HomeMy WebLinkAbout96_041 PC ResolutionPC RESOLUTION NO. 96-41
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING TO THE
CITY COUNCIL THAT IT APPROVE A DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMFNT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
FOREST CITY DEVELOPMENT INC., AND LGA-7, INC.,
FOR APPROXIMATELY 179 ACRES LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND
YNEZ ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-0333)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Planning Commission hereby £mds determines, and declares as
follows:
a. Section 65864 et z~lq. 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,
Forest City Development, Inc. CDevelopex") and LGA-7, Inc. ("Owner") have jointly filed with
the City of Temecula an application for a Development Agreement ("Development Agreement")
for approximately 179 acres located at the southeast comer of Winchester Road and Ynez Road
("Propexty") for a regional mall and retail commercial uses consistent with Specific Plan No. 263,
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 fmdings under the California Environmental Quality Act that a
Supplemental F_JR or Subsequent EIR is not required has been duly given in the form and manner
require by law for both the public heating before the Planning Commission and the public hearing
before the City Counc'fl;
(1) Notice of the public heatings 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 heatings to the project
applicants and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, schools, police protection, and
fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the Property as shown
on the latest equalized assessment roll;
(2) Notice of the public hearings before the Planning Commission and
City Council included the date, time, and place of the public heating, the identity of the hearing
body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description in text or
R:\STAFFRPT~33PA96.PC 1 12/17/96 mf
diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing, and notice of the
need to exhaust administrative remedies;
d. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the
Development Agreement on December 16, 1996 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;
Section 2. The Planning Comnmss~on hereby further finds and determines that
the Project has been the subject of extensive prior environmental review:
a. On July 13, 1993, following a duly noticed public heating, the City Council
of the City of Temecula adopted Resolution No. 93-57 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT NO. 340 WITH ADDENDUM, ADOPTION OF THE STATEMENTS OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF YNEZ AND
WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO(S) 910-130-046, 047;
921-090-001,002, 003, 004, 005, AND 006," certifying the Environmental Impact Report for
Specific Plan No. 263 and Zone Change 5589 for the Property.
b. Additionally, on October 11, 1994, following a duly noticed public heating,
the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted Resolution No. 94-100 entitled "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE
ADDENDUM TO THE FEIR NO. 340; TO ADOPT AN ADDENDUM TO FEIR NO. 349
INCLUDING A NEW MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND DETERMINING NO
ADDITIONAL IMPACTS AS A RESULT OF CHANGING THE CIRCULATION
MITIGATION MEASURES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE
INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD." The Council found at this
time that the proposed specific plan and zone change did not change any of the impacts identified
in FEIR No. 340, none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the CEQA guidelines
calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR had occurred, only minor technical changes or
additions were necessary to make FEIR No. 340 adequate under CEQA, and the changes to the
EIR by the Addendum do not raise important new issues about the significant effects on the
environment.
c. The Staff of the Planning Department has prepared an Initial Study of
Environmental Impact, dated December 6, 1996 analyzing the proposed Development Agreement
and the prior environmental actions on the Project, which Initial Study is incorporated herein by
this reference.
d. The proposed Development Agreement incorporates the provisions of the
City's General Plan, Specific Plan 253, the current zoning regulations for the Property, the
Mitigation Plan of Environmental Impact Report No. 340 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. The Development Agreement makes minor adjustments to the
procedures for Planning Commission determination of adequate parking spaces, the procedures
for approval by the Director of lighting for the Project, allows for a freeway identification sign
for the Project, all as provided for by the Specific Plan, and provides for allocation between the
City and Developer of responsibility for construction of the off-site improvements which are
required for the Project. All of the provisions of the proposed Development Agreement which
might affect the environment were discussed and analyzed in FEIR 340.
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 properly analyzed in the EIR certified and approved by the City
Council on July 13, 1993 and the Addendum thereto approved on October 11, 1994 for the
approval of Specific Plan 263 and Zone Change 5589;
b. There have been no subsequent changes to the Project since October 11,
1994 which would require major revisions of the previous FEIR and Addendum due to the
involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects.
c. Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the circumstances
under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous FEIR
and Addendum due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
d. There is no new information since the certification of the previous FEIR and
Addendum which would show or tend to show that the Project might have one or more significant
effects not discussed in the previous FEIR and Addendum.
e. There is no new information since the certification of the previous FEIR and
Addendum which would show or tend to show that significant effects previously examined might
be substantially more severe than shown in the FEIR and Addendum.
f. There is no new information since the certification of the FEIR and
Addendum 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.
R:~STAFFRPTB33PA96.PC 1 12/17/96 mf
g. There is no new information since the certification of the FEIR and
Addendum which would show or tend to show that mitigation measures or alternatives which are
considerably different from those analyzed in the previous FEIR and Addendum 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, Professional Office and Public/Institutional Facilities for
the Property which provide for commercial development;
(2) The Development Agreement and development on the Property will
provide for the creation of jobs within the City, enhance the balance of housing and jobs within
the City as provided in the Growth Management/Public Facility, Land Use, and Economic
Development Elements of the General Plan;
b. The Development Agreement is consistent with Specific Han 263 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 263;
(2) The specific land uses proposed for the Project as set forth in the
Development Agreement are specifically allowed by Specific Plan No. 263;
(3) The Development Agreement provides for the actual construction
of the regional public improvements by the City as described in Specific Plan 263;
(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;
e. The Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council to approve
R:\STAFFRl~I~33PA96.PCI 12117196 mf
of the Development Agreement is based upon evidence and findings of the Planning Commission
and the evidence presented at the hearings before the Planning Commission on the Development
Agreement;
f. The following benefits, among others, will accrue to the people of the City
of Temecula from the Development Agreement:
(1) Generation of municipal revenue;
(2) Construction of needed public infrastructure facilities;
(3) Acceleration of both the timely development of subject property as
well as the payment of municipal revenue;
(4) Enhancement of quality of life for surrounding residents with the
timely development through the elimination of dust and nuisance of partially improved lots and
providing retail development necessary to serve the community; and
(5) Payment of Public Facility Fees.
Section 5. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council
that it make the environmental findings described herein and approve a Development Agreement
between the City of Temecula, Forest City Development Inc., and LGA-7, Inc., (Planning
Application No. PA 96-0333).
Section 6. The Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
R: \$TAFFRPT~333PA96.PC 1 12/17/96 mf
Section7. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula on December 16, 1996
I IiEREBY 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
December, 1996 by the following vote of the Commission:
3 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: SLAVEN, MILLER, WEBSTER
NOES:
0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: 2 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: FAHEY, SOLTYSIAK
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:\STAFFRPT~333PA96.PC1 12/17/96 mf