Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout051502 PC Agenda In compliance with the Americar{s with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (909) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II] AGENDA TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE May 15, 2002- 6:00 P.M. Next in Order: Resolution: No. 2002-013 CALL TO ORDER: Flag Salute: Chairman Chiniaeff Roll Call: Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso, Telesio and Chairman Chiniaeff PUBLIC COMMENTS 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 Agenda, 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 ~or the record. For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Commission Secretary prior to the Commission addressing that item. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers. CONSENT CALENDAR NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC 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. 1 Agenda RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Agenda of May 15, 2002 R:~PLANCOMM~Agendas~2002~5-15-02,doc 1 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve Minutes from April 24, 2002 2.2 Approve Minutes from May 1, 2002 -Will be delivered under separate cover COMMISSION BUSINESS 3 Capital Improvements Proqram (ClP) 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) at 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. Continued from April 24, 2002 4 Plannincl Application No. 01-0307 (Development Plan) - Matthew Harris, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Staff recommends the project be continued off-calendar for redesign. (See attached documentation) New Items 5 Planninq Application No. 01-0324 (Conditional Use Permit~ - Don Hazen, Senior Planner RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Staff recommends the project be continued off-calendar at the applicant's request, in order to develop a revised lighting plan for the facility. (See attached documentation) 6 Plannin~l Application No. 01-0521 (Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan) - Rick Rush RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. 01-0521 pursuant to Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act; Adopt a Resolution entitled: . R:~PLANCOMM~Agendas~2002\5-15~2.doc 2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-052t, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A 55,906 SQUARE FOOT TWO-STORY SELF- STORAGE FACILITY ON 3.47 VACANT ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED ON PALA ROAD NORTH OF LOMALINDA ROAD AND SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 96t-0t0-0t0 COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next Meeting: June 5, 2002 - Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590 R:~PLANCOMM~Agendas~2002~5-15-02,doc 3 ITEM #2 MINUTES FROM APRIL 24, 2002 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 24, 2002 CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in an adjourned regular meeting at 6:00 P.M., on Wednesday, April 24, 2002, 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 Chairman Chiniaeff. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso,. and Chairman Chiniaeff. Absent: Commissioner Telesio. Also Present: Director of Planning Ubnoske, Assistant City Attorney Curley, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks, Senior Planner Hazen, Associate Planner Harris, Associate Planner Thornsley, Project Planner McCoy, Management Analyst Smith, and Minute Clerk Hansen. PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. CONSENT CALENDAR I Agenda RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Agenda of April 24, 2002. 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the Minutes of the April 3, 2002 Meeting. 3 Director's Hearinq Case Update RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Approve the Director's Hearing Case Update. MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-3. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Olhasso and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Telesio who was absent and Chairman Chiniaeff who abstained from Item No. 2. COMMISSION BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 4 Planninq Application No. 01-0307 (Development Plan) - Matthew Harris, Associate Planner It is noted that the Planning Commission took action on Agenda Item No. 4 when Item No. 5 was addressed; see below. 5 Planninq Application No. 01-0309 (Development Plan) - Rick Rush Project Planner Relaying that both Agenda Item Nos. 4 and 5 had been continued from the last Planning Commission meeting (April 3, 2002) to tonight's meeting (April 24, 2002), Director of Planning Ubnoske relayed that the applicants were not yet prepared for Planning Commission presentation and recommended that the items be continued, as follows: that Item No. 4 be continued to the May 15, 2002 meeting, and that Item No. 5 be continued to the May 1, 2002 meeting. For Chairman Chiniaeff, Senior Planner Hazen provided additional information regarding the items that had been continued from the April 3, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, relaying that the Planning Commission had recommended that both projects be redesigned. For informational purposes, Chairman Chiniaeff relayed that Agenda Item No. 4 (Planning Application No. 01-0307) was a proposal for a 24,170 square foot IndustrialNVarehouse building located on Zevo Drive, west of Diaz Road, and that Agenda Item No. 5 (Planning Application No. 01-0309) was a proposal for a warehouse building located on Winchester Road, north of Colt Court and south of Zevo Drive. MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to continue Item No. 4 to May 15, 2002, and to continue Item No. 5 to May 1, 2002. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Guerriero and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Telesio who was absent. 6 Planning Application No. 01-0445 (Extension of Time) - Thomas Thornsle¥, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATiQN: 6.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. 01-0445 (Extension of Time) based on the Determination of Consistency with a project for which a · Negative Declaration was previously adopted pursuant'to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162- Subsequent EIR's and Negative Declarations. 6.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-007 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA0'1-0445 (THE SECOND ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME), FOR PA97-0420 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A SENIOR APARTMENT BUILDING, TVVO MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDINGS TOTALING 27,700 SQUARE FEET, 69 INDEPENDENT CARE HOUSING UNITS WITH A DETACHED CLUBHOUSE AND POOL (380,859 TOTAL SQUARE FEET) WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCAPING ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 22.62 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOMALINDA AND PALA ROADS, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS, 961- 010-0'14 AND 961-010-0'15, By way of overhead maps, Associate Planner Thomsley presented the staff report (per agenda material), noting that the requested extension of time was for a project which was brought before the Planning Commission three years ago; and relayed that in order to update the associated Conditions of Approval to meet the City's current standards, the following revisions are recommended by staff: the addition of Community Services Department Condition Nos. 94, 95 and 97 as per the staff report (regarding requirements associated with solid waste disposal, recycling and the installation of bike lanes), and the addition of Public Works Department Condition No. 50 (regarding requirements to improve the existing channel on Pala Road if ClP Project No. PW99-11 has not occurred prior to development of this project.) For Chairman Chiniaeff, Mr. Daniel Lomax, the applicant, relayed agreement with the revised conditions. MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to close the public hearing; and to approve staff's recommendation, subject to the conditions being revised, as presented by staff (see above). The motion was seconded by Commissioner Mathewson and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Telesio who was absent. 7 Planninq Application No. 01-0539 (Development Plan) - Matthew Harris, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. 01-0539 (Development Plan) pursuant to Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act; 7.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-008 A RESOLUTION OF THI= PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 0'1-0559, DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A '18,894 SQUARE FOOT TVVO-STORY OFFICEA~VAREHOUSE BUILDING ON A .96 ACRE SITE GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF ENTERPRISE ClRCL£ NORTH, 230 FEET NORTH OF WINGHESTER ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 909-28'1- 003 Via color renderings and overheads, Associate Planner Harris presented an overview of the proposed project (per agenda material), highlighting the location, the zoning (Business Park), the surrounding land uses, the site design, the entrance point, the roll- up delivery door located at the rear of the building, the landscape plan which will aid in the screening of the on-site parking, and the decorative paving located at the building entrances, the outdoor eating patio, and at the driveway entrance; specified the building design with the use of three colors on the building, the entry frames provided at the building entrances which the applicant was willing to extend two feet per staff's recommendation in order to provide additional depth; noted the glass treatments which would aid in breaking up the massing; relayed staff's efforts with the applicant which resulted in larger windows being proposed; advised that while the applicant was proposing five flagpoles at the front of the building, the Development Code only allowed for three flags on the proper[y, one of which would be the American flag while the other two could be international flags, noting that since the project would not qualify for variance regarding this issue, staff was recommending that the site plan be amended to indicate three flagpoles Prior to the Issuance of a Building Permit; for Commissioner Guerriero, relayed that the proposed glass would be a green reflective glass, providing the sample material board; and for Chairman Chiniaeff, reiterated the restrictions' regarding allowance for only three flags on site. For clarification, Director of Planning Ubnoske relayed that it was her understanding that the allowance of three flags was a requirement of the Code, and not a recommendation. Mr. Dave Wakefield, representing the applicant, noted agreement with the conditions; with respect to the architectural design, provided additional information regarding the glass treatments and the accent paint application; relayed the landscape plan, and the proposed decorative concrete to create visual interest; and noted that if the Planning Commission could approve the plan for five flagpoles it would be greatly appreciated. Ms. Judy Muscarella, representing the applicant, relayed that the company (Gospel Recordings) was relocating to the City of Temecula, after being located in Los Angeles for over 62 years; provided an overview of the work this non-profit company was involved with (providing the gospel message in an audio format in various world languages); and advised that staff members (missionaries) were based in 35 different nations around the world, noting that the rationale for the plan to have five flagpoles was due to the desire to fly the flag of the country where a staff member had been stationed while that member was home on leave, advising that the applicant would abide by whatever determination was made regarding the flagpole issue. At this time Chairman Chiniaeff opened the public hearing. Mr. Mack Timm, 41840 Enterprise Circle Drive North, representing the use located directly across the street from this proposed project, noting that he was in favor of the development plan and would have no objection to the additional flagpoles. MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to close the public hearing; and to approve staff's recommendation; and directed staff to further investigate as to whether the five proposed flagpoles could be installed, ultimately subjecting the site plan to the requirements of the Development Code. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Mathewson and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Telesio who was .absent. 8 Planninq Application No. 01-0385 - Michael McCov, Proiect Planner RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. 01-0385 pursuant to Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act 8.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-009 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 0t-0385, DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE TWO MULTI-TENANT INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSE SPECULATIVE BUILDINGS, ONE OF t9,400 SQ. FT. AND ONE OF 23,700 SQ. FT. ON A 3.25-ACRE VACANT PARCEL LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF WINCHESTER ROAD AT THE TERMINUS OF COLT COURT AND WEST OF DIAZ ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NOS. 909-360-025 & 042 By way of overheads and a material sample board, Project Planner McCoy presented the staff report (of record), relaying the location, the zoning (Light Industrial), the General Plan Designation (Business Park), the surrounding properties, the site design, the access point, the circular driveway, the employee patio area, the trash enclosures and loading area located in between the proposed buildings, and the buildings' enhanced articulation which provided material variation creating visual interest; noted the landscape plan which enhanced the entrance, and effectively screened the parking area and provided additional accenting; and advised that the internal driveway between the buildings has been conditioned (Condition No. 13) to provide one-way access only and restricted from extended parking, and storage of materials or vehicles of any kind behind the tenant suites. For Commissioner Mathewson, Project Planner McCoy relayed that while the entire width of the internal driveway was thirty-six feet (36'), that with the ten-foot (10') wide striped areas along the length of each of the rear of the buildings the clearance would be reduced to sixteen feet (16'), confirming that the striped areas were the designated as loading zones; and noted that the Fire Depadment was satisfied with the plan, relaying that the 150 foot (150') fire hose would address fire emergencies with the fire vehicles being parking on the edge at the side of the entrances. Director of Planning Ubnoske clarifying that conditioning the driveway to only allow one-way access created a circulation plan that was adequate. Commissioner Olhasso noted her concern regarding enforcement of the conditions regarding restrictions at the internal driveway. In response to Chairman Chiniaeff, Senior Planner Hazen advised that it had been relayed to the applicant that if there was a desire to have two-way access at the internal driveway the square footage of the buildings would need to be decreased: The applicant's architect provided additional information regarding the internal driveway design; and with respect to Condition No. 24, noted the applicant's concern regarding the requirement to establish a reciprocal access between this property and the parcel to the west (which was also owned by the applicant) due to negative impacts if the two sites are sold separately. Providing clarification regarding the second access point, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks noted the applicant's original request for a second driveway to be located at the westerly parking area which staff was not in agreement with due to the plan to limit the number of driveways on Winchester Road, ergo the requirement to establish reciprocal access to provide a second access point as per the Fire Department requirements; for Chairman Chiniaeff, relayed that there would be a conflict with the alternate parking lot is a second driveway was to be installed at the westerly parking area; and confirmed that staff would not be opposed to the installation of a breakaway gate at the location of the reciprocal access point. After additional discussion regarding maintaining the reciprocal access as restricted for fire and safety vehicle access only, Assistant City Attorney Curley relayed that staff would need to further investigate the recommendation to ensure there would be clear emergency access prior to developing the language for the reciprocal agreement; and provided language which could be added to Condition No. 24 to reflect the plan for limited reciprocal access (as indicated in the modifications to the conditions under the motion; see the italicized section on page 7). R: PlanComnflminut es~042402 6 Per her experience in the City of Ontario, Commissioner Olhasso noted that various tenants had created negative impacts in alleyways such as this particular proposal (i.e., installing fences). Mr. David Silver, representing the applicant, provided assurance that there would be no fencing or storage in the alleyway, relaying a willingness to have the project conditioned with these restrictions. MOTION: Commissioner Olhasso moved to close the public hearing; and to approve staff's recommendation, subject to the following revisions: Modify- . That additional language be added to Condition No. 15 restricting the storage of any items including dumpsters, stacking bins, as well as proh!biting the installation of fences. · That Condition No. 24 be revised to state A reciprocal access agreement shall be established in the property title to provide for limited reciprocal access for emergency vehicles (subject to the satisfaction of the City's Legal, Planning and Public Works staff) between this property and the adjacent parcel to the west. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Guerriero and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Telesio who was absent. 9 Planninq Application No. 01-0386 - Michael McCoy, Proiect Planner RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. 01-0386 pursuant to Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act 9.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-010 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 0t-0386, DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A 33,226 SQUARE FOOT INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON A 1.9t ACRE VACANT PARCEL LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF WINCHESTER ROAD AT THE TERMINUS OF BOSTIK COURT AND WEST OF DIAZ ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 909-360- 041. Project Planner McCoy provided an overview of the project plan (of record); via overheads, relayed the location, the Zoning (Light Industrial), the General Plan designation (Business Park), the surrounding land uses, the site design, the two R:PlanComr~/minutes~42402 7 decorative paved entryways, the access from Winchester road, the employee patio area, the loading docks, the provision of a variation of visual relief with vertical columns offset from the building, the two raised glass elements, and the horizontal metal canopies at the entranceways, and the landscape plan; and with respect to the proposed paint application which was comprised of three shades of blue, noted that staff has conditioned the applicant to provide an alternative color palette with earth tones due to incompatibility issues with the proposed bright colors against the hillside. For Chairman Chiniaeff, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that with respect to Condition No. 23, the same revision as in Agenda Item No. 8 regarding the reciprocal easement being for emergency access only could be applied. The applicant's architect noted the desire of the applicant to maintain the proposal for the building to be painted in blue shades; and with relayed concern respect to Condition No. 10, requiring that all downspouts be internalized. Chairman Chiniaeff relayed that due to the lack of visibility of the rear of the building, face-mounted downspouts would most likely be acceptable in this location. Director of Planning Ubnoske relaying that this revision would be satisfactory with staff. In response to Chairman Chiniaeff, the applicant's architect relayed the proposed color application, which was comprised of blue hues that graduated from light to darker tones. Addressing the color application issue and in light of the applicant's opposition to utilizing earth tones, Commissioner Olhasso suggested utilizing a sage green color tone. Chairman Chiniaeff concurred with the applicant with respect to opposing the utilization of earth tones for the paint application, noting that he could support the plan to Utilize blue tones. Director of Planning Ubnoske relayed the rationale for staff's recommendation regarding the opposition to the applicant's plan to utilize a blue-toned paint palette, noting that per previous Planning Commission meetings, the Commissi0. n's desire had been to approve color applications which would blend with the natural hillside colors with projects located on the hillside. Additional discussion ensued regarding the paint application on buildings on the City's hillsides, Chairman Chiniaeff, echoed by Commissioner Guerriero, noting that a gray color ton~ might blend more than blue tones with the natural background, recommending that the applicant work with staff to develop an appropriate paint application. The applicant's architect relayed that it was the applicant's desire to utilize a blue-toned paint application due to the use potentially selling more readily, additionally noting the plan to utilize blue-colore~ glass. Commissioner Guerriero noted his concern regarding the visual appearance of the south elevation. Commissioner Mathewson suggested that the glass band be extended further across this area, Chairman Chiniaeff suggesting that the glass treatment be repeated stepping down towards the middle of the building which would fill the void. Due to the location of the service door, Commissioner Olhasso recommended screening this area on the Winchester elevation. For informational purposes, the applicant's architect noted that there was a slight grade change from the street to the site; and for Chairman Chiniaeff, relayed that applicant's willingness to add landscaping to screen the door on the Winchester Road elevation. MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to close the public hearing; and to approve staff's recommendation, subject to the following revisions: Modify- · With respect to the Winchester elevation, that there be additional glass added, specifically that the glass treatment be extended with an additional stepping down towards the middle of the building, and that a 24-inch box tree be installed in this area to screen the service door on this elevation. · With respect to Condition No. 10, that the language be revised to state All downspouts visible to the public shall be intemalized. · With respect to Condition No. 23, that the language be revised to state A reciprocal access agreement shall be established in lhe property title to provide for limited reciprocal access for emergency vehicles (subject to the satisfaction of the City's Legal, Planning and Public Works staff) between this property and the adjacent parcel to the east. · With respect to Condition No. 24 (regarding the color palette), that the applicant be directed to work with staff to develop an appropriate color scheme. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Guerriero and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Telesio who was absent, COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS A. Noting the progress in the City since she was an employee four years ago, Commissioner Olhasso commended Director of Planning Ubnoske and Deputy Director of Public Works Parks for the development of a concurrent permit process, in order for the community to be perceived as business friendly;, with respect to the struggle the Planning Department has had filling positions due to the competitive market, requested that consideration be given regarding staff salaries and the recruitment process, and that whatever steps are deemed necessary that this matter be addressed; and noting her desire to see more current architectural design, offered her time to tour staff and/or th& Planning Commission through development projects in the City of Ontario. B. For Commissioner Mathewson, Director of Planning Ubnoske relayed that she would forward the information regarding the plethora of banners displayed at the Portofino Apartment Complex to Code Enforcement, advising that the Planning Commission could e-mail or phone Senior Management Analyst Brown in order for staff to address these matters expeditiously. C. With respect to the May 7~ City Council/Planning Commission Joint Workshop meeting, Commissioner Mathewson noted that he would be unable to attend. D. Regarding the recent National Planning Convention in Chicago that he had attended, Commissioner Guerriero noted that it had been an educational and wonder[ul experience. E. Commissioner Guerriero requested that there be investigation as to whether it would be feasible to extend the left-turn lane on Rancho California Road (coming from Margarita Road.) In response, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that staff was in the process of investigating this issue and that he would update the Planning Commission at a future meeting. F. Commenting on the National Planning Convention held in Chicago, Chairman Chiniaeff noted that the architecture being developed in alternate cities was a regression back to the 1920's and 1930's style; and thanking staff for the opportunity to attend this convention, relayed that he would provide to staff the photographs (reflecting interesting architectural design elements) that he took while in the City of Chicago. G. Referencing Agenda Nos. 4 and 5, Chairman Chiniaeff recommended that in the future additional information be provided on continued items in order to provide clarification as to what project was being continued. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT A. Regarding architectural design in the City, Director of Planning Ubnoske noted the struggle between staff and the development community with respect to this issue; and advised that in the proposed CIP budget (which has not yet been approved by the City Council) funds have been designated for hiring a consultant to prepare a new set of Design Guidelines which would aid in addressing this issue in written form, noting that in the future a workshop would be scheduled in order to have discussions with the Planning Commission prior to meeting with the consultant. B. In order to gain input, Senior Planner Hazen queried whether when applicants made minor changes in approved project plans if it was the Planning Commission's desire to have these items brought back to the Commission or if the Commission preferred to have staff address these minor revisions; and provided an example of a project where the applicant was requesting a minor deviation from the approved plan regarding awnings and entryway design, noting the desire to utilize retractable awnings and to replace the dome over the entry with a canvas canopy. In response to Senior Planner Hazen's queries, and after additional discussion it was the general consensus of the Planning Commission to have staff bring back these particular projects to the Commission where the applicant was requesting to deviate from the approved project plan. Assistant City Attorney Cudey confirming that these items would need to be noticed. C. For Commissioner Mathewson, Director of Planning Ubnoske provided an update regarding the Home Depot/Staples Shopping Center. D. Apprising the Planning Commission, Senior Planner Hazen noted that on May 16, 2002, staff would be conducting a field trip to visit development in the City of Temecula, relaying that desire to gain input from the Planning Commission regarding design elements. E. Updating the Planning Commission, Chairman Chiniaeff noted that at the April 23, 2002 City Council meeting the City Council voted to deny approval of the proposed Development Code Amendment (regarding second dwelling units), supporting the Planning Commission's recommendation. For Chairman Chiniaeff, Director of Planning Ubnoske and Senior Planner Hazen providing additional information regarding the Pacific Bell Wireless lease agreement, which was approved by the City Council at the April 23rd meeting. F. Commissioner Guerriero noted that he most likely would not be able to attend the May 1, 2002 Planning Commission meeting. G. Commissioner Olhasso queried the scheduling of a Joint City Council/Planning Commission Workshop on May 7th, advising that she had relayed that she would never be able to attend a meeting on any first or third Tuesday night of any month. Providing clarification, Director of Planning Ubnoske noted the difficulty City staff had scheduling this meeting. ADJOURNMENT At 8:00 P.M. Chairman Chiniaeff formally adjourned this meeting to the next re.qular meetin.cl to be held on Wednesday, Mav 1, 2002 at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. Dennis W. Chiniaeff, Debbie Ubnoske, Chairman Director of Planning MINUTES FROM MAY t, 2002 (Will be delivered under separate cover) ITEM #3 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION May 15, 2002 2002-2007 Capital Improvement Program Prepared By: David Hogan, Senior Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Depadment - Planning Division Staff recommends that: The Planning Commission review the proposed Capital Improvement Program and provide comments to the City Council on the consistency of the 2003 - 2007 Capital Improvement Program with the adopted General Plan. BACKGROUND Section 65403 (c) of State Planning and Zoning Law requires that the Planning Commission review and provide comments to the City Council concerning the conformity of the proposed Capital Improvement Program with the adopted General Plan. The role of the Planning Commission is to review the proposed projects and determine if the projects are consistent with the City General Plan. While the timing may be of interest to the Commission, and the Council is interested in the Commission's thoughts, the primary issue for the Planning Commission is whether or not the project as proposed is consistent with the General Plan. DISCUSSION: The City Departments have been meeting over the last few months to finalize the 2003-2007 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The ClP covers the funding and timing for major capital and construction projects throughout the City. The priority categories for CIP projects are as follows: Priority I: The project is urgent and must be completed as soon as feasible. Failure to address the project may impact the health, safety, or welfare of the community; or have a significant impact on the financial well being of the City. The project must be initiated or financial opportunity losses may result. Priority I1: The project is important and addressing it is necessary. The project impacts safety, law enforcement, health, welfare, economic base, and\or quality of life. Priority III: The project will enhance the quality of life and will provide a benefit to the community. Completion of the project will improve the community by providing cultural, recreational, and\or aesthetic value. Priority IV: The project will be an improvement to the community, but does not necessarily need to be completed within a five-year capital improvement program time frame. This category may include projects that may need to be initiated in the subsequent CIP cycles. Attachment 1. 2003-2007 Capital Improvement Program - Blue Page 2 R:\STAFFRPT~CIP Review 2002 PC.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 1 DRAFT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM R:\STAFFRPT~CIP Review 2002 PC.doc Z 0 tu tu Z m U~ 0 0 0 © © . ~ :EDEDt~H SM~'H RD ~ .~, ~ .~ ~ o el) o .= ~ ITEM #4 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION May 15, 2002 Planning Application No. 01-0307 (Development Plan) Prepared By: Matthew Harris, Associate Planner SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT ON ARCHITECTURAL REVISIONS IN ASSOCIATION WITH PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0307, A 24,170 SQUARE FOOT INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON 1.50 ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF ZEVO DRIVE, WEST OF DIAZ ROADKNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 909-360-034. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Don Mosco Builders PROPOSAL: A proposal to design, construct and operate a 24,170 square foot industrial/warehouse building LOCATION: South side of Zevo Drive, approximately 2,700 feet west of Diaz Road EXISTING ZONING: Light Industrial (LI) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: Light Industrial (LI) South: Light Industrial (LI) East: Light Industrial (LI) West: Light Industrial (LI) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Business Park (BP) EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Vacant South: Vacant/Industrial Building East: Warehouse Building West: Industrial Building PROJECT STATISTICS (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) Lot area (net): 1.50 Acres Building square footage: 24,170 square feet Building 'height: 30'-0" Landscaped area: 13,050 square feet (20%) Parking required: 41 vehicular, 2 handicapped, 2 bicycle, and 1 motorcycle Parking provided: 42 vehicular, 2 handicapped, 2 bicycle, and 1 motorcycle Lot coverage/FAR: 35%/.38 R:'~D P't2001\01-0307 mosco lot 34\Staff Report for Continuance.doc BACKGROUND This application was continued from the April 3r~ Planning Commission meeting after, the Commission identified several building architecture issues. The following is a summary of the concerns that were expressed by the Planning Commissioners. · The building does not have sufficient articulation. · The building does not have a sufficient variety of siding materials. · The building needs more windows of various shapes and sizes. · The building has a stark appearance with minimal ornamentation. · The building was not designed by a licensed architect. At the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the applicant retained the services of a licensed architect. Since the April 3, 2002 meeting, the architect and staff met once to discuss the proposed changes to the architecture. Since that meeting, the architect made additional revisions that were not reviewed by staff prior' to formal submittal. The revisions undertaken by the architect took longer to complete than anticipated. Subsequently, the application had to be continued a third time from the May 1 st meeting to May 15th. The applicant has also stated that they do not wish to resubmit additional copies of the site plan or landscaping plan, despite staff's opinion that we should not assume Planning Commissioners still have their old sets. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ANALYSIS Staff has reviewed the revised elevations and floor plans submitted by the architect. Staff believes the proposed revisions fail to comply with the following Industrial Design Guidelines: · The plan does not provide a variety of building indentations and architectural details. · The plan does not provide variety in building forms to provide entry character and visual interest. · The plan does not use various siding materials, i.e. metal, masonry, concrete texturing, and cement of plaster to produce effects of texture and relief that provide architectural interest. Buildinq Articulation & Architectural Details A series of sandblasted concrete panels with varying heights have been added to both the north and east sides of the building. In addition, square 5'x5' spandrel glass windows have been added to the north and east elevations. Painted knockout panels are also proposed along the east and west elevations to simulate additional square windows. Rectangular and square shaped score lines are proposed on the body of the building and along the six-foot tall screen wall on the west side of the building. The Planning Commission expressed concern with the building's un-articulated, box-like appearance. Staff believes the sandblasted panels, which have minimal depth, provide little, if any additional articulation. While a second-story office mezzanine is only proposed at the northwest corner of the building, the entire structure appears two-story in height given that all the panels are oriented vertically. Moreover, the panels and other proposed architectural details, including the windows, are all square or rectangular which serves to amplify the buildings box-like shape and appear repetitive. R:~D P~.001~01-0307 mosco lot 34\Staff Repot1 for Continuance.doc Buildinq Entry A 15 foot tall, 22 foot wide square sandblasted entry panel has been added in front of the main building entrance. Staff feels that the panel, which projects outward six and one-half feet from the building face, provides minimal entry character and visual interest contrary to the Industrial Design Guidelines. In addition, staff believes the square shape of the projection again serves to amplifythe buildings box-like shape. Sidinq Materials Staff believes the proposed sandblasted panels do not provide enough variety with regard to siding materials. The panels provide a second concrete material in addition to the building's tilt-up concrete walls. However, in accordance with the Industrial Design Guidelines, a variety of siding materials should be utilized. Staff is also concerned that the sandblasted aggregate will take on a gray colored appearance that may not complement the proposed earth tone colors to be used on the body of the building. Landscapincl At the time this staff report was prepared, the applicant had not yet provided a revised landscape plan. Therefore, staff is unclear as to how the proposed building elevation modifications will affect landscaped planters adjacent to the building. Staff believes that all landscape plantings adjacent to the building should either be retained or enhanced so as to ensure that the building is not further exposed. Processinq Timeline The project application was deemed complete for processing on March 5, 2002. Moreover', the CEQA exemption determination was made on March 19, 2002. In accordance with the Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Section 65950) the City must approve or disapprove the application within sixty days of the date the determination of exemption is made, i.e. May 19, 2_002. Given that this deadline cannot be achieved, staff recommends that the applicant consent to a one- time, 90 day processing extension if no action is taken at the May 15th meeting. CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION Staff has determined that the proposed project complies with all of the applicable development standards. However, the project does not conform to all applicable Industrial Design Guidelines and findings for approval cannot be made. Staff recommends the project be continued off-calendar so that additional architectural revisions can be accomplished or deny the application if the applicant is unwilling to consent to a continuance and time extension. A Planning Commission Resolution has not been drafted given that the project is being recommended for continuance. If the Planning Commission chooses to approve or deny the application, the Commission will need to make findings for the record, and staff will prepare the necessary Resolution for signature. Attachments: 1. Exhibits -. Blue Page 4 A. Revised Building Elevations B. Revised Floor Plan 2. Staff Report Dated April 3, 2002 - Blue Page 5 R:~O P~2001\01-0307 rnosco lot 34\Staff Report for Continuance.doc ATFACHMENT NO. 1 EXHIBITS R:~D P~001\01-0307 mosco lot 34\Staff Repod for Continuance.doc 4 PLAN SHEET REDUCTIONS NOT PROVIDED R:'~D P~001\01-0307 mosco lot 34~Staff Report for Continuance.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 2 STAFF REPORT DATED APRIL 3, 2002 R:'~D P~2001~01-0307 mosco lot 34\Staff Report for Continuance.doc STAFF REPORT- PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION April 3, 2002 Planning Application No. 01-0307 (Development Plan) Prepared By: Matthew Harris, Associate Planner 1. ADOPT a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. 01-0307 pursuant to Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act; 2. ADOPTa Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01- 0307, DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A 24,170 INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON 1.50 VACANT ACRES. GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF ZEVO DRIVE, WEST OF DIAZ ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 909-360-034 APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Don Mosco Builders PROPOSAL: A proposal to design, construct and operate a 24,170 square foot industrial/warehouse building. LOCATION: South side of Zevo Drive, approximately 2,700 feet west of Diaz Road EXISTING ZONING: Light Industrial (LI) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: Light Industrial (LI) South: Light Industrial (LI) East: Light Industrial (LI) _~Vest: Light Industrial (LI) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Business Park (BP) EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Vacant South: Vacant/Industrial Building East: Warehouse Building West: Industrial Building R:~D PX2001\01~)307 mosco lot 34~Slaff Report aud COAs.doc PROJECT STATISTICS (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) Lot area (net) 1.50 acres : Footprint: 22,670 square feet Building square footage: 24,170 square feet Building hei'ght: 30'-0" Landscaped area: 13,050 square feet (20%) Parking required: 41 vehicular, 2 handicapped, 2 bicycle, and 1 motorcycle Parking provided: 42 vehicular, 2 handicapped, 2 bicycle, and 1 motorcycle Lot coverage: 35% Floor area ratio: .38 BACKGROUND The applicant submitted a Development Plan a~pplication on June 22, 2001. The application was subsequently deemed incomplete for processing on July 19, 2001. A Development Review Committee meeting was held on October 2, 2001. Staff expressed a variety of amhitectural and site plan concerns to the applicant at the meeting. Amhitectural concerns included the lack of building indentations and architectural details, an under accentuated and defined main building entry, minimal use of siding materials and lack of variety in building colors. Site plan concerns included the lack of pedestrian sidewalks between the building and parking areas, and non-existent screening of loading docks and overhead doors from Zevo Drive. In addition, staff expressed concern about the lack of significant landscaping at the main building entrance. In the months since the October 2"d DRC meeting, several revised plans have been submitted; and while staff's concerns have not been completely alleviated, the plans do meet the minimum standards required for approval. The applicant has been reluctant to make further changes to the plan. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Site Plan The applicant proposes to construct a one-story 22,670 square foot industrial/warehouse building including a 1,500 square foot office area. A future 1,500 square foot second-story office mezzanine is also proposed. The building is approximately 100 feet wide and 247 feet long, and will be sited along the southern property line, perpendicular to Zevo Drive (and oriented to face north). The building will have a 62-foot front setback from the Zevo Drive right-of-way. Within that setback thers will be a 20 foot-wide landscape planter along Zevo Drive and a row of trees along the front building R:~D P~001\01-0307 mosco lot 34~Staff Report and COPs.doc 2 wall face. in addition, a six-foot tall screen wall will be provided perpendicular to Zevo Drive on the east side of the building to provide additional screening of loading doors. Access/Circulation Access to the site will be from a single driveway off Zevo Drive. Based on the proposed uses, the site is required to provide 41 parking spaces and the site plan shows 42 spaces to be provided. Parking rows will be located along the north and east sides of the building. Two motorcycle spaces and six bicycle racks will also be provided onsite. Building Design The spec building is being constructed to provide for 21,170 square feet of warehouse or manufacturing space. A single entry will be accessed at the northeast corner of the building. In addition, four separate roll-up doors will be accessed from the east side of the building. The proposed building will be constructed of tilt-up concrete with a plain painted finish. The front of the building features a recessed aluminum storefront with green reflective glass. A sandblasted trellis structure will project out from the storefront to provide a defined element to complement the building entrance. A recessed panel will be incorporated into the northern building elevation with three separate building offsets along the eastern elevation all serving to provide building articulation. Several windows with green reflective glass will be utilized along the northern and eastern building elevations. The majority of the building's concrete panels will be painted "Caisson". A panel along the east and north sides will be painted "Soloman Sand" to provide a complementary contrast. In addition, a three-quarter inch recessed, five and one-half inch wide horizontal painted detail line will be provided at the top and mid-section of the north and east building elevations along with three-quarter inch recessed painted squares. A material sample board provided with the application shows the proposed colors/materials. Landscaping The site is required to have a minimum of 20% landscape coverage and 20% will be provided. The plan shows a 20-foot wide planter along the Zero Drive frontage, consisting of six liquid amber trees, fern pines and assorted shrubbery. Within the parking area along the eastern property line, minimum five-foot wide planters (exclusive of parking overhang) will be planted with 24-inch box fern pines, london plane trees and assorted shrubbery. A 36-inch box, multi-trunk crepe myrtle tree and three 24-inch box fern pines will frame the walkway leading to the building's main entrance. A seven-foot wide landscape planter will be planted along the rear (southern) property line with six Canary Island Pine trees and assorted shrubbery to serve as a buffer. ANALYSIS Environmental Determination The project is exempt from environmental review based on Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and there are no potentially significant environmental constraints on the site. The project qualifies for an infill development exemption because the project is consistent with the General Plan designation and zoning regulations; is located on a site within the city limits which is served by all utilities; and is less than 5 acres in area. Site Plan The project conforms to all of the development regulations of the Light Industrial (LI) zoning district. The building setbacks exceed the minimum requirements of the Development Code, including the western interior side-yard setback, which is permitted to have a zero setback. The proposed 35% lot coverage is below the maximum permitted lot coverage of 40%, and the .38 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is below the maximum permitted FAR of .40 for the Light Industrial district. The plan also exceeds the minimum number of required parking spaces, and the distribution of the parking is functional and accessible to all areas of the building entry points. Access and Circulation The Public Works Department has analyzed the projected traffic impact of the project and determined that the impacts are consistent with the traffic volumes projected for the site by the General Plan EIR. The Fire Department has also reviewed the plan and determined that there is proper access and circulation to provide emergency services to the site. Building Design The building design is consistent with the minimum requirements of the Development Code, and Design Guidelines and is consistent with adjacent industrial buildings. The variations in building form and colors will present a visual interest from the streets and'will maintain a balance of scale, form and proportion with the surrounding area. Staff had requested that a variety of siding materials such as tile, masonry or stone be incorporated into the building architecture so as to provide interest and break-up building wall expanses. However, the applicant was reluctant to incorporate such materials. Landscaping The landscape plan conforms to the minimum landscape requirements of the Development Code and Design Guidelines, and the City's consulting landscape architect recommends approval of the plan. Conditions of approval have also been added which require a one-year landscape maintenance bond to be submitted prior to occupancy (Condition # 19); and that the location of the parking lot lighting fixtures not adversely impact the growth potential of the parking lot trees (Condition # 14). CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION Staff has determined that the proposed project is consistent with the City's Design Guidelines and conforms with all of the applicable development regulations. Staff recommends approval of the Development Plan with the attached conditions of approval. FINDINGS Development Plan (Section 17.05.010F) 1. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan and with all applicable requirements of state law and other City ordinances. The plan to develop a 24,170 square foot warehouse/industrial building is consistent with the Light Industrial (LI) policies and development regulations. The proposed plan incorporates architectural and landscape designs, which will achieve the City's General Plan Community Design Goal #2, "Design excellence in site planning, architecture, and landscape architecture in new development ". 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The project has been conditioned to conform to the Uniform R:kD PL2001 \014)307 mosco lot 34\Staff Report and COAs.doc 4 Building Code, and all construction will be inspected by City staff prior to occupancy. The Fire Department staff has also found that the site design will provide adequate emergency access in the case of a need for emergency response to the site. Attachments: 1. PC Resolution No. - 02- - Blue Page 6 Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 9 2. Exhibits- Blue Page 20 A. Vicinity Map B. General Plan Map C. Zoning Map D. Site Plan E. Grading Plan F. Building Elevations G. Floor Plan H. Landscape Plan R:~D PL200I\01-0307 mosco lot 34XS~aff Report and COAs.doc 5 A'I-FACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002° R:~ ~1\01~3~ m~co lot 34~f Re~ and COAs.d~ 6 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01- 0307, DEVELOPMENT PLAN CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A 24,170 INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON 1.50 VACANT ACRES. GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF ZEVO DRIVE, WEST OF DIAZ ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 909-360-034 WHEREAS, Don Mosco Builders, filed Planning Application No. PA01-0307 Development Plan "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 a 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 April 3, 2002, 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 recommended approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findinqs. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby makes the following findings as required by Section 176.05.010F of the Temecula Municipal Code: 1. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan and with all applicable requirements of state law and other City ordinances. The plan to develop a 24,170 square foot warehouse/industrial building is consistent with the Light Industrial (LI) policies and development regulations. The proposed plan incorporates architectural and landscape designs, which will achieve the City's General Plan Community Design Goal #2, "Design excellence in site planning, architecture, and landscape architecture in new development ". 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The project has been conditioned to conform to the Uniform Building Code, and all construction will be inspected by City staff prior to occupancy. The Fire Department staff has also found that the site design will provide adequate emergency access in the case of a need for emergency response to the site. R:~D P~2001\01 ~)307 mosco lot 34~Siaff Report and COAs.doc 7 Section3. Environmental Compliance. The project will have no significant environmental impacts and has been found to be categorically exempt, Pursuant to Section 15332 class 32 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves the Application, a request to develop a 24,170 square foot warehouse/industrial building set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 3rd day of Apd12002. Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 02-__was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 3rd day of April, 2002, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:~D P~2001\01-0307 rnosco lot 34~Staff Report and COAs.dcc 8 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:~D.PX2001\01-0307 mosco lot 34~Staff Report and COAs.d~c 9 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA01-0307 Development Plan Project Description: Planning Application to construct, establish and operate a 24,170 square foot warehouse/industrial building on 1.50 acres of vacant land. Development Impact Fee Category: The Development Impact Fee for the project will be Business Park/Industrial Assessor's Parcel No.: 909-360-034 Approval Date: April 3, 2002 Expiration Date: April 3, 2004 PLANNING DIVISION Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. 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 Sixty- Four Dollars ($64.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Exemption 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 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 2. 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, judgments, 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. 3. City shall promptly notify 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. 4. All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this Development Plan. 5. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this development plan. 6. 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 pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. 7. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits D (Site Plan), E (Grading Plan), F (Building Elevation), G (Floor Plan), H (Landscape Plan), and I (Color and Material Board) contained on file with the Community Development Department- Planning Division. 8. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Director. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Director 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. 9. All mechanical and roof equipment shall be fully screened from public view by being placed below the lowest level of the surrounding parapet wall. A roof top equipment plan, including equipment model numbers and cross-sections shall be submitted for review and approval prior to submittal of building plans. 10. The colors and materials for the project shall substantially conform to those noted directly below and with Exhibit "1" (Color and Material Board), contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. Primary wall exterior: Behr paint #3A15-3 "Caisson" Behr paint #3A15-4 "Soloman Sand" Exterior Accent Behr paint #3A15-5 Building Glazing Azurelite Green Reflective (Downey Glass) 11. The construction landscape drawings shall indicate coordination and grouping of all utilities, which are to be screened from view per applicable City Codes and guidelines. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 12. The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided bythe Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and return one signed set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files. 13. The applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for permanent filing two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of the approved Color and Materials Board and of the colored version of approved Exhibit "E", the colored amhitectural 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. 14. The applicant shall submit a parking lot lighting plan to the Planning Department which meets the requirements of the Development Code and the Palomar Lighting Ordinance. The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely impact the growth potential of the parking lot trees. 15. A copy of the Grading Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. R:LD P~2001\01 ~0307 mosco lot 34\S~aff Report and COAs.doc 16. 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. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit 17. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. 18. 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 "F", 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 show temporary irrigation and seeding for the Phase lB area. 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. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). d. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). Prior to Building Occupancy · 19. The property owner shall fully install all required landscaping and irrigation, and submit a landscape maintenance bond in a form and amount approved by the Planning Department for a period of one-year from the date of the first occupancy permit. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 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 20. A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site flat 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. 21. 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. 22. 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 23. 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. 24. 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. 25. 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. 26. A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address special study zones and the geological conditions of the site, and shall provide recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. 27. 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 propedies 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. 28. 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. 29. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. Planning Department b. Department of Public Works c. Southern California Edison d. Verizon 30. 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. 31. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 32. 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. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 33. 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. 34. 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. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with City Standard No. 800, 801,802 and 803. R:~D P~2001\01~)307 mosco lot 34~Staff Report and COAs,doc d.Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400, 401and 402. e. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. f. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. g.All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed through undersidewalk drains. 35. All access rights, easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be submitted and reviewed by the Director of the Department of Public Works and City Attorney and approved by City Council for dedication to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 36. 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. 37. 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. 38. The Developer shall record a written offer to participate in, and waive all rights 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 39. 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. Department of Public Works 40. 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. 41. 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. FIRE DEPARTMENT 42. 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 43. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commemial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-Ill-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 2125 G PM at 1 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 2350 GPM for a total fire flow of 4475 GPM with a 4 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, er 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) 1 44. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A~III-B-1. A minimum of 5 hydrants, in a combination of on-site and off- site (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 300 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 180 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) 45. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. For this project on site fire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2) 46. 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) 47. 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 lbs. GVVV. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) 48. 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 lbs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. ( CFC sec 902) 49. 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) 50. The gradient for a fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC 902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14) 51. Prior to building construction, dead end road ways 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) 52. 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 ) 53. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed to identity fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3) 54. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, approved numbers or addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a R:~D PX2001\01-0307 mosco Io~ 34\Staff Report and COAs.doc 15 contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and industrial buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall gave a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single family residences and multi-family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4) 55. 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) 56. 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) 57. 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. (CFC 902.4) 58. 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 fire fighting personnel. (CFC 902.4) 59. Prior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating Fire Lanes with appropriate lane painting and or signs. 60. 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 California Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81) 61. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developer/applicant shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the storage of combustible liquids, flammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau.(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) Sisecial Conditions 62. Prior to issuance of building permits, plans for structural protection from vegetation fires shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval. The measures shall include, but are not limited to, enclosing eaves, noncombustible barriers (cement or block walls), and fuel modification zones. (CFC Appendix II-A) 68. Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report may be required to be submitted and to the Fire Prevention Bureau. This report shall address, but not be limited to, all fire and Jife safety measures~per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, NFPA - 13, 24, 72 and 231-C. 64. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final a simple plot plan and a simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format must be submitted to the R:~D PX200I\01-0307 mosco lot 34~Staff Report and COAs.doc 16 Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention for approval. 65. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code permit. These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105) 66. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and City Fire ~Department an update to the Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E) COMMUNITY SERVICES 67. All perimeter landscaping and parkways shall be maintained by the property owner or I~rivate maintenance association. 68. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul construction debris. 69. The developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure area'. BUILDING AND SAFETY 70. 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. 71. 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. 72. 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. 73. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction ' work. 74. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 75. 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) 76. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 77. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. R:~D P~2001\01-0307 mosco lot 34~Staff Report and COAs.doc 78. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. 79. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. 80. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. 81. 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 Amhitect recommendation for the accessible restroom dimensions for toddlers from the Building Official, to implement in the building design. 82. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. 83. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior to permit issuance. 84. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 85. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. 86. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility. 87. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. · 88. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. 89. Show all building setbacks. 90. Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours of construction, shown below, as allowed by the City of Temecula Ordinance No. 0-90-04, specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one- quarter mile of an occupied residence. Monday-Friday 6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. · Saturday 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sundays of holidays. POLICE DEPARTMENT 91. The construction plans shall indicate the application of painted rooftop addressing plotted on a 9-inch grid pattern with 45-inch tall numerals spaced 9-inch apart. The numerals shall be painted with a standard 9-inch paint roller using fluorescent yellow paint applied over a contrasting background. The address shall be oriented to the street and placed as closely as possible to the edge of the building closest to the street. OUTSIDE AGENCIES 92. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated July 17, 2001 from the California Historical Resources Information System. R:~D P~2001\01-0307 mo~co lot 34\Staff Report and COAs.doc 18 93. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated August 8, 2001 from the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 94. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated July 11,2001 from Rancho Water 95. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated July 2, 2001 from County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health. 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's Signature Date Name printed R:~D P',2001\01-0307 mosco lot 34~Staff Report and COAs,doc ]9 ATFACHMENT NO. 2 EXHIBITS CITY OF TEMECULA Project SiteI CASE NO. - PA01-0307 EXHIBIT - A VICINITY MAP PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- APRIL 3, 2002 R:~D P~2001~)1-0307 mosco lot 34~Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA EXHIBIT-B - GENERAL PLAN MAP DESIGNATION ~LI) EIGHT INDUSTRIAL EXHIBIT C - ZONING DESIGNATION - (LI) LIGHT INDUSTRIAL CASE NO. - PA01-0307 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - APRIL 3, 2002 R:~D P~2001~01-0307 mosco lot 34\Staff Report and COAs,doc CITY OF TEMECULA ~ CASE NO. - PA01-0307 EXHIBIT- D SITE PLAN PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- APRIL 3, 2002 R:~D P~2001~01-0307 mosco lot 34\Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA01-0307 EXHIBIT-E GRADING PLAN PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- APRIL 3, 2002 R:~D P~001~01-0307 mosco lot 34\Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.- PA01-0307 EXHIBIT-F BUILDING ELEVATIONS PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- APRIL 3, 2002 R:~D P~2001~01-0307 mosco lot 34\Staff Report and COAs,doc CiTY OF TEMECULA I CASE NO. - PA0i~0307 EXHIBIT-G FLOOR PLAN PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- APRIL 3, 2002 R:~D P~2.001~D1-0307 mosco lot 34\Staff Report and COAs.doc CITY OF TEMECULA DON MOSCO BUILDER PHONE: (760) 724-0747 CASE NO. - PA01-0307 EXHIBIT-H LANDSCAPE PLAN PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- APRIL 3, 2002 R:~) P~2001~01-0307 mosco lot 34~Staff Report and COAs.doc ITEM #5 CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Don Hazen, Senior Planner DATE: MAY 15, 2002 SUBJECT: PA-01-0324 - CUP to Establish Golfing Facility at Linfield School Site The applicant requests a continuance in order to develop a revised lighting plan for the facility. ' At the time of this writing, the applicant is not able to determine when those revised plans will be available for staff review, so please continue this item off-calendar and staff will re-notice the application when it is ready for hearing. Attachments 1. Letter from the Applicant - Blue Page 2 R:'thazend~golf. doc 1 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 LETTER FROM APPLICANT R:~azend~olf. doc 2 PROFESSIONAL GOLFERS CAI~F. ER COLLEGE "Educating thc fi~lure leaders Ill the workl of golf.' l~r. Don Hazon May Ii, 2002 8eniur Planner City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Tcm¢cula, CA 92589 Dear Mr. Hazen: Thank you for taking time to talk to me this afternoon regarding our proposed golf project on the Linfield School property. As I discussed with you on the phone, w¢ are in the process of revising our lighting plan and hereby are requesting that we be taken offthe docket for the proposed May I $'~ Planning Commission meeting. We are in the process of modeling our plan after the lighting in effect at Tustin Ranch Golf Course in Orange County. Wc are very exci~ed about the state of the art concept with virtually no negative impact on the high-end residential homes adjacent to the facility. I know we discussed moving to the July date, however, we may be able to get ready for a presentation to you prior to tl~t. I will call you next week as I learn more about how soon we can be ready. Thank you for your interest in our project, Sincerely, Dr. Tim Somerville 892319 - Ttqnccula, CA 9258~2319 · 8¢~}-877-4380 * 9~19~;,93-29(¥3 · FAX: 909-693-'~(;3 ~mMl: pgc~'l~{a~lMk.nel · Visit ot~ web aiu: m: www.p~g~lfed.con~ · ITEM #6 STAFF REPORT- PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION May 15, 2002 Planning Application No. 01-0521 (Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan) Prepared By: Rick Rush, Project Planner II 1. ADOPT a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. 01-0521 pursuant to Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act; 2. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01- 0521, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A 55,996 SQUARE FOOT TWO-STORY SELF-STORAGE FACILITY ON 3.47 VACANT ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED ON PALA ROAD NORTH OF LOMALINDA ROAD AND SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 961-010-010 APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: U-Store-It, Doug Lamison PROPOSAL: A proposal to design, construct and operate a 55,906 square foot two-story self-storage facility on 3,47 acres LOCATION: Located on Pala Road north of Loma Linda Road and South of Highway 79 South EXISTING ZONING: Pala Road Planned Development Overlay District (PDO-1) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: Paia Road Planned Development Overlay District (PDO-1) South: Low Medium Density Residential (LM) East: Low Medium Density Residential (LM) West: Low Medium Density Residential (LM) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Neighborhood Commercial (NC) EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Existing U-Store-It facility South: Single Family Residence East: Single Family Residence West: Single Family Residence R:\C U 1:~2001\01~0521 U Store It~Staff Rcportdoc 1 PROJECT STATISTICS (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) Lot area (gross): 151,153 square feet (3.47 acres) Lot area (net) 131,748 square feet (3.02 acres) Building square footage: 55,906 square feet Building height: 23'-0" Landscaped area: 39,243 square feet (30%) Parking required: 21 vehicular, 1 handicapped Parking provided: 22 vehicular, I handicapped Lot coverage: 19% Floor area ratio: .37 BACKGROUND The applicant submitted an application for'a Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan on October 22, 2001. As submitted the application was not complete and an incomplete letter was sent to the applicant. The applicant resubmitted and a Development Review Committee meeting was held on January 22, 2002. As a result of the Development Review Committee meeting the applicant made revisions to the plans and staff scheduled the item for public hearing. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for a 55,906 square foot two-story self-storage facility on a 3.47-acre site, which is an expansion of the existing storage facility to the west. The site is located in the Pala Road Planned Development Overlay District. Code Section 17.22.106 requires a Conditional Use Permit for Mini-Storage or Mini Warehouse facilities located in this district. The site is accessed off of a single driveway off of Pala Road and cross-lot access from the adjacent storage facility. The building is located ten feet from the north property line and twenty-six feet from the front property line. Parking for the site is located in front of the office portion of the building, the rear of the site and two covered spaces have been located within the building. The building will be constructed with a combination of split-face block and concrete masonry units (CMU). The split-face block will be located along the lower ten feet of the building and will be painted with Sherwin Williams paint SW 1089 "Mexican Sand". The CMU will be finished stucco and painted with Sherwin Williams paint SW1088 "Only Natural". Along the west elevation the applicant is providing three elements that pop out ten feet from the remainder of the elevation. These elements are finished with stucco and painted with Sherwin Williams paint $W1086 ~Only Natural". The elements have gable roofs with green standing seam metal roofs. Three windows with spandrel glass have been provided on each element. Windows have been provided along the west and south elevations that will bring natural light into the office and the manager's living unit. All windows will be surrounded by stucco pop outs to be painted to match the cornice. The applicant is providing a corniced roof to be finished with "Pure White" stucco. A canopy has been provided along the south elevation to match the comica. RAC U P~2001\01-0521 U Store It~Staff Report. doc 2 The applicant is previding 39,243 square feet of landscaping, which is thirty pement of the entire site. The Development Code Section 17.08.050Rid requires the applicant to previde ten pement. The applicant is providing approximately thirty-eight feet of landscaping along the west elevation including the twelve feet of landscaping in the public right of way. A ten-foot wide landscape buffer is being provided along the north portion of the building abutting the existing facility as required by code. The triangular portion of the site located in the southwest portion of the site the applicant is providJng approximately four hundred square feet of landscaping. ANALYSIS Staff has made the required findings necessary to approve a self-storage facility located in the Pala Road Planned Development Overlay District. The proposed site planning and cimulation is consistent with the commemial development performance standards in the Development Code. The proposed site plan has eliminated any conflicts between pedestrian and vehicular treffic by located the pedestrian access parallel with the vehicular access. The loading and unloading areas have been located to the rear of the building and will not be visible from the public right of way. The drive aisles previded are a minimum thirty feet wide, which take into, account the large moving vans that will be utilizing this site on a daily basis. The proposed building design is consistent with the amhitectural design of the Development Code and the architectural elements in the City-Wide Design Guidelines. Providing offsets along the front elevation has broken up the mass and bulk of the proposed building, Stepping back the two-story portion of the building further serves to break up the mass of the building. It also meets the intent of the Community Design Element of the General Plan, by stepping heights back away from the existing single-family homes located along the west side of Pala Road. Metal vine trellises have been located along the west elevation, which further breaks up this elevation. The proposed architecture is broken into three traditional parts as defined in the Design Guidelines. The utilization of the split face block as a base for the building is an excellent choice. The choice of stucco and tile along the mid section of the building not only blends well with the base of the building but it also blends well with the surrounding single-family residences. The comice provided along the reofline is an attractive feature that delineates the building's profile. The colors and materials serve to Compliment the design theme fer the building. The proposed landscaping not only exceeds the minimum requirements of the Development Code it also complements the architectural design theme. The large landscape areas that are provided along Pala Road are planted with a wide range of varying trees, shrubs and ground cover that create visual interest from the public right of way. Landscaping effectively screens the parking area located on the south elevation. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The project is exempt from envirenmental review based on Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects) of the California Envirenmental Quality Act and there are no potentially significant environmental constraints on the site. The project qualifies for a Class 32 infill development exemption because the project is consistent with the General Plan designation and zoning regulations; is located on a site within the city limits, which is served by all utilities; and is less than 5 acres in area. CONCLUSlON/RECOMMEN DATION Staff has determined that the proposed project is consistent with the City's Design Guidelines and conforms to all of the applicable development regulations for the Neighborhood Commercial zoning district. Staff recommends approval of the Development Plan with the attached findings and conditions of appreval. R:\C U P~2001\01-0521 U Store lt~Staff Rcportdoc 3 FINDINGS Conditional Use Permit (Section 17.04.010E) 1. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the general plan and the development code. The proposed self-storage facility is consistent with the Land Use Element of the general plan. The proposed self-storage facility meets the purpose and intent of a conditional use permit as defined in Section 17.04.010A of the development code. 2. 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 proposed conditional use is compatible with adjacent land uses as defined in the general plan. Staff has reviewed the proposed project against the adjacent land uses and has determined that the proposed use will be a complimentary addition to the area. 3. The site for a proposed 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. Staff has reviewed the proposed project against the development code requirements for a self-storage facility and has found that the project meets or exceeds all of the requirements. 4. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the Community. Staff has reviewed the proposed self-storage' facility and found that it in no way will be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. Ingress and egress to the site have been located in a safe location and will not impede or affect traffic flow along Pala Road. Fire Prevention has reviewed circulation and ddve aisle widths and has determined that the site will able to be adequately served by the Fire Department in an emergency situation. 5. That the decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a conditional use permit be based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council. This application has been brought before the Planning Commission at a Public Hearing where members of the public have had an opportunity to be heard on this matter before the Planning Commission renders their decision. Development Plan (Section 17.05.01 OF) 1. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of state Paw and other ordinances of the city. The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for Neighborhood Commemial (NC) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development standards for Planned Development Overlay One (PDO- 1) in the City of Temecula Development Code. The site is therefore properlyplanned and zoned and found to be physically suitable for the type and density of the proposed self-storage building. 2. The overall develoPment of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The architecture proposed for the se/f-storage building is consistent with the Architectural requirements as stated in the Design Guidelines and the Commercial Performance Standards of the Development Code. 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. Attachments: 1. PC Resolution No. - 02- - Blue Page 6 Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 10 2. Exhibits - Blue Page 20 A. Vicinity Map B. General Plan Map C. Zoning Map D. Site Plan E. Grading Plan F. Building Elevations G. Floor Plan H. Landscape Plan R:\C U PE1001\01-0521 U Store 16Staff Report.doc A'R'ACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002- R:\C U P~001~O1-0521 U Store lt~Staff Report.doc 6 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01- 0521, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A 55,906 SQUARE FOOT TWO-STORY SELF-STORAGE FACILITY ON 3.47 VACANT ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED ON PALA ROAD NORTH OF LOMALINDA ROAD AND SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 961-010-010 WHEREAS, Doug Lamison, filed Planning Application No. 01-0521 (Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan), 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 a 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 May 15, 2002, 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 recommended approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES · HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findinqs. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby makes the following findings as required by Sections 17.04.010E and 17.05.010F of the Temecula Municipal Code: 1. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the general plan and the development code. The proposed Self-storage facility is consistent with the Land Use Element of the general plan. The proposed self-storage facility meets the purpose and intent of a conditional use permit as defined in Section 17.04.010A of the development code. 2. 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 proposed Conditional use is compatible with adjacent land uses as defined in the general plan. Staff has reviewed the proposed project against the adjacent land uses and has determined that the proposed use will be a complimentary addition to the area. 3. The site for a proposed 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. Staff has reviewed the proposed project against the development code requirements for a self-storage facility and has found that the project meets or exceeds all of the requirements. 4. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. Staff has reviewed the proposed self-storage facility and found that it in no way will be detrimental to the health, safety, or general we/fare of the community. Ingress and egress to the site have been located in a safe location and will not impede or affect traffic flow along Pala Road. Fire Prevention has reviewed circulation and drive aisle widths and has determined that the site will able to be adequately served by the Fire Department in an emergency situation. 5. That the decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a conditional use permit be based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council. This application has been brought before the Planning Commission at a Public Hearing where members of the public have had an opportunity to be heard on this matter before the Planning Commission renders their decision. 6. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the city. The proposal is consistent with the 'land use 'designation and policies reflected for Neighborhood Commercial (NC) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as tho development standards for Planned Development Overlay One (PDO- 1) in the City of Temecula Development Code. The site is therefore propertyplanned andzoned and found to be physically suitable for the type and density of the proposed self-storage building. 7. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The architecture proposed for the self-storage building is consistent with the Architectural requirements as stated in the Design Guidelines and the Commercial Performance Standards of the Development Code. 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. Section3. Environmental Compliance. The project will have no significant environmental impacts and has been'found to be categorically exempt, Pursuant to Section 15332 class 32 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. Section 4. Conditions, That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves the Application, a request to develop a 55,906 square foot two-story self storage facility set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary. R:\C O l~001\014)521 U Store lt~S~ff Report.d~c 8 Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 15th day of May 2002. Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that PC Resolution No. 02- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of th Temecula at a regular ~eeting thereof held on the 15 day of May, 2002, by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:~C U PI2001X014)$21 U Store lt~Staff ReporLdOC 9 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:\C U P~2001\01-0521 U S~re lt~Slaff ReporCdoc 10 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: 01-0521 Conditional Use Permit /Development Plan Project Description: Planning Application to construct, establish and operate a 55,906 square foot self-storage building on 3.47 acres of vacant land DIF Category: Service Commercial Assessor's Parcel No.: 961-010-010 Approval Date: May 15, 2002 Expiration Date: May 15, 2004 PLANNING DIVISION Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. 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 Sixty- Four Dollars ($64.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Exemption 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 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 2. 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, contractom, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek monetary damages resulting, directly o~'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. 3. City shall promptly notify 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. 4. All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan. R:~C U laY2001\01-0521 U Sto~ lfiStaff Report. doc 11 5. This Conditional Use Permit may be revoked pursuant to Section 17.03.080 of the City's Development Code. 6. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan. 7. 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 pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. 8. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits D (Site Plan), E (Grading Plan), F (Building Elevation), G (Floor Plan), H (Landscape Plan), and I (Color and Material Board) contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. 9. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Director. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Director 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. 10. All mechanical and roof equipment shall be fully screened from public view by being placed below the lowest level of the surrounding parapet wall. 11. All Downspouts shall be internalized. 12. The colo~s and materials for the project shail substantially conform to those noted directly below and with Exhibit "1" (Color and Material Board), contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. Split Face Concrete Sherwin Williams SW 1089 "Mexican Sand" Stucco Wall Surfaces Sherwin Williams SW 1088 "Only Natural" Metal Roll Up Doora DBCI "Forrest Green" Standing Seam Roof · DBCI "Forrest Green" Accent Stucco Sherwin Williams SW 1004 "Pure White" 13. The construction landscape drawings shall indicate coordination and grouping of all utilities, which are to be screened from view per applicable City Codes and guidelines. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 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. The applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for permanent filing two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of the approved Color and Materials Board and of the colored version of approved Exhibit "E", 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. R:\C U/~2001~01-0521 U Stm-e lt~Staff Report.doc 16. The applicant shall submit a parking lot lighting plan to the Planning Department, which meets the requirements of the Development Code and the Palomar Lighting Ordinance. The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely impact the growth potentiaJ of the parking lot trees. 17. A copy of the Grading Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. 18. The applicant shall indicate on the grading plan a trash enclosure location that is acceptable to the Planning Director. 19. 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. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit 20. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule. 21, 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 "F', 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 show temporary irrigation and seeding for the Phase lB area. 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. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). d. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). Prior to Building Occupancy 22. The property owner shall fully install all required landscaping and irrigation, and submit a landscape maintenance bond in a form and amount approved by the Planning Department for a pedod of one-year from the date of the first occupancy permit. 23. The construction plans shall indicate the application of painted rooftop addressing plotted on a 9-inch grid pattern with 45-inch tall numerals spaced 9-inch apart. The numerals shall be painted with a standard 9-inch paint roller'using fluorescent yellow paint applied over a contrasting background. The address shall be odented to the street and placed as closely as possible to the edge of the building closest to the street. 24. The applicant shall record an ingress and egress easement between this facility and the existing U-Store-It facility located at 44618 Pala Road that will provide the required Fire Department circulation. R:\C U P~2001\01-0521 U Store lt~Staff Report.doc ]3 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 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 25. A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site flat 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. 26. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing er proposed City right-of-way. 27. 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 28. 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. 29. 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. 30. 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. 31. 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. 32. 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. 33. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District R:\C U 1~2001\01-0521 U $~ore lt~Staff Report.doc 14 c. Planning Department d. Department of Public Works 34. In compliance with the Circulation Element of the General Plan, the ultimate Pala Road is classified as an Urban Arterial Highway Standard - 134' R/W, therefore the developer shall record a written offer to dedicate additional right-of-way of 24 feet along property frontage on Pala Road. 35. 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. 36. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 37. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-sita work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. 38. 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, pdor 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. 39. 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. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 40. 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. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with City Standard No. 800, 802 and 803. d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed al(~ng public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecuia Standard Nos. 400, 401and 402. e. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries. f. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. g. Public Street improvement plans shall include plain and profile showing existing topography, utilities, proposed centedine, top of curb and towline grades. h. 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. 41. 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: R:\C lJ P~7.001~01-0521 U Store It~gtaff Report.doc 15 a. Improve Pala Road (Urban Arterial Highway Standards - 134' R/W) from the northerly property boundary to 50 feet south of the proposed driveway to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) 42. . If the improvements on Pala Road are not complete prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer shall record a written offer to participate in, and waive all rights 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 Ultimate Storm Drain Facility and Pala Road Widening Improvements in accordance with the General Plan. The form of the offer shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney. 43. All street improvement design shall prOvide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans' standards for transition to existing street sections. 44. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil or Traffic Engineer and reviewed by the Director of the Department of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. 45. 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. 46. The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the adjacent property. 47. 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 48. 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 49. 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. 50. 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. FIRE DEPARTMENT 51. 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 Califomia Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which ara in R:\C U P~2001~.01-0521 U Store lt~St~'TReport, doc 16 fome at the time of building plan submittal. 52. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commemial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 2500 GPM at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a total fire flow of 3350 GPM with a 4 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) 53. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-Ill-B-1. A minimum of 4 hydrants, in a combination of on-site and off- site (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to an .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). 54. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street/as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. For this project on site fire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2) 55. Maximum cul-de-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 Subdivision Ord 16.03.020) 56. 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) 57. 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 lbs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) 58. 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 lbs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. (CFC sec 902) 59. 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) 60. The gradient for fire apparatus access 'roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC 902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14) 61. Prior 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) 62. Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all- R:\C U IA2001\01 ~)521 U Store It~Staff Report doc 17 weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1) 63. 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) 64. 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) 65. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, approved numbers or addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and industrial buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall give a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single-family residences and multi-family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4) 66. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a directory display monument sign shall be required for apartment, condominium, townhouse or mobile home parks. Each complex shall have an illuminated diagrammatic layout of the complex which indicates the name of the complex, all streets, building identification, unit numbers, and fire hydrant locations within the complex. Location of the sign and design specifications shall be submitted to and be approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior to installation. 67. 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) 68. ' 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) 69. 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. (CFC 902.4) 70. 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 fire fighting personnel. (CFC 902.4) 71. Prior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating Fire Lanes with appropriate lane painting and or signs. R:\C U P~2001\01~0521 U Store lt~S~xf£ Report.doc 18 72. 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 California Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81) 73. Prior to the issuance of a Cert!ficate of Occupancy or building final, the developer/applicant shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the storage of combustible liquids, flammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau.(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) Special Conditions 74. Prior to issuance of building permits, fuel modification plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval for all open space areas adjacent to the wildland- vegetation interface. (CFC Appendix II-A) 75. Prior to issuance of building permits, plans for structural protection from vegetation fires shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval. The measures shall include, but are not limited to, enclosing eaves, noncombustible barriers (cement or block walls), and fuel modification zones. (CFC Appendix II-A) 76. Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report may be required to be submitted and to the Fire Prevention Bureau. This report shall address, but not be limited to, all fire and life safety measures per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, and NFPA - 13, 24, 72 and 231-C. 77. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final a simple plot plan and a simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format must be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention for approval. 78. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code permit. These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105) 79. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E) 80. The project owner shall take afl reasonable precautions to ensure compliance with storage height limitations and all other fire code requirements COMMUNITY SERVICES General Conditions 81. All perimeter landscaping and parkways shall be maintained by the property owner or private R:\C U lA2001\01q)521 U Store ltXStaff Reportdcc 19 maintenance association. 82, The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul construction debris. , 83. Developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure area(s). 84. A fourteen (14) foot easement for a public trail will be provided as indicated in the Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan and shall be shown on the Final Map, Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 85. Prior to the installation of street lights or issuance of building permits, whichever comes first, the developer shall file an application and pay the appropriate fees to the TCSD for the dedication of arterial street lights into the TCSD maintenance program. BUILDING AND SAFETY 86. All design components shall comply with applicable previsions of the 1998 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1998 National' Elecfi'ical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code. 87. 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 streetlights 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. 88. 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. 89. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 90. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 91. 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) 92. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, !998) 93. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. 94. Provide van accessible Parking located as close as possible to the main entry. 95. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. R:\C U P~2001\014)521 U Store Ii, Staff Reportdoc 2O 96, Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire alarm systems. 97. 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. 98. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. 99. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans pdor to permit issuance. 100. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 101. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. 102. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility. 103. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 104. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. 105. Show all building setbacks. 106. Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours of construction, shown below, as allowed by the City of Temecula Ordinance No. 0-90-04, specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one- quarter mile of an occupied residence. Monday-Friday: 6:30 a.m.- 6:30 p.m. Saturday: 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Holidays OUTSIDE AGENCIES 107. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated October 25, 2001 from the California Historical Resources information System. 108. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated April 22, 2002 from the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. 109. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated October 30, 2001 from Rancho Water. 110. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated October 29, 2001 from County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health. R:\C U P~2001g01-0521 U Store Ii. taft Rcpor~doc 21 111. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated November 8, 2001 from the Department of the Army Corps of Engineers. 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's Signature Date Name printed R:\C U 1~2001\01-0521 U Store lt~Staff Reportdoc 22 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 EXHIBITS R:\C U I~2001\01-0521 U Stm'e It~Staff Rep0rtdoc 23 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA01-0521 EXHIBIT - A VICINITY MAP PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 15, 2002 R:\C U P~.001~D1-0521 U Store It~Staff Report.doc 24 CITY OF TEMECULA EXHIBIT B - GENERAL PLAN MAP DESIGNATION -(NC) NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SP-12 EXHIBIT C - ZONING DESIGNATION - (PDO-1) PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ONE CASE NO. - PA01-0521 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 15, 2002 R:\C U P~2001~1-0521 U Store It~Staff Report.doc CITY OF TEMECULA VICINITY MAP ~ ~ P LA ROAD ........ ~' CONCEPTUAL SITE CASE NO. - PA01-0521 EXHIBIT - D SITE PLAN PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 15, 2002 R:\C U P~2001~01-O521 U Store IflStaff Reporl.doc 26 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. -'PA01-0521 EXHIBIT - E GRADING PLAN PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 15, 2002 R:\C U p%2001%01-O521 U Store It%Staff Report.doc 27 CITY OF TEMECULA - //~ EAST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION ,,~.. J- STOR. IT EXPANSION TEMECULA, CA ' "~" PALA ROAD WE~-'T :,, CASE NO. - PA01-0521 EXHIBIT - F BUILDING ELEVATIONS PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 15, 2002 R:\C U P~001'O1-O521 U Store It~taff Reporl.doc 28 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA01-0521 EXHIBIT - G FLOOR PLAN PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 15, 2002 R:\C U P~2001~D1-0521 U Store Jt~Staff Report. doc CiTY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA01-0521 LANDSCAPE pLAN EXHIBIT - H PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 15, 2002 R:\C U P~2.001~01~0521 U Store It~Staff Report.doc 30