HomeMy WebLinkAbout91_068 PC Resolution RESOLUTION NO, 91-68
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING APPEAL NO. 15,
ADMINISTRATIVE PLOT PLAN NO. 91, TO INSTALL AN
APPROXIMATELY 111 SQUARE FOOT SIGN ABOVE AN
EXISTING ROOF LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER
OF JEFFERSON AVENUE AND OVERLAND DRIVE AND
KNOWN AS 27425 JEFFERSON AVENUE.
WHEREAS, Local Neon Co., Inc., filed Appeal No. 15 in accordance with
the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which
the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Appeal application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing
pertaining to said Appeal on July 15, 1991, at which time interested persons had
opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Appeal; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission received a copy of the Staff Report
regarding the Appeal;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
A:APPL15 1
(a) There is a reasonable probability that the land
use or action proposed will be consistent with
the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
(b) There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(c) The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the
boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its
General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion
with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed Plot Plan is inconsistent with the SWAP and
meet the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government
Code, to wit:
(1) The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The Planning Commission finds, in denying projects
pursuant to this title, each of the following:
a) There is reasonable probability that Appeal
No. 15 proposed will not be consistent with
the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
b) There is a probability of substantial detriment
to or interference with the future adopted
general plan if the proposed use or action is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
A:APPL15 2
buildings as stipulated in Section 19.4(b) of
Ordinance No. 348.
SECTION 2_. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby denies Appeal
No. 15, Administrative Plot Plan No. 91, to install an approximately 111 square foot
sign above an existing roof located on the northwest corner of Jefferson Avenue and
Overland Drive and known as 27425 Jefferson Avenue.
SECTION 3.
PASSED, DENIED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of July, 1991.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held
on the 15th day of July, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES: 5 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
A:APPL15 4