HomeMy WebLinkAbout99_043 PC ResolutionPC RESOLUTION NO. 99-043
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0283
(DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT) APPROVING THAT CERTAIN
AGREEMENT ENTITLED "VILLAGES AT PASEO DEL SOL
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, COVERING 23.74 ACRES
LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF
CAMPANULA WAY, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST
OF MEADOWS PARKWAY
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Planning Commission hereby finds determines, and declares as
follows:
A. Section 65864 et seq. of the Government Code of the State of California and
Temecula City Resolution No. 91-52 authorize the execution of development agreements
establishing and maintaining requirements applicable to the development of real property;
B. In accordance with the procedure specified in said statutes and Resolution,
del Sol Investments, LLC, a California limited liability company ("Developer") have filed with the City
of Temecula an application for a Development Agreement ("Development Agreement") for
approximately 23.75 acres located north of State Highway 79 South, south of Campanula Way,
east of Margarita Road and west of Meadows Parkway ("Property") for retail commercial uses
consistent with Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 7, which application has been reviewed and
accepted for filing by the Community Development Director;
C. Notice of the City's intention to consider adoption of the Development
Agreement and to consider the findings under the California Environmental Quality Act that a
Supplemental EIR or Subsequent EIR is not required has been duly given in the form and manner
require by law for both the public hearing before the Planning Commission and the public hearing
before the City Council;
(1) Notice of the public hearings before the Planning Commission and
City Council was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the
public hearings, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days prior to the hearings to the project
applicants and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, schools, police protection, and
fire protection, and to ail property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the Property as shown on
the latest equalized assessment roll;
(2) Notice of the public hearings before the Planning Commission and
City Council included the date, time, and place of the public hearing, the identity of the hearing
body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description in text or diagram
of the location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing, and notice of the need to
exhaust administrative remedies;
C. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the
Development Agreement on September 15, 1999 ,September 29, 1999 and October 6, 1999, at
which time the Planning Commission heard and considered all of the written material and oral
comments presented to it on the proposed environmental findings and the proposed Development
Agreement;
R:\STAFFRP'D~284pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
38
Section 2. The Planning Commission hereby further finds and determines that
the Project site has been the subject of extensive pdor environmental review:
A. The Paloma del Sol Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 235)
was approved and certified by the County of Riverside on September 6, 1988. Since that date
Addendum No. 1 was certified in conjunction with Amendment No. 4 to the Specific Plan, which
added a Development Agreement to the project. Addendum No. 2 was adopted on Mamh 17, 1999
by the City of Temecula in conjunction with an evaluation of additional facilities and uses to the
Specific Plan.
B. The applicant has submitted for certification Addendum No. 3 in
conjunction with Amendment No. 7 to the Specific Plan. Addendum No. 3 considers the
environmental impacts of an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units from 5,328 to
5,246 (an 82 dwelling unit difference), and the reconfiguration and realignment of Campanula
Way from a lO0-foot major street section to a 78-foot right-of-way with traffic circles.
C. The Addendum analysis concludes, as noted in Table 1-Comparative Analysis
of Impacts and Mitigation Measures, that changes in project impacts as a result of Amendment No.
7 are either unchanged or decreased, and no additional mitigation measures are required. Staff
acknowledges the overriding consideration with regards to air quality impacts made by the Riverside
County Board of Supervisors dudng the odginal certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 235.
Staff concludes that environmental concerns regarding the project have been adequately addressed.
D. The proposed Development Agreement incorporates the provisions of the
City's General Plan, Specific Plan 219, the current zoning regulations for the Property, the Mitigation
Plan of Environmental Impact Report No. 235 and such other ordinances, rules, regulations and
official policies governing permitted uses, density, design, improvement, development fees, and
construction standards applicable to the Property on the effective date of the Development
Agreement.
E. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for the Amendment
unless required by 14 Cal. Admin. Code Sections 15161 or 15163.
Section 3. Based on the evidence in the record before it, and after careful
consideration of the evidence, the Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that neither
a Subsequent EIR a Supplemental EIR, nor further environmental review is required for the
Development Agreement pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166, 14 Cal. Admin. Code
Sections 15162 or 15163, based on the following findings of the Planning Commission:
A. The elements of the Project as described in the Development Agreement
were contemplated and fully and propedy analyzed in the EIR certified and approved by the County
of Riverside and the Addendums thereto, for the approval of Specific Plan 219 and subsequent
Amendments;
B. There have been no subsequent changes to the Project which would require
major revisions of the previous FEIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects
or a substantial increase in the sevedty of previously identified significant effects.
C. Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the circumstances
under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous FEIR due
to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the sevedty
of previously identified significant effects.
F:!DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
26
D. There is no new information since the certification of the previous FEIR which
would show or tend to show that the Project might have one or moro significant effects not discussed
in the previous FEIR and Addendums.
E. There is no new information since the certification of the previous FEIR and
Addendums which would show or tend to show that significant effects previously examined might
be substantially more severe than shown in the FEIR and Addendums.
F. There is no new information since the certification of the FEIR and
Addendums which would show or tend to show that mitigation measures or alternative previously
found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more
significant effects of the Project.
G. There is no new information since the certification of the FEIR and
Addendums which would show or tend to show that mitigation measures or alternatives which are
considerably different from those analyzed in the previous FEIR and Addendums would substantially
reduce one or more significant effects on the environment.
Section 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula further finds,
determines and declares that:
A. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies,
general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula's General Plan in that:
(1) The Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use
of the Property for commercial development consistent with the General Plan's land use designation
of Community Commercial for the Property which provide for commercial development;
(2) The Development Agreement and development on the Property will
provide for the ~eation of jobs within the City, enhance the balance of housing and jobs within the
City as provided in the Growth Management/Public Facility, Land Use, and Economic Development
Elements of the General Plan;
B. The Development Agreement is consistent with Specific Plan 219 in which
the Property is located in that:
(1) The Development Agreement provides for commercial development
pursuant to and in conformance with the terms of Specific Plan 219;
(2) The specific land uses proposed for the Project as set forth in the
Development Agreement are specifically allowed by Specific Plan No. 219;
(3) The Development Agreement provides for the actual construction of
the public improvements as described in Specific Plan 219;
(4) The Applicable Rules set forth in the Development Agreement do not
change the provisions of the Specific Plan, but clarifies the uses to be allowed and standards to be
imposed where the Specific Plan provides for alternatives;
C. The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience,
general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance
of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City;
D. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to, and in fact enhances,
the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection
thereof through the implementation of the Applicable Rules;
F:~DEPTS~LANNING~STAFFRP'F~.84pa99.pc revised 9-29-gG..doc
27
E. The Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council to approve
of the Development Agreement is based upon evidence and findings of the Planning Commission
and the evidence presented at the hearings before the Planning Commission on the Development
Agreement;
F. The following benefits, among others, will accrue to the people of the City of
Temecula from the Development Agreement:
(1) Generation of municipal revenue;
(2) Construction of needed public infrastructure facilities;
(3) Acceleration of both the timely development of subject properly as
well as the payment of municipal revenue;
(4) Enhancement of quality of life for surrounding residents with the timely
development through the elimination of dust and nuisance of partially improved lots and providing
retail development necessary to serve the community; and
(5) Payment of Public Facility Fees.
Section 5. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council
that it make the environmental findings described herein and approve a Development Agreement
between the City of Temecula and del Sol Investments, LLC (Planning Application No. PA 99-0283).
Section 6. The Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
Section 7.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of October, 1999.
F~on Guem"~6, Chairperson
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a special meeting thereof, held on the 6th day of October,
1999 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES: 5
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
FAHEY, GUERRIERO, MATHEWSON,
NAGGAR, WEBSTER
NONE
NONE
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
F:'~DEPTS',PLANNING~STAFFRPT~.84pa99.pc revised 9-29-99..doc
28