HomeMy WebLinkAbout101806 PC Agenda
AI
In 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 (951) 694-6444.
Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements
to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II]
AGENDA
TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
October 18, 2006 - 6:00 P.M.
********
Next in Order:
Resolution No. 06-59
CALL TO ORDER
Flag Salute:
Commissioner Guerriero
RollCall:
Carey, Chiniaeff, Guerriero, Harter, and Telesio
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 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 not 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.
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the Minutes of September 20, 2006
R:IPLANCOMMlAgendasl2006\ 1 Q-18.Q6.doc
COMMISSION BUSINESS
2 Director's Hearino Case Uodate
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Receive and File Director's Hearing Update for September
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.
Any person dissatisfied with any decision of the Planning Commission may file an
appeal of the Commission's decision. Said appeal must be filed within 15 calendar days
after service of written notice of the decision, must be filed on the appropriate Planning
Department application and must be accompanied by the appropriate flllng fee.
i
New Items
3 Plan nino Aoo[ication No PA06-0213. a Develooment Plan and Conditional Use Permit.
submitted bv Clearwater Waterqark Develooment. for the construction of a 13,000 SQuare
foot water Dark on aooroximatelv 15 acres consistina of oools. slides. and other tvqes of
water rides. other buildinas and an associated !;larkina lot. located at the northwest
intersection of Ynez Road and County Center Drive. Christine Damko. Associate Planner.
COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS
PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: Wednesday, November 1, 2006, 6:00 p.m., Council Chambers, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
R:\PLANCOMMlAgendasI2OO6I1 Q-18-06.doc
2
ITEM #1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 20, 2006
CALL TO ORDER
The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:00 p.m., on
Wednesday, September 20,2006, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
Chairman Guerriero thanked Ms. Craig for the prelude music.
ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Carey led the audience in the Flag salute.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Commissioners: Carey, Telesio, Harter, Chiniaeff, and Chairman Guerriero.
Absent:
None.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No public comments.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the Minutes of September 6, 2006.
2 Director's Hearina Case Uodate
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the Director's Hearing Case Update for August.
MOTION: Commissioner Chiniaeff moved to approve the Consent Calendar. Commissioner
Harter seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous aDDroval.
R:\MinutesPC\092006
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
New Items
3 Plan nino Aoolication No. PA06-0258. a orooosed Municioal Code Amendment to amend the
tvoe of aptivities currentlv allowed for weekend promotional events at automobile and truck
dealershios and to eliminate the sunset clause of the Master Temoorarv Use Permit orocess
Associate Planner West provided a PowerPoint Presentation, highlighting on the following:
. Background
. Auto Dealership Proposal.
In response to Commissioner Chiniaeff, Associate Planner West stated that the purpose of the
Sunset term was to go for one year to determine the effectiveness of the program, and that
since the results have been favorable staff would recommend eliminating the Sunset provision.
The Planning Commission expressed concern with the removal of the Sunset provision, and
noted that due to the applicant's request for increased canopies, banners, jolly jumps, and the
addition of wind flags, the Planning Commission would recommend keeping the Sunset
provision for a couple of years in order to evaluate the results of the new proposed requests.
In response to the Planning Commission, Director of Planning Ubnoske noted that she will
apprise the City Council of the Commission's desire.
At this time, the public hearing was opened.
Mr. Isaac Lizarrga, applicant, spoke in favor of proposed Amendment to the Development Code,
advising that the wind flags would not be more than four per street frontage and will not exceed
37.5 square feet with a maximum height of 15-feet. Mr. Lizarrga noted that the proposed
changes to weekend promotional events would allow dealerships to be more competitive.
At this time, the public hearing was closed.
MOTION: Commissioner Telesio moved to approve staff recommendation subject to the City
Council considering keeping the Sunset provision for a period of three-years. Commissioner
Chiniaeff seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous aooroval.
PC RESOLUTION NO. 06-58
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 CHAPTER 17.04 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW MINOR WEEKEND
PROMOTIONAL EVENTS FOR AUTOMOBILE AND TRUCK
DEALERSHIPS" (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA06-0258)
R:\MinutesPC\092006
2
COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS
Commissioner Carey stated that due to construction at the corner of Ynez and Overland Road
and possible danger to the public, temporary fencing should be installed.
In regard to parking at BJ's restaurant on the corner of Ynez and Overland Road, Director of
Planning Ubnoske noted that more parking spaces will be opened up within the next few weeks.
Director of Planning Ubnoske noted that the pillar at Hooter's Restaurant will be repainted an
off-white color.
For the Planning Commission, Senior Planner Papp stated that he will speak with the City
Attorney regarding amending the cell tower ordinance process to go have it go through planning
review.
Director of Planning Ubnoske noted that she will discuss the right-turn lane, westbound on
Overland Road with the Public Works Department.
PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Ms. U~noske stated that the Junior Planner position will take place on Monday, September 11,
2006.
Chairman Guerriero and Commissioner Chiniaeff volunteered to work on a subcommittee
regarding the mall expansion.
ADJOURNMENT
At 6:35 p.m., Chairman Guerriero formally adjourned to October 18. 2006. at 6:00 p.m., in the
City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula.
Ron Guerriero
Chairman
Debbie Ubnoske
Director of Planning
R:\MinutesPC\092006
3
ITEM #2
CITY OF TEMECULA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
. MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning
DATE: October 18, 2006
SUBJECT: Director's Hearing Case Update
Planning Director's Agenda items for September 2006.
September 14, 2006 PA06-0104 A Minor Conditional Use Permit to Gennaro Derviso
upgrade the current Alcohol for Zeda, LLC
Beverage Control (ABC) license
from a Type 41 (On Sale Beer and
Wine license) to a Type 47 (On
Sale General license), which
authorizes the sale of beer, wine
and distilled spirits for
consumption on the licensed
premises located at 27644 Ynez
Road
APPROVED
Attachment:
1. Action Agenda - Blue Page 2
.
R:\DIRHEARIMEM0\2006\IO-18-2006.doc2
r
ATTACHMENT NO.1
ACTION AGENDA
ACTION AGENDA
TEMECULA PLANNING DIRECTOR'S HEARING
REGULAR MEETING
September 14, 2006 1 :30 p.m.
TEMECULA CITY HALL MAIN CONFERENCE ROOM
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
CALL TO ORDER: Stuart Fisk, Senior 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 not 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 vour name and address.
Item No.1
Project Information
Project Number:
Project Type:
Project Title:
Applicant:
Project Description:
Location:
Environmental Action:
Project Planner:
ACTION:
.
1 :30 p.m.
PA06-0104
Minor Conditional Use Permit
Mazzaro's Italian Dining
Gennaro Derviso for Zeda, LLC
A Minor Conditional Use Permit to upgrade the current Alcohol
Beverage Control (ABC) license from a Type 41 (On Sale Beer and
Wine license) to a Type 47 (On Sale General license), which
authorizes the sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits for consumption
on the licensed premises
27644 Ynez Road
Exempt (Section 15301 - Existing Facilities)
Katie Le Comte
APPROVED
R:\DIRHEAR\Agendas\2006I09-I~ Action Agenda.doc
ITEM #3
DATE OF MEETING:
PREPARED BY:
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
RECOMMENDATION:
CEQA:
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
(
October 18, 2006
Christine Damko
TITLE: Associate Planner
Planning Application No. PA06-0213, a Development Plan and
Conditional Use Permit to construct a 13,000 square foot water
park located on 15.4 acres at the northwest comer of Ynez Road
and County Center Drive consisting of pools, slides, and other
types of water rides, concession stands, gift shop, party room,
changing room with lockers, restrooms, picnic areas, service yard,
and a 433 space parking lot.
D Approve with Conditions
D Deny
D Continue for Redesign
D Continue to:
C81 Recommend Approval with Conditions
D Recommend Denial
D Categorically Exempt
(Section)
(Class)
D Notice of Determination
(Section)
D Negative Declaration
C81 Mitigated Negative Declaration with Monitoring Plan
DEIR
G:\Planning\2006IPA06-0213 Temecula Wale' Park CUP\P1anninglPC Staff Report.doc
1
PROJECT DATA SUMMARY
Name of Applicant: Joshua Hunter. Clearwater Waterpark Development
Date of Completion: Julv 21. 2006
Mandatory Action Deadline Date: October 18. 2006
General Plan Designation: Service Commercial
Zoning Designation: Service Commercial
Site/Surrounding Land Use:
Service Commercial: Existing industrial and office
buildinQs
Site:
Vacant
North:
South:
East:
West:
ExistinQ industrial and office buildinQs
ExistinQ industrial and office buildinQs
ExistinQ industrial and office buildinQs
Interstate 15 freewav
Lot Area:
15.4 acres (670.824 square feet)
Total Floor Area/Ratio:
4.6% proposedl20% allowed
Landscape Area/Coverage:
30% proposedl20% reQuired
Parking RequiredlProvided:
433 spaces proposedl393 spaces reauired
BACKGROUND SUMMARY
. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all concerns have been addressed, and the
applicant concurs with the recommended Conditions of Approval.
DESCRIPTION
The water park will operate approximately four months of the calendar year, seven days a
week, from Memorial Day to Labor Day, 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. The park will also be open a
couple of weekends before Memorial Day and after Labor Day, dependiO{! on the weather.
The water park will retain a full time staff of 15 employees and 300 seasonal employees, and
will concentrate on recruiting mainly younger employees that live in the area. Access to the
site will be from Ynez Road, towards the eastern property line. The park will propose three
lanes on site accessing to the park including a bus lane. The park will accommodate .433
vehicles with an additional nine handicapped parking spaces, which is in compliance with the
City's parking standards. The water park will charge a nominal parking fee upon entering the
site. Parking attendants will be located onsite to accept payment and direct park attendees
entering and leaving the site at all times. It is anticipated that that average daily attendance
will be 2,000 people. Based on previous water park experience, the applicant estimates that
50% of the attendance (approximately 185 vehicles) will arrive at the park between the hours
G:IPlanningl2006IPA06-Q213 Temecula Water Park CUPlPlanninglPC Staff Report.doc
2
of 9:30 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. Eighty-five percent of the daily attendance (approximately 130
cars) will arrive before 3:30 p.m. The remaining 15% (approximately 55 vehicles) will arrive
between 3:30 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. According to the Traffic Analysis, mostly all trips generated
by the operation of the water park will not be during peak hours, which are betw~en 11 :30 a.m.
and 1 :30 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.
ANALYSIS
Development Plan
Site Desian
The site is zoned Service Commercial and "Sports and Recreational Facilities" are permitted
with a Conditional Use Permit. The development of the proposed water park is consistent with
the City's General Plan, Development Code, and Design Guidelines. All buildings, mechanical
enclosures, and rides meet the 50 foot maximum height requirement and main building
setbacks. The front yard building setback (facing Ynez Road) will vary from 27 feet to more
than 80 feet. The water park ride portion of the site will be enclosed by a seven foot tall
perimeter wall with portions being tubular steel. The wall will include setback variations in
addition to variation in materials. The north and east sides (facing Ynez Road) will include
black tubular steel material and a slump block wall with river rock veneer pilasters. The south
side of the properly (facing Gold's Gym) will be enclosed strictly by a slump block wall, while
the west side of the properly (facing 1-15) will be enclosed by a tubular steel fence. In addition
to the tubular steel fence, the project will propose a 15-foot high keystone retaining wall with
plantablecells along the 1-15 freeway. Plantings will also be planted at the base of the
retaining wall to further soften the wall elevation.
The project proposes two slide rides (Drop Slides and Boomerango/Superbowl), Matt Racer,
Wave Pool, Lazy River, Water Spray Park, Tots Play Area, and a smaller slide ride
(Rainfortress). There are two areas (one towards the east side and the other towards the
west) designated as future ride attractions that will be developed at a later date. All rides will
be conditioned to not exceed the maximum building height of 50 feet. In association to the
water and rides, the site will provide food service buildings and vending carts along with shade
structures, picnic areas, lockers, changing rooms, and two separate areas for restrooms.
Access/Parkina.
Ingress/egress to the site will be from Ynez Road. Ingress will consist of three separate onsite
lanes, in addition to a bus lane. Egress will be provided by a separate driveway location to the
north of the entry point, and consist of a right tum lane onto Ynez Road. The Department of
Public Works and Fire Department have reviewed the project and have determined that there
is adequate onsite circulation for vehicles and emergency access. Parking attendants will
greet the vehicles entering the site, accept the parking fee, and direct the vehicles to the
appropriate parking locations.
G:IPlanningl2006IPA06-Q213 Temecula Water ParK CUPlPlanninglPC Staff Report.doc
3
Parking is based on the City's Dev.elopment Code requirements for a commercial recreation
pool of one space per 1,000 square feet of park area plus one space per 300 square feet of
related administration building area. This would equate to 393 required parking spaces. The
project proposes 433 parking spaces. Parking is located towards the north property line,
adjacent to the neighboring parking lot.
Landscaoinc.
The project meets the 20% minimum landscape requirement for proposed development in the
Service Commercial Zone. Landscaping is used for aesthetic purposes by providing specimen
trees at the main entries such as Crape Myrtles, Purple-leaf Plums, and Southern Live Oaks.
Pedestrian crossings are enhanced by using raised planters, specimen trees, and enhanced
interlocking pavers.
Landscaping is also used to help screen the project. Berming is used at a minimum of three
feet along Ynez Road to screen the entry drive to the park, in addition to the 20 foot wide
landscape setback that is also proposed along Ynez Road. Trees such as California
Sycamore, Lemon Bottlebrush, Afghan Pine, Yew Pine, and Silver Dollar Gum are planted
along the perimeter of the project in addition to shrubs and vines that are proposed to be
planted adjacent to and on all walVfences.
Architecture
The water park is a unique facility targeted for amusement and entertainment. The project
proposes a light hearted "Ranch/Western" architectural theme and is consistent with City-Wide
Design Guidelines. The Design Guidelines state that "main entries accessible to the public
should be pronounced and easily recognizable." The water park proposes a 43 foot tall steel
frame shade structure with open web steel trusses to enhance the main entry to the park.
Associated buildings (such as the administrative offices, party barn, etc.) consist of vertical
wood and "hardie-plank" siding. Details such as a clock element, porch overhangs, decorative
vents, and variation of window placement and size create architectural interest. The Design
Guidelines state "variation in roof form is encouraged to create interest, and lessen the mass of
the building." The water park achieves this goal by creating various roof heights and pitches.
Dormers are also added to create additional interest. The various roofs are constructed of
standing seam metal, corrugated galvanized sheet metal, and asphalt shingle roofing. Some
portions of the buildings (including roofs) and the'slides will be painted in colors of red, yellow,
blue, and green to generate excitement and energy.
Conditional Use Permit
According to Section 17.10.020 of the Development Code, Commercial Recreational Uses are
permitted in the Service Commercial Zone with an approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP).
Staff has reviewed the application and determined that the findings for approval can be made.
The proposed water park is consistent with the surrounding uses and structures and will not
adversely impact the existing buildings and uses because recreational uses already exist in the
area. Immediately adjacent to the southern property line is Gold's Gym, a recreational workout
facility open to the public. Less than one mile north of the project site is the Harveston Sports
park, a public recreational facility which includes soccer fields and baseball fields.
Approximately four miles east of the project site is the Harveston Community Park, a
recreational lake with associated trails for City residents. In addition, the water park will only
G:\Planningl2006IPA06-o213 Temecula Water Park CUPlPlanningIPC Staff Reportdoc
4
be open approximately four months of the calendar year, which will greatly reduce the impact
to businesses immediately adjacent to the project. The use is also adequate in size and shape
to accommodate the facility. The project proposes a 13,000 square foot water park on 15
acres and is considered a relatively small project compared to existing water parks in
California. The water park will meet all Development Code regulations in regards to floor area
ratio, lot coverage, setbacks, height regulations, and parking regulations. Over 30% of the site
will be landscaped, which exceeds the required 20%.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Staff has reviewed the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) and based on an Initial Study, determined the project will not have a significant impact
on the environment if mitigation measures are incorporated into the project.
Traffic
A Traffic Study was conducted by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., dated September 2006.
Under existing conditions, all intersections evaluated in the Traffic Study are functioning at
LOS D or better during existing peak hour conditions except for the following intersections:
Winchester Road at 1-15 NB Ramp (weekday evening peak hour), Winchester Road at Ynez
Road (weekday evening at peak hour), Winchester Road at Promenade Mall East (weekday
evening peak hour), Winchester Road at Margarita Road (weekday evening peak hour). With
the addition of the project to the existing conditions, all intersections would continue to operate
at LOS D or better except for those listed above that were already operating below acceptable
levels per the City standards. The intersection of Ynez Road and County Center Drive
warrants signalization under current conditions and is scheduled for signalization in the near
future. City staff has directed that an annual ambient growth rate of 2% per year, be applied to
existing (2006) peak hour traffic volumes.
Assuming the project is constructed and operational in 2007, all intersections would function at
LOS D or better during peak hours with the exception of the intersections forecasted to operate
at an unacceptable LOS without the project, and will continue to do so with the addition of
project traffic. The project will contribute to intersections already operating at a deficient LOS,
but will not cause any intersection to worsen to an unacceptable LOS, or to fall to a lower LOS.
The over-capacity conditions along Winchester Road will be improved with the completion of
the French Valley Parkway Interchange, which will result in a new interchange with the 1-15
Freeway one mile to the north. The construction of the French Valley Parkway Interchange
project will result in substantial improvement of peak hour intersection traffic along Winchester
to an acceptable LOS. The Winchester northbound ramp intersection and the
WinchesterlYnez. intersection will continue to operate at a LOS "P during the evening peak
hour; the total average daily vehicle delay will be reduced by as much as 30-90 seconds per
vehicle. With the French Valley Parkway Interchange in place, some traffic that currently uses
the Winchester Road interchange will shift to the north, providing some relief. Likewise, it is
expected that the portion of the Temecula Water Park traffic that was forecasted to approach
the site from the north will also shift from the Winchester Interchange to the French Valley
Parkway Interchange, which would further reduce any project contribution to congestion on
Winchester Road. .
G:lPlanningI2OO6\PA06-Q213 Temecula Waler Part< CUPlPlannlnglPC Staff Report.doc
5
The proposed project developed as a water park generates average weekday entering
vehicles of 630 over the course of the day, for a total of 1,260 trips. Average Saturday
entering vehicles is 802 vehicles, for a total daily trip generation of 1,604 trips. The project site
is currently zoned Service Commercial. The Service Commercial designation would allow
many different types of development, including office and retail uses. Assuming the Target
Floor Area Ration of .30, the 15.4 acre site could be developed with up to 201,247 square feet
of commercial or office uses. An office use would bring 2,216 daily weekday trips/83 weekend
trips and a department store could bring in 11,274 daily weekday trips/1 ,008 weekend trips per
day. The proposed water park use would generate less traffic each day during the peak hours
(additionally, the water park does not open until 10:00 a.m.) than most other uses, since any
other type of development would typically be open 5 to 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year. The
proposed water park is anticipated to generate significantly less traffic on an annual basis than
any other allowed use.
Over the long-term, the proposed project will contribute to LOS F traffic flows at the locations
identified above, even after above mentioned improvements are implemented. However, this
project will not significantly worsen the traffic flow after implementation of mitigation. In
addition, the project is required to pay a fair share contribution to circulation system
components that are impacted by cumulative traffic growth in the Temecula region through the
payment of mitigation fees. Based on the identified project specific and cumulative impacts of
the proposed project, staff concludes that potential project specific and cumulative effects of
the project are effectively mitigated to a less than significant impact level based on the
mitigation measures identified below, including payment of fair share fees for circulation
system impacts that result from cumulative traffic growth.
With implementation of the above condition of approval, the project's specific and cumulative
circulation system impacts will be offset or mitigated to a less than significant level of impact.
Recommended Mitigation Measures:
1. An Irrevocable Offer of Dedication shall be approved and recorded for the future French
Valley Interchange right-of-way along the westerly property boundary.
2. Improve Ynez Road along property frontage to include installation of sidewalk, signing
and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), and a 14-foot wide
raised landscaped median.
3. The signal at the intersection of Ynez Road and County Center Drive shall be modified
to accommodate full movement.
4. Provide dedicated right turn lane on Ynez Road onto the project's main entry 10-feet
wide by 150 feet long with a 120 feet transition.
5. 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.
6. 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.
G:\Planningl2006IPA06-Q213 Temecula Wale! Pari< CUPlPlanninglPC Staff Reportdoc
6
7. 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.
Noise
Based on a Noise Study that was prepared, the project will generate a maximum noise level of
65.8 dBA at the property lines with mitigation measures, which is less than the maximum
threshold limit of 70 dBA specified in the General Plan Noise Element.
Recommended Mitigation Measures:
1. Applicant shall establish a noise complaint response program and shall respond to any
noise complaints received for this project by measuring the noise levels at the affected
receptor site.
2. Applicant will require that all construction equipment be operated with mandated noise
control equipment (mufflers or silencers).
Air Qualitv
Based in the Air Quality report prepared for the project, the project will not exceed the
thresholds of the South Coast Air Basin with the following mitigations:
Recommended Mitigation Measures:
1. During construction of the proposed improvements, construction equipment will be
properly maintained at an offsite location and includes proper tuning and timing of
engines. Equipment maintenance records and equipment design specification data
sheets shall be kept onsite during construction.
2. During construction of the proposed improvements, all contractors will be advised not to
idle construction equipment on site for more than ten minutes.
3. Prior to construction of the proposed improvements, the project proponent will provide a
Dust Control Plan that will describe the application of standard best management
practices to control dust during construction.
Based on the above mitigation measures, staff recommends the adoption of a Mitigated
Negative Declaration and attached Mitigation Monitoring Program.
CONCLUSIONlRECOMMENDATION
Staff has determined that this project is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code,
and Design guidelines and recommends approval based on the following findings and subject
to the attached Conditions of Approval.
G:\Planningl2006\PA06-0213 Temecula Water Pari< CUPlPlanninglPC Staff Report.doc
7
FINDINGS
Development Plan (Code Section 17.05.01O.F)
1. 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 proposed water park is permitted in the Service Commercial Zone based on the
standards contained in the City's Development Code, which includes approval of a
Conditional Use Permit. The site is properly planned and zoned, and as conditioned, is
physically suitable for the proposed water park. The project, as conditioned, is also
consistent with other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances,
including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and all applicable fire and
building codes;
2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety, and general welfare.
The overall design of the water park, including the site, buildings, parking, circulation,
and other associated site improvements, is consistent with, and intended to protect the
health and safety of those living and working in and around the site. The project has
been reviewed for, and as conditioned, has been found to be consistent with the City's
General Plan, Development Code, Building Code, and Fire Prevention Codes to ensure
that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the
public health, safety, and welfare.
Conditional Use Permit (Code Section 17.04.010.E)
1. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the Development
Code.
The proposed water park is permitted in the Service Commercial Zone based on the
standards contained in the City's Development Code, which includes approval of a
Conditional Use Permit. The site is properly planned and zoned, and as conditioned, is
physically suitable for the proposed water park. The project, as conditioned, is also
consistent with other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances,
including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and all applicable fire and
building codes.
2. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development
of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will not
adversely affect the adjacent uses, or structures.
The proposed water park is consistent with the surrounding uses and structures and
will not adversely impact the existing buildings and uses because recreational uses
already exist in the area. Immediately adjacent to the southern property line is Gold's
Gym, a recreational workout facility open to the public. Less than one mile north of the
project site is the Harveston Sports Park, a public recreational facility which includes
soccer fields and baseball fields. Approximately four miles east of the project site is the
G:IPlanning\2006IPA06-Q213 Temecula Water Pari< CUPlPlanninglPC Staff Report.doc
8
Harveston Community Park, a recreational lake with associated trails for City residents.
In addition, the water park will only be open approximately four months of the calendar
year, which will greatly reduce the impact to businesses immediately adjacent to the
project. With existing recreational uses already existing in the area and the short term
operation season, the water park will not adversely affect adjacent uses or structures.
3. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate
the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and
other development features prescribed in this Development Code and required by
Planning Commission or Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the
neighborhood.
The project proposes a 13,000 square foot water park on 15 acres and is considered a
relatively smaller project compared to existing water parks in California. The water park
will meet all Development Code regulations in regards to floor area ratio, lot coverage,
setbacks; height regulations, and parking regulations. Over 30% of the site will be
landscaped, which exceeds the required 20%.
4. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and
general welfare of the community.
The project has been reviewed for compliance with the Development Code, Universal
Building Code (UBC), and Fire Prevention Code for compliance with all applicable
requirements. Staff has found the proposed water park is not detrimental to the heath,
safety, or general welfare of the community. In addition, Fire Prevention has reviewed
the circulation and drive aisle widths and has determined that the site will be able to be
adequately served by the Fire Department in an emergency situation.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity Map - Blue Page 10
2. Plan Reductions - Blue Page 11
3. PC Resolution 06-_ -, Blue Page 12
Exhibit A - DraftConditions of Approval
4. Initial Study - Blue Page 13
5. Statement of Operations - Blue Page 14
.
G:\PlanningI2006\PA08-0213 Temecula Waler Park CUPlPlanningIPC Staff Report.doc
9
ATTACHMENT NO.1
VICINITY MAP
.
G:\Plannlngl2OO6IPA08-0213 Temecula Waler Pall< CUPlPlanninglPC Staff Report.doc
10
CIty of Temeclu:a
I PA06-0213I
0 245 490 980
r . ~~ ~,- >..-.. ..... -
1,470
;l'.i!.,IFeet
I->l
f
ThIs map was macle by Itl8 ,City of Temecula Geographic Information System.
The map Is derived from base c1ata produoed by the Riverside County Assessofs
Department and !he Transportation and land Management Agency of Rl\l8tSlde
County. The City ofTemecula assumes no warranty or legal responsibility fOr the
Information contained on this map. Data and i . ,,":.., represented on this map
are subfecl to update and .. ~,...,.. The Geographic Infonnation System and
other sources should be queried for the most current Information.
This map is not for reprint or resale.
~~
ATTACHMENT NO.2
PLAN REDUCTIONS
G:lPlanningI2006IPA08-0213 Temecula Water Pari< CUPlPlanninglPC Staff Report.doc
11
-----------'r:r
- ! I 1 1
. Z II I.. i
~ Iltm ~! 1!"i!!i1'--'J! 1
< i " ,~~. ~', g!!j,,, !5i 'I "!!;1 ~. Il;~l Ii. i
0.. f H !:.. h ~' I . ., h
a: · , 5, Ii, L
~ .! .,~ n~ mm " !i.j)i Ii III
~ . ill !l t': '~:': : .. i~: ,:;;:ij 1!ll",11 ~dl: .1,1.::"'11;':::: " : .
::l !t~1 1mB II 1111 ! ! Jlu f U !Hi UhU~ i! HI ~ ~ Il! I II n~1 ~il.m J!;jdi =.
~ h!ll!m! !! IIll! I . .. '" , !l! 1111 IIi .,,,U !".", . ,
,'! if I ,fl' , \,\ '" r.m.mm.....\'
", I': \ : \\: I J '. _________.,___c.1~._,,___,____./ -----=.0;..____',
,:, i: . \ :: ' \',~'~:~~'=;~:~c:c:Ol~=t=..=.mt !
", :b', 1\ i :,' ! If,'. .'1: \
! '- i ,I: r/..... "1' ,
I 'I" i '.... ..',.. .. , l' ,
.1, ,.,/.,.....,......... '.' " I
;'.! ! 1'i 'f\re ...,-,~\;,J: :
'. I ,. 11"11 I
}, 1'111; ,ij ...\j: it
.. i I! i ..'.~j)fl: '
11 I
\1 I
~.v ,~
. "\
:.! !'
-:'.1 i:
.',] 11
'..:,.:.! ~
-:)1 [.1
.~.'\ ~ it-
...,., ,I
\\1'\'
. . ':>:~, II
"'. ~~. i
\Il
. 1'\
! ,:' ~' / !.' ': . lilli,,' 1111 . : CJ. . , \..
./>; 1-t"':foB';J:' "- ...., 'p
f,cr 'n' -------,-'0------ 'c--.'; " .________:___0.;.:__' _" _--0 ~--o .;\ n
o:ny~c~::Ti.'=--: . Il I ;t . ft--.' ~\i~l
l" :i .t- --~ \i .\
.......'....0.:.... --- '.:-~.'~-' i!:l'l 'I:: :" "\ .j' ';,
~ 0;; _u__ - ,p.i t _ ~ \_\ \
~,s' :: ~ _ -"}l~-t
~e.. I::' ---:ll{
m [!:, ~i.*"1
I'.,. , ~'.I
" - , ~ '" ~',
" ~ 1"1
", / ~.-- , "
:: . / /..../ 1>.'
-----.m-------.~b.~::.:!.i!J!J.~i!Jl~UJ.l.c==-l....1.
---.....".......
---
~ I
l: j
J
~d il31N3::/=-:
AlN~
--"""~-"'-~o,-,_~
-- ,ob
:i
,
..._......~'...:...~.
.' f'
'l.,
~i
..
/Ii
",.'
j!
II
if
f-
~.' ,
i'
r,},
L
II,
Ir':;"
Ii
r.
I
,
,
,
c;
"l
,'> ,
.._-_._._.__._-v~
'r
[I
:~"" . : i . CI~, '-,
,,<.... ,"'~~ - -~ - --" -~";;_:_~ ----=t.i.i':::.. _____nn
.~"''-~~_'::':::'_7__;;:'=~_________ ....../~.,. "_
I'-, __________________
;/ ......----------
'..'
~~~~~ 0 : !~i
:~o:: V:.I_i!"
:.:.- :s "J II
!::: ..... :] ~t
,:......;,k
~! ~.f.I ;;JJ.. v
::..:: :,,,",~'" 1
; :.'
. ,
, .
"
, ,
("~.,'\'
, ,;
, ,la,
\\\,U
I" ,
',] I
1 "
:: !:\
I,,) I
\ ~ ' I L I
\;:: I
il. '.
II
II
Ii
\
\1
"
..
"
:1
\l
1\
Ii
P
1
\
!
I
,
,
!
,. .
" ,
:: '
. \
.
. .
, .
. ,
, ,
, ,
,
! I,
.U),
,~,
:*:
:'l:~:
, ,
, ,
:~;
:~:
" ,
., ,
; "I
I ;::
, "
\ "
,
I
. ,
. .
,
. .
,
, .
, .
, ,
, .
. .
, ,
, .
.'
, ,
, .
, ,
,
,
,
, .
.'
,
~
0::
<(
a..
0::
w
I-
~
:5
:;)
(,)
w
==
W
I-
,... ~"_..'-'.-'-~'1:-'.
-'~"~'-'~-"~~'I (;- I'... j ~
..--- . I! II . -.
llh Iii. ~.. I
i Illi l~ II-t~i . .ll1j,
\ ~__.__..'----L
... -~' ;_'::~~~:~o~J;=_';____~=_:___o~';;L_); .
...:::: ,n :-'. _
t.
i
Ii
),
. ,
Iii
! :
'11>0/
I I
. I
.
. i
i
. ,
.
.
..
..
JI
~
z
:5
D..
I-
D..
W
U
Z
o
U
W
D..
c(
U
III
Q
Z
c(
...I.
.If
~
0:::
<(
0..
0:::
w
i
<(
...J
;:)
CJ
w
:E
w
I-
-O-..-....---O.----lh"-i -~- -~lili
- \, II. I
i 1111 Ii i .. I j
illlii: II'ill Iii:'
"
~l """"........ HI !!Hmml!;"m m mm.;; I
11 HUUHHuun H! !HHH~HHHHH !H ~~HHIHI
I I! I '
I !' !.I' hi III I j'lll! '1111,1 . I I hi i
i Iliilll!llli!!11 III lilll!IIII!lll.,I! Iii 1IIIIIIIIj
I I II I II! I 1'1" i II I'll I i
1llilllilil!lhlh Illllmllllhllhllll i IIII 1111111I11
ill~oo I~
,
I~ liB
I H!!
Ifllll ~f:~::!: ~!~ ;~~gg
:~~;~~~:~f :: I~;;
III III :f~;~~~~~~ ~~;;
1111111111 11 Il!l
~~~ H: ~~HHUH ~!H
l!!!l! 11111111 III l!lll
I' III I I' I I III I ,I I
I ,. " I' I '1 I I . I
i ml l,h!,hll Ii ,Ill III ~ Iii illilthh hll huh iillllh iii hili
I Iili hIli Ilill( I !i\1111111 iql, 1'1 II 1111 Ihlll
2 I illll !hlllmlhlllill ihnll! llllllmlhlh ilhhhlllllhlilllilhl
g I 0 ~ ~"!i;':.. '''''1 ! o@IN;))
~~ I ~ 1;':," 10~ -I' ifi!;:
,."",>.. :111,1
"""'. ",'>
.~H
~C$~
~~ ~
~
0::
c(
C-
o::
w
!;;(
3:
c(
....I
:J
()
w
::E
w
I-
" --.----'"'--'-
'--"'--~-'-"-
I ~.,---- -...-..
.....--....-..--.....
\\
I'
,I
'~'Y"i't
Ii:! i
Ii II ~
1!Il! Ii
II!ml ! III
Iii' I '
~ ;h~:i ~ ;
IIII
'-'1"
---.---.-.------ -...r.'-.-...'...I---- .'3'ii"'1
I II -I
i j' II" I
i Iii j'--- I -
. ,', Ii" !
lI!lilU li.. ~ll~'
'.;,"--.-----
!
.
. i
i
G
b
1
,
-
."{r-- - \\
~'_..~
\.- '1'1
"
I:.
Ii
: \
\
i
,
i__ i
\.
li!
I,;
j\
J\
: J'I \i
, "
~' 1\
, "
. l'
.'i.! I
- l i.
, I'" I"
i:."" ' 1 IliPI \~
~ L1\1
,=::- LllT'l!i1Ji,:\\
II! ~lll! I [I ~~:fr:~ ~I[~_,~ \11
,","' - =: .,. = ,Ii
,,,' c'JUJJlJ~ - =C.. .U'I'
l----L i~ -. =, r . .c ..
__m_ I .. ,-" J~ c; :fee; ''', 1\
"ir=~-.."".."f\~~:""' P~"':T~i j; ~ ~J!fi' ~ ~I ; I
II: \..f:~ c =0 ~1""i(ir'li= 'II 1\
~. 1:.'1: =: :Jud,= Ii \
~, Ii _Ji ~ =n~: l \: . ~
I:D =: .. ,-;.
JI!j:1~ c~: ~~\\~J
111': J1t -- -: := ': :. ;-J'!\li
II i "-liE --- ! -,,:hl.
::~I-JrJl!I~:_~~!}JJJJli(~\j,~
z
:5
IL
C)
Z
~
IL
C
E Z
I ~
t 0
I ffi
~ u.
i! ..i
U ~
_~i
...~~
r..--'-'
L_'_l-..J. J.),1..:.
, ".1
~. _ I t --;. .r.,
fJ4-.U
,i, ,t +
~ ii' i l' ~
! '-1"i----I t l.
j ! I :,~ 1
1-'"
iWII+r
-td 111i
hitlli
T ::r.:
1
<..
it]jl"!'" '":]'1
1':I~li' '~:~ ii,' II;} -='J
f:+'n.i1t-.I.W f 'JII~~ii:; , J!
.',d ,.,1 - q ij~ i ~a ili
':)j': L. ~
.. "",.,. ","".
i:J llilil ili ~
1 <(
(')
z
is
;2
I H ~ (!)
; J"';:
~ l ,..j:"
.'.:1';__\_.
Iii:
, ,.,";
I!l i; i ~'"
! II, 1:1' ..','"
. .
,
1 !
~ f ~ J
Iii!! ji!
o Ii III/I!llllll
~dll!!! II!!!! l!!
. .'1
['ii",
, .1.
I!!
.:ii
Ii,!
.. 1
'L:, 1
"I'
"1trr!' :fi: ,j
.."t-dT -;-j
-<' ': f,
.:''It.t.:-.. +--.
'II; ,
.:,1.1
;h
;,r ;
, I _~ ,
II'
"\:, ,
:!:q ;...
ia.;
i! 0 i
.... -
o :~;~
V.H!1
:S:Jh
...:It!1
ii!II : I'i
~. 1
,
,
(\~
, II
i'
I
I'
,
"fil!-"'i,7't<~ II
I I I 1 ,
! ,_" "- - I _
I . I -i I'
(--I Ill, I
"I!! I , ~(l'l i l:
~I i I ~ I! I
~
0:::
~
0::
w
i
:3
::J
o
w
:E
w
I-
\,
I .
1 \G ...-_.) ~"(,,) Co.:::':.,/) \~, .-'
"
~~~:. _'_~;~:~J ~=,_ c:-Y -. I i'-- --':=::=_
,
, ,
: j
, .
: I
T
:1
'I
1 !~il"
"
i : r'!I:'f..
/il/"
{ Ii"
l 'f '
/1
l'I'1~.
, .
1 ,,/, I
f JI,
l !:' I
" / I'
'/ //./
/, ;~.""
/.::~~..:,::.--
'I.
I,
~
.
~
!
! i
1,1 ,I,
111,1 W lli
I P' III
.11
, " ,J
i<i:.: ,I
I.',', " I
,'..' '.
1:::: ' i
'ln~ _::'
,': ';-::
I .,...
I ! 1 ." :: l:! ! ~ .
'ih!I!!' bll.
I iiiii .1 I l:
'J-""
I"
I
d i .
.1, II
I ' III
. 1 bill
! t,iiiii
.~. I'
!.. <
,
I, ., '<
I .
II: : ..
'i -
it,
I, ,I
III!'
l~~
,
I.
Il l"i:i -;:
I ~:
I'
I" i I
~i"i
i
.
i
I
G
Q
]T
-
z
:5
II.
Z
o
j:
:5
:;)
U
..J
4(
U
lJt.
W
...
~
-~~!
"'-1.
,-
!
N
~
k
i
1 - ~J~~
. .
i I, -
il " ,I
l,,/llil. Ii,
~
i
i
.
.
o
w
.
..~ ..
.. "'C"
...:, ....
..~ ....
Zz ..
~r::'
-.--
- ~
= -
= '"
= -
,
>.. ..
:::e;:;:
-<
::; ~..
:;,,::
z
, ... 0
: ~
~ mm
w
... Clz
~ :i!!:o
c-
::!!;(
::l>
lllw
, z..J
'" OW
-:r
......
:i::l
~ ...0
i mm
i zolJ
-...
:Em
Ow
~1i:
>- -
adii
!Zi1i
w
z
o
~
~
w
t;
~.
~
- v .
~
;::
;l
w
~
w
5
o
'"
,
I.
,
,-
,
,
i
i
z
o
~
~
~
w
i"
a:
o
z
"
r--~
l..b~1t
-,.~,-- ---
nrn.
i I _1[11
~il,il L ""II i L
,
, :::"...
, ~.. .....
u ..: "''''
" ...... ..
. :.0""
~. ..... ....
..
Ii '"".. ..
- ~ ~:o--
~ ~
,
..... J"
( ::'::0::
I
I.
N
,t
I
I
---'L ::a..
~
i
a
"I:L~ I
,
: '
r
<lL______
J
'"
z
;;:
I;;
~
J
l
i
a
,.
I/)Z
00
z-
c!;(
:::!ii'i
:J..I
mill
zl-
OZ
1=0
~e:
1-0
I/)Z
z<
-I/)
::!:z
~~
---ll..
>n:
~o
zO
IU..I
II.
[""0---
i
r::::::::::::-::--:- - : ,----------------- r:-----------;,i
rnmnm:~=== ! f.; ==:1
LO_____m_~__ j ~l i
~o '
- ~-m---\1.m-m..J
I I1l ~I .
': fh -'II '---
'"
z
;;:
I;;
l ~
i .
1~(JE
1
,
~
a:
8
ii'
,
\
,~
\i
ill
.
;:&::
...-;. ::
-;:.."'.....
4- ",,,,
':~ ~~
;... ....
:~0~:
.
o
.
.
~.-~
~ ~
~ -
= ~
~ -
.
,
....- .....
:~O::
'"
'"
~
~ l
l \
\
$
,
,
~
l
\ t
\
\
\ >>,
i ~
'" .-~..._____Ti-r-------1 ';(
~ ~ \0 I I \ "\ ~
';( ~ \~~I~\
~ \o~ ~ ~o\ 0
~ ~
0 , , ~
~ , ~ \~\\\~.
t
"3 \0 ~ . r<
.. :ot \.~_~____J-J..-\,------- ~
~ 'Z 0
'Ii. 0
'" ~
~ 'ii.
? ..
\
$
\
Go
~
ti
U1
i
~
"'
~:i
%-~
'6,&
~
~~
Ul~
~t-
u;,&
~~
<t'G
Go~
a.
'in
U1
~
~
~
Go
"-
r'fU7mm~_u;
~ ~C-J
...--'
\i
i
,
,
i
!
i
,.
I
,
!
i
'..u,.um\ ,j
m_' l
0"" -..--- ~-
.\
!
(
\0
\0
\0
o
rn...,..m
i no_ ----1
, '
, '
i i
I .'
\
\
II
.
0\
j\
I
! 1
_'m
L. I
-
---------
if
i
i
,
i
i
,
i
I
!
,
,
"
~
m
so
I~
L5
I
o
" 0
i
,
,
i i
L2,.., 0
, 1
, 0
,
I
I
i
i
i
!
i
~
so
l ~
o
i i' l ,~_. fl
'i. I' -
.Ii l Iii J .. ii
.
;~D ::
~~.:: I
....... -..
~~e~~
,
o
.
,
-, ~.-:::
= ~
= -
~ I[ .......
~
I
:: ::,
....0.......
Ul
Cl
z
5
..J
5
ED
Z
Q~
~~
lii~
z~
i
5l
-
~
...
ffi
z
:'i
Q.
U.
o
li!
~
l
=-
~
c-
i
~
E
: ~. . i
..'.
y
~\~
'~ll
i
I ~.' .
. -:-~_.m_T--------l
, '
, '
, '
, '
, '
, ..
, '
1 ~ I \
r ~ ~
, '
, '
, '
L" :
, .
, '
, '
l I :
~H.[I-' .;'-- \
1:0 ) I
'I ,:0 ) :
II t -- --- ~
{~-- --j
~rL--::---_r1l
.. .
'"
l
"
,
I
.....--.......
.1'-.
'"
z
o
~
...
w
o
z
<(
~
"-
&l
w
"
o
o
...
..
"
8
a:
t;;
w
a:
z
~
i
jl
.,.... .-
~i-i-m~:;---l
I ~--~
l '~ -.. : :
" 't l I'
. 'II r' ~- ~-- ---I :
:" I 1
\ '" I I
~!'~ Irr-:J
,....-L________ J
II .. --I I
~.
, .
I
U-lr-., '''''n
i I -(
il" ;
I; ,I, -- I
1,1 111U li.1
l
i
i
'"
z
Q
!;:
(jj
ul
~
~
;;;
"
~
\;;
w
a:
w
t:
...
...
w
!;:
'"
N
l
i
I
'"
~
!;:
~
o
~
~
"-
\I
"
8
~
w
a:
~
...
...
w
!;:
'"
;;;:11- :0
~ -
= ~
= ;::
<
(
,
....:;;R~~
:;::- .......
..: ...-
"
o
"
>
..~ ..
>P I!i''''''
:: ::
~'" ..
~.. ~~
::CI~;::
;:; ~..
:':::0::
~
011
....
'II>
l/l
::E
o
o
II:
I-
l/l
W
II:
W
I-
::i
..J
l/lW
C)!;t
~Ul
90
-z
::;)<
IDC)
Wz
0-
-0
l/l..J
:G-
o::::;)
<(ID
c.0::
~
U
o
..J
011
::E
o
o
II:
I-
l/l
W
II:
Z
<(
:;;
'-r------
I
,
I
I
,
,
,
,
,
!
-;. I
,
I
!
,
,
I
,
b
I
~'
t
I
,
I
M ~E
=
...--.,..- , ~I
i
[] I ,,- .,- ,
I i
[] I i III III
I Ow
Za:
[ ) -:J
a...
I I I ::!(,)
:J:J
[ ] Li ~ i ma:
~Iii
-w
III a
lI::<(
a:J:
<(Ill
II.
-.;;-t
N
,
i
I
,.,
i
i
..
,
---;-----------1
, ,
, I
I I
: 'j
I ,
. ,
I
.1
i
---------~
'"
z
o
>=
~
w
~
w
o
~
~
UJ
0:
::>
Ii
::>
0:
Ii;
l!l
'"
:J:
'"
,.,
-,,--------- I --------1
I : I
I ! I
I , ~
I ,
I !
". '
! ]1
I I
! ------4
_l_________ 1
~-I
.,- i_
q II
,.; i~ i - - J
'I" 'II .
li.llll: j, Lit,
.
......0......
-:: ......
:: ::
>
o
w
>
~"'IIlCO"
c- .....
::~ ~:
;:e::
-.-~
~ -
= -
= :::
~ .
....... ..K
::0::
(
i
i
'"
z
Q
~
-'
w
o
~.
~
Q.
W
0:
t
::>
0:
Ii;
"
z
~
o
ill
w
>
8
ATTACHMENT NO.3
PC RESOLUTION 06-_
G:IPlanningl2006\PA06-o213 Temecula Wale' Part< CUPlPlanninglPC Slaff Reportdoc
12
PC RESOLUTION NO, 06-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA 06-0213, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR THE SITE DEVELOPMENT AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A 13,000 SQUARE FOOT WATER PARK
ON 15.4 ACRES.. LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST
INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND COUNTY CENTER
DRIVE CONSISTING OF POOLS, SLIDES, AND OTHER TYPES
OF WATER RIDES, CONCESSION STANDS, GIFT SHOP,
PARTY ROOM, CHANGING ROOM WITH LOCKERS,
RESTROOMS, PICNIC AREAS, SERVICE YARD, AND
PARKING LOT. THE WATER PARK WILL BE OPERATING
APPROXIMATELY FOUR MONTHS OF THE CALENDAR
YEAR. THE PARK WILL BE OPEN FROM MEMORIAL DAY TO
LABOR DAY FORM 10:00 A.M. TO 8:00 P.M. IT IS
ANTICIPATED THAT THE PARK WILL RETAIN 15 FULL TIME
STAFF AND 300 SEASONAL EMPLOYEES
.
Section 1. On July 21, 2006, Joshua Hunter with Clearwater Waterpark
Development filed Planning Application No. PA06-0213, in a manner in accord with the City of
Temecula General Plan and Development Code.
Section 2. The Application was processed including, but not limited to a public
notice. in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law.
Section 3. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the
Application, Initial Study, and Mitigation Monitoring Program on October 18, 2006, 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.
Section 4. 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.
Section 5. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
Section 6. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby
incorporated by reference.
Section 7. Findinos. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby
makes the following findings as required by Sections 17.05.010.F and 17.04.010.E of the
Development Code.
Development Plan (Code Section 17.05.010.F)
A. . 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;
G:\Planning\2006\PA08-0213 Temecula Water Park CUPlPlanning\PC RESOLUTION #1.doc
1
The proposed Water Park is permitted in the Service Commercial zone based on the
standards contained in the City's Development Code, which includes approval of a
Conditional Use Permit. The site is properly planned and zoned, and as conditioned, is
physically suitable for the proposed Water Park. The project, as conditioned, is also
consistent with other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances,
including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and all applicable fire and
building codes.
B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public
health, safety, and general welfare;
The overall design of the Water Park, including the site, buildings, parking, circulation,
and other associated site improvements, is consistent with, and intended to protect the
health and safety of those living and working in and around the site. The project has
been reviewed for, and as conditioned, ahs been found to be consistent with the City's
general Plan, Development Code, Building Code, and Fire Prevention Codes to ensure
that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the
public health, safety, and welfare.
Conditional Use Permit (Code Section 17.04.010.E)
A. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the
Development Code;
The proposed Water Park is permitted in the Service Commercial zone based on the
standards contained in the City's Development Code, which includes approval of a
Conditional Use Permit. The site is properly planned and zoned, and as conditioned, is
physically suitable for the proposed Water Park. The project, as conditioned, is also
consistent with other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances,
including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and all applicable fire and
building codes.
B. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and
development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will
not adversely affect the adjacent uses, or structures; .
The proposed 'Water Park is consistent with the surrounding uses and structures and
will f!of adversely impact the existing buildings and uses because recreational uses
already exist in the area. Immediately adjacent to the southern property line is Gold's
Gym, a recreational workout facility open to the public. Less than one mile north of the
project site is the Harveston Sports park, a public recreational facility which includes
soccer fields and baseball fields. Approximately four miles east of the project site is the
Harveston Community Park, a recreational lake with associated trails for City residents.
In addition, the Water Park will only be open approximately four months of the calendar
year, which will greatly reduce the impact to businesses immediately adjacent to the
project. With existing recreational uses already existing in the area and the short term
operafion season, the Water Park will not adversely affect adjacent uses or structures.
C. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to
accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas,
G:\PlanningI2006IPA06-0213 Temecula Water Part< CUPIPlanninglPC RESOLUTION #1.doc
2
landscaping, and other development features prescribed in this Development Code and
,required by Planning Commission or Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in
the neighborhood;
The project proposes a 13,000 square foot Water Park on 15 acres and is considered a
relatively smaller project compared to existing Water Parks in California. The Water
park will meet all Development Code regulations in regards to floor area ratio, lot
coverage, setbacks, height regulations, and parking regulations. Over 30% of the site
will be landscaped, which exceeds the required 20%.
D. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health,
safety and general welfare of the community;
The project has been reviewed for compliance with the Development Code, Universal Building
Code (UBC), and Fire Prevention Code for compliance with all applicable requirements. Staff
has found the proposed Water Park is not detrimental to the heath, safety, or general weffare
of the community. In addition, Fire Prevention has reviewed the circulation and drive aisle
widths and has determined that the site will be able to be adequately seNed by the Fire
Department in an emergency situation.
Section 8. Environmental Comoliance. In accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act, it has been determined that, with this mitigation, this project as
proposed will not have a significant impact upon the environment. As a result, a Negative
Declaration with a Mitigation Monitoring Program has been prepared.
Section 9. Conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approves
Planning Application No. PA06-0213, including the Initial Study with a Mitigation Monitoring
Program, subject to the Conditions of Approval set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and
incorporated herein by this reference.
G:lPlanningl2006IPA06-Q213 Temecula Water Park CUPIPlanningIPC RESOLUTION #1.doc
3
Section 10. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula
Planning Commission this 18th day of October 2006.
Ron Guerriero, Chairman
ATTEST:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
[SEAL}
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify
that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 06- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 18th day of
October 2006, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
G:\PlanningI2006lPA06-0213 Temecula Waler Part< CUPIPlanninglPC RESOLUTION #1.doc
4
EXHIBIT A
DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
G:\PlannlngI2006IPA08-0213 Temecula Waler Park CUPlPlanning\PC RESOLUTION #1.doc
5
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
DRAFT CONDmONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No.: PA06-0213
Project Description
A Development with a Conditional Use Permit for the
construction of a 13,000 square foot water park on 15.4
acres at the northwest intersection of Ynez Road and
County Center Drive consisting of pools, slides, and
other types ot water rides, concession stands, gift shop,
party room, changing room with lockers, restrooms,
picnic areas, service yard, and parking lot
Assessor's Parcel No.
910-271-002 and 910-271-005 thru 910-271-008
MSHCP Category:
DIF Category:
TUMF Category:
Commercial
Service CommercIal
Service Commercial
Approval Date:
October 18, 2006
Expiration Date:
October 18, 2008
WITHIN 48 HOURS OF THE APPROVAL OF THIS PROJECT
Planning Department
1. The applicanVdeveloper shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or
money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Sixty-Four Dollars ($64.00)
for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination with a
DeMinimus Finding for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public
Resources Code Section 21152 and Califomia Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within
said 48-hour period the applicanVdeveloper 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)).
G:IPlanningl2006\PA08-0213 Temecula Water Park CUPIPlanninglDraft COAs.doc
1
J
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
(Conditional Use Permit)
G:\PlanningI2OO6IPA08-0213 Tern.cula Water Park CUPlPlannlng\Draft COAs.doc
2
"
Planning Department
2. 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 City'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.
3. The hours of operation for the water park shall be 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through
Sunday, unless a modification of this Conditional Use Permit is approved.
4. The water park operating season shall be limited to Memorial Day to Labor Day. The park
may open before and after MemoriaVLabor Day up to a maximum of 60 days per calendar
year, unless a modification of this Conditional Use Permit is approved.
5. The water park shall be in compliance with the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program at all
times.
6. Parking attendants shall assist in the directing of ingress/egress traffic flow at all times.
7. The water park shall comply with the attached Statement of Operations at all times.
8. This Conditional Use Permit may be revoked pursuant to Section 17.03.080 of the City's
Development Code.
9. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of
this Conditional Use Permit. .
G:\Planning\2Q06IPA06.Q213 Temecula Water Park CUPlPlanning\Drafl COAs.doc
3
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
(Development Plan)
G:\PlanningI2OO6IPA06-o213 Temecula Water Part< CUPlPlanning\Drafl COAs.doc
4
Planning Department
1. The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided
by the Planning Department staff, and return one signed set to the Planning Department for
their files.
2. The applicant and owner of the real properly subject to this condition shall hereby agree to
indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City'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, conceming 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.
3. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of
this development plan.
4. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application
No. PA06-0213.
5.
This approval shall be used within two 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-year period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion,
or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval.
,
6. The Director of Planning may, upon an application being filed within 30 days prior to
expiration" and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to three 1-year extensions of
time, one year at a time.
7. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. (Sign program may be required)
8. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved site plan and
elevations contained on file with the Planning Department.
9. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable
satisfaction of the Planning Director. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being
maintained, the Planning Director shall have the authority to require the properly owner to
bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued
maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any
successors in interest.
10. The applicant shall s,ubmit to the Planning Department for permanent filing two 8' X 10'
glossy photographic color prints of the approved Color and Materials Board and the colored
architectural elevations. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be
readable on the photographic prints.
G:\Planning12006IPA06-0213 Temecula Water Park CUPIPlanning\Draft COAs.doc
5
11. Trash enclosures shall be provided to house all trash receptacles utilized on the site. These
shall be clearly labeled on site plan.
12. Parking for the project shall be shared across the site, including parking spaces in all lots
that are a part of the project. If the project involves multiple lots, 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.
13. All buildings, mechanical structures, slides, and attractions must meet the 50 foot height
requirement (including all future development).
Public Works Department
14. 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.
15. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works pripr to
commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way.
16. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the California Department ofTransportation
prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State right-of-
way.
17. All improvement plans, grading plans, and raised landscaped median 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.
18. The project shall include construction-phase pollution prevention controls and permanent
post-construction water quality protection measures into the design of the project to prevent
non-permitted runoff from discharging offsite or entering any storm drain system or receMng
water.
19. A Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) must be accepted by the City prior to the initial
grading plan check. The WQMP will be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and include
site design BMPs (Best Management Practices), source controls, and treatment
mechanisms.
20. The proposed access on Ynez Road shall be restricted to a righlinlright out movement.
Building and Safety Department
21. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2001 Edition of the
California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2004 California Electrical Code;
California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy Code, Califomia Title 24 Disabled Access
Regulations, and the Temecula Municipal Code.
22. The City of T emecula has adopted an ordinance to collect fees for a Riverside County area
wide Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). Upon the adoption of this oroinimce on
March 31, 2003, this project will be subject to payment of these fees at the time of building
permit issuance. The fees, if applicable to the project, shall be subject to the provisions of
Ordinance No. 03-01 and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
G:IPlanningl2006IPA08-0213 TemllCllla Water Park CUPIPlanning\Draft COAs.doc
6
23. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans .showing compliance
with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. AII.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.
24. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to
the Building and Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School
Mitigation Fees.
25. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
26. . Show all building setbacks.
27. Developments with Multi-tenant Buildings or Shell Buildings shall provide a house electrical
meter to provide power for the operation of exterior lighting, irrigation pedestals and fire
alarm systems for each building on the site. Developments with Single User Buildings shall
clearly show on the plans the location of a dedicated panel in place for the purpose of the
operation of exterior lighting and fire alarm systems when a house meter is not specifically
proposed.
28. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system.
29. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1 , 1998)
30. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building.
31. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
32. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
33. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls if not on the approved
building plans, will require separate approvals and permits.
34. 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 Teme.cula Ordinance No. 94-21,
specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one-
quarter mile of an occupied residence.
Monday-Friday 6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
Saturday 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
No work is permitted on Sundays or Govemment Holidays
35. Please be advised of the following shell building/complete building policy in the City of
T emecula when preparing plans for submittals. It is our recommendation that buildings with
a known tenant or occupant be submitted as a complete building. Please consider the
attached Building and Safety Department policy in determining the course of your design
work and subsequent submittal.
G:\Planningl2006\PA06-Q213 Temecula Waler Pari< CUPlPlanning\Drafl COAs.doc
7
36. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
37. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 2001
Edition of the Califomia Building Code Appendix 29.
38. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic
and mechanical plan applicable to scope of work for plan review.
39. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer
engineer are required for plan review submittal.
40. Provide precise grading plan at plan check submittal to check accessibility for persons with
disabilities.
41. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
Fire Prevention
42. Final fire. and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by
the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the
California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in
force at the time of building plan sui:lmittal.
43. 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 2000 GPM at
20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 400 GPM for a
total fire flow of 2400 GPM with 2 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted
during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automaticIire
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 III-A).
44. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC
Appendix IH-B, Table A-III-B-1. A combination of on-site and off-site superfire hydrants (6' x
4' x 2-2 1/2' outlets) shall be located on Fire Departmentaccess roads and adjacent 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 a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent
hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants maybe required (CFC 903.2,
903.4.2, and Appendix III-B). .
45. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150
feet from a water supply on a public street, as measured by an approved route around the
exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire
flow shall be provided. For this project on site fire hydrants are required (CFC 903.2).
46. If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection prior
to any building construction (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2).
G:IPlanningl2OO6\PA06-Q213 Temecula Water Pall< CUPIPlanning\Draft COAs.doc
. 8
Community Services Department
47. The trash enclosures shall be large enough to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as,
regular solid waste containers.
48. 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.
49. The developer shall contact the Maintenance Superintendent for a pre-design meeting to
obtain TCSD design specifications for the landscaped median on Ynez Road.
50. The landscape construction drawings for the landscaped median on Ynez Road shall be
reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Services.
51. . Construction of the future TCSD maintained landscaped median on Ynez Road shall
commence pursuant to a pre-construction meeting with the developer and TCSD
,Maintenance Superintendent. Failure to comply with the TCSD review and inspection
process may preclude acceptance of these areas into the TCSD maintenance programs.
52. The developer, the developer's successor or assignee, shall be responsible for the
maintenance of the landscaped median on Ynez Road until such time as those
responsibilities are accepted by the TCSD or other responsible party.
53. Successful completion of a 90-day maintenance period will be required prior to the
acceptance of the landscaped median on Ynez Road by TCSD.
54. The Applicant shall comply with the Public Art Ordinance.
55. All parkways, landscaping, fencing and on site lighting shall be maintained by the property
owner.
56. A Class II bike lane shall be installed on Ynez Road.
G:\Planningl2006IPA08-0213 Temecula Water Park CUPlPlanning\Drafl COAs.doc
9
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS
G:\PlanningI2006\PA06-0213 Temecula Wale' Pari< CUPlPlanning\Draft COAs.doc
10
Planning Department
57. Double detector check valves shall be either installed underground or internal to the project
site at locations not visible from the public right-of-way, subjeclto review and approval by the
Director of Planning.
58. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "If at any time
during excavation/construction of the site, archaeologicaVcultural resources, or any artifacts
or other objects which reasonably appears to be evidence of cultural or archaeological
resource are discovered, the property owner shall immediately advise the City of such and
the City shall cause all further excavation or other disturbance of the affected area to
immediately cease. The Director of Planning at his/her sole discretion may require the
property to deposit a sum of money it deems reasonably necessary to allow-the City to
consult and/or authorize an independent, fully qualified specialist to inspect the site at no
cost to the City, in order to assess the significance of the find. Upon determining that the
discovery is not an archaeologicaVcultural resource, the Director of Planning shall notify the
property owner of such determination and shall authorize~the resumption of work. Upon
determining that the discovery is an archaeologicaVcultural resource, the Director of
Planning shall notify the property owner that no further excavation or development may take
place until a mitigation plan or other corrective measures have been approved by the
Director of Planning:
59. If cultural resources are discovered during the project construction (inadvertent discoveries),
all work in the area of the find shall cease, and a qualified archaeologist and representatives
of the Pechanga Tribe shall be retained by the project sponsor to investigate the find, and
make recommendations as to treatment and mitigation.
60. All sacred sites are to be avoided and preserved.
Public Works Department
61. An Irrevocable Offer of Dedication shall be approved and recorded for the future French
Valley Interchange right-of-way along the westerly property boundary.
62. A permit from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is required for
work within their right-of-way.
63. A permit from Caltrans is required for any work within their right-of-way.
64. 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.
65. 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.
66. 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.
G:\PlanningI2006\PA08-0213 Temecula Water Park CUPIPlanning\Draft COAs.doc
11
67. The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in
accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and
upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private
drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify
impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect the
properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream facilities,
including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required
improvements, shall be provided by the Developer.
68. Construction-phase pollution prevention controls shall be consistent with the City's Grading,
Erosion & Sediment Control Ordinance and associated technical manual, and the City's
standard notes for Erosion and Sediment Control.
69. The project shall demonstrate coverage under the State NPDES General Permit for
Construction Activities by providing a copy of the Waste Discharge Identification number
(WDID) issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). A Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be available at the site throughout the duration of
construction activities.
70. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer
shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
b. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
c. Planning Department
d. Department of Public Works
71. 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 properly.
72. 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.
73. 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.
74. 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
properly, no new charge needs to be paid.
.
G:IPlanningl2006IPA06-0213 Temscula Water Park CUPIPlanning\Draft COAs.doc
12
.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT
G:\PlanningI2006\PA06.Q213 Temecula Water Pall< CUPlPlanning\Drafl COAs.doc
13
Planning Department
75. A lot line adjustment shall be submitted and approved and recorded by the Planning
Department prior to the issuance of any building permit.
76. The applicant shall submit a photometric plan, including the parking lot 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.
77. All downspouts shall be intemalized.
78. Three copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and
approved by the Planning Department. These plans shall conform to the approved
conceptual landscape plan, 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 plans shall be accompanied by the
following items:
a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of T emecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal).
b. Provide a minimum five-foot wide planter to be installed at the perimeter of all
parking areas. Curbs, walkways, etc. are not to infringe on this area.
c. Provide an agronomic soils report with the construction landscape plans.
d. One copy of the approved grading plan.
e. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
f. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with approved plan).
g. A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted for approval, which details the
proper maintenance of all proposed plant materials to assure proper growth and
landscape development for the long-term esthetics of the property. The approved
maintenance program shall be provided to the landscape maintenance contractor
who shall be responsible to carry out the detailed program.
h. Specifications shall indicate that a minimum of two landscape site inspections will be
required. One inspection to verify that the irrigation mainline is capable of being
pressurized to 150 psi for a minimum period of two hours without loss of pressure.
The second inspection will verify that all irrigation systems have head-to-head
coverage, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the
approved construction landscape. plans. The applicant/owner shall contact. the'
Planning Department to schedule inspections.
79. All utilities shall be screened from public view. Landscape construction drawings shall show
and label all utilities and provide appropriate screening. Provide a three foot clear zone
around fire check detectors as required by the Fire Department before starting the screen.
Group utilities together in order to reduce intrusion. Screening of utilities is not to look like
an after-thought. Plan planting beds and design around utilities. Locate all light poles on
plans and insure that there are no conflicts with trees.
G:\PlanningI2006\PA06-Q213 Temecula Waler Park GUPlPlanninglDrafl COAs.doc
14
80. Building Construction Plans shall include details of all outdoor areas (including but not
limited to trellises, decorative furniture, fountains, and hardscape to match the style of the
building subject to the approval of the Planning Director.
81. Building plans shall indicate that all roof hatches shall be painted "Intemational Orange."
The construction plans shall indicate the application of painted rooftop addressing plotted on
a 9-inch grid pattem with 45-inch tall numerals spaced 9-inches apart. The numerals shall
be painted with a standard 9-inch paint roller using fluorescent yellow paint applied over a
contrasting background. The address shall be oriented to the street and placed as closely
as possible to the edge of the building closest to the street.
Public Works Department
82. Improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of
Temecula standards subject to approval by the Director ofthe 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.
83. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207 A.
a. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in
accordance with City Standard No. 800, 8.01, 802 and 803.
b. Concrete ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance
with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400. 401 and 402.
c. All street and driveway center1ineintersections shall be at 90 degrees.
d. Landscaping shall be limited in the comer cut-off area of all intersections and
adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility.
84. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula
GeneralPlan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by
the Director of the Department of Public Works.
a. Improve Ynez Road (Major Highway Standards - 100 foot RIW) along property
frontage to include installation of sidewalk, signing and striping, utilities (including but
not limited to water and sewer), and a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median.
b. The signal at the intersection of Ynez Road and County Center Drive shall be
modified to accommodate full movement.
c. Provide a dedicated right tum lane on Ynez Road onto the project's main entry - 10
feet wide by 150 feet long with a 120 feet transition.
85. 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:
a. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: median, sidewalk, drive
approaches, signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices
as appropriate
G:IPlanningI2006\PA06-Q213 Temecula Waler Park CUPIPlanninglDraft COAs.doc
15
b. Storm drain facilities
c. Sewer and domestic water systems
86. 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.
87. 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.
88. 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.
89. The Developer shall pay to the City the Westem 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.
Building and Safety Department
90. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior
to permit issuance.
Fire Prevention
91. 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 Ibs. GVW (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2).
92. 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 Ibs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet
(CFC sec 902). .
93. 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 feet six
(6) inches (CFC 902.2.2.1).
94. 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 tumaround capable of
accommodating fire apparatus (CFC 902.2.2.4).
95. Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access from
Ynez Road, via all weather surface roads and one (1) point of access into the grounds. The
bridges going in to the center island do not require vehicle access and was approved by the
Fire Prevention Bureau (CFC 902.2.1).
G:\PlanningI2006IPA06-0213 Temecula Water Park CUP\Planning\Draft COAs.doc
16
96. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water
system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. Plans shall be
signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature
block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. After
the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to the Fire
Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be
installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building
materials being placed on an individual lot (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire
Protection Association 24 1-4.1).
Community Services Department
97. The developer shall provide TCSD verification of arrangements made with the City's
franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris.
98. The developer shall post security and enter into an agreement to install the landscaped
median on Ynez.Road.
99. The trash compactor, location and enclosure (if any) will be reviewed and approved by
Planning Department, Community Services Department and the City's franchised trash
hauler.
100. Prior to the first building permit or installation of street lights on Ynez Road which ever
occurs first, the developer shall complete the TCSD application process, submit an Edison
Streetlight Plan and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of street lighting
into the TCSD maintenance program.
G:IPlanningI2OO6\PA08-0213 TemeCtJla Water Pari< CUPIPlanning\Draft COAs.doc
17
PRIOR TO RELEASE OF POWER, BUILDING OCCUPANCY OR
ANY USE ALLOWED BY THIS PERMIT
G:\PlanningI2OO6\PA06.Q213 Temecula Wale' Park CUPlPlanning\Draft COAs.doc
18
Planning Department
101. Prior to the release of power, occupancy, or any use allowed by this permit, the applicant
shall be required to screen all loading areas and roof mounted mechanical equipment from
view of the adjacent residences and public right-of-ways. If upon final inspection it is '
determined that any mechanical equipment, roof equipment or backs .of building parapet
walls are visible from any portion of the public right-of-way adjacent to the project site, the
developer shall provide screening by constructing a sloping tile covered mansard roof
element or other screening if reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning.
102. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been 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.
103. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Planning, to
guarantee the maintenance of the plantings in accordance with the approved construction
landscape and irrigation plan shall be filed with the Planning Department for a period of 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 upon request by the applicant.
104. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently
affixed reflectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying
the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square
inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum
height of 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or
centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground,
or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-
street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously stating
the following:
"Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces ~ot
displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for persons with
disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be
reclaimed by telephoning (951) 696-3000."
105. In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a
surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least
three square feet in size. '
106. All site improvements including but not limited to parking areas and striping shall be installed
prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit.
107. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed
by this permit.
Public Works Department
108. The project shall demonstrate that the pollution prevention BMPs outlined in the WQMP
have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and are ready for
immediate implementation.
G:\PlanningI2006\PA08-0213 Temecula Water Pari< CUPlPlanning\Draft COAs.doc
19
109. 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
110. All public improvements, including traffic signals, shall be constructed and completed per the
approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of
Public Works.
111. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall
be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of
Public Works.
Fire Prevention
112. 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).
113. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, approved numbers or
addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be
plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a
contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and industrial
buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum
of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall gave a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or
numbers on both the front and rear doors (CFC 901.4.4).
114. 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).
115. 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).
116. 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. Application for the Knox-Box may be obtained
from the Fire Prevention Bureau (CFC 902.4).
117. 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).
118. 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.
G:\PlanningI2006IPA06-G213 Temecula Water Part< CUPlPlanninglDraft COAs.doc
20
119. 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).
120. 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).
121. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of
Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material
Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any
quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any
additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports (CFC Appendix II-E).
Community Services Department
122. The landscaped median on Ynez Road shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Director
of Community Services.
Outside Agencies
123. Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control
District's transmittal dated August 7,2006, a copy of which is attached. The fee is made
payable to the Riverside County Flood Control Water District by either a cashier's check or
money order, prior to the issuance of a grading permit (unless deferred to a later date by the
District), based upon the prevailing area drainage plan fee.
124. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated August 14, 2006, a copy of which is
attached.
125. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California
Water District's transmittal dated July 28, 2006, a copy of which is attached.
126. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the City of Temecula
Police Department transmittal dated July 27,2006, a copy of which is attached.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance
with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be
subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant's Signature
Date
Applicant's Printed Name
G:lPlanningl2006IPA08-0213 Temecula Wale' Park CUPlPlanning\Draft COAs.doc
21
WARREN D. WILLIAMS
Jeneral Manager-01iefEngineer
1995 MARKEr STREET
. RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
951.955.1200
951.788.9965 FAX
SIlS0_2
~ ~ (Q; [ff, D W ~~::.~:
HI
. AUG 08 2006 :(.'
'.-
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
9ilY ofTemetula
Planning Department
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, California 92589-9033
Allention~ ~.$n,.J1!' s::>B-\\4.
ladies and Gentlemen: Re: 'f'A 0 "-o'Z-l ~
The District does not nonnaIly .._.......00 conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in :.....r.''lIted cities.
The District also does not plan check ~ land use cases, or provide state Division of Real Estate letters or other flood
hazard r~ for such cases. District _....,.....lsIrecommendations for such cases are normall)' limited to items of
specific iriteresl to the District Including District Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood control and
d'rainage facilities which could be considered a logical componenl or extension of a master jilan s)'Slem, and District
Area Drainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition, information of a geneiaI nature is provided.
The District has not reviewed the pro~ project In detail and the following checked comments do not in any way
constitute or Imply District approval or endorsement of the proposed project With respect to flood hazard, public health
and safety or any other sucli Issue:
No comment.
7.. This., .1'."; would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other tacllities of
reglolial nterest., vt'u-Xld. .
This project involves District Master Plan tacllities. The District will accept ownership of such tacllities on
written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District pian check and
i......<-..;;oo wiD be required for District a""",,,;",.ce. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be
required. .
This ~ proposes channels, stann drains 36 inches or larger in diameter or other facilities that could be
considered regional in nature and/or a logical extension of the adopled .
Master Drainage Plan. The District would consider 8CCellting ownership OT sucn taClIIUes on wrnten requeST
of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District slanOards, and District plan check and inl!PElClion WIll be
required for District a..~"""....... Plan check, insr.";;... and administrative fees will be required.
~ This project is located within the limits of the District's l'!1I"""1'A~-~""~"/I'W'~
Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been a~ed; apjiTlcaDle rees snoulO De palo oy C8SI1Ier s clJeck
or money order only to the AoOO Control District or . 'prior to issuance of grading pennits. Fees to be paid
should be at the rate in effect at the time of issuance the actual permit.
_ An e. .~_~..ltment permit shall be obtained for any construction related activities accurring within District right
of way or facilities. For further information, contact the District's encroachment permit section at
951.955.1266. .
GENERAL INFORMATION
By_
Planning 0 . __'u,
spa! tm,mt
This project may r~uirea National Pollutant Discharge Bimination Svstem (NPDES) ~rmit from the StaleWater
. Resources Control BOard. Clearance for gradin!!, recoroation, or other final approval slioUld not be given until the City
has detennined that the project has been granteu a permit or IS shown to be exempl.
If this prllject InvolVes a Federal Emergell9' Mall<.~....<-"l Agency (FEMAl map~ flood plain, then the CitY should
require tile applicant to prOvide all studies,,- ~ICUlations, Plans and other Information reguired to meel FEMA
requirements, and should further ~ulre that me applicant ciblain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) prior
to grading, .<-_, "",tion or other final approval of the project, and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior (0 OCCI!Jl8ncy.
If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain.is impacted !>Y this project, the City should require the aPDlicant to
obtain a section 160111603 Agreement from the California Department of Fish ani:! Game and a Clean Water Act
Section 404 Permit from.the U.S. (vrny Corps of Engineers, or virilten correspondence from these agencies indicating
the project is exempt from these requirements. A Clean Water Act Section 401 Water QualityceitiflCalion may be
requirei:l from the local California Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of the Corps 404 pennit.
Very truly yours,
~d2;
c~
Riverside County Planning Department
Alln: David Mares
-;w..
ARTURO DIAZ
Senior Civil Engineer
Date: e-7-tJ~
r--"" '-'0:
~"'A 0 C6JNTY OF RIVERSIDE · HEAJA SERVICES AGENCY 0
, ~.. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH.
~.~ .,.."~...",,.~,..~_ "'_..,m............"."..._,.."'"...,. .....",.~".,. ....'::..... ... ., ..............""",, .""."...,,,..,~,........, . ._~...
August 14, 2006
City of Temecula Planning Department
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Attention: Christine Damko
RE: Development Plan No. P A06-0213
~ fC2 ','''' """ .1 ,-. n "'"" .........
O L.S:; Il I'~' I Yei "ei.' ,
~./J b u \j .1._ "~I i1~
--.. J4 t
J I' ,
AUG 1 6 2006 &
f.>.,
Dear Ms. Damko:
D.:.p...;"'ent of Environmental Health has reviewed the development plan with a Conditional Use
Permit for a 13,000 square foot water park located on the northwest intersection of Ynez Road and
County Center Drive (Former Pre-App, PR06-0015) does indicate water and sewer services exist, and
we assume that these services are in and are available.
-, l'*'>"':'"\nartrnent
1. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS THE FOLLOWING
SHOULD BE REQUIRED:
a) "Will-serve" letters from the appropriate water district (APN 910-271-002).
b) If there are to be any food establishments, (including vending machines), three complete
sets of plans for each food establishment will be submitted including a fixture schedule,
a fmish schedule and a plumbing schedule in order to ensure compliance with the
California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law 2. For specific reference, contact Food
Facility Plan Examiners at (951) 461.0284.
c) Swimming pools must be submitted to the Department of Environmental Health pool
. plan section at 951-461-0284.
Sincerely,
Gregor Dellenbach, REHS
(951) 955-8980
NOTE: Any current additional requirements not covered can be applicable at time of Building Plan review for final D ~r.....-.....-~t of
Eovironm~ Health clearance.
Local Enforcement Agency. po.. Box 1280. Riverside, CA 92502-1280 . (909) 955-8982 . FAX (909) 781-9653 . 4080 Lemon Street. 9th Floor, Riverside, CA 92501
Land Use and Water Engineering' Po. Box 1206, Riverside, CA 92502-1206 . (9091955-8980 . FAX (lJ09) 955-8903 . 4080 Lemon Slreet. 2nd Floor. Riverside. CA 92501
/
@
Bado
later
Board of Directors
Ben R. Jhake
President
Stephen J. Corona
Sr. Vice President
Ralph H. Daily
Lisa D. Beraum
JohnE. Ho~d
Michael R. McMillan
WiWamE. Plummer
Officers:
Brian J. Brady
G.nmol Manager
Phillip L Forbes
Assistant General Manager I
Chief Financial Offi.~r
E. P."Bob" Lemons
Director of Engineering
Perry R. Louck
Director of PIanning
JeffD. Armstrong
ControU"
Kelli E. Garcia
District Secretary
C. Michael CoweU
Best Best & Krieger LLP
G.nmol """"'"
,
'.
July 28, 2006
Christine Damko, Project Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
6)~(QJ~ a W~m~
III AUG 0 2 2006 :::J
By
Planning Department
SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY
PROPOSED TEMECULA WATER PARK
PARCELS NO.3, NO.4, AND NO.5 OF PARCEL MAP NO.
27239 AND PORTIONS OF PARCEL NO.2 AND NO.3 OF
PARCEL MAP NO. 19677;APN 910-271-002, APN 910-271-
005, APN 910-271-006, APN 910-271-007, AND APN 910-271-
008; CITY PROJECT NO. PA06-0213
[CLEARWATER W ATERPARK DEVELOPMENT]
Dear Ms. Damko:
Please be advised that the above-referenced ",v"",ty is located within the
boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service,
therefore, would be available upon construction of any required on-site and/or off-
site water facilities and the completion of financial arrangements between RCWD
and the property owner.
Iff Ire 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 A15,,,,,ment that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. .
This project should be conditioned to USI'l recycled water for all landscape
irrigation.
If you should have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services
Representative at this office.
Sincerely,
ISTRICT
Mic el G. Meyerpeter, .E.
Acting Development Engineering Manager
cc: Laurie Williams, Engineering Services Supervisor
O6IMM:aU52\FEG
/
Rancho Califol'Dia Water District
42135WinchesterRoad . -PQstQffiI..'6Box9017 . Temecula,Califomia92589-9017 . (951)296-6900 . FAX(95l)296-6860
-www,."n..hnw"t......-..-
TEMECULA POLICE DEPARTMENT
Crime Prevention & Plans Unit
28410 Old Town Front Street, Suite 105, Temecula, CA 92590
(951) 695-2773 Fax: (951) 506-5708
Project Number:
July 27,2006
PA06-0213 .
Date:
Project Type:
Project Name:
Development Plan
Temecula Water Park
Project
Description:
A Development Plan with a Conditional Use Permit for a 13,000 square
foot water park located at the North West intersection of Ynez Road and
County Center Drive
Applicant:
Clearwater Water Park Development
Case Planner:
Christine Damko
The following pertains to Officer Safety, Public Safety and Crime Prevention measures regarding
this planning project transmittal.
1. landscaping: Applicant shall ensure all landscaping surrounding all buildings are kept
at a height of no more than three feet (3') or below the ground floor windowsills. Plants,
hedges and shrubbery should be defensible plants to deter would-be intruders from
breaking into the buildings utilizing lower level windows. All landscaping surrounding all
waterslide attractions will be maintained at a level so as not to interfere with the safe
operation of each attraction.
a. Applicant shall ensure all trees surrounding all building roof tops and water
attractions be kept at a distance so as to deter roof accessibility by "would-be
burglars." Trees also act as a natural ladder. Prune tree branches with at least a
6 feet clearance from all buildings and water attractions.
b. Any burms should. not exceed 3' in height.
c. The placement of all landscaping should follow the recommendations from Crime
Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) guidelines.
2. Lighting: All parking lot lighting surrounding the complex should be energy-saving and
minimized after hours of darkness and in compliance with the State of Califomia Lighting
Ordinance, Califomia Govemment Code 8565. Furthermore, recommend all exterior
lighting be in compliance with Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance 665 requiring low-pressure
sodium lighting.
".
a. Recommend all exterior doors have their own vandal resistant fixtures installed
above each door. The doors should be illuminated with a minimum one (1) foot
candle illumination at ground level, evenly dispersed.
b. All exterior night lighting should be wall mount light fixtures to provide sufficient
lighting during hours of darkness and to prevent problems on the premises.
c. The Govemors Order to address the power crisis became effective March 18,
2001. This bill calls for a substantial reduction from businesses to cut usage
during non-business hours. The order. in part. states: "All Califomia retail
establishments, including but not limited to shopping centers, auto malls and
dealerships, shall substantially reduce maximum outdoor lighting capability during
non-business hours except as necessary for the health and safety of the public,
employees or property.'
d. "Failure to comply with this orderfollowing a waming by law enforcement officials
shall be punishable as a misdemeanor with a fine not to exceed $1,000.00 in
accordance with section 8565 of the Califomia Govemment Code."
3. Hardware: Recommend all doors, windows, locking mechanisms, hinges, and other
miscellaneous hardware is commercial or institI,ltion grade.
4. Graffiti: Any graffiti painted or marked upon the buildings should be removed or painted
over within twenty-four (24) hours of being discovered. Photographs of the graffiti should
be taken and forwarded to the Temecula Police Department, attn: Crime Analysis.
Report all crimes to the Temecula Police 24-hour dispatch center (951) 696-HELP.
5. Alarm System: Upon completion of construction, the buildings shall have a mpnitored
alarm system installed and monitored 24-hours a day by a designated private alarm
company, to notify theTemecula Police Department of any intrusion.
6. Roof Hatches: All roof hatches shall be painted "Intemational Orange.'
7. Public Telephones: Any public telephones located on the exterior of the buildings
should be placed in a well-lighted, highly visible area, and.installed with a "call-out only"
feature to dete( loitering. This feature is not required for public telephones installed
within the interior of the buildings.
8. Marked Parking for Disabled Vehicles: All disabled parking stalls on the premises
shall be marked in accordance with section 22511.8 of the Califomia Vehicle Code.
9. Crime Prevention:
a. All retailing business~s shall contact the Califomia Retailers Association fortheir
booklet on the Califomia Retail Theft Law at: Califomia Retailers Association
1127-11th Street, Suite 1030, Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 443-1975. Penal
Code 490.5 affords merchants the opportunity to recover their losses through a
civil demand program.
b. Business desiring a business security survey of their location can contact the Crime
Prevention and Plans Unit of the Temecula Police Department.
c. Employee training regarding retail theft, credit card prevention, citizen's arrest
procedures, personal safety, business security, shoplifting or any other related
crime prevention training procedures is also available through the crime
prevention unit.
d. If the applicant plans on applying for a separate alcoholic beverage control
license, a separate conditional use permit/public convenience and necessity
request must be submitted. Applicant will comply with all guidelines of the
Califomia Business and Profession Codes and all other guidelines associated
with the State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. Contact the Temecula
Police Department for inspections and training for employees, management
. and owners: This includes special events held on location where alcohol will be
serviced for a fee and the event is open to the general public.
e. The Temecula Police Department affords all retailers the opportunity to
participate in the "Inkless Ink Program: At a minimal cost of less than $40.00 for
inkless inkpads, retailers can take a thumbprint of every customer using a
personal check to pay for services. A decal is also posted on the front entry of
the business-advising customers of the "Inkless Ink program in use". If the
business becomes a victim of check fraud, the police department will be able to
track the suspect with the thumbprint. .
Any questions regarding these comments shall be referred to the Temecula Police Department
Crime Prevention and Plans Officer at (951) 695-2773.
Lynn N. Fanene, Sr.
ATTACHMENT NO.4
INITIAL STUDY
.
G:IPlanningl2006\PA06-Q213 Temecula Water Part< CUPlPlanninglPC Staff Report.doc
13
City of Temecula
Planning Department
Notice of Proposed Negative Declaration
PROJECT:
Temecula Water Park, Planning Application No. PA06-0213
APPLICANT:
Clearwater Waterpark Development
LOCATION:
Northwest intersection of Ynez Road and County Center Drive
DESCRIPTION: The proposed project is the site development and construction of a 13,000
square foot water park located on approximately 15 acres consisting of pools, slides, and other
types of water rides, concession stands, gift shop, party room, changing room with lockers,
restrooms, picnic areas, service yard, and an associated parking lot.
.
The City of T emecula intends to adopt a Negative Declaration for the project described above.
Based upon the information contained in the attached Initial Environmental Study and pursuant
to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); it has been determined
that this project as proposed, revised or mitigated will not have a significant impact upon the
environment. As a result, the Planning Commission intends to adopt a Negative Declaration for
this project.
The Comment Period for this proposed Negative Declaration is September 28, 2006 to October
17,2006. Written comments and responses to this notice should be addressed to the contact
person listed below at the following address: City of Temecula, P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA
92589-9033. City Hall is located at 43200 Business Park Drive.
The public notice of the intent to adopt this Negative Declaration is provided through: (Phase
One will be approved administratively; Phase Two will be heard by the Planning Commission)
-X The Local Newspaper. L Posting the Site. -X Notice to Adjacent Property Owners.
If you need additional information or have any questions concerning this project, please contact
Christine Damko at (951) 694-6400.
Prepared by:
Christine Damko. Associate Planner
. (Name and Title)
G:\Planning\2006\PA06-02f3 Temecula Water Park CUPlPlanninglNOTICE OF PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION.doc
I
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
I Project Title
Lead Agency Name and Address
Contact Person and Phone Number
Project Location
Project Sponsor's Name and Address
I General Plan Desionation
I Zonino
Description of Project
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
I Other public agencies whose approval
is reQuired
Use of this Initial Study
Environmental Checklist
Temecula Water Park
(Planning Application No. PA06-02131
City of T emecula
P.O. Box 9033,
T emecula, CA 92589-9033
Christine Damko, Associate Planner
(951) 694-6400
The project site is located east of and abutting Interstate 15, west of
and abutting Ynez Road, and north of Winchester Road in the City of
Temecula. It is within unsectioned land of Township 8 South and
Range 3 West of the Temecula U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-
minute topographic quadrangle.
Stan Berney
303 Broadway, Suite 212
Laouna Beach, CA 92651
Service Commercial (SCI
Service Commercial (SCI
The proposed project is the site development and construction of a
13,000 square foot water park on 15 acres consisting of pools,
slides, and other types of water rides, concession stands, gift shop,
party room, changing room with lockers, restrooms, picnic areas,
service yard, and parking lot. The water park will be operating
approximately four months of the calendar year. The park will be
open daily from Memorial Day to Labor Day from 10:00am to
8:00pm. It is anticipated that the park will retain 15 full time
emplovees and 300 seasonal employees.
The site is surrounded by industrial and office buildings located to
the north, east, and south. The building to the south also includes a
gym. The west side of the property abuts the Interstate 15 freeway.
The furthest north corner of the property is located next to vacant,
graded land. Approximately one mile north of the site is the
Harveston Specific Plan which includes an estimated 1 ,900
residences. The Harveston Sports Park which is located less than
one mile north east of the site.
None
This Initial Study is intended to evaluate the environmental effects
and impacts associated with the proposed project. The final
approval for the proposed project and this Initial Study is expected to
be made by the City Planning Commission.
G:\Planning\2006\PA08-0213 Temecula Water Park CUPlPlanningllnitial Environmental Study.doc
1
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one
impact that is a .Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
I
. Aesthetics
Agriculture Resources
X Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Geology and Soils
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Hydrology and Water Qualitv
Land Use and Planning
. Mineral Resources
X Noise
Population and Housing
Public Services
Recreation
X T ransportationIT raffic
Utilities and Service Svstems
Mandatory Findings of Significance
. None
Determination
(To be completed by the lead agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
'"
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a I
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be preoared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by
the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an I
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is reQuired.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant
unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in
an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is reauired. but it must analyze on Iv the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to
that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the proposed project. nothing further is reQuired.
~)~
q h (p jfJ./)
Date
Christine Damko
Printed Name
City of T emecula
For
G:\PlanningI2006IPA08-0213 Temecula Water Park CUP\Planning~nn;al Environmental Study.doc
2
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
d.
Issues and SUDoortina InfOrmation Sources
Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but
not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildinos within a state scenic hiohwav?
Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
oualitv of the site and its surroundinos?
Create a new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
Potentially
Significam
lnu>acl
Potentially
Slgnificanl Unless
;MitigatiOn'
lncol'DOf8ted
.. Less Than
Significant
lmoacr
Nolmoacl
.;
.
I a.
b.
I c.
.
.
Comments:
1.a. No Impact: The proposed project is on vacant land. No scenic vistas have been identified per the City's
General Plan or will be adversely impacted from developing the proposed project. No impacts are expected.
1.b. No Impact: No major rock outcroppings or historic buildings exist on the project site. The project site is
not located on a scenic highway. No impacts are expected.
1.c. Less Than Significant Impact: The area surrounding the project consists of the Interstate 15 freeway
directly to the west, a church and an industrial building to the north, and industriaVoffice buildings to the east
and south. The Harveston Specific Plan is located less than 1 mile north of the project site, however residents
within that Specific Plan will have a low aesthetic impact from the proposed development since existing
industrial and office buildings block the views. The water park will be partially visible to the traffic on the
Interstate 15 northbound and southbound, specifically the rides located near the west side of the properly. The
existing landscaping located adjacent to the freeway and a proposed garden wall with additional landscaping
will aid.in screening the project. Employees and visitors driving to the industrial buildings located adjacent to
the site will be affected the most and the water park will substantially change the existing character of the
surrounding area. This project, however, will not degrade the existing character of the area. The City's
Development Code and Design Guidelines establish design and landscaping standards which will ensure that
the project site is developed in a manner consistent with the City's standards. The project site will have
landscaped screening and decorative walls around the entire perimeter of the site to help screen the project
from the surrounding area. Based on fulfilling these design standards, project aesthetic impacts are
anticipated to be less than significant. .
1.d. Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project site is currently vacant with no sources of light or
glare. The proposed project will' introduce new generators of light and glare. However, the surrounding uses
will typically not be open for business in the evening. In addition this project will be constructed in accordance
with zoning development standards including maximum height, landscape buffers, and the Mount Palomar
Lighting Ordinance. The City of Temecula requires all new development to comply with the Riverside County
Mount Palomar Ordinance 655. Ordinance 655 requires lighting to be shielded, directed down to avoid glare
onto adjacent properties and emit low levels of glare into the sky. Less than significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of the project.
G:\Plannlngl2OO6IPA08-0213 Temecuia Water Part< CUPlPianningUnitial Environmental Study.doc
3
2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land
Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of
Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.
Would the project:
b.
Issues and SUoDortii1alnfoim-atioriSoui'ceS
Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of. Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
Calffornia Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
'Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
Involve other changes in the existing environment
.which, due .to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-aoricultural use?
PotentiOlly
Signitic8nt;
tinoact
Potentially.;
Significant'Unless '
.Mitigation.
lilc.u,'~......."..
LeSs Than
Slgniflcal1l
lrrioact
.j
'No-Imead-'-
a.
y'
c.
y'
Comments:
2.a. Less Than Significant Impact: According to Figure 5.2-1 labeled "Agricultural Resources" in. the
Agricultural Resources, Section OS-30 of the General Plan, the project is in an area of farmland of local
importance. However, the 15 acre site is surrounded by industrial development and there are no other
immediate properties in the vicinity of the project which have been allocated for farmland use. . The subject site
is not currently being used for agricultural purposes, and the City's General Plan Land Use Element has
designated the site for Service Commercial uses. Therefore, there will be less than significant impacts as a
result from the project.
. 2.b-c. No Impact The site is not under a Williamson Act contract nor is it zoned for agricultural uses. This
property is not considered prime or unique farmland of statewide or local importance as identified by the State
Department of Conservation and the City of Temecula General Plan. In addition, the project will not involve
changes in the existing environment, which would result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses.
No impact is anticipated from this proposed project.
G:\Planningl2006IPA06-0213 Temecula Water Part< CUPlPlanning~nitial Environmental Sludy.doc
4
I a.
I d.
Ie.
3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
Issues ane;t'Suooortina Information Sources
PotentiaUy
SignifiCant
Imoad
PolenliallY.
Significant Urness
Mitigation. ;
Ineor'Dorated'
. No Impact .
-/
LessTh8n
;,Signific<Urt,
., lmoact'-
b.
Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air Quality plan?
Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air. quality
violation?
Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient
air qualRy standard (including releasing emissions
which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
orecursorsl?
Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of oeoole?
-/
-/
c.
-/
-/
Comments:
3.a. No Impact: An Air Quality Impact Analysis Report was prepared by Michael Brandman Associates dated
August 21, 2006. The proposed project will not conflict or obstruct the implementation of the Air Quality
Management Plan for the South Coast Air Basin. Furthermore, the project will comply with the provisions of
the Plan and the City's General Plan Air Quality Element policies and goals. As a result, no adverse impacts
are forecast and no mitigation is required.
3.b-c. Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated: Some short term construction-related air
quality impacts are expected to occur as a result of this project. These short term impacts are eXpected to
occur from onsite grading activities and from the actual construction of the project. The potential air quality
impacts of this project were assessed using the Air Quality Management District's URBEMIS 2002 model.
Short-term emissions were evaluated with the URBEMIS 2002 for Windows computer program. The
URBEMIS 2002 model sets default values for worker trips and the use of asphalt. Model inputs include the
projected type of land use, the year in which construction is to begin, and the length of the construction period.
For the purpose of this analysis as a worst-case scenario, it is assumed that painting and asphalt paving would
occur simultaneous with building activities. Construction is slated to begin in 2006 and the construction period
is anticipated to require approximately one year to complete. Tables 3 through 5 summarize the results of
these evaluations.
G:lP1anningl2OO6\PA06.Q213 Temecula Water Park CUPlPlanningllnttial Environmental Study.doc
5
Table 3: Estimated Short-Term Emissions (Site Grading)
I 1 1 1 1
Fugitive Dust From Grading' NG NG NG NG 37.50
I Off-road Construction Equipment 103.96 127.35 15.59 NG' 4.43
I Commuting Traffic 0.32 3.47 0.17 NG' 0.02
I Emissions Totals (lbs/day) 104.28 130.82 15.76 >0.01 41.95
I SCAQMD Thresholds 100 lbs/day 550 Ibs/day 75 lbs/day 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day
I Notes: 'Criteria pollutants that have estimated negligible values are designated NG (negligible emissions).
Table 4: Estimated Short-Term Emissions (Construction Period)
Construction Equipment 28.76 30.04
Commuting Traffic NG 1 0.06 NG' NG 1
I Architectural Coating Application NG' NG 1 3.75 NG'
I Emissions Totals (lbs/day) 28.76 30.10 7.69 >0.01
I SCAQMD Thresholds 100 lbs/day 550 Ibs/day 75 Ibs/day 150 Ibs/day .
I Notes: ' NG designates criteria pollutants that have estimated negligible values.
Table 5: Estimated Short-Term Emissions (Asphalt Paving)
1
NG.
1
NG
1.22
150 Ibs/day
69.91
87.63
10.71
I Off-road Asphalt Equipment
IOn-road Asphalt Equipment
Commuting Traffic
1
NG
0.Q1
0.74
0.57
0.20
0.05
3.85
0.03
,
NG
Asphalt Offgassing NG 1 NG 1 0.95 NG 1
I Emissions Totals (Ibs/day) 73.79 88.94 11.91 0.01
SCAQMD Thresholds 100 lbs/day 550 Ibs/day 75 lbs/day 150 lbs/day
Notes: lNG designates criteria pollutants that have estimated negligible values.
2.72
0.08
0.Q1
1
NG
2.81
150 Ibs/day
When emissions projections are compared with the SCAQMD thresholds for significance, it is shown that
emissions exceed the applicable thresholds for NOx. The primary source of NOx is heavy equipment.
In an effort to reduce estimated NOx emissions related to construction activities, a range of mitigation
measures were considered. Effective NOx emission reduction measures include the use of construction
equipment with lean NOx oxidation catalyst and/or reduction in equipment horsepower hours per day,
providing temporary traffic control (e.g., flag person) during transport activities, properly maintaining
construction equipment, prohibit truck and equipment idling in excess of five minutes, provide on-site meals
during lunch to construction workers by arranging to have a lunch wagon visit the site during work breaks, and
use temporary electric power for electric power tools.
G:\Planningl2OO6\PA08-0213 Temecula Waler Park CUPlPlanningllnitial Environmental Study.doc
6
Table 6 shows the estimated total short-term emissions with construction phase mitigation measures imposed
upon the proposed project.
Table 6: Mitigated Short-Term Emissions
I Grading Emissions Totals (Ibs/day) 93.88
I Grading Exceed Threshold? NO
I Construction Emissions Totals (lbs/day) 28.76
I Construction Exceed Threshold? NO
I Asphalt Emissions Totals (lbs/day) 73.79
Paving
Asphalt Exceed Threshold? NO
Paving
I SCAQMD Thresholds 100 Ibs/day I
As shown in Table 6, mitigated short-term emissions are below the all applicable SCAQMD suggested
thresholds.
An estimate of the daily total long-term project emissions is derived by combining both mobile and stationary
emissions (natural gas consumption, consumer product consumption, paint applications, and landscape
maintenance). Total daily emissions were estimated for summer and winter. Table 7, Composite Long-term
Emissions-Summer, presents the estimated daily total emissions during the summer at project build out.
G:\PlanningI2006\PA06-Q213 Temecula Waler Pam CUPlPlanning\lnitial Environmental Study.doc
7
Table 7: Composite Long-Term Emissions-Summer
I Mobile Emissions 6.75 69.83 5.10 0.05 6.97
I Natural Gas 0.02 0.02 NG NG NG
Consumption
I Landscape Emissions 0.01 2.07 0.31 NG 0.01
I Painting activities NG NG 0.03 NG NG
I Emissions Totals 6.78 71.92 5.44 0.05 6.98
(lbs/day)
I SCAQMD Thresholds 55 lbs/day 550 Ibs/day 55 Ibs/day 150 Ibs/day 150 lbs/day
I Note: NG designates criteria pollutants that have estimated negligible values.
Table 8, presents the estimated daily total emissions during the wintertime at project build out.
Table 8: Composite Long-Term Emissions-Winter
Mobile Emissions 67.72
I Natural Gas NG NG
Consumption 0.02 0.02
I Painting activities NG NG 0.03 NG
Emissions Totals 9.75 67.74 5.55 0.04
(lbs/day)
SCAQMD Thresholds 55 Ibs/day 550 lbs/day 55 Ibs/day 150 Ibs/day
I Note: NG designates criteria pollutants that have estimated negligible values.
NG
NG
6.97
150 lbs/day
When emissions projections are compared with the SCAQMD suggested thresholds for significance, it is
shown that long-term emissions are below all the applicable thresholds.
Carbon monoxide (CO) is a localized problem requiring additional analysis beyond total project emissions
quantification. Projects with sensitive receptors or projects that could negatively impact levels of service (LOS)
of existing roads need to use the "California Department of Transportation Carbon Monoxide Protocol"
(hereafter referred to as the CO protocol) to determine the potential to create a CO hot spot. A CO hot spot is
a localized concentration of CO that is above the State or Federal one-hour or eight-hour ambient air
standards. Localized high levels of CO are associated with traffic congestion and idling or slow-moving
vehicles.
The CO protocol recommends using CALlNE4, the fourth generation California Line Source Roadway
Dispersion Model developed by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), to estimate one-hour
CO concentrations from roadway traffic. Input data for this model includes meteorology, street network
geometrics, traffic information, and emissions generation rates. Meteorological data required includes average
temperatures, wind direction, sigma theta (standard deviation of wind direction), and wind speed. Street
network geometrics require the use of an x, y coordinate system onto which the modeled roadways can be
overlain in order to identify the relative.
G:\PlanningI2OO6IPA06-0213 Temecula Walel Park CUPlPlanningllnitial Environmental Study.doc
8
Required traffic information was taken from the project specific traffic study and includes peak hour traffic
volumes arid levels of service. Emission factors were calculated in grams/mile/vehicle using the EMFAC2002
computer model.
According to the CO protocol, the CALlNE4 model should simulate intersections by using a reduced speed to
represent intersection speeds and waits. Therefore, the slowing speed approaching an intersection was
calculated at an average speed of five miles per hour (mph) within 249 feet. This value was derived by
calculating the time it would take for a vehicle to slow from 28 mph at a rate of 4.6 mph/second and doubling
this distance to account for any vehicles which have already stopped at the intersection. Vehicles outside of
the 249-foot intersection approaches were assumed to be at a cruise speed of 28 mph as directed by the CO
protocol for suburban traffic. The peak hour traffic volumes, when the worst-case LOS value occurred at each
intersection, were used in this analysis because they represent the highest traffic volumes for both the project
area and the proposed project. Typically, the LOS at an intersection producing a hot spot is at D or worse
during the peak hour. Five intersections meet this criterion including:
. Winchester Road at Jefferson Avenue
.
Winchester Road at 1-15 NB Ramps
Winchester Road at Ynez Road
Winchester Road at Promenade Mall East Driveway
Winchester Road at Margarita
.
.
.
The model procedure that was followed combined the results of the traffic analysis assuming very restrictive
dispersion conditions in order to generate a worst-case impact assessment. Output from the CALlNE4 model
is in one-hour CO concentrations in ppm at the selected receptor locations. The predicted one-hour CO
concentrations were determined by adding the ambient background one-hour CO concentrations to the model
projected one-hour CO concentration. The eight-hour CO concentration was estimated by multiplying the one-
hour model estimate by the persistence factor for the project area (0.6) and adding the ambient background
eight-hour CO concentration.
Assuming worst-case conditions, the estimated one-hour and eight-hour average CO concentrations in
combination with background concentrations are below the State and Federal ambient air quality standards.
No CO hot spots are anticipated as a result of traffic generated emissions by the proposed project in
combination with other anticipated development in the area.
The AQMP contains performance standards and emissions reduction targets necessary to attain the state and
federal AAQS. According to CARB's transportation performance standards, the rate of growth in vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) and trips should be held to the rate of population growth. Compliance with this performance
standard for residential projects is one way suggested in the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook of
showing compliance with the AQMP and is assessed by determining the population, vehicle trips generated
(VT) and VMT for the project at build-out year and comparing that to the disaggregated population, VT and
VMT for the project area assumed in the AQMP. If the total VMT generated by the proposed project at project
build-out year is at or below the disaggregated total VMT for the project site assumed in the AQMP, then the
proposed project is consistent with the AQMP. The URBEMIS 2002 model assigns trip generation and miles
traveled for particular land uses.
The SCA6population projections for year 2010 used in the AQMP for the City of Temecula assumes land use
designations in the General Plan and includes build-out of the site. The project site under the current General
Plan land use designation (Service Commercial) would accommodate up to a total of 339,420 square feet of
commercial floor space. Table 9 compares the proposed project with the assumptions in the AQMP.
G:\planningI2006IPA06-Q213 Temecula Water Park CUP\Planning\ln~ial Environmental Sludy.doc
9
Table 9: AQMP Population, VT, and VMT Comparison With Proposed Project
I Variables AQMP Assumptions for Site Proposed Project at Build Out
I Land Use Designation Service Commercial Water Park
Density 350,000 sq.ft. of floor space 15 acres of water park
ITE Trip Generation Rate 10.07 ADTs per TSF See Traffic Study
Average Daily Trips (ADTs) 3,525 802
VMT 20,191 I 4,595
Sources: SCAQMD CEQA Handbook (1993), ITE Trip Generation /' Edition
The proposed project is below the number of VMT assumed in the AQMP based on the Service Commercial
zoning. For this reason, it is appropriate to conclude that the proposed project is in compliance with the AQMP
and there will be less than significant impacts with the following mitigation measures proposed:
Prior to construction of the proposed improvements, the project proponent will provide a traffic control
plan thatwill describe safe detours around the project construction site and provide temporary traffic
control (i.e., flag person) during construction related truck hauling activities.
During construction of the proposed improvements, construction equipment will be properly
maintained at an offsite location and includes proper tuning and timing of engines. Equipment
maintenance records and equipment design specification data sheets shall be kept onsite during
construction.
During construction of the proposed improvements, all contractors will be advised not to idle
construction equipment on site for more than 10 minutes.
During construction of the proposed improvements, the project applicant will provide on-site meals to
construction workers by arranging a lunch wagon to visit the construction site during work breaks
including the lunch break.
Prior to construction of the proposed improvements, the project proponent will provide a Dust Control
Plan that will describe the application of standard best management practices to control dust during
construction. Best management practices will Include:
. Application of water on disturbed soils and unpaved roadways a minimum of three times per
day
. Usingtrack-out prevention devices at construction site access points
. Stabilizing construction area exit points
. Covering haul vehicles
. Restricting vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour (mph)
. Replanting disturbed areas as soon as practical and other measures, as deemed appropriate to
the site, to control fugitive dust
3.d. No Impact: Sensitive receptors include the very young, elderly, and persons suffering from illness and
are normally associated with locations such as schools, daycare facilities, convalescent care facilities, medical
facilities, and residential areas. The closest potentially sensitive receptor is a church. Diesel emissions during
the short-term construction activities are too low to pose an acute significant toxic air contaminant health
hazard and they will not occur over the long-term. As a result, no significant impacts are expected with this
project.
G:\Planningl2006IPA06-Q213 Temecula Wale, Park CUPlPlanningllnitial Environmental Study.doc
10
With no significant potential exposure to toxic substances or to CO "Hotspots", the proposed project is not
forecast to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations that would be considered
significant and adverse or exceed air quality significance thresholds with the inclusion of the identified
mitigation measures.
3.e. No Impact: During construction the proposed project will contain operations that will produce odors
associated with equipment and materials. The site is located within the vicinity of sensitive receptors, a
church; however, the odors associated with this type project are normally not considered so offensive as to
cause sensitive receptors to complain. Diesel fuel combustion odors from construction equipment, operation
equipment, and new asphalt paving fall into this category. Both based on the short-term of the emissions and
the characteristics of these emissions, no significant odor impacts will result from implementing the proposed
project.
G:\Plannlngl2OO6\PA08-0213 Temecula Water Park CUP\Planning~nitlal Environmental Study.doc
11
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project?
Issues and Suooortinci Information-Sources
POIEmtially" :'
SignifiCant
"ImOaCt
" _Potentially
,-'SignifiCant Uniess'
: ,Mitigalion:~ '
':lncoroorated
No ImriaCt
Less Than
Significanr
lmoacl
.j
a.
Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications. on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the Califomia Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identnied
in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by
the California Department of Fish and Game or US
Fish and Wildlife Service?
Have a substantial adverse effect of federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh,
vemal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
fillina, hydroloaical interruDtion, or other means?
Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
Dreservation Dolicy or ordinance?
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
'"
b.
'"
c.
'"
d.
'"
e.
'"
f.
Background:
Riverside County adopted the Western Riverside County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP)
on June 17, 2003. The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Biological Opinion in favor Qf adopting the
MSHCP was released on June 22,2004. The City of Temecula is a signatory to the MSHCP, and therefore,
the project is required to comply with the MSHCP. Section 6.0 of the MSHCP identifies the local
implementation measures.. Section 6.1.6 details the County and Cities Obligations and corresponds with
Section 13.2 of the Biological Opinion issued by the USFWS. The program requires the City to undertake the
following steps to insure compliance with the requirements of the MSHCP.
. Payment of local development mitigation fees and other relevant fees (Section 8.5)
· Comply with the Habitat Assessment program (HANS) processor equivalent process to satisfy local
acquisition obligation
. Comply with the survey requirements (Section 6.3.2)
. Comply with the policies of the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools (Section 6.1.2)
. Comply with the policies of the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species (Section 6.1.3)
. Comply with the policies of the UrbanlWildlands Interface (Section 6.1.4)
. Comply with the Best Management Practices (Section 7.0; Appendix C)
G:\PlanningI2006\PA06-Q213 Temecula Water Park CUPlP1anning~nitial Environmental Sludy.doc
12
The project site is in the Southwest Area Plan of the MSHCP. The project site is not within a Criteria Cell of
the MSHCP and no HANS review is required. The closest Criteria Cell (6783) of the MSHCP is approximately
.3 mile to the south and will not be affected by project activities. The MSHCP does not have any habitat
assessment requirements for the project sit!!. so no additional wildlife or plant surveys are necessary. A review
of the property and its relation to the conservation goals of the MSHCP concluded that no portions of the
property fall within any land that is required for long-term conservation within the area.
Comments:
.
4.a. Less Than Significant Impact: Proposed development within Criteria Cells and Cell Groups is subject
to review under the HANS process. Project applicants whose site falls within Criteria Areas are required to file
a HANS application, which includes a habitat assessment of their project site to determine if all or part of the
property is necessary for inclusion in any MSHCP conservation areas. If it is determined by the Western
Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA), the County, Cities, or various State and Federal
Agencies that all or part of the property is needed for inclusion in the MSHCP Conservation Area, the property
owner will enter in negotiations with such agencies to determine the extent of development allowed within the
project area that will not significantly impact the function of the conservation areas in question. The project site
does not occur within a Criteria Cell of the MSHCP and no HANS review is required. The project site has been
previously grubbed and disturbed for many years to comply with the City's weed abatement ordinance (Ord.
8.16). . There are some grasses on the project site; however they are not considered sensitive habitat, nor is
the site part of a wildlife corridor. Less than significant impact is anticipated from the proposed project.
4.b. No Impact: Section 6.1.2 of the Western Riverside County MSHCP requires an assessment of the
potentially significant effects of a project on covered species occupying riparian/riverine areas and vernal
pools.
The project biologist (Michael Brandman and Associates) conducted a riparian/riverine and vernal pool habitat
assessment of the project site. There are no jurisdictional drainage features or riparian/riverine habitat occurs
on the project site. No blue-line streams are mapped on the Temecula USGS topographic map. Therefore,
there will be no significant impact.
4.c. No Impact: No depressions or areas where water would pool were observed on the site. No vernal pools
occur on the project site. Further, there are no ponded areas or depression onsite that could support fairy
shrimp habitat. No. impact is expected.
4.d. No Impact: The development of the site will not interfere with the movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or species or within the wildlife corridors because this project has not been identified as a
linkage, block, or core in the MSHCP. No significant impacts are proposed for this site.
4.e. Less Than Significant Impact: There are ornamental trees in the western edge of the property, which is
partially developed as an overflow parking lot from the adjacent lot. Species include: Eucalyptus species, pine
species, and the Peruvian pepper tree. These trees are not identified either by the MSHCP or the City as
species that need to be preserved; therefore less than significant impact is proposed.
4.f. No Impact: The burrowing owl is a California state species of concern. Due to lack of adequate
information for known recorded surveys for the Burrowing Owl, the MSHCP has assigned specific conservation
objectives, including a required habitat assessment for this species. This project is not within a Criteria Cell of
the MSHCP and no HANS Review is required. The MSHCP does not have any habitat assessment
requirements for the project site, so no additional wildlife or plants surveys are necessary. No significant
impacts are expected.
G:\PlanningI2OO6IPA06.Q213 Temecula Wale, Pam CUP\Planning~nilial Environmental Study.doc
13
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
.
poiE!ntially' ,
:SignlfiC_antUnless
'~itigatiott
Incoroora:ted
No
ImDact
Leiss Than
Slgnifkiarrt
,'Imoact'
"
PotenUally
Signlficiml
ImoaCt
Issuesand-Suooortlnc.lnformatiOri Sources
a.
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5?
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or uniQue Qeolooic feature?
Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
"
"
lb.
I c.
I d.
"
Comments:
5.a-d. Less Than Significant Impact: The City of Temecula General Plan identifies the project site as a
potential for sensitive archaeological resource area and area of high paleontological sensitivity (Figure 5-6 and
5-7, respectively). The San Diego Natural History Museum indicated in a letter dated August 2, 2006 that the
existing site conditions make paleontological mitigation unnecessary. The majority of the site is underlain by
unfossiliferous, undocumented fill materials. The project site consists of land that has been previously
disturbed as a result of previous maintenance activities, and other human-related disturbances. Cultural
resources of either prehistoric or historical origin were not observed within the site boundaries. Due to the
potential for such resources to occur on the property, the following conditions will be implemented:
If any cultural resources are exposed during initial grading and ground disturbance activities the City
will be contacted, and a qualified archaeologist will evaluate the resources. If discovered resources
merit long-term consideration, adequate funding will be provided to collect, curate and report these
resources in accordance with standard archaeological management requirements. The Pechanga
Band of Luisei'io Indians shall be contacted to develop a management plan for any resources that may
be unearthed, to afford the Band an opportunity to monitor ground-disturbing activities and to
participate in the decisions regarding collection and curation of any such resources.
If any human remains are encountered during initial grading activities, all ground disturbing activities
In the vicinity of the discovery will be terminated immediately and the County Coroner's office will be
contacted to manage such remains.
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a.
Issues and SUDOOrtirinli1fOlTTlatiOriSOurees
Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involvinQ:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on
the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based
on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and GeoloQV Special Publication 42.
ii. StronQ seismic Qround shakinQ?
iii. Seismic-related Qround failure, includinQIiQuefaction?
. PotonlialtY"
'~_,~ot86tiallyi,-.$igriifioaoftJn~$!{
, '.SignIflCarit,:.,. -Miligaliiin.
";,:"bnQactft '\"_': loooroartlled:"
Nolmoact-
U'" .
~ Less Than.: .
" Significant
J:::;"lmoact,'"
.j
"
"
"
G:\PlanningI2006IPA06-0213 Temecula Waler Pari< CUPlPlanningllnitial Environmental Sludy.doc
14
.<, <
I iv. Landslides?
I b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the project,
and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreadinQ. subsidence. liQuefaction or collaose?
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B
of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or oropertv?
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks or altemative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the disposal
of wastewater?
'"
'"
'"
'"
'"
Comments:
6.a.i. Less Than Significantlmpact: According to the City's General Plan EIR, the site is not located within
an Earthquake Fault Hazard Zone. Additionally, the site is not located within the Riverside County Earthquake
Fault Zone. The site could, however, be subjected to significant shaking in the event of a major earthquake on
the San Jacinto fault or other nearby regional faults: As a standard condition of approval, the applicant is
required to build the structures in accordance with the current UBC seismic codes and local ordinances. Less
than significant impacts are anticipated.
6a.ii-iii. Less Than Significant Impact: The principal seismic considerations for most structures in southern
California are surface rupturing of fault traces and damage caused by ground shaking or seismically induced
ground settlement. The possibility of damage due to ground rupture is considered low since active faults are
not known to cross the site. Lurching due to ground shaking from distant seismic events in not considered a
significant hazard. The project will be required to comply with all building code requirements per the State
Building Code to help mitigate the risk of damage during strong seismic ground shaking. Less then significant
impacts are anticipated.
Portions of the subsurface soils are potentially susceptible to liquefaction. Given the relative thickness of the
potential liquefiable soils compared to the thickness of the overlying nonliquefiable soil, surface manifestations
resulting from soil liquefaction are not likely. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
6.a.iv. Less Than Significant Impact: There is a low potential for earthquake induced landslides or rockfalls
on the project site because the site and its surroundings are essentially flat. As a result, no impacts will occur
or mitigation is required for landslides or rock falls and there will be less than a significant impact.
6.b. Less Than Significant Impact: The development of the project site will expose it to potential erosion
and downstream sedimentation. The General Plan requires mitigation for projects to control erosion. Further,
the state-wide NPDES program requires every project with ground disturbance greater than five acres to
implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during project construction and operation. Best
Management Practices (BMPs) are identified in the SWPPP to control erosion on a site and any sedimentation
generated by disturbing the site for development with conformance to the NPDES program, less than
significant impacts are expected.
6.c-d. Less Than Significant Impact: The project is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of this project, and potentially result in on or off-site grading landslide,
lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. The applicant will be required to prepare soils reports
prior to issuance of a grading permit. Less than significant impacts are expected.
6.e. No Impact: The project site will be served by a sewer collection system owned by Eastern Municipal
Water District. No impact is expected.
G:\Planningl2006IPA06-o213 Temecula Water Pari< CUPlPlanningUnitial Environmental Study.doc
15
7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the projecf:
a.
Issues andSuDoomna Information Sources
Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transportation, use,
or diSpOsal of hazardous materials?
Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment? .
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely
hazardous materials,. substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Govemment Code Section 65962.5 and, as a resuR,
would iI create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted. wilhin
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residinQ or workinQ in the proiect area?
For a project within !he vicinily of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residinQ or workinQ in the proiect area?
Impair implementation of or physically interfere wilh
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
Expose people or structures to a signilicant risk or
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
Comments:
'. .Potentially
sigilificimt. .
lmoaet: ,<
potentlaUy
SignificcltitUniess
Mitigation
.. Incomorated:,.
No lmoact '
LessThan ,
Sig~ificard
'hrioact:
./
./
./
./
./
./
./
./
7.a. Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project will use the existing Ynez Road as the ingress and
egress point. The project does propose the use of chlorine and muratic acid and will store these liquids in
above ground double contained containers on site. However, chemicals stored, used, and handled at facilities
are required to ensure that proper types of fire and life safety protection systems and procedures are in place.
The applicant has submitted a chemical classification packet to the City as required by the California Fire Code
and California Building Code for compliance with these requirements. The Fire Department has found that the
access storage and leak protection plan is acceptable. Therefore, there will be no significant hazard to the
public or the environment from the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Less than
significant impacts are anticipated as a result from this project.
7.b. Less Than Significant Impact: It is not anticipated that the project would create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the environment. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
G:\Planningl2006IPAoa-Q213 Ternecula Water Park CUPlPlanningllnilial Environmental Sludy.doc
16
7.c. No Impact: No schools are located within one quarter mile of the site. The proposed construction on the
property does not include any activities or uses that would pose a potential health hazard to the local
population or the nearby school. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.
7.d. No Impact: Review of available data (site appearance, USGS map, California Department of Toxic
Substance Control's (DTSC) Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese List), the Leaking
Underground Storage Tank Information System (LUSTIS) and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
indicates no past uses that may have involved hazardous materials.
Based upon the available data and the historical land use, there is no evidence to support that hazardous
wastes would be present on the site. No impacts are anticipated.
7.e-f. No Impact: The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public
or private airstrip according to Figure 5.9-4 in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. No impact upon
airport.uses will result from this proposal.
7.g. No Impact: The proposed project is not located in an area and is not a portion of an emergency
response or evacuation plan and will be designed to allow for adequate emergency vehicle access to the site.
Therefore, the project would not impair the implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed
project.
7.h. No Impact: The proposed project is not located in or near a wildland area that would be subject to fire
hazards. The location of the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk or
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. No impact is anticipated as a result of this project.
G:\Planning\2006\PA08-0213 Temecula Waler Park CUPIPlanningllnilial Environmental Study.doc
17
8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
Potentially,
Po~nli~Uy Sigl1iftc8nf_Unl~ Less Than
S,ignificant :,:':'MitlgatiQlt Sign~
Issues and SUDOOrtinl1lnfonnation Sources'" Imead 'Incoi'DOrated 'lmoact' No hnoaCt
Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge .j
a.
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade water
aualnv?
b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere v
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquffer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production
rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing land uses or planned
uses for which permits have been oranted)?
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the v
c.
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off-sne?
d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the v
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the
rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would resull in floodinq on- or off-site?
e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed v
the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
If. Require the preparation of a Water Quality Management v
Plan?
Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as v
g.
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary .or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
I h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures v
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, v
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
I j. Inundation bv seiche. tsunami. or mudflow? v
Comment:
8.a. Less Than Significant Impact The project proposes a 13,000 square foot water park. This type of
development typically generates domestic and/or municipal wastewater that does not require pretreatment or
waste discharge requirements. No water quality standards are forecast to be violated by implementing the
proposed project which will deliver its wastewater flows to the region!!l wastewater plant. Wastewater will be
delivered to the regional treatment plant for treatment under waste discharge requirements established by the
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. During construction and occupancy, Best Management
Practices (BMPs) will be implemented which will control storm water runoff pollution to a level of no
significance, therefore less than significant impacts are anticipated.
G:lPlanningI2006IPA06-Q213 Temecula Water Pari< CUPlPlannlngllnilial Envirorunental Sludy.doc
18
8.b. Less Than Significant Impact Groundwater related problems are not expected to be encountered
during site development. If shallow perched groundwater is encountered during construction, it can be
managed with the use of sump pumps placed in the bottom of excavations which will be incorporated.
the proposed project does not include any extraction of groundwater, so no adverse direct impact can result
from implementing the proposed project. The GPEIR addresses water demand from development in the City
of Temecula. The GPEIR concludes that cumulative water demand within the City can be met by the City's
two purveyors without having a significant adverse impact on the environment, including depletion of the areas
groundwater supplies. This is verified by the Rancho Califomia Water District's Urban Water Master Plan
which defines the resources available to the District to meet future cumulative demand within its service area.
The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan designation for the property and thus, is
considered consistent with the GPEIR. Therefore, the proposed project will not contribute to a significant
cumulative, indirect adverse impact on the area groundwater aquifers. In addition, some water will be used for
dust control during the grading process. The property owner has indicated that recycled water will be used for
construction purposes if available. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
8.c. Less Than SIgnificant Impact: Through the implementation of the project SWPPP, erosion and siltation
issues are controlled toa less than significant impact level and this project will not result in substantial erosion
or siltation on or off-site. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
8.d-f. Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would increase runoff as a result of increasing
the impervious surface on the project site. The City imposes standard mitigation to detain surface runoff on the
property to ensure that the maximum runoff volume from the site is not significantly increased.
The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements established by the
State of California. However, the project is required to prepare a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP)
pursuant to the Municipal Separate Storm-Sewer permit (MS4 permit) issued by the Regional Water Quality
Control Board. A preliminary plan has been submitted and the project will comply with RWQCB standards as
designed.
Based upon the information presented above, no significant adverse impact to either downstream flows or
water quality is forecast to affect properties downstream of the site from developing the project as proposed.
Less than significant impacts are proposed. '
8.g-h. Less Than Significant Impact: No buildings or structures will be located within the 1 OO-year floodplain
according to the City's General Plan as a result of implementing this project. No significant flood hazards are
expected to occur from developing the project site as proposed. No significant flood hazards are expected to
occur from developing the project site as proposed. Less that significant impacts are proposed.
8.i. Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee
or dam. The subject property is not located within a dam inundation area per the City's General Plan. In
addition, the City has implemented a multi-hazard functional plan pursuant to the California Emergency
Services, Act. The proposed project does not contain critical or essential facilities. Less than significant
impacts are proposed.
8.j. No .Impact: Due to the project area's distance from the ocean and elevation, there is no potential for a
tsunami. The project area is not located near a large surface water body and there is no potential for
inundation by seiche or mudflow. No impacts are anticipated.
G:lPlanningl2006IPA08-0213 Temecula Water Pari< CUPlPlanningllnitial Environmental Study.doc
19
9. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
I a.
b.
Issues andSuooortinalnfonn~tion Sources
Physically diyide an established community?
Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation
of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not
limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program,
or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitillatinll an enYironmental effect?
Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
Potentially
Signfficant
IrTicart
Potentially:
,SignifiCarrtlJ~less,
"Miti9Ci1icl1l
Il1COrOorated
" LeSs Than
. Significant
Imtiael,
.;
No
lmaact
.,.
I c.
.,.
Comments:
9.a-b. Less Than Significant Impact The project site will not divide the physical arrangement of an
established community. The project site is vacant and surrounded by existing service commercial, industrial,
and office buildings. Just north of the property are a church and an industriaVoffice building. The Harveston
Specific Plan is located further north of the site. This area of the Specific Plan is zoned Service Commercial
and is vacant with no proposals currently submitted to the City. East of the project site, there are existing office
and light industrial buildings located within the Industrial Park zoning designation. West of the property is the 1-
15 Freeway, and to the south of the property is an existing service commercial building. The proposed water
park site is zoned Service Commercial (SC). The City of Temecula Development Code allows Sports and
Recreational Facilities to be permitted in the SC zone with an approved Conditional Use Permit (Table
17.08.030). The project is consistent with the zoning standards of the City's General Plan and Development
Code, the location of the project eliminate any possibility of physically dividing an established community.
Impacts from all General Plan Land Use designations were analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
for the General Plan. Agencies with jurisdiction within the City comments on the scope of the analysis
contained with the EIR and how the land uses would impact their particular agency. Mitigation measures
approved with the EIR have been applied to this project where necessary. Furthermore, all agencies with
jurisdiction over the project are being given the opportunity to comment on the project, and it is anticipated that
they will make the appropriate comments as to how the project relates to their specific environmental plans or
policies. Less than significant impacts are anticipated from this project.
9.c. Less Than Significant Impact The project site is riot within a Criteria Cell of the Westem Riverside
County MSHCP. The property does not fall within any MSHCP Consistency Habitat assessment area. No
jurisClictional drainage features or riparian/riverine habitat occur inside the project site. No vemal pools or fairy
shrimp habitat were observed on the project site. :rhe project site is also located within the Riverside County
Habitat Conservation Plan for Stephen's kangaroo rat, and therefore, a mandatory per acreage development
fee will be assessed for the project. Please refer to the Biological Section for a full discussion of this item and
details of the mitigation measures required. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result from this
project.
G:\Planningl2OO6\PA08-0213 Temecula Wale' Pari< CUP\Planning~nitial Environmental Sludy.doc
20
10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
[ a.
b.
Issues and Suooortinc InfonnationSources
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that
would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific
olan or other land use olan?
Comments:
. Potentially
Signiflcanl
. lmoacl
Pot~EI~Iy: .
SlgnificanfUnlesS _-
Mitigation
liiComorated '
L.essTI\an"
Significant; .. No linpact
lnioact .
~
~
10.a-b. No Impact According to the California Geological Survey, no known mineral resources exist in
Temecula. Development pursuant to the General Plan will not result in the loss of a known mineral resource.
No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
11. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a.
lb.
c.
d.
e.
t.
Issues and SUDDortinalnformation Sources
Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
aoencies?
Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
oroundborne vibration or oroundborne noise levels?
A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without
the oroiect?
A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the oroiect?
.For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working in
. the oroiect area to excessive noise levels?
Comments:
", Potentially
SigniflC8lll"
. Imoact:
Potentially .
,';_~ign~~mY~I~s,sL /~~T~Il':
., -;MitiI1~()"; ;','. 'k:~IghifltAl~1
Incorc0r8tec,; '~i':'lriioad',,'
.j
. , Nolmpact
~
~
~
~
~
11.a. Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated: According to the Acoustical Analysis Report
prepared by Michael Brandman Associates dated August 16, 2006, development of the project would require
site preparation (i.e. land clearing, grading, excavation, and trenching) and construction of the buildings and
infrastructure. These construction activities would generate noise that would be heard both on and off the
project site. The proposed project is not forecast to generate severe noise levels over the long-term. The
project will create some noise levels over that currently emanating from the vacant land. However, those
G:\Planningl2006\PA08-0213 Temecula Water Part< CUP\Planning~nilial Environmental Study.doc
21
noises are not anticipated to create a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the project. Since this project does not involve any pile driving or other
severe noise generating activities, this project is not forecast to generate severe noise levels that would impact
the nearby church, businesses, or residential noise receptors. In general, the trucks and earth-moving sources
are noisiest with equipment noise ranging up to about '90 dBA at 50 feet from the source. Noise emissions
tend to be more associated with periodic events under full load rather than continuous noise exposure.
Spherically radiating point sources of noise emissions are atmospherically attenuated by a factor of 6 dB per
doubling, of distance, or about 20 dB in 500 feet of propagation. The loudest earth-moving noise sources will
therefore sometimes be temporarily detectable above the local background beyond 1,000 feet from the noise
source. An extensive noise impact envelope requires a clear line of sight from source to receiver. Any terrain,
topography or structures between the source and receiver would limit line of sight. Construction noise impacts
are therefore less than predicted under theoretical maximum input conditions.
Construction noise sources are not strictly relatable to a noise standard because they occur only during
selected times and the source strength varies sharply with time. The penalty associated with noise
disturbance during quiet hours, and the nuisance factor accompanying such disturbance, usually leads to time
limits on grading activity imposed as a condition on grading permits. The City of Temecula provides specific
standards for preventing construction noise nuisance which will be incorporated as mitigation measures:
The applicant shall establish a noise complaint response program and shall respond to any noise
complaints received for this project by measuring noise levels at the affected receptor site. If the noise
level exceeds an Ldn of 65 dBA exterior or an Ldn of 45 dBA Interior at the receptor, the applicant will
implement adequate measures (which may include portable sound attenuation walls, use of quieter
equipment, shift of construction schedule to avoid the presence of sensitive receptors, etc.) to reduce
noise levels to the greatest extent feasible.
The applicant will require that all construction equipment be operated with mandated noise control
equipment (mufflers or silencers). Enforcement will be accomplished by random field inspections by
applicant personnel during construction activities.
Compliance with the above standard conditions measures will ensure that construction noise impacts are
controlled to a less than significant level. These measures are set as conditions on the project grading
permits. Compliance with these criteria will preclude creation of a significant temporary noise impact during
construction.
11.b. Less Than Significant Impact: This project does not include any construction activities that would
generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise. No potential exists for significant
groundborne noise/vibration impacts associated with the proposed project. Less than significant impacts are
expected from this project.
11.c. Less Than Significant Impact: In reviewing project impacts, future noise levels will be compared with
the City standards for commercial uses since these are the land uses in the project area.
Project related impacts are minimal (all less than 1.0 dBA) as shown in the right hand column of Table 3. All
predicted noise levels are within the City's Noise Standards with the exception of Winchester Road between 1-
15 and Margarita Road. Noise levels along this roadway segment violate the City's Noise Standards for
commercial 'and uses in the existing conditions and project generated impacts are extremely small (0.10 dBA)
and is not considered a significant project impact. The greatest roadway noise impact generated by the project
occurs on Ynez Road between County Center Drive and Winchester Road where the project increases the
noise levels by 0.50 dBA with an estimated cumulative roadway noise level of 69.1 dBA CNEL. This section of
roadway is bordered entirely by commercial land uses and is within the City's Noise Standard for commercial
land uses. Predicted noise levels at noise sensitive land uses (residential) are all within the City's Noise
Standards in the future with project condition and project impacts are extremely small (less than 0.01 dBA) in
these locations. For these reasons, project generated roadway noise impacts are less than significant.
G:\Planningl2006IPA08-0213 Temecula Water Park CUPlPlanningllnilial Environmental Sludy.doc
22
Table 3 - Existing and Future Year 2007 Noise Impacts
I Winchester Rd.: West of 1-15 67.2 68.5 68.6 1.3 0.10 I
Winchester Rd.: 1-15 to Ynez Rd. 71.5 72.5 72.6 1.1 0.10 1
Winchester Rd.: Ynez Rd. 10 70.4 71.3 71.4 0.9 0.10 I
Margarita Rd
I Ynez Rd.: North of Equity Dr. 51.0 58.5 58.5 7.5 >0.01 I
I Ynez Rd.: County Cenler Dr. to 63.4 68.6 69.1 5.7 0.50 I
Winchester Rd.
I Ynez Rd.: South of Winchester 68.8 70.1 70.4 1.6 0.30 I
County Center Dr.: Ynez Rd. to 54.5 58.1 58.1 3.6 >0.01 I
Equily Dr.
Equity Dr.: Ynez Rd. to County 44.8 55.6 55.6 10.8 >0.01 I
Center Dr. Source: MBA 2006 Measured atl14 feet from roadway cenlerline on Winchester Rd. and Ynez Rd.
Measured at 58 feet from roadway centerline on County Center Dr. and Equity Dr.
Noise levels take into account noise walls along residential properties on Ynez Rd. north of Equity Dr. and Equity Dr. Noise levels al
School slle does not include noise walls.
Onslte Noise Levels. In addition to roadway noise impacts, the analysis needs to address noise impacts to
residential land used closest to the. site related to the onsite activities. The primary sources of noise onsite
include vehicles in the parking lot, pumps and compressors associated with the pools and water rides, and
periodic enouncements on the public address system. Some noise sources such as the public address system
will be periodic, while others such as pumps and compressors will be fairly constant throughout the day. Noise
from children and adults visiting the park is expected, however the noise levels will be consistent with the City's
General Plan noise dBA. The park will be surrounded by a seven foot tall fence which will be constructed of a
block material on the north, south, and west sides. The east side will have partial block and partial tubular
steel.
G:\Planningl2006IPA08-0213 Temecula Water Park CUP\Planning~nitial Environmental Study.doc
23
Table 4 -Noise Impacts From Onsite Noise
I At the SHe Boundaries 65.83
I Across the Streel from Site 57.60
I At Nearesl Residenlial UnHs to the Project Site 41.36
I Source: MBA 2006 Note: 1 Noise measured from center of each noise sourced.
The noise study prepared for the project indicates that the proposed project will not have any significant impact
to off-site noise levels along the project's adjacent roadways or other sensitive land uses in the area. There is
a church adjacent to the property; however, their parking lot and drive aisle is located on the subject parcel
away from the park activities.
H.d. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation: Temporary construction noise impacts vary because
the noise strength of construction equipment ranges as a function of the equipment used and its activity level.
Short-term construction noise impacts tend to occur in discreet phases dominated initially by earth-moving
sources, then by foundation and parking area construction, and finally for finish construction.
In general, earth-moving sources are noisiest with equipment noise ranging up to about 90 dBA at 50 feet from
the source. Pile drivers, jack hammers and rock drills are also noisy, with the peak noise from a pile driver
exceeding 100 dBA at 50 feet and jack hammers and rock drills exceeding 90 dBA. (For more specific
information on construction equipment noise generation, please refer to the noise study in the technical
appendices).
Spherically radiating point sources of noise emissions are atmospherically attenuated by a factor of 6 dB per
doubling of distance, or about 20 dB in 500 feet of propagation. The loudest earth-moving noise sources will
therefore sometimes be temporarily detectable above the local background beyond 1 ,000 feet from the noise
source. An extensive noise impact envelope requires a clear line of sight from source to receiver. Any terrain,
topography or structures between the source and receiver would limit line of sight. Construction noise impacts
are therefore less than predicted under theoretical maximum input conditions.
G:lPlanningl2006IPA08-0213 Temecula Water Pari< CUPlPlanning\lniUal Environmental Sludy.doc
24
Construction noise sources are not strictly relatable to a noise standard because they occur only during
selected times and the source strength varies sharply with time. The penalty associated with noise
disturbance during quiet hours, and the nuisance factor accompanying such disturbance, usually leads to time
limits on grading activity imposed as a condition on grading permits. The following mitigation measures will be
imposed on the project:
The applicant shall require that construction activities be limited to no more than the hours of 7:00 a.m.
to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No construction can occur outside of these hours or on
Sundays or holidays except in the event of emergency.
The applicant shall establish a noise complaint response program and shall respond to any noise
complaints received for this project by measuring noise levels at the affected receptor site. If the noise
level exceeds an Ldn of 65 dBA exterior or an Ldn of 45 dBA interior at the receptor, the applicant will
implement adequate measures (which may include portable sound attenuation walls, use of quieter
equipment, shift of construction schedule to avoid the presence of sensitive receptors, etc.) to reduce
noise levels to the greatest extent feasible.
The applicant will require that all construction equipment be operated with mandated noise control
equipment (mufflers or silencers). Enforcement will be accomplished by random field inspections by
applicant personnel during construction activities.
Compliance with the above time limits will ensure that construction noise impacts are controlled to a less than
significant level. These time limits are set as conditions on the project grading permits. Compliance with these
criteria will preclude creation of a significant temporary noise impact during construction; therefore less than
significant impacts are expected from this project.
11.e-f. No Impact: This project is not within two miles of a public airport or public or private use airport.
According to Figure 5.10-4 of the French Valley Airport Future Noise Contours in the Noise Element of the
General Plan, the project is not located in the noise impact area for the French Valley Airport. In addition, the
project is not located in the French Valley Airport Land Use Compatibility Zone according to Figure 5.9-3 in the
Land Use and Planning Element of the. General Plan. Therefore, people within the project area will not be
exposed to excessive noise levels generated by an airport and less than significant impacts will result from this
project.
G:\Ptanningl2006IPA08-0213 Temecula Water Pari< CUP\Planning~nitial Environmental Study.doc
25
12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a.
Issues andSuooortina hiformation Sources
Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing hew homes and
. businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating
the construction of reolacement housinQ elsewhere?
POf~ntially
Significant
liTloact
, ,Poten~ally, ,"-
SighifitamUi1less
."Mitigatign
liiCororirated
Loss Than
Sjgn~ .
(moael-
.j
No-liiioad:
b.
0/
c.
0/
Comments:
12.a. Less Than Significant Impact: The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly
or indirectly. The proposed project is an amusement park that will attract people that live outside City limits,
and may cause some people to relocate to (or near) Temecula to their place of employment (future employees
of the water park), which is considered a moderate indirect affect. However, the project will not induce
substantial growth beyond what is projected in the City's General Plan. Less than Significant impacts are
. anticipated as a result of this project.
12.b-c. No Impact '['he project will riot displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing, as the
site is vacant property zoned for service commercial development. Therefore, the project will not necessitate
the construction of replacement housing due to displacement of housing or people. No impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
G:\Planningl2OO6IPA06-o213 Temecula Water Park CUPlPlanning\lnitial Environmental Study.doc
26
-
13. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated
with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the constructIon of which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain ac_..,.;..ble service ratios, response tImes or other performance
objectives for any of the public services: .
a.
b.
I c.
I d.
Ie.
Issues and Suooortii1Q IrtfOnnation SOurces
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
Potentially
Significant
.linDact
Polenllally
. S;gnifocantUriless
Mitigation
Incorooraled
NOlriloact .
Less Than
Significanl
lmoact
""
""
""
""
""
Comments:
13.a,b,d,e. Less Than Significant Impact: The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result
in a need for new or altered fire, police, recreation or other public facilities. The development of the site will
incrementally increase the need for these services. The water park will only be open during the summer
months, which will greatly decrease the need for public services for the water park the rest of the year. In
addition, the water park will have life guards on duty for safety. The project will also contribute its fair share
through the City's Development Impact Fees to the maintenance or provision of services from these entities.
Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
13.c. No Impact: The project itself is not creating a residential use and therefore will have no impact upon, or
result in a need for new or altered school facilities. Development of the parcels within the project will not cause
significant numbers of people to relocate within or to the City. The cumulative effect from the project will be
mitigated through the payment of applicable school fees at the time the parcels are developed. No impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
.14. RECREATION. Would the project:
a.
b.
;..Isst.iesand SuooortinolnfonnatiCln Sources
Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
:substantial physical deterioration of the facil~y would
occur or be accelerated?
Include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities
.which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
Potentially
Significant
Imoact;
Potentially
,'Sigliifk:lintUI11eSS
Mitigation
IncortiOrated
N9JmP8ct::-,
. Less Than
Sig'nificant'
'Iml)8ct
.;
""
Comments:
14.a-b. Less Than Significant Impact: The project will have no impact on the demand for neighborhood,
regional parks or other recreational facilities, or affect existing recreational opportunities. In addition, this
. project will have a positive impact on recreational services in the City as it will provide an outlet for young
people who live in the community. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
G:\Planningl2OO6IPA06-Q213 Temecula Water Pari< CUPlPlanning~nnlal Environmental Study.doc
27
Ie.
If.
g.
15. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC. Would the project:
a.
IsSl, ~lJl.lnc:t SuoOortinalnfonnation Sources
Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in
either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity
ration on roads. or conQestion at intersections!?
Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county congestion
manaQement aQencv for desiQnated roads or hiQhwavs?
Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either
an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that
results in substantial safety risks?
Substantially increase hazards due to a desigl] feature
,(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incomDatible uses (e.Q.. farm eQUiDment\?
Result in inadeouate emeroencv access?
Result in inadeauate oarkinQ caoacitv?
Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus tumouts,
bicvcle racks\?
b.
c.
d.
Comments:
PotentiaUy
Si!lriifiCant
lmoacl
Potentially .
.SlgnIfscant Unless .
~itiQ~tl()~;,.
Intorooratec:l
,;
No IIppact
.. Less Than
Significant
"lmoact
'"
'"
'"
'"
'"
'"
15.a-b. Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated: A Traffic Study was conducted by
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., dated September 2006. Under existing conditions, all intersections
evaluated in the Traffic Study are functioning at LOS D or better during existing peak hour conditions except for
the following intersections: Winchester Road at 1-15 NB Ramp (weekday evening peak hour), Winchester
Road at Ynez Road (weekday evening at peak hour), Winchester Road at Promenade Mall East (weekday
evening peak hour), Winchester Road at Margarita Road (weekday evening peak hour). With the addition of
the project to the existing conditions, all intersections would continue to operate at LOS D or better except for
those listed above that were already operating below acceptable levels per the City standards. The
interseCtion of Ynez Road and County Center Drive warrants signalization under current conditions and is
scheduled for signalization in the near future. City staff has directed that an annual ambient growth rate of 2%
per year be applied to existing (2006) peak hour, traffic volumes.
Assuming the project is constructed and operational in 2007, all intersections would function at LOS D or better
during peak hours with the exception of the intersections forecasted to operate at an. una""",!-,;"'ble LOS
without the project, and will continue to do so with the addition of project traffic. The project will contribute to
intersections already operating at a deficient LOS, but will not cause any intersection to worsen to an
unacceptable LOS, or to fall to a lower LOS.
The over-capacity conditions along Winchester Road will be improved with the completion of the French Valley
Parkway Interchange, which will result in a new interchange with the 1-15 Freeway one mile to the north. The
construction of the French Valley Parkway Interchange project will result in substantial improvement of peak
hour intersection traffic along Winchester to an acceptable LOS. The. Winchester northbound ramp
intersection and the WinchesterNnez intersection will continue to operate at a LOS "P' during the evening
peak hour; the total average daily vehicle delay will be reduced by as much as 30-90 seconds per vehicle.
With the French Valley Parkway Interchange in place, some traffic that currently uses the Winchester Road
interchange will shift to the north, providing some relief. Likewise, it is expected that the portion of the
G:\PlannlngI2OO6IPA06-Q213 Temecula Wale' Park CUP\Plannlng~nitial Environmenlal Study.doc
28
Temecula Water Park traffic that was forecasted to approach the site from the north will also shift from the
Winchester Interchange to the French Valley Parkway Interchange, which would further reduce any project
contribution to congestion on Winchester Road.
The proposed project developed as a water park generates average weekday entering vehicles of 630 over the
course of the day, for a total of 1,260 trips. Average Saturday entering vehicles is 802 vehicles, for a total daily
trip generation of 1,604 trips. The project site is currently zoned Service Commercial. The Service
Commercial designation would allow many different types of development, including office and retail uses.
Assuming the Target Floor Area Ration of .30, the 15.4 acre site could be developed with up to 201,247 square
feet of commercial or office uses. An office use would bring 2,216 daily weekday trips/83 weekend trips and a
department store could bring in 11,274 daily weekday trips/1 ,008 weekend trips per day. The proposed water
park use would generate less traffic each day during the peak hours (additionally, the water park does not
open until 10:00 a.m.) than most other uses, since any other type of development would typically be open 5 to
7 days a week, 52 weeks a year. The proposed water park is anticipated to generate significantly less traffic
on an annual basis than any other allowed use.
Over the long-term, the proposed project will contribute to LOS F traffic flows at the locations identified above,
even after above mentioned improvements are implemented. However, this project will not significantly
worsen the traffic flow after implementation of mitigation. In addition, the project is required to pay fair share to
circulation system, components that are impacted by cumulative traffic growth in the Temecula region. Based
on the identified project specific and cumulative impacts of the proposed project, the City concludes that
potential project specific and cumulative effects of the project are effectively mitigated to a less than significant
impact level based on the mitigation measures identified below, including payment of fair share fees for
circulation system impacts that result from cumulative traffic growth.
With implementation of the above condition of approval, the project's specific and cumulative circulation
system impacts will be offset or mitigated to a less than significant level of impact.
15.c. No Impact: The project site is located approximately seven miles from the nearest airport, French
Valley, and therefore project implementation has no potential to adversely impact any air traffic patterns. No
railroads occur adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the project site. No impact can be identified, and no
mitigation is required.
15.d. Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed circulation system improvements associated with the
project will be i.nstalled in conformance with the City's circulation system requirements. The Traffic Study
recommends implementation of the following conditions relative to the new circulation system components.
Complete the internal circulation system per the City of Temecula standards.
Sight distance at the project accesses shall be reviewed with respect to standard City of Temecula
sight distance standards and constructed in conformance with these standards.
Traffic signing/striping shall be defined at the time detailed construction plans are completed and
implemented prior to occupancy.
Stop signs, stop bars and stop legends shall be provided at the project access points.
Implementation of these measures will ensure that no residual traffic hazards result from the construction of
the roadways in conjunction with the proposed project. Therefore, less than significant impacts are projected.
15.e. No Impact: A review of the site plan design indicates that emergency access is provided by one ingress
and one egress outlet from Ynez Road. The Fire Department and the Department of Public Works has
reviewed the project and has determined that there is adequate internal emergency vehicle access. The
G:\Planningl2006IPA06-0213 Temecula Wale' Park CUPlPtannlngllnitial Environmental Study.doc
29
proposed development will have no effect on emergency access to adjacent parcels after development. No
impacts are anticipated.
15.f. No Impact: The project is consistent with the parking requirements of the City's Development Code.
The project proposes 433 parking spaces. The Development Code requires 393 parking spaces. No adverse
parking capacity impacts are forecast to occur. No impact is anticipated as a result of this project.
15.g. No Impact: The City of Temecula mass transit is provided by the Riverside Transit Authority (RTA).
The project will be required to be designed consistent with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting this
alternative transportation. No conflict or adverse impact to adopted alternative transportation policies, plans or
programs is forecast to occur from implementing the proposed project. No impact is anticipated as a result of
this project.
I a.
I g.
16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
b.
Issues and SuooortlnalnforffiaiionSources ;
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
aoolicable'Reoional Water Qual~v Control Board?
Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facil~ies, the construction of which could cause
sionificant environmental effects?
Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
new or exoanded ent~lements needed?
Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that ~
has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity
to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal
needs?
Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and I
reoulatioris related to solid waste?
c.
d.
e.
I.
Comments:
Potentially-
Significant-',
Imoact'
, Potentially
Significant Unless:
"Mitigation .
Incoroorated .
'.No Impact
Less,Than
Significailt .
Imoael'
-i
0('
0('
0('
0('
0('
0('
16.a. Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project will deliver wastewater to the Eastern Municipal
Water District (EMWD) wastewater treatment plant in Temecula. EMWD is in the process of improving sewer
capacity to be able to convey the expected peak flows at full development of the areas it services. Through the
payment of annexation fees, sewer connection fees, development impact fees (for water facilities), the impact
of implementing the proposed project on sewage systems is forecast to be less than significant.
16.b. Less Than Significant Impact: Through the payment of ,water district fees, sewer connection fees,
development impact fees (for water facilities) and meter installation fees, the impact of implementing the
proposed project on sewage systems is forecast to be less than significant. Adequate capacity exists in each
G:\PlanningI2006IPA06-0213 Temecula Water Pal1< CUP\Planning~nilial Environmental Study.doc
30
system for this project to be implemented without causing significant adverse impacts to these systems. Less
than significant impact is expected as a result from this project.
16.c. Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would increase runoff as a result of increasing
the impervious surface on the project site. The City imposes standard mitigation to detain surface runoff on the
property to ensure that the maximum runoff volume from the site is not significantly increased.
Based upon the information presented above, the project will not result in the need for construction of new
storm water drainage facilities other than those discussed above and analyzed as part of the project. Less
than significant impact is expected from this project.
16.d. Less Than Significant Impact: Adequate water supplies have been identified by the Rancho California
Water District to meet the current and immediate future demands in its service area, including the proposed
project. Therefore, a less than significant impact is expected.
16.e. Less Than Significant Impact: Adequate wastewater treatment capacity has been identified by the
EMWD to meet the current and immediate future demands in its service area, including the proposed project.
Therefore, less than a significant impact is expected.
16.f. No Impact: According to the General Plan and the County Solid Waste Management Plan adequate
landfill disposal capacity exists within the regional landfills to meet current and future demands. Solid waste
mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR (Measures 2 and 3) must be implemented by all
projects in the City to meetthe City's source reduction requirements. No impact is expected.
16.g. Less Than Significant Impact: By participating in the City's source reduction and recycling element,
the proposed project will comply with all statutes and regulations for management of solid waste. The
proposed commercial and residential project does not pose any significant or unique management
requirements. Therefore, less than significant impact is expected as a result from this project.
G:\Planning\2006IPA06-0213 Temecula Water Pal1< CUP\Plannlng~nitlal Environmental Study.doc
31
17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Would the project:
a.
b.
c.
Issues andSuooortinallifonnation Sources
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 community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
orehistorv?
Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future
oroiectsl?
Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directlv or indirectlv?
Comments:
PoleOtiaUy ,
Sigruficanf
Imoael"
~~~a1ly.
Sign~tp~ss .
"Mitigation"
IncOrDoraled
Nolmoact
,LEiss Than
Significant
Im")8Ct
.;
0('
0('
17.a-c. Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project is the construction and development of a
13,000 square foot water park on 15 acres. The project will be accessed via a one way entrance and a one
way exit off of Ynez Road. This project will provide a commercial recreational outlet for the City of Temecula if
it is approved for development. A water park use is allowed by Conditional Use Permit approval in the Service
Commercial land use designation if approved by the City.
Potential impacts include short-term construction effects and the long-term effects that result from converting a
property from its existing disturbed, pastoral setting to a commercial recreational use. Most of the potential
adverse impacts are either not significant without mitigation or they can be controlled to a less than significant
impact with identified mitigation measures. Several potential impacts (air quality, transportation/circulation)
require extensive mitigation, including modification of the construction schedule, to ensure that impacts are
controlled to a less than significant level.
Traffic impacts are limited, but when combined with the effects of past projects approved in the immediate
area, the cumulative result is considerable. The applicant will be required to pay standard mitigation fees that
will be used to help ease the traffic impacts in the City.
With the identified mitigation required to be implemented, the proposed project is not forecast to cause any
significant adverse environmental impacts to any of the environmental resource issues addressed in this Initial
Study. The City of Temecula proposes to issue a Mitigated Negative Declaration with mitigation as the
appropriate environmental determination for this projeqt to comply with the California Environmental Quality
Act. The City will issue a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and distribute this
document for public review. Assuming potential project impacts remain less than significant after receipt of
comments and development of responses, the City will consider adopting the Mitigated Negative Oeclaration
prior to issuance of any of the entitlements for this project to be developed on the project site.
G:\Planning\2006IPA06-0213 Temecula Water Pal1< CUP\Planning~nilial Environmental Study.doc
32
18. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering program
EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier
EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3){D). In this case a discussion should Identify
the following on attached sheets.
I a. Earlier analyses used. IdentifY earlier analyses and state where they are ayailable for review.
b. Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the aboye checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyZed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such
effects were addressed bv mitiQation measures based on the earlier analvsis.
c. M~igation measures: For effects that are 'Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the
mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they
address site-specific conditions for the oroiect.
18.a. There were no earlier analyses used in preparing this Initial Study.
18.b. There were no impacts that were previously addressed by mitigation measures based on an earlier
analysis.
18.c. See attached Mitigation Monitoring Program.
SOURCES
1. City of Temecula General Plan (April 12, 2005)
2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (April 12, 2005)
3. Acoustical Analysis Report prepared by Michael Brandman Associates on August 17, 2006
4. Air Quality Impact Analysis Report prepared by Michael Brandman Associates on August 21, 2006
5. Traffic Impact Study prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. dated September 2006
6. MSHCP Consistency Analysis prepared by Michael Brandman Associates on August 15, 2006
7. San Diego Natural History Museum letter dated August 2, 2006
G:\Plannlngl2OO6lPA06-0213 Temecula Water Pal1< CUP\Plannin~nttial Environmental Study.doc
33
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
G:\Planning\2006\PA06-0213 Temecula Water Pal1< CUP\Planningllnitial Environmental Study.doc
34
AIR QUALITY
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Temecula Water Park
Planning Application No. PA06-0213
The proposed project could potentially expose sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentration and could
potentially create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people working in the nearby area.
Prior to construction of the proposed improvements, the
project proponent will provide a traffic control plan that will
describe safe detours around the project construction site
and provide temporary traffic control (i.e., flag person)
during construction related truck hauling activities.
During construction of the proposed improvements,
construction equipment will be properly maintained at an
offsite location and includes proper tuning and timing of
engines. Equipment maintenance records and equipment
design specification data sheets shall be kept onsite during
construction. .
During construction of the proposed improvements, all
contractors will be advised not to idle construction
equipment on site for more than 10 minutes.
During construction of the proposed improvements, the
project applicant will provide on-site meals to construction
workers by arranging a lunch wagon to visit the
construction site during work breaks including the lunch
break.
Prior to construction of the proposed improvements, the
project proponent will provide a Dust Control Plan that will
describe the application of standard best management
practices to control dust during construction. Best
management practices will include:
. Application of water on disturbed soils and unpaved
roadways a minimum of three times per day
. Using track-out prevention devices at construction
site access points
'. Stabilizing construction area exit points
. Covering haul vehicles
. Restricting vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15
miles per hour (mph)
G:\PlanningI2006IPA06-0213 Temecula Water Pal1< CUPlPlannlnglMiligation Monitoring Program.doct
Specific Process:
. Replanting disturbed areas as soon as practical
and other measures, as deemed appropriate to the
site, to control fugitive dust
Planning staff will verify compliance with the above
mitigation measure as part of the grading plan check
review process.
Mitigation Milestone:
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Responsible Monitoring
Party:
Planning Department
CULTURAL RESOURCES
General Impact:
Directly or indirectly destroying any unique paleontological
or archaeological resources.
Mitigation Measure:
If any cultural resources are exposed during initial
grading and ground disturbance activities the City will be
contacted, and a qualified archaeologist will evaluate the
resources. If discovered resources merit long-term
consideration, adequate funding will be provided to collect,
curate and report these resources in accordance with
standard archaeological management requirements. The
Pechanga Band of Luiseiio Indians shall be contacted to
develop a management plan for any resources that may be
unearthed, to afford the Band an opportunity to monitor
ground-disturbing activities and to participate in the
decisions regarding collection and curation of any such
resources.
If any human remains are encountered during initial
grading activities, all ground disturbing activities in the
vicinity of the discovery will be terminated immediately and
the County Coroner's office will be contacted to manage
such remains:
Specific Process:
Planning staff will verify compliance with the above
mitigation measure as part of the grading plan check
review process.
Mitigation Milestone:
Prior to issuance of a grading permit.
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Planning and Public Works Departments
NOISE
Genera/Impact:
Noise levels could potentially exceed the City's General
Plan requirement
G:\Planning\2006\PA06-0213 Temecula Water Pal1< CUPlPlanninglMitigation MonRoring Program.d0c2
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Processes:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
TRAFFIC
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Processes:
Mitigation Milestone:
Rc"l'v, ,sible Monitoring Party:
The applicant shall establish a noise complaint response
program and shall respond to any noise complaints
received for this project by measuring noise levels at the
affected receptor site. If the noise level exceeds an Ldn of
65 dBA exterior or an Ldn of 45 dBA interior at the
receptor, the applicant will implement adequate measures
(which may include portable sound attenuation walls, use
of quieter equipment, shift of construction schedule to
avoid the presence of sensitive receptors, etc.) to reduce
noise levels to the greatest extent feasible.
The applicant will require that all construction equipment
be operated with mandated noise control equipment
(mufflers or silencers). Enforcement will be accomplished
by random field inspections by applicant personnel during
construction activities.
Planning staff will verify compliance with the above
mitigation measure as part of the grading plan check
review process.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit
Planning Department
The proposed project could potentially increase traffic
levels
Complete the internal circulation system per the City of
Temecula standards.
Sight distance at the project accesses shall be reviewed
with respect to standard City of Temecula sight distance
standards and constructed in conformance with these
standards.
Traffic signing/striping shall be defined at the time detailed
construction plans are completed and implemented prior to
occupancy.
Stop signs, stop bars and stop legends shall be provided
at the project access points.
The Department of Public Works will review plans and
check for compliance with these mitigations.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Public Works Department
G:\Planning\2006\PA06-0213 Temecula Water Pal1< CUP\PlanningIMitigation Monitoring Program.doc3
ATTACHMENT NO.1
AERIAL
G:\Planning\2006IPAOe-D213 Temecula Water Pal1< CUPIPlannlngllnitlal Environmental Study.doc
35
CIty of TemeCUia
I PA06-0213I
o 245 490
,"--' '-'_____...1' ,'-.
980
1,470
,,1 Feet
i'lI
ThIs map was made by the CityofTemecula Geographic. .. ..",.. system.
The map Is derived from base data prodUced by the RiVen;ide County Assessor's
I '.'", . and the Transportation and land M "..,. . Agency of Riverside
County. The CRy of Temecula assumes no warranty Of legal responsibility for the
i ". .... contalnedonthismap.Oataand". ."..,repcesentedonlhismap
are subject to update and modification. The Geographic Infomlation System and
other sources should be queried ror the most aJfT'eOI iflfonnatioo.
This map is not for reprint or resale.
ATTACHMENT 2
SITE PLAN
G:\PlanningI2OO6IPA06-0213 Temecula Water Pal1< CUP\Plannlng~nltial Environmental Study.doc
36
I
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
I'
.
.
q
q
.
-,
.
cJ" ~
~
~
r;
r
I
J
I
~
I
i
a
i
,
..,j
)"
, ,
- -t----+---------;----r----
g
A
J~ l
Source: Oavid Neault Associates (July 2006).
g
~i
~
~ :r~
Ii:
_~, . NOT TO SCALE
..." \
Site Plan
30900001 . 0812006 I 3_sdeJl18n.mxd
ONTI CONSTRUCTION. TEMECULA WATER PARK
ATTACHMENT NO.5
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS
G:\Planning\2006IPAOe-0213 Temecula Water Pal1< CUPlPlanning\PC Staff Report.doc
14
"
TEMECULA WATERPARK
Statement of Operations
Clearwater Waterpark Development is pleased to submit for your review a statement of
operations for the development of a waterpark located on Ynez Rd at the intersection of Ynez
Rd. and County Center Dr. and near the intersection of Yunez Rd. and Winchester Rd. The
park we be developed on approximately +/-15 acres. The site is designed to accommodate
approximately +/- 8.5 acres of waterpark with the balance allotted for access, and parking.
Following is a partial listing of the key points accompanied by a brief description of the
operations that would affect the property under which Clearwater anticipates working:
1. Hours and Days of Operation- The waterpark operating season is about four months of
a calendar year. It is anticipated the Temecula Park will be open daily from Memorial
Day to Labor Day from 10:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Additionally, the park will open for a few
weekends prior to Memorial Day and after Labor Day depending on the weather.
2. Number of Employees- It is anticipated the park will retain a full time staff of 15
employees and 300 seasonal or part-time employees. The full time staff will oversee the
year round operation and maintenance of the park. The 300 seasonal employee work
forces will primarily be youth recruited from within the local community.
3. Number of Required Parking- Parking will be based on the City's code for a
community/recreational pool of 1 space per 1,000 s.t. of recreational area for the park,
and standard parking requirements for the administration buildings. This would equate
to approximately 370 stalls for the park and an additional 48 for the administration and
food service buildings totaling 418 stalls. Currently the park is designed to
accommodate 438 vehicles with an additional 14 handicap stalls.
4. Average Daily Peak Trips Generated-. Clearwater anticipates the average daily
attendance to be 2,000 people. 50% of the attendance or approximately 185 vehicles
will arrive at the park between the hours of 9:30 AM and 12:00 PM. 85% of the daily
attendance or approximately 130 cars will arrive before 3:30 PM. The remaining 15% or
55 vehicles will arrive at the park between the hours 3:30 PM and 8:00 PM. According
to a parking and traffic, nearly all trips generated by the operation of the Temecula Park
will not be during peak hours.
.
5. Type of Equipment or Process Used- There is not special equipment or processes
used in the operation of a waterpark.
6. Description of Hazardous Materials- In order to maintain standards set forth by local
health codes, a storage area for liquid chlorine will be designed into the park. This
storage area will be located at the SE corner of the park behind the wave pool. In
addition to liquid chlorine, a small quantity of muriatic acid will stored and used on site.
Clearwater Waterpark Development feels the development of a waterpark in the City of
Temecula will prove to be a tremendous asset to the community. It will not only provide
wholesome family recreation for the residents of Temecula , but provide employment
opportunities to hundreds of youth. Clearwater Waterpark Development looks forward to
working with the City of Temecula and successfully constructing a Temecula's own premier
waterpark.