HomeMy WebLinkAbout071603 PC AgendaIn compliance with the Americans 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 III
AGENDA
TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
July 16, 2003 - 6:00 P.M.
Next in Order:
Resolution: No. 2003-044
CALL TO ORDER
Flag Salute:
Commissioner Guerriero
Roll Call:
Guerriero, Mathewson, Olhasso, Telesio and Chiniaeff
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total ~)f 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Commission
on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes
each. If you desire to speak to the Commission about an item no.__~t on the Agenda, a
salmon colored "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 for 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.
A.qenda
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1. App~0ve th~ Agenda o~f July 16, 2003
R:~PLANCOMM~Agendas~2003\07-16-03.doc
· ' ' ',- 2" 'Minutes
;RECOMMENDATION!
2.1 Approve the Minutes of May 21, 2003
3 Director's Hearin,q Case Update
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Approve the Director's Hearing Update for June, 2003
COMMISSION BUSINESS
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.
New Items
Plannin.q Application No.'s PA02-0707 and PA03-0136 A Development Plan to desiqn and
construct two free-standin.q multi-tenant industrial buildin.qs totalin.q approximately 88,640
square feet and a Tentative Tract Map (Map 31259) for 31 industrial condominiums and a
common area on 5.58 acres located on the north side of Zevo Drive, approximately 635 feet
east of Winchester Road, Dan Lonql Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Adopt Notice of Determination for Planning Application No. PA02-0707 and PA03-0136
(Development Plan and Tentative Tract Map) pursuant to .Section 15164 of the
California Environmental Quality Act;
· ,R:\PLANCOMM~gendas~O03\07-16-03.doc
4.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
pC RESOLUTION NO; 2003-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA02-0707, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCT TWO MULTI-TENANT INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS
TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 88,640 SQUARE ON 5.58
ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF
ZEVO DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 635 FEET EAST OF
WINCHESTER ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO.
909-370-008
4,3 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA03-0136, A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FOR 31:
INDUSTRIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND A COMMON AREA
ON 5.58 ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH
SIDE OF ZEVO DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 635 FEET EAST OF
WINCHESTER ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO.
909-370-008
COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS
PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Harveston Street Name Sign Design
ADJOURNMENT
Next adjourned regular meeting: July 29, 2003
(For the purposes of a joint City Council/Planning Commission workshop
to discuss the General Plan)
Council Chambem
43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590
R:\PLANCOMMV~,gendas~003~07-16-03.doc
3
ITEM #2
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 21, 2003
CALL TO ORDER
The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:03 P.M., on
Wednesday, May 21, 2003, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Guerriero led the audience in the Flag salute.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Commissioners Guerriero, Mathewson, OIhasso,
and Vice Chairman Telesio
Absent: Chairman Chiniaeff
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Aqenda
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the Agenda of May 21,2003.
2 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the Minutes of April 23, 2003. ~,
MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-2.
Commissioner Olhasso seconded the motion and voice .vote reflected approval .with the
exception of Chairman Chiniaeff who was absent.
R:~PLANCOMM~MINUTES~.003~052103 pc .doc
1
COMMISSION BUSINESS
3 City of Temecula Capital Improvement Proqram (CIP) 2004-2008
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Receive and File
Commissioner Olhasso noted that she has not received any comment from Redevelopment or
staff regarding Senior Housing on Pujol Street, stating that, in her opinion, seniors prefer to live
near services and that locating Senior Housing in the Tower Plaza or Target Shopping Center
would be a more appropriate area.
For Commissioner Mathewson, Principal Planner Hogan noted that at the present time, Guidant
Corporation has not made a decision as to whether or not it will be expanding locally but was of
the opinion that Guidant is in agreement with the proposals.
Commissioner Mathewson relayed that, in his opinion, the proposed Veterans' Memorial would
be best suited at Veteran's Park on La Serena Road versus at the Temecula Duck Pond.
Development Services Administrator McCarthy noted that she would relay this to the
Subcommittee in charge of handling this decision.
MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to receive and file this report. Commissioner
Olhasso seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of
Chairman Chiniaeff who was absent.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
4
Planninq Application No.'s AP02-0605 a Development Plan for the desi.qn and construction
of a 9.24-acre commercial center which includes two proposed retail buildinqs totalinq
20,500 square feet and three conceptual future retail buildinq pads, PA02-0606 a
Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for the desiqn and construction of a 41000
square foot restaurant buildinq with a drive-thru, on Pad "G" of a 9.24-acre commercial
center within Temecula Reqional Center1 PA02-0607 a Development Plan for the desiRn
and construction of a 5,514 square foot restaurant, on pad "F" of a 9.24-acre commercial
center within the Temecula Re.qional Center located on the northwest corner of North
General Kearny and Marqarita Roads in the Temecula ReRional Center (aka Power Center
II) (APN 910-130-087 thru -090, -092, & -096
(Continued from the May 7, 2003, Planning Commission meeting.)
RECOMMENDATION
4.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No.'s PA02-0605, PA02-0606,
and PA02-0607 (Development Plan) based on the Determination of Consistency with a
project for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was previously certified
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 - Subsequent EIR's and Negative
Declarations;
4.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
R:\PLANCOMM~MtNUTES~003\052103 pc .doc
2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA02-0605 A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN
AND CONSTRUCTION OF A 9.24 ACRE COMMERCIAL
CENTER WHICH INCLUDES TWO PROPOSED RETAIL
BUILDINGS TOTALING 20,500 SQUARE FEET AND THREE
CONCEPTUAL FUTURE RETAIL BUILDING PADS LOCATED
WITHIN THE TEMECULA REGIONAL CENTER ON THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY
ROAD AND MARGARITA ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR
PARCEL NO.'S 910-130-087, 088, 089, 090, 092, AND 096.
4.3 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA02-0606 - A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT
BUILDING WITH A DRIVE-THRU, AT A 9.24 ACRE
COMMERCIAL CENTER WITHIN THE TEMECULA REGIONAL
CENTER, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY ROAD AND MARGARITA ROAD,
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 910-130-092.
4.4 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA02-0607 - A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN
AND CONSTRUCTION OF A 5,514 SQUARE FOOT
RESTAURANT, AT A 9.24 ACRE COMMERCIAL CENTER
WITHIN THE TEMECULA REGIONAL CENTER, LOCATED ON
THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY
ROAD AND MARGARITA ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR
PARCEL NO. 910-130-096.
MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved, as per the applicant, to continue this
Item to the June 4, 2003, Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner
Mathewson seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the
exception of Chairman Chiniaeff who was absent.
R:\PLANCOMM~41NUTES~2003\052103 pc .doc
3
The following item was discussed out of order
6 Planninq Application No. PA03-0109 Development Code amendment to require the
standards for secondary dwellinq units be approved administratively located Citywide
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-035
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY THE PROCEDURES FOR
APPROVING SECONDARY DWELLING UNITS AND CLARIFY
THE PROCEDURES FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS
(PLANNING APPLICATION PA03-0110)
Principal Planner Hogan gave a brief overview of the staff report (as per agenda material),
noting the following:
That the proposal would be viewed as a minor modification to the procedures for
secondary dwelling units to, reflecting a State Law change eliminating a city's ability to
require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for secondary dwelling units;
That staff would be proposing a specific inclusion with regard to the approval authority,
reflecting that approval would be an administrative approval and would not require
Planning Commission or City Council for consideration.
For Commissioner Mathewson, Principal Planner Hogan relayed that the legislature was
concerned with local governments creating hurdles for the approval of secondary dwelling units.
MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve Item No. 6. Commissioner Olhasso
seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Chairman
Chiniaeff who was absent.
R:',p LANCOMM'~IIN UTES~2003V352103 pc .doc
4
New Items
5. Planninq Application No. PA02-0612: A Zoninq Amendment to adopt section 17.22.180 of
the Temecula Municipal Code and amend the official Zoninq Map of the City of Temecula
from Public Institutional (PI) to Planned Development Overlay (PDO-7), PA01-0653: A
Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan for a master plan and desiqn quidelines for
the development of Christian school facilities, athletic fields, and facilities, a residential area,
and approve phase A-1 of the master plan located on the north side of Pauba Road, south
of Rancho Vista Road and east of Temecula Valley Hi.qh School, APN: 955-02-002
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-031
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM,
FOR THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN," GENERALLY
LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO
VISTA ROAD, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF
MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS
PARCEL NO. 955-02-002
5.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-032
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA FROM PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL (PI) TO PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO-7), AND ADOPT SECTION
17.22.180 INCLUDING THE PDO TEXT AND DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS," GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA
ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD, EAST OF
MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002
5.3 Adopt a resolution entitled:
R:\PLANCOMM~IINUTES~2003~052103 pc .doc
5
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-033
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA01-0653, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A
MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A PRIVATE
SCHOOL COMPLEX, ATHLETIC FIELDS AND RELATED
FACILITIES, AND FUTURE RESIDENTIAL AREA FOR UP TO
26 RESIDENTS ON A 94 ACRE SITE," GENERALLY LOCATED
BETWEEN RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND PAUBA ROAD, WEST
OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 955-02-002
5.4 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-034
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA01-0653, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR
PHASE A-1 OF THE LINFIELD SCHOOL MASTER PLAN TO
INCLUDE A TWO STORY HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING
TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 38,358 SQUARE FEET AND AN
APPROXIMATELY 9,728 SQUARE FOOT ONE STORY
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BUILDING," GENERALLY
LOCATED BETWEEN PAUBA ROAD AND RANCHO VISTA
ROAD, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF
MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL
NO. 955-02-002
Because of the close proximity of his residence to the proposed project, Commissioner Telesio
advised that he would be abstaining.
Associate Planner Long presented an overview of the staff report (as per agenda material),
noting the following:
· That the proposed project includes a zone change from Public Institutional (PI) to
Planned Development Overlay (PDO);
That the parameters of the project extend from Rancho Vista Road to Pauba Road -
Temecula Valley High School to the west and some single-family residences on the
east;
R:\PLANCOMM'uMINUTES~2003',052103 pc .doc
6
Planned Development Overlay (PDO)
That the Planned Development Overlay (PDO) text includes a matrix of the uses allowed
and the development standards for the PDO zone; that the applicant is proposing to
permit student and/or faculty residences within the project; that since the existing PI
zone does not allow for residential uses, the zone change to a PDO was required to
provide for this flexibility;
Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
That the Master Plan includes a blueprint for future development of the Linfield Christian
School site including a conceptual site layout and Design Guidelines;
That the long-term plan will include the following: new high school buildings,
administrative office building, library/media center, dining hall, outdoor amphitheatre, fine
arts auditorium, middle school expansion, elementary school expansion, and multi-
purpose mom, new kindergarten and pre-school building, and various new athletic fields
and courts, and including a new gymnasium and pool;
· That in addition, the Master Plan will include an area intended for a student/faculty
residential area (Planning Area 2), which could result in a maximum of 26 residences;
· That the proposed Design Guidelines are specifically for a campus facility.
Development Plan
That staff has reviewed the proposed Development Plan and has determined the
proposed project will be consistent with the Planned Development Overlay (PDO)
development standards, the Master Plan, and Design Guidelines;
Environmental Determination
That staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan
for the project site; that staff primarily focused on traffic, biological and cultural
resources, and noise; that the Mitigation Monitoring Program was prepared and has
been included in the conditions of approval;
· That the following conditions of approval were amended, deleted, and added:
Amend:
Condition #9
that London Plane Tree be used as street trees along interior streets;
Condition # 47c
that installation of half-width street improvement from Pauba Road to the
North Boundary ...
R:\PLANCOMM',MINUTES~00~052103 pc .doc
7
Delete:
Condition # 49
that the proposed driveway shown as "emergency/secondary gated
ingress-egress" off of Rancho Vista Road should be realigned to match
the existing street's location across the street (i.e. Via El Greco) and/or
show how the driveway's access will be restricted (i.e. restrict movement
via median, etc.)
Add:
Condition # 51
That 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
Condition #52
That the Developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County
Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Progam as required by,
and in accordance with Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code
and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.08.
Condition #53
Condition #54
That all public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the
approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of
Public Works.
That deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the
Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
· Rancho California Water District
· Eastern Municipal Water District
· Department of Public Works
Associate Planner Long advised that staff has determined that the project, as proposed, will be
consistent with the General Plan, and, therefore, staff would recommend that the Planning
Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the Mitigated
Negative Declaration, adopt an ordinance approving the Zone Change Amendment, adopt a
resolution approving a Conditional Use Permit, and adopt a resolution approving a Development
Plan for phase A-1.
For Commissioner Mathewson, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks advised that the
previously performed Supplemental Traffic Analysis included the cumulative affects of the golf
course plus the proposed project and that the Level of Service (LOS) at build-out will remain at
C.
In response to Commissioner Mathewson, Assistant City Attorney Curley clarified that there
would not be a piecemealing concern as it relates to California Environmental Quality Act
(Mitigated Negative Declaration) with regard to this project and the golf course project (Planning
Area 3).
R:\PLANCOMM\MINU~r ES~2003~052103 pc .doc
8
Ms. Karen Raftery, the applicant, 22971 Anasaze Drive, spoke in favor of the project, stating.
that Linfield Christian School has been open since 1936 and has been operating in the
Temecula Valley since 1967; that Linfield Christian School is an independent, Christian College
Preparatory School that serves Kindergarten through 12th grade; that Linfield Christian School
seeks to provide students an excellent education, opportunities for athletics, spiritual guidance,
and preparation for life of service; that character and leadership development is an integral part
of its education process; and that School's current facilities are in need of renovation in order to
keep pace with the enrollment demand.
In response to Commissioner Mathewson's query regarding faculty residences, Ms. Deanna
Elliano, 22359 Whirlway Court, planning representative for Linfield Christian School, relayed
that the proposal for faculty residences is a long-term proposal and that these 26 units would be
used to help supplement teacher income.
At this time, the public hearing was opened.
The following individuals spoke in favor of the proposal:
Ms. Dee Butler 31422 Inverness Court
Mr. Dan Atwood 37104 De Portola Road
Mr. Tom Blaylock 31285 Corte Rimola
Ms. Taylor Martindale 41440 Valencia Way
Mr. Ryan Weillry P.O. Box 2218
Ms. Krista Rogers 23160 Compass Drive
The above-mentioned individuals spoke in favor of the proposal for the following reasons:
· That nearly 100% of graduates advance to college;
· That Linfield Christian School offers a strong academic program;
· That Linfield Christian offers a strong athletic program;
· That Linfield Christian builds self-confidence;
· That the teacher/student relationships are well developed and strong.
At this time, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Mathewson expressed concern adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Monitoring Program prior to closure of public comment period.
R:\PLANCOMIvI'~MIN UTES~003~052103 pc .dcc
9
Assistant City Attorney Curley provided information regarding California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) guidelines as it relates to the advisory bodies jurisdiction to consider the proposed
Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring program before making its recommendation
noting the following:
That for the advisory board (Planning Commission), there would be no need to integrate
the public comments into its recommendations or decision-making process;
That the decision-making body (City Council) shall consider the proposed Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program together with comments received during
the public hearing review process.
In response to Commissioner Olhasso's query regarding the long rooflines on the school
buildings, Associate Planner Long relayed that the intent of the long rooflines would be to
reduce the scale and the bulk of the building
MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve Item No. 5 subject to the additions,
deletions, and amendments as noted on pages 7-8. Commissioner OIhasso seconded the
motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Telesio who
abstained and Chairman Chiniaeff who was absent.
6 Planning Application No. PA03-0109 Development Code amendment to require the
standards for secondary dwellinq units be approved administratively located Citywide
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECIJLA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY THE PROCEDURES FOR
APPROVING SECONDARY DWELLING UNITS AND CLARIFY
THE PROCEDURES FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS
(PLANNING APPLICATION PA03-0110)
(This item was previously discussed; see page 4.)
COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS
For Commissioner Olhasso, Director of Planning Ubnoske relayed that the sofa issue
would be addressed.
B. Commissioner Guerriero thanked Code Enforcement for its inquiry of the Costco trees.
Vice Chairman Telesio queried the need for 12 newspaper racks along Margarita Road
and Rancho California Road.
R:\pLANCOMM'~IINUTES',2.00~052103 pc .doc
PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Planning Director Ubnoske noted that she has nothing to report this evening.
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:08 p.m., Vice Chairman Telesio formally adjourned this meeting to the next re,qular
meeting to be held on June 4, 2003 at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200
Business Park Drive, and Temecula.
Dennis W. Chiniaeff,
Chairman
Debbie Ubnoske,
Director of Planning
R:',PLANCOMM'~MINUTES~2003',052103 pc ,doc
11
ITEM #3
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
ClTY OFTEMECULA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM
Planning Commission
Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning
July 2, 2003
Director's Hearing Case Update
Planning Director's Agenda items for June 2003
JUNE 12, 2003 PA03-0058 Product review for 114 detached single- Us Home Approved
family residential homeswith three different Corp
floor plans and three architectural designs.
Attachments:
1. Action Agendas - Blue Page 2
PAPLANN I~GXD IRHEAR~IEMO~2003~June 2~03.memo,doc
1
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
ACTION AGENDAS
P:',PLANN1NG'd)IPoHEAR'~MEMO~003~.Iune 200'3,memo.doc
2
ACTION AGENDA
TEMECULA PLANNING DIRECTOR'S HEARING
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE12,20031:30PM
TEMECULA CITY HALL MAIN CONFERENCE ROOM
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
CALL TO ORDER: Don Hazen, Principal Planner
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Principal Planner
on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes each.
If you desire to speak to the Principal Planner about an item no~t listed on the Agenda, a
white "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the Principal Planner.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address.
Item No. 1:
Planning Application Number:
Case Name:
Applicant:
Owner:
Proposal:
Location:
Assessor Parcel Number:
Intended Environmental Action:
Case Planner:
Status:
Action:
PA03-0058
Stratford Homes at Crowne Hill
US Home Corp., Randy Schroeder, 391 North Main Street,
Suite 300, Corona, CA 92880
US Home Corp.
Product review for 114 detached single-family residential
homes with three different floor plans and three architectural
designs.
Those lots in the northeast corner of Butterfield Stage Road
Road and Pauba Road west of Crowne Hill Drive.
Tracts 23143-1
CEQA Exemption
Thomas Thornsley
X New Project
Re-submittal: Previous DRC Date:
Approved
p:~PLANNINGXDIRHEAR~Agendaxk2003\06-124)3 A(TflON AGENDA.doc
1
ITEM #4
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
July 16, 2003
Planning Application Nos. PA02-0707/PA03-0136 (Development Plan/Tentative Tract Map)
Prepared By: Dan Long, Associate Planner
1. Adopt Notice of Determination for Planning Application No. PA02-0707 and PA03-0136
(Development Plan and Tentative Tract Map) pursuant to Section 15164 of the California
Environmental Quality Act;
2. Adopt a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA02-0707, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCT TWO MULTI-TENANT INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS
TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 88,640 SQUARE ON 5.58 ACRES,
GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF ZEVO DRIVE,
APPROXIMATELY 635 FEET EAST OF WINCHESTER ROAD
KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 909-370-008
3. Adopt a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA03-0136, A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FOR 31 INDUSTRIAL
CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND A COMMON AREA ON 5.58 ACRES,
GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF ZEVO DRIVE,
APPROXIMATELY 635 FEET EAST OF WINCHESTER ROAD
KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 909-370-008
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
California Business Condos, Temecula LLC
PROPOSAL:
A Development Plan to design and construct two free-
standing multi-tenant industrial buildings totaling
approximately 88,640_ square feet and a Tentative Tract Map
(Map 31259) for 31 industrial condominiums and a common
area on 5.58 acres
R:kD PX2002\02-0707 Zevo Industrial Condo's~Staff Report.doc
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
Located on the north side of Zevo Drive, approximately 635
feet east of Winchester Road.
Light Industrial (LI)
North: Light Industrial (LI)
South: Light Industrial (LI)
East: Light Industrial (LI)
West: Light Industrial (LI)
Business Park (BP)
Vacant
North: Vacant
South: Vacant
East: Vacant
West: Previous Zevo Golf Driving Range
PROJECT STATISTICS (DEVELOPMENT PLAN)
Lot area
6.17 gross (5.58 acres net)
Building "A" square footage:
41,950 square feet
Building "B" square footage:
Total Building square footage:
46,690 square feet
88,640 square feet
Building height:
24'-0' maximum (single story)
Landscaped area:
52,294 square feet (21.5%)
Parking required:
179 vehicular, 6 handicapped, 9 bicycle, and 4
motorcycle
Parking provided:
210 vehicular, 7 handicapped, 10 bicycle, and 2
motorcycle
Lot coverage: 36.5%
Floor area ratio: .37
BACKGROUND
An application for a Development Plan was submitted on December 26, 2002. A DRC meeting was
held on January 30, 2003 to discuss site, landscaping, architecture and other departmental issues.
On March 3, 2003, the applicant submitted a tentative tract map application along with the revised
Development Plan Application. The applicant resubmitted revised plans on April 17, 2003. On June
18, 2003, staff received approval from the Riverside County Geologist regarding the adequacy of
the geotechnical reports prepared by the applicant.
2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Planning Application Nos. PA02-0707 (Development Plan) and PA03-0136 (Tentative Tract Map No.
31259) is a request to design and construct two single story industrial buildings totaling 88,640
square feet, and a tentative tract map to subdivide the buildings into 31 industrial condominiums
located on a 5.58-acre site. The project is located north of Zevo Drive approximately 635 feet east
of Winchester Road.
Environmental Determination
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) permits the preparation of an addendum to
previously adopted Negative Declarations if no new significant impacts or environmental factors
have changed (Section 15164).
In 1991 the City Council approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the underlying 57 lot parcel
map (PM24085) which created the subject parcel. The project is consistent with the previous land
use and traffic assumptions; the updated geotechnical report has been approved; and no new
environmental factors will be impacted as the result of the development.
Staff has determined that there are no other potential impacts as a result of the proposed project.
Staff recommends the adoption of an addendum to the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map
24085/31259.
Site Plan
Access to the site is taken from two driveway entrances along Winchester Road. Vehicle circulation
is provided around the perimeter of the project site and includes a single driveway between the two
buildings with parking on both sides. Loading doors are proposed on the eastern and western
elevations of each building.
The two proposed buildings are situated parallel to each other (north to south) in a quasi-rectangular
pattern, along a common driveway. A 2:1 sloped landscape area and 25 foot driveway separate
Building A from Zevo Drive. A front landscape setback of approximately 26 feet is proposed along
the frontage of Building B.
The main driveway includes a beam over the driveway, which may be utilized for future site
identification. A second beam is proposed between the two buildings towards the rear of the site.
The main driveway entrance also includes a fountain in the landscaped setback. The applicant has
proposed four employee lunch areas throughout the project site.
Architecture
The buildings will be constructed of concrete tilt-up panels, tinted glass and canvas awnings. The
buildings will have a series of wall offsets and varied parapets to create visual interest. The applicant
has proposed three varied color schemes throughout the project. All paint is by Dunn Edwards and
includes the following combinations: Main Color: Birchwood SP 51, Accent: Taos SP 2650, Main
Color Riverbed SP 2240, Accent Sonora Gray SP 2220, Main Color Sahara SP 513, Accent Desert
Gray SP 8. The tinted glass includes a shade of light green and the awning is a multi toned beige,
white and light brown. The roofline includes various elevation changes at the entrances and breaks
in the wall plane to reduce the mass and scale of the building.
RAD PX2002\02-0707 Zero Industrial Condo'sXStaff Report.doc
3
Landscapin,q
The landscaping plan includes a mix of deciduous and evergreen tree species such as London
Plane trees, Fern Pine, California Pepper, Red Crepe Myrtle and Pink Flowering Locust. Fifteen
gallon London Plane Trees are proposed as street trees, while Fern Pines are used in key areas
required for screening. A keystone retaining wall is proposed along the western-sloped area and will
include Boston Ivy vines along the span of the wall. The applicant has proposed a sidewalk system
around the buildings and has provided landscaping between the building and the sidewalk,
producing an island effect.
Tentative Tract Map
The tentative tract map includes 31 condominium units plus a common open space area. Each
individual parcel will encompass the tenant suite area. The suite areas range in size from 1,291
square feet to 4,773 square feet. As a condition of approval the applicant will be required to
establish an association and CC&R's to maintain the common area (including landscaping) and
exterior building.
ANALYSIS
Site Plan
Staff can make the required findings necessary to approve the Development Plan and tentative tract
map for 31 industrial condominium units located in the Light Industrial zoning district. The proposed
site planning and circulation is consistent with the industrial development performance standards in
the Development Code. The proposed site plan provides adequate circulation for vehicles
anticipated to utilize the site as well as emergency vehicles. Loading areas are screened with the
use of building orientation, wing walls and/or landscaping. Landscaping along the frontage and
slopes will screen much of the parking' areas from the public street.
Architecture
The proposed architecture includes painted concrete tilt-up buildings and the use of glass and
awnings throughout the site. Glass and awnings are proposed at office entries with additional glass
along the front of the building. The buildings include numerous breaks in the wall plane, which
provides for screening of the loading areas as well as breaking up the mass from street view. Due to
the perpendicular orientation of the buildings to the street, the scale of the buildings are reduced.
The roof-line has varied papapet heights at office entry locations and where the wall plane changes.
Staff feels that the amhitecture is innovative and will add variety to the industrial park. The use of
canvas awnings is not a typical material used in the business park, however it functions as an
alternative material that softens the concrete structure while providing interest at office entries. The
overhead beams, fountains, awnings, orientation of the buildings and landscaping integrate with
each other to provide a campus type setting for the site.
Landscaping
The landscape plan includes a variety of native and non-native deciduous and evergreen species.
London Plane trees are proposed as street trees, Evergreen Fern Pine trees are proposed along the
eastern property line to screen the loading areas from Zevo Drive. Staff has determined that the
current landscaping on the former Zero Golf driving range to the east along with the proposed on-
site landscaping will screen the loading areas on the eastern elevation of building B.
The applicant has provided the required landscaping for sloped areas and the required ratio of tree
sizes. A sloped and planted keystone retainipg wall is proposed on the western portion of the lot
ranging from seven to ten feet in height and is approximately 450 linear feet. The applicant has
proposed 47, 5-gallon Boston Ivy vines to grow along the wall, which should soften the appearance
of the wall. Landscaping is proposed at the base of the buildings to produce an island affect as
stated in the Design Guidelines. Landscaped fingers are proposed every 10 parking spaces and a
minimum landscaped perimeter of 6'-2" has been provided (5 feet minimum required). Three
existing trees will be removed along the frontage of the site. The applicant has proposed to relocate
the three trees on-site.
Tentative Tract Map
The proposed Tentative Tract Map meets the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance and the
Development Code for condominiums. Each unit will consist of the suite area, plus the common
area. All improvements in the area exist and will be adequate for the proposed project.
CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION
The project has been determined by staff to be consistent with all-applicable City ordinances,
standards, guidelines, and policies. It is staff's opinion that the project is compatible with
surrounding developments in terms of design and quality.
FINDINGS
Development Plan (Section 17.05.010F)
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 Business
Park (BP) development in the City of Temecula General Plan. The General Plan has listed
the proposed use, light manufacturing, office and warehouse as O/pical uses in the Business
Park designation. The proposed project is consistent with the use regulations outlined in the
DevelopmentCodefortheLightlndustdalzoningdistrict. Theprojecthasbeenconditioned
by the Building Department and Fire Prevention Bureau to comply with all applicable
Building and Fire Codes.
The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety, and general welfare.
The proposed project is consistent with the development standards outlined in the City of
TemeculaDevelopmentCode. Theproposedarchitectureandsitelayoutfortheprojecthas
been reviewed utilizing the Industrial Development Performance Standards of the
Development Code. The proposed project has met the performance standards in regards to
circulation; architectural design and site )lan design.
Tentative Tract Map (Section 16.09.104)
The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are
consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, Subdivision Ordinance and the City of
Temecula Municipal Code;
R:~D P~2002\024)707 Zevo Indus~al Condo's\Staff Report.doc
5
o
The proposed subdivision is a Tentative Tract Map for industrial condominiums and is
consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, Subdivision Ordinance, and the City
of Temecula Municipal Code because the proposed Tentative Tract Map complies with the
development standards and will function as a typical single large lot with individual owners of
each suite.
The tentative map does not propose to divide land, which is subject to a contract entered
into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the land is subject to a
Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting pamels following division of the land will not
be too small to sustain their agricultural use;
The project site is not subject to any agreements entered into pursuant to the California
Land Conservation Act of 1965, because the project site is not within an area requiring
conservation nor is the land or surrounding land used for agricultural purposes.
The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by
the tentative map;
The site is physically suitable forthe type and proposed density of development proposed by
the Tentative Tract Map because the project site will function as a single lot, which allows for
anticipated, required access, cimulation and improvements, however the individual industrial
condominium units will be individually owne~,,
The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval,
are:
The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval,
are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure
fish or wildlife or their habitat, because the project conforms with the initially adopted
Negative Declaration and all required mitigation measures have been incorporated into the
conditions of approval
The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious
public health problems;
The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious
public health problems because development will be inspected by City Staff prior to
occupancy to ensure all improvements are constructed in a manner consistent with City of
Temecula standards;
The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling
opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible;
The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling
opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible, because the construction plans will
comply with all applicable building codes and State energy guidelines
The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements
acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed
subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to
those previously acquired by the public will be provided;
R:X.D P~2002\02~0707 Zevo Industrial Condo'sXStaff Report.doc
6
The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements
acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed
subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to
those previously acquired by the public will be provided because required off-site
dedications and improvements have been provided or will be acquired as conditions of
approval
The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby);
Industrial subdivisions are not required to dedicate parkland or fees/requirements (Quimby),
therefore the project is consistent with the City's Parkland dedication requirements,
R:~D Pk2002\02q)707 Zevo Industrial Condo'sXStaff Report.doc
7
Attachments
1. PC Resolution No.- 2003-
- Blue Page 9
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 12
PC Resolution No.-2003__- Blue Page 25
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 29
Initial Environmental Study- Blue Page 40
Exhibits - Blue Page 41
B. Vicinity Map
C. General Plan Map
D. Zoning Map
E. Site Plan
F. Grading Plan
G. Building Elevations
H. Floor Plan
I. Landscape Plan
J. Tentative Tract Map
K. Color and Material Board
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-
RAD 1~2002X02-0707 Zevo Industrial Condo'sXStaff Report.d~c
9
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA02-0707, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DESIGN, CONSTRUCT
AND OPERATE TWO MULTI-TENANT INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS
TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 88,640 SQUARE ON 5.58 ACRES,
GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF ZEVO DRIVE,
APPROXIMATELY 635 FEET EAST OF WINCHESTER ROAD
KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 909-370-008
WHEREAS, California Business Condominiums, Temecula LLC, filed Planning Application
No. PA02-0707 (Development Plan Application), in a manner in accord with the City of Temecuia
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
July 16, 2003, 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.
by reference.
That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated
Section 2. Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby
makes the following findings as required by Section 176.05.010F of the Temecula Municipal Code:
The proposed use is in cohformance 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 Business
Park (BP) development in the City of Temecula Gb~neral Plan. The General Plan has listed
the proposed use, light manufacturing, office and warehouse as a typical uses in the
Business Park designation. The proposed project is consisten~t with the use regulations
outlined in the Development Code for the Light Industrial zoning district. The project has
been conditioned by the Building Department and Fire Prevention Bureau to comply with all
applicable Building and Fire Codes.
2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety, and general welfare.
R:~D P~2002\024)707 Zevo Industrial Condo's\Staff Report.doc
10
The proposed project is consistent with the development standards outlined in the City of
TemeculaDevelopmentCode. Theproposedarchitectureandsitelayoutfortheprojecthas
been reviewed utilizing the Industrial Development Performance Standards of the
Development Code. The proposed project has met the performance standards in regards to
circulation; architectural design and site plan design.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. An Addendum to a Negative Declaration has
been prepared and adopted by the Planning Commission. Whereas, no further environmental
review is required for the proposed project.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby
conditionally approves the Application, a request to construct two industrial buildings totaling 88,840
square feet as 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 16th day of July 2003.
Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CiTY OF TEMECULA )
I, Debbie U bnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
PC Resolution No. 2003- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the
th
City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 16 day of July, 2003, by the following
vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:~I) PY2002\024)707 Zevo Industrial Condo's\Staff Report.doc
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No.:
PA02-0707 (Development Plan)
Project Description:
A Development Plan to design and construct
two free-standing multi-tenant industrial
buildings totaling approximately 88,640 square
feet on 5.58 acres
DIF Category:
Business Park/Industrial
Assessor's Parcel No.:
909-370-031
Approval Date:
July 16, 2002
Expir~ion Da~:
July 16, 2004
PLANNING DIVISION
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or
money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand Three
Hundred Fourteen Dollars ($1,314.00) which includes the One Thousand Two Hundred and
Fifty Dollar ($1,250.00) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the
Sixty-four Dollars ($64.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of
Determination for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resoumes
Code Section 21108(a) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said
for[y-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning
Department 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. No outdoor staging/storage of any kind shall be permitted.
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. 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.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this
Development Plan.
The applicant shall comply with the conditions of approval for Planning Application 96-0140
and Parcel Map No. 24085, including the mitigation measures included herein, unless
superseded by these conditions of approval.
The permittee shall obtain Cit~ approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of
this development plan.
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.
The Director of Planning may, upon an application being filed within thirty day prior to
expiration and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to three one-year extensions of
time, one year at a time.
The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits E
(Site Plan), F (Grading Plan), G (Building Elevation), H (Floor Plan), I (Landscape Plan), and
J (Color and Material Board) contained on file with the Community Development Department
Planning Division.
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.
Landscaping shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "1" (Conceptual Landscape
Plan). Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the
reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Planning. If it is determined that the landscaping is
not being maintained, the Director of Planning 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.
In the .event the three trees proposed to be replanted/relocated on the project site do not
survive, said trees shall be replaced with the same tree species no less than 24-inch box, or
as approved by the Planning Director.
All utilities and light poles shall be shown and labeled on the landscape plans and
appropriate screening shall be provided. A 3' clear zone shall be provided around fire check
detectors as required by the Fire Department before starting the screen. Group utilities
together in order to reduce intrusion.
Ground covers shall be planted below all shrubs on slope areas in order to provide erosion
control while shrubs establish.
R:kD PL2002\02-0707 Zero lndusa~al Condo%\Staff Report.doc
]4
15. All mechanical and roof equipment shall be fully screened from public view from Zevo Drive
by being placed below the lowest level of the surrounding parapet wall.
16.
The colors and materials for the prbject shall substantially conform to those noted directly
below and with Exhibit "J" (Color and Material Board), contained on file with the Community
Development Department - Planning Division.
Concrete (walls) - Main Body
Concrete (walls) - Top Painted Band
Concrete (walls) - Middle Painted Band
Concrete (walls) - Painted Vertical Stripes
Diamond Accent Medallions - Painted Accents
Metal (roll-up doors)
Concrete Tile Roofing
Parker 5401 (Turtle Dove)
Parker 5403M (Otter)
Parker 5404D (Colonnade)
Parker 5403M (Otter)
Parker 5404D (Colonnade)
Parker 5401 (Turtle Dove)
U.S. Tile (Carmel Blend)
17.
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.
18.
The applicant shall provide two additional motorcycle spaces to comply with Section 17.24 of
the Development Code.
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
19.
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.
20.
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 "G", 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.
21.
22.
A separate building permit shall be required for all signage.
An appropriate method for screening the gas meters and other externally mounted utility
equipment shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department.
23.
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.
24. A copy of the Grading Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department.
25.
A qualified paleontologist/archaeologist shall be chosen by the developer for consultation
and comment on the proposed grading with respect to potential paleontological/
archaeological impacts. A meeting between the paleontologist/archaeologist, Planning
Department staff, and grading contractor prior to the commencement of grading operations
R:~D P~00'2\0'24T/07 Zevo Industrial Condo'sXStaff Report.doc
15
and the excavation shall be arranged. The paleontologist/archaeologist or representative
shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery
of fossils.
26.
A qualified amhaeologist shall be chosen by the developer and approved by the Planning
Director for the purpose of conducting a stratified surface sampling of archaeological site
CA-RIV 237. The archaeologist shall excavate 20 to 30 one cubic meter surface units to
determine the depth, spatial extent and significance of the site. Based on the results of
these tests, the extent of further sampling and data collection will be determined. A qualified
amhaeologist shall also monitor grading activities and shall have the authority to temporarily
halt or redirect grading activity to allow recovery of cultural resoumes. A native American
representative shall be present during archaeological testing and during grading and shall
also have the authority to temporarily halt or divert grading activity.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permit
27. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
28. 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 'T', 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 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).
29. The Planning Director shall approve the Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans.
Prior to Release of Power
30.
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.
31.
The property owner shall submit a landscape maintenance plan that will insure that the
landscaping will be maintained at heights sufficient to screen bay doors visible from the
public right of way.
32.
The applicant shall paint a 3-foot x 3-foot section of the building for Planning Department
inspection, prior to commencing painting of the building.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
R:XD Pk2002\02-0707 Zevo Industrial Condo's~Staff Report.doc
33.
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
34.
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.
35.
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.
36.
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.
37.
The Developer shall construct public improvements in conformance with applicable City
Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works.
a. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: curb and gutter,
sidewalks, drive approach,
b. Storm drain facilities
c. Sewer and domestic water systems
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
38.
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.
39.
The Developer shall post secudty 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.
40.
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.
41.
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.
42.
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
R:~D 1~2002\02~3707 Zero Industrial Condo'sXStaff Report. doc
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.
43.
The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resoumes 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.
44.
As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer
shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
a. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
b. Planning Department
c. Department of Public Works
d. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
45.
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.
46.
Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department
and the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
47.
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.
48.
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.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
49.
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. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
d. 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.
50.
The Developer shall construct the following public improvements in conformance with
applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the Department of
Public works.
R:kD 1~2002\02-0707 Zevo Industrial Condo's~Staff RepoxLdoc
Street improvemen.ts, which may include, but not limited to: curb and gutter,
sidewalks, drive approach,
Storm drain facilities.
Sewer and domestic water systems.
51.
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.
52.
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.
53.
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.
54.
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.
55.
The Developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform
Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.08 of
the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.08.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
56.
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
57.
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.
58.
The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken due to
new construction shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the
Director of the Department of Public Works.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
59.
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.
R:~ID 1~7.002\024)707 Zevo Industrial Condo's\Staff Repolt.doc
19
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A~1. The
developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 2825 GPM at
20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 1850 GPM for a
total fire flow of 4625 GPM with a 3 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)
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 3 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 400 feet apart, at each
intersection and shall be located no more than 225 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).
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 mute 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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
67.
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)
68.
Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all-
weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1)
69.
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, and spacing and minimum fire flow standards.
R;~D PX2002\02-0707 Zero Induslfial Condo's\Staff Report.doe
20
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
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 )
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)
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. Commemial, 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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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.
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)
R:~D P~2002\02-0707 Zevo Industrial Condo's~Staff Repor~.dcc
21
78.
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)
Special Conditions
79.
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.
80.
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)
81.
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)
BUILDING AND SAFETY
82.
All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2001 edition of the
California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2001 California Electrical Code;
California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy Code, California Title 24 Disabled Access
Regulations, and the Temecula Municipal Code.
83.
The City of Temecula has adopted an ordinance to collect fees for a Rivemide County area
wide Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TU MF). Upon the adoption of this ordinance on
March 31,2003, this project will be subject to payment of these fees at the time of building
permit issuance. The fees shall be subject to the provisions of Ordinance 03-01 and the fee
schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
84.
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.
85.
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.
86.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
87. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
RAD P'~2002\02~0707 Zero Industrial Condo'sXSlaff Report.doe
22
88. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
89.
Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of extedor lighting, fire
alarm systems.
90.
Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 2001
edition of the California Building Code Appendix 29.
91.
Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior
to permit issuance.
92.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic
and mechanical plan for plan review.
93.
Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer
engineer are required for plan review submittal.
94. Provide precise grading plan at plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
95.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
96.
Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved
building plans, will require separate approvals and permits.
97. Show all building setbacks.
98.
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
COMMUNITY SERVICES
General Conditions
99.
The trash enclosures shall be large enough to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as,
regular solid waste containers.
100. 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.
101. All parkways within the ROW, landscaping, fencing and on-site lighting shall be maintained
by the property owner or maintenance association.
102.
Prior to the issuance of a Building Permits, the developer shall provide TCSD verification of
arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction
debris.
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
103. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated January 6, 2003 from the Riverside
County Department of Environmental Health.
104. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated January 6, 2003 from Rancho
Water.
105. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated February 4, 2003 from Riverside
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District.
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
Name printed
Date
R:~,D P',2002',02 -0707 Ze-/o Industrial Condo'skStaff Report.doc
24
January 6, 2003
Dan Long, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AND SEWER AVAILABILITY
PARCEL NO. 3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 24085-2
APN 909-370-008
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA02-0707
THE VINYARD
Dear Mr. Long:
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the
boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water and sewer
service, therefore, would be available upon construction of any required on-site
and/or off-site water and sewer facilities and the completion of financial
arrangements between RCWD m~d the property owner.
If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees
and requirements.
Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an
Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD.
This project is shown as an industrial condominium site with individual building
ownem and a homeowners' association maintaining the common property and
private water and fire protection facilities. RCWD requires that the City of
Temecula include a Reciprocal Easement and Maintenance Agreement for these
on-site private water facilities, as a condition of the project. In addition to this
agreement, RCWD will require individual water meters for each unit.
If you should have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services
Representative at this office.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brannon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
03~SB:at003kFCF
Laurie Williams, Engineering Services Supervisor
Bud Jones, Senior Engineering Technici,xn
TO:
FROM
RE:
County of Riverside
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ATTN: Matthew Fagan
GREGOR DELLENBACH, Environmental Health Specialist IV
PLOT PLAN NO. PA02-0707
DATE: January 6, 200J
1. The Department of Environmental Health (DEH) h as reviewed t he P lot P lan N o. P A02-
7007. (Zevo Industrial Condo's). Sanitary sewer and water services are available in this
area.
2. PRIOR TO PLAN CHECK SUBMITTAL, THE FOLLOWING ITEMS WILL BE
REQUIRED:
a) "Will-serve" letters f~om the watering and sewering agencies.
b) If required, three(3) complete sets of plans for vending or food facilities will need to be
submitted with appropriate fees ( to DEH Offices c/o Food Plan Check, 38740 Sky
Canyon Drive, Suite A. Murrieta, CA. 92563), in order to ensure compliance with the
California Administrative Code, Califomia Health and Safety Code and the Uniform
Building Code. (Office phone 909.461.0284)
GD:gd
(909) 955-8980
WAILREN D: WILLIAMS
General Manager-Chief Engineer
51180.1
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATERCONSERVATIONDISTRICT'Y,~ i~;: ~!:' ~ ~ ~'
City of Temecula :~I,~t FEB 0 7 Z003
Planning Department
Post Office Box 9033 , ~'
Temecula, California 92589-9033
Attention: ~')/~ ~l /_~,.~ ~,, ~3~!
Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: P/~ 0 '~- - 0 '70 '7
The District does not norma y recommend condtions for land divisions or other land use cases in incorporated
cities. The Distdct also does not plan check cry and use cases, or provide State Division of Real Estate letters or
other flood hazard reports for sucn cases. District comments/recommendations for such cases are normally limited
to terns of specific interest to the District including District Master Draina0e pla. n fa. cilitie, s, othe.r regional fi. bed
contro and drainage facilities which could be.cans dered a og ca componemor extenslonot a master p~an system
and District Area Drainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition, information of a general nature is
provided.
The DisMct has not reviewed the proposed project in detail and the fo!lowing checked commen~ dq not in any way
constitute or imply Distdct approval or endorsement of the propose~ project with respect to tloo~a hazard, public
health and safety or any other such issue:
v~ This pr,oiect would not b9 impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of
regional tnterest proposee.
This project involves District Master Plan facilities. The District will accept ownership of su .ch.fa.cilifl,es on.
written request of the C ty Faci ifies must be constructed to District standards and District p~an checK ane
insp.ectign will be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will ha
requtre~a.
Th s p~oje .ct proposes channels, storm .drains. 36 inches or larger in diameter, or other facilities that could be
cons~dereo regional in nature and/or a legica~ extension of the adopted
Master Drainage Plan. The District woula consider accepting ownership or. such faCqit~es on .written .r.eque.s.t,
of the City. Facilities.must b~. cons_t_m, cted. to pi.strict st,.andard.s, a. nd..D[s~.ct pJan ch...ec.k, and m.s .pgction wm
be requirL~d for District acceptance. ~lan checK, inspecaon ane aommlstrauve tees Will De requ~reo.
~" This project is I. ocat .e~. within the Ii.mits 9f the.Districr.s ~l}~£'~h ~..E&~II~£OJLp,- ~.~./~.~.e.a
Drainage Plan mr wnich drainage tees nave eeen aaopted; applicable tee,~.sno, ul.(l be para py casino-rs
check or money order on y to the Flood Control District pdor to iss.uance ~ butld.ing or gradLn~, perm..its~
whichever comes first. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time or issuance otme actua~
permit.
GENERAL INFORMATION
This project ma}' require a National Po. llutant ..Discharge ~iminafion.,System. (NPDES) .perm.R. from. the State .W.a.t. er
Resources Control Board. Clearance tor graoing, reconaation or omer tmal approva/snou~(~ not De given unul the
City has determined that the project has been granted a permit or is shown to be exempt.
If this project invo yes a Federa Emergency Management Agency (FE,MA~ map .~ed fl ..opd plain then.the Cit~ s..h._o.u, ld
require the applicant to provide a studies, calculations, [alans anna omer tnrormation required to meet
requirements, and should further require that the applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR)
prior to grading, recordation or other final approval' 6f the project, and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior to
occupancy.
If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain is impacted by this project, the. City,s..hould req.uire..t.he app. li.~nk~
obtain a Section 1601/1603 Agreement from the California Department of Fisn ana ~ame anc~ a ~.,~ean water ct
Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Eng neers, o.r written correspondence, frq.m ~.es_e a.g. en~es
ind cating the project s exempt from these requirements. A Clean water Act Section 401 Water ~ua~ib' L;ertmcation
may be required from the local California Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of the Corps 404
permit. '
1995 MARKET STREE~
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
909.955.1200
909.788.9965 FAX
Very truly yours,
STUART E- MCKIBBIN
Senior Civil Engineer
Date: ~--- Z~- ~00~'~
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-
R:XD P~2002\024)707 Zevo imdustrial Condo's~Staff Report.doc
25
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2003-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA03-0136, A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31259 FOR 31
INDUSTRIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND A COMMON AREA ON
5.58 ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF
ZEVO DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 635 FEET EAST OF
WINCHESTER ROAD KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO.
909-370-008
WHEREAS, California Business Condominiums, Temecula, LLC, filed Planning Application
No. PA03-0136 (Tentative Tract Map), 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
July 16, 2003, 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.
by reference.
That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated
Section 2. Findinqs. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby
makes the following findings as required by Section 16.09.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code:
A. The proposed subdivision is a Tentative Tract Map for industrial condominiums and
is consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, Subdivision Ordinance, and the City of
Temecula Municipal Code because the proposed Tentative Tract Map complies with the
development standards and will function as a typical single large lot with individual owners of each
suite.
B. The project site is not subject to any agreements entered into pursuant to the
California Land Conservation Act of 1965, because the project site is not within an area requiring
conservation nor is the land or surrounding land used for agricultural purposes.
R:~D 1R2002\02~0707 Zevo Industrial Condo's~Staff Report.doe
26
C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development
proposed by the tentative map because the project site will function as a single lot, which allows for
the required access, circulation and improvements, however the individual industrial condominium
units will be individually owned.
D. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of
approval, are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably
injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, because the project conforms with the initially adopted Negative
Declaration and all required mitigation measures have been incorporated into the conditions of
approval.
E. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause
serious public health problems because development will be inspected by City Staff prior to
occupancy to ensure all improvements are constructed in a manner consistent with City of Temecula
standards.
F. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling
opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible, because the construction plans will comply
with all applicable building codes and State energy guidelines.
G. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with
easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed
subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those
previously acquired by the public will be provided because required off-site dedications and
improvements have been provided or will be acquired as conditions of approval.
H. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements
(Quimby) because the project has been conditioned to pay in-lieu fees consistent with city standards
for industrial condominiums.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. A Negative Declaration was approved for Parcel
Map 24085, which addressed all the environmental impacts on the site. An addendum to the
adopted Negative Declaration for Parcel Map 24085 has been prepared, and determined that no
further environmental review is required because the potential significant impacts have been
previously mitigated. The application is consistent with the project description analyzed in the
Negative Declaration for Parcel Map 24085, and no subsequent environmental review is necessary
per Section 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby
conditionally approves the Application, for a Tentative Tract Map for 31 industrial condominium
units, plus a common area as 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:kD PL2002~02-0707 Zevo Industrial Condo's~laff Report.doc
27
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning
Commission this 16th day of July 2003.
Dennis Chinaeff, Chairperson
ATI'EST:
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. 2003- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 16th day of July, 2003, by the following
vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R?,D IA2002\02-0707 Z~vo Industrial Condo'sXStaff Repo~t.doc
28
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
R:~D F~2002\02-0707 Zevo Industrial Condo's~Slaff Repol~.doc
29
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No.: PA03-0136 (Tentative Tract Map No. 31259)
Project Description:
A Tentative Tract Map for 31 Industrial Condominiums and a
common area on 5.58 acres
Assessor's Parcel No.: 909-370-008
Approval Date:
July 16, 2003
Expiration Date:
July 16, 2006
PLANNING DIVISION
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or
money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand Three
Hundred Twenty-Eight Dollars ($1,328.00) which includes the One Thousand Two Hundred
and Fifty Dollar ($1,250.00) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus
the Sixty Four Dollars ($64.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice
of Determination for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources
Code Section 21108(a) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said
forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning
Department 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
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and
to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless modified bythe conditions listed below.
A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and 'City
Ordinance, upon written request, if made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to
indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the Ci~s own
selection from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the
City to attack, set aside, annul, or 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. 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. 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 the 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.
R:~D 1~.002\02-0707 Zevo Industrial Condo's~Staff Report.doc
30
If Subdivision phasing is proposed, a phasinq plan shall be submitted to and approved by
the Planning Director.
The applicant shall comply with the conditions of approval for Planning Application 96-0140
and Parcel Map No. 24085, including the mitigation measures included therein, unless
superseded by these conditions of approval.
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning
Division.
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.
A qualified paleontologist/archaeologist shall be chosen by the developer for consultation
and comment on the proposed grading with respect to potential paleontological/
archaeological impacts. A meeting between the paleontologist/archaeologist, Planning
Department staff, and grading contractor prior to the commencement of grading operations
and the excavation shall be arranged. The paleontologist/archaeologist or representative
shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery
of fossils.
A qualified amhaeologist shall be chosen by the developer and approved by the Planning
Director for the purpose of conducting a stratified sudace sampling of archaeological site
CA-RIV 237. The amhaeologist shall excavate 20 to 30 one cubic meter surface units to
determine the depth, spatial extent and significance of the site. Based on the results of
these tests, the extent of further sampling and data collection will be determined. A qualified
amhaeologist shall also monitor grading activities and shall have the authority to temporarily
halt or redirect grading activity to allow recovery of cultural resources. A native American
representative shall be present during amhaeological testing and during grading and shall
also have the authority to temporarily halt or divert grading activity.
10.
Prior to the approval of a grading permit, an overall conceptual grading plan shall be
submitted for approval. The plan shall be used as a guideline for subsequent detailed
grading plans for individual phases of development and shall include the following:
a. Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and sedimentation during and
after the grading process.
b. Approximate time frames for grading and identification of areas which may be
graded during the higher probability rain months of January through March.
c. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
d. Areas of temporary grading off-site.
Prior to Recordation of the Final Map
The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division:
11. A copy of the Final Map.
12.
A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes:
a. This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All
proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of
Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations, Ordinance No. 655.
b. An Addendum to a Negative Declaration was prepared for this project and is on file
at the City of Temecula Planning Department.
c. This project is within the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone.
Archaeological and paleontological monitoring of grading is required, and summary
reports shall be submitted to the Planning Department pdor to the issuance of
building permits.
The property is affected by earthquake faulting and ground fissures. Structures for
human occupancy shall not be allowed in the fault and ground fissure hazard area.
County Geologic Report No. 627 was prepared for this property on June 7, 1989 by
Schafer Dixon Association as well as County Geologic Report No 1136 prepared by
EnGen Corporation dated February 25, 2003, as well as a revised supplemental
Geotechnical Engineering Study entitled Response to County Geologic Report No
1136, Revised, prepared by EnGen Corporation dated May 30, 2003 and is on file at
the City of Temecula Planning Department. Specific items of concern are as follows:
earthquake faulting, fissuring and ground subsidence, liquefaction, landsliding and
uncompacted trench backfill.
13.
A copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's)
a. CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved bythe Planning Director. The CC&R's shall
include liability insurance and methods of maintaining open space, recreation areas,
parking areas, private roads, exterior of all buildings and all landscaped and open
areas including parkways.
b. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense.
c. The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Planning Director, City
Engineer and the City Attorney and shall include such provisions as are required by
this approval and as said officials deem necessary to protect the interests of the City
and it's residents.
d. The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's Association are
subject to the approval of the Planning and Public Works Departments and the City
Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with the final map. A recorded copy
shall be provided to the City.
e. The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management,
use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage and facilities.
f. The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and
maintained so as not to create a public nuisance.
R:~D I~2002\02-0707 Zevo Industrial Condo's~Staff Report.doc
32
The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition
required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving
reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the owner's sole expense,
any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City Ordinances. The
properly shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not
promptly reimbursed.
Every owner of a suite or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such suite or lot, either
(1) an undivided interest in the common areas and facilities, or (2) a share in the
corporation, or voting membership in an association owning the common areas and
facilities.
All open areas and landscaping shall be permanently maintained bythe association
or other means acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be
submitted to the Planning and Public Works Department prior to the issuance of
building permits.
Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all
parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided
by the CC&R's or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrent with the map or prior to
the issuance of building permit where no map is involved.
10.
The applicant shall submit to the Planning Department a copy of a recorded Reciprocal Use
Agreement, which provides for cross-lot access and parking across all lots and establishes
mutual responsibility for all commonly accessed areas and street front landscaping.
11.
No lot or suite in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property
owner's group or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties
individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the
common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be
sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to
maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall
operate under recorded CC&R's, which shall include compulsory membership of all owners
of lots and/or suites and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance,
repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City for provisions
required as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with
this requirement to, and receive approval of, the city prior to making any such sale. This
condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits
The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division:
12.
Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans. The location, number,
genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be
consistent with the Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance. The cover page shall identify
the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. 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.
13.
Co
Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved
plan).
The locations of all existing trees that will be saved consistent with the tentative map.
Automatic irrigation for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground
mounted equipment from the view of the public from streets and adjacent property
for:
i. Front yard and slopes prior to issuance of building permit.
ii. Private common areas prior to issuance of the first building permit,
iii. All landscaping excluding Temecula Community Services District (TCSD)
maintained areas and front yard landscaping, which shall include, but may
not be limited to private slopes and common areas.
g. Hardscaping for the following:
i. Pedestrian paths within private common areas,
ii. Wall and Fence Plans consistent with the Conceptual Landscape Plans
showing the height, location and the following materials for all walls and
fences.
h. Precise Grading Plans consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all
structural setback measurements.
The applicant shall submit a receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School
District to the Planning Department to ensure the payment or exemption from school
mitigation fees.
Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits
14.
If deemed necessary by the Director of Planning, the applicant shall provide additional
landscaping to effectively screen various components of the project.
15.
All required landscape planting and irrigation shall be installed consistent with the approved
construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Planning. The
plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be
properly constructed and in good working order.
16. Landscaping shall be completed pdor to final inspection.
17.
Common area landscaping shall be completed for inspection prior to issuance of the
certificate of occupancy permit.
18.
Pedormance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Planning, to
guarantee the maintenance of the plantings within private common areas for a period of one
year, in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be
filed with the Planning Department for one year from final certificate of occupancy. After that
year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition
satisfactory to the Director of Planning, the bond shall be released.
19. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed
by this permit.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
General Requirements
18.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative map all existing and
proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and
their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision.
19.
A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the Department
of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained
road right-of-way.
20.
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.
21.
All grading plans, landscape and irrigation 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 Approval of the Final Map, unless other timing is indicated, the Developer shall
complete the following or have plans submitted and approved, subdivision improvement
agreements executed and securities posted:
22.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
b. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
c. Rancho California Water District
d. Eastern Municipal Water District
e. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
f. City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau
g. Planning Department
h. Department of Public Works
i. Riverside County Health Department
j. Cable TV Franchise
k. Community Services District
I. General Telephone
m. ' Southern California Edison Company
n. Southern California Gas Company
23.
The Developer shall design and guarantee construction of the following public improvements
to City of Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be
reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works:
R:kD 1~,2002\02-0'707 Zero Industrial Condo's\Slaff Report.doc
35
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
Improve Zevo Drive (Principal Collector Highway Standards - 78' R/W) to include
installation of drainage facilities, and utilities (including but not limited to water and
sewer).
Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of
the street improvement plans:
a. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard No. 207A
b. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
c. 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.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be
provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required where adequate right-of-
way does not exist for installation of the facilities. All utilities shall be designed and
constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider.
A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
reviewed by 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.
Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Zevo Drive on the Final Map with the
exception of two openings as delineated on the approved Tentative Tract Map.
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid.
An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Final
Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with the map. A
copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval.
The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental
Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property.
The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property
interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submittal of the
Final Map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant
to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such agreement shall
provide for payment by the Developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site
properly interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these
costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report
obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been
approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal.
The Developer shall record a written offer to participate in, and wave 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" or "Medians in accordance with the General Plan". The form of the offer shall be
subject to the approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney.
The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit
shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements.
R:XD Pk2002\024)707 Zevo Industrial Condo's\Staff Report.doc
36
34. A 26-foot (minimum) easement shall be dedicated for public utilities and emergency vehicle
access for all private streets and drives.
35.
An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to approval of the Final Map or
issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first.
36.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities,
utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division
boundary. All offem of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted for review and
recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities located
outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the
final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating, "drainage easements shallbe kept
free of buildings and obstructions."
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
37.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
Planning Department
Department of Public Works
38.
A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City of
Temecula standards and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any grading. The plan shall incorporate adequate erosion control
measures to protect the site and adjoining properties from damage due to erosion.
39.
A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and submitted to 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 preliminary pavement sections.
40.
A Geotechnical Report shall be prepared by a registered engineer or engineering geologist
and submitted to the Department of public Works with the initial grading plan check. The
report shall address special study zones and identify any geotechnical hazards for the site
including location of faults and potential for liquefaction. The report shall include
recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction.
41.
A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the
Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identify
storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of the
site. It shall identify all existing or proposed off-site or on-site, public or private, drainage
facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall
capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property.
The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any
upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water renoff shall
be provided as part of development of this project. The basis for analysis and design shall
be a storm with a recurrence interval of one hundred years.
42.
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.
43.
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.
44.
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.
45.
The Developer shall obtain letters of approval or easements for any off-site work performed
on adjoining properties. The letters or easements shall be in a format as directed by the
Department.of Public Works.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits
46. Final Map shall be approved and recorded.
47.
A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and
approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and
elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction
and site conditions.
48.
Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the California Building Code, the
approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards and
accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial
conformance with the approved rough grading plan.
49.
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.
50.
The Developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform
Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.08 of
the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.08.
Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy
51.
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
R:~D PX2002\02-0707 Zero Industrial Condo's\Slaff Report.doc
38
52.
53.
All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public
agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works.
All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City
standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
54.
The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken due to
the construction operations of this project shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the
satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
55.
The City of Temecula has adopted an ordinance to collect fees for a Rivemide County area
wide Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). Upon the adoption of this ordinance on
March 31,2003, this project will be subject to payment of these fees at the time of building
permit issuance. The fees shall be subject to the previsions of Ordinance 03-01 and the fee
schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
56.
57.
58.
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.
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.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
Other Agencies
59.
60.
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecuia Valley School District shall be submitted to
the Planning Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation fees.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside
D~partment of Environmental Health's transmittal dated January 6, 2003, a copy of which is
attached.
61.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California
Water District's transmittal dated January 6, 2003, a copy of which is attached.
62.
The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated February 4, 2003 from Riverside
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District.
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 Signature
January 6, 2003
Dan Long, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AND SEWER AVAILABILITY
PARCEL NO. 3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 24085-2
APN 909-370-008
PLANN1NG APPLICATION NO. PA02-0707
THE VINYARD
Dear Mr. Long:
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the
boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water and sewer
service, therefore, would be available upon construction of any required on-site
and/or off-site water and sewer facilities and the completion of financial
arrangements between RCWD mad the property owner.
If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees
and requirements.
Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an
Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD.
This project is shown as an industrial condominium site with individual building
owners and a homeowners' association maintaining the common property and
private water and fire protection facilities. RCWD requires that the City of
Temecula include a Reciprocal Easement and Maintenance Agreement for these
on-site private water facilities, as a condition of the pr~ect. In addition to this
agreement, RCWD will require individual water meters for each unit.
If you should have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services
Representative at this office.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brannon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
03~SB:at003hnCF
Laurie Williams, Engineering Services Supervisor
Bud Jones, Senior Engineering Technician
County of Riverside
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
DATE: January 6, 200~
TO: CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ATTN: Matthew Fagan
FROM ~')// GREGOR DELLENBACH, Environmental Health Specialist 1V
RE: PLOT PLAN NO. PA02-0707
The Department of Environmental Health (DEH) h as reviewed t he P lot P lan N o. P A02-
7007. (Zevo Industrial Condo's). Sanitary sewer and water services are available in this
area.
2. PRIOR TO PLAN CHECK SUBMITTAL, THE FOLLOWING ITEMS WILL BE
REQUIRED:
a) "Will-serve" letters from the watering and sewering agencies.
b) If required, three(3) complete sets of plans for vending or food facilities will need to be
submitted with appropriate fees ( to DEH Offices c/o Food Plan Check, 38740 Sky
Canyon Drive, Suite A. Murrieta, CA. 92563), in order to ensure compliance with the
California Administrative Code, California Health and Safety Code and the Uniform
Building Code. (Office phone 909.461.0284)
GD:gd
(909) 955-8980
WARREN D.:WILE1AMS ~
General Manager-Chief Engineer
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
City of Temecula
Plannin~l Department
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, California 92589-9033
Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: /~/~ 0 "Z- - 0 '70 '7
The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in incorporated
cities. The District also does not ,o an check ci~/ and use cases, or provide State Division of Real Estate left.em., or
other flood, hazar.d, reports for su.c.n c.~se.s,. Dis ,b'ic[.. com~.me, nt .~[ .eco.mme_ndafions f..o, r such...ca.., ses a..re norm.ally !lm.~ted,
to items eT specific nterest to the uistrict inc~uoing uistrict Master uraina(,le ~qan taC~lmes, omer reglona~ nooe
contra and draina_qe facilities which could be considered a logical componera or extension), of a master plan system.,
and District Area Drainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition, information, of a general nature ~s
provided.
The District has not reviewed the proposed project in detail and the fo!lowing checked commen~ do not in .any .w~..y
constitute or imply District approval or endorsement of the pmposee project with respect to need hazara, puouc
health and safety or any ether such issue:
~ This pr.oje.ct wo. uld not b,e impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities nor ara other facilities of
regiona~ interest proposes.
This project involves D~istrict Ma...s.t. er Plan.facilities.. TI].e .D. is~ct..wi!l a. ccept .ownem. h_ip p.f .su.ch fa.cilifi.es on,
written request of the t;ity. Facilities must ~e constmctee to uismct sianoaros, ,aha. u.~s. tnct plan. check..a.no
inspection will be required for Distdct acceptance. Plan check, inspection aoe a(3mm~strative roes wm De
required.
This project proposes cha. nnels, s, torm .drains. 36 inches or. I.arger.in .dia. meter, or other facilities that could be
consldei~ed regional in nature an~or a ~ .(x..~ica~ extension o~ me a(3opteu.
Master Drainage Plan. The District woul(] consider accepting ownership et suc~ tac~lffies on .written .r.~ue~..t.
of the City. Facilities must bg. constructed to District s..tgnda~d.s, .and District p!an ch.,.eL:k' and m. sp.ection
be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection am a(3ministrative tees va, De requ~ree.
This project is located within the limits of the District's ~v~t~g./ETR Ct~,.E~/17E~£OJt ia- ~/nLLg~.,.Are. a
Drainage Plan for wh ch dra nage fees have been adopted; applicable teesl~ should tie paid by c~sniers
check or money order only to ~e FI .o~d..Con. t.r?l Di.s.,t~dt p.rior to .i.ss.ua.m~.. ~. build.i .rig or gradi.ng, perm..its
whichever comes nrs[ Fees to ee pai(~ snoum De at me rate in enect at me eme et msuance ottne actuat
permit.
GENERAL INFORMATION
This project ma}/require a National Pollutant ..Discharge .Elimination.System. (NPDES) .perm.i.t from. the. State .W..a.t. er
Resources Control Board. Clearance tor graoieg recoraafion or omer ~na~ appmva/snoul~3 not De given unal me
City has determined that the project has been granted a permit or s shown to be exempt.
If th s prelect nvo ves a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FE.MA.) map_Red flood plain then the Ci~ s..h..o.u, ld
requ re the app cant to provide all studies, ..calculab:ons. pla. ns and_ om..e.r ,nf.o.rm.a. tion.r.e~l, uire..d to me.e~L~o~MM~)
requ rements and shoud further require that me applicant obtain a t.;onoitiona~ Letter or Map ~<evision tc,~-u I
pdor to grad ng, recordation or other final approval bf the project, and a Letter of Map Rev s on (LOMR) prior to
occupancy.
· If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain is impacted by this project, the City should require the a[~p. licant to
obtain a Section 1601/1603 Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Game and a Clean water .Act
Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of .Engi.n_ee. rs, or..wfitte, n. ~rr.e. spo.n_dg.n, ce' Tro..m t..h.e~ a.g. en~es
indicating the project s exempt from these requirements. A t.;lean water Act ~ection 4u~ water [,/ualEy t..erancaiion
may be required from the local California Regional Water Quality Control Board pdor to issuance of the Corps 404
permit.
1995 MARKET STREE'I
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
909.955.1200
909.788.9965 FAX
Very truly yours,
STUART E. MCKIBBIN
Senior Civil Engineer
Date: ~.- q" ~)0'~
A'i-TACHMENT NO. 3
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
R:~D P',2002\0'24)707 Zevo Industrial Condo's\Staff Report.doc
40
City of Temecula
Planning Department Notice of Determination
SUBJECT:
County Clerk and Recorders Office
County of Riverside
P.O. Box 751
Riverside, CA 92501-0751
FROM:
Planning Department
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Filing of a Notice of Determination in compliance with the provisions of Section 21152 of the Public
Resources Code.
State Clearinghouse No.: N/A
Project Title:
Zevo Industrial Condominiums, Tentative Tract Map 31259
Project Location:
North side of Zevo Drive, approximately 635 feet east of Winchester Road
(APN: 909-370-008)
Project Description:
A Development Plan Application and Tentative Tract Map No 31259 for
Condominium Development. Two free standing industrial buildings totaling
approximately 88,640 square feet and 31 condominium suites and a common area
on 5.58 acres
Lead Agency:
City of Temecula
ntact Person:
Dan Long, Associate Planner
Telephone Number: (909) 694-6400
s is to advise you that the City Council for the City of Temecula has approved the above described project on
{date} and has made the following determinations regarding this project:
The project ([ ] will [ X] will not) have a significant effect on the environment.
That ([ ] An Environmental Impact Report [ X] An Addendum to a Negative Declaration) was
prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
Mitigation measures ([X] were [ ] were not) made a condition of the approval of the project.
A Statement of Overriding Consideration ([ J was [ XJ was not) adopted for this project.
Findings ([XJ were [ ] were not) made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
This is to certity that the Negative Declaration with comments, responses, and record of project approval is
available to the General Public at the City of Temecula, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California, 92590.
Signature:
Db~bi~bTke, Director of Planning
Date received for fili~a the County Clerk and Recorders Office:
Date:
R:~D P~002~02-0707 Zevo Industrial Condo s~-~OTICE OF DETERMINATION.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
Background
1. Name of Proponent:
2. Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
NBS Lowry
27403 Ynez Road, Suite 209
Temecula, CA 92390
{714) 676-6225
August 21, 1991
4. Agency Requiring
Assessment:
5. Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
6. Location of Proposal:
Environmental Imoacts
CITY OF TEMECULA
Parcel Map Nos. 24085 and 24086
Southwesterly of Diaz Road bounded
by the future extension of Winchester
Road on the northwesterlv and
southwesterlv sides of the site.
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.)
Earth.
a.
Will the proposal result in:
Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures7
Disruptions,' displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
dj
The destruction, covering or modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudslides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
Air. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air
quality?
The creation of objectionable
odors?
Co
Alteration of air movement,
moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, whether locally
or regionally?
Water. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or
fresh waters?
Substantial changes in absorption
rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFR~T~24085 2
eo
Plant
a.
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
Discharge into surface waters, or
in any alteration of surface water
quality, including, but not limited
to, temperature, dissolved oxygen
or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow or ground waters?
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
Substantial reduction in the amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as flood-
ing 0r tidal waves?
Life. Will the proposal result in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any native species of
plants (including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare, or endangered species
of plants?
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFF1%°~24085 3
Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop?
Animal Life. Will the proposal result
in:
Yes Maybe No
X
10.
Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or insects)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
Light' and Glare. Will the proposal
produce substantial new light or glare?
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal
involve:
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~24085 4
11,
A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances (including,
but not limited to, oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
Population, Will the proposal alter
the location, distribution, density, or
growth rate of the human population of
an area?
12.' Housing. Will the proposal affect
existing housing or create a demand for
additional housing?
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the
proposal result in:
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
eo
fo
Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking?
Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic?
Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFR~T~24085 5
14.
Public Services. Will the proposal have
substantial effect upon, or result in a
need for new or altered governmental
services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
Parks or other recreational
facilities7
eo
Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
f. Other governmental services:
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
16.
ao
Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy?
Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFF~°T~24085
bo
Communications systems?
Water?
Sewer or septic tanks7
Storm water drainage?
Solid waste and disposal?
6
X
17.
18.
19.
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)?
Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities?
20. Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPT~24085 7
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into
the future.)
Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumu-
latively considerable? (A project's
impact on two or more separate
resources may be relatively small,
but where the effect of the total of
those impacts on the environment
is significant.)
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substan-
tial ad. verse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRP-~24085 8
Ill Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
1 .a,b,c.
Yes. Parcel Map No. 24085 will involve 363,000 cubic yards of cut arid
fill, and Parcel Map No. 24086 will involve 349,000 cubic yards of cut
and fill. Some cut will penetrate into the Pauba Formation which
consists of sandstone and siltstone. Mitigation of liquefaction potential
on the site may involve removal and recompaction of soil on the site. All
cut and fill slopes will not exceed a 2:1 grade. Cut slopes on the site of
Parcel Map No. 24085 will be up to 25 feet in height and fill slopes will
be approximately 10 feet high. Cut and fill slopes on the site of Parcel
Map No. 24086 will be less than 30 feet in height. The Slope Stability
Report determined that the proposed 2:1 cut slopes will be grossly stable
to a maximum height of 29 feet, and surficial erosion potential should be
mitigated by directing drainage away from the slope faces and installing
landscape planting on the slopes. The recommendations of the Slope
Stability Report shall be included in the conditions of approval for the
subject parcel maps.
No. There are no unique geologic or physical features on the site.
Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the
construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are replanted.
The wind erosion impact is considered high and significant but will be
mitigated through minimal grading, retention of natural vegetation
whenever feasible, and use of watering trucks and hydroseeding
disturbed areas after grading. After construction of the project, water
run-off is likely to increase due to the addition of impermeable surfaces.
Appropriate drainage control devices will have to be approved through
the Engineering Department and will have to be designed in accordance
with Temecula's standards and the conditions of approval.
No. Any dra!nage into the Murrieta Creek channel will be via drainage
improvements as approved by the City Engineer and will not result in
erosion or siltation.
1
Yes. Portions of the site are susceptible to liquefaction and subsidence,
and the site is traversed by.a potentially active fault. The Geology
Report recommends that the effects of liquefaction, including loss of
bearing capacity, surface subsidence and lateral spreading should be re-
evaluated for each individual structure when grading and building plans
become available. In accordance with the requirements of state law, a
restricted use zone based on the geology report is shown on the map.
The restricted use zone represents a setback from the earthquake fault
S~STAFFRPT~24085 9
2.a,b,c.
3.5.
3.f,g.
on the site, and no structures for human occupancy will be permitted
within the restricted use zone. Hazards to buildings outside of the
restricted use zone due to groundshaking associated with the fault are
addressed by the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. The
geologic hazard mitigations recommended in the Geology Report and the
County Geologists letter shall be conditions of approval.
No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any impacts to air quality
or the climate. Subsequent development proposals will be assessed for
potential impacts to air quality and mitigation measures will be required
if necessary.
No. The portion of the property necessary for the future construction of
Murrieta Creek flood control facilities is indicated on the tentative parcel
map as a County Channel .Easement. There will be no change in the
course or direction of water in Murrieta Creek.
Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in changes in the amount of
surface runoff. The improvement of the site will provide for adequate
drainage facilities as approved by the City Engineer.
No. The project will result in minor, localized redirection of flood waters
to the extent necessary to elevate the site above the 100 year flood
plain elevation, but the overall direction and flow of flood waters will not
be changed.
Maybe. Grading and future development of the site may increase the
amount of surface runoff flowing into the Murrieta Creek channel. This
is not considered a significant impact and is consistent with the
provisions of the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan and Assessment
District 155.
Yes. Grading may result in an increase in turbidity in local surface water.
This impact is temporary and is not considered significant.
No. Recompaction of soil to mitigate the potential for liquefaction is not
expected to result in a significant impact on the direction or rate of flow
of ground waters.
No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any impact on public
water supplies.
S~STAFFRP'~24085 1 0
4.a,b.
5.a,b.
9.a,b.
No. Prior to recordation of the proposed parcel map, the applicant shall
obtain a Letter of Map Revision from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency indicating that grading of the site or other
improvements are adequate to ensure that the site will be above the 1 00
year flood plain elevation.
No. A botanical survey of the site found no sensitive plant species on
the site. Grazing and the introduction of non-native grasses have
previously disturbed the natural native flora on the site.
Maybe. Landscaping of the site may introduce some non-native species.
This is not considered a significant impact.
No. The site is not currently used as crop land.
No. A biology survey of the site did not reveal the presence or any
indications of any species classified as rare or endangered.
Yes. The project will involve a loss of grass land and chaparral which
provides foraging habitat for birds, mammals, and reptiles. In regional
terms, the loss of foraging habitat is an incrementally adverse but non-
significant impact. The biology report recommends the use of native
California shrubs and trees to revegetate graded and open areas in order
to enhance reoccupation of the bird community. Use of native plant life
shall be a condition of approval.
Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in increased noise levels during
grading. This impact will be temporary and is not considered significant
because the site is not near any noise sensitive land uses.
No. Future development will be reviewed for potential noise impacts,
and land uses which generate severe noise impacts will be prohibited or
required to provide adequate noise mitigation.
No. The proposed Parcel Map will not cause new light or glare, and
subsequent development of the site will be subject to standard
conditions prohibiting lighting from impacting adjacent properties and
requiring Iow-glare sodium vapor lights.
No. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zone and the land
use designation in which the property is located.
No. The project will not involve a substantial increase in the rate of
consumption of natural or non-renewable resources.
S\STAFFRPT~24085 I I
10.a,b.
11,12.
13.a.
13.b.
13.c,e.
13.d.
No. The proposed parcel map will not involve the use of hazardous
materials or interference with emergency response or evacuation plans.
No. The proposal is not likely to alter the distribution or growth rate of
the population or create a demand for new housing. Future development
of the site wil! help address the imbalance of local jobs in relation to
existing and approved housing.
Yes. Future development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24085 is
expected to generate 5,340 vehicle trip ends per day. 5,150 trip ends
per day are expected as a result of development of the site of Parcel
Map No. 24086. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the
project determined that intersections and roadways in the vicinity will
continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended
improvements are implemented. The following recommended traffic
impact mitigations are incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for
Parcel Map No. 24085. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by
a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public
Works and shall be included in the street imporvements plans. Plans for
traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of
Avenida de Ventas at Diaz Road and Avenida de Ventas at Winchester
Road, and shall be included in the street improvemnt plans with the
second plan check submittal. The developer shall execute a
Reimbursement Agreement for the design and construction of traffic
signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz Road,
Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at
Enterprise Circle East. The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with
the City of Temecula to contribute a pro-rata share to the construction
of the extension of Diaz Road to Washington Street/Rancon Center
Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland overcrossing, Winchester Road
restriping to six lanes, and the western bypass corridor as determined by
a focused traffic analysis approved by the Deaprtment of Public Works.
No. Future development of the site will be required to provide adequate
off-street parking as appropriate for the particular land use proposed.
No. The project will have no impact upon existing transportation
systems or upon water, rail, or air traffic.
No. The proposed parcel maps will not alter present patterns of
circulation.
S~STAI~FRPT~24085 I 2
13.f.
14.a~f.
15.a,b.
16.a-d,f.
16.e.
17.a,b.
18.
19.
20.alb,c.
No. The streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate
at acceptable levels of service if recommended street improvements are
implemented. The street improvements will be conditions of approval for
the proposed parcel map.
No. The project will not result in a need for new public services. Future
development will generate an increase in the need for public services in
the areas of fire and police protection and road maintenance. Payment
of the required traffic signal mitigation fee, the facility fee, and property
taxes will fund the additional public services.
No. The project will not result in a substantial use or increase in demand
for fuel or other energy sources.
No. Future development of the site will require only hook up to or
service by existing utility systems and will not result in a need for new
or substantially altered utility systems.
Yes. The proposed Parcels Maps will involve the construction of the
Murrieta Creek Channel through the site. The construction of channel
improvements will be in compliance with the recommendations of the
County Flood Control District and will be provided by the developer or by
the developer's participation in an assessment district.
No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any potential health
hazards. Future development will be assessed for potential health
hazards, and mitigations, if needed, shall be required.
No. The proposal will not result in the obstruction of any scenic views.
Future development will be reviewed in order to prevent the construction
of aesthetically offensive structures or site layouts.
No. The site is not currently used for recreational purposes.
Maybe. The site of Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086 contain a recorded
archaeological site (CA~RIV-237) which is beleived to encompass
approximately 70,000 square meters, part of which is outside of the
subject property. During an archaeological surface survey of the site
conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of basalt and quartz debitage,
fragmented manos and metates, fire-affected rocks, pestles,
hammerstores, and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed. The
recommendations of the Archaeological Assessment are to conduct a
surface collection of the. site and to excavate a sufficient number of one
cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and
S\STAFFR~T~24085 I 3
significance of the site. The resulting information shall be used to
determine whether the site is a unique resource for the area and whether
measures to preserve the site or salvage some percentage of the cultural
resources should be implemented. The Archaeological Assessment
includes the recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted for any
future grading activities. These recommendations shall be incorporated
as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Maps 24805 and 24806. In
addition, a Native American representative shall be present during
archaeological excavation and also during grading.
20.d.
No. The site is not used for any religious or sacred purposes.
21 .a.
No. Although the project will result in a reduction of foraging habitat,
this impact is not considered regionally significant. The inclusion of
native trees and shrubs in the landscaping will provide adequate
mitigations for potential biological impacts due to reduction of foraging
habitat.
21 .b,c.
No. The long term and cumulative traffic impacts of the project will be
adequately mitigated by the street improvements recommended by the
traffic study which are conditions of approval fo~ the proposed parcel
map. Streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at
acceptable levels of service.
21 .d.
No. The proposed parcel map will not create any health hazards,
Environmental review of future development of the site will address any
potential health hazards and mitigations, if necessary, will be required.
S~STAFFRPT~24085 1 4
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signi-
ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi-
ficant effect on this case because the mitigation measures
described on attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval
have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
X
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
Auqust 12, 1991
Date
For CITY OF TEMECULA
S~STAFFRPT~24085 1 5
$ ITE-~
../
ICpASE NO.
.C. DATE
{ C,TV o~ T===CU'^ ).
II
ZONE MAP
CASE NO.
C.C. DATE
!!
IIIL!
!iiii II,
m
A'I-I'ACHMENT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
R:~D P~.002\02~707 Zero Industrial Condo's~Staff Repofl.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
Project Site
CASE NO. - PA02-0707/PA03-0136
EXHIBIT - A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - July 16, 2003
VICINITY MAP
R:'~D P~002~2-0707 Zero Industrial Condo's\Staff Report.doc
42
CITY OFTEMECULA
O0000C
EXHIBIT B- GENERAL PLAN MAP
DESIGNATION ~BP)BusinessPark
EXHIBIT C - ZONING
DESIGNATION -~ Industrial
CASE NO. - PA02-0707/PA03-0136
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - July 16, 2003
R:~D P~2002~02-0707 Zevo Industrial Condo's\Staff Report,doc
43
CITY OF TEMECULA
./
SITE PLAN
CASE NO. - PA02-0707/PA03-0136
EXHIBIT- D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -July 16, 2003
SITE PLAN
R:',D P~2002~02-0707 Zevo Industrial Condo's\Staff ReporLdoc
44
CITY OF TEMECULA
TENTATIVE. TRACT MAP NO. 31259
CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT
CASE NO. - PA02-0707/PA03-0136
EXHIBIT- E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - July 16, 2003
R:~D F%?.002\02-0707 Zevo Industrial Condo's~Staff Report,doc
45
CITY OF TEMECULA
I
~-~,, ~ ~- . ~ '-~'~7,, ,I~I~ '~--~
COLOR SCHEDULE
CASE NO. - PA02-0707/PA03-0136
EXHIBIT -F
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - July 16, 2003
BUILDING ELEVATIONS
R:~3 P~002\02-0707 Zevo Industrial Condo's\Staff Reporl.doc
46
CITY OF TEMECULA
BUILDING A FLOOR PLAN <~:--~
CASE NO. - PA02-0707/PA03-0136
EXHIBIT - G
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -July 16, 2003
FLOOR PLAN
R:~D P~002~02-0707 Zevo Ir~dustriat Condo's\Staff Report.doc
47
CITY OFTEMECULA
BUILDING B FLOOR PLAN
SCALE: 1116'=1'-0"
CASE NO. - PA02-0707/PA03-0136
EXHIBIT - H
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - July 16, 2003
FLOOR PLAN B
R:'~D P~2002\02-0707 Zevo Industrial Condo's\Staff Report,doc
4g
CITY OF TEMECULA
PR~Y PLANTING PLAN
CASE NO. - PA02-0707/PA03-0136
EXHIBIT - I
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - July 16, 2003
LANDSCAPE
R:~D P~2002~02-0707 Zevo Industrial Condo*s~Staff Report.doc
49
PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
HARVESTON STREET NAME SIGN DESIGN
CITY OF TEMECULA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission
Matthew Harris, Associate Planner
July 16, 2003
Harveston Street Name Sign Design
At the Commission's July 2, 2003 meeting, concern was expressed regarding the design of the
existing street name signs within the Harveston Specific Plan area. According to Matthew
Fagan, planning consultant for the Harveston development, the existing street signs are only
temporary and have been installed for construction traffic and emergency purposes. A
permanent street name sign design was recently submitted to the Public Works Department by
Lennar Communities for review and approval (see Attachment No. 1).
The Harveston Specific Plan does not address the issue of street name sign design within the
development. The Public Works Department believes that street name signs within Harveston
should be consistent with the City's street name sign standard (see Attachment No. 2) which
has been applied to all subdivisions within the City with the exception of Meadowview and
Santiago Estates.
The Public Works Department feels the letter heights on the signs proposed by Lennar
Communities are too small and will be hard to read by motorists. Moreover, the Department
feels the signs should be green instead of blue and should denote the City seal. The seal
serves to verify to motorists that they are indeed located within the Temecula City limits.
Ron Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works, has indicated that he will postpone taking final
action on Lennar's street name sign proposal until the Commission has had a chance to provide
input on the issue.
Attachments:
Street name sign design proposed by Lennar Communities
Adopted City street name sign design standard
R:\S P~Harveston SP~Street Sign Design.doc
1
June 27, 2003
CONSULTING
JUN 2 7
CITY OF TE~CULA
Mr. Ron Parks
City of Temecula
Public Works Department
43200 Business Park Dr.
Temecula, CA 92589
Subject: Proposed Street Sign for Harveston Community
Dear Mr. Parks,
Enclosed is a color print of the proposed street sign exhibit for the Harveston
Masterplan Community that I had previously sent. Please note that the sign color is blue
instead of the city's green signs. As previously mentioned, Lennar Communities is
requesting that this sign be used in place of the city's standard. These signs will be
purchased by Lennar Communities initially and will be maintained if damaged as part of
the HOA fees for the Harveston community. If you have any questions, please feel free
to call me at (909) 676-8042.
Sincerely,
Michael Boeck
RBF Consulting
PLANNING B DESIGN · CDNSTRUCTIDN
27555 Ynez Road, Suite 400, Temecula, CA 925914679 .. 909.6768042 · Fax 909.676.7240
Offices located throughout California, Arizona & Nevada · www. RBEcorn
24'-30'-35'-4~' -
A-~ - ~_/~. II,~'~,I _
B, USINESS PARK
/42300
~ 4 V~ C STltl.[ ~U]CK
~- C11~ B' l'r~KctJI. A ~ ~' c STfL[
4 A SIGN SHALL lie ALUHINUN EXTRUDED 0.090' THK VITH A
0.;~50' SUPPORT CHANNEL ALONG THE TOP & ~InTTOH EDGE.
ALI. BLADES ARE 6-3/4' TALL 9Y ;~4',30',36',4;? LONG OR
EQUIVALENT. (SEE SHEET 2~ DETAIL)
9 CENTER CROSS SADDLE SHALL lie ONE PIECE CAST
II ANODIZED ALUH[NUH oR EQUIVALENT. (SEE SHEET ~ DETAIL)
C ONE PIECE ~'($1n~) CAST ANODIZED ALUHINUH POST
CAP VITH FOUR 3/8'(9.$nn) STAINLESS STEEL ALLEN
HEAD SET SCREVS, DR EQUIVALENT. (SEE SHEET P DETAIL)
~"~-- c
/D O ~'(51~n) SO. STEEL POST 8'(~.4~) - 1~'(3,1n) LONG
INSTALLED VITH A DRIVEN ~ 1/~'(64~) SQ, STEEL
IiRFAKA~/AY IiASE 3~(0.9) LONG. INSTALLED PER CITY
STANDARD ND, 403. Z~
ASSEHBLY
DESIGN, EACH FDUR-~/AY UNIT SHALL CONSIST DF T~/D DOUBLE FACE SIGNS ~/ITH STREET
NAMES HDUNTED AT RIGHT ANGLES.
BRACKET A$$EHDLY, THE POST CAP nRNAHENT SHALL BE MADE TO HDUNT ON 2'(51~r~) SQ,
GALVANIZED POST. PI]ST CAP SHALL DE SECURED Tn THE PIPE ~/ITH THREE
5/16'(7.Br~r~) x 3/B'(g.5r~r~) STAINLESS STEEL ALLEN HEAD SET SCR£~/S.
HATERIAL~. SIGN SHALL BE GREEN ANODIZED ALUMINUH EXTRUSION OF 6063T.4 ALLOY
MATERIAL, ALL ANODIZING SHALL CONFORH ~/ITH ALUMILITE SPECIFICATInN ND. ~15-Rt.
FINISH, SIGN FACE SHALL DE FHVA TYPE II REFLECTIVE SHEETING, THE TRANSPARENT
SCREEN PROCESS COLOR SHALL DE AS RECDHHENDED DY THE REFLECTIVE SHEETING
MANUFACTURER, APPLICATION OF THE REFLECTIVE SHEETING TO THE SIGN SHALL DF
BY HETHODS AS APPROVED BY THE REFLECTIVE SHEETING MANUFACTURER,
LETTERIHG~ STREET NAMES SHALL BE 4-1/2'(114r~) HIGH. EACH NAME SHALL BE INDIVIDUALLY
LAID OUT TD FIT EITHER THE ~4'(0,6~M) Tn 4~'(1067r~rO SPACE. THE LETTERS SHALL I~E DF
THE ROUNDED TYPE STYLE CnNFORHING ~/ITH THE STANDARD ALPHADET FOR HIGH~/AY SIGNS
DESIGNED DY THE U,S, PUBLIC RI]ADS ADMINISTRATION. LETTERS SHALL BE FHVA TYPE II
REFLECTIVE SHEETING.
REVISIONS APPROVED CITY OF TEMEC~'I~.
REQUIREMENTS
RONALD J. PARKS
DEPUTY DIRECTOR, PUBLIC WORKS
~.c.;. NO. ~744 EXP. 9~OS STANDARD NO. 405 (1 of 2)
=c~dAd/st~d~rds/4OO'sSiWs
.
CENTERED CROSS SADDLE
(SUPR-LOK 990x or EQUIVALENT)
I
POST CAP
(SUPR-LOK 97 Sq. or EQUIVALENT)
REVISIONS APPROVED C~ O~
DATE IN m OA~~ ST RE ET NAME SIGN
REQUIREMENTS'
R~D J. P~KS
DEP~ DIRE~OR, PUB~ WO~S
R.C.E, NO. 197~ ~P. ~ STANDARD NO, 405 (2 of 2)
acod/td/stand~rds/4OO's5OO's