Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout92_032 PC ResolutionATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 92-032 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING OF PLOT PLAN NO. 2, REVISED PERMIT NO. 2, AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO CONSTRUCT A COCO'S RESTAURANT AND A 15,400 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO K-MART ON A PARCEL LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND YNEZ ROAD IN THE PALM PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 910-130-030. WHEREAS, Bedford Development Company filed Plot Plan No. 2, Revised Permit No. 2, Amendment No.3 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WIIEREAS, said Plot Plan application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WIt~REAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Plot Plan on July 20, 1992, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Plot Plan; and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said Plot Plan. NOW, TI~F~REFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section I. 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: S\STAFFRPTX2PP.PC 7 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 consistent with the SWAP and meet the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit: The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general plan. 2. The Planning Commission finds, in recommending approval of projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this ritle, each of the following: a. There is reasonable probability that Plot Plan No. 2, Revised Permit No. 2, Amendment No. 3 proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time since the project is consistent with the existing SWAP and zoning designation. 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 since the project is compatible with surrounding development. c. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances since it complies with Ordinance No. 348. D. Pursuant to Section 18.30(c), no plot plan may be approved unless the following findings can be made: 1. The proposed use must conform to all the General Plan requirements and with all applicable requirements of state law and City ordinances. S\$TAFFRPT~2PP.I~C 8 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; conforms to the logical development of the land and is compatible with the present and future logical development of the surrounding property. E. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the proposed Plot Plan, makes the following findings, to wit: 1. This project will likely be consistent with the futura General Plan since it is located within an existing commercial shopping center and the proposed future General Plan will most likely designate the site as commercial. The first draft of the preferred Land Use Map shows the project site as commercial. 2. This project is consistent with the Southwest Area Plan (SWAP) since it is designated as commercial in the plan. 3. This project is consistent with the Scenic Highway Commercial (C-P-S) zone since it meets all the requirements for this zone. 4. This project will not have a significant impact on the environment since all the impacts have been mitigated to a level of insignificance. 5. The proposed project is suitable for the site since it accommodates all the structures, the necessary parking, landscaping and circulation for the site. 6. The proposed project will not cause a parking shortage ,since the parking analysis performed used a shared use parking demand analysis and demonstrated that the available number of parking spaces are adequate to serve the project. F. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION III, the Plot Plan proposed conforms to the logical development of its proposed site, and is compatible with the present and future development of the surrounding property. Section II. Environmental Compliance. Reaffirmation of the Negative Declaration for Plot Plan No. 2, Revised No 1, Amendment No. 1 is recommended. Section III. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves Plot Plan No. 2, Revised Permit No. 2, Amendment No. 3 to construct a Coco's restaurant and a 15,400 square foot expansion of K-mart located at the southwest comer of Winchester Road and Ynez Road in Palm Plaza and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 910-130- 030 subject to the following conditions: A. Attachment No. 2, attached hereto. Section IV. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of July, 1992. CHAIRMAN I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temeeula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 20th day of July, 1992 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford and Hoagland PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: lqone PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Fahey SXSTA~PP.~C 10