135 square foot suite within a
commercial building at 29850 Front Street
Assessor's Parcel No.: 922-120-0011
Approval Date: February 10, 2000
Expiration Date: February 10, 2002
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
General Requirements
The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree
to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own
selection, the City shall be deemed for puq~oses 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 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
dtizens in regards to such defense.
The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval for Planning Application No,
PA99-0113 pdor to any occupancy or use allewed by this conditional use permit,
This Conditional Use Permit may be revoked pursuant to Section 17.03.080 of the City's
Development Code.
The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the
approval of this Conditional Use Permit.
5. Hours of operation shall be between 11 a.m. and 2 a.m., seven days a week.
R:\C U P~99-O113~STAFFRPT,DH,doc
4
BUILDING AND SAFETYDEPARTMENT
Comply with applicable provisions of the 1998 edition of the California Building,
Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1998 National Electrical Code; California
Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the
Temecula Municipal Code.
Submit at time of plan review, a complete extedor site lighting plans showing compliance
with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other
outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of
Building and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine
directly upon adjoining property or public dghts-of-way.
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.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals pdor to commencement of any
construction work.
10. The Occupancy classification of the proposed buildings shall be A-3.
11.
Provide Occupancy approvals for all existing buildings (i.e. finale building permits or
Certificate of Occupancy)
12.
All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations.
Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April
1, 1998)
13. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
14. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
15.
Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1998
edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code, Appendix C.
16.
Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with odginal signature on plans
submitted for plan review.
17.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing
schematic and mechanical plan for plan review.
18.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
19.
Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved
building plans, will require separate approvals and permits.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - None.
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.
R:~C U P~99-0113~STAFFRPT.DH,dO¢
5
20.
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.
21.
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 1500 GPM
at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 400 GPM
for a total fire flow of 1900 GPM with a 2 hour duration, The required fire flow may be
adjusted dudng the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or
automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire
Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2,
Appendix Ill-A)
22.
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 lr2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and
adjacent public streets, Hydrants shall be spaced at 500 feet apart and shall be located
no more than 250 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s)
frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent
hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC
903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B)
23.
As required by the Califomia 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)
24.
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. GVVV with a minimum AC thickness of
.25 feet. ( CFC sec 902)
25.
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)
26.
Pdor to building construction, dead end road ways and streets in excess of one hundred
and f~'y (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of
accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4)
27.
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)
28.
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)
29. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage
R:~C U P~99-0113~STAFFRPT. DH.doc
6
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 pdor to installation. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9)
30.
Pdor 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 appreved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station.
Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to installation.
(CFC Article 10)
31.
Pdor 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)
32.
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)
OTHER AGENCIES
33.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of
Riverside Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated Apdl 9, 1999, a copy
of which is attached.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, I understand and I accept all the
above mentioned Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be
maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish
to make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant Name
R:\C U P%99-0113~STAFFRPT,DH,doc
7
ITEM #5
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
February 16, 2000
Planning Application No. PA99o0239 (Development Plan) and
Planning Application No. PA99-0373 (Tentative Parcel Map 29406)
Prepared By: John De Gange, Project Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff
recommends the Planning Commission:
1. ADOPT a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA99-0239 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN)
FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION
OF TWO INDUSTRIAL SPECULATIVE BUILDINGS
TOTALING 14,593 SQUARE FEET ON A 1.87 ACRE SITE
LOCATED AT THE KNUCKLE OF ENTERPRISE CIRCLE
WEST (225 FEET WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF
ENTERPRISE CIRCLE WEST AND COMMERCE CENTER
DRIVE) AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-
480-015.
ADOPT a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No.
PA99-0239 pursuant to Section 15332 of the CEQA
Guidelines.
3. ADOPT a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000~
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA99-0373, TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP NO. 29406 TO SUBDIVIDE A 1.87 ACRE PARCEL
INTO TWO (2) PARCELS WITHIN THE BUSINESS PARK
ZONE GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE KNUCKLE OF
ENTERPRISE CIRCLE WEST (225 FEET WEST OF THE
INTERSECTION OF ENTERPRISE CIRCLE WEST AND
COMMERCE CENTER DRIVE) ON AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-480-015.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\DEFTS\PLANNING~STAFFPjrr~239pa9o~c.doc
1
APPLICATIONINFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
EXISTING LAND USE:
ADOPT a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No.
PA99-0373 pursuant to Section 15315 of the CEQA
Guidelines.
Brian Fronk
Saddleback and Associates
PA99-0239 A request to approve a Development Plan to
construct and operate two industrial speculative buildings
totaling 14,593 square feet; and PA99-0373 a subdivision of
the project site (which encompasses 1.87 acres) into two lots
(TPM 29406)
At the knuckle of Enterprise Circle West (225 feet west of the
intersection of Enterprise Circle West and Commerce Center
Drive).
BP (Business Park)
North:
South:
East:
West:
SC (Service Commercial), BP (Business Park)
LI (Light Industrial), OS-C (Conservation/Open
Space)
BP (Business Park)
BP (Business Park)
BP (Business Park)
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Existing Service Commercial Building
Flood Control Channel
Existing Auto Repair Facility
Existing Light Industrial Building and Flood
Control Channel
PROJECT STATISTICS
Development Plan
Total Site Area (gross): 1.67 acres (81,294 square feet)
Total Site Area (excluding channel): 1.33 acres (57,747 square feet)
Total Building Area: 14,593 square feet 17.9% of the total site
25.3% of site excluding channel
Building I Footprint:
6,816 square feet
17.0% of the total site
25.3%of site excluding channel
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANN1NG\STAFFRPT~39pa99pc.doc
2
Building 2 Footprint: 7,777 square feet 18.9% of the total site
27.5%of site excluding channel
Total Landscape Area: 14,461 square feet
25% of site excluding channel
Paved Area:
28,693 square feet
Total Floor Area:
Total Floor Area Ratio (FAR): Building 1 Floor Area:
Building 1 Floor Area Ratio (FAR):
14,593 square feet
0.25
6,816 square feet
0.25
35.0% of the total site
49.7% of site excluding channel
Building 2 Floor Area: 7,777 square feet
Building 1 Floor Area Ratio (FAR): 0.28
Parking Required:
Building 1
Office - 600 sq. ft.: 2 Vehicles
Manufacturing - 3,108 sq.ft.: 8 Vehicles
Warehousing - 3.108 s~l. ft.:3 Vehicles
Total - 6,816 sq. ft.: 13 Vehicles, 1 Bicycle, 0 Motorcycles
Building 2
Office - 600 sq. ft.: 2 Vehicles
Manufacturing - 3,589 sq. ft.: 9 Vehicles
Warehousing - 3.588 sq. ~.: 4 Vehicles
Total - 22,561 sq. ~.: 15 Vehicles, 1 Bicycle, 0 Motorcycles
Parking Provided:
Building 1
Standard Spaces: 25
Total Parking Provided: 25
Building 2
Standard Spaces: 38
Total Parking Provided: 38
Building Heights: Twenty-one (21 ') feet
TPM 29406
Total Acreage for the Project
Number of Lots
Lot Size (Parcel 1 )
Lot Size (Parcel 2)
Average Lot Size
1.87 acres
2
0.95 acres
(40,064 square feet)
0.92 acres
(41,230 square feet)
0.93 acres
\\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLI\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX239pa99pC.doc
BACKGROUND
On November 18, 1998 the Planning Commission approved a proposal on this site for a single
22,561 square foot industrial speculative building (PA98-0348). Since that time the applicant
determined that the site and the market would be better served with two smaller buildings. As a
consequence the applicant formally submitted and entirely new application on June 18, 1999.
Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was held on July 15, 1999, with staff providing
written comments on July 27 1999. The project was deemed complete on February 2, 2000.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project consists of a development plan for the design, construction and operation of two
industrial speculative buildings totaling 14,593 square feet on a 1.87 acre site (PA99-0239) and a
Tentative Parcel Map (TPM 29406) for the subdivision of the site into two roughly equal sized lots
to accommodate each building (PA99-0373). The project also includes associated improvements,
such as hardscape, parking, landscaping and drive aisles. Landscape improvements include
parking lot landscape fingers, perimeter planter areas, and streetscape plantings.
ANALYSIS
Development Plan (PA99-0239)
Site Design
The project is being proposed on a rectangular-shaped parcel with one building located within the
southwestern portion of the site and the other building sited on the northern property line.
Customer parking areas are provided within the center of the site off of the main drive aisle.
Private/employee parking is located along the rears of each building and will be enclosed with
wrought iron gates. The design of the site is compatible with existing development in the area.
Outdoor employee lunch areas are being provided for each building in the center of the site.
Access, Traffic and Circulation
The project takes access from a single driveway off of Enterprise Circle West. Truck traffic is
accommodated through the main drive aisle and emergency vehicles have direct access to all
portions of the site with fire truck turn hammerheads provided within the drive aisles.
Architecture
Both buildings wilt be tilt-up concrete with smooth, painted panels and painted accent colors. The
applicant proposes to highlight the office entry portions of the buildings with a projected entry
statement, tilt-up freestanding entry walls, decorative paving and the use of windows. The applicant
is also adding a certain amount of visual interest and articulation to the elevations with the use of
a varied roof height along the front elevation, columnar projections along the front corners of the
buildings, painted reveals, recessed accent features and varying paint colors. These features
provide some interest and help to break up the mass of the building walls. In contrast to the
previously approved project that proposed one large massive building this project proposes two
smaller buildings. The two smaller separate buildings considerably reduce the massing and scale
of a single building. In addition, trees and shrubs within the landscape planters along two sides of
each of the buildings complement the buildings and helps break up their massing.
\\TEMEC_FSi01\VOLIx, DEPTS\pLANNING\STAFFPdrI~39pa99pC.dOe 4
Landscaping
Twenty-five percent (25%) of the overall site has been landscaped which is consistent with the 25%
minimum landscaping requirement in the BP (Business Park) zone. The project provides a
minimum of a six-foot (6') wide perimeter-landscaping planter around approximately 80% of the
site. Significant portions of this planter are 10 feet wide. The frontage along Enterprise Circle West
will have a minimum 20-foot wide planter. The applicant proposes to utilize existing Sycamore and
Pepper trees along the front of the property as street trees.
Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) 29406 (PA99-0373)
The proposed subdivision of the property creates two completely self-sufficient lots in terms of
compliance with the requirements of the City's Development Code, such as lot size, lot density,
parking and required landscaping. Each parcel being created by the tentative parcel map and both
buildings proposed within the associated development plan completely stand alone with the
exception that both lots share a common driveway approach an drive aisle. The project applicant
has been conditioned to establish a shared access agreement and landscape maintenance
agreement between parcels.
EXISTING ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
The General Plan Land Use designation for the site is BP (Business Park). Existing zoning for the
site is BP (Business Park). Manufacturing/office/warehouse uses are permitted with the approval
of a development plan pursuant to Chapter 17.05 of the Development Code. Both the development
plan and the tentative map as proposed, meet all minimum standards of and are consistent with
the Development Code and the General Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
For the current proposals (Planning Applications PA99-0239 and PA99-0373) staff is
recommending that a Notice of Exemption be made for both applications pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15332 and 15315, respectively.
The proposed development plan (PA99-0239) is eligible for a CEQA exemption pursuant to Section
15332 of the CEQA Guidelines based on the following reasons:
· The project site is 1.87 acres which is less than the 5 acres required
· The proposed development is consistent with the existing development in the area
· The site has no value as a habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species
· The site will be adequately served by public utilities and services
· The proposed buildings are consistent the zoning and general plan designations for the site.
The proposed tentative parcel map (TPM 29406) [PA99-0373] is eligible for a CEQA exemption
pursuant to Section 15315 of the CEQA Guidelines based on the following reasons:
· The property is in an urbanized area zoned for commercial/industrial uses
· The division is for fewer than four (4) lots
· The proposed division conforms to the General Plan, the Development Code, and the California
Subdivision Map Act
· Services are currently available to the parcels
\\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLI\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX239pa9°4X:.dOC
5
· The parcel is not a division of a larger parcel divided within 2 years
· The parcels do not have an average natural slope greater than 20 percent
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The proposed development plan consists of the design, construction and operation of two industrial
speculative buildings totaling 14,593 square feet on a 1.87-acre site. The design of the project is
consistent with the City's Design Guidelines, Development Code and the General Plan.
The proposed tentative parcel map (TPM 29406) is in compliance with the City's Subdivision
Ordinance as well as the California Subdivision Map Act. Further, the map as proposed is
consistent with the development requirements of Business Park zone within the City's Development
Code.
FINDINGS
Development Plan
The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for (BP)
Business Park development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the
development standards for (BP) Business Park development contained in the City's
Development Code. The site is therefore properly planned and zoned and found to be
physically suitable for the type and density of commercial development proposed. The
project as conditioned is also consistent with other applicable requirements of State law and
local ordinance, including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CityWide
Design Guidelines, and fire and building codes.
The overall design of the project, including the site, building, parking, circulation and other
associated site improvements, is consistent with and intended to protect the health and
safety of those working in and around the site. The project has been reviewed for, and as
conditioned has been found to be consistent with, all applicable policies, guidelines,
standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and
function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety and welfare.
The design of the proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are
no 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 industrial park. 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.
Tentative Parcel Map No. 29406
The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision is consistent
with the Development Code, General Plan, and the City of Temecula Municipal Code. The
project is compatible with the existing General Plan Land Use Designation and zoning
standards of Business Park. Tentative Tract Map No. 29406 proposes to divide 1.87 acres
into one 0.95 acre parcel and one 0.92 acre parcel, which exceeds the 20,000 square foot
minimum lot area required by the Development Code.
\\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLI\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~Bgpa99pc.doc
6
The tentative map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered
into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the :and is subject to a
Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will
not be too small to sustain their agricultural use. The tentative map has not been previously
divided in the last two years and it is not designated as an agricultural land use area.
The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed
by the tentative map. The site does not have any serious topographical or environmental
constraints, which would inhibit the type of development permitted by the Development
Code or the General Plan.
The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval,
are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably
injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The site is within the vicinity of infill development and
is considered an infill site. 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.
The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious
public health problems. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The
project has been reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineer, Public Works Department and Fire
Department. These departments have conditioned the map to ensure public health, safety
and welfare.
The design of the subdivision provides future passive natural heating or cooling
opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible.
The design of the subdivision and 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
subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to
those previously acquired by the public will be provided. The map proposes access from
Enterprise Circle West. The proposed access points will not obstruct any easements.
Attachments- (Development Plan)
PC Resolution - Blue Page 8
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval for PA99-0239 (Development Plan) - Blue Page 11
PC Resolution - Blue Page 22
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval for PA99-0373 (TPM No. 29406)- Blue Page 26
3. Exhibits for PA99-0239 (Development Plan) - Blue Page 34
A. Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C. General Plan Map
D. Site Plan
E. Grading Plan
F. Elevations
G. Floor Plans
H. Landscape Plan
\\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLI\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRFI'X239pa99pc.doc
7
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
\\TEMEC~FSI01\VOLI\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX239pa99pc.doc
8
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0239, A
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND
OPERATION OF TWO INDUSTRIAL SPECULATIVE BUILDINGS
TOTALING 14,593 SQUARE FEET ON A 1.86 ACRE SITE LOCATED AT
THE KNUCKLE OF ENTERPRISE CIRCLE WEST (225 FEET WEST OF
THE INTERSECTION OF ENTERPRISE CIRCLE WEST AND COMMERCE
CENTER DRIVE) AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-480-
015.
WHEREAS, Saddleback and Associates filed Planning Application No. PA99-0239 in
accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0239 was processed in the time and manner
prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA99-0239 on
February 16, 2000, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time interested
persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or in opposition;
WHEREAS, at the public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the Commission considered all facts relating
to Planning Application No. PA99-0239;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
Section 2. FindingS;. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No.
PA99-0239 makes the following findings; to wit:
A. The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for
(BP) Business Park development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development
standards for (BP) Business Park development contained in the City's Development Code. The site
is therefore properly planned and zoned and found to be physically suitable for the type and density
of commercial development proposed. The project as conditioned is also consistent with other
applicable requirements of State law and local ordinance, including the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), the CityWide Design Guidelines, and fire and buildin9 codes.
A. The overall design of the project, including the site, building, parking, circulation and
other associated site improvements, is consistent with and intended to protect the health and safety
of those working in and around the site. The project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned has
been found to be consistent with, all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations
intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent
with the public health, safety and welfare.
\XTEMEC~FS101\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANN1NG\STAFFRPT\239pa99pc.doc
9
C. The design of the proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial
environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There
are no 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 industrial park. 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. A Notice of Exemption for Planning Application
No. PA99-0239 was made per the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section
15332. This Section allows exemptions for infill development projects that meet certain
prescribed criteria, The subject site complies with these criteria and therefore the exemption
can be applied to this project.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves
Planning Application No. PA99-0239 to construct and operate two square foot speculative office,
industrial, warehouse building, associated parking and landscaping on a parcel containing 1.87
gross acres, located approximately 225 feet west of the intersection of Enterprise Circle West and
Commerce Center Drive and known as a portion of Assessor's Parcel No. 921480-015 subject to
Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference and made a part hereof.
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of February 2000.
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 16th day of February,
2000 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
\\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLI\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTL239pa99pc.d~c
10
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
\\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANN1NG\STAFFRPT~239pa99pc.doc
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA99-0239 (Development Plan)
Project Description: The design and construction of and operation of two industrial
speculative buildings totaling 14,593 square feet on a 1.87-acre site.
Assessor's Parcel No.: 921-480-015
Approval Date: February 16, 2000
Expiration Date: February 16, 2000
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of
seventy-eight Dollars ($78.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to
the Notice of Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and
California Code of Regulations Section 15062. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the
applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason
of failure of condition (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
General Requirements
The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to
indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own
selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or
instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees,
consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions,
awards, judgements, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek
monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the
approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal
board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning
the Planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner
of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further
cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all
action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such
defense.
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall
become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction
contemplated by this approval within the two- (2) year period which is thereafter diligently
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNlNG\STAFFRPT\239pa99pc.doc
12
pursued to completion or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this
approval.
The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "D"
(Site Plan), contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning
Division.
Landscaping shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "E" (Landscape Plan).
Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable
satisfaction of the Planning Manager and the Temecula Development Code. If it is
determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Manager shall have
the authority to require the property owner to bdng the landscaping into conformance with
the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall
be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest.
Building elevations shall conform substantially with Exhibit "F" and Exhibit "G" (color
elevations), or as amended by these conditions.
Colors and materials used shall conform substantially with Exhibit "H", or as amended by
these conditions (color and material board).
Materials
Concrete (main body of bldg.)
Concrete (vertical accenting)
Concrete (base of bldg.)
Recessed Accents
Accent Reveals
Metal (roll-up doors)
Glazing (Windows)
Aluminum Storefront
Colors
Misty Mica (Frazee 8711W)
Kindling Wood (Frazee 8713W)
Wildcat (Frazee 87124M)
Kindling Wood (Frazee 8713W)
Kindling Wood (Frazee 8713W)
Kindling Wood (Frazee 8713W)
Solar Gray
Black (Arcadia 85)
The maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer.
The construction landscape drawings shall indicate coordination and grouping of all utilities,
which are screened from view per applicable City Codes and guidelines.
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
10.
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8,24 of the Temecula Municipal
Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by
providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid.
11.
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.
12.
The applicant shall revise Exhibits "D, E, F, G, H and I', (Site Plan, Grading Plan,
Elevations, Floor Plan, Landscape Plan, and Color and Material Board) to reflect the final
conditions of approval that will be provided by the Community Development Department
- Planning Division staff, and shall submit five (7) full size copies, one (1) reduced 8.5"xl 1"
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLl\DEFFS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~39pa99pc.doc
13
copy of Exhibits D through H, and two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of
approved Exhibit "1" (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.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
13. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
14.
Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department - Planning Division for approval. These plans shall
conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "H", or as amended by these conditions.
The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown.
The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover page shall
identify the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be
accompanied by the following items:
D=
Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal).
One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved
plan).
Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits
15.
An Administrative Development Plan application for signage shall be required for any
signage not included on Exhibits "D" and "F", or as amended by these conditions. A
separate building permit shall be required for all signage identified on the approved
Exhibits "D" and "F", or as amended by these conditions.
16.
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.
17.
Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to
guarantee the maintenance of the landscape plantings, in accordance with the approved
construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Community Development
Department - Planning Division for one year from final certificate of occupancy. After that
year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition
satisfactory to the Planning Manager, the bond shall be released.
18.
Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently
affixed refiectodzed sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying
the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaIler 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
\~TEMEC FS101\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPTX239pa99pc.doc
off-street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously
stating the following:
"Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not
displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for
persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense.
Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 909 696-3000."
19.
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.
20.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with pdor to occupancy or any use allowed
by this permit.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
21.
Comply with applicable provisions of the 1998 edition of the California Building, Plumbing
and Mechanical Codes; 1996 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title
24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code.
22.
Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance
with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other
outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building
and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly
upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way.
23.
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.
24.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
25. The Occupancy classification of the proposed buildings shall be B/F-I/S-3.
26. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
27.
All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
28. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building,
29. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
30. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
31.
Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire
alarm systems.
\\TEMEC_FS 101\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFF~39pa99pC,doc
15
32. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1994
edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code, Appendix C.
33. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system.
34.
Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans
submitted for plan review.
35.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic
and mechanical plan for plan review.
36.
Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer
engineer are required for plan review submittal.
37. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
38.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
39.
Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls require separate
approvals and permits.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any
Government Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site plan all
existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and
drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review
and revision.
General Requirements
40.
A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site fiat work and
improvements shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way.
41.
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.
42.
All improvement plans and grading plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent
projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on
standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars.
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
43.
Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and
approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary
erosion control measures needed to 'adequately protect adjacent public and private
property.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRI~T~239pa99pc.doc
16
44.
The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading
and erosion control improvements in conformance with appiicable City Standards and
subject to approval by the Department of Public Works.
45,
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.
46
The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in
accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and
upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private
drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and
identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect
the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream
tacilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make
required improvements, shall be provided by the Developer.
47.
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.
48.
As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer
shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
Planning Department
Department of Public Works
49.
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.
50.
Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department
and the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
51.
The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site
work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works.
52.
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.
53. The site is in an area identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map as Flood Zone A. This
project shall comply with Chapter 15, Section 15.12 of the City Municipal Code, which may
include obtaining a Letter of Map Revision from FEMA. A FloodPlain Development Permit
shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
\\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~239pa99pc.doc
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
54. Improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of
Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works.
The following design criteria shall be observed:
a. Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C.
paving.
b. Driveway shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No, 207A,
c. Concrete sidewalk shall be constructed along public street frontage in accordance
with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400 and 401.
d. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
55. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula
General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by
the Director of the Department of Public Works:
a. Improve Enterprise Circle West (Collector Road Standards - 66' R/W) to include
installation of sidewalk, drainage facilities, and utilities (including but not limited to
water and sewer).
56. The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with
the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer
shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
57. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as
required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and
all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
58. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
· Rancho California Water District
· Eastern Municipal Water District
· Department of Public Works
All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and
City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works.
The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall
be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department
of Public Works.
59.
60.
\%TEMEC_FS101\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX239pa99pc.dO¢
18
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.
61.
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.
62.
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 1500 GPM at
20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 1850 GPM for
a total fire flow of 3350 GPM with a 2 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted
during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic
fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as
given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix
Ill.A)
63.
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 "outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public
streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart and shall be located no more than 210
feet from any point on the street or Fire Depadment 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)
64.
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)
65.
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 lbs. GVVV. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
66.
Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire
Department vehicle access reads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any
portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all
weather surface designed for 70,000 Ibs. GVVV with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet.
( CFC sec 902 and Ord 99-14)
67.
Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than
twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13)
feet six- (6) inches. (CFC 902.2.2.1 and Ord 99-14)
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT',239pa99pc.doe
19
68.
Pdor to building construction, dead end roadways and streets in excess of one hundred and
fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of
accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4)
69.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water
system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval 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 )
70.
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 and Ord. 99-14)
71.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, all commercial buildings
shall display street numbers in a prominent location on the street side of the building. The
numerals shall be minimum twelve (12) inches in height for buildings and six (6) inches for
suite identification on a contrasting background. In strip centers, businesses shall post the
suite address on the rear door(s). (CFC 901.4.4 and Ord 99-14)
72.
Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and
type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system.
Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to
installation. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9 and Ord 99-14)
73.
Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for
monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm
system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans
shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC
Article 10)
74.
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be
provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be
located to the right side of the main entrance door. The Knox-Box shall be supervised by
the alarm system. (CFC 902.4 and Ord. 99-14)
75.
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 and Ord. 99-14)
76. Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible
stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: an
automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage
arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department
access doors and Fire department access roads. Buildings housing high-piled combustible
stock shall comply with the provisions Uniform Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable
National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81)
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLl~DEPTS\PLANNINGXSTAFFP. PT~239pa99pc.dOC 20
OTHER AGENCIES
77.
The applicant shall comply with all applicable or appropriate recommendations set forth in
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District transmittal dated August
2, 1999, a copy of which is attached,
78.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations as set forth in the County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health transmittal dated July 12, 1999 a copy of which is
attached, to the extent practical and not in conflict with conditions contained herein.
79.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations as set forth in the Rancho Water
District transmittal dated July 2, 1999 a copy of which is attached, to the extent practical
and not in conflict with conditions contained herein.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance
with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be
subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant Name
\\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLI\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~39pa99pc.doc
21
DA qID P. ZAPPE
General Manager-Chief Engineer
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTR~
AND WATER CONSERVATION DIST,R~,T
August 2. 1999
1995 MARKET STREET
RIVERSIDE. CA 92501
909.955.1200
909.71/~ oca~5 FAX
City of Temecula
Planning Department
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula. CA 92589-9033
Attention: John De Gange
Ladies and Gentlemew'
Re: PA 99-0230
The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in
incorporated cities. The District does not plan check City land use cases, or provide State Division of
Real Estate letters or other flood hazard reports for such cases. District comments/recommendations
for such cases are normally limited to items of specific interest to the District including District
Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood control and drainage facilities which could be
considered a logical component or extension of a master plan system, and District Area Drainage
Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition. information of a general nature is provided.
The District has not reviewed the proposed project in detail and the following comments do not in
any way constitute or imply District approval or endorsement of the proposed project with respect to
flood hazard. public health and safety or any other such issues.
PA 99-0239 is a proposal to design and construction of two industrial speculative buildings totaling
14,593 square feet on the south side of Enterprise Circle West, about 300 feet west of Commerce
Center Drive. The District has also reviewed PA 98-0348 in 1998 on this property and issued a letter
to the City with our recommendations. They are as follows:
A small portion of the southwest comer of the parcel is within the 100 year Zone AE flood plain
limits t0r Murrieta Creek, as delineated on Panel No 060742-0005B of the Flood Insurance Rate
Maps issued in conjunction with the National Flood Insurance Program, administered by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The elevation of the FEMA map for a flow rate of
30.900 cfs is 1018.00 at the upstream edge of the property. However, a District flood study
determined the base flood elevation for the master plan flow rate of 38,300 cfs to be 1018.71 at the
upstream edge of the property. The highwater mark during the flood of January 1993 was 1017.4.
All the elevations are based on 1929 NGVB.
Because of the extreme hazard posed by Murrieta Creek, the City should consider not allowing
development to proceed adjacent to the creek until the ultimate improvement can be constructed.
Property within the flood plain should be conditioned to construct the required improvements to
Murrieta Creek Channel or participate in a financing mechanism such as an assessment district to
ensure necessary improvements are constructed.
58185 !
City. of Temecula '2-
Re: PA 99-0239
August 2. 1999
If the City chooses to allow development to proceed, we recommend that the City require the
applicant to dedicate to the District a 25-foot wide access road adjacent to the top of channel bank.
which is basically coincident with the property line (see Exhibit "A"). The access road is necessary
for District forces to patrol Murrieta Creek. New buildings should be floodproofed by elevating the
finished floor a minimum of 12 inches above elevation 1018.71 which is the District's base flood
elevation for 38.300 cfs.
This project is located within the limits of the Disla'ict's Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area
Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been adopted, applicable fees should be paid by cashier's
check or money order to the Flood Conn'ol District prior to issuance of building or Fading permits,
whichever comes first. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of issuance of the
actual permit.
The District has received a letter dated October 22. 1998 from the previous applicant. Markham &
Associates, regarding our comments on PA 98-0348. After review, we feel our comments are still
appropriate.
Questions concerning this matter may be referred to me at 909.955.1214.
Very truly yours,
STUART E. MCKIBBIN
Senior Civil Engineer
Enclosure
SKM:slj
[Hor~lay Jury 12, 1~/,:05pro -- From ,~558~03' -- Page 21
07/12/1999 15:45 9558983
County of Riverside
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
TO:
FROM
RE:
CITY OF TEMF, CULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PLOT PLAN NO. PA99-0239
PA~E: 02/02
DATE: July 12, 1999
The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the Plot Plan No. PA99-0239 and has no
objections. Sanitary sewer and water services may be available in this area.
PRIOR TO ANY PLAN CHECK SUBBII'I'I'AL for health clearance, the follov. ing items am
required:
a) "Will-serve" letters fxom the appropriate water and sewering agencies.
b)
Three ~mpletc sets of plans for each food establishmere (to include vending machines) will be
submitted, including a fixlure schedule, a finish schedule, and a plumbing schedule in order to
ensure compliance with the California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific
re/hence, please contact Food Facility Plan examiners at (909) 694-5022).
c) A clearance letter fi'om the Hazardous Sea'ices Materials Management Branch (909) 694.5055
will be required indicating that the project has been cleared for:
Underground storage tanks, Ordinance # 617.4.
· Hazardous Waste Generator Services, Ordinance # 615.3.
· Emergency Response Plans Disclosure (in accordance x~th Ordinance # 651.2.)
· Waste reduction management
d) A letter fxom the Waste Regulation Branch (Waste Collection/LEA).
CH:dr
(909) 955-8980
NOTE:
Any current additional requirements not covered, can be applicable at time of Building
Plan review for final Department of Environmental Health Clearance.
Doug Thompson, Hazardous Materials
s~d3bl
.Jer~e~ L MinkJet
July 2, 1999
John DeGange, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AVAILABILITY
LOT NO. 11 OF TRACT NO. 16178-3
APN 921-480-015
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0239
Dear Mr. DeGange:
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within
the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water
service, therefore. would be available upon completion of financial
arrangements between RCWD and the property owner·
If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for
fees and requirements.
Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing
an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to
RCWD.
If you have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services
Representative at this o,.,.=.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brannon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
99t. SB:mc167~F012-T5~CF
c: Laude Williams, Engineering Services SGpervisor
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
APPROVING PA99-0373
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29406
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX239pa99pC.doe
22
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0373,
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29406 TO SUBDIVIDE A 1.87 ACRE
PARCEL INTO TWO (2) PARCELS WITHIN THE BUSINESS PARK ZONE
GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE KNUCKLE OF ENTERPRISE CIRCLE
WEST (225 FEET WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF ENTERPRISE
CIRCLE WEST AND COMMERCE CENTER DRIVE) ON AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-480-015.
WHEREAS, Saddleback Associates, filed Planning Application No. PA99-0373 (Tentative
Parcel Map No. 29406) in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan,
Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance;
WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on
February 16, 2000, 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, testi~ either in support or opposition
to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission approved the Application subject to the conditions after finding that the
project proposed in the Application conformed with the City of Temecula General Plan,
Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance;
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. PA99-0373 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29406) hereby makes the following findings
as required in Section 16.09.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision is
consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, and the City of Temecula Municipal Code.
The project is compatible with the existing General Plan Land Use Designation and zoning
standards of Business Park. Tentative Tract Map No. 29406 proposes to divide 1.87 acres into one
0.95 acre parcel and one 0.92 acre parcel, which exceeds the 20,000 square foot minimum lot area
required by the Development Code,
B. The tentative map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract
entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the land is subject to a
Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will not be
\XTEMEC_FSI01\VOLI\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRFrX239pa99pc.doc 23
too small to sustain their agricultural use. The tentative map has not been previously divided in the
last two years and it is not designated as an agricultural land use area.
C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development
proposed by the tentative map. The site does not have any sedous topographical or environmental
constraints, which would inhibit the type of development permitted by the Development Code or
the General Plan.
D. The design of the subdivision end the proposed improvements, with conditions of
approval, are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably
injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The site is within the vicinity of in~ll development and is
considered an infill site. 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.
E. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause
serious public health problems. Access and cimulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The
project has been reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineer, Public Works Department and Fire
Department. These departments have conditioned the map to ensure public health, safety and
welfare.
F. The design of the subdivision provides future passive natural heating or cooling
opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible.
G. The design of the subdivision and 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 subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent
to those previously acquired by the public will be provided. The map proposes access from
Enterprise Circle West. The proposed access points will not obstruct any easements.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. A Notice of Exemption for Planning
Application No. PA99-0373 was made per the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines
Section 15315. This Section allows exemptions for minor land divisions that meet certain
prescribed criteria. The subject site complies with these criteria and therefore the exemption
can be applied to this project,
Section 4. Conditions, That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves
Planning Application No. PA99-0373 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29406) for the subdivision of 1.87
acres into two (2) lots, located generally located at the knuckle of Enterprise Circle West (225 feet
west of the intersection of Enterprise Circle West and Commerce Center Drive) and known as
assessors parcel no. 909-480-015, subject to the project specific conditions set fodh on Exhibit A,
attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~39pa991~.doc
24
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16 day of February, 2000.
Ron Guerriero, Chairperson
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission
of the City of Temecuta at a regular meeting thereof, hetd on the 16th day of February, 2000 by the
following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
\\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLI\DEPTS~PLANNING~TAFFRPT~39pa99pc.doc
25
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PA99-0373 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP No, 29406)
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRFE239pa99pc.doc
26
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No:
Project Description:
Assessor°s Parcel No:
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
PA99-0373 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29406)
Subdivide a 1.87 vacant acre parcel into two (2) lots
909-480-015
February 16, 2000
February 16, 2003
PLANNING DIVISION
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. 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 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
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. 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.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFILPTx239pa99F.do¢
27
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 evidene~e that the fees have already been paid.
Prior to Recordation of the Final Map
6. 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) This project is within a liquefaction hazard zone.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
The Department of Public Works recommends the following Conditions of Approval for this project.
Unless stated otherwise, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any
Government Agency.
General Requirements
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.
A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the Department
of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained
road right-of-way.
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.
10
All improvement plans, grading plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent
projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on
standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars.
Prior to 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:
\\TEMEC~FS101\VOLI\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT',239pa99pc.doc
28
11. 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. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
d. City of Temecuta Fire Prevention Bureau
e. Planning Department
f. Department of Public Works
g. Riverside County Health Department
h. Cable TV Franchise
i. Community Services District
j. General Telephone
k. Southern California Edison Company
I. Southern California Gas Company
12. 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 Enterprise Circle West (Collector Road Standards - 66' R/W) to include
sidewalk, street lights as necessary, driveway approach and utilities (including
but not limited to water and sewer laterals).
13. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Enterprise Circle West on the Parcel
Map with the exception of one opening as delineated on the approved Tentative Parcel
Map.
14. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid,
15. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the
Parcel Map\Final Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be
recorded with the map. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning
Department for review and approval. The following information shall be on the ECS:
a. The delineation of the area within the 100-year floodplain.
b. Special Study Zones.
c. Geotechnical hazards identified in the project's geotechnical report.
d. Archeological resources found on the site.
\\TEMEC_FSi01\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~-39pa99pC.dOC 29
16.
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.
17.
Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be
delineated and noted on the final map.
18.
An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to approval of the Parcel
Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first.
19.
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
20.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
a. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
b. Planning Department
c. Department of Public Works
d. Riverside County Health Department
e. Community Services District
f. General Telephone
g. Southern California Edison Company
h. Southern California Gas Company
21.
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.
22.
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.
23.
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
\\T EMEC_FS 101 \VOL 1 \DEPTS\PLANN1NG\STAFFRPTL239pa99pc.dOc
30
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 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.
24.
The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board.
25.
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.
26.
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,
27.
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.
28.
The site is in an area identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps as Flood Zone "A"
and is subject to flooding of undetermined depths. Prior to the approval of any plans,
the Developer shall demonstrate that the project complies with Chapter 15.12 of the
Temecula Municipal Code for development within Flood Zone "A". A FloodPlain
Development Permit is required prior to issuance of any permit. Residential
subdivisions shall obtain a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) prior to occupancy of any unit. Commercial subdivisions
may obtain a LOMR at their discretion.
29.
A Flood Plain Development Permit and Flood Study shall be submitted to the
Department of Public Works for review and approval. The flood study shall be in a
format acceptable to the Department and include, but not be limited to, the following
criteria:
Drainage and flood protection facilities which will protect all structures by
diverting site runoff to streets or approved storm drain facilities.
Adequate provision shall be made for the acceptance and disposal of surface
drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
The impact to the site from any flood zone as shown on the FEMA flood hazard
map and any necessary mitigation to protect the site.
d. Identify and mitigate impacts of grading to any adjacent floodway.
e. The location of existing and post development 100-year floodplain and floodway
shall be shown on the improvement plan.
\\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLI\DEFFS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'I~39pa99pc.doc 31
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits
30, Parcel Map shall be approved and recorded.
31. 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.
32. 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.
33. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as
required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code
and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06.
Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy
34. 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 Vqorks
35. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public
agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works.
36. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City
standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
37. 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.
BUILDING SAFETY DIVISION
38. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
FIRE SAFETY DIVISION
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.
39. The conditions for PA99-0239 will apply to each parcel independent of the other parcel.
\\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFP, PT',239pa99pc.doc
32
OTHER AGENCIES
40.
Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control
District's transmittal for PA99-0239 dated August 2, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
41.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in Rancho Water District's
transmittal dated September 29, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance
with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be
subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant Signature
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFR.PT~.39pa99pc.doc
33
Doug Kulberg
John F. Hennlgar
Phillip L Forbes
E. P. "Bob" Lemons
Kenneth C. Dealy
Perry' R. Louck
September 29, 1999
John DeGange, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AVAILABILITY
PARCEL MAP NO. 29406
APN 921-480-015
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0373
Dear Mr. DeGange:
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the
boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service,
therofore, 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:rnr160\F012-T5~FCF
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~239pa99pc.doc
34
CITY OF TEMECULA
Pro'ect Silte.~~
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0239 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT- A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - February 16, 2000
VICINITY MAP
R:/STAFFRPT\348PA98PC 2/10/00jid
CITY OF TEMECULA
EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - LI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL)
BP
OS
Projec~ Sit
EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - BP (BUSINESS PARK)
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0239 (Development Plan)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - February 16, 2000
R:/STAFFRPT\348PA98PC 2/10/00jid
CITY OF TEMECULA
'ERPRISE
It
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0239 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT- D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - February 16, 2000
SITE PLAN
R I,STAFFRPT%348PA98.1~C 2/10/00jid
CITY OF TEMECULA
IJILDING 2 - WEST ELEVATION
'IILDING 2 - EAST ELEVATION (BLDG 1 - SOUTH ELEV SIM)
~1.
IILDING 2 - NORTH ELEVATION
BUILDING 1 - NORTH ELEVATION
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0239 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - I
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - February 16, 2000
ELEVATIONS
CITY OFTEMECULA
ENTERPRISE i
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0239 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT - E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - February 16, 2000
LANDSCAPEPLAN
R:\STAFFRPT~348PA98.PC 2/10/00jid
ITEM #6
RECOMMENDATION:
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
February 16, 2000
Planning Application No. PA99-0472 (Development Plan)
Prepared By: Carole K. Donahoe, AICP
The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff
recommends the Planning Commission:
ADOPT a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000~
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0472
(DEVELOPMENT PLAN), TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A 62,100
SQUARE FOOT MINI-SELF STORAGE FACILITY WITH A 2-STORY OFFICE
AND RESIDENT MANAGER'S QUARTERS AND COVERED R.V. STORAGE
SPACES ON 3.92 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
DIAZ ROAD AND REMINGTON ROAD (41906 REMINGTON ROAD), AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-370-014
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT: KAZ I.E.A., Inc.
REPRESENTATIVE: Ifti Kazmi, President
PROPOSAL: To construct and operate a 62,100 square foot mini-self storage facility with 2-
story office and resident manager's quarters and covered R.V. storage
spaces.
Southwest corner of Diaz Road and Remington Road (41906 Remington
Road)
LI (Light industrial)
North: LI (Light Industrial)
South: LI (Light Industrial)
East: OS-C (Open Space Conservation)
West: LI (Light Industrial)
PROPOSED ZONING: Not Applicable
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
F:\Depts\PLANNING\D P\99-0472 Diaz Super StOrage\STAFFRPT.PC.dOC
1
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: BP (Business Park)
EXISTING ',_AND USE: Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North: Vacant, Milgard under construction beyond
South: Zevo and PHS
East: Vacant, partially constructed park
West: Vacant
PROJECT STATISTICS:
Parking Required: 1/200 units = 2, or a minimum of 3 spaces + 1 handicapped space and 2 covered
Parking Provided: 5 spaces + I handicapped space and 2 enclosed garage spaces
Bike Spaces Required: 1
Motorcycle Spaces Required: 0
Bike Spaces Provided: 1 (conditioned)
Motorcycle Spaces Required: 0
Total Acreage: 3.92 acres,
Building envelopes:
Landscaping:
Hardscape:
170,700 s.f.
63,283 s.f. 37.3%
19,001 s.f. 11.2%
88,579 s.f. 51.9%
BACKGROUND
The applicant submitted the project on November 19, 1999. Staff discussed the project's architecture
with the applicant and his architect on December 7th and 8th. A Development Review Committee
(DRC) Meeting was held on December 23, 1999. A DRC Comment Letter was faxed to the applicant
on January 12, 2000. Subsequently, staff conferred with the applicant's architect regarding the
elevations, via phone and fax. The applicant resubmitted revised plans on January 21't and 24"' 2000.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant proposes to offer 390 storage units within a series of masonry block buildings, and
approximately 38 covered spaces for recreational vehicle storage, called the Diaz Super Storage
facility, in the Westside Business Centre industrial park. The office and sales display area is proposed
to be open Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. and Saturdays from 8 a.m. to noon. However,
gate access is available 24-hours. According to the applicant the project utilizes state-of-the-an
computerized operating system, security cameras and unit alarms. A manager will reside onsite, on
the upper floor of the office and enclosed 2-car garage.
ANALYSIS
Traffic. Access and Circulation
The project takes sole access from Remington Road, and customer will pass by the office before
entering the gated storage area. There is also a one-way drive-through lane provided for customers
to drop-off their payments.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\DeptS\PLANNING\D P\99-0472 Diaz Super Storage\STAFFRPT.PC.doc 2
Site Design and Architecture
Except for the entrance on Remington, the project is completely enclosed, with building walls
providing the perimeter wall treatment. These walls vary in height from 12, 14 and 16-feet to 19-
feet, 4-inches at the corner of Diaz and Remington. These height variations, coupled with the pop-
outs along Diaz and Remington, breakup the long expanse of the perimeter walls. Additionally, the
architect has carried the aluminum storefront gridwork from the office building to the pop-out areas
to provide interest and cohesiveness to the elevations. Staff has conditioned the project to wrap the
gridwork around the 16-foot high perimeter wall at the southeast corner of the project, which will be
visible from Diaz Road.
Signage proposed for the project is limited to the corner wall treatment facing both Remington and
Diaz Roads. However, the approval of the Development Plan does not include approval of signage
because the applicant is still in the design stages with his sign.
The height of the perimeter walls will block public view of the R.V. storage spaces, because the
maximum height of the parking canopy shall be 14-feet.
Landscaping
The Development Code lists self-storage or mini-warehouse facilities as a "Special Use" under
Section 17.08.050R, for which there are specific regulations and standards. The project
landscaping complies with these Codes, which require no rear or side yard setbacks. The majority
of the landscaped area is within the required 20-foot street setbacks. In combination with the street
trees, and the clustering of species, the plantings add to the relief and interest along the perimeter
walls fronting Remington and Diaz.
However, staff feels that the queen palms proposed along the west and south walls are
inappropriate because they do not breakup the expanse of walls and accentuate their starkness.
Staff has conditioned the project to revise landscape plans providing for a 4-foot planter area along
the west property line, which staff believes to be the minimum width required for the health of
plantings. Staff has also conditioned the project to replace the queen palms on the west and south
perimeter to another tree that has a full crown. The 3-foot planter proposed along the southern
perimeter is adjacent to an existing I O-foot wide planter area already installed for the Zevo building.
Staff concurs with the applicant that plantings could survive along this area, given a total landscape
width of 13-feet.
Because of the walled design of the project, staff had requested that the applicant provide 36-inch
and 48-inch box sized trees for quick vegetation. However, the applicant did not provide larger
sizes on his resubmittal of plans.
The landscape planter between the customer parking spaces facing east and Building A is also
inadequate in width, and staff has conditioned the project to provide a minimum 5-foot interior width
dimension.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Staff recommends that this project qualify for an exemption to the California Environmental Quality Act,
as a Class 32 In-Fill Development, in accordance with Section 15332. The project is consistent with
the General Plan designation of BP Business Park and Zoning of LI Light Industrial, which permits mini-
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\DeptS\PLANNING\D P\99-0472 Diaz Super Storage\STAFFRPT.PC.doc 3
storage facilities. The proposed development is within the City limits, on a 3.92 acre site, and is
substantially surrounded by urban industrial uses. The project site has no value as habitat for
endangered, rare or threatened species. Approval of the project will not result in any significant effects
relating to traffic, noise, air quality or water quality, because a self-storage facility generates minimal
traffic and noise. Lastly the site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY
The BP Business Park designation within the General Plan lists storage as a typical land use. The
City's Development Code also lists mini-storage facilities as a permitted use within the LI Light
Industrial zone. Furthermore, the project complies or is conditioned to comply with the development
standards specifically noted in Section 17.08.050R, Special Use Regulations and Standards for Self-
Storage or Mini-Warehouse Facilities.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
Staff recommends that the Commission approve Planning Application No. PA99-0472 (Development
Plan) as designed and conditioned because it is a permitted use within the zone and General Plan
designation, and complies with applicable development standards and regulations.
FINDINGS
The proposed design of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation of BP
Business Park and consistent with the LI Light Industrial zoning on the site. As a land use, self-
storage facilities are listed by both the General Plan and Zoning Matrix as a permitted use on
this site. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. It is primarily
flat, with access from Remington Road, an existing roadway.
The design of the proposed improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems.
The project has been reviewed for conformance with the City's General Plan, Development
Code, 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 improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the
public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the site. No known easements will
be affected by the project.
The proposal 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 project was reviewed by the Fire Department and the applicant has provided
adequate circulation and clearance throughout the development for Fire apparatus.
The design of the 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 substantial development and is an infill site.
Furthermore, rough grading has already occurred at the site, and street improvement are
already installed. 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.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\DeptS\PLANNING\D P\99-0472 Diaz Super StOrage\STAFFRPT.PC.doC
4
Attachments:
PC Resolution - Blue Page 6
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 10
Exhibits - Blue Page 22
B.
C.
D.
El.
E2.
E3.
F.
G.
H.
I.
Vicinity Map
Zoning Map
General Plan Map
Site Plan
Elevations - Diaz and Remington Roads
Elevations - Office and Manager's Unit
Elevations - South and West Perimeter
Floor Plans
Landscape Plan
Grading Plan
Color and Material Board
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\Depts\PLANNING\D P\99-0472 Diaz Super StOrage\STAFFRPT.PC.dOC
5
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 00-
%\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\Depts\PLANNING\D P\99-0472 Diaz Super StOrage\STAFFRPT.PC.dOC
6
ATTACHMENT NO. I
PC RESOLUTION NO. 00-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0472
(DEVELOPMENT PLAN), TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A 62,100
SQUARE FOOT MINI-SELF STORAGE FACILITY WITH A 2-STORY
OFFICE AND RESIDENT MANAGER'S QUARTERS AND COVERED RV
STORAGE SPACES ON 3.92 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF DIAZ ROAD AND REMINGTON ROAD (41906
REMINGTON ROAD), AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.
909-370-014.
WHEREAS, KAZ I.E.A., Inc. filed Planning Application No. PA99-0472 (the "Application") in a
manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the time
and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application, on
February 16, 2000, 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 the Application subject to the conditions after finding that the
project proposed in the Application conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan and Development
Code;
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 appreving the Application hereby
makes the following findings as required by Section 17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code;
A. The proposed design of the project is compatible with the General Plan designation of
BP Business Park and consistent with the LI Light Industrial zoning on the site. As a land use, self-
storage facilities are listed by both the General Plan and Zoning Matrix as a permitted use on this site.
The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. It is primarily fiat, with access
from Remington Road, an existing roadway.
B, The design of the proposed improvements is not likely to cause serious public health
problems. The project has been reviewed for conforrnance with 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.
F:\Depts\PLANNING\D P\99-0472 Diaz Super StOrage~STAFFRPT,PC.doc
7
C. The design of the proposed improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by
the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the site. No known easements will be
affected by the project.
D. The proposal 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 project was reviewed by the Fire Department and the applicant has provided adequate
circulation and clearance throughout the development for Fire apparatus.
E. The design of the 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 substantial development and is an inflll site. Furthermore,
rough grading has already occurred at the site, and street improvement are already installed. 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. A Notice of Exemption for Planning Application PA99-
0472 was made in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section15332.
The project is consistent with the General Plan designation of BP Business Park and Zoning of LI Light
Industrial, which permits mini-storage facilities. The proposed development is within the City limits, on
a 3.92 acre site, and is substantially surrounded by urban industrial uses. The project site has no value
as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. Approval of the project will not result in any
significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality or water quality, because a self-storage facility
generates minimal traffic and noise. Lastly the site can be adequately served by all required utilities
and public services.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula City Council hereby conditionally approves
the Application for the design, construction and operation of a 62,100 square foot mini-self storage
facility with two-story office and resident manager's quarters and covered RV storage spaces on 3.92
acres located at the southwest corner of Diaz Road and Remington Road (41906 Remington Road)
and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 909-370-014 subject to the project specific conditions set forth
on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI~Depts\PLANNING\D P\99-0472 Diaz Super StOrage\STAFFRPT.PC.dOC
8
Section 5, PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of February, 2000.
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 16th day of February,
2000 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\Depts\PLANNING\D P\99-0472 Diaz Super Storage\STAFFRPT.PC.doc
9
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
\\TEMEC_FS101%VOL1\Depts\PLANNING\D P\99-0472 Diaz Super StOrage\STAFFRPT.PC,dOC
10
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA99-0472 - Development Plan
Project Description: To construct and operate a 62,100 square foot mini-self storage
facility with 2-story office and resident manager's quarters and
covered r.v. storage spaces.
Development Impact Fee Category: Business Park / Industrial
Assessor's Parcel No. 909-370-014
Approval Date: February 16, 2000
Expiration Date: February 16, 2002
PLANNING DIVISION
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division a
cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Seventy-
Eight Dollars ($78.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of
Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code
of Regulations Section 15062. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant has not
delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division the check as required
above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish
and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
General Requirements
The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to
indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection,
the City 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 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.
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.
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
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\Depts~PLANNING\D P\99-0472 Diaz Super StOrage\STAFFRPT.PC.dOC
11
approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or
the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval.
The applicant shall comply with all Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures contained
in the approved Mitigation Monitoring Program for the underlying Revised Tentative Parcel Map
No. 24085, Amended No. 3.
The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "D" (Site
Plan), contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division, and
as amended by these conditions of approval or Planning Commission action.
The 22-foot wide automatic sliding gate shall be replaced with a 24-foot wide automatic
sliding gate for Fire emergency equipment access. A notation shall be added as
follows: "All aisle widths are a minimum of 30-feet."
b. All 2-hour area separation walls shall be replaced with 4-hour area separation walls.
Code references shall be added as follows: "All design components shall 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."
The existing fire hydrant shall be identified as "Relocated Existing Super Fire Hydrant
from Driveway."
The west perimeter landscape planter shall be increased to provide a 4-foot interior
width.
The landscape planter adjacent to the customer parking spaces facing east shall be
increased to provide a minimum 5-foot interior width.
Acreage of 3.92 acres (170,700 s.f.) shall be added to the Project Data legend.
Landscape shall be corrected to 19,001 s.f.
Grading Plans shall be revised to show the location of the trash enclosure adjacent to the north
end of Building D,
Landscaping shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "G" (Landscape Plan), and as
amended by these conditions of approval or Planning Commission action. 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.
Queen palms are appropriate as accent trees. However, trees are required along the
south and west elevations to breakup the long expanse of perimeter walls. Appropriate
tree species shall be added to these elevations or shall replace the queen palms
proposed.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\Depts\PLANNING\D P\99-(2472 Diaz Super StOrage\STAFFRPT.PC,dOC
12
b. Additional landscaping shall be provided in the increased planter area along the
customer parking spaces facing east.
c. Plans shall show the trash enclosure adjacent to the north end of Building D.
Building elevations shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "El, E2 and E3" (Building
Elevations), contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division,
and as amended by these conditions of approval or Planning Commission action.
All perimeter walls, including the south and west elevations, shall be painted with Behr
Paint color "Blue Tear" at the upper portion, and Behr Paint color "Scandia" at the lower
portion, and Exhibit E3 shall be revised to reflect these changes.
Gridwork shall be added to the southeast comer of the project, on the south-facing, 16-
foot high perimeter wall, to wrap-around this architectural element where it is visible
from Ynez Road, and Exhibit E3 shall be revised to reflect this change.
C=
Exhibit E1 shall identify the top elevation as "Exterior elevation along Remington Road
- East End," and shall identify the middle elevation as "Exterior Elevation along
Remington Road - West End."
Exhibit E2 shall identify the roofing material for the r.v. parking area as "Gavalume metal
with a matte finish."
All mechanical and roof equipment shall be screened from public view by architectural features
integrated into the design of the structure.
10.
The recreational vehicle storage area canopy shall be limited to a maximum of 14-feet at its
highest point.
11.
The colors and materials for this project shall substantially conform to the following list of
approved colors and materials and with Exhibit "1" (Color and Material Board) contained on file
with the Community Development Department - Planning Division, and as amended by these
conditions of approval or Planning Commission action. Any deviation from the approved colors
and materials shall require approval of the Planning Manager.
Material Color
Cement Plaster Building walls
Cement Plaster Secondary color
Split face Masonry Block and cap
Aluminum storefront window system w/¼-inch
Glazing, standing seam metal roof,
Wrought iron gate, metal overhead doors, gutter
Metal expansion joints
Metal roofing, r.v. canopy
Behr Paints #3B51-1 "Blue Tear"
Behr Paints #3A48-5 "Scandia"
Angeles Block Co. "Spice"
Behr #5C12-3 "True Blue"
Color to match adjacent paint
Gavalume Matte Finish
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
12. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code
(Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by providing
documented evidence that the fees have already been paid.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\Depts\PLANNtNG\D P\99-0472 Diaz Super Storage\STAFFRPT.PC.doC 13
13.
A qualified paleontologist/archaeologist shall be chosen by the applicant for consultation and
comment on the proposed grading with respect to potential paleontological/archaeological
impacts. A meeting between the paleontologist/archaeologist, Community Development
Department - Planning Division staff, and grading contractor prior to the commencement of
grading operations and the excavation shall be arranged. The paleontologist/archaeologist or
representative shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to
allow recovery of fossils.
14.
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.
15.
With seven (7) working days of the approval of this project the applicant shall revise Exhibits
"D, El, E2, E3, F, G, H, and I", (Site Plan, Elevations, Floor Plans, Landscape Plan, Grading
Plan, Color and Material Board) to reflect the final conditions of approval that will be provided
by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff. Revised exhibits shall
be readable. The applicant shall submit five (5) full size copies and two (2) 8" X 10" glossy
photographic color prints of approved Exhibit "1" (Color and Materials Board) and of the colored
version of approved Exhibit "El, E2, E3" (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.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
16. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
17.
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 "G", as amended by these conditions of
approval or Planning Commission action. The location, number, genus, species, and container
size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient
Ordinance. The cover page shall identify the total square footage of the landscaped area for
the site. The plans shall be accompanied by the following items:
a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal).
b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
C,
Additional landscaping is required to screen all utilities from view from the public street.
Identify the location of utilities and the additional landscape screening on Construction
Drawings.
Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient
Ordinance).
e. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan).
Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits
18.
An Administrative Development Plan application for signage shall be submitted and approved
by the Planning Manager for all signage at the site prior to installation.
%\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\Depts~PLANNING~D P\99-0472 Diaz Super StOrage\STAFFRPT.PC.dOC
14
a. A separate building permit shall be required.
19.
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.
20.
Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to guarantee
the maintenance of the planrings, 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 cedificate 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.
21.
Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently affixed
refiectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the
International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in
area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height if 80
inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a
minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A
sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-street parking
facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously stating the following:
"Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not
displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for 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.
22.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by
this permit.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
23. 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
24. A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site fiat work and
improvements, shall be obtained from the Depadment of Public Works prior to commencement
of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way.
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 right-of-way.
\\TEMEC_FS101WOLI\Depts~PLANNING\D P\99-0472 Diaz Super StOrage\STAFFRPT.PC.dOC
15
26. All improvement plans and grading plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent
projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard
24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars.
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
27. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and
approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary
erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private property.
28. 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.
29. The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in
accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and
upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private drainage
facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify impacts
to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect the properties and
mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream facilities, including acquisition
of drainage or access easements necessary to make required improvements, shall be provided
by the Developer.
30. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board.
31. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Pubtic Works, the Developer shall
receive written clearance from the following agencies:
a. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
b. Planning Department
c. Department of Public Works
The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental
Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property.
Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and
the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site
work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Riverside
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either 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.
The site is in an area identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map as Flood Zone AE. This
project shall comply with Chapter 15, Section 15.12 of the City Municipal Code which may
include obtaining a Letter of Map Revision from FEMA, A Flood Plain Development Permit
shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
\\TEMEC_FS101~VOLI\Depts\PLANNING\D P~99-0472 Diaz Super StOrage\STAFFRPT.PC.dOC
16
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
37. Improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of Temecula
Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. The following
design criteria shall be observed:
a. Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C.
paving.
b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A.
c. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
d. 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.
e. All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed through
undersidewalk drains.
38. The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with
the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer shall
issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions,
39. 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.
40. The Developer shall record a written offer to participate in, and waive all dghts to object to the
formation of an Assessment District, a Community Facilities District, or a Bridge and Major
Thoroughfare Fee District for the construction of the proposed Western Bypass Corridor in
accordance with the General Plan. The form of the offer shall be subject to the approval of the
City Engineer and City Attorney.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
41. 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
42. All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City
standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works.
43. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be
repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public
Works.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
44.
All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1998 edition of the
California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1998 National Electrical Code; California
Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula
Municipal Code.
45.
Submit at time of plan review, complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance with
Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other outdoor lighting
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\DeptS\PLANNING\D P\99-0472 Diaz Super StOrage\STAFFRPT.PC.dOC
17
shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety. Any
outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property
or public rights-of-way.
46, A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the
Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation
Fees.
47, Obtain all building plans and permit approvals pdor to commencement of any construction work.
48. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
49. Disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building is required. The path
of travel shall meet the California Disabled Access Regulations in terms of cross slope, travel
slope stripping and signage. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access
Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
50. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all
details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
51. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building.
52. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
53. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
54. Provide house electricel meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire
alarm systems.
55. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1998 edition
of the California Building Code Appendix 29. Obtain the Division of the State Architect
recommendation for the accessible restroom dimensions for toddlers from the Building Official,
to implement in the building design.
56. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans
submitted for plan review.
57. Provide electdcel plans including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and
mechanical plan for plan review.
58. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer
engineer are required for plan review submittal.
59. Provide approved precise grading plan for plan check submittal to review handicap accessibility.
60. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction,
61. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved
building plans, will require separate approvals and permits.
62. Show all building setbacks
\\TEMEC_FS101%VOL1\DeptS\PLANNING\D R99-0472 Diaz Super StOrage\STAFFRPT.PC.doC 18
FIRE DEPARTMENT
The following are the Fire Department Conditions of Approval forthis project. All questions regarding
the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau.
63.
Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the
Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California
Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the
time of building plan submittal.
64.
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commemial buildings per CFC Appendix Ill. A, Table A-Ill-A-I. The developer
shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 1500 GPM at 20 PSI residual
operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a total fire flow of 2350
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)
65.
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 500 feet apart and shall be located no more than 250 feet
from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant. The
required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade
of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B)
66.
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)
67.
Maximum cuPde-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)
68.
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)
69.
Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved
temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads are installed.
Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for 80,000 Ibs. GVVV.
(CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
70.
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. GVVV with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. ( CFC sec
902)
71.
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)
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\Depts~PLANNING\D R99-0472 Diaz Super StOrage\STAFFRPT.PC,dOC
19
72.
Prior to building construction, dead end road ways and streets in exces,~ 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)
73.
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)
74.
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)
75.
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)
76.
Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and
type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system. Fire
sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to
installation. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9)
77.
Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for
monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm
system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans shall
be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10)
78.
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be
provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be located
to the right side of the main entrance door. The Knox-Box shall be supervised by the alarm
system. (CFC 902.4)
79.
All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates obstructing
Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry system for
emergency access by firefighting personnel. (CFC 902.4)
OTHER AGENCIES
80.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated December 7, 1999, a copy of which
is attached.
81.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water
Districts transmittal dated December 7, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
~\TEMEC_FS101WOLI\Depts\PLANNING%D P\99-0472 Diaz Super StOrage\STAFFRPT.PC.dOC
20
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with
these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject
to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant Name
~\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\Depts\PLANNING\D P\99-0472 Diaz Super StOrage\STAFFRPT.PC.dOC
21
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
DATE: December 7. 1999
TO:
FROM:
RE:
CITY OF TEMECULA PLA.\~ING DEPARTMENT
-TIN: Carole Don oe , ~
~LARENCE gLgON, Environmental Health Specialist
PLOT PLAN NO. PA99-0472
1. The Department of Enviromnental Health has reviewed the Plot Plan No. PA99-0472 and has no
objections. SanitaD' sewer and water services may be available in this area.
2. PRIOR TO ANY PLAN CHECK SUBIMITTAL for health clearance. the lbllo~ing items are
rcquired:
a) "Will-serve" letters fi'om the appropriate water and sewering agencies.
b)
Three complete sets of plans tbr each food establishment (to include vending machines) will be
submiued, including a fixtm'e schedule, a finish schedule. and a plumbing schedule in order to
ensure compliance ~4th the Califomia Unilbrm Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific reference,
please contact Food Facili~' Plan examiners at (909) 694-5022.
c) A clearance letter from the Hazardous Services Materials Management Branch (909) 694-5055
will be required indicating that the project has been cleared tbr:
· Underground storage tanks. Ordinance #617.4.
· Hazardous Waste Generator Setwices. Ordinance #615.3.
· Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with Ordimmce #651.2).
· Waste reduction management.
3. Waste Regnlation Branch (Waste Collection/LEA).
CH:dr
(909) 955-8980
NOTE: Any current additional requirements not covered. can be applicable at time of Building
Plan review Ibr final Department of Environmental Health clearance.
cc: Doug Thompson, Hazardous Materials
Bormie Dierking, Supervising E.H.S.
stand3b doc
Wa r
John F. Hennigar
Philllp L. Forbes
December 7, ~ 999
Carole Donahoe, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
DEC 0 9 1999
SUBJECT:
WATER AND SEWER AVAILABILITY
PARCEL NO. 3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 24085-3
APN 909-370-014
Dear Ms. Donahoe:
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within
the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water and
sewer service, therefore, would be available upon the 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 that 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
99t, SB:mc325~012-C1',FCF