Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout031914 PC Agenda 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 41000 MAIN STREET TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA MARCH 19, 2014 —6:00 PM Next in Order: Resolution: 14-06 PRELUDE MUSIC: Earlene Bundy CALL TO ORDER: Flag Salute: Commissioner Guerriero Roll Call: Carey, Guerriero, Harter, Kight, and Telesio PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS 1 Business Spotlight Recognition Presentation, Tension Envelope, Christine Damko 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 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-minute time limit for individual speakers. 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 r � ITEJ1 1 L J CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Armando G. Villa, AICP, Director of Community Development DATE: March 19, 2014 SUBJECT: Business Recognition Program —Tension Envelope PREPARED BY: Christine Damko, Economic Development Analyst BACKGROUND: Tension Envelope is one of the nation's leading producers of envelopes, marketing directly to companies and organizations across the country. Tension Envelope makes many of the envelopes you see and handle daily, including financial statement envelopes, direct mail envelopes, and photo finishing packaging. Tension Envelope is a family-owned-and-operated business that has enjoyed stability and growth over the last 125 years. They credit their success to responding to their customers with top manufacturing quality, first-class service, and innovative solutions for their customers' needs and requirements. With its long and successful history, Tension Envelope is prepared to meet the challenges of today and the future. Their products range from standard styles and sizes to specialty envelopes, some created for one-of-a-kind mailing or packaging purposes. Tension Envelope produces over 12 billion envelopes a year, with plants from coast to coast and nationwide distribution. They service their customers from over 30 sales/service offices located in major market areas including Temecula. r � ITEM 2 L J ACTION MINUTES TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 41000 MAIN STREET TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA MARCH 5, 2014— 6:00 PM Next in Order: Resolution: 14-05 PRELUDE MUSIC: Earlene Bundy CALL TO ORDER: Flag Salute: Commissioner Carey Roll Call: Carey, Guerriero, Harter, Kight, and Telesio ABSENT: KIGHT Staff Attendees: Villa, Garcia, Lee and Fisk CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Action Minutes of February 19, 2014 APPROVED 4-0-1-0; MOTION BY COMMISSIONER TELESIO, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GUERRIERO; AYE VOTES FROM COMMISSIONERS CAREY, GUERRIERO, HARTER AND TELESIO; KIGHT ABSENT 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 filing fee. 2 Planning Application No. PA13-0270, a Minor Conditional Use Permit for Luke's Restaurant, a bona fide eating establishment, to allow for a Type 47 ABC license (on- sale general beer/wine/distilled spirits) and live indoor entertainment, located at 28693 Old Town Front Street, Kenny Taylor APPROVED 4-0-1-0; MOTION BY 1 COMMISSIONER TELESIO, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GUERRIERO; AYE VOTES FROM COMMISSIONERS CAREY, GUERRIERO, HARTER AND TELESIO; KIGHT ABSENT 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 14-05 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA13-0270, A MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR LUKE'S RESTAURANT, A BONA FIDE EATING ESTABLISHMENT, TO ALLOW FOR A TYPE 47 ABC LICENSE (ON-SALE GENERAL BEER/WINE/ DISTILLED SPIRITS) AND LIVE INDOOR ENTERTAINMENT AT 28693 OLD TOWN FRONT STREET (APN 922-046- 010) REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONERS REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONER SUBCOMMITTEE(S) DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS REPORT Discussion on Old Town Sewer Project ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Wednesday, March 19, 2014, 6:00 PM City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. Stanley Harter Armando G. Villa, AICP Chairman Director of Community Development 2 r � ITEM 3 L J STAFF REPORT— PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF MEETING: March 19, 2014 TO: Planning Commission Chairperson and members of the Planning Commission FROM: Armando G. Villa, AICP, Director of Community Development PREPARED BY: Kenny Taylor, Case Planner PROJECT Planning Application No. PA13-0233, a Wireless Telecom- SUMMARY: munications Facility Application to allow a new 48-foot stealth bell tower to be constructed and operated within the existing Chaparral Self Storage facility located at 27380 Nicolas Road RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution approving the project subject to Conditions of Approval CEQA: Categorically Exempt Section 15301, Class 1 Existing Facilities PROJECT DATA SUMMARY Name of Applicant: David Kazner General Plan Professional Office (PO) Designation: Zoning Designation: Roripaugh Estates Specific Plan (SP-1) Existing Conditions/ Land Use: Site: Existing Chaparral Self-Storage Facility/Professional Office (PO) North: Existing Santa Gertrudis Creek and single-family residential/Open Space/ Riverside County— Low Medium Density Residential South: Existing vacant lot/Professional Office (PO) East: Existing single-family residential/Medium Density Residential (M) West: Existing commercial retail complex/Community Commercial (CC) Existing/Proposed Min/Max Allowable or Required Lot Area: 5.15 acres N/A for existing legal lots Total Floor Area/Ratio: N/A N/A Landscape Area/Coverage: N/A N/A Parking Required/Provided: N/A N/A BACKGROUND SUMMARY On September 30, 2013, David Kazner, on behalf of Smartlink LLC and AT&T, submitted Planning Application No. PA13-0233. This application consisted of a Conditional Use Permit designed to allow the construction and operation of a cellular facility at the existing Chaparral Self Storage facility. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all concerns have been addressed, and the applicant concurs with the recommended Conditions of Approval. ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting the approval of a Wireless Telecommunications Facility Application to allow a new 48-foot stealth bell tower to be constructed and operated within the existing Chaparral Self Storage facility at 27380 Nicolas Road. AT&T proposes a wireless telecommunications facility consisting of a three (3) sector array with four (4) panel antennas per sector all completely hidden and disguised within a new 48-foot stealth bell tower. The associated six (6) equipment cabinets will be installed within an existing storage unit. The proposed antennas would be mounted inside the new tower and would be completely screened from view. Furthermore, the equipment cabinets would be further screened by the architectural materials and features of the existing self-storage building. In addition, the proposed wireless communications facility would not affect existing operations in the self-storage facility since the proposed project does not impact vehicle access on the site. Consequently, the proposed wireless communications facility operations are compatible with the self-storage facility and the surrounding land uses. Upon installation, the proposed wireless communications facility would increase both coverage and capacity of the AT&T Wireless network for residents and businesses in the vicinity. The addition of the proposed wireless communications facility would improve wireless coverage for customers, and enhance local emergency 911 services and public communications during other emergencies. The proposed stealth bell tower elevations utilize a contemporary color scheme and building materials to achieve an architectural design that complements the existing Chaparral self-storage facility visible from Nicolas Road and the surrounding vicinity. LEGAL NOTICING REQUIREMENTS Notice of the public hearing was published in the U-T San Diego on March 6, 2014 and mailed to the property owners within the required 600-foot radius. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review per CEQA Section 15301, Class 1 Existing Facilities. Class 1 exemptions include the operation, repair, maintenance, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that previously existing capacity. The application will allow AT&T to construct and operate a new 48-foot stealth bell tower and supporting equipment within a new bell tower structure to be located within an existing self- storage facility. As designed and conditioned, the proposed project involves the minor alteration of an existing private structure involving negligible expansion for use and will not have an adverse impact on the environment. The proposed tower architectural design, color scheme, and materials, complements the existing self-storage facility. No further environmental review is required. FINDINGS Conditional Use Permit (Municipal Code Section 17.04.010.E) The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. The proposed use is consistent with all requirements stated in Telecommunications Facility and Antenna Ordinance of the Temecula Development Code. In addition, the project is in conformance with all the requirements of the General Plan and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, building and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect uses, building or structures. As proposed, the wireless telecommunication facility will be completely disguised as a new 48- foot stealth bell tower compatible with the existing architecture materials and colors of the storage facility on site. The project is located and designed to have a negligible impact on surrounding uses. The site for the proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer area, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning Commission or City Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. Based on the requirements stated in the Telecommunication Facility and Antenna Ordinance (Chapter 17.40), as well as the applicable sections of the Development Code, the site for the conditional use is adequate to accommodate required yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other features described in the Development Code, including setbacks from residential structures. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The project is in conformance with all requirements of the Development Code, Fire Code, and Building Code. These codes contain provisions that ensure the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The project is not anticipated to have negative impact to the public health, safety, and general welfare. That the decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a Conditional Use Permit be based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council on appeal. The decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a Conditional Use Permit has been based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission. ATTACHMENTS Aerial Map Plan Reductions Resolution Exhibit A - Draft Conditions of Approval Statement of Justification Notice of Public Hearing AERIAL MAP City of Temecula k , ....,_ I+. ":4.:<' ':„-.1 artrr■y: Aril , . . ■ ,_ ,.... i , ,_ , 1, , 444.0„. ..__. g„,„„t_ ��t �� �� ; 40111 ���1■r mow . 4 810 V . ._ % .�� ,� �♦� •,� �� •. ail II. - .40, -4. . , 44 ■ ■ Ilr , _.. . ,, „ a 114. * #, ■ 4 Project Site to so •♦ iv, �� 0,�■ , <P J. 44,00 ar'''' ..\: .,,4„ ** , . Irpal . -,,- *., ' 4/ 4Wip 1 7/- 'i 41 ,-7 -- , k - , 1 4,,f,L7 , - * ■ /♦ III ift; .:1...Fs-- ‘ ois a.: 4.„ ; or , Atr Alrg iiit ityr._ ft ■ 4_0, 4# 1441 I iii* hilt ilitrip; --. 1111.11111/411147 411, 4" - 111111 11111111 - .► .� *UMW 111 ���o .: ,..... .„ ,Itt-. . �� ® •s+� •. •b �,. % avail 4, t jimi ,,w me, a -0* *) , • . Iv: -- , um, - ■ disi* opt * , itir sizi opt... . ,/,. , v_to. ► � I�I�I� I � o 0 250 500 1,000 Feet 2 This map was made by the City of Temecula Geographic Information System. &`^ The map is derived from base data produced by the Riverside County Assessor's W � y ® Department and the Transportation and Land Management Agency of Riverside County.The City of Temecula assumes no warranty or legal responsibility for the --" information contained on this map.Data and information represented on this map are subject to update and modification.The Geographic Information System and other sources should be queried for the most current information. This map is not for reprint or resale. MvLCNO: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION at&t a 124W PA.1 PLAZA NNE me°d.\ CERO105.CA 90702 FRe4CT SGOVUIU43.4 LAZA 01400140 NN SMARTLINK LLC. MA C AO9ML OWE.BRIE 411 AMMPDIII.MD 21101 PN:010)Ee2-303 FAY:(110)291-8170 RNM04Y. - iiEBl Consulting SITE NAME: CHAPARRAL SELF STORAGE 21 B 8lreel I BurWt9lon,MA 01803 Tel:(701)273-25001 Fen:(781)273-3311 SITE NO.• RS0393 WWW,ebICGRBMBfIM COW 27380 NICOLAS ROAD TEMECULA, CA 92591 VICINITY MAP (NOT TO SCALE) 0 PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION SHEET INDEX •.. r g[ THE PROPOSED PROJECT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING: SHEET DESCRIPTION 2 y IL pf F SITE NAME CHAPARRAL SELF STORAGE 4. �+4 7''N t(.y,i• 1. DISTNIATIDN OF(12)PANEL ANTENNAS WITHIN NEW STEALTH T-1 TITLE SHEET XKRECR 11NMP/91422WP1 vT 1~'$ r .7 4' SITE NO: RS0393 CONCEALMENT TOWER. . W.3%. 1; d Z-1 PLOT KLAN k N01E5 NZ OOCUYT O 6 5 DE56N PROPEREY a N. 'k. 4 Il. APN: 920100016 2 INSTALLATION OF(24)MTH'S WITHIN NEW STEALTH NO COMMIT OF ER CGN0IAT0IO,SG 1.,. +n.�- Y'i+ CONCEALMENT TOWER. 7-2 SITE PLAN No FOR 111E EXCWIRE USE ER 711E �4 O0,f SITE ADDRESS: 27380 NICOLAS ROAD T WEIR.AM COM.OA USE • i r rr TEMECULA.CA 92591 3. INSTALLATION OF EQUIPMENT CABINETS WITHIN EXISTING STORAGE Z-3 ~ELEVATIONS Nx MENTOR EXPRESS M�c6NbEN1 0E ,- FACILITY BUILDING FOOTPRINT. TIE SCALE s SMOLT rRaB1E0 ,.cM LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT:164 Z-4 ELEVATIONS ■ d5060 SCALES 02 415 FOR 51•.la• I ,•� *- 1Y' TRACT:TR-T-L-WC BEE PRFRED 000 ONLY.ALL 001ER • M , � ,.Y 4 INSTALLATION OF NEW(1)CPS ANTENNA ON EXISTING SOTRAGE PRPRED HIES ARE OWED TOT TO 10EE-. N. A Y d P LOT SIZE:515 ACRES BUILDING, _ 6.. •"° "�L { `r4" r� - ZONING DISTRICT: SP-1 SUBMITTALS *• ; ••• °+I! 5. INSTALLATION OF NEW FIBER/DC POWER CONDITS ROUTED 2 G '°4y r•., °i , GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: OFFICE PROFESSIONAL WITHIN NEW STEALTH CONCEALMENT TOWER AND EQUIPMENT NO. ME OEm1w0ON 0 o▪ e 1�A, � - T - EXISTING LAND USE: PUBLIC STORAGE FACILITY SPACE. 1 12/19/15 ROW 200NO pMWNR r �• F N 1 RIP ,'N i B. INSTALLATION OF(2)NEW UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL&TELCO - — 1 raARR� PROPOSED USE: WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACIUTY CONDUITS 2 01/02/12 900503 ADMUOS 00 WITHIN PUBLIC STORAGE FACILITY DS/D9/16 ATBWXD 10910 GE9EM W PROPOSED STRUCTURE HEIGHT: 4B'-0'1=AGL _ —` 1 1 03/24/1)4000 PER CM WNPLN71 -I a ', , T 1 r PANEL ANTENNA RAD CENTER' 40.-0'3 AOL PROJECT TEAM APPROVALS A 07/23/109 4.09[6 TONER 0601 TV ErEN J ,' PROPOSED LEASE AREA: J50'f S0.Ff. I 40N410 PLR OEM c014016 OF •.` L COORDINATES: LATITUDE:33'32'23 33•N(NA063) V OS r;A r,4'.:7M1 AAA' LONGITUDE: 11T013'25 6B.W(NA063) 4771(CANT; NAME SIGNATURE DATE E;, �'4, "1.M1'"' _ GROUND ELEVATION: 1113.2'3 A.M 5 L(NAVDB8) AT&T ig.AI"° AP ''v t 12900 PARK PLAZA DRIVE 81 122068 CERRITOS,CA 90703 • NA'/' rs r ,•,.rte,•,. P30JEGT cOORDD4A1ID$&MATACEYUlh FN 625: �,r r-.,.„s„.... F EASPP/S E"COBS DN - p SMARTLINK LLC. • J 18301 VON HARMAN AVE.STE 910 IRVINE,CA 92512 SITE NAME: CHAPARRAL 4 �!,• PHONE:949-357-1285 RE ENONEE0 SELF STORAGE $ 4 PAL SITE NO.: RS0393 GENERAL NOTES EBI CONSULTING 27390 NI:OLAS ROAD 21 B STREET TTOL DLy 4A.A.. .. TEMECULA CA 92591 -- - 4 BURLINGTON,MA 011303 - -'—" 1 THIS IS AN UNMANNED TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY CONSISTING OF PHONE:787-273-2500 BTS EOUIPMENT AND ANTENNAS FAX;781-277-7711 2. SIGNALS FROM THE ANTENNA SHALL NOT INTERFERE WITH ANY EXISTING BITE ACQUISITION; COISRUCT:0N COMMUNICATION SITES.ALL ITEMS SHOWN HEREON ARE EXISTING SxFY'E 101£ UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. ALEXIS w1DLEY 3 THIS IS AN UNMANNED FACILITY-NO SOLID WASTE THE SITE WILL PH:949-0313-7313 CREATE NO TRASH.THUS REQUIRES NO DUMPSTER. TONING 4. DEVELOPMENT AND USE OF THE SITE WILL CONFORM TO ALL .004X30 TITLE SHEET APPLICABLE CODES AND ORDINANCES. VERONICA ARVIZU 5. FACILITY IS UNMANNED AND NOT FOR HUMAN HABITATION HANDICAPPED PH:858-602-6380 ACCESS NOT REO'D. RF ENGINEER: DD 801 OC LE ON4•,•9ZA - • ADIL AZI DRA4W : BNur 40: O PH:714-624-8957 CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL PLANS AND EXISTING JR CONSTRUCTION: DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS ON THE JOB SITE AND -pE6E0 WE SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IN WRITING OF T-1 JEFF JACOBS ANY DISCREPANCIES BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK 1 PH:949-553-13566 DATE 10/19/12 - A ,o � � .7 NOT FOR v 1A --,,, dz.,'`��,r CONSTRUCTION " at&t ■ •_ .+ i21100 Cos TOS,RATA DRNE CFRRROS,CA 80703 241.20 C.0.0.7.1 A u NICAPEYN ` _ SMARTLINK LLC. ■ \ IFI C ASSAIL BIM.ANTE ST A WPOLI xLIIDD 21401 Ne 1 r4� - 1 IN.IP OA 10.X704/' FAIL IAIB)2B]-91700 .. ANKII IOA NBI000I. 110ll161 / OYYNII21 KU SIM.MINIM x13•0 ICOIAS ROAD M'.6AOYD AST AAACL WIOR1W PREPARIT)S. PTEXECIRA CA BxRel lm V.P11 ACOe DIAL p EBI Consulting Aa r \ ale:Aare x1 R X111 IElP.DI• T SEIYM. y VAL a AOAAO..141144 i.M.0 l[.o',H+B e..,,1,TS 12(41.41601 6144A�•�• r r r .tA 21 B Street I Burlllglon,MA 01803 _ f Tel:(781)273-25001 Fax:(781)273-3311 /1 UN■ 'AA"+..,,�+..,� www,M8conaulITg.Eom L B , r '``'^-�. ..7 11022114011 l RANCHO nmErutrn r * 71f1lYN(I:NIER A � • MMORld AxaB X . ..�_ - J PARCEL IOWMMIE�1�1[ A •r ..�' .. ' If 4 ERGMif 4iAX•I'e4EW{IE[ 8x01080]9 - 1 AT�k - Iles DOCWENI 6 THE 0.701011 PROPERTY J mass..\I fy,Il., s ...FOR 62 wCLORNE USE of THE :77-' -\- f Ar}� IA91. f - f, 1�// IA 0 ]B N iR wui0 pl S ORM DUPLICATION SEEiT USE 36r- ! ti /f r - '. t` _ _ _ THE MASH 6 SiFCRY PROx91E ``�, / alorr,¢wyan�Mw In.zar _. 1+14 f wen f - ffiC PIeIRlO IX W.dE.r.NL OIxFR 3 Y101Wl4 f f PXXT T9 MS AN AEPLO 141 ID SGT•- . .e'�''1 PAS 2 ENLARGED PLAT PUN SCALE: 1'. 10' u OMEN I ' ae _-:. wort __ x sueumALS Oros A,/ MOKPO yaMT 1.0.13 X O ! YW1N0i} I �T �� �YOa m,P'E xiE+/fix L-! N. `•r~`� 1 JTA M1,T 1 fr{{//�� rf I co x iw,t A wmEViurXn n ola iuw�eYws E ��RTVas xu Aziwns/ gi=1 ®. 1IIO•L1xf0 ATM PM&W 14.1(M OF 4 Ad r / ACTOR.MM.0*41 d 115e MIN 0.A POI / 2 �0 Ea•0 08 SWAN ARE MS PROPOSED 51001 TOWER• n OR/./.2 AMID M.OL@41 Es Adp4 191+.0..MNykRO IMw Af-o's FCJ' f OLNINT m 0761410 PROPERTY LP. 31fli1N CMYILO11 MOT 19t0nI[D b OIIlR) A k , }" _,.Z 7 1 + r_ p Wf�Y, o OW ri PER R4 z�AI D/y f Ir-���"J—Jif f "` ] 3•+.4``rr . OMO IOU 13.6 22 PARCELS: VEST- nuERCMI�Y p�ITyXI r �'I SONG[X00]f0 706 PAR, f I 13 1 1'' I / a l NI10 tb�x4 RnOAMf NS Y-- ri�PTA WENT COMMITS / BMIE0001 ft ROAD 1 / p- ��p�'7y� �� R EN ifER10 RAE;1 RO' ._ -_ •• I /"� -- �l ^'C.. .{ r • 501-CP0.WR ALCM NM•MAT KYR 10 CIMMO. Ed,ioa x0: fP -,\ J \' \ `\ I "� + ~" r l ZONING INFORMATION 81122068 - \ / - PARCEL NO: J J S..... 70.041X07 DISTRICT:SP-1 SAE Ilea - I A ff I 'i 4 A1PN:920100018 / .. \ I II7 y I�L�v�J f 1'1+� 1 .1P rf TOWER: �. / / / Cc. f J "`��411 + o SITE NAME: CHAPARRAL / !I+-'-'r.KJ' ,j` 4 ainlsau REDIARETIENTS: MOUSED �I•ROIasEB: SELF STORAGE / i i 1 r f r wa xTe rr SITE NO.: 550393 M!A lOt%>d 3N 19 1�{C rtb.R./� 1 1 I �!fN TI.RETOOK: 0 .ieB'l _ y f / /1A iz 1°OOBIe. /}L 1 11 r l ff�+�• r f A Y*5 N: i� N AS SW* 77J47.0 WI TEMECULA CA 9256 _~ 3j,7 Fl /IIa�� METH lMO 0 ARA -615.2201 S P NO A '\ !I ! IJ 1 WT.t•an I 111-"��`\I L `+\ I -/ f I + ! 1 M.u1Ie OMRM¢OP iOY: ait.1 LOS P R0n11K0 TIN f\_ 1 ( f)A1.1ouq: U \-1. A _ 1 �' l� k89O IWM RAM BRAT NNW 100E `f-t-�'^-�-/Ix(// oCNtlO!G IW O 1 I R MGR'11ET OIIIER: ARMOUSPIORrA0RA0T PM1Xf16 APPROX NORTH Af -\ _ v,/11 Y f I f 1~'�7�r f .tf, TEN G 9x591 PLOT T NOTES PLAN _ `Yft.lsk��n M1 �''-1.�' -J f C.. ._4 I + f'''.� tEGENb \/' .,__i r+ ! LC:;:i.----1 f ---------- nBrtRn.ea-sletcr nmf, l `\-_ - ffle�s, 11 ��,f,G� ����y ITAkIAN ! .- MAO.IA(-w11Pn um No If \--- -\- -`BO.00 TALCS oE COMIC G)GI �~..-` - -_! —I A i G •f76 .1 riA..� -.I 0f 1--.._.,F 1144 Ea+llcr ew+wr LsIE' ME - TORN BOOMAR!lWE CHECKED 6/. OP SO e 5D A9 xm Z-1 I I PLOT PLAN .'® SC-ALE: 1• O' MST.OUTLOOKS 071 E. B/le/Ix s ♦ / AFPLCA T: / NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION �� at&t f 1. / f 12200 PAN(PLM DR. / CERR11D5 EA 20703 / ''/ ' imam,cDD• r•gr r 1 . SMARTLINK LLC. ti R / NA A/ 5n cN1Mwo YD 21.,1E slJ PREMED ATV APP0pWATE L// �( 1, (410)203-5465 EpgplE LEASE A.(LEASE Mk(410)263-5470 N.-5504 10.FT.) © 1 e EISFOWiO u!i 111 AD 0a00RW ® 4tTP OM dA'S g0tR1[PK � � CE S MM.WAWA= UMW IME sup0Rc ,�„ EBI Consulting rWI).gWO MST MAO.MEEJ'A'01.f pR.p•PQ - EufTPS'Hlt '�' POWWOW 'x c..M. M..n NGEMI EMST M H27•hat's YM Of x PM R.STMR 5 �� . DEMMI(il um MI REW 103 M 21 9 Street I Burlington.MA 01903 AWFDV4 1gAl grit 4tr whi ITT 0 .0 Tel:(781)273-2500 1 Fax:(791)2733311 iN [FlEip 1000011 POH 75117)1V) W / f�96ptl Ar" WWW eHoo70oIOng DI 401 // 711 S f W510O 70oos, MOY W1FF L 1 "717r—\._ SUMP ACCESS MR- T k liC•VA IE 4 y 1% `` !100L AR'�jtlRl y Y1■ p6RN0 F/24N1�yp01RII �i(�j` //�TD4SA0 51ti•Kt ' .4L-14 111.1—.—.—.—.—.—.—"�—r—I I rP LOT IKE IE1P1 �_..,. A .. f I, Y ' •r RR O I , A i I a•� wry M LE1E4�10e i.` Y '. gas.OP...ma sox 4 I M.. r/ _ r47,' 17Ow[4R slAWVI LAMIM.¢. ADA Pm*1y �..g I p61YW CORCRETE I/ / IE'-,.. Ala COMM.Of ES1 COMuL Y (i if'1 SbAA1M 041 II 1 NU MII llE ENCLOSNE USE H!11E 11 ! 1 CA.. ! '!_ A K[ .IIR7. nixOUT pPRER 2WrtFN C01bEM GW9 Ei6/fq 5-l401F 0E CRUTOR 5 STRACTLY ARE OW 24 PROMO-ED or _. —_. I I 4 111H(Y/ARArWEN' / ORIUE MONIED EM VE Au. MER LY1INA�N91A�5A - • .y1 SUE SIMIEO MED E OS ALL 01 WA rp-YG 1 /. TOWN!EASE PRMRD SIZES NE DEEMED'MDT 10 WALE'. MtPY POMMY SI.[ 1 I ` p. (1D'x15T 11. • SUBMITTALS 1R A.VR • llY w-•-•••••_ it 1a. 051E PESCFSVIOX �V TOW I _ CST ./� J7 1 12/1012 NA ISM MAMSS AP IUFI/L00 .01/02/13 pronto Anumws ® I • 3 06/08/I3 RYFfP 1DRA DOOM LY pp I 1 CO/24/13 RCMP PER cu am... .r IE I 5 07/37/I3 WSW TOWER 1M.sDEE ii ip I I 10001 14041) 0 02/10/13 PM CLOD CW1EN15 CPC �t1 I I • E9 00 MP I I 81122089 I I /' OJ =r f APPROX. NORTH SITE IEWO' —1--0-1-1— 1 3 TOWER BASE PLAN SCALE:I/4 . 1.-0' SITE NAME: CHAPARRAL SELF STORAGE I SITE NO.: R50393 AAn 27390 NICOIAS ROAD MAW ROW MAI�f 110 IO-0' TEMECULA,CA 92591 EWRAES PAPA(9404 0M 1-1) r—— l-1 E FOOPVm WO tEA]WpA 5oM@ ! V =MO PPAL: DN 0-y SHEET ST U. 1_ PROJECT owl.RESP07601 f0R PR3AOIR0 A MO.Y/LOL4L STRUCIUVL I I [4OfA6 6 6 ST Y AR1LY35 Of NW..ANCHORS,SUPPORTS 0 CEWW/MIMMO �0 IELCO EDAW•031 Of ANY STRUCTURAL YDpiIG11g6/REMMICEMEM REOURED THERETO.MR CONSTRUCTSN DOCUMENT 5 FOR MD.PERI.5111 A 5 EST iN1ExDE0 I I N R SITE PLAN Fos Commt.0ION UNLESS ALCOYPANEO eY A PE STAVENSISHSO UMW PEE STRUCTURAL A95ESSYEHT REPORT. MANSEE 2.PLOT RAN 6 HOT THE NSW Of A SURYEY R 6 MSED OM MO MUMSUNSMOTES.AER.PHOTOS•DOMING PARCEL MPS MPS/SE PROM MEC01 D5 OATAM .ALL 051 A 11.00 SHORN 5 MpOxHMR ONLY DRMx DY: SNEfl X0: DIE MO SUBJECT TO ANY COMM361 THAT A SLAW(MY REVEAL i—1O-0 —i J■ I 1 APPROX NORTH CHEMED IN: Z-2 WP G N 051E 1 SITE PLAN SCALE: 1/9' 1•-0' 2 LEASE ARPA p19ENSgH RAN SCALE:N.T.S. 10/1e/12 N•P1iyR1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION at&t 12100 PM PUMA DONE COMM CA 50703 TIP Of P0OVO3E0 �51IGFPLM�I11:IOM �OAV.•N'-0'!A01 - _ Ma,[Et 433443444404•41441415404.. SMARTLINK LLC. CA-R rOPPVR(Ltl1OlIO 930 c $ '2140IE 111 orS,,, 16'-01�A6i ----- LI PH(110)253-5155 R1114630ip NH fMR NReSW[11T OP 1 FAX(110)251-5110 M O 1030 M AL 414 112•155nw1 OF 1591 M19014 IOW V 113 l' *MN Kr ream OGIINAucer MSG 7■201.710 MY EBI Consulting 4441RAiM h MOMS 5 L^..,o:rntn Y41C0/w11MFYn 21 B Street I Burlington,MA 01803 f1�OlI1D10y14�nY�ryy�1 Tel:(781)273-25001 Fan:(781)273-3311 OM.6srw lt1NL�e�p www.ehwnsulWg.com M4/lCri NEM C fii E16MN011OLKE EMSIFNO 2-.-- W [' L, STORY ORMI USW COLUMN "4115' (WW1 "6150 a ME (nP.) Nl:t(YrrJ Fy4 AxESS ME I IIIIIIIMMIIM _ELE EM0'-0 CMOE C. ( 1 V. -0'3 A40 40094005 STA4R/1CwAY01E • MOMENT 61 E PROPE lw1E R964 RTY COPYRIGHT OF FBI GM:ULM.WC AND FOR TIE EMCLU XE USE BY TE TITLE CLEAT NIT 902/047001 OR USE 0' 4 e' II MM009 40404140 M1OEN CON5011 0 Of 1 ' SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE:IA'.1'-O' 34I G 507/4 5 511bCTLY NI P DR 24, ■_■ O SUE 521045 NOTED NE ALR INER SME 517E5 WON ONLY ALL OMER PRIMO SDR NE DEMO MT TO MLLE'. • SUBMITTALS NO ME MORON. BY I 12/10/12 140%203040 MM. lM E 01/02/11 IEMO 5451/7116 439 1 95/00/13 NEVMF0 EWER OY904 CV OOP OF PROPOSED 4 05/21/13 1044510 910 C4 COMM, Au _ 51F•LM cream 4f MINA, 0.03.-W'-O'1 AOL 5 03/45/11 WNW 104 OE1:G1 NE fiagriP,//,II�^��-�-�� 6 05/19/11'R»RV[M COMM CPC AT&T C.A.NPAM.PROPOS b ED ELEV.- '--0'i PAL, Ed.RB 451: 81122068 I3111333114 3161 non 041146905 IOM.Of 0 Ial 1(09 .TOTAL OF 12)!NKY IPIOF.OF .4 NNW NOFORO MTMI K5{tA14 fr[ltYl[ [1O5u1O MOO=ATILI 61 SITE NAME: CHAPARRAL .0346e TO SELF STORAGE TON F�ryO® �I�pLyllpn SITE NO.: RS0393 R1p4 F11O1019 Mif 4F-O'S l5EA m mns RMO 5g4Lq MHO N�.Y)fAS ROW 04011020 1-eleNY Exn1MC XROUCx1 WE 11WL1H'Mal2L _4 mom rR4155T1 TEMECULA,CA 92591 • A .Of1E0/N4•1TP41 511040 ACCESS •13138441 41041130 Amapa srdiAOE MEN]E1 0464,Ip(4e1 Deft INN M.fur) ....... or..) - MY .1.1 ELEVATIONS ELEV.nr-73 AG.4 -. 111090][04 IOER F0WMTgNJ 030932 5r: NYE1 1q (OEIMIFD M 011416) All MG.00IL Z-3 2 NORTH ELEVATION 1• a 16 _ SCALE: I/L7" 1'—O' .1 ,0,0,2 • NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION at&t 7 121U0 PARE ELM ORME CEMLm9,G R0703 �µ =El TOP OF @y M�fL10RU _—- THE TOWER STRUCTURE DIMENSIONS E ARE ENGINEERED EXCEED meO,ECm i , AS DEPICTED.FOUNDATION PLAN MAY VARY SMARTLINK LLC. CL d memo DEPENDING ON FURTHER SERVICES PERFORMED 128 C•,DAME ORM EWE 013 INCLUDING A CEOTECHNICAL STUDY&STRUCTURE A P.P01b.110'21401 981tt��T p DESIGN TO SUPPORT THE TOWER. PR(110)295-3110 . 4„ AD.L - - _— y F .(MO)211-M70 FRYVF(8 Mil PAM.X)104 MT.Cr• FM SWIM MX a 1t1• 11mI•a T IMGIOSIO MEM !IPM CORE-3181 W11130 MDFl PREPARED PT: H.2LE P P.M M 1ASR 1112 Rlal�a ` 011 46-0.M A EBI Consulting 110014 OSRawEGP IMP ,..onnrc+Ti 11^P�.snrs!uuo 2.ncP 21 B Slreel I Burlinglan,MA 01803 i1P1111E 2- Tel:(781)273-2500 I Fax:(781)273-3311 smart www.ebicansWBng.COm wrCtA AMA1MMwl MIRE!MUM dI1D111O—\ • • ... afAOF ELEV.?DM BAL. 11044(2 11M A, 001190 OM DIMMER!R TIE OESION PROPERTY AND COMER(OF EM COM ORE.PC AM FOR TIE EXCL..USE BY THE TIRE CIA .PM OWUCATg0 OR USE LY 4. Y 11' 21• WITHOUT IMPRESS MADE COWART OF 1 EAST ELEVATION SCALE:1/B'-1'-0- PE CREATOR rs STREW PRwartD ■ ■ OR MO SCALES N0E0 ME FOR 24,3M( --- --... - SIZE PRINTED BEM ONLY ALL 01NE9 PfM1ED SEES ARE MELED'MT TO SUM'. SUBMITTALS ' ND. WI DESCRPOON BY 1 12/1S/12 OM Z01M0 DRAMS 2 01/02/13 Ps Ewe arwrq 1TRe 3 05/01/15 a1V81210+-1MUM LV TOP Cr PaoroTm I 01/21/15 1EASA0 154 411 NER11P15 411 M .• ! L -—- "' 07/21/15 eEYRFO TOPER DFSEII M1{l/� 8 DO/11/15' CPC BA . -0'f 41 1. - ------ 10MIR7Rm Ryf fPA14 11lPUiCNs W 1 Fd"'xP.PM Yana 1DIAL a Wit a wh ryxP.a PEpE®101-3-3 P KR HA Df0.TWIE Cr 21i.WAXED MDw 1EZZYaE FLOOR 411249 PEP SREM 00NE//LM011 10101 —=1:00.024.4104.0 510E RED: SITE NAME: CHAPARRAL SELF STORAGE SITE NO.: RS0393 PROROSED wan. � 27380 RA ON ROAD MCP TEMECUUa G 22591 pMmwD x1DE'a[ 11111 MO. 1.8(1 41111 _ Emino cR1oE0 ELEVATIONS ELEV.. '_ C.L MOM OP SHEET NM AI "`SP Z-4• 2 WEST ELEVATION o' 1�e• 113' 21• SCALE: 1/B•- I'-0' wE: 10/18/12 NOT F CONSTRUCTION at&t f NOES PROPOSED TOP OF PROPOSED TOWER DESIGN TAD NOT BEEN ENGINEERED AND S OF STEALTH CONCEALLHIT TUNER SIEALU CONCEALMENT TOWER ELEV-NV-9.3 ACL ELF,/-M8'-0•3 AC THE STRUCTURE DIIAENSIONS ARE NOT TO EXCEL D AS DEPICTED FOUNDATION N PLAN NAY VARY DEPENDING ON FURTHER SERVICES 1500 0 S1 VRNED INCLUDING A C.COiECHPIICAL STUDY k STRUCTURE DESIGN 10 SUPPORT THE TONER PRDPDSEn AT&T��-0-3 EBI Consulting i STEALTH CONCEALMENT TONER 11140... PROPOSED •TOWER •,.rPPPm•,n:Il NllrH..ug cat tlnr,:KL (DESIGNED or OTHER5) 21 B Slreel I Bu111Rglon,MA 01803 sown' a- Tel:(781)273-2500 I Far:(701)273-3311 1;f`} Nom. www,eblconsulIing.com AGEECRO PROPOSED DADO CPS i YrA'� RODE ;.$� pTM:#/uAN1Np1 Ex611NO STORAGE DATING SJUE105 SLALOM BALDING EON FE NROIIC.) �IrI{!�I.,D�L!'1jwc cOluw ■ p(MI fEVCE(TW.) EAKTNG LADE 11. �_!1 !����o i'Ji'ill 1. EXRIHG GRADE EXrsmN:CMDE ELEV.•0'-0•2 ACL EL., •O'-0•3 AGL ELEV.•D'-O•k AC.L 1 SOUTH ELEVATION L EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/0 _ .-0 STEALTH 1LOI�LFAl1FM TONER STEAM CONCGUmJENn TOWER ,i1.n IN..Ar ••.. • I_OF (LEV•45N-0.1.AO L ELEV.•H'-0•0 ALL igir PROPCGEO N11220N0< STEALTH CONCEALMENT T&T IR TONER PROPOSED AT&T CPS ANTENW MOUNTED 10 PROPOSED AT&T AR-0•1 ROOF STEALTH COACEAHFNT TOWER ,I l �VA.M f. (:11A4iAt I.4AL PROPOfEO RI EOUPMENT LFASE MD1 WTNN fMRONC s10RAGE PROPOSED AT&T LPS .L(! Si GRAD :MTNC WROUGHT IRON FOOTPRINT 1 ANTENNA MOUNTED TO ,GI I1 NO.. RSOSrr SUING ACCESS GTE JI/SOIl NILUIn0 8061, iii EAalwC STORAGE ILVTr:Jln-�'r.9'i Sll EM6INIO COLUMN �L } MP) EIOSTNO STORAGE ` - 2 ll1+ S{1r ■■■■ 1{ypI KRUM . 1■lh IA�IJII 'I Ili III�1�I I EMT.LRAM EN6INC CRAOE E ELEV.-r-tt A G L ELEV•0'-0•3 AC L I_LE Vi,I I.- 2 NORTH ELEVATION 2 WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"= 1'-0" RS0393 ARTISTNC rrneering at&t CHAPARRAL SELF STRORAGE AEs61a1s.cnrn f377,9AE.sims 27380 NICOLAS ROAD TEMECULA CA 92591 � + t ,y 114 a rs . `ie4 Q e l `4:4 ..,, ...,,!4.e' ' `,1 . ,,r / _- . ro,„ — 14- - 4.;. , ,S A., of d, ft.: _ d " : <, ' rrfr..J R ' t r 4r ,�1: M • Est LO" _ . "� , LOCATIDN _. 82013 Google Maim r I • .1eg0M0ar0 TOWER i = .5. [ I i w. •f - arm" ,.,��. , +[•— -d __ - _--._ --__ -- -- -��.. �r..-.- ,...ate �� _ - - _.--- __ EXISTING PROPOSED LOOKING NORTHWEST FROM NICOLAS ROAD gccu Pncv oc Pry oio aimu.gviory ens[o upory irvroengi�ory peovio[o ev Peo�[ci gPP�icgrvv. kampiso RS0393 ARTIFIC.„,„,,,,„,,i „%„..............0„,0„ atsit CHAPARRAL SELF STRORAGE AEsinES.conl i37T.`,A .sims 27380 NIC OLAS ROAD TEMECU LA CA 92591 l';':,'7,0'4:414.0- 'le y ~• '� ; f 4! ♦ , - n "^' 11ti } ay' ,+ .y� r � c . 4,° i P ....• .rs.iiiii' ' '' 1 $$ ' 1144 1+- 4 . 41st'' V 1 L rt ., r .‘. 1...D UAT 10N - T2013 Goode Maps y p „ PROPOSED TOWER .. •. -- r• — _ _ F _ r• - _ __ l ` I — — EX ISTINii PROPOSE° LOOKING SOUTHEAST FROM WINCHESTER ROAD A.C.11 ws wt r•nsn•rxu!I.4nury •wnkn urnnt,nvp*..■016n.NB r.en w•rpBJLCt wrruw*T. PC RESOLUTION NO. 14- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA13-0233, A WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY APPLICATION TO ALLOW A NEW 48-FOOT STEALTH BELL TOWER TO BE CONSTRUCTED AND OPERATED WITHIN THE EXISTING CHAPARRAL SELF STORAGE FACILITY LOCATED AT 27380 NICOLAS ROAD (APN 920-100-016) Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On September 30, 2013, David Kazner, on behalf of Smartlink LLC and AT&T, filed Planning Application No. PA13-0233, a Conditional Use Permit Application in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. The Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. C. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on March 19, 2014, 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. D. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission approved Planning Application No. PA13-0233 subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder. E. All legal preconditions to the adoption of the Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby finds, determines and declares that: Conditional Use Permit, Development Code Section 17.04.10.E 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; The proposed use is consistent with all requirements stated in Telecommunications Facility and Antenna Ordinance of the Temecula Development Code. In addition, the project is in conformance with all the requirements of the General Plan and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. B. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, building and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect uses, buildings or structures; As proposed the wireless telecommunication facility will be completely disguised as a new 48-foot stealth bell tower compatible with the existing architecture materials and colors of storage facility on site. The project is located and designed to have a negligible impact on surrounding uses. C. The site for the proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning Commission or City Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood; Based on the requirements stated in the Telecommunication Facility and Antenna Ordinance (Chapter 17.40), as well as the applicable sections of the Development Code, the site for the conditional use is adequate to accommodate required yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other features described in the Development Code, including setbacks from residential structures. D. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community; The project is in conformance with all requirements of the Development Code, Fire Code, and Building Code. These codes contain provisions that ensure the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The project is not anticipated to have negative impact to the public health, safety, and general welfare. E. That the decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a Conditional Use Permit be based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council on appeal; The decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a conditional use permit has been based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Conditional Use Permit Application: A. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review (Section 15301, Class 1 Existing Facilities). Class 1 exemptions include the operation, repair, maintenance, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that previously existing capacity. The application will allow AT&T to construct and operate a new 48-foot stealth bell tower and supporting equipment within a new bell tower structure to be located within an existing self-storage facility. As designed and conditioned, the proposed project involves the minor alteration of an existing private structure involving negligible expansion for use and will not have an adverse impact on the environment. The proposed tower architectural design, color scheme, and materials, complements the existing self-storage facility. No further environmental review is required. Section 4. Conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approves Planning Application No. PA13-0233, A Wireless Telecommunications Facility Application to allow a new 48-foot stealth bell tower to be constructed and operated within the existing Chaparral Self Storage facility located at 27380 Nicolas Road, subject to the Conditions of Approval set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 19th day of March, 2014. Stanley Harter, Chairman ATTEST: Armando G. Villa, AICP Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Armando G. Villa, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 14- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of March, 2014, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Armando G. Villa, AICP Secretary EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA13-0233 Project Description: A Wireless Telecommunications Facility Application to allow a new 48-foot stealth bell tower to be constructed and operated within the existing Chaparral Self Storage facility located at 27380 Nicolas Road Assessor's Parcel No.: 920-100-016 MSHCP Category: Exempt (No New Occupiable Square Footage/Grading) DIF Category: Exempt (No New Occupiable Square Footage) TUMF Category: Exempt (No New Occupiable Square Footage) Quimby Category: Exempt (Non-Residential) Approval Date: March 19, 2014 Expiration Date: March 19, 2016 PLANNING DIVISION Within 48 Hours of the Approval of This Project PL-1. Filing Notice of Exemption. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Fifty Dollars ($50.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15062. If within said 48-hour period the applicant/ developer has not delivered to the Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish and Wildlife Code Section 711.4(c)). General Requirements PL-2. Indemnification of the City. 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. PL-3. Modifications or Revisions. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this project. PL-4. Expiration. 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, or use of a property in conformance with a Conditional Use Permit. PL-5. Time Extension. The Director of Community Development may, upon an application being filed prior to expiration, and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to 3 one-year extensions of time, one year at a time. PL-6. Consistency with Specific Plans. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 1 Roripaugh Estates. PL-7. Conformance with Approved Plans. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved site plan and elevations contained on file with the Planning Division. PL-8. Graffiti. All graffiti shall be removed within 24 hours on telecommunication towers, equipment, walls, or other structures. PL-9. Water Quality and Drainage. Other than stormwater, it is illegal to allow liquids, gels, powders, sediment, fertilizers, landscape debris, and waste from entering the storm drain system or from leaving the property. To ensure compliance with this Condition of Approval: a. Spills and leaks shall be cleaned up immediately. b. Do not wash, maintain, or repair vehicles onsite. c. Do not hose down parking areas, sidewalks, alleys, or gutters. d. Ensure that all materials and products stored outside are protected from rain. e. Ensure all trash bins are covered at all times. PL-10. Paint Inspection. The applicant shall paint a three-foot-by-three-foot section of the building for Planning Division inspection, prior to commencing painting of the building. PL-11. Photographic Prints. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Division 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. PL-12. Materials and Colors. The Conditions of Approval specified in this resolution, to the extent specific items, materials, equipment, techniques, finishes or similar matters are specified, shall be deemed satisfied by staff's prior approval of the use or utilization of an item, material, equipment, finish or technique that City staff determines to be the substantial equivalent of that required by the Conditions of Approval. Staff may elect to reject the request to substitute, in which case the real party in interest may appeal, after payment of the regular cost of an appeal, the decision to the Planning Commission for its decision. MATERIAL COLOR Proposed Stealth Concealment Tower Match existing PL-13. Statement of Justification. The applicant shall comply with their Statement of Justification dated September 30, 2013, on file with the Planning Division, unless superseded by these Conditions of Approval. PL-14. Revocation of CUP. This Conditional Use Permit may be revoked pursuant to Section 17.03.080 of the City's Development Code. PL-15. City Review and Modification of CUP. The City, its Director of Community Development, Planning Commission, and City Council retain and reserve the right and jurisdiction to review and modify this Conditional Use Permit (including the Conditions of Approval) based on changed circumstances. Changed circumstances include, but are not limited to, the modification of business, a change in scope, emphasis, size of nature of the business, and the expansion, alteration, reconfiguration or change of use. The reservation of right to review any Conditional Use Permit granted or approved or conditionally approved hereunder by the City, its Director of Community Development, Planning Commission and City Council is in addition to, and not in-lieu of, the right of the City, its Director of Community Development, Planning Commission, and City Council to review, revoke or modify any Conditional Use Permit approved or conditionally approved hereunder for any violations of the conditions imposed on such Conditional Use Permit or for the maintenance of any nuisance condition or other code violation thereon. PL-16. Construction and Demolition Debris. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris and shall provide the Planning Division verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul demolition and construction debris. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) PL-17. Maintenance/Facility Removal Agreement. The maintenance/facility removal agreement or enforceable provisions in a signed lease that will assure the intent of the Telecommunication Facility and Antenna Ordinance will be complied with, shall be signed by the applicant and shall be submitted to the Director of Community Development. The agreement shall comply with all provisions set forth in Section 17.40.210 of the Ordinance. PL-18. Utility Screening. 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 ensure that there are no conflicts with trees Prior to Release of Power, Building Occupancy or Any Use Allowed by This Permit PL-19. Compliance with Conditions of Approval. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION General Conditions/Information B-1. Street Address. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings. B-2. Compliance with Code. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2013 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2013 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy Code, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and the Temecula Municipal Code. B-3. Obtain Approvals Prior to Construction. Applicant shall obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. B-4. Obtaining Separate Approvals and Permits. Commercial and industrial project trash enclosure, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls will require separate approvals and permits. At Plan Review Submittal B-5. Electric Plan. Applicant shall provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan applicable to scope of work for plan review. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) B-6. Plans Require Stamp of Registered Professional. Applicant shall provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans. FIRE PREVENTION General Requirements F-1. Fire Dept. Plan Review. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. F-2. Fire Access Roads. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be with a surface to provide all-weather driving capabilities. Access roads shall be 80,00 lbs. GVW with a minimum of AC thickness of .25 feet. In accordance with Section 1410.1, prior to building construction all locations where structures are to be built shall have fire apparatus access roads (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). Fire Department vehicles access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 24 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet inches (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) F-3. Required Submittals (Fire Sprinkler Systems). Fire sprinkler tenant improvement plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of sprinkler plans must be submitted by the installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. These plans must be submitted prior to the issuance of building permit. F-4. Required Submittals (Generator). Permits will be required by the Fire Department for any future generator installation. Applications for permits require the submittal of three sets of plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau. F-5. Required Submittals (Hazardous Material Inventory Statement). The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the City Fire Department a Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report. A full hazardous materials inventory report and color coded floor plan is required for any building storming or using hazardous materials (CFC Chapters 1 and 28 through 44 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). The inventory shall include the batteries that are stored and used as well as any diesel fuel or gasoline for the generator. Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy F-6. Knox Box. A "Knox-Box" shall be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six feet in height and be located to the right side of the fire riser sprinkler room (CFC Chapter 5). F-7. Knox Rapid Entry System. 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 Chapter 5). F-8. File Format Requirements. A simple plot plan and a simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format, must be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau. Contact Fire Prevention for approval of alternative file formats which may be acceptable. POLICE DEPARTMENT General Requirements PD-1. Defensible Plants. Applicant shall ensure all landscaping surrounding any proposed equipment or structures is kept at a height of no more than three feet from ground level. Plants, hedges and shrubbery shall be defensible plants to deter would-be intruders from breaking into the structure utilizing lower level entry ways. PD-2. Trees. Applicant shall ensure any trees surrounding any structure rooftop be kept at a distance to prevent roof accessibility by would-be burglars. Since trees also act as a natural ladder, the branches must be pruned to have a six-foot clearance from the structure. PD-3. Berms. Any berms shall not exceed three feet in height. PD-4. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design. The placement of any landscaping should be in compliance with the guidelines of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED). PD-5. Exterior Building Lighting. Any exterior lighting to the structure must be in compliance with Riverside County Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance 655, low pressure sodium lighting preferred. PD-6. Exterior Door Illumination. Any exterior doors shall have vandal resistant light fixtures installed above the door. The door area shall be illuminated with a minimum one-foot candle illumination at ground level, evenly dispersed. PD-7. Exterior Building Lighting. Any lighting affixed to the buildings less than 8 feet above the ground shall be vandal resistant, wall mount light fixtures. PD-8. Hardware. All doors, windows, locking mechanisms, hinges, and other miscellaneous hardware shall be commercial or institution grade. PD-9. Graffiti. Any graffiti painted or marked upon the structure should be removed or painted over within twenty-four (24) hours of being discovered. Report all crimes to the Temecula Police 24-hour dispatch center at 951-696-HELP. PD-10. Roof Hatches. Any roof hatches shall be painted "International Orange." PD-11. Crime Prevention through Design. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) as developed by the National Crime Prevention Institute (NCPI) supports the concept that "the proper design and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in the fear and incidence of crime and an improvement in the quality of life." The nine primary strategies that support this concept are included below: a. Provide clear border definition of controlled space. Examples of border definition may include fences, shrubbery or signs in exterior areas. Within a building, the arrangement of furniture and color definition can serve as a means of identifying controlled space. b. Provide clearly marked transitional zones. Persons need to be able to identify when they are moving from public to semi-public to private space. c. Gathering or congregating areas to be located or designated in locations where there is good surveillance and access control. d. Place safe activities in unsafe locations. Safe activities attract normal users to a location and subsequently render the location less attractive to abnormal users due to observation and possible intervention. e. Place unsafe activities in safe locations. Placing unsafe activities in areas of natural surveillance or controlled access will help overcome risk and make the users of the areas feel safer. f. Redesign the use of space to provide natural barriers. Separate activities that may conflict with each other (outdoor basketball court and children's play area, for example) by distance, natural terrain or other functions to avoid such conflict. g. Improve scheduling of space. The timing in the use of space can reduce the risk for normal users and cause abnormal users to be of greater risk of surveillance and intervention. h. Redesign space to increase the perception of natural surveillance. Abnormal users need to be aware of the risk of detection and possible intervention. Windows and clean lines-of sight serve to provide such a perception of surveillance. i. Overcome distance and isolation. This strategy may be accomplished through improved communications (portable two-way radios, for example) and design efficiencies, such as the location of restrooms in a public building. PD-12. Contact. Any questions regarding these conditions should be directed to the Temecula Police Department Crime Prevention and Plans Unit at (951) 506-5131. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT General Requirements PW-1. Conditions of Approval. Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the developer at no cost to any Government Agency. It is understood that the developer correctly shows on the site plan all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. PW-2. Encroachment Permit. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. PW-3. Easements. The developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the affected properties. The Developer shall obtain all necessary easement over the affected properties. r) 3 0 2014 Project Description/Scope of Work . , Proposed AT&T Wireless Installation 27380 Nicolas Road,Temecula, California 9591 Please find a brief outline as to the description of the proposed AT&T Wireless facility located at an existing Self-Storage Facility, located at the intersection of Nicolas &Winchester . Lai The proposed installation will consist of twelve (12) panel antennas, placed within a new freestanding stealth tower. The radio cabinets will be placed inside the base of the tower. All antennas & radio equipment will be completely concealed from the public. AT&T is aware of the recently installed Distributed Antenna System (DAS) through-out the City of Temecula and Murrieta. AT&T's engineers have carefully reviewed the locations and heights of the nodes (light standards) and have determined the existing system would not meet AT&T's requirements for capacity coverage to the Community of Temecula. The findings are based on the following: 1) DAS does not have the required call capacity/Switching capability (2) DAS does not achieve the required ERP (1800-1900) (3) DAS does not have sufficient height required (4) Although there is coverage, it reduces capacity within areas,when the antennas are all working. AT&T has multiple sites on air within the same band, but not all on the same frequency within the same area. The DAS nodes are on same frequency and don't create substantial capacity at all, but only create signal strength on existing antennas. (5) DAS is an extension of an antenna. Das does not operate like a Base station (no calls). It takes a modulated RF signal and converts it. The one advantage to a DAS system is at the nodes, large radio cabinet are not required (not a large foot-print). If the nodes are so close to close to ground—need 8-12 of them to complete Macro cell. The nodes were mapped by AT&T Engineering, and it was determined that AT&T could achieve much better coverage objectives by placing the new proposed facility at the Self-Storage Property. Also, there are no DAS nodes available to the Northeast of the proposed facility, which is thickly residential and has caused AT&T to receive a number of customer complaints from the area. By utilizing the proposed Self-Storage Facility, and use it as a full Macro Site, AT&T can cover the requested community area. The existing DAS system lacks the coverage to those AT&T customers, and clearly misses a very important portion of the primary coverage objective. Building NEW DAS nodes would require extensive effort; with low power at each node and the lower height, a new DAS system would not allow AT&T to fulfill the coverage/capacity gap in the area. The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed facility will not create unusual noise, traffic or other conditions or situations that may be objectionable, detrimental or incompatible with the surrounding land uses. The proposed use is consistent with this finding in that: 1. The proposed equipment associated with the telecommunication structure operates quietly or virtually noise free. 2. The equipment does not emit fumes, smoke, or odors that could be considered objectionable. 3. The telecommunications facility is unmanned and only requires periodic maintenance, which equates to approximately one trip per month. The proposed communication facility will not result in conditions or circumstances contrary to the public health, safety and the general welfare. The proposed use is consistent with this finding in that. The facility will allow for the community, public safety and local businesses to have enhanced wireless coverage while working, commuting, shopping or visiting the area. The proposed facility at the subject location will be unmanned, have no impact on circulation systems, and generate no noise, odor, smoke, or any other adverse impacts to adjacent land uses. The installation of antenna sectors and transmission equipment will not result in any material changes to the character of the existing structures or surrounding built or natural environments. The proposed communications facility will operate in full compliance with the U.S. standards for radiofrequency emissions as published by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). Background: AT&T Mobility is a registered public utility, licensed and regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). As a public utility, AT&T Mobility is licensed by the FCC to provide wireless communication services throughout California. AT&T Mobility is the second largest wireless company in the United States and is dedicated to providing customers with wireless technology designed to enrich their lives. Its vision is to simplify the wireless experience for its consumer and business customers by offering easy-to-understand, affordable rate plans and excellent customer service. AT&T Mobility is bringing next-generation wireless data products - from corporate e-mail to downloadable ringtones-to customers nationwide through its advanced networks AT&T Mobility is regulated by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and is authorized to operate in the frequencies established for Cellular and PCS operators. AT&T's wireless telecommunication facilities operate at the lowest possible power levels and are well below established standards used by the FCC for safe human exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields. These standards have been tested and proved safe by the American National standards Institute (ANSI) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). 1. The proposed communications facility will operate in full compliance with the U.S. standards for radiofrequency emissions as published by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). The ANSI was developed by the committee composed of 125 scientists from universities, non-profit laboratories and Federal Health Laboratories (FDA, NIOSH, EPA): 13: are from the industry and consultants to the industry: and 15% are from the military and other federal agencies. In 1992, the ANSI established, as a public safety standard, a maximum exposure level to radiofrequency emissions of 1000 microwatts per centimeter squared (1,000 uW/cm2). 2. The radiofrequency emissions emitted by the proposed AT&T Mobility facility will fall within the portion of the electromagnetic spectrum which transmits non-ionizing electromagnetic emissions, at the low levels associated with this type of wireless technology, are not harmful to living cells. Among the items which result in non-ionizing electromagnetic emissions are radios, television broadcasts, CB radios, microwave ovens, and a variety of common security systems. Conversely, items which transmit ionizing electromagnetic emissions include ultraviolet light, medical x-rays and gamma rays. 3. Data currently available on the effects of electromagnetic transmission on public health indicate that there is no likelihood of negative Impacts to public health and safety. Project Benefits The proposed project will provide the following community benefits. • Alternative emergency response communications for police,fire, paramedics and other emergency services. • Better voice and reception quality through use of the all-digital technology. • Higher security and privacy for telephone users. • More affordable service due to increased competition in the market area. • High speed data transfer for business or leisure activities. 01 11,11P ��1,��AA1//gib! 14 oJ0 € ' * Notice of Public Hearing, :,,-7 1989 _ ''"., ..,:N. ,v�"� A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the City of Temecula PLANNING COMMISSION to consider the matter described below: Case No: PA13-0233 Applicant: David Kazner Proposal: A Wireless Telecommunications Facility Application to allow a cellular antenna and equipment facility within a new 48 foot bell tower to be constructed and operated within the existing Chaparral Self Storage facility located at 27380 Nicolas Road. Environmental: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed project is exempt from further environmental review and a Notice of Exemption will be adopted in compliance with CEQA (Section 15301, Class 1 Existing Facilities) Case Planner: Kenny Taylor, (951) 240-4203 Place of Hearing: City of Temecula, Council Chambers Date of Hearing: March 19, 2014 Time of Hearing: 6:00 p.m. IP .1 ivopp--v. , iir.. - - 4.- ... ...,- ...- ,-„:„.....,- ,,,,- zw,„„ . ... . ......4,...,,, , v4p, - v....v. - , . 4 i 4 SttR i '" 1#■t.44 Project Site Ni.,..... :74t4 it: 1 -Niti IP-441 'Attaititity #140 jeWt/Talp14 ..,________ ____.. , _ /4, a_, _ 4, „sp., 4.4. ,,,,,,, -164, ';.ii ilhorift 4 •. ..4 a► ! ...., .,, ff allribriirokki,,,,,, 4 sear *au! ,, .744. e.ft 0 375 750 � ititlr�_ ` _ m RMN '.-- 3` _ col-ASP C 1 i,lit a Notice of Publ[c Hearing The agenda packet (including staff reports) will be available for viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula) after 4:00 p.m. the Friday before the Planning Commission Meeting. At that time, the packet may also be accessed on the City's website — www.cityoftemecula.org. Any Supplemental Material distributed to a majority of the Commission regarding any item on the Agenda, after the posting of the Agenda, will be available for public review in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula), 8:00 a.m. — 5:00 p.m. In addition, such material will be made available on the City's website — www.cityoftemecula.orq — and will be available for public review at the respective meeting. If you have any questions regarding any item of business on the Agenda for this meeting, please call the Planning Department, (951) 694-6400. r � ITEM 4 L J STAFF REPORT— PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF MEETING: March 19, 2014 TO: Planning Commission Chairperson and members of the Planning Commission FROM: Armando G. Villa, AICP, Director of Community Development PREPARED BY: Matt Peters, Case Planner PROJECT Planning Application Nos. PA13-0155 and PA13-0156, a SUMMARY: Development Plan to construct a 140-unit attached residential project, including two-story townhomes and three-story walk-up flats, also with a pool and clubhouse for project residents, and Tentative Tract Map 36568 (for Condominium Purposes) located on approximately 7 acres at the southernmost point of Pujol Street, on the west side of the street (APNs: 922-110-013 and 922-110-014). RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolutions approving the project subject to the Conditions of Approval CEQA: Mitigated Negative Declaration with Monitoring Plan PROJECT DATA SUMMARY Name of Applicant: Rob Honer, Ambient Communities General Plan H (High Density Residential) Designation: Zoning Designation: H (High Density Residential) Existing Conditions/ Land Use: Site: Vacant, but previously disturbed with numerous concrete slab foundations North: Apartments South: Open space, a Metropolitan Water District (MWD) easement, and the extension of Camino Estribo, a rural dirt road East: Pujol Street and Murrieta Creek West: Undeveloped foothills of Santa Rosa Mountains 1 Existinq/Proposed Min/Max Allowable or Required Lot Area: 7.05 acres NA Maximum Number of Units: 140 units proposed 140 max allowed Lot Coverage: Building 29% building coverage 30% max building coverage Landscaping 44% landscape coverage 30% minimum open space Parking Required/Provided: 316 proposed 316 required 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. On June 18, 2013, Rob Honer, on behalf of Ambient Communities, submitted Planning Application Nos. PA13-0155 and PA13-0156, a Development Plan and Tentative Tract Map for Shearwater Creek. Subsequently, there have been two meetings held with the Planning Commission Subcommittee, consisting of Commissioners Ron Guerrerio and Stan Harter. The first Subcommittee meeting was held on September 5, 2013. The comments consisted of a need for enhanced architecture to justify the higher density and the Subcommittee suggested incorporation of the Mediterranean architectural style, enhanced garage doors, and high end finishes. The applicant did not attend this meeting, but the comments were relayed to the applicant. On November 21, 2013, a second Planning Commission Subcommittee meeting was held with the applicant. The focus of the discussion was on, paint colors, landscaping and sidewalk circulation, breaking up the massing, and avoiding blank walls. The architect was present and was able to make design changes on his computer to visualize comments and suggestions for paint colors and other enhancements as they were discussed during the meeting. Design features and colors were negotiated and the result of the meeting was a mutually beneficial design for the City and Applicant. ANALYSIS Tentative Tract Map No. 36568 Tentative Tract Map No. 36568 is located at the terminus of Pujol Street, on the west side of the street. The proposed project will subdivide approximately 7 acres into a one lot condominium parcel to facilitate the construction of 140 units, a clubhouse/pool building, and detached garage units. The project design accommodates a combination of two-story townhome buildings and three-story stacked flat condominium buildings, including some with green courts. The townhome buildings front onto Pujol Street, which is a similar design to the Vineyards Apartments just to the north of this project on Pujol Street. Front doors are oriented to the street and a private sidewalk is separate and elevated from the public sidewalk on Pujol Street. The three-story stacked flats have private entrances fronting the internal driveways or a courtyard. A 0.20 acre Lot A is located on the east side of Pujol Street. This open space lot will be owned and maintained by the development. 2 The project site is a previously graded pad and contains multiple concrete slab foundations. Overall, the elevation of the site varies between 5 and 10 feet above the height of Pujol Street. The majority of the site is flat with the exception of slopes at the back, or west part of the site adjacent to Calle Cerillo. Per the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance (Section 16.03.060.A), two points of access are proposed. Primary access is taken off of Pujol Street at the northern end of the site. A secondary (gated) emergency only access is located at the southern end of the site. The emergency only access will be designed as engineered turf block to support emergency vehicles. In addition, the gated turf design is intended to keep people from confusing this as another entrance. Currently, the pavement for Pujol Street ends at the northern boundary of the project site. This map will be conditioned to provide for the extension of Pujol Street to a t- intersection at Calle Cerillo, which will serve as the future internal circulation street for the proposed Altair Specific Plan. Calle Cerillo then connects to the future Western Bypass corridor just north of the proposed bridge over Murrieta Creek. The condominium map proposes private interior streets, which are 24 feet wide and meet all access and circulation requirements in the Subdivision Ordinance and Fire Code. In addition, the private interior streets will be comprised of decorative brick pavers that both enhances the appearance of the site and serves as part of the overall Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for the site. Development Plan/Access/Circulation The development takes access from Pujol Street at the northern end of the project site, and a secondary (gated) emergency only access is located at the southern end of the site. A single story clubhouse is a focal point of the entry to the project, and provides a visible California room and pool adjacent to Pujol Street. The entrance also includes a green common area as a focal point to the west entry. Two-story townhomes front on Pujol Street and each has a private entry (front door) taking access from an elevated sidewalk above the public sidewalk on Pujol Street. The orientation of these buildings presents a traditional urban front door to the street layout, similar to the Vineyards Apartment buildings just north of the project site. Orientation of entries and the fronts of the townhomes activates the street scene and promotes "eyes" on the street in contrast to a more suburban design, which would generally orient buildings internally to the site and turn its back on the street. Garages are oriented as efficiently as possible to not be visible from the Pujol Street. The project site consists of 140 units on approximately 7 acres. The breakdown of building types and number of units is as follows: Building Type Number#of Dwelling Units Three 6-unit, two-story townhome buildings 18 units One 5-unit, two-story townhome building 5 units Five 9-unit, three-story stacked flat condo buildings 45 units Four 18-unit, three-story stacked flat condo buildings (with green court) 72 units 140 total units The unit mix is as follows: Plan 1 1 B/1 BA 725 SF 26 units Plan 2 2B/2BA 950 SF 52 units Plan 3 2B/2BA 1,000 SF 13 units Plan 4 3B/2BA 1,164 SF 26 units Plan 5 3B/2BA 1,450 SF 15 units Plan 6 4B/2BA 1,500 SF 8 units 140 total units 3 The project meets all setback requirements, and parking has been provided to meet the number of spaces required by the Development Code. However, the project exceeds Development Code requirements as related to the minimum number of covered spaces. The project provides 248 covered spaces when only 189 are required, thereby providing an additional amenity for the residents of the project. Architecture The architectural design for Shearwater Creek is inspired by the style of Irving Gill, an American Architect from San Diego whose best work, much of it dating from the 1910s, favors flat roofs without eaves, a unity of materials (mostly concrete), casement windows with transoms, white or near-white exterior and interior walls, cubic or rectangular massing, and plentiful ground-level arches or series of arches creating transitional breezeways in the manner of the California missions. The proposed architecture utilizes a majority of these elements and further complements the style by incorporating decorative metal railings, heavy wood beam trellises over the patios, and decorative wood beam outlookers that appear to support the concrete tile hip roof. The maximum height in the High Density Residential Zone is 50 feet. The tallest three-story structure is well below the maximum height at 38' 6". The colors for the buildings are mostly neutral and consist of white, tan, cream, and gray tones for the field colors on each of the different massing elements of the building. The garage doors and trim colors are dark brown to contrast with the lighter building colors. Each building has plentiful ground-level arches, and each unit has a private open space balcony, ranging in size from 68 to 140 square feet. The private open space balconies and patios are further supplemented by a common open space provided by an internal green court, as well as a main pocket park centrally located in the development. In addition, the clubhouse building contains a pool, recreation room, and a California room for barbequing and outdoor dining/lounging. The clubhouse is a single-story building with a tower element that complements the architecture of the remaining development by incorporating ground level arches, rectangular massing and flat roofs. Furthermore, the one-story clubhouse building is easily identifiable at the entrance to the project and provides a slight contrast to the two- and three-story condominiums throughout the rest of the development. The project also proposes trash enclosures and detached garage plans, which are both architecturally compatible with the residential units. The proposed elevations for this development meet the intent of the City's Design Guidelines, specifically Chapter 3, Multi Family, in terms of varied roofline elements, windows and doors consistent with the architectural style, four-sided architecture and articulation, appropriate materials and colors to convey a sense of quality and permanence. Landscaping The Development Code requires a minimum of 30 percent of the site to be landscaped open space. The proposed site plan identifies that 44% of the site will be landscaped. Trees along Pujol Street will include 24" box Holly Oak and Shoestring Acacia. Date Palms will provide an entry statement and perimeter landscaping will include a mix of deciduous accent trees and groundcovers. Slope landscaping at the back of the site will include trees, shrubs and groundcover to meet spacing and coverage requirements in the Development Code. Furthermore, sidewalks are located on both sides of the street throughout the site, and landscape planters have been included to break up massing along the front of the buildings and 4 between each of the garage spaces throughout the site. As designed, the project meets the landscape and open space requirements of the Development Code. LEGAL NOTICING REQUIREMENTS Notice of the public hearing was published in the U-T San Diego on March 6, 2014 and mailed to the property owners within the required 600-foot radius. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Staff has reviewed the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and based on an Initial Study, it has been determined the project will not have a significant impact on the environment; therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project. The Initial Study prepared for the project indicates that the project will have the following potential significant environmental impacts unless mitigation measures are included as Conditions of Approval: Impact—Air Quality 1. Mitigation - During grading and construction activities, the applicant/builder shall comply with the requirements of the SCAQMD Rule 403. The purpose of this rule is to reduce the amount of particulate matter entrained in the ambient air as a result of man-made fugitive dust sources by requiring actions to prevent, reduce or mitigate fugitive dust emissions. 2. Mitigation - The following mitigation measures are necessary to reduce construction related emissions of NO,, PM,oand VOCs: • Apply soil stabilizers to inactive areas • Replace ground cover in disturbed areas within 72 hours of disturbance • Suspend all excavating and grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 m.p.h. • Water the haul route and exposed surfaces a minimum of two times per day or as conditions require • Use of construction equipment with low emission factors and high energy efficiency • Perform regularly scheduled engine maintenance to minimize equipment emissions • Use of alternative fuels such as ultra-low sulfur diesel or off-road construction vehicles/equipment where feasible • Use of electric or diesel powered equipment rather than gasoline powered engines, where feasible •Where applicable, limit the application of exterior architectural coatings (i.e. paint, etc.) to average no more than 225 gallons per week and/or use Zero-VOC paint Impact— Cultural Resources 1. Mitigation - Prior to issuance of grading permit, the Project Applicant shall retain a Riverside County qualified archaeological firm to monitor all ground-disturbing activities. 5 2. Mitigation - Pechanga Tribal monitors shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities. Prior to issuance of grading permit, The Project Applicant must submit a fully executed Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement, by and between the Pechanga Tribe, the Project Applicant, and the landowner. The Agreement shall address the treatment of cultural resources on the Project property, the designation, responsibilities, and participation of Pechanga Tribal monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities; project grading and development scheduling; terms of compensation for the monitors; and treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site. 3. Mitigation - Prior to issuance of the grading permit, the Project Applicant shall file a grading plan with the City, and a copy to the Pechanga Tribe, which sets forth the plan and methodology for grading activities, including a timeline, locations and nature of grading, and details concerning the observation of grading activities by the archaeological firm and the Pechanga Tribe. Said plan or methodology shall include the requirement for a qualified archaeological monitor and Pechanga Tribal monitor to be present and to have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. At least 7 business days prior to project grading, the Project applicant shall contact the Pechanga Tribe to notify the Tribe of grading, excavation and the monitoring program/schedule, and to coordinate with the Tribe on the monitoring work schedule. In accordance with the Agreement required in MM 2, the archaeological monitor's authority to stop and redirect grading will be exercised in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe in order to evaluate the nature and significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. Such evaluation shall include culturally appropriate temporary and permanent treatment pursuant to the Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement, which may include avoidance of cultural resources, in-place preservation and/or re-burial on Project property so they are not subject to further disturbance in perpetuity. Any reburial shall occur at a location predetermined between the landowner and Pechanga, details of which to be addressed in the Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement. 4. Mitigation - If human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur in the vicinity of the find(s) until the Riverside County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission must be contacted within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission must then identify the "most likely descendant(s)," which parties agree will likely be the Pechanga Band based upon the Tribe's ancestral ties to the area and previous designation as MLD on projects in the geographic vicinity. The landowner shall engage in consultations with the most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD will make recommendations concerning the treatment of the remains within 48 hours as provided in Public Resources Code 5097.98 and the Treatment Agreement described above. 5. Mitigation - The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods and all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area to the Pechanga Tribe for proper treatment and disposition pursuant to the Agreement required in Mitigation 2 referenced above. 6 6. Mitigation - All sacred areas, should they be encountered within the project area, shall be avoided and preserved. 7. Mitigation - It is understood by the Applicant, the City and the Tribe that this Project area is located in the vicinity of and possibly contains components of a culturally significant Pechanga/Luiseno village, known as exva Temeku and/or associated cultural properties, including a Traditional Cultural Property (TCP). The Project area and TCP contain not only archaeological components, but also resources with cultural values, including, but not limited to ceremonial components. If inadvertent discoveries of subsurface archaeological or cultural resources are discovered during grading, the Developer, the project archaeologist, and the Tribe shall assess the significance of such resources and shall meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources, which may include avoidance of cultural resources, in-place preservation and/or re-burial on Project property so they are not subject to further disturbance in perpetuity. Any reburial shall occur at a location predetermined between the landowner and Pechanga, details of which to be addressed in the Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement required in Mitigation 2 referenced above. Pursuant to Calif. Pub. Res. Code § 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method of preservation for archaeological resources and cultural resources. If the landowner and the Tribe cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for the archaeological or cultural resources, these issues will be presented to the City Planning Director for decision. The City Planning Director shall make the determination based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological resources and shall take into account the cultural and religious principles and practices of the Tribe. Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the decision of the City Planning Director shall be appealable to the City Planning Commission and/or City Council. Impact— Noise 1. Mitigation - Noise-generating construction equipment operated at the Project site shall be equipped with effective noise control devices, (i.e, mufflers, lagging, and/or motor enclosures). All equipment shall be properly maintained to assure that no additional noise, due to worn or improperly maintained parts, would be generated. 2. Mitigation - Ensure that during construction, trucks and equipment are running only when necessary. 3. Mitigation - To the extent feasible, construction activities shall be scheduled so as to avoid operating several pieces of heavy equipment simultaneously, which causes high noise level nearby residential uses. FINDINGS Tentative Tract Map (Code Section 16.09.140) The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance, and the City of Temecula Municipal Code. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, and the City of Temecula Municipal Code. The one- 7 lot condo map on a 7.05 gross acre site will result in a density of 20 dwelling units per acre, which is within the allowable density range of 13-20 units per acre consistent with the High Density Residential standards. The Tentative Map does not propose to divide land, which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965. The proposed property has not been used as agricultural land and is not subject to a Williamson Act Contract. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the Tentative Map. The project consists of a one lot condo map for 140 residential units on 7.05 acres on property designated for high density residential uses, which is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. The development meets all setbacks and development standards, including lot coverage, setbacks, parking, minimum landscaping, and private open space. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with Conditions of Approval, will not be likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with Conditions of Approval, will not likely cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, because the Initial Study and associated mitigation outlined in the special reports prepared for the project have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval and Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems because the proposed development is consistent with all applicable building, development and fire codes, which include provisions to safeguard public health, and will be further reviewed and inspected by City staff for compliance with all applicable building, development and fire codes prior to issuance of grading, building, and occupancy permits. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. The project has been designed to ensure that all setbacks have been met and that light and air access is available to the extent possible. In addition, the construction will be required to conform to all state energy efficiency codes as well. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision 8 The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. All required easements and dedication are required as Conditions of Approval. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby) because payment of Quimby fees will be required prior to issuance of a building permit. Development Plan (Code Section 17.05.010.F) 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 Shearwater Creek project is consistent with the land use standards and land use designation contained in the City of Temecula General Plan. The site is properly planned and zoned, and as conditioned, is physically suitable for the type and density of residential development proposed. The project, as conditioned, is also consistent with other applicable requirements of State law and local ordinances, including the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA), the Citywide Design Guidelines, and fire and building codes. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare. The overall design of the Shearwater Creek project, including the site, building, parking, circulation and other associated site improvements, is consistent with, and intended to protect the health and safety of those working and living in and around the site. The project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, has been found to be consistent with all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare. ATTACHMENTS Aerial Map Plan Reductions Resolution Exhibit A— Draft Conditions of Approval (Development Plan) Resolution Exhibit A— Draft Conditions of Approval (Condo Map) Initial Study Mitigation Monitoring Plan Public Correspondence Notice of Public Hearing 9 AERIAL MAP Cit y of Temecula Project Site, Ili ...., , imi -"■1111E-- - 1111 �. ,7,110.:0. 00,4,, iitr:-. i444 4. ,_ M - " -"- . • Ali Project Site • It- ' .,,,A,:,„_,,,_ :: 10 11014ilihilir iiir' . ' '--'-.-... . 401 . _. . 1 01, , �v 1 , iitivoilli gill IIIIIIIIh: • ,,, _ (0000111, - -- PPIP \ \ . V f 0 250 500 1,000 I Feet ^ "`2 This map was made by the City of Temecula Geographic Information System. &` ® ff y The map is derived from base data produced by the Riverside County Assessor's Department and the Transportation and Land Management Agency of Riverside :. County.The City of Temecula assumes no warranty or legal responsibility for the "'+�„� information contained on this map.Data and information represented on this map are subject to update and modification.The Geographic Information System and other sources should be queried for the most current information. This map is not for reprint or resale. THE CITY OF TEMECULA,COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE,STATE OF CALIFORNIA TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 36568 .w (FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES) "`« N1S'4211,A1 92x.11' 1 . PARCEL MAP NO. 8248 ZONING PI ` El LOT B N 813E14 P.M B, 32/16-18 PARCEL 2 I OPEN SPACE LOT A ; AP,N.922-110-033 / r-0.16 AC ( �_ 'S PUJOL STREET A -: A, .I \. NIp'IIE^IE NEst' . I NO SCALE F...r - ..► IOTA tLaevr ° — -- - - r II 1"" s 1112 R&2AC _. *"y``••"' h u a _ NWJ4W / --- - NIuI Eel=Mr RT,4RRrRRnhRT 1 ETA...I 'I 1.`I ,°.7."�.�p` 7r rer.rmurrerrrmnnfrImr1T•rIMOFI CArnn.Yfr' _ e,,,rm-r,= - —I- _ _ ...._• 1 n - ..x—.._ �'.*✓_-_ •_ f�'�J_ - •. a13.1p' .".+it ir, if I 1 11 rc„lfam �tA- 1 x J \ 1 ., �� I — — — — i — ! A=N --f I N 6.88 AC 1 11 RakN92ffuulf Enj r '. ' ..162E f a� r 1 I.[JJ f MOO JO { �r� r 1 �i APPLCANT�/D.04HO r — J I — ��1- - - -�^ - - i 1I _ 'MB75eltr ' 1 �'{ , ., Q. Ta«nm,.e. ,”• F + r / p u eaGy I I I I 3 �r I r [ I j I /ti 0 . 4yh�' J\.\' � I I I I - J�� / h& 1• wPS 622/11196!1 nRCr CT ew a I ' ,A. ID\ I I r s IytL ' k y ,�TL«« ,1 1.rrr{BROCAX/ I te / B,GRDe TOroORA , 3 41 I l wpp� An Y �X I f — LEG __ L-� — — —. — J- — —� . 'ff r /F ASSESSORS PARCEL NNMSER I / `F{ rill /•*I GENERPIN oRMAl1ON � I /' / w�N a�4 ...•..I . MIRAGE ol..,w�,^�, >.t.;.I f M � ---...$ r ZONING OS SP8 \'k `! ° "` m' .Ammon 8800080 MuNiaA011 mum.NE8LEANAL RN PARCEL MAP NO. 18254 t+ s In pR Pose NOTES P.M,B. 116/69-78 \\\ _ _ PARCEL 28 1\ �+r0,0 5001 i., ASTia w,^x 'e°`9C''.^�xvwa.uvx^n,. BUILDINGS A{S41 'M. 9 Y•— >f avanr 4.ztY..nI....i rl-- ...nazi 1,•00aTaarEmEraiimpagmama .w..E.,E'xr,FAEr IG.,"x«.«.�Pw,.rD,I"r.2'w I „INS"w..�,xffxxo<....x���^.,,.,,,w.,.www" - r w., r.- •"'" ..."n.e...e me, ®ww ra I�w" x��we�.ww . ."rx„"wxlw..R.x«�.Iw„ "AIwI "x N.,, pweH..'x R . xwE "xww .w"wwd� , 4.." AA...T „.IZnne„x a�w„wx^'"'''.rn''''' LEGEND 1 ♦ w ♦\ —4 ',.,mss I <E wM0180888101.11 1pm.• wvxn.rur"wu .N.,N,l.nw�x^,.c.rw.x.6riw rcraw^rxxOeoE eNnrivs. ' re l -``` vtwc'�wA *.'IV,.r,rw� ~ ,_,.___ .ar.,•!.? I an — _ — PUJOL STIREET-SECTION B-S A ...",''''" w.mNx.0=`, ." 80.1800 000 ,--•..- PUJOL STREET-SECTION A-A NTS II.rNNwr. �rn,Dx.oN"II..wAw. ucardBOrxrs,aDC muxrv.c"aow-A cams,. ITS. (SU ERELEVATpN MAMMON) A ---- xD,.�ma"urcxlrw A^.x^�w,x,m�v...,mr �..l�cm,m.l .AU...I ---- GATE PREPARED:JANUAIO 4914 CITY or TF811•Cif.A pro" °^aa wx , `° .� ..."W a o 1 l 1 ,,NE4VWATER CREEK CONDOMINIUMS a.u"II Ivo.o....n 6xuurx rf ..^cl�,^„a >,ff.N.Na c I S mix���or��.al.�xlsw,xEQ,""IxI T."wNllra«xa III in—. _. %AI D -- TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.36568 `; PA 13.0155 I OPEN SPACE ,g, MURRIETA CREEK 0-IANNEL ; :Tr„.g.< '-'2, 1 A ,--- I 1 . - I 1 e fr.---- -or..4%, --1,1*""'"7,7,r„,t` ,t, ,,k. -,../ '-'0 — -- , 4 ■ PUJOL STREET '' :71' — --' — _ _ -11. _.".64._ N, I! . re MirArilIGI.•••••••••••• It w_rwer-piffAnsio,----- ----. - 1, .4,,VA ----Flo.* 4—,[ -,- . 0 --"m -...7.„,k-,.... .......t4e . - - ,,,,,,, I._a-4:'r-"---.11111 "-"" ''.",, _ •'.:1_ L _J-s_'''' , !l ,', _ AL..'. - -_mairXillrafemmar_l -414L-,.L'f-N_.......____..„.....,..„-WEA.,,,4:?"-v _-1 ... ,--_--- 0 -,----)7 1 ' -,---q--. '2' . -...,- ,,,‘,.., ,,... 11, ---- ...-. 6 , _ -, A ' '.%,e'''''+',Ilr'''''' --- .-- ' ''' li . ..4111-17-14' . ••••''' 76 '.14111it 'kr-.C.14. '301: IllAfl.'..N173J3' ,; - -- A, III-j ,16::.. 14- --,h1-0- 44%*,il1?--,,7,,- Ie.,, —,A6 I- -..--- ,t ,- _ '4 s ' . ' . " ‘ ,t9 ',`. 11 I ,•■•. .5, ir : . 1, ..,, ,. _ fFf.fflig LI ,ig I, e / - ,,,rr. ji , ' ,F4=no rti "*7"'" — „1„*...yigi , 14 . I ., -- ' ::_.,..,_. ._.,- ,4 - '';'4 ■ — •1-'---:--i— ." F) `' ' 1 C ') ) I i ti im III, -. ' . 1. FFEKI1019 0 117.10,19 0 , ,:.... ...,.., 1, 45...,:;:: ilri:1 ,- f:t_ _6,.:,._, t,7........,, 1;,,,-',;.111--:-:;'_‘-ti:„;_.--:_,.7, ---....---::4k,",...,,- --:-..." ;f:)..- .?"-1,--'''' : ▪ 117M0 'Ittir , I° '.... 1,15i) 7 -•. - ,..-?' -- -- 5 __ i , . . / ,,, t„.., ,k./ : f ---- / 1 i 11.1 . i r 1 + 'kr ,‘ — ....-- it ",.. co' ,o / • , .... ,, 4. . , ..:,, 44, / ---\- . , • -.0.1 ..,40, , :o■ 1:11 iv,., .....* % '-1`,411e* -"- 4., / i 7-`1N.vVe` FFE0gOIR 0 [ pre," F--lit 1:114 , "I-11 • ,14:T.,1'.k 1 ill -.1 d I „. T 1\ 1 111111r-'41- „ ., ,,, CO i e . , . , ,, N Ern 14•- . j I 1.. :::,4 1 _ .., IQ_ „.., .... ,1 p i i „.„,.... ,i,,,,, 0, A 4,,,,, ER. i 1.„ _ ti ' ') •--11 9 2... ......1........." "'''' I— "7-41,,,_',-_,A, / ,,,..0a0 ..' 019 — FFE.1018,S.- 11,,,ct,',6sl'IP z ..,FF ri:::nr:.0 , II wee e, 11-1 '" m.... n m $ .--„,i ...-' 1 ■, S1 l' 1 = j."''''' t'z,4. 1 400000041 , , - yr,,,,"". LEGEND 1 11/11 'i i I 11111111 1111111/ ''' ''''1A "'"' OWNER/DEVELOPER Go•Leac•ca./TA/Gs Tor G•NoN wREAr ars ,,,,„,„„ 11•••• DIPSIPID conrro. 7 M.1 '11g1 ---z!,1" 1 —c.c.°cA02105 DM 501-2. PAY • sat . s kt. ,..i., ,....• siTELTRESs • WATER MHO ,,V,I....,... ti.' . ■•• TEPECUA et. Ka=— _44,,,_ ,% _ _64,. ._. _-- stiu -. .--ii, — ... -- WATER PPM Ey I 1.p j, .pi. e• FRE DIrOf.147 8 . ..W.FF PAIE VNVE <'P)'''''''.44'''''s::'4T':o;N,O:-i)''s';':—''\''Iv::v „ric";17.,,,„„rgE=5:■'"''" NUN LEGAL DESCRIPTION • •NETER 8 DOOM I•SLDLE DE1 EDI.OPEOC A . if°gO 1 IctegEl:r''' REMPIND W/11 AREA • SEVIER AIM.. 1 at .11 a .w.milAs11.1.011....flowim 0 ,,,,,,re DaspiuNIPOLE TITIITItT PROPOSED , ,. ,, BUILD NO PROPOSED 11+11MAAMILLXVYR••• • 1001.0.1 DRAW OVER,.OWED BD MING -. ROW LNE /I... YOGA.KIR••••5. WM. P• I. -, e .- 1•1•1901-99 imam -. BROW MOH _11•1•DI._ .,.....4tiv......,1 .,ILD Aka.1., ..._. i t/.._,. ,,.,, I P.. ' T ....Or 1VONVIhilif I I -- 1 ''''' 'V'''),....'-iN'', " ''''... . 'M ',' ',74t4Cogi 1 • ':,.., ' ••••••••••KAUAI:ft v .L,\ \......,••••••• ••••■• 110,Am.AM NMI 7V:i"%••'; ••11=t171* All‘414,119P1•11.04£1+ so 11.11.11.1177110.1 '''.•W•r•D 1 I PERM.PAVERS PU-JOL—ST IREETEOTION E-E TYPICAL PRIVATE STREET SECTION PRIVATE ENTRY SECTION •••••M.&Mali.0+AN 411,0. jU04 .UID = •LfGrrX'V:G"Er/v•I S=171.MCglticrgiFINE■pDE2 POW, r I r0.05.11t.LEVAMM Myren n, e DESCRIPTIONS DWI SEWER -..1' .....,... 1 Ellir 1.... OW•DOMESTIC WATER PROPOSED 1, Mr1==•••=11 01•• • BD LONGS .1. i r1Cd.DPP I ..--• i / 'n DOIrC '''Za t i'5■VV rVa .1.1.1r.i1...../N.W....... CALLE CERILLO O \ a"4SUA4ILO0ING 3" PARD s I n M...ELL.EM. ,. SHEARWATER CREEK \' , '1 11,141.1•DEE: ....Ram.. .......t. CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN 1555 _,..;.2.rn... AMBIENT COMMUNITIES LEM EMMA •• „ SECTION B-B SECTION C-C 10-23-13 1 SHEET SECTION A-A NJ 5 N T 5 1 o 1 N T 5 •990•0444.1%1•LO-41t+-.0. 5 A If �9r..rm. =41' ._ PUJOL STREET ....As.�'r._.. 11— —I - II— — --11 — —II -r IWIIIIIPIIII,. - , R ,Xk�fi � . i y . ..E.—S a4rz ).31.1 �7S .5 1 " rr1 � �rE �r �J .4 holgir GETS` i1i f� IL -Qi. a�� L 1 1 '��' .'.�.`� i.v IMP_ •iii igi- .. if A.,1®1 All RI Old ..- 1,1 1m a �+„ ��L rrF-Ipv ty e >tlQr it OY • 4' jI �. I Yom•,.'0/ ,�II �! r_ fib: i g,--„,-. -r ■�`�r •:•_-•'- 'Y`air -rii I. J. II_. ■I I...s1Q : 1RPI111 v ■si_. I 'Ill KM I!,i`OP- E .. Irr��lrrrrm►.11e�i r -I' co ) v;� eRil .... 112MMI.r �•: " 1rir1 ► Lwi �a :,,, -. r 2 �l ■■i®i , ill•1 ■ numi ti lip�� ilia— L� III .. •� °� Fit-gm IRP7r-,RN9. nt. Ics MI 11,511 ,,v'9 ,`.. I y �'.. � I I li migI - — IILI a ` °r'+IU / . ,..,,IILI1�11I / - i4 I. ! Zll t 1 .rd! 1M-4012L. 1911 i '1111+M...,0 WI WI m..,411.;: i 0 cn ' f� '$,- 6wLGIFB l P! A� M P /;Y / 1' i. ""i — mg 40, { ! SITE PLAN NOTES PROJECT SUMMARY I "" ':+:I:Dl■1 ~ 0 [6': 1 OPEN PARKING STALL-9'X18' RESIDENCES 140 HOMES 5s ~ ���� 1����11�►���1������1 2 GREEN COURT AREA 7,08 ACRES T' gm.". . 3 ACCESSIBLE PARKING DENSITY 20 DU/AC .,_+�, PARKING 316 SPACES �'•J� 4 PERIMETER FENCING n 71 F � Hr rL.1�r ...,«o:..w.rw.,... _ 5 PROPERTY LINE UNIT MIX -�^ 6 2 CAR GARAGE(20'X 20") PLAN I 26 18/1 BA 725 SF — — — ~ PUJOL STREET €€ `.,w....�. 7 1 CAR GARAGE(10'X 20) PLAN 2 52 2B/2BA 950 SF OWNER/DEVELOPER LOTCOVERAGE q Y B TRASH ENCLOSURE PLAN 3 13 2B/2BA 1,000 SF TEMECULA FOOTHILLS.LLC BUILDING AREA- 91,5058F=29% '^o` t-....e 9 GATE WI KNOX BOX PLAN 4 26 3B/2BA 1,164 SF C/O AMBIENT COMMUNITIES PARKING AREA- 81,634 8 F=27% � � SECTION D-D ROB HONER LANDSCAPING AREA•133,7595 =44% 70%71 74 1 �, NTS 10 2 STORY TOWNHOMES PLAN 5 15 3B/2BA 1,450 SF 2917 CANON STREET FLOORAREA RATIO OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION DEVELOPMENT wm 1Psr.,imi SAN DIEGO,CA 92108 17 FAR RESIDENTIAL GROUP(R) - _ 11 3 STORY WALKUP FLATS PLAN 6 8 4B/2BA 1,500 SF (819)501-2899 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION SPRINKLERED/ALARM Nip M- ARCHITECT VA YES ,-- - � MK 12 PRIVATE COURTYARD TOTAL 140 HOMES SUMMA ARCHITECTURE NUMBEROF STORIES BUILDING HEIGHT ' Ni-0 TVT ,E `a 1q (S1 DAMIAN TAITANG 3 STORIES 38'-0' _ ; PARKING SUMMARY 5256 5,MISSION RD.STE 409 BONSALL,CA 82003 ......._/- .. OPEN SPACE SUMMARY REQUIRED: (780)729-1198 ENGINEER LEGEND DIES w duu<uw9�u Ma. Maw.10iSEIRA "R REQUIRED: 1 BED(26 X 1.5 SP/DU) =39 SPACES (13 CVR'D) ERIC sAENZ I w.:,v..' PRIVATE: 140 X 150 SF=21,000 SF 2 BED(65 X 20 SP/DU) =130 SPACES(65 CVR'D) — 27950 YNEZ ROAD,SUITE 110.8 --- 3 BED(41 X 25 SP/DU -(03 SPACES(21 CVR'D TEMECULA,CA 92591 �„y, EXISTING OF WAY I SECTION A-A COMMON: 308,404.8 SF X 30%=95,521,4 SF ( ) ( )uttot TEL:(s51)fi84-0BZ4 NTS. - - 4 BED(8 X 25 SP/DU) =20 SPACES (4 CVR'D) ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER I I APOROUS PAVEMENT It PROVIDED:SEWER APN:922-110-013=373 ACRES GROSS S1ORUPRMR GUEST(140 X.167/DU) -24 SPACES APN:922-110-019=3.32 ACRES GROSS STORM DRAIN PANG I I H•md7r1•Ihv4n PRIVATE: STREET ADDRESS W,.7Ln r.•+ucn r .. TOTAL =316 SPACES(188 CVR'D) PUJOL STREET 11+rrn.r.w 'Ir., a.. PLAN I 68 SF x.26 1,768 SF TEMECULA.CA 92500 r, 6.4118•68,87 PLAN 2 68 SFx 52 - 3,536 SF LEGAL DESCRIPTION CALLECERILLO ,.='R" '— PROVIDED: LOTS 6ANGSIN BLOCK 33 TOWN OFTEMECULA,AS IxavN>R '®• 01031V.c PLAN3 100 SF 41 = 4.100 SF SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 15 PAGE 726 OF P�1r1r•H. RI.NL = GARAGES MAPS,RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY,CA 9c urni44dl5RM ,,I 11 O9ttf1•NRrr PLAN 4 140 SFx 8 1,129$F .r.d ••••• PLAN 5 135 SFx IS = 2,025 SF ATTACHED 202 SPACES sq,ZONING DESIGNATION I90L•l5.6 VW, rr PLAN 6 135 SF x B = 1,080.5E (H)HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL eCtAIYOA w:M9L - rwa. 1 - 'NO9' If" DETACHED 44 SPACES GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION (H)HIGH(1320 DU/AC MAX) • stun oNml. DESCRIPTIONS PJ051•DGLAN6 uRF1PROPO86Q LArlp UaE • STORM DRAIN NANNOLE SEWER .,...=, -- 00�.� TOTAL = 13,6295E VACANT/RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS • fl M93wvdlWt50R tit) asu.=p p;M ECW nn I COMMON =167,155 SF=54% COVERED 246 SPACES TOTAL GROSS AREA RI.ILpe „1,G.WATtil9 A Mu QOM. SECTION C•Cwm OPEN 70 SPACES 305,4048 SQUARE FEET 708 ACRES •y„yw,� = SECTION B-0 TOTAL OPEN SPACE = SF FIRE=FIRE LINE 11.1 • TOTAL 2,5055 SQUARE TOTAL PARKING 316 SPACES 52,905 SQUARE FEET 17 FAR •�' � N.T.S. TEMECULA, CA S H E A R W A T E R CREEK SITE PLAN TEMECULA FOOTHILLS,LLC a _ w m 'I '\I'\ j 2917 Canon Street San Diego,CA 92106 �'$ ! I 951.5981602 D cRU.nc xaE `� .*`0-'.ITE iLR: MARCH 3,2014 5256 5 Mission Road,Ste.404 BonsrS 92003 WWW summarchcom 780.724-1198 11111 DECK • - ir'7'X 22" j I{0 SF ■ IDAM I LIVING BDRM 2 i "" ill -� DECK ... � ; @, [i // 7'.DEX8-6„ E �r_ir i 11 i t 685E �►, i� 29'-6" 1.. ..1-1 _,', ,�,5. ft. - BDRM 2 1 - ' LIVING i S _ aTtF Ik�1 I BDRM I I �. ... DINING Wy ININ �T/ 24 A" l Y 13A d ENTRY 1'-1--I BDRM 3 \I 'L1_1` � - _ - .. _ 2 �_� ..-__...' BA k.r1 ■I Ll,_i'llli ��ip� a Iii Rai I 1 KITCHEN '�2 T::::-- ENTRY �' �'y BA KITCHEN MBlrra�_ 1Cf` ( 1 { d �� j<�- �1 O i - ._ ___ 49%6' I! !r d 43%11' Y PLAN 4:1,164 S.F. PLAN 2:950 S.F. 3BD/2BA 2BD/2BA MINIM I ! 7 100SFI3 6°: ,Ii 111 LIVING DECK„, J1! in.. !. '�f� 685E s 24'.6' `l _.., ! j i i 1_1 o BDRM I I LIVING r �--� � 6A2 DNNVG BDRM x3'-B — !r 1 f X� L DINING LI --. ' rll}x U () i„ Ur'). tHENI ! .�{o 'Bj - KITCHEN – 5 t—_..._—--_-- 43:e6” .J 1 35'-6' i PLAN 3:1,000 S.F. PLAN I:725 S.F. 2BD/2BA I BD/1 BA TEMECULA, CA S H E A R W A T E R CREEK GREEN COURT FLOOR PLANS TEMECULA FOOTHILLS,LLC ps T " 2917 Crown Street San D CA 92106 0 2 4 12 _ 1"'...4.+ 951.698/501 . A'CHITECTUR� 2 5256 S Mission Road,Ste.306 Bansall,CA 92003 JANUARY 9,2013 www sommarch.com 760.724.1198 - Ai - 1 :., - _ :I PLAN gli.M3' PLAN PUN! 3 0 4 9� V 1 PLAN I Irm�3.: rm ! wku • I I W �.._ IIIIIIIIUIIlIII IiiI iIIIII II ' Ili , PSI 'it r.: It Et 4 PA IEt 4 Mili0 1 L olio., 1 0 _ III fw ��—� 1ii R PLAN, q Ili l 11 ,I"Ni PLIW2 4 jilill --, 1551 *few .., , . II , EP 1 ...„. , THIRD FLOOR SECOND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR TEMECULA,CA S H E A R W A T E R CREEK 9 UNIT GREEN COURT COMPOSITE PLANS TEMECULA FOOTHILLS,LLC • 2917 Canon Street San Diego CA 92106 0 4 8 24 N 3 951.898.1502 '- i 5256 0.Mlraon Road,Ste.326 &LS,G0.91009 JANUARY 9,2013 MAW.t„mmttrI rem 760.724.1198 ELEVATION NOTES 1 - - I ROOF:CONCRETE TILE COLORS-(BROWN OR SLATE RANGE) .' )• P. 1 n�' 1 2 WALLS:SAND FINISH STUCCO • �' 1 II COLORS-(OMEGA NO. 10, 14,236 OR 414) 9 6i-..— . H..IIII IL 1, 11 al 1 I A COMPOSITE RAILINGS � ` Mr 111. 1 COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2987N OR CL 3I37N) ' • 4 WOOD TRELLIS li'I rl:�ll�l i L Li 4 COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2987N OR CL 3I37N) 5 DECORATIVE OUTLOOKERS RESAWN 1 J COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2987N OR CL 3I37N) et —1 �`i `��_ 6 FASCIA:2 X 6 RESAWN WOOD �4 \:.1 's- COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2986A OR CL 3175A),4ii:AMII&Z 7 TRIM:FOAM WITH STUCCO OVER 1/11MMIMMIli_ __31111111111.__ _ COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2986A OR CL 3175A) PERSPECTIVE ,2' 11 A .,1, C?) , i 1) (Piliji ',IL -7v Q ii:VI i T 1 ii ir+ f I s 2. ' { I , ' II mid W 1 il ,1 I h 1^ h a RIGHT ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION :7. 2 o 0 3 0 s O 0 0 r, i iii ___ Ai E •` .Rd 111 r. -. - I iv �Irg, "` JI 1 I t • . —� i . W i.. N . i I LEFT ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION TEMECULA, CA S H E A R W A T E R CREEK GREEN COURT ELEVATIONS TEMECULA FOOTHILLS,LLC \D\i t 2917 Canon Street San Diego,CA 92106 0 4 8 24 1 =� 4 951.896 1502 ARCHITECTUR • 5256 S Mission Road,Ste 306 Bonsall,CA 92003 JANUARY 9,2013 www.summarch.com 760 724 1198 I PC:IN I PLAN 2 Pi–AN I f■. PLAN 2 r 'L Iex la ® J i �� .'' 1r�IRal 1py i WAGE . -.:__a i$.- al p4 i.. -.mu J� W r. i1:. i ,-.-__. i1 11111' r' 11•11, j11.111AV.: 14 MN - II' 40111 IL ' If= _. 0 it =I -olim ,_ ..... 1 ..' 1 i PLAN 3 h._ li .0 ...,„ 4 PUN 2 , Ii AM , p;4 j 2�__ i. J 1 1 �..�.,- ,_.tee 11 1M —,. MO xi .._....... fri__ .. m ; 10: , PLAN I _ �C`i�t"2 11 no im, .,•or __,..,,.... ,, —511 KAN 3 II al I 1 ii IG - : !' f� nvae_�_ �,.� !� II `. 1 _ _� r:�, �I. - I ,fir 11 A'61 -Al prod-:2-mai. -1 L,:"' 101.1 17)&411-l'-'.. ._ ....._ _ "� 1 r '1i ® I N PUN l { PLAN I --I ,LAN 2 � '" _ __ y. 1 84'-I. THIRD FLOOR SECOND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR TEMECULA, CA S H E A R W A T E R CREEK 18 UNIT GREEN COURT dCO`MTPOSITE PLANS TEMECULA FOOTHILLS,LLC 0 4 8 24 £ `Ii\IA L 2917 Canon Street San Diego,CA 92106 951 898 1502 1-1_1--- iA'Ck97EONR. 5256 5 Mission Road,Ste.306 Bonsai!,CA 92003 JANUARY 9,2013 www.summarch.com 760 724.1 198 _a ELEVATION NOTES • I ROOF:CONCRETE TILE ,, COLORS-(BROWN OR SLATE RANGE) _ - 2 WALLS:SAND FINISH STUCCO - I 1 r s w �' COLORS-(OMEGA NO. 10, 14,236 OR 414) yy_ ( -L, 11 t pr- 3 COMPOSITE RAILINGS COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2987N OR CL 3137N) -1 I, 11 u ii 1 , 11 Ii ' 4 WOOD TRELLIS a, t --, • COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2987N OR CL 3137N) re � i _ - 5 DECORATIVE OUTLOOKERS RESAWN It II 11 1 1! ;111 ! J ,I ,, , , COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2987N OR CL 3137N) ( ! _ . . : ' � r : w , � 6 FASCIA:2 X 6 RESAWN WOOD COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2986A OR CL 3I75A) 7 TRIM:FOAM WITH STUCCO OVER PERSPECTIVE COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2986A OR CL 3I75A) TrigilArg_00. sti 1 e n :i 11;1111111r- ■ . 1F II i i i i '1 iir a '4. 14 I an - t[ ' ,,,, ' E I iffiLliii 11111 " 1111 iAlla I 1 1 ,�. i i i -r TYP. SIDE ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION z 0 M1 5 F I 1 I IV El II' - I 1 1-a Tii n I I ir . I . T ' FRONT ELEVATION TEMECULA, CA S H E A R W A T E R CREEK 18 UNIT GREEN COURT ELEVATIONS TEMECULA FOOTHILLS,LLC y T 1�� k 2917 Canon Street San Diego,CA 92106 0 4 8 24 - ` 951,898.1502 IJ I ARCHRECTUR• 5256 5 Mission Road,Ste 306 Bonsai!,CA 92003 JANUARY 9,2013 www.sntntnarth coin 760.724 1198 ` _�..�.._� fl CJ Q. MIA 413411 T BA Y MSMSGR.BDRM '��yy__ff 1 NI MIA LIVING DINING LIVING DINING r J 1 -_ BEAM PM I I .. ddd�II1g KITCHEN :Ill V KITCHEN -t 45' rhal 45' .r°J 45 45 BATH BDRM 2 I GARAGE BDRM 3 - BDRM 2 GARAGE BDRM 7 i SECOND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR FIRST FLOOR PLAN 6: 1,500 SF PLAN 5: 1,450 SF 4BD/2.5BA 3BD/2.5BA TEMECU LA, CA S H E A R W A T E R CREEK TOWNHOUSE FLOOR PLANS TEMECULA FOOTHILLS,LLC \IR LA, 1917 c3 su« s, Dk4o,CA 9z1a6 0 2 A 1 ) , 9514981502 I +' G711^4 425E S-Miruan 11434.Sze 3306 Bnnu1L CA 92083 JANUARY 9,20l J ww w.rummorth.cw 760,724.1198 Jl L till Ilia -�. II nog gn i A_ iuu •am elf%., brae Idu II �,., �.--= ,m;, .I-- 11 Il A BIM W 1111' mai ; •to ple 1720.1,- == == SECOND FLOOR „_144%10• •r i= 'IF '_ - IF i ED 11111 1•111111 III Ii 111 .ME ii Ea uuu■•IIIIII En h E! _ .Ii - ■. _ ■Vi�9 ; 'i• VI®'J * 41� �: 1 I ELI�! R � l��I��i !!+� I t1 all h III g FIRST FLOOR TEMECULA, CA S H E A R W A T E R CREEK TOWNHOUSE COMPOSITE PLANS TEMECULA FOOTHILLS.LLC .�I \4f\ £ 2417 Cane.Srre Ulan i2kpa.CA 92106 0 4 8 16 �} F 451.B4B.1 507 �L; - a .. St56 S.Malian Road Sec-3% Buna+tl,CA 4X.007 JANUARY 9,2013 rnvw.aummarch.com 260T24.t19B ELEVATION NOTES I ROOF:CONCRETE TILE -.,_ - � - COLORS-(BROWN OR SLATE RANGE) t - - 2 WALLS:SAND FINISH STUCCO Et] Et COLORS-(OMEGA NO. 10, 14,236 OR 414) ¢ .a ?a ,y _ ,, 3 COMPOSITE RAILINGS Tr zi. COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2987N OR CL 3137N) 1 ,1 11 11 f 3 4 WOOD TRELLIS I - COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2987N OR CL 3137N) 'I 5 DECORATIVE OUTLOOKERS RESAWN J I a 4 COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2987N OR CL 3137N) Oil IMF* y� -1 !! �' 6 FASCIA:2 X 6 RESAWN WOOD COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2986A OR CL 3175A) 7 TRIM:FOAM WITH STUCCO OVER COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2986A OR CL 3175A) PERSPECTIVE 0 0 a, 0 ,r,i) iiiikr. 7 4, , 6 li n 11 I Q . Iii 3 w �1 °� ___ LigrinnHair P•, i M y M �.1,1." 1 -"*e; ..,1"a,.� TYPICAL SIDE ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION —41—iirvijIT-It--*' - 0 I usli T , ,,,tii _„Q iii 1 0 It I PI O _6' ii 11 1 0 �N+ 1 1 1 FRONT ELEVATION TEMECULA, CA S H E A R W A T E R CREEK TOWNHOUSE ELEVATIONS TEMECULA FOOTHILLS,LLC ON 2917 Canon Street San Diego,CA 92106 0 8 16 32 11 `CTUR ^ 951.898.1502 -�ARCHITECTURS 7 5256 S.Mission Road,Ste.306 Bonsall,CA 92003 JANUARY 9,2013 www summarch corn 760.724.1198 I0I'-8" E I 1 21 2' 2' -Iwo i i FITNESS - 1 LOGGIA nn#9 I 'd R,': q ... 'eP1 ---. MEN -'\ ! WOMEN STG 1 r" CALIFORNIA ` LOUNGE STORAGE If ROOM - flTMEDIA Ire --FOYER .rrl-rj-t--1 :1—]I FIREPLACE OFFICE 1 KITCHEN d l' -- =:=7-1 \--I L ._ itt_k_moL_____Lv If...-- LA,,,_r.-- . 1 _ . .4._. L i ,--1 TEMECULA, CA S H E A R W A T E R CREEK RECREATION BUILDING FLOOR PLAN TEMECULA FOOTHILLS,LLC 0 2 4 12 �i \ [I\l'o'll' 2917 Canon Street San Diego,CA 92106 1 1 951.898.1502 �J I ! • I O 5256 S.Minion Road,Ste.306 Bonsai],CA 92003 JANUARY 9,2013 wtwv.sommarch.cam 760.7241198 ELEVATION NOTES 1 ROOF:CONCRETE TILE '~ :1 I i COLORS-(BROWN OR SLATE RANGE) .,., i I i 2 WALLS:SAND FINISH STUCCO COLORS-(OMEGA NO. 10, 14,236 OR 414) ,Affa 3 COMPOSITE RAILINGS � " COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2987N OR CL 3137N)■ 1.4 n, y Y l I • .11 I 1 t-, •,, ',' 4 WOOD TRELLIS I- + �• a •i COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2987N OR CL 3137N)ill K-•I I 5 DECORATIVE OUTLOOKERS RESAWN � t { •'" l k COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2987N OR CL 3137N) 1_ .y� ' I I tij * ,, 6 FASCIA:2 X 6 RESAWN WOOD 1' rN 1 ` I; (FRAZEE CL 29 A OR CL 3175 F, + 1 �x COLORS-(FRAZ C 86 O ) i ., I + ....L,-.Z.4. 7 TRIM:FOAM WITH STUCCO OVER . •�K ""—",,, s x` � ' -_ COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2986A OR CL 3I75A) PERSPECTIVE . .74,L.,., 4 i 2 J y H%. ! - - ! • . RI p } ■ RIGHT ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION 12. 4, CO (7) W U) (i) ligiW-7 a 1 i i . tom; - LEFT ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION TEMECULA, CA S H E A R W A T E R CREEK REC BUILDING ELEVATIONS TEMECULA FOOTHILLS,LLC 2917 Canon Street San Diego,CA 92106 0 4 8 16 I I 951.8913 1502 ARCHITECTUR 5256 5,Mission Road,Ste 306 Bonsai!,CA 92003 JANUARY 9,2013 www.summarch.com 760724.1198 ELEVATION NOTES 2 C (j) L'l I ROOF:CONCRETE TILE \ COLORS-(BROWN OR SLATE RANGE) ---? 2 WALLS:SAND FINISH STUCCO COLORS-(OMEGA NO. 10, 14,236 OR 414) ti 3 WOOD TRELLIS I COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2987N OR CL 3137N) 4 FASCIA:2 X 6 RESAWN WOOD COLORS-(FRAZEE CL 2986A OR CL 3175A) REAR ELEVATION ,� 1 4 I'-5" _- . ' x,r�„ 10'X 20' k 1 el, - W — GARAGE _i TYR SIDE ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION FLOOR PLAN DETACHED GARAGE • !, ” T ivr x t 3' 2 J (3) (2) .A.. -'-,,,,. . - - (3'` . ! b SIDE ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION FLOOR PLAN TRASH ENCLOSURE TEMECULA, CA S H E A R W A T E R CREEK TRASH ENCLOSURE/ DETACHED GARAGE PLANS TEMECULA FOOTHILLS,LLC Il ' IIN IA. 2917 Canon Street San Diego,CA 92106 0 4 8 24 I 2 9518913 1502 7 1ARCHITECTUR. 5256 S.Mission Road,Ste 306 Bonsall,CA 92003 JANUARY 9,2013 WNW,summarcn tom 760.724 1198 . . . • . . /Z":'Z/Z/V / /VZ 7/24"- "/7,7/7/72=1' 7.a -=,/2 7777 .= • PLANT LEGEND _ - I PUJOL STREET ..........., ::!.;:trV"" I 0 ------ „.. _ . ......... ,... „....... AMIN. . AIL 111111TrA47111.1r0144,144111411111k IF41.F.IFII 1111,,F*1,111rallq011.11.11r-ilir,- .. I i 0 .1/4 44444.A tr-.:-4, . i.,, .... ..',-9+,r- ....e11 "111)k ?..10 ' ..,?,..,,,,,, 0....,3.,,,7"."%"::°4;°.2_,...,:z,....' ........4 .1111Prolmnimmm■Ipr .!5"'L".1tN'ig ',.. N,,i . P 411111111111'' N.° - d 4 4., ■ . . ,I yo•••••••••■•••• • as. .-•• • 4 'a* . 1 0 .--.:.- ,..,.., :,.... .. ,.....,... .. .,„ ... , ----- ' 11H- -.---. L-1 ' '''''' . ,. . ..!•...,..1i ' • *rt. ,••••••.. ••• •••■ re• • . 1:4 ,, "i, •.■., . .- . ,. t: . ° ,=•-/ :,,,,,,-,i-,.I .. -,- . k.. , , -1,..' ,h,' , .,.:i_j___, 'serf - 13,11'.---.1 IV 12! I), ";'.;," .IT 7 CI'' --r F t''';1111 / t, E1 0 .- .. II ... .4•4 4 9.••*, OF •• oh i It I go IF• • 111 1 i,or u" o 1-- r- g r. I ...;,..i, itt 0 - • _ .- AWILEF Xv.i ri%nt51 IN , w oar 4 ,,, .41011„,'.! ,.' 4,4i---- -;:.. . J. ': I'n .t. , I 41111 ,,, 44.440...1.4 11144,4.4. i4Lt■',‘.' I I I r7.:::111"3[001' 1'.1 74.■11E1„„',..e ..44, ,...___.____......" :, . ..,j _,.. . ,...., , 1 i ti. , 1.2,..21,470,,„....„%. . ,..„, n. ',T., . , .._ _____;., 4: ■71., i 14.4 .. IIM r412:13 V A.:,2"..:..1 I i itr°*" -. !:1: It' C 1 1) ,%'.i ,. .... i I ...._04114 0 I, 6...• ttr.e. - A.,_.,•4041114:- -0- ,- ,.- .., L, 1 ‘ , ... 'hi lea:!1 gi ii =III (410 i . 1 4f . „..ill 1-'---•• :... ,t1.1.si?4 .• .. ..,v.^....:,.:::44 • ... - ic , ..,, 1,1 c ..„... -.,-•_==..gn,- .:1,-.. . I I I At Illiiii •- •-•-- " ' 1, 1 I 1 up 1 1 1 1 L, I=- .; , ,:"..,:;:„": ..,...•••••■ tr.,. ,i) ''.'•I ±.•r...re., I ;,...r....-:-..- SIREFT%-(PRIVATE) 0 .-"'.. ...-...,...," 1&las ' .1111111 ii '.ii',) .. 7-...... - 1 ; gl'"ill" Mi. - -i r . _ ..., I'll 47' 171. ' r4". k ,' .'rilOP -' -. , Iiii ..•• .„..... I • I I r! ° -- ----i- ,,.... . •. 1.11 •.• 0 r.. - 410::;,. . - .0. . r,mi• ,....f.e-..A,1 - L il, Num 1 .,: ,.,„,?.......,,,f . ...:,,,ta-...-3.-/.4 itlr:t[M__.11- I. , • i ; , 4.4.., ::''...,;131- -VI' w .. - -,- •• , ... .•-•. ..v. (v. .-i • - •414•••••••••• 4..... • ,,,,,,14,,, . r, i . r_____.,-,;1_,._ 1....... 4,1. ,...it ,,,,,,,,,,,,, :4 .44. , 1. i ,....„._,... id -4-Or ... ,75.1^.1., ..7,,,,.. • - ;OF.Z....4. .4, 1 b. 41 NI ,. ...II .•-•,) ,, ON 0 wis.,,..1. ••••••• 07..S. liMi ..4 , ta "Mil ..... ziR rip ". -trt 0:-. ,,...4-4,..%v". i?fr:,'• 0 ....,- -....... ........, G ,., ..F.T...., ...oak elj-;.' ..M II-lig " liii"L'.... -r-- 4;1. , Q.0., WM :,41,0-eiv.:.;,...;,...,,,,,,,n, I..1 t mum -- '' " Pi AM'u,',...-' .'''.:••••':.. '5:4,g i ii I 1 41i . iiii; mi, .,.... - .,-;:p t..,,,,,:,„•.-; ..,... --4::.' ...f,t?,,, ...-- I 64...1111 In ..... ..41.14 .„.........p.... = mi. 473.0.4.4.4.. .S...477•., '. -..,' . 1).;4. . •II m i..4 ,.......A.....nrg...0 ..........,....., 1 1'7 ' -:-- ° : --- - : , , al IV t.:-: -- : " =V --- .6r,` --:.; ■ -... g%;'4.4 Ili 2 rfirErcrowo IT, ,A4a1NaY4.7AL:', ..1-,P-' " F I 4300,•," '''" . .44. 11... <ii....S n't 444100'- , ....,..,... ..e.I . t. • • VI' • • • "....i ... +. 4.T' ''.4 ' ..'.. . 0 7416.,V106 l. , , ,44• • • • 4 • 0. , ?..All 111111 1. .. Ii" qi i ne, i gi i iiir 1 BINE i*V „4„111111 III 40 ll•Pi•II 1 ni WA'F-....°:'''...I.--2-.,;:'-'"'1'°. No gip Er :..-....c.., I - - _ilt..,....., . ..,..1 sj - -- _... .. r 1 A g I IVA. ..., PRI I ll II 1,41.??. 9."..--e:: ' LL, • ....•'' ' 51:ii.I MEI we.,no,n .. 47.11...........4111F c .,,,... “- .gstr-,$.,.....2-w. i,-'''' n " ' 1r44 4. .. ...• ..k, , 1,7 :. - = „,„.,......, ,,,,,„.„.,...,„, 4.4.4.•••.10....A4•44.4.441■44.,.........4.04; •A•4,4.1.F. . =.4■...:411,114,4.1=plism4.644,4.1........ .. g 4,0 6.40.•cit . .L., . ", . 3 V':C. 4,,,,,,‘,,,A* ......':"'"V .4 •:' ir '..°....,..-..,-"" -":„...... .........„, le ....,.. I■ ...•••••■•■••••=1...........3.b.1.1e.m...00 a L.A.II •irm..611.1•1‘41.116.41..,1441.1 WAIL 11.41.1.61.1.14,111.1,11.01. 1........Usart.,•••=ftatuarr••■co.f.......14.11... 1,, ,If 4111,47,....?1-NpiitrAr'.' %tap o,r.'Ax.;-.. ...0 _ Vrit•4.tr 4.'9 1P50.,.'•,:2 ',4:701Pr.ieT.-A-.W,‘'c:0 ..-' , „...'''. .„.. .,- II &..=7:i3".... 1: ...c.a. .- " ..- • ....•9,0....1.4 ...• ' - - --- --:-' "":7.,,,■"'"-'r . ...--, 2,.........,-, P..• • e, .,,,,, ...- ......, i r-:"'"-=..., ' .....1.■ingl...14........E,..........................it. .4,4111W.Ine.114•1..111,1•41.1.5.0..M.1.1.1.4., I.... •,,.,,,.,.., .. 14,. A 1 La Ce,•r.14.9 i^4..7 I■4.er TY,...il i Aft,.1.4.11M.:ri. .... , ' '. ....„ TEMECULA, CA SHEARWATER CREEK CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLAN _ TEMECULA FOOTHILLS,LLC - 2917 Canon Sthrta 53n Dkg0.CA 92106 1 • 0 10 20 60 .- 951 898.1502 ••••) \ -.2 ril BEI11111111111.* Ll /101111-1 JANUARY 17,2014 LI.,I I.sion,II,a.NJ ..I 97.-102 9.1121:go CA 921. ■19-295.20,w••..lantA.nb.n. . . , . . PLANT LEGEND ••1 a•al IMill,.... sac,* *...... '*"' VI::."4,..,',' I _, , . . b. . 1 .410•• ,,, , r••••••9 , 411.11. 10"44YMa 4 14,1•4 N. • . Wr'IT141141.1!AIIMr*,41 4,Ir Alli61.1 -4,., 4rAIL:r1101r561-VglirlealWANLIVIIIIVJILTrill,WAtilre, ■41 I 4.4,W. 44.444 44q 4 Aru-01, 1060-,•-• 0,,- 6,- •• 1/...... PO.0i '119'45 r;::1,1-rer,••••41%... LU ',NW 11.111.1.411111.1••• iv ripr....... •9-5gliiirAPPIWOR171. ' ... 1:94 ".9 47,41.., ,, N..‘‘,. IVO _ 4 _,, 1,, ,r• t,..: 0 1.• ' ''"19 5,1 /pi.41....j.in 5.,,0.54”..1.c.,g ' 1..4 „,1 k.' ;4 I,4:`... '•,4t..r.t4.79, Lu .L- 1i 0 iP iit ii7m v''A .,.. '"1 g6?c..?.■?*1.•.A1l;'•i.. . irm,m.,...,.. ., r i.,....'', .11ylli '-,rx-tr?d,"e.l:i t7.Ab7'f.N.M.,-,T. - ...-_.„-'.ar '-'- 1:r.:I:,ar.N rV,,1d110e 011,.1,,;.,,,1..e.t..,i..?i,•7„•6-v.,.t1y.c1.,.*,`,.n.:.i'L•/r if oF, 1a•g• . a41 11, IX ill IA. I • I. .4.4 04r4,4 44 1•4 •44 &On ArY14.1.41■ I. n ta - 1>*.•'' .4. 4.,4 4,,e..' OEM Ma' 1;11111. . il -4,•!.' / .40,-; 1 „, ...,,,,,,, .,-...- • ... ........ rrrr.r. IA, .... STREET.8'(PRIVATE) - (11r4iitt 0(.v■, ,....•I I."_.•,:•,., ,i V'.'. :,:...,..- ' •_TI.- k•i...,7.t 1 3 7.',F.,„'4.-p43:,..,.:.r--,_-'4 7!,:,,:: •- "- •_• _• ;..§.".i r.....t........-f.e- \-,-. 7--...„. ..-.... -1 • 44... .I1,4144 .• 4,'4„1 a84r.a. •.. 1 _ , % , . 1 . 4••4• . . "pr,f4;4 or 0 ,- ' '• .-.Veignru." H 1 1.1 ';474,-....-,-, gil i I I 11,11r1 1 1 ,Ln„„, 0 _ .......... ,... , e ._.,/ °•',..-9, -rZr ..,;#,-,r;,,,tar- o 11.1 ,115 I -'.. .;•5 rkfiiijilitIlfr „ ,..,..,". •-9,-...... . OP! r .1:•••'..,,r., ° ay.drImuill•L, ,...--;........"'F',...--"/".' ,,, .-,.. ...........,,,........ - ....4. ,. ,--, -F,. ,,,, • ., Ill °I. •° Pr. ‘'5.3 4, s' rr, ,„,. II -: . •:U. 11.. : ..`,,,. -, ,... ',pm..0*,9(:,;00 .i.......,.......„...... 0 ir Ow,c,,rv:'4 .... ''''' P il'‘" ...--""..- '' L-1 I r'' . MI i'4Illki,211Illith44);w..,.., ... ...- ............,- -, I I 6 I , ill I ;pa CO 4 cp:n . 4."107:41fIrrV -''. " ' , ..,.....'-'" - 0.110).!....,....s... .. .0i , ,,- .., ....".',..-'''' ,.... • '4.4' '.: ." .. ..--" -,' .... _ 0 ■.-`, .......,,,, 0 -,s. 4,044-,444. 11444.44 . 14, 4.1 LN l., a .14 1- rrr ••• JIM 4 .. 5 a 'A4'''' V AM I Mil ' ''''AI' ."'. ........'''::::''' '''' ''''' o a arr n41444 4....444, ...-4•44,41t. 4 .4,, ,,,,,,,, ..,., , , , I .i''';'' • i 't it . ,... , 0.,,,,, , ..,, ,,,....„.„...., „.... .. . , . . ,.... ,.....„... • ...,,. ..___,...,. ........ E.'" r .00 '''''' -' 0 6.........■ AC.1c3SJC,I,17, ...my. r r.., 519 ar tr 5 r r .„ f',"'L.''.°r^,,,''.•:,'''',Or°,::9',.. „or.--- ,r''' ..."' Ara•t.tagn. I. c.... ,,r+ t■ I .._ _ I ...,',,;,.:-''-':•31'.r.''' ,• _F.," ,- ............ ":„,/ m -.rm. ao5.95,•• 4..4,14 411.• li 4 4.• 444 11.4. r• V I.6.:iJ''.':4".: ' ^" .•,''' ' '''' :-- me WIL•11 1.71.■,..10.1.1/1111.11 M1E■Illal MIA{ 1.:A.10:Er'''' ,...' , .,- ,...e.'. ED .... n," ■ • - ' gm ••■•• 0,9nreu Ira 4,44,11•1•141 I..41.4.14.414 ..._ .r.e 14 A 04 MR LLI•>`,N, / 7,,,:?_ 115 14.441 411.10 ...444 • 1...,„ 0.-I MI 01-00 .10.1 OA in, .... .....,'„.../...'CP564i'.1,. CO• _ _ v ... gr.44,,aa■••■•14•4 I.--001•100000 . '''' -''''' " ‘Prn-72'10'7' Is. W. I \ -4,4116•4 P.' ' _,-'' 0 .912•1/•• ••=44.44.1.440.404 4414,444, a, au. .4444 4I la ••• e'. I...- *...- ;; = 4444440 .4•4•441.114444,•^4.4 44 ..4 T1 I \ ,,,- , 4„:":„.„, MI 145••••,•• new. 0 I il P.EtIlWr WEI'<APE..uar.u....L.1 I- \....,,-" ,...„•• F'L-- ...a.... a I =re.=.1 • u.,0•,•,•••••,11.,Ld•u_ut runn r.•o•prehLPI-PEIMAELI a....rna I ..E.E..1.44 %WI.. W4...011....... I 116.1,04......• ... Yr.VAN*. 'TAvam en.a. • K901 WaR,r1,14 if WSIA1113,TRt/FEES,'OM 5 0.1.0,...AVE 4144444.44. .4444.44.44/44•41,14404.4•4,444.•444IF ..3. . Awn...raciary,a•-,5••••••••••••••■•••••na•• - ...marl.. 141.44,1P4 '''....4=4;"Tar 'rt '''''41.1=7:47=1,717arralregrr C1.11.4111710 4,4 TEMECULA, CA SHEARWATER CREEK CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLAN rEritcuLA,0 91-HU S,LLC 0-110 20 60 13211011.11111111.- - L2 '9,,Cu,5'9 91,err 59 1 Or9g C 9 9"06 951 S99 3 595, Ii- I 2Alta 1111,ri•Il.,auuktl.Suit.IU-401,0 e,CA 921K JANUARY 17.2014 61)7,7661 6-th.Imlieland.951555,115 1 PW04 92/929# 1.+l..: _A-: ggi r--,—,Ai,ia--1.4121,1 ..: 1 :fir'— 1.ir.3-- c •.. t' ..t7 I • II y • - ,. . A . : 5. �_. ... x._x...�. r s . �._. r 1 111 11L1 N i 40,y y.07 i 761- ;I. r ._ it d -. 4 Ph `' 11111111 ,3 �o TEMECULA,CA S H E A R W A T E R CREEK CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN TEMECULA FOOTHILLS,LLC 0 15 30 90 2917 Carron Street San Diego,CA 92106 " IN-SI E. -', /1 951.393.1502 `�71 �� 1N Ilnr nrr 1.v.. �L.I��J xrnrn DECEMBER 13,2013 3100 nlmnc Numvx4 1619 107 403 Sc der.CA 93106 619.1911603 w+_udWsdorlmm 1 PUJOL STREET 1 I . ' s ..,0-. ..• 'l.eS f 144 j�� ,e ., r . T1.„--.-.,i M� 1 :1 f' r ;, , ry�?4T _ice pl - -,.:,,, .I %r.. r' �` If :I ' s, rl ��r r i ,+ea i.1 1 I., ' r° + a" .• s, ''', -.• J WIMP -111111- UMW 111F lilni -- -..k. .,-. 101701 It ''', .. ''19L17:.' . ...1.„,,:\., CO ' ' -91111 .-., ..i ',"... . 46('': .1i, !IL p!M!r• 5 �1 •, re-III};i1.. l• '\' `\' ,IF !.I,r�... ..m..- ii. -9 l ,ter -4 _ . 1 �� �� y�, ;'CC G 1- - STREET"C"(PRIVATE") TEMECULA, CA S H E A R W A T E R CREEK RECREATION CENTER—CONCEPTUAL PLAN TEMECULA FOOTHILLS,LLC 2917 Canon Sulu San Dlego,CA 92106 0 5 10 30 i I' .1$ l u t:+_,vr �� 951898,1502 AKKllftll_Il'N.L In'ti u- „D01" OECEMBEO 10,2013 2400x14,011 Devour AC.Sac 101401 S01TCS0.CA 92106 6101951601 cwwlmiNWdnchwm STREET"C"(PR lvA Tr=) I` ,. . , . fr ti_ fr. E C i! I •- ,77‘..-. • ' • k' ,I 11111111111111111111,1111 lillInIl',illlll :IIIfll E R I r ! ` 4V if.:''''.4(1.." I .1, i y D U 'Vi ''--. . -',-7:!..-'.•-• ''. r . L1' i X;: ii i ST15 T D"{PR VATE) �ti'....... a kif....-- -,..,,..,[ _..,-L--i.:1,,_ . !, TEMECULA,CA S H E A R W A T E R CREEK MAIN POCKET PARK-CONCEPTUAL PLAN TEMECULA FOOTHILLS,LLC 0 5 10 30 IN-Sl E ,,:, . ]l, 2917 Canon Street San Diego,CA 91106 �, .'�iltl --..:r ir��- 951 B9B 1501 � u ��� 00 10 DECEMBER 19,2013 2400111.0,ic Naval, Rd,Su0e 101-401 San Di.go,CA 92106 619-795.100]enrcinlitelinduch corn y� - .• el .. ! '* � �F � Y r, h , �' :. • .,�, rt— -4.-, -4: -;.L.,,-r. . s_ c' it, a• - _ ''^ � . ,^. ` ''. _, 1 � k a x'' I r . " y r iy r tl G . , ; Fr ' fi, s '� . 1, `� ; : .d fJ!, i f ,w t .II I i r 4 �.;' ,.� .+ t i 7 .. 75•• F, _ fir ' �° ' , . v r0,• . — • • �. 41'e{i 7• a 774 �.�e� w s� '41 tilq41114 4 -111W -.111114.-ri a i'-.Ti17tt-•....q .7---. 1.^ .4.•• . ,. • ,, ., .. ., ._ -i'.... ..r. ..,":-1 I.3:. it...=. '' ' 74 • 000,- . TEMECULA,CA S H E A R W A T E R CREEK MAIN POCKET PARK—CONCEPTUAL RENDERING TEMECULA FOOTHILLS,LLC �" 2917 Gnan Street San Diem CA 92106 J N—SitE ,.''i,1,.,, 1 /'� 951.096.1502 ,.' �,,rr r� LYV1 APRIL 8,2013 24001100040 Dxuo,ad,m.107-103 S Div,0092106 610-791-7603 remenilebdmkaxe C It ll ! : r � iii � .I,.F!OIII11:,1IJIJ fP.y .�qt l r�w� r-,i 11uv$s, L ? ,s;I�Ps.N:r l b'`N'>,,) i, a : _� �"` 'ti. 4' is . a 9.`ji ._ VIEW FENCE SWINGING GATES CHAIN LINK FENCE(PVC COATED BLACK) Eton-. $1t krnay..a:.na uo.xfn.,+braw..,..n..w.01,09rnuw ••z.. ., .. I .. 1 i 1 0 .. 1. F —` IF 1� d F 4 ig§f ay t �, Z.'�: "i„� #Yit,"IFL.2`a`a�.3 '•+ " a �r a �� ,�qe Eri }r.---,,,,=_..l , 3•,A �..ir,, . l�v,$ gall na lu,f;� �p�,�I�71� �.•rnR ��; —, g..W• ,011 SLIDING GATE DECORATIVE LIGHT STANDARD CALL BOX GATE w sr PE,.VF-A Fri'0.vMn4Hl AV%NWI:o Kw.WOO PION TM,. TEMECULA,CA S H E A R W A T E R CREEK SITE DETAILS TEMECULA FOOTHILLS.LLC 0 10 20 60 L7 DECEMBER 19,2013 +,w D:,wm.MTO•kJ Sale 10,01 C•,Dec,CA U.mn f19-1�5-TNT] ,x ,.aW,�t,cb.ani 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 14- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA13-0155, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT A 140 UNIT ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL PROJECT, INCLUDING TWO STORY TOWNHOMES AND THREE-STORY WALK-UP FLATS, ALSO WITH A POOL AND CLUBHOUSE FOR PROJECT RESIDENTS, LOCATED ON APPROXIMATELY 7 ACRES AT THE SOUTHERNMOST POINT OF PUJOL STREET, ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE STREET (APNS 922-110-013, 922- 110-014) Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On June 18, 2013, Rob Honer representing Ambient Communities filed Planning Application No. PA13-0155, a Development Plan Application in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. The Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. C. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on March 19, 2014, 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. D. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission approved Planning Application No. PA13-0155 subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder. E. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby finds, determines and declares that: Development Plan, Development 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; The proposed Shearwater Creek project is consistent with the land use standards and land use designation contained in the City of Temecula General Plan. The site is properly planned and zoned, and as conditioned, is physically suitable for the type and density of residential development proposed. The project, as conditioned, is also consistent with other applicable requirements of State law and local ordinances, including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Citywide Design Guidelines, and 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 Shearwater Creek project, including the site, building, parking, circulation and other associated site improvements, is consistent with, and intended to protect the health and safety of those working and living in and around the site. The project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, has been found to be consistent with all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Development Plan Application, PA13-0155: A. Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the approval of the Development Plan Application, as described in the Initial Study ("the Project"). Based upon the findings contained in that study, City staff determined that there was no substantial evidence that the Project could have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. B. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration as required by law. The public comment period commenced on February 14, 2014, and expired on March 17, 2014. Copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Planning, located at City Hall, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590. C. One written comment was received prior to the public hearing and a response to all the comments made therein was prepared, submitted to the Planning Commission and incorporated into the administrative record of the proceedings. D. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the March 19, 2014 public hearing, and based on the whole record before it finds that: (1) the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; (2) there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment; and (3) Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. E. Based on the findings set forth in the Resolution, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project. Section 4. Conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approves Planning Application No. PA13-0155, a Development Plan to construct a 140- unit attached residential project, including two-story townhomes and three story walk-up flats, also with a pool and clubhouse for project residents, and Tentative Tract Map 36568 (for Condominium Purposes) located on approximately 7 acres at the southernmost point of Pujol Street subject to the Conditions of Approval set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 19th day of March, 2014. Stanley Harter, Chairman ATTEST: Armando G. Villa, AICP Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Armando G. Villa, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 14- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of March 2014, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS Armando G. Villa, AICP Secretary EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA13-0155 Project Description: A Development Plan to construct a 140-unit attached residential project, including two-story townhomes and three-story walk-up flats, also with a pool and clubhouse for project residents, located on approximately 7 acres at the southernmost point of Pujol Street, on the west side of the street Assessor's Parcel No.: 922-110-013 and 922-110-014 MSHCP Category: Residential (greater than 14.1 du/ac) DIF Category: Residential — attached TUMF Category: Residential — multi-family Quimby Category: Residential — multi-family Approval Date: March 19, 2014 Expiration Date: March 19, 2016 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within 48 Hours of the Approval of This Project PL-1. Filing Notice of Determination. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Two Thousand Two Hundred Thirty-One Dollars and Twenty-Five Cents ($2,231.25) which includes the Two Thousand One Hundred Eighty-One Dollars and Twenty-Five Cents ($2,181.25) fee, required by Fish and Wildlife Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Fifty Dollars ($50.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination for the Mitigated Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said 48-hour period the applicant/ developer has not delivered to the Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void due to failure of condition [Fish and Wildlife Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirements PL-2. Indemnification of the City. 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. PL-3. Modifications or Revisions. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this project. PL-4. Expiration. 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, or use of a property in conformance with a Conditional Use Permit. PL-5. Time Extension. The Director of Community Development may, upon an application being filed prior to expiration, and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to 3 one-year extensions of time, one year at a time. PL-6. Signage Permits. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage, including entry monuments. PL-7. Conformance with Approved Plans. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved site plan and elevations contained on file with the Planning Division. PL-8. Landscape Maintenance. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Director of Community Development shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest. PL-9. Graffiti. All graffiti shall be removed within 24 hours on telecommunication towers, equipment, walls, or other structures. PL-1 O. Water Quality and Drainage. Other than stormwater, it is illegal to allow liquids, gels, powders, sediment, fertilizers, landscape debris, and waste from entering the storm drain system or from leaving the property. To ensure compliance with this Condition of Approval: a. Spills and leaks shall be cleaned up immediately. b. Do not wash, maintain, or repair vehicles onsite. c. Do not hose down parking areas, sidewalks, alleys, or gutters. d. Ensure that all materials and products stored outside are protected from rain. e. Ensure all trash bins are covered at all times. PL-11. Paint Inspection. The applicant shall paint a three-foot-by-three-foot section of the building for Planning Division inspection, prior to commencing painting of the building. PL-12. Photographic Prints. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Division 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. PL-13. Materials and Colors. The Conditions of Approval specified in this resolution, to the extent specific items, materials, equipment, techniques, finishes or similar matters are specified, shall be deemed satisfied by staff's prior approval of the use or utilization of an item, material, equipment, finish or technique that City staff determines to be the substantial equivalent of that required by the Conditions of Approval. Staff may elect to reject the request to substitute, in which case the real party in interest may appeal, after payment of the regular cost of an appeal, the decision to the Planning Commission for its decision. MATERIAL COLOR Concrete Roof Tile Brown or slate range Walls Omega No. 10,14, 236, or 414 Composite Railings Frazee CL 2987N or CL 3137N Wood Trellis Frazee CL 2987N or CL 3137N Decorative Outlookers Frazee CL 2987N or CL 3137N 2x6 Resawn Wood Fascia Frazee CL 2986 A or CL 3175A Foam Trim Frazee CL 2986 A or CL 3175A PL-14. Trash Enclosures. Trash enclosures shall be provided to house all trash receptacles utilized on the site. These shall be clearly labeled on the site plan. PL-15. Covered Trash Enclosures. All trash enclosures on site shall include a solid cover and the construction plans shall include all details of the trash enclosures, including the solid cover. PL-16. Waste Hauling and Recycling. The event organizer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler, CR&R, at 951-943-1991 for disposal of event trash. Only the City's franchisee may haul solid waste within the City. The event organizer shall also provide recycling opportunities for the participants, employees, and volunteers. PL-17. Phased Construction. If construction is phased, a construction staging area plan or phasing plan for construction equipment and trash shall be approved by the Director of Community Development. PL-18. Construction and Demolition Debris. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris and shall provide the Planning Division verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul demolition and construction debris. PL-19. Public Art Ordinance. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City's Public Art Ordinance as defined in Section 5.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code. PL-20. Property Maintenance. All parkways, including within the right-of-way, entryway median, landscaping, walls, fencing, recreational facilities, and on-site lighting shall be maintained by the property owner or maintenance association. PL-21. Trash Enclosures. The trash enclosures shall be large enough to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as regular solid waste containers. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) PL-22. Placement of Transformer. Provide the Planning Division with a copy of the underground water plans and electrical plans for verification of proper placement of transformer(s) and double detector check prior to final agreement with the utility companies. PL-23. Placement of Double Detector Check Valves. Double detector check valves shall be installed at locations that minimize their visibility from the public right-of-way, subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development. PL-24. Archaeological/Cultural Resources Grading Note. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "If at any time during excavation/construction of the site, archaeological/cultural 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 Community Development at his/her sole discretion may require the property owner 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 archaeological/ cultural resource, the Planning Director shall notify the property owner of such determination and shall authorize the resumption of work. Upon determining that the discovery is an archaeological/cultural resource, the Planning Director 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 Planning Director." PL-25. Cultural Resources Treatment Agreement. The developer is required to enter into a Cultural Resources Treatment Agreement with the Pechanga Tribe. This Agreement will address the treatment and disposition of cultural resources and human remains that may be impacted as a result of the development of the project, as well as provisions for tribal monitors. (See Mitigation Monitoring Plan) PL-26. Discovery of Cultural Resources. 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. (See Mitigation Monitoring Plan) PL-27. Archaeological Monitoring of Cultural Resources. A qualified archaeological monitor will be present and will have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities, in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe and their designated monitors, to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. (See Mitigation Monitoring Plan). PL-28. Tribal Monitoring of Cultural Resources. Tribal monitors from the Pechanga Tribe shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities, including all archaeological surveys, testing, and studies, to be compensated by the developer. (See Mitigation Monitoring Plan) PL-29. Relinquishment of Cultural Resources. The landowner agrees to relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area, to the Pechanga Tribe for proper treatment and disposition. (See Mitigation Monitoring Plan). PL-30. Preservation of Sacred Sites. All sacred sites are to be avoided and preserved. (See Mitigation Monitoring Plan) PL-31. MSHCP Pre-Construction Survey. A 30-day preconstruction survey, in accordance with MSHCP guidelines and survey protocol, shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance. The results of the 30-day preconstruction survey shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to scheduling the pre-grading meeting with Public Works. PL-32. Burrowing Owl Grading Note. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "No grubbing/clearing of the site shall occur prior to scheduling the pre-grading meeting with Public Works. All project sites containing suitable habitat for burrowing owls, whether owls were found or not, require a 30-day preconstruction survey that shall be conducted within 30 days prior to ground disturbance to avoid direct take of burrowing owls. If the results of the survey indicate that no burrowing owls are present on-site, then the project may move forward with grading, upon Planning Division approval. If burrowing owls are found to be present or nesting on-site during the preconstruction survey, then the following recommendations must be adhered to: Exclusion and relocation activities may not occur during the breeding season, which is defined as March 1 through August 31, with the following exception: From March 1 through March 15 and from August 1 through August 31 exclusion and relocation activities may take place if it is proven to the City and appropriate regulatory agencies (if any) that egg laying or chick rearing is not taking place. This determination must be made by a qualified biologist." PL-33. Rough Grading Plans. A copy of the Rough Grading Plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Division. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) PL-34. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). The City of Temecula adopted an ordinance on March 31, 2003 to collect fees for a Riverside County area wide Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). This project is subject to payment of these fees at the time of building permit issuance. The fees are subject to the provisions of Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. PL-35. Development Impact Fee (DIF). The developer shall comply with the provisions of Title 15, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all its resolutions by paying the appropriate City fee. PL-36. Quimby Requirements. The developer shall satisfy the City's parkland dedication (Quimby) requirement. PL-37. Photometric Plan. The applicant shall submit a photometric plan, including the parking lot, to the Planning Division, which meets the requirements of the Development Code and the Riverside County Palomar Lighting Ordinance 655. The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely affect the growth potential of the parking lot trees. PL-38. Downspouts. All downspouts shall be internalized. PL-39. Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans. Four (4) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division. These plans shall be submitted as a separate submittal, not as part of the building plans or other plan set. These plans shall conform to the approved conceptual landscape plan, or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, height and spread, water usage or KC value, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance and Water Storage Contingency Plan per the Rancho California Water District. The plans shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal) and one copy of the approved Grading Plan. PL-40. Parking Area Landscaping. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall 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. PL-41. Landscaping Site Inspections. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note stating, "Three landscape site inspections are required. The first inspection will be conducted at installation of irrigation while trenches are open. This will verify that irrigation equipment and layout is per plan specifications and details. Any adjustments or discrepancies in actual conditions will be addressed at this time and will require an approval to continue. Where applicable, a mainline pressure check will also be conducted. This will 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 are operating properly, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The third inspection will verify property landscape maintenance for release of the one-year landscape maintenance bond." The applicant/owner shall contact the Planning Division to schedule inspections. PL-42. Agronomic Soils Report. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note on the plans stating, "The contractor shall provide two copies of an agronomic soils report at the first irrigation inspection." PL-43. Water Usage Calculations. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance), the total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with approved plan). Applicant shall use evapotranspiration (ETo) factor of 0.70 for calculating the maximum allowable water budget. PL-44. Landscape Maintenance Program. A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted to the Planning Division for approval. The landscape maintenance program shall detail 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. PL-45. Specifications of Landscape Maintenance Program. Specifications of the landscape maintenance program shall indicate, "Three landscape site inspections are required. The first inspection will be conducted at installation of irrigation while trenches are open. This will verify that irrigation equipment and layout is per plan specifications and details. Any adjustments or discrepancies in actual conditions will be addressed at this time and will require an approval to continue. Where applicable, a mainline pressure check will also be conducted. This will 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 are operating properly, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The third inspection will verify property landscape maintenance for release of the one-year landscape maintenance bond." The applicant/owner shall contact the Planning Division to schedule inspections. PL-46. Irrigation. Automatic irrigation shall be installed for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from view of the public from streets and adjacent property for (private common areas; front yards and slopes within individual lots; shrub planting to completely screen perimeter walls adjacent to a public right-of-way equal to 66 feet or larger; and, all landscaping excluding City maintained areas and front yard landscaping which shall include, but may not be limited to, private slopes and common areas). PL-47. Temporary Landscaping Requirement for Phased Development. If any phase or area of the project site is not scheduled for development within six months of the completion of grading, it shall be temporarily landscaped and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control. PL-48. Hardscaping. The plans shall include all hardscaping for all trails and walkways within private common areas. a. Wall and Fence Plans. Wall and fence plans shall be consistent with the Conceptual Landscape Plans showing the height, location and the following materials for all walls and fences: b. Decorative block for the perimeter of the project adjacent to a public right-of-way equal to 66 feet or larger and the side yards for corner lots. c. Wrought iron or decorative block and wrought iron combination to take advantage of views for side and rear yards. d. Wood fencing shall be used for all side and rear yard fencing when not restricted/conditioned outlined above. PL-49. Precise Grading Plans. Precise Grading Plans shall be consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements. PL-50. WQMP Treatment Devices. All WQMP treatment devices, including design details, shall be shown on the construction landscape plans. If revisions are made to the WQMP design that result in any changes to the conceptual landscape plans after entitlement, the revisions will be shown on the construction landscape plans, subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development. PL-51. Roof-Mounted Mechanical Equipment. Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the subdivision; however, solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with Director of Community Development approval. PL-52. Utility Screening. 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 ensure that there are no conflicts with trees. PL-53. Building Construction Plans for Outdoor Areas. Building Construction Plans shall include detailed outdoor areas (including but not limited to trellises, decorative furniture, fountains, hardscape (to match the style of the building subject to the approval of the Planning Director. Prior to Release of Power, Building Occupancy or Any Use Allowed by This Permit PL-54. Letter of Substantial Conformance. The applicant shall submit a letter of substantial conformance, subject to field verification by the Director of Community Development or his/her designee. Said letter of substantial conformance shall be prepared by the project designer and shall indicate that all plant materials and irrigation system components have been installed in accordance with the approved final landscape and irrigation plans. Such letter of substantial conformance shall be submitted prior to scheduling for the final inspection. PL-55. Screening of Loading Areas. 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 reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. PL-56. Landscape Installation Consistent with Construction Plans. 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 Planning Director. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. PL-57. Front Yard and Slope Landscaping. Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots shall be completed for inspection. PL-58. Private Common Area Landscaping. Private common area landscaping shall be completed for inspection prior to issuance of the adjacent building occupancy permita. PL-59. HOA Landscaping. HOA landscaping shall be completed for inspection for those lots adjacent to HOA landscaped area. PL-60. Performance Securities. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Community Development, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Planning Division 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 Community Development, the bond shall be released upon request by the applicant. PL-61. Installation of Site Improvements. All site improvements, including but not limited to, parking areas and striping shall be installed. PL-62. TCSD Service Levels. It shall be the developer's responsibility to provide written disclosure of the existence of the Temecula Community Service District (TCSD) and its service level rates and charges to all prospective purchasers. PL-63. Compliance with Conditions of Approval. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. OUTSIDE AGENCIES PL-64. Compliance with. County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health's transmittals dated July 8, 2013, copies of which are attached. PL-65. Compliance with. Eastern Municipal Water District's transmittal dated July 1, 2012 but received on July 3, 2013, a copy of which is attached. (City suspects 2012 was a "typo"). PL-66. Compliance with. Rancho California Water District's transmittal dated July 3, 2013, a copy of which is attached. PL-67. Compliance with. Metropolitan Water District's transmittal dated August 1, 2013, a copy of which is attached. PL-68. Compliance with. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District's transmittal dated July 16, 2013, a copy of which is attached. BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT General Conditions B-1. Final Building and Safety Conditions. Final Building and Safety conditions will be addressed when building construction plans are submitted to Building and Safety for review. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), and related codes which are enforced at the time of building plan submittal. B-2. Compliance with Code. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2013 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2013 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, 2013 California Energy Codes, 2013 California Green Building Standards, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and City of Temecula Municipal Code. B-3. Green Measures. The applicant shall provide 10% voluntary green measures on the project, as stipulated by the 2013 California Green Building Standards. B-4. Disabled Access. Applicant shall provide details of all applicable disabled access provisions and building setbacks on plans to include: a. All ground floor units to be adaptable. b. Disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. c. Van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. d. Path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. e. Path of travel from public right-of-way to all public areas on site, such as club house, trash enclose tot lots and picnic areas. B-5. County of Riverside Mount Palomar Ordinance. Applicant shall submit, at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plan showing compliance with County of Riverside Mount Palomar Ordinance Number 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All streetlights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Building and Safety Division. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and aimed not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of- way. B-6. Street Addressing. Applicant must obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings by requesting street addressing and submitting a site plan for commercial or multi-family residential projects or a recorded final map for single-family residential projects. B-7. Clearance from TVUSD. 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. B-8. Obtain Approvals Prior to Construction. Applicant must obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. B-9. Obtaining Separate Approvals and Permits. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls will require separate approvals and permits. B-10. Sewer and Water Plan Approvals. On-site sewer and water plans will require separate approvals and permits B-11. Hours of Construction. Signage shall be prominently posted at the entrance to the project, indicating the hours of construction, as allowed by the City of Temecula Municipal Ordinance 9.20.060, for any site within one-quarter mile of an occupied residence. The permitted hours of construction are Monday through Saturday from 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sundays and nationally recognized Government Holidays. B-12. House Electrical Meter. Applicant 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 how the operation of exterior lighting and fire alarm systems when a house meter is not specifically proposed. At Plan Review Submittal B-13. Submitting Plans and Calculations. Applicant must submit to Building and Safety four (4) complete sets of plans and two (2) sets of supporting calculations for review and approval including: a. An electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic, and mechanical plan applicable to scope of work. b. A Sound Transmission Control Study in accordance with the provisions of the Section 1207, of the 2013 edition of the California Building Code. c. A precise grading plan to verify accessibility for persons with disabilities. d. Truss calculations that have been stamped by the engineer of record of the building and the truss manufacturer engineer. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) B-14. Onsite Water and Sewer Plans. Onsite water and sewer plans, submitted separately from the building plans, shall be submitted to Building and Safety for review and approval. B-15. Demolition Permits. A demolition permit shall be obtained if there is an existing structure to be removed as part of the project. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) B-16. Plans Require Stamp of Registered Professional. Applicant shall provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on the plans. Prior to Beginning of Construction B-17. Pre-Construction Meeting. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. FIRE PREVENTION General Requirements F-1. Fire Dept. Plan Review. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. F-2. Fire Flow. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all residential buildings per CFC Appendix B. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 4,000 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure for a 4-hour duration for multi-family projects. The fire flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided (CFC Appendix B and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-3. Fire Hydrants. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix C. Standard fire hydrants (6" x 4" 2 '/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart at each intersection, and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant for multi-family projects. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required (CFC Appendix C and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) F-4. Turning Radius (Culdesac). Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum outside turning radius on any cul-de-sac shall be 45 feet for multi-family dwelling tracts. (CFC Chapter 5 along with the Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-5. All Weather Access Roads. Fire apparatus access roads and driveways shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be with a surface to provide all-weather driving capabilities. Access roads shall be 80,000 lbs. GVW with a minimum of AC thickness of .25 feet. In accordance with Section 3310.1, prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have fire apparatus access roads (CFC Chapter 5 and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-6. Access Road Widths. Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 24 feet for multi-family projects with an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches (CFC Chapter 5 and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-7. Gradient Of Access Roads. The gradient for fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed 15 percent (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-8. Two Point Access. This development shall maintain two points of access, via all- weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau (CFC Chapter 5). F-9. Turning Radius. Dead end roadways and streets in excess of 150 feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) F-10. Required Submittals (Fire Underground Water). The developer shall furnish three copies of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation for all private water systems pertaining to the fire service loop. 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. Hydraulic calculations will be required with the underground submittal to ensure fire flow requirements are being met for the on-site hydrants. The plans must be submitted and approved prior to building permit being issued (CFC Chapter 5 and Chapter 33). F-11. Required Submittals (Fire Sprinkler Systems). Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of sprinkler plans must be submitted by the installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. These plans must be submitted prior to the issuance of building permit. F-12. Required Submittals (Fire Alarm Systems). Fire alarm plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of alarm plans must be submitted by the installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. The fire alarm system is required to have a dedicated circuit from the house panel. These plans must be submitted prior to the issuance of building permit. F-13. Access Points. Both access points need to be constructed prior to issuance of first building permit. The access points will be used during construction and need to meet the minimum road widths and weight loads as specified in the above conditions. Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy F-14. Hydrant Verification. Hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers (blue dots) (City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-15. Addressing. New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Multi-family shall have a minimum of 12-inch numbers with suite numbers being a minimum of six inches in size (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-16. Address Directory (Multi-Family). A directory display monument sign shall be required for apartment, condominium, townhouse or mobile home parks. Each complex shall have an illuminated diagrammatic layout of the complex which indicates the name of the complex, all streets, building identification, unit numbers, and fire hydrant locations within the complex. Location of the sign and design specifications shall be submitted to and be approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior to installation. F-17. Knox Box. A "Knox-Box" shall be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six feet in height and be located to the right side of the fire riser sprinkler room (CFC Chapter 5). F-18. Gates And Access. 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 Chapter 5). F-19. Site Plan: 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 (CFC Chapter 5). PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT General Requirements PW-1. Conditions of Approval. The developer shall comply with all Conditions of Approval, the Engineering and Construction Manual and all City codes/standards at no cost to any governmental agency. PW-2. Entitlement Approval. The developer shall comply with the approved site plan, the conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and other relevant documents approved during entitlement. Any significant omission to the representation of site conditions may require the plans to be resubmitted for further review and revision. PW-3. Precise Grading Permit. A precise grading permit for onsite improvements (outside of public right-of-way) shall be obtained from Public Works. PW-4. Haul Route Permit. A haul route permit may be required when soils are moved on public roadways to or from a grading site. The developer/contractor is to verify if the permit is required. If so, he shall comply with all conditions and requirements per the City's Engineering and Construction Manual and as directed by Public Works. PW-5. Encroachment Permits. Prior to commencement of any applicable construction, encroachment permit(s) are required. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from: a. Public Works for public offsite improvements; and b. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD) PW-6. Street Improvement Plans. The developer shall submit public/private street improvement plans for review and approval by Public Works. The plans shall be in compliance with Caltrans and City codes/standards; and shall include, but not limited to, plans and profiles showing existing topography, existing/proposed utilities, proposed centerline, top of curb and flowline grades. PW-7. Right-of-Way Dedications. All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered to the public or other appropriate agency and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by Public Works. PW-8. Signing & Striping Plan. A signing & striping plan, designed by a registered civil engineer per the latest edition of Caltrans MUTCD standards, shall be included with the street improvement plans for approval. PW-9. Storm Drain Improvement Plans. The developer shall submit storm drain improvement plans if the street storm flows exceeds top of curb for the 10-yr storm event and/or is not contained within the street right-of-way for the 100-yr storm event. A manhole shall be constructed at right-of-way where a private and public storm drain systems connect. The plans shall be approved by Public Works. PW-10. Drainage and Water Quality Facility Maintenance. All onsite drainage and water quality facilities shall be privately maintained. PW-11. Emergency Access. The southerly 24-foot wide opening on Pujol Street is restricted to emergency access only. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) PW-12. Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS). The developer shall comply with all constraints per the recorded ECS with any underlying maps related to the subject property. PW-13. Required Clearances. As deemed necessary by Public Works, the developer shall receive written clearances/permits from applicable agencies such as RCFC&WCD and other affected agencies. PW-14. Grading/Erosion & Sediment Control Plan. The developer shall submit a grading/erosion & sediment control plan(s) to be reviewed and approved by Public Works. All plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. The approved plan shall include all final WQMP water quality facilities and all construction-phase pollution-prevention controls to adequately address non-permitted runoff. Refer to the City's Engineering & Construction Manual at: http://www.cityoftemecula.org/Temecula/Government/PublicWorks/engineeringconst manual.htm PW-15. Grading/Erosion & Sediment Control Securities. The developer shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 24, Section 18.24.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code by posting security for private development and entering into an agreement to guarantee the grading and erosion & sediment control improvements. PW-16. Habitat Conservation Fee. The developer shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in the ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. PW-17. Area Drainage Plan (ADP) Fee to RCFC&WCD. The developer shall demonstrate to the City that the flood mitigation charge (ADP fee) has been paid to RCFC&WCD. If the full ADP fee has already been credited to this property, the developer shall show proof of credit; and no new charge will be required. PW-18. Letter of Permission/Easements. The developer shall coordinate with adjacent property owners affected by the project's improvements and shall obtain the required documents such as letters of permission, easement(s) and/or maintenance agreement(s) for any offsite work performed on adjoining properties. The document's format is as directed by, and shall be submitted to, Public Works for acceptance. The document information shall be noted on the approved grading plan. PW-19. NPDES General Permit Compliance. The developer shall obtain project coverage under the State National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Construction Activities and shall provide the following: a. A copy of the Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID) issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB); b. The project's Risk Level (RL) determination number; and c. The name, contact information and certification number of the Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD). Pursuant to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) requirements and City's storm water ordinance, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be generated and submitted to the Board. Throughout the project duration, the SWPPP shall be routinely updated and readily available (onsite) to the State and City. Review www.cabmphandbooks.com for SWPPP guidelines. Refer to the following link: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/programs/stormwater/construction.sht ml PW-20. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and O&M Agreement. The developer shall submit a final WQMP (prepared by a registered professional engineer) with the initial grading plan submittal, based on the conceptual WQMP from the entitlement process. It must receive acceptance by Public Works. A copy of the final project-specific WQMP must be kept onsite at all times. In addition, a completed WQMP Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement shall be submitted for review and approval. Refer to the WQMP template and agreement link below: http://www.cityoftemecula.org/Temecula/Government/PublicWorks/WQMPandN PDE S/WQMP.htm PW-21. Soils Report. A soils report, prepared by a registered soil or civil engineer, shall be submitted to Public Works with the initial grading plan submittal. The report shall address the site's soil conditions and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. PW-22. Drainage Study. A drainage study shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and submitted to Public Works with the initial grading plan check in accordance with City, Riverside County and engineering standards. The study shall identify storm water runoff quantities (to mitigate the 100-year storm event) from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed offsite or onsite, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. a. Pujol Street drainage facilities i. Analyze adequacy of the existing storm drain facility discharging into Murrieta Creek and construct required private storm drain improvements. ii. Permission to construct the extension of the private storm drain facility to Murrieta Creek shall be obtained from respective property owner(s) iii. A private drainage and maintenance easement shall be acquired from the property owner and recorded. iv. Developer shall provide a recorded document accepting offsite drainage. PW-23. Drainage. All applicable drainage shall be depicted on the grading plan and properly accommodated with onsite drainage improvements and water quality facilities, which shall be privately maintained. Alterations to existing drainage patterns or concentration and/or diverting flows is not allowed unless the developer constructs adequate drainage improvements and obtains the necessary permissions from the downstream property owners. All drainage leaving the site shall be conveyed into a public storm drain system, if possible. The creation of new cross lot drainage is not permitted. PW-24. RCFC&WCD Approval. A copy of the grading and improvement plans, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations, shall be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for approval. PW-25. Sight Distance. The developer shall limit landscaping in the corner cut-off area of all street intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. Prior to Issuance of Encroachment Permit(s) PW-26. Public Utility Agency Work. The developer shall submit all relevant documentation due to encroaching within City right-of-way; and is responsible for any associated costs and for making arrangements with each applicable public utility agency. PW-27. Traffic Control Plans. A construction area traffic control plan (TCP) will be required for lane closures and detours or other disruptions to traffic circulation; and shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works. The TCP shall be designed by a registered civil or traffic engineer in conformance with the latest edition of the Caltrans Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and City standards. PW-28. Improvement Plans. All improvement plans (including but not limited to street and storm drain) shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works. PW-29. Street Trenching. All street trenches shall conform to City Standard No. 407; refer to the City's Paving Notes. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) PW-30. Final Map. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, Tract Map No. 36568 shall be approved and recorded. PW-31. Street Improvements. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, Pujol Street improvements shall be completed. PW-32. Construction of Street Improvements. All street improvement plans (and the construction plans for landscaped medians) shall be approved by Public Works. The developer shall start construction of all public and/or private street improvements, as outlined below, in accordance to the City's General Plan/Circulation Element and corresponding City standards. All street improvement designs shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans' standards to join existing street improvements. a. Improve Pujol Street along the existing street alignment (Station 10+00 to Station 18+12.84) ((Local Street) Modified Standard No. 104 — 60' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements plus twelve feet, paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk on the west side, mountable dike on the east side, streetlights, drainage facilities, signing and striping and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). b. Improve Pujol Street along the new street alignment (Station 18+12.84 to Station 20+13.59) ((Local Street) Modified Standard No. 104 — 60' R/W) to include dedication of full-width street right-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk on the west side, mountable dike on the east side, streetlights, drainage facilities, signing and striping and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). PW-33. Undergrounding Wires. All existing and proposed utility lines, except electrical lines rated 34kV or greater, shall be installed underground per Title 15, Chapter 15.04 of the Temecula Municipal Code and utility provider's standards. The developer is responsible for any associated costs, for making arrangements with each utility agency and for obtaining the necessary easements. PW-34. Street Lights. The developer shall submit a completed SCE street light authorization application, an approved SCE Streetlight Plan and pay the advanced energy fees. All costs associated with the relocation of any existing street lights shall be paid by the developer. PW-35. Certifications. Certifications are required from the registered civil engineer-of-record certifying the building pad elevation(s) per the approved plans and from the soil's engineer-of-record certifying compaction of the building pad(s). Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy PW-36. Completion of Improvements. The developer shall complete all work per the approved plans and Conditions of Approval to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. This includes all onsite work (including water quality facilities), public improvements and the executed WQMP Operation and Maintenance agreement. PW-37. Utility Agency Clearances. The developer shall receive written clearances from applicable utility agencies (i.e., Rancho California and Eastern Municipal Water Districts, etc.) for the completion of their respective facilities and provide to Public Works. PW-38. Replacement of Damaged Improvements/Monuments. Any appurtenance damaged or broken during development shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of Public Works. Any survey monuments damaged or destroyed shall be reset per City Standards by a qualified professional pursuant to the California Business and Professional Code Section 8771. PW-39. Certifications. Certifications are required from the registered civil engineer-of-record certifying satisfactory completion of all improvements per the approved plans and from the soil's engineer—of-record certifying the final compaction. jib�`� COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE `..., DEPAT'TMENT OF ENVIR''NMENTAL HEALTH Steve Van Stockum, Director July 8, 2013 City of Temecula Planning Department A Attn: Eric Saenz, Project Planner P.O. Box 9033 ' Temecula, CA 92589 .�C/� I ,1 SUBJECT: PA13-0155—SHEARWATER CREEK DP & PA13-0156—SHEARWATER CREEK CONDO MAP -,, (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER#922-110-013) Dear Mr. Saenz: Planning Application(PA) 13-0155 is proposing a development plan to construct a 141 unit attached residential project which will include a pool and clubhouse for the project residents. PA 13-0156 is proposing a"Condo Map"to allow for the 141 unit attached residential project. The project is located on the southern end of Pujol Street. In accordance with the agreement between the County of Riverside, Department of Environmental Health(DEH) and the City of Temecula, DEH offers the following comments for the project(s)referenced in the subject heading of this letter: POTABLE WATER AND SANITARY SEWER SERVICE This project is proposing Rancho California Water District (RCWD) potable water service and Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) sanitary sewer service. Per Memorandum of Understanding between the County of Riverside and EMWD, no "will-serve" letters for sewer service are required for projects located within EMWD's service area. However, a"Will-Serve" shall be required from RCWD for potable water service. Please note that it is the responsibility of the developer to ensure that all requirements to obtain potable water and sanitary sewer service are met with the appropriate water and sewer purveyor, as well as, all other applicable agencies. Office Locations • Blythe • Corona • Hemet • Indio • Murrieta • Palm Springs • Riverside • Phone: (888)722-4234 www.rivcoeh.org COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DEPAT'TMENT OF ENVIRr'NMENTAL HEALTH Steve Van Stockum, Director INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE -NOISE A general condition shall be placed on the project(s) addressing the following: 1) Facility-related noise, as projected to any portion of any surrounding property containing a"sensitive receiver, habitable dwelling, hospital, school, library or nursing home",must not exceed the following worst-case noise levels: 45 dB(A)— 10 minute noise equivalent level ("leq"), between the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (nighttime standard), and 65 dB(A)— 10 minute leq, between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. (daytime standard). 2) Whenever a construction site is within one-quarter(1/4) of a mile of an occupied residence or residences, no construction activities shall be undertaken between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. during the months of June through September and between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. during the months of October through May. Exceptions to these standards shall be allowed only with the written consent of the building official. 3) All construction vehicles, equipment fixed or mobile shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers. 4) During construction, best efforts should be made to locate stockpiling and/or vehicle staging area as far as practicable from existing residential dwellings. For any questions, please contact Steve Hinde at(951) 955-8980. ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT—PHASE I Prior to Planning Department approval of the project(s), an Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) Phase I Study shall be required to determine whether any chemicals and/or pesticides were used on the property, the location of use, and any possible lingering negative effects. This condition requires the applicant to compile sufficient information about the property and land uses to aid the Department in making a determination of whether additional investigation is needed. Please note that the Environmental Site Assessment process serves to protect public health and welfare by lessening the change of hazardous or toxic substances remaining on the property and interfering with safe land use. For further information regarding the ESA Phase I study, please contact Yvonne Reyes with DEH Environmental Cleanup Program at(951) 955-8982. Office Locations • Blythe • Corona • Hemet • Indio • Murrieta • Palm Springs • Riverside • Phone: (888)722-4234 www.rivcoeh.org COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DEPA'-'TMENT OF ENVIR''NMENTAL HEALTH Steve Van Stockum, Director HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT BRANCH (HMMB): Prior to final occupancy of a building permit, the facility will require a business emergency plan for the storage of hazardous materials greater than 55 gallons, 200 cubic feet or 500 pounds, or any acutely hazardous materials or extremely hazardous substances. If further review of the site indicates additional environmental health issues, HMMB reserves the right to regulate the business in accordance with applicable County Ordinances. For further information, please contact HMMB at (951) 358-5055. PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL/SPA FACILITY Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any proposed public/semi-public swimming pool/spa facility, total of three(3) complete sets of plans for each pool/spa must be submitted to DEH to verify compliance with all applicable State and County regulations, codes and standards. Pool/Spa plans should be submitted to: • Department of Environmental Health, District Environmental Services, Murrieta 38740 Sky Canyon Drive. Suite A, Murrieta CA 92563 Attention: Plan Check (951) 461-0284. Plan Check fees are required. If you have any questions regarding this letter please contact me at (951) 955-8980. Si —rely, 1 Of Michael Mistica, MBA, REHS Environmental Protection and Oversight Division Land Use/ Water Resources Program Office Locations • Blythe • Corona • Hemet • Indio • Murrieta • Palm Springs • Riverside • Phone: (888)722-4234 www.rivcoeh.ora EASTERN MUNICIPAL W A T E R D I S T R I C T, SINCE 1950 ` `` • July 1, 2012 r '. Board of Directors fit, ^ ,%, President Philip E. Paule City of Temecula Vice President PO Box 9033 Randy A. Record Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Re: Shearwater Creek DP, Project No. (PA13-0155), APN (922110013) Joseph J. Kuehler,CPA David J.Slawson Attn: Erik Jones, Ronald W.Sullisan In order to receive sewer service from Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD), the General Manager following information D.Jones u.P.E. g ormation will be helpful to the project proponent: Treasurer EMWD requires beginning dialogue with the project proponent at an early stage in site Joseph J. Kuchler,CPA design and development, via a one-hour complimentary Due Diligence meeting. To set up this meeting, the project proponent should complete a Project Questionnaire (form Director of The NBD-058) and submit to EMWD. To download this form or for additional information, Metropolitan Water District of So.calif please visit our "New Development Process" web page, under the "Businesses" tab, at Randy A.Record www.emwd.orq. This meeting will offer the following benefits: Board secretary and 1. Describe EMWD's development work-flow process Assistant to the General Manager 2. Identify project scope and parameters Rosemarie V. Howard 3. Preliminary, high level review of the project within the context of existing infrastructure Legal Counsel 4. Discuss potential candidacy for recycled water service Lemieux&O'Neill Following the Due Diligence meeting, to proceed with this project, a Plan Of Service (POS) will need to be developed by the developer's engineer, and reviewed/approved by EMWD prior to submitting improvement plans for Plan Check. The POS process will provide the following: 1- Technical evaluation of the project's preliminary design 2- Defined facility requirements, i.e. approved POS 3- Exception: for feasibility evaluation of a purchase acquisition, only a conceptual facilities assessment may be developed. If you have questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sip -,rely, r l Ma oun El-Rage, /S., P.E. Senior Civil Engineer New Business Development (951) 928-3777 x4468 Ei-haqememwd orq Mailing Address: Post Office Box 8300 Perris,CA 92572-8300 Telephone: (951)928-3777 Fax: (951)928-6177 Location: 2270 Trumble Road Perris, CA 92570 Internet : www.emwd.org i \ July 3, 2013 Rancho Water chi 100. Eric Jones � City of Temecula �k Board of Director: Post Office Box 9033 f Ben R.Drake Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Stephen.) Coruna SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY .�r l-i••I'rr•>ideni Lisa D.Herman SHEARWATER CREEK DP (29026 AND 29028 PUJOL .John E.Hoagland STREET, PA13-0155 AND PA13-0156); PARCEL NO. 7 OF William E.Plummer TRACT MAP NO. 13007; APNS 922-110-013 AND 922-110- Roland C.Sknmawitz 014 [ERIC SAENZI .James"Stew-Stewart Dear Mr. Jones: Officers Please be advised that the above-referenced project/property is located within the Matthew-G.Stone Crti6r)(1:\lanavor service boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD/District). The Richard S.Williamson.P E. subject project/property fronts an existing 22-inch diameter water pipeline (1305 "i't°nt C n 1 Pressure Zone) and 36-inch transmission main (1305 Pressure Zone) within Pujol Jeffrey D.Armstrong r Ff;•fr.sumo Street. N.Craig Elitharp,P.E. Direc(nr if t(noratinn5& Water service to the subject project/property does not exist. Additions or �Lintrn;mcr Andrew L.Webster.P.E. modifications to water service arrangements are subject to the Rules and Choi 1•:nq;m•0r Regulations (governing) Water System Facilities and Service, as well as the Keui E.Garcia completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. .James B.Gilpin Best Best&Krieger 1.LP Where private (on-site) facilities are required for water service, fire protection, irrigation, or other purposes, RCWD requires recordation of a Reciprocal Easement and Maintenance Agreement for such on-site private facilities, where private on-site water facilities may cross (or may be shared amongst) multiple lots/project units, and/or where such `common' facilities may be owned and maintained by a Property Owners' Association (proposed now or in the future). Water availability is contingent upon the property owner(s) destroying all on-site wells and signing an Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. In addition, water availability is contingent upon the timing of the subject project/property development relative to water supply shortage contingency measures (pursuant to RCWD's Water Shortage Contingency Plan or other applicable ordinances), and/or the adoption of a required Water Supply Assessment, as determined by the Lead Agency. I3'\PD:hab0I i F450\FEG Rancho California Water District -1213,)Wuiche:ter Road • Post U(tiro Box.91117 •Temecula)California 92589-9017•(951)296-691)0• FAX(951)296-686(1 City of Temecula July 3,2013 Page Two In accordance with Resolution 2007-10-5, the project/property may be required to use recycled water for all landscape irrigation, which should be noted as a condition for any subsequent development plans. Recycled water service, therefore, would be available upon construction of any required on-site and/or off-site recycled water facilities and the completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. Requirements for the use of recycled water are available from RCWD. As soon as feasible, the project proponent should contact RCWD for a determination of existing water system capability, based upon project-specific demands and/or fire flow requirements, as well as a determination of proposed water facilities configuration. If new facilities are required for service, fire protection, or other purposes, the project proponent should contact RCWD for an assessment of project-specific fees and requirements. Please note that separate water meters will be required for all landscape irrigation. Sewer service to the subject project/property, if available, would be provided by Eastern Municipal Water District. If no sewer service is currently available to the subject project/property, all proposed waste discharge systems must comply with the State Water Resources Control Board and/or the basin plan objectives and the permit conditions issued by the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board. If you should have any questions or need additional information, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at the District office at(951) 296-6900. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Phillip Dauben Assistant Engineer cc: Corey Wallace,Engineering Manager-Design Warren Back,Engineering Manager-Planning Heath McMahon,Construction Contracts Manager Cony Smith,Engineering Services Supervisor Eric Saenz,Landwest Consulting 13',PD:hab011 F450\FEG Rancho California Water District 42135 Winchester Road•Post Office Box 9017•Temecula,California 92589-9017•(951)296-1,900•FAX(951)296-6860 oPN W4TF. c pQp AO,,i. ti4' �r r S THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT r`r • OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Office of the General Manager f-5 Your Project No. PA13-0155 MWD San Diego Pipeline Nos. 4 and 5 Sta. 1587+00 to 1591+00 R/W Parcel 142-4-1 (Fee) Substr. Job No. 4046-13-001 August 1, 2013 Mr. Eric Jones Project Planner City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Dear Mr. Jones: Shearwater Creek Thank you for your project transmittal letter dated July 9, 2013, submitting prints of the Tentative Tract Map No. 36568 (Sheet 1 of 1), conceptual grading plan (Sheet 1 of 1), site plans (Sheets 1 through 10) and conceptual planting plans (Sheets L 1 and L2) for the proposed development located at 29026 and 29098 Pujol Street in the city of Temecula. Included with your submittal were copies of the City of Temecula's development plan and tentative map applications and a statement of operations for this project. The location of Metropolitan's 97-inch-inside-diameter San Diego Pipeline No. 5 and the westerly boundary of Metropolitan's fee right-of-way, as shown on Sheets 1 of the Tentative Tract Map No. 36568 and conceptual grading plan, appears to be in general agreement with our records. However we request that our San Diego Pipeline Nos. 4 and 5 and accompanying fee right-of-way also be 700 N.Alameda Street,Los Angeles,California 90012•Mailing Address:Box 54153,Los Angeles,California 90054-0153•Telephone(213)217-6000 Mr. Eric Jones Page 2 August 1, 2013 shown and identified as Metropolitan's on all pertinent sheets of the plans. Enclosed for your information and use are prints our Drawings B-66612 and B-66613 and Right-of-Map 124-4 (Sheet 4 of 6). There appear to be no conflicts with the grading and improvements of Pujol Street, as shown on Sheets 1 of the conceptual grading plans and Tentative Tract Map No. 36568, since our San Diego Pipeline No. 5 is located outside the construction limits of your improvement. Our records indicate that Metropolitan granted an easement to the City of Temecula for Pujol Street within our fee property. We have no objections with the proposed storm drain line discharging water onto an existing drainage ditch located within our fee right-of-way, as shown on Sheets 1 of the conceptual grading plans and Tentative Tract Map No. 36568. We request a stipulation be added to all pertinent plans to notify Darwin Potter or Gerri Michael of our Water System Operations Group, telephone (951) 926-5853, at least two working days prior to starting any work in the vicinity of our facilities and right-of-way. We are returning prints of Sheet 1 of 1 of the Tentative Tract Map No. 36568, Sheet 1 of 1 of the conceptual grading plan, Sheet 1 of the site plans and Sheets L 1 and L2 of the conceptual planting plans, stamped "REVIEWED— CORRECTIONS NOTED —NO RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED." Facilities constructed within Metropolitan's fee property shall be subject to the paramount right of Metropolitan to use the fee property for the purpose for which it was acquired. If at any time Metropolitan or its assigns should, in the exercise of their rights, find it necessary to remove any of the facilities from the fee property, such removal and replacement shall be at the expense of the owner of the facility. Mr. Eric Jones Page 3 August 1, 2013 For any further correspondence with Metropolitan relating to this project, please make reference to the Substructures Job Number shown in the upper right-hand corner of the first page of this letter. Should you require any additional information, please contact Ken Chung, telephone (213) 217-7670. Very truly yours, Kieran M. Callanan, P.E. Manager, Substructures Team KC/km DOC#:4046-13-001 Enclosures (8) WARREN D.WILLIAMS - - 1995 MARKET STREET General Manager-Chief Engineer RIVERSIDE,CA 92501 951.955.1200 FAX 951.788.9965 www.rcflood.org f RIVERSIDE COUNT . f '000 OQNTROL 51180 AND WATER CONS r t VA ION bIS . CT City of Temecula t, Planning Department Post Office Box 9033 Temecula,California 92589-9033 Attention: rR/ (. 1 0 N C..S • Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: 3 (o�� Cr) 1 3 _ �'/5.s-) The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in incorporated cities. The District also does not plan check city land use cases, or provide State Division of Real Estate letters or other flood hazard reports for such cases. District comments/recommendations for such cases are normally limited to items of specific interest to the District including District Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood control and drainage facilities which could be considered a logical component or extension of a master plan system, and District Area Drainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition,information of a general nature is provided. The District has not reviewed the proposed 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 such issue: No comment. NZ This project would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of regional interest proposed. This project involves District Master Plan facilities. The District will accept ownership of such facilities on written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acceptance. Plan check,inspection and administrative fees will be required. This project proposes channels, storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter or other facilities that could be considered regional in nature and/or a logical extension of the adopted Master Drainage Plan. The District would consider accepting ownership of such facilities on written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required. \/ This project is located within the limits of the District'sHur'7.►∎1CI A (—KU.k f VI ECCI—Ps 4 Pt l nArea Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been adopted; applicable fees should be paid by cashier's check or money order only to the Flood Control District or City prior to issuance of grading permits. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of issuance of the actual permit. An encroachment permit shall be obtained for any construction related activities occurring within District right of way or facilities. For further information,contact the District's encroachment permit section at 951.955.1266. GENERAL INFORMATION This project may require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Clearance for grading, recordation or other final approval should not be given until the City has determined that the project has been granted a permit or is shown to be exempt. If this project involves a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mapped flood plain, then the City should require the applicant to provide all studies,calculations, plans and other information required to meet FEMA requirements, and should further require that the applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) prior to grading, recordation or other final approval of the project,and a Letter of Map Revision(LOMR)prior to occupancy. If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain is impacted by this project, the City should require the applicant to obtain a Section 1602 Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Game and a Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or written correspondence from these agencies indicating the project is exempt from these requirements. A Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification may be required from the local California Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of the Corps 404 permit. Very truly yours, /r/ HE '4 • i Engineering Project Manager c: Riverside County Planning Department Date: //2u/J Attn: Kristi Lovelady PC RESOLUTION NO. 14- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA13-0156, A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 36568 (CONDO MAP) TO ALLOW FOR A 140-UNIT ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL PROJECT LOCATED ON APPROXIMATELY 7 ACRES AT THE SOUTHERNMOST POINT OF PUJOL STREET, ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE STREET (APNS 922-110-013, 922-110-014) Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On June 18, 2013, Rob Honer representing Ambient Communities filed Planning Application No. PA13-0156, a Tentative Tract Map 36568 (for Condominium Purposes) located on approximately 7 acres at the southernmost point of Pujol Street in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. The Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. C. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on March 19, 2014, 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. D. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission approved Planning Application No. PA13-0155 subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder. E. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby finds, determines and declares that: Tentative Tract Map, Development Code Section (16.09.140) A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance and the City of Temecula Municipal Code; The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, and the City of Temecula Municipal Code. The one-lot condo map on a 7.05 gross acre site will result in a density of 20 dwelling units per acre, which is within the allowable density range of 13-20 units per acre consistent with the High Density Residential standards. B. The Tentative Map does not propose to divide land, which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965; The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the Tentative Map. C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the Tentative Map; The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with Conditions of Approval, will not be likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. D. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with Conditions of Approval, will not be likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with Conditions of Approval, will not likely cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, because the Initial Study and associated mitigation outlined in the special reports prepared for the project have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval and Mitigated Negative Declaration with Mitigation Monitoring Program. E. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems; The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems because the proposed development is consistent with all applicable building, development and fire codes, which include provisions to safeguard public health, and will be further reviewed and inspected by City staff for compliance with all applicable building, development and fire codes prior to issuance of grading, building, and occupancy permits. F. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible; The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. The project has been designed to ensure that all setbacks have been met and that light and air access is available to the extent possible. In addition, the construction will be required to conform to all state energy efficiency codes as well. G. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. All required easements and dedication are required as Conditions of Approval. H. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby); The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby), because payment of Quimby fees will be required prior to issuance of a building permit. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Development Plan Application, PA13-0156: A. Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the approval of the Development Plan Application, as described in the Initial Study ("the Project"). Based upon the findings contained in that study, City staff determined that there was no substantial evidence that the Project could have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. B. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration as required by law. The public comment period commenced on February 14, 2014, and expired on March 17, 2014. Copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Planning, located at City Hall, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590. C. One written comment was received prior to the public hearing and a response to all the comments made therein was prepared, submitted to the Planning Commission and incorporated into the administrative record of the proceedings. D. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the March 19, 2014 public hearing, and based on the whole record before it finds that: (1) the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; (2) there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment; and (3) Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. E. Based on the findings set forth in the Resolution, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project. Section 4. Conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approves Planning Application No. PA13-0156, a Tentative Tract Map 36568 (for Condominium Purposes) located on approximately 7 acres at the southernmost point of Pujol Street subject to the Conditions of Approval set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 19th day of March, 2014. Stanley Harter, Chairman ATTEST: Armando G. Villa, AICP Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Armando G. Villa, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 14- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of March, 2014, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS Armando G. Villa, AICP Secretary EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA13-0156 Project Description: A Tentative Tract Map (Condo Map) to allow for a 140-unit attached residential project located on approximately 7 acres at the southernmost point of Pujol Street, on the west side of the street Assessor's Parcel No.: 922-110-013 and 922-110-014 MSHCP Category: Residential (greater than 14.1 du/ac) DIF Category: Residential — attached TUMF Category: Residential — multi-family Quimby Category: Residential — multi-family Approval Date: March 19, 2014 Expiration Date: March 19, 2017 (three year approval for TTM) PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within 48 Hours of the Approval of This Project PL-1. Filing Notice of Determination. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Two Thousand Two Hundred Thirty-One Dollars and Twenty-Five Cents ($2,231.25) which includes the Two Thousand One Hundred Eighty-One Dollars and Twenty-Five Cents ($2,181.25) fee, required by Fish and Wildlife Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Fifty Dollars ($50.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination for the Mitigated Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said 48-hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void due to failure of condition [Fish and Wildlife Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirements PL-2. Indemnification of the City. 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. PL-3. Modifications or Revisions. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this project. PL-4. Expiration. This approval shall be used within three 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 three years period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval, or use of a property in conformance with a Conditional Use Permit. PL-5. Time Extension. The Director of Community Development may, upon an application being filed prior to expiration, and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to 5 one- year extensions of time, one year at a time. PL-6. Conformance with Approved Plans. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved map, site plan and elevations contained on file with the Planning Division. PL-7. Landscape Maintenance. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained,the Director of Community Development shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest. PL-8. Water Quality and Drainage. Other than stormwater, it is illegal to allow liquids, gels, powders, sediment, fertilizers, landscape debris, and waste from entering the storm drain system or from leaving the property. To ensure compliance with this Condition of Approval: a. Spills and leaks shall be cleaned up immediately. b. Do not wash, maintain, or repair vehicles onsite. c. Do not hose down parking areas, sidewalks, alleys, or gutters. d. Ensure that all materials and products stored outside are protected from rain. e. Ensure all trash bins are covered at all times. PL-9. Phased Construction. If construction is phased, a construction staging area plan or phasing plan for construction equipment and trash shall be approved by the Director of Community Development. PL-10. Subdivision Map Act. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No.460, unless modified by the conditions listed below. An Extension of Time may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request, if made 60 days prior to the expiration date. PL-11. Subdivision Phasing. If subdivision phasing is proposed, a phasing plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Community Development Director. PL-12. Construction and Demolition Debris. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris and shall provide the Planning Division verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul demolition and construction debris. PL-13. Public Art Ordinance. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City's Public Art Ordinance as defined in Section 5.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code. PL-14. Property Maintenance. All parkways, including within the right-of-way,entryway median, landscaping, walls, fencing, recreational facilities, and on-site lighting shall be maintained by the property owner or maintenance association. PL-15. Trash Enclosures. The trash enclosures shall be large enough to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as regular solid waste containers. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) PL-16. Placement of Transformer. Provide the Planning Division with a copy of the underground water plans and electrical plans for verification of proper placement of transformer(s) and double detector check prior to final agreement with the utility companies. PL-17. Placement of Double Detector Check Valves. Double detector check valves shall be installed at locations that minimize their visibility from the public right-of-way, subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development. PL-18. Archaeoloqical/Cultural Resources Grading Note. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "If at any time during excavation/construction of the site, archaeological/cultural 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 Community Development at his/her sole discretion may require the property owner 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 archaeological/cultural resource, the Planning Director shall notify the property owner of such determination and shall authorize the resumption of work. Upon determining that the discovery is an archaeological/cultural resource, the Planning Director 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 Planning Director." PL-19. Cultural Resources Treatment Agreement. The developer is required to enter into a Cultural Resources Treatment Agreement with the Pechanga Tribe. This Agreement will address the treatment and disposition of cultural resources and human remains that may be impacted as a result of the development of the project, as well as provisions for tribal monitors. (See Mitigation Monitoring Plan) PL-20. Discovery of Cultural Resources. 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. (See Mitigation Monitoring Plan) PL-21. Archaeological Monitoring of Cultural Resources. A qualified archaeological monitor will be present and will have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities, in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe and their designated monitors, to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. (See Mitigation Monitoring Plan) PL-22. Tribal Monitoring of Cultural Resources. Tribal monitors from the Pechanga Tribe shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities, including all archaeological surveys, testing, and studies, to be compensated by the developer. (See Mitigation Monitoring Plan) PL-23. Relinquishment of Cultural Resources. The landowner agrees to relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area, to the Pechanga Tribe for proper treatment and disposition. (See Mitigation Monitoring Plan) PL-24. Preservation of Sacred Sites. All sacred sites are to be avoided and preserved. (See Mitigation Monitoring Plan) PL-25. MSHCP Pre-Construction Survey. A 30-day preconstruction survey, in accordance with MSHCP guidelines and survey protocol,shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance. The results of the 30-day preconstruction survey shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to scheduling the pre-grading meeting with Public Works. PL-26. Burrowing Owl Grading Note. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "No grubbing/clearing of the site shall occur prior to scheduling the pre-grading meeting with Public Works. All project sites containing suitable habitat for burrowing owls, whether owls were found or not, require a 30-day preconstruction survey that shall be conducted within 30 days prior to ground disturbance to avoid direct take of burrowing owls. If the results of the survey indicate that no burrowing owls are present on-site,then the project may move forward with grading, upon Planning Division approval. If burrowing owls are found to be present or nesting on-site during the preconstruction survey, then the following recommendations must be adhered to: Exclusion and relocation activities may not occur during the breeding season, which is defined as March 1 through August 31, with the following exception: From March 1 through March 15 and from August 1 through August 31 exclusion and relocation activities may take place if it is proven to the City and appropriate regulatory agencies(if any) that egg laying or chick rearing is not taking place. This determination must be made by a qualified biologist." PL-27. Rough Grading Plans. A copy of the Rough Grading Plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Division. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) PL-28. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). The City of Temecula adopted an ordinance on March 31, 2003 to collect fees for a Riverside County area wide Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). This project is subject to payment of these fees at the time of building permit issuance. The fees are subject to the provisions of Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. PL-29. Development Impact Fee (DIF). The developer shall comply with the provisions of Title 15, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all its resolutions by paying the appropriate City fee. PL-30. Quimby Requirements. The developer shall satisfy the City's parkland dedication (Quimby) requirement. PL-31. Maintenance/Facility Removal Agreement. The maintenance/facility removal agreement or enforceable provisions in a signed lease that will assure the intent of the Telecommunication Facility and Antenna Ordinance will be complied with, shall be signed by the applicant and shall be submitted to the Director of Community Development. The agreement shall comply with all provisions set forth in Section 17.40.210 of the Ordinance. PL-32. Photometric Plan. The applicant shall submit a photometric plan, including the parking lot, to the Planning Division, which meets the requirements of the Development Code and the Riverside County Palomar Lighting Ordinance 655. The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely affect the growth potential of the parking lot trees. PL-33. Downspouts. All downspouts shall be internalized. PL-34. Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans. Four (4) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division. These plans shall be submitted as a separate submittal, not as part of the building plans or other plan set. These plans shall conform to the approved conceptual landscape plan, or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, height and spread,water usage or KC value, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance and Water Storage Contingency Plan per the Rancho California Water District. The plans shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal) and one copy of the approved Grading Plan. PL-35. Parking Area Landscaping. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall 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. PL-36. Landscaping Site Inspections. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note stating, "Three landscape site inspections are required. The first inspection will be conducted at installation of irrigation while trenches are open. This will verify that irrigation equipment and layout is per plan specifications and details. Any adjustments or discrepancies in actual conditions will be addressed at this time and will require an approval to continue. Where applicable, a mainline pressure check will also be conducted. This will 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 are operating properly, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The third inspection will verify property landscape maintenance for release of the one-year landscape maintenance bond." The applicant/owner shall contact the Planning Division to schedule inspections. PL-37. Agronomic Soils Report. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note on the plans stating, "The contractor shall provide two copies of an agronomic soils report at the first irrigation inspection." PL-38. Water Usage Calculations. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance), the total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with approved plan). Applicant shall use evapotranspiration (ETo) factor of 0.70 for calculating the maximum allowable water budget. PL-39. Landscape Maintenance Program. A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted to the Planning Division for approval. The landscape maintenance program shall detail 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. PL-40. Specifications of Landscape Maintenance Program. Specifications of the landscape maintenance program shall indicate, "Three landscape site inspections are required. The first inspection will be conducted at installation of irrigation while trenches are open. This will verify that irrigation equipment and layout is per plan specifications and details. Any adjustments or discrepancies in actual conditions will be addressed at this time and will require an approval to continue. Where applicable, a mainline pressure check will also be conducted. This will 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 are operating properly, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The third inspection will verify property landscape maintenance for release of the one-year landscape maintenance bond." The applicant/owner shall contact the Planning Division to schedule inspections. PL-41. Irrigation. Automatic irrigation shall be installed for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from view of the public from streets and adjacent property for (private common areas; front yards and slopes within individual lots; shrub planting to completely screen perimeter walls adjacent to a public right-of- way equal to 66 feet or larger; and, all landscaping excluding City maintained areas and front yard landscaping which shall include, but may not be limited to, private slopes and common areas). PL-42. Temporary Landscaping Requirement for Phased Development. If any phase or area of the project site is not scheduled for development within six months of the completion of grading, it shall be temporarily landscaped and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control. PL-43. Hardscaping. The plans shall include all hardscaping for equestrian trails and pedestrian trails within private common areas. PL-44. Wall and Fence Plans. Wall and fence plans shall be consistent with the Conceptual Landscape Plans showing the height, location and the following materials for all walls and fences: Decorative block for the perimeter of the project adjacent to a public right-of-way equal to 66 feet or larger and the side yards for corner lots. Wrought iron or decorative block and wrought iron combination to take advantage of views for side and rear yards. Wood fencing shall be used for all side and rear yard fencing when not restricted/conditioned outlined above. PL-45. Precise Grading Plans. Precise Grading Plans shall be consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements. PL-46. WQMP Treatment Devices. All WQMP treatment devices, including design details, shall be shown on the construction landscape plans. If revisions are made to the WQMP design that result in any changes to the conceptual landscape plans after entitlement,the revisions will be shown on the construction landscape plans, subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development. PL-47. Roof-Mounted Mechanical Equipment. Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the subdivision; however, solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with Director of Community Development approval. PL-48. Utility Screening. 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 ensure that there are no conflicts with trees. PL-49. Building Construction Plans for Outdoor Areas. Building Construction Plans shall include detailed outdoor areas (including but not limited to trellises,decorative furniture, fountains, hardscape to match the style of the building subject to the approval of the Planning Director. Prior to Release of Power, Building Occupancy or Any Use Allowed by This Permit PL-50. Letter of Substantial Conformance. The applicant shall submit a letter of substantial conformance, subject to field verification by the Director of Community Development or his/her designee. Said letter of substantial conformance shall be prepared by the project designer and shall indicate that all plant materials and irrigation system components have been installed in accordance with the approved final landscape and irrigation plans. Such letter of substantial conformance shall be submitted prior to scheduling for the final inspection. PL-51. Landscape Installation Consistent with Construction Plans. 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 Planning Director. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. PL-52. Front Yard and Slope Landscaping. Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots shall be completed for inspection. PL-53. Private Common Area Landscaping. Private common area landscaping shall be completed for inspection prior to issuance of the adjacent occupancy permit. PL-54. HOA Landscaping. HOA landscaping shall be completed for inspection for those lots adjacent to HOA landscaped area. PL-55. Performance Securities. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Community Development,to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Planning Division 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 Community Development, the bond shall be released upon request by the applicant. PL-56. Installation of Site Improvements. All site improvements, including but not limited to, parking areas and striping shall be installed. PL-57. TCSD Service Levels. It shall be the developer's responsibility to provide written disclosure of the existence of the Temecula Community Service District(TCSD)and its service level rates and charges to all prospective purchasers. PL-58. Compliance with Conditions of Approval. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map PL-59. Final Map. A copy of the Final Map shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Planning Division. PL-60. Environmental Constraint Sheet. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet(ECS) shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Planning Division with the following notes: a. This property is located within 30 miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations, Ordinance No. 655. PL-61. Submittal of CC&Rs. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall be submitted and approved by the Director of Community Development. The CC&Rs shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, exterior of all buildings, and all landscaped and open areas, including parkways. PL-62. Form and Content of CC&Rs. The CC&Rs shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Community Development, City Engineer, and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem necessary to protect the interests of the City and its residents. PL-63. Preparation of CC&Rs. The CC&Rs shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense. PL-64. Review of CC&Rs. The CC&Rs and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owners Association are subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development, Public Works Director, and the City Attorney. PL-65. CC&Rs and Management and Maintenance of Common Areas. The CC&Rs shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair, and maintenance of all common areas, drainage facilities, and pollution prevention devices outlined in the project's Water Quality Management Plan. PL-66. CC&Rs and Public Nuisance. The CC&Rs shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated, and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. PL-67. Termination of CC&Rs. The CC&Rs shall provide that the association may not be terminated without prior City approval. PL-68. CC&Rs and Maintenance of Property. The CC&Rs shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&Rs, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&Rs or the City Ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. PL-69. Interest in Association. Every owner of a suite or lot governed by CC&Rs shall own as an appurtenance to such suite or lot, either: (1) an undivided interest in the common areas and facilities, or (2) a share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association owning the common areas and facilities. PL-70. Maintenance of Open Areas. All open areas and landscaping governed by CC&R shall be permanently maintained by the association or other means acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to the Planning Divisions and Public Works Department prior to the issuance of building permits. PL-71. Reciprocal Easements. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives, parking areas, drainage facilities, and water quality features, shall be provided by the CC&Rs or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrent with the map or prior to the issuance of building permit where no map is involved. PL-72. Consent of City of Temecula. An Article must be added to every set of CC&Rs to read as follows: Article CONSENT OF CITY OF TEMECULA 1. The Conditions of Approval of Tentative Tract Map Number requires the City to review and approve the CC&Rs for the Parcel. 2. Declarant acknowledges that the City has reviewed these CC&Rs and that its review is limited to a determination of whether the proposed CC&Rs properly implement the requirements of the Conditions of Approval for the Parcel. The City's consent to these CC&Rs does not contain or imply any approval of the appropriateness or legality of the other provisions of the CC&Rs, including, without limitation, the use restrictions, private easements and encroachments, private maintenance requirements, architecture and landscape controls, assessment procedures, assessment enforcement, resolution of disputes or procedural matters. 3. In the event of a conflict between the Conditions of Approval of the land use entitlements issued by the City for the Parcel or Federal, State, or local laws, ordinances, and regulations and these CC&Rs, the provisions of the Conditions of Approval and Federal, State or local laws, ordinances, and regulations shall prevail, notwithstanding the language of the CC&Rs. 4. These CC&Rs shall not be terminated, amended or otherwise modified without the express written consent of the Director Community Development of the City of Temecula. PL-73. Consent of City of Temecula.An Article must be added to every set of CC&Rs,following the Declarant's signature, to read as follows: CONSENT OF CITY OF TEMECULA The Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. require the City of Temecula to review and approve the CC&Rs for the Parcel. The City's review of these CC&Rs has been limited to a determination of whether the proposed CC&Rs properly implement the requirements of the Conditions of Approval for the Parcel. The City's consent to these CC&Rs does not contain or imply any approval of the appropriateness or legality of the other provisions of the CC&Rs, including,without limitation,the use restrictions, private easements and encroachments, private maintenance requirements, architecture and landscape controls, assessments, enforcement of assessments, resolutions of disputes or procedural matters. Subject to the limitations set forth herein, the City consents to the CC&Rs. Armando G. Villa Director Community Development Approved as to Form: Peter M. Thorson City Attorney PL-74. Operation of Association. No lot or suite in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owners group or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&Rs,which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or suites and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&Rs shall permit enforcement by the City for provisions required as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. PL-75. Recordation of CC&Rs. CC&Rs shall be finalized and recorded at the time of Final Map Recordation. PL-76. Copies of CC&Rs. Three copies of the final recorded CC&Rs shall be provided to the Planning Division. PL-77. Smoking in Residential Units. Per Municipal Code Chapter 17.30, "Smoking in Multi- Unit Residences," the developer shall submit a site plan to the City for review and approval, designating a minimum of 25 percent of the units within the project as non- smoking units. OUTSIDE AGENCIES PL-78. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health's transmittals dated July 8, 2013,copies of which are attached. PL-79. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Eastern Municipal Water District's transmittal dated July 1, 2012 but received on July 3, 2013, a copy of which is attached. (City suspects 2012 was a "typo" and should have indicated 2013). PL-80. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water District's transmittal dated July 3, 2013, a copy of which is attached. PL-81. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Metropolitan Water District's transmittal dated August 1, 2013, a copy of which is attached. PL-82. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District's transmittal dated July 16,2013, a copy of which is attached. FIRE PREVENTION General Requirements F-1. Previous Conditions Of Approval. All previous existing conditions for this project or any underlying map will remain in full force and effect unless superseded by more stringent requirements here. F-2. Fire Dept. Plan Review. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. F-3. Fire Flow. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all residential buildings per CFC Appendix B. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 4,000 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure for a 4-hour duration for multi-family projects. The fire flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided (CFC Appendix B and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-4. Fire Hydrants. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix C. Standard fire hydrants (6" x 4" 2 '/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart at each intersection, and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant for multi-family projects. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required (CFC Appendix C and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-5. Construction Phasing. If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection prior to any building construction. This will include all internal roads, connecting roads between phases, and construction gates. All required access must be in and available prior to and during all construction. Phasing is approved on a separate map, and is ultimately subject to final approval in the field (CFC Chapter 5). Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) F-6. Turning Radius (Culdesac). Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum outside turning radius on any cul-de-sac shall be 37 feet for single-family dwelling tracts and 45 feet for multi-family dwelling tracts. (CFC Chapter 5 along with the Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-7. Access Road Widths (Private Driveway). Private entry driveways with divider medians must be a minimum of 16 feet wide on each side and the median must be held back 30 feet from face of curb of perpendicular road, if no median, then a minimum of 24-feet is required.. F-8. Access Road Widths. Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 24 feet with an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches (CFC Chapter 5 and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-9. All Weather Access Roads. Fire apparatus access roads and driveways shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be with a surface to provide all-weather driving capabilities. Access roads shall be 80,000 lbs. GVW with a minimum of AC thickness of .25 feet. In accordance with Section 3310.1, prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have fire apparatus access roads (CFC Chapter 5 and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-10. Turning Radius (Dead End Roadway). Dead end roadways and streets in excess of 150 feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus (CFC Chapter 5 and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-11. Two Point Access. This development and any street within serving more than 35 dwelling units shall have two points of access, vial all-weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau (CFC Chapter 5). General Requirements PW-1. Conditions of Approval. The developer shall comply with all Conditions of Approval,the Engineering and Construction Manual and all City codes/standards at no cost to any governmental agency. PW-2. Subdivision Map. The developer shall submit a complete Tract Map submittal for review and approval. Any omission to the representation of the site conditions may require the plans to be resubmitted for further review and revision. PW-3. Grading Permit. A grading permit for rough and/or precise grading shall be obtained from Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within private property. Grading shall be in accordance with the approved grading plan, grading permit conditions and City codes/standards. PW-4. Encroachment Permits. Prior to commencement of any applicable construction, encroachment permit(s) are required; and shall be obtained: a. from Public Works for public offsite improvements; and b. from Riverside County Flood Control &Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD) within their right-of-way. PW-5. Improvement Plans. The developer shall submit improvement plans (to include public/private street plans, storm drain plans, signage and striping plans, etc.) as required for review and approval by Public Works. The designs shall be in compliance with Caltrans, Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and City codes/standards. PW-6. Drainage and Water Quality Facility Maintenance. All onsite drainage and water quality facilities shall be privately maintained. PW-7. Emergency Access. The southerly 24-foot wide opening on Pujol Street is restricted to emergency access only. Prior to Recordation of the Tract Map PW-8. Right-of-Way Dedications. All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public or other appropriate agency and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by Public Works. PW-9. Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS). The developer shall prepare and record an ECS with the Tract Map to delineate identified environmental concerns. The developer shall comply with all constraints per the recorded ECS along with any underlying maps related to the property. PW-10. Required Clearances. As deemed necessary by Public Works, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District; b. Riverside County Health Department; c. Rancho California Water District; d. Eastern Municipal Water District; e. Cable TV Franchise; f. Verizon; g. Southern California Edison Company; h. The Gas Company; or other affected agencies. PW-11. Right of Access. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Pujol Street on the Tract Map with the exception of two (2) openings as delineated on the approved Tentative Tract Map. PW-12. Right of Access. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Calle Cerillo on the Tract Map with no openings as delineated on the approved Tentative Tract Map. PW-13. Easements. Note the following: a. An easement shall be dedicated for public utilities and emergency vehicle access for all private streets and drives. b. Private easements for cross-lot drainage shall be delineated and noted on the Final Map. c. Easements (when required for roadway slopes, landscape, drainage facilities, utilities, etc.) shall be shown on the Tract Map if they are located within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted for review and recorded, as directed by Public Works. Onsite drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the Final Map. A note shall be added to the Final Map stating: "Drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions." PW-14. RCFC&WCD Approval. A copy of the grading and improvement plans, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations, shall be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for approval prior to issuance of any permit. PW-15. Public Street Improvements and Securities. The developer shall design and guarantee construction (i.e., posting of security and entering into agreements) of the following public improvements to the City's General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be approved by Public Works. All street improvement designs shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans'standards to join existing street improvements. a. Improve Pujol Street along the existing street alignment (Station 10+00 to Station 18+12.84) ((Local Street) Modified Standard No. 104 — 60' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements plus twelve feet, paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk on the west side, mountable dike on the east side, streetlights, drainage facilities, signing and striping and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). b. Improve Pujol Street along the new street alignment (Station 18+12.84 to Station 20+13.59) ((Local Street) Modified Standard No. 104 — 60' R/W) to include dedication of full-width street right-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk on the west side, mountable dike on the east side, streetlights, drainage facilities, signing and striping and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). PW-16. Parkway Landscaping. All parkway landscaping areas shall be privately maintained. PW-17. Undergrounding Wires. All existing and proposed electrical and telecommunication lines, except electrical lines rated 34KV or greater, shall be installed underground per Title 15, Chapter 15.04 of the Temecula Municipal Code and utility provider's standards. The developer is responsible for any associated costs, for making arrangements with each utility agency and for obtaining the necessary easements. PW-18. Undergroundinq Utility Systems. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer and cable TV shall be provided underground (with the required easements); and shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City codes and utility provider's standards. Telephone, cable TV and/or security systems shall be pre- wired in the residence. The developer shall notify the City's cable TV franchisees of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable TV standards at time of street improvements. PW-19. Property Taxes. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. PW-20. Acquisition of Offsite Property. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire required offsite property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the developer shall, prior to submittal of the Tract Map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Subdivision Map Act, Sections 66462 and 66462.5. The agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the offsite property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer (at developer's cost). The appraiser shall be approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. PW-21. Parcel Geometry. The applicant shall submit an editable projected digital version of the parcel geometry in a drawing exchange format (pursuant to Riverside County standards). Prior to final approval, the City's GIS Division shall conduct quality control on the data to verify accuracy and compatibility. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) PW-22. Required Clearances. As deemed necessary by Public Works, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District or other affected agencies. PW-23. Grading/Erosion & Sediment Control Plan. The developer shall submit a grading/erosion & sediment control plan(s) to be reviewed and approved by Public Works. All plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. The approved plan shall include all final WQMP water quality facilities and all construction-phase pollution-prevention controls to adequately address non-permitted runoff. Refer to the City's Engineering & Construction Manual at: http://www.cityoftemecula.org/Temecula/Government/PublicWorks/engineeringconstma nual.htm PW-24. Grading/Erosion & Sediment Control Securities. The developer shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 24, Section 18.24.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code by posting security and entering into an agreement to guarantee the grading and erosion & sediment control improvements. PW-25. Habitat Conservation Fee. The developer shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in the ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. PW-26. Area Drainage Plan (ADP) Fee to RCFC&WCD. The developer shall demonstrate to the City that the flood mitigation charge (ADP fee) has been paid to RCFC&WCD. If the full ADP fee has already been credited to this property, no new charge will be required. PW-27. Letter of Permission/Easement. The developer shall obtain documents (letters of permission or easements)for any offsite work performed on adjoining properties. The document's format is as directed by, and shall be submitted to, Public Works for acceptance. The document information shall be noted on the approved grading plan. PW-28. NPDES General Permit Compliance. The developer shall obtain project coverage under the State National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Construction Activities and shall provide the following: a. A copy of the Waste Discharge Identification number(W DID) issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB); b. The project's Risk Level (RL) determination number; and c. The name, contact information and certification number of the Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD). Pursuant to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) requirements and City's storm water ordinance, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)shall be generated and submitted to the Board. Throughout the project duration,the SWPPP shall be routinely updated and readily available (onsite) to the State and City. Review www.cabmphandbooks.com for SWPPP guidelines. Refer to the following link. http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/programs/stormwater/construction.shtml PW-29. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and O&M Agreement. The developer shall submit a final WQMP (prepared by a registered professional engineer) with the initial grading plan submittal, based on the conceptual WQMP from the entitlement process. It must receive acceptance by Public Works. A copy of the final project-specific WQMP must be kept onsite at all times. In addition, a completed WQMP Operation and Maintenance (O&M)Agreement shall be submitted for review and approval. Refer to the WQMP template and agreement link below: http://www.cityoftemecula.org/Temecula/Government/PublicWorks/WQMPandNPDES/ WQMP.htm PW-30. Soils Report. A soils report, prepared by a registered soil or civil engineer, shall be submitted to Public Works with the initial grading plan submittal. The report shall address the site's soil conditions and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. PW-31. Drainage Study. A drainage study shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and submitted to Public Works with the initial grading plan check in accordance with City, Riverside County and engineering standards. The study shall identify storm water runoff quantities (to mitigate the 100-year storm event)from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed offsite or onsite, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. a. Pujol Street drainage facilities Analyze adequacy of the existing storm drain facility discharging into Murrieta Creek and construct required private storm drain improvements. ii. Permission to construct the extension of the private storm drain facility to Murrieta Creek shall be obtained from respective property owner(s) iii. A private drainage and maintenance easement shall be acquired from the property owner and recorded. iv. Developer shall provide a recorded document accepting offsite drainage. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) PW-32. Final Map. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, Tract Map No. 36568 shall be approved and recorded. PW-33. Street Improvements. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, Pujol Street improvements shall be completed. PW-34. Street Lights. The developer shall submit a completed SCE street light application, an approved SCE Streetlight Plan and pay the advanced energy fees. If not obtaining a building permit, this shall be done prior to installation of additional street lighting. All costs associated with the relocation of any existing street lights shall be paid by the developer. PW-35. Precise Grading Plan. A precise grading plan shall be submitted to Public Works for review and approval. The plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan; and shall show all lot drainage directed to the driveway by side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot. The building pad shall be certified by a registered civil engineer for location and elevation; and the soils engineer shall issue a final soils report addressing compaction and site conditions. Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy PW-36. Completion of Improvements. The developer shall complete all work per the approved plans and Conditions of Approval to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. This includes all onsite work(including water quality facilities), public improvements and the executed WQMP Operation and Maintenance agreement. PW-37. Utility Agency Clearances. The developer shall receive written clearance from applicable utility agencies (i.e., Rancho California and Eastern Municipal Water Districts, etc.) for the completion of their respective facilities and provide to Public Works. PW-38. Replacement of Damaged Improvements/Monuments. Any appurtenance damaged or broken during development shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of Public Works. Any survey monuments damaged or destroyed shall be reset per City Standards by a qualified professional pursuant to the California Business and Professional Code Section 8771. PW-39. Certifications. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by Public Works. jib�`� COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE `..., DEPAT'TMENT OF ENVIR''NMENTAL HEALTH Steve Van Stockum, Director July 8, 2013 City of Temecula Planning Department A Attn: Eric Saenz, Project Planner P.O. Box 9033 ' Temecula, CA 92589 .�C/� I ,1 SUBJECT: PA13-0155—SHEARWATER CREEK DP & PA13-0156—SHEARWATER CREEK CONDO MAP -,, (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER#922-110-013) Dear Mr. Saenz: Planning Application(PA) 13-0155 is proposing a development plan to construct a 141 unit attached residential project which will include a pool and clubhouse for the project residents. PA 13-0156 is proposing a"Condo Map"to allow for the 141 unit attached residential project. The project is located on the southern end of Pujol Street. In accordance with the agreement between the County of Riverside, Department of Environmental Health(DEH) and the City of Temecula, DEH offers the following comments for the project(s)referenced in the subject heading of this letter: POTABLE WATER AND SANITARY SEWER SERVICE This project is proposing Rancho California Water District (RCWD) potable water service and Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) sanitary sewer service. Per Memorandum of Understanding between the County of Riverside and EMWD, no "will-serve" letters for sewer service are required for projects located within EMWD's service area. However, a"Will-Serve" shall be required from RCWD for potable water service. Please note that it is the responsibility of the developer to ensure that all requirements to obtain potable water and sanitary sewer service are met with the appropriate water and sewer purveyor, as well as, all other applicable agencies. Office Locations • Blythe • Corona • Hemet • Indio • Murrieta • Palm Springs • Riverside • Phone: (888)722-4234 www.rivcoeh.org COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DEPAT'TMENT OF ENVIRr'NMENTAL HEALTH Steve Van Stockum, Director INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE -NOISE A general condition shall be placed on the project(s) addressing the following: 1) Facility-related noise, as projected to any portion of any surrounding property containing a"sensitive receiver, habitable dwelling, hospital, school, library or nursing home",must not exceed the following worst-case noise levels: 45 dB(A)— 10 minute noise equivalent level ("leq"), between the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (nighttime standard), and 65 dB(A)— 10 minute leq, between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. (daytime standard). 2) Whenever a construction site is within one-quarter(1/4) of a mile of an occupied residence or residences, no construction activities shall be undertaken between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. during the months of June through September and between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. during the months of October through May. Exceptions to these standards shall be allowed only with the written consent of the building official. 3) All construction vehicles, equipment fixed or mobile shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers. 4) During construction, best efforts should be made to locate stockpiling and/or vehicle staging area as far as practicable from existing residential dwellings. For any questions, please contact Steve Hinde at(951) 955-8980. ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT—PHASE I Prior to Planning Department approval of the project(s), an Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) Phase I Study shall be required to determine whether any chemicals and/or pesticides were used on the property, the location of use, and any possible lingering negative effects. This condition requires the applicant to compile sufficient information about the property and land uses to aid the Department in making a determination of whether additional investigation is needed. Please note that the Environmental Site Assessment process serves to protect public health and welfare by lessening the change of hazardous or toxic substances remaining on the property and interfering with safe land use. For further information regarding the ESA Phase I study, please contact Yvonne Reyes with DEH Environmental Cleanup Program at(951) 955-8982. Office Locations • Blythe • Corona • Hemet • Indio • Murrieta • Palm Springs • Riverside • Phone: (888)722-4234 www.rivcoeh.org COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DEPA'-'TMENT OF ENVIR''NMENTAL HEALTH Steve Van Stockum, Director HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT BRANCH (HMMB): Prior to final occupancy of a building permit, the facility will require a business emergency plan for the storage of hazardous materials greater than 55 gallons, 200 cubic feet or 500 pounds, or any acutely hazardous materials or extremely hazardous substances. If further review of the site indicates additional environmental health issues, HMMB reserves the right to regulate the business in accordance with applicable County Ordinances. For further information, please contact HMMB at (951) 358-5055. PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL/SPA FACILITY Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any proposed public/semi-public swimming pool/spa facility, total of three(3) complete sets of plans for each pool/spa must be submitted to DEH to verify compliance with all applicable State and County regulations, codes and standards. Pool/Spa plans should be submitted to: • Department of Environmental Health, District Environmental Services, Murrieta 38740 Sky Canyon Drive. Suite A, Murrieta CA 92563 Attention: Plan Check (951) 461-0284. Plan Check fees are required. If you have any questions regarding this letter please contact me at (951) 955-8980. Si —rely, 1 Of Michael Mistica, MBA, REHS Environmental Protection and Oversight Division Land Use/ Water Resources Program Office Locations • Blythe • Corona • Hemet • Indio • Murrieta • Palm Springs • Riverside • Phone: (888)722-4234 www.rivcoeh.ora EASTERN MUNICIPAL W A T E R D I S T R I C T, SINCE 1950 ` `` • July 1, 2012 r '. Board of Directors fit, ^ ,%, President Philip E. Paule City of Temecula Vice President PO Box 9033 Randy A. Record Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Re: Shearwater Creek DP, Project No. (PA13-0155), APN (922110013) Joseph J. Kuehler,CPA David J.Slawson Attn: Erik Jones, Ronald W.Sullisan In order to receive sewer service from Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD), the General Manager following information D.Jones u.P.E. g ormation will be helpful to the project proponent: Treasurer EMWD requires beginning dialogue with the project proponent at an early stage in site Joseph J. Kuchler,CPA design and development, via a one-hour complimentary Due Diligence meeting. To set up this meeting, the project proponent should complete a Project Questionnaire (form Director of The NBD-058) and submit to EMWD. To download this form or for additional information, Metropolitan Water District of So.calif please visit our "New Development Process" web page, under the "Businesses" tab, at Randy A.Record www.emwd.orq. This meeting will offer the following benefits: Board secretary and 1. Describe EMWD's development work-flow process Assistant to the General Manager 2. Identify project scope and parameters Rosemarie V. Howard 3. Preliminary, high level review of the project within the context of existing infrastructure Legal Counsel 4. Discuss potential candidacy for recycled water service Lemieux&O'Neill Following the Due Diligence meeting, to proceed with this project, a Plan Of Service (POS) will need to be developed by the developer's engineer, and reviewed/approved by EMWD prior to submitting improvement plans for Plan Check. The POS process will provide the following: 1- Technical evaluation of the project's preliminary design 2- Defined facility requirements, i.e. approved POS 3- Exception: for feasibility evaluation of a purchase acquisition, only a conceptual facilities assessment may be developed. If you have questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sip -,rely, r l Ma oun El-Rage, /S., P.E. Senior Civil Engineer New Business Development (951) 928-3777 x4468 Ei-haqememwd orq Mailing Address: Post Office Box 8300 Perris,CA 92572-8300 Telephone: (951)928-3777 Fax: (951)928-6177 Location: 2270 Trumble Road Perris, CA 92570 Internet : www.emwd.org i \ July 3, 2013 Rancho Water chi 100. Eric Jones � City of Temecula �k Board of Director: Post Office Box 9033 f Ben R.Drake Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Stephen.) Coruna SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY .�r l-i••I'rr•>ideni Lisa D.Herman SHEARWATER CREEK DP (29026 AND 29028 PUJOL .John E.Hoagland STREET, PA13-0155 AND PA13-0156); PARCEL NO. 7 OF William E.Plummer TRACT MAP NO. 13007; APNS 922-110-013 AND 922-110- Roland C.Sknmawitz 014 [ERIC SAENZI .James"Stew-Stewart Dear Mr. Jones: Officers Please be advised that the above-referenced project/property is located within the Matthew-G.Stone Crti6r)(1:\lanavor service boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD/District). The Richard S.Williamson.P E. subject project/property fronts an existing 22-inch diameter water pipeline (1305 "i't°nt C n 1 Pressure Zone) and 36-inch transmission main (1305 Pressure Zone) within Pujol Jeffrey D.Armstrong r Ff;•fr.sumo Street. N.Craig Elitharp,P.E. Direc(nr if t(noratinn5& Water service to the subject project/property does not exist. Additions or �Lintrn;mcr Andrew L.Webster.P.E. modifications to water service arrangements are subject to the Rules and Choi 1•:nq;m•0r Regulations (governing) Water System Facilities and Service, as well as the Keui E.Garcia completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. .James B.Gilpin Best Best&Krieger 1.LP Where private (on-site) facilities are required for water service, fire protection, irrigation, or other purposes, RCWD requires recordation of a Reciprocal Easement and Maintenance Agreement for such on-site private facilities, where private on-site water facilities may cross (or may be shared amongst) multiple lots/project units, and/or where such `common' facilities may be owned and maintained by a Property Owners' Association (proposed now or in the future). Water availability is contingent upon the property owner(s) destroying all on-site wells and signing an Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. In addition, water availability is contingent upon the timing of the subject project/property development relative to water supply shortage contingency measures (pursuant to RCWD's Water Shortage Contingency Plan or other applicable ordinances), and/or the adoption of a required Water Supply Assessment, as determined by the Lead Agency. I3'\PD:hab0I i F450\FEG Rancho California Water District -1213,)Wuiche:ter Road • Post U(tiro Box.91117 •Temecula)California 92589-9017•(951)296-691)0• FAX(951)296-686(1 City of Temecula July 3,2013 Page Two In accordance with Resolution 2007-10-5, the project/property may be required to use recycled water for all landscape irrigation, which should be noted as a condition for any subsequent development plans. Recycled water service, therefore, would be available upon construction of any required on-site and/or off-site recycled water facilities and the completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. Requirements for the use of recycled water are available from RCWD. As soon as feasible, the project proponent should contact RCWD for a determination of existing water system capability, based upon project-specific demands and/or fire flow requirements, as well as a determination of proposed water facilities configuration. If new facilities are required for service, fire protection, or other purposes, the project proponent should contact RCWD for an assessment of project-specific fees and requirements. Please note that separate water meters will be required for all landscape irrigation. Sewer service to the subject project/property, if available, would be provided by Eastern Municipal Water District. If no sewer service is currently available to the subject project/property, all proposed waste discharge systems must comply with the State Water Resources Control Board and/or the basin plan objectives and the permit conditions issued by the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board. If you should have any questions or need additional information, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at the District office at(951) 296-6900. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Phillip Dauben Assistant Engineer cc: Corey Wallace,Engineering Manager-Design Warren Back,Engineering Manager-Planning Heath McMahon,Construction Contracts Manager Cony Smith,Engineering Services Supervisor Eric Saenz,Landwest Consulting 13',PD:hab011 F450\FEG Rancho California Water District 42135 Winchester Road•Post Office Box 9017•Temecula,California 92589-9017•(951)296-1,900•FAX(951)296-6860 oPN W4TF. c pQp AO,,i. ti4' �r r S THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT r`r • OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Office of the General Manager f-5 Your Project No. PA13-0155 MWD San Diego Pipeline Nos. 4 and 5 Sta. 1587+00 to 1591+00 R/W Parcel 142-4-1 (Fee) Substr. Job No. 4046-13-001 August 1, 2013 Mr. Eric Jones Project Planner City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Dear Mr. Jones: Shearwater Creek Thank you for your project transmittal letter dated July 9, 2013, submitting prints of the Tentative Tract Map No. 36568 (Sheet 1 of 1), conceptual grading plan (Sheet 1 of 1), site plans (Sheets 1 through 10) and conceptual planting plans (Sheets L 1 and L2) for the proposed development located at 29026 and 29098 Pujol Street in the city of Temecula. Included with your submittal were copies of the City of Temecula's development plan and tentative map applications and a statement of operations for this project. The location of Metropolitan's 97-inch-inside-diameter San Diego Pipeline No. 5 and the westerly boundary of Metropolitan's fee right-of-way, as shown on Sheets 1 of the Tentative Tract Map No. 36568 and conceptual grading plan, appears to be in general agreement with our records. However we request that our San Diego Pipeline Nos. 4 and 5 and accompanying fee right-of-way also be 700 N.Alameda Street,Los Angeles,California 90012•Mailing Address:Box 54153,Los Angeles,California 90054-0153•Telephone(213)217-6000 Mr. Eric Jones Page 2 August 1, 2013 shown and identified as Metropolitan's on all pertinent sheets of the plans. Enclosed for your information and use are prints our Drawings B-66612 and B-66613 and Right-of-Map 124-4 (Sheet 4 of 6). There appear to be no conflicts with the grading and improvements of Pujol Street, as shown on Sheets 1 of the conceptual grading plans and Tentative Tract Map No. 36568, since our San Diego Pipeline No. 5 is located outside the construction limits of your improvement. Our records indicate that Metropolitan granted an easement to the City of Temecula for Pujol Street within our fee property. We have no objections with the proposed storm drain line discharging water onto an existing drainage ditch located within our fee right-of-way, as shown on Sheets 1 of the conceptual grading plans and Tentative Tract Map No. 36568. We request a stipulation be added to all pertinent plans to notify Darwin Potter or Gerri Michael of our Water System Operations Group, telephone (951) 926-5853, at least two working days prior to starting any work in the vicinity of our facilities and right-of-way. We are returning prints of Sheet 1 of 1 of the Tentative Tract Map No. 36568, Sheet 1 of 1 of the conceptual grading plan, Sheet 1 of the site plans and Sheets L 1 and L2 of the conceptual planting plans, stamped "REVIEWED— CORRECTIONS NOTED —NO RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED." Facilities constructed within Metropolitan's fee property shall be subject to the paramount right of Metropolitan to use the fee property for the purpose for which it was acquired. If at any time Metropolitan or its assigns should, in the exercise of their rights, find it necessary to remove any of the facilities from the fee property, such removal and replacement shall be at the expense of the owner of the facility. Mr. Eric Jones Page 3 August 1, 2013 For any further correspondence with Metropolitan relating to this project, please make reference to the Substructures Job Number shown in the upper right-hand corner of the first page of this letter. Should you require any additional information, please contact Ken Chung, telephone (213) 217-7670. Very truly yours, Kieran M. Callanan, P.E. Manager, Substructures Team KC/km DOC#:4046-13-001 Enclosures (8) WARREN D.WILLIAMS - - 1995 MARKET STREET General Manager-Chief Engineer RIVERSIDE,CA 92501 951.955.1200 FAX 951.788.9965 www.rcflood.org f RIVERSIDE COUNT . f '000 OQNTROL 51180 AND WATER CONS r t VA ION bIS . CT City of Temecula t, Planning Department Post Office Box 9033 Temecula,California 92589-9033 Attention: rR/ (. 1 0 N C..S • Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: 3 (o�� Cr) 1 3 _ �'/5.s-) The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in incorporated cities. The District also does not plan check city land use cases, or provide State Division of Real Estate letters or other flood hazard reports for such cases. District comments/recommendations for such cases are normally limited to items of specific interest to the District including District Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood control and drainage facilities which could be considered a logical component or extension of a master plan system, and District Area Drainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition,information of a general nature is provided. The District has not reviewed the proposed 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 such issue: No comment. NZ This project would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of regional interest proposed. This project involves District Master Plan facilities. The District will accept ownership of such facilities on written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acceptance. Plan check,inspection and administrative fees will be required. This project proposes channels, storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter or other facilities that could be considered regional in nature and/or a logical extension of the adopted Master Drainage Plan. The District would consider accepting ownership of such facilities on written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required. \/ This project is located within the limits of the District'sHur'7.►∎1CI A (—KU.k f VI ECCI—Ps 4 Pt l nArea Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been adopted; applicable fees should be paid by cashier's check or money order only to the Flood Control District or City prior to issuance of grading permits. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of issuance of the actual permit. An encroachment permit shall be obtained for any construction related activities occurring within District right of way or facilities. For further information,contact the District's encroachment permit section at 951.955.1266. GENERAL INFORMATION This project may require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Clearance for grading, recordation or other final approval should not be given until the City has determined that the project has been granted a permit or is shown to be exempt. If this project involves a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mapped flood plain, then the City should require the applicant to provide all studies,calculations, plans and other information required to meet FEMA requirements, and should further require that the applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) prior to grading, recordation or other final approval of the project,and a Letter of Map Revision(LOMR)prior to occupancy. If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain is impacted by this project, the City should require the applicant to obtain a Section 1602 Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Game and a Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or written correspondence from these agencies indicating the project is exempt from these requirements. A Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification may be required from the local California Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of the Corps 404 permit. Very truly yours, /r/ HE '4 • i Engineering Project Manager c: Riverside County Planning Department Date: //2u/J Attn: Kristi Lovelady City of Temecula 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 Environmental Checklist Project Title Shearwater Creek Lead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 Contact Person and Phone Number Matt Peters, AICP ^` Associate Planner (951) 694-6408 Project Location The Project is generally located on the west side of the southernmost terminus of Pujol Street in the City of Temecula ("City"). APNs: 922-110-013 and -014 Project Sponsor's Name and Address Temecula Foothills, LLC C/O Ambient Communities Attn: Rob Honer 2917 Canon Street San Diego, CA 92106 _ General Plan Designation H — High Density Residential Zoning H — High Density Residential Description of Project The Shearwater Creek Project ("Project") includes a Development Plan to construct a 140-unit attached residential project consisting of 13 buildings, including two-story townhomes and three-story walk-up flats, a pool, and clubhouse for Project residents, located on approximately 7 acres at the southernmost terminus of Pujol (on the west side). The Project also includes a Tentative Tract Map for Condominium Purposes (Condo Map) to define private and common ownership areas for the proposed 140 attached residential units. The Project consists of 7.05 gross acres on two parcels. APN 922- 110-013 is 3.73 acres. APN 922-110-014 is 3.32 acres The Project site has been extensively disturbed, including historic period plowing/disking and construction of multiple structures associated with a previous residence. Modern disturbances include widespread earthmoving to level the site into tiered terraces, construction of numerous concrete slab foundations, and ongoing disking for weed abatement. Elevation ranges from 1,045 feet above mean sea level along the western edge of the site to 1,015 feet at the eastern edge of the site. All utilities are underground and available to the site from Pujol Street. Water is provided by Rancho California Water District (RCWD); sewer is provided by Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD); cable is provided by Time Warner Cable; telephone is provided by Verizon; gas is provided by Southern California Gas Company; and electricity is provided by Southern California Edison. The site is located within the Temecula Valley Unified School District (TVUSD). _. 1 The Project site is located within the City of Temecula General Plan area and the Project will be evaluated in the context of the City of Temecula General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) 2005, which contains current and reliable data for a thorough analysis of the Project. Studies have been conducted for the following issue areas: biological resources, cultural resources, water quality, noise, traffic, and air quality and greenhouse gases. The Project site is located just north of the future Western Bypass Corridor, which is the western extension of Temecula Parkway. The bridge crossing Murrieta Creek has already been designed and engineered by the City of Temecula. Also, the City is processing a General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan, Tentative Tract Map, EIR, and Development Agreement associated with the proposed Altair Project, which consists of approximately 270 acres, and is also owned by Ambient Communities. The developer of the Altair Project will be responsible for construction of the Western Bypass. Thus, the Project access for Shearwater Creek will be limited to the southern terminus of Pujol Street until such time as the Western Bypass is constructed. This temporary condition and its impacts are addressed in a Traffic Study prepared by Kunzman and Associates, and included in the Transportation and Traffic section of this Initial Study. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting The site is bounded to the north by an apartment project referred to as the Vineyards; to the west is open space associated with the undeveloped foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains; to the east is Pujol Street and open space associated with Murrieta Creek; and to the south is open space, a Metropolitan Water District (MWD) easement, and the extension of Camino Estribo, which is a rural dirt road. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval None is Required -, -' - -t....7.7.-.".. Alii: — . 10°11 44 . ,0 . , r P 431•s, '4,, \114vor _.fir �'L 2 0 0 L9A 4.470 o% ti 0 G Z o Project Site -� o a } tP \11 LP I rC)p sn oiEs-FERN BYP.qss 7,1i 046C'04,1,0 A-k u1 S C 2 t' I S 0 /__ "7 0 250 5no i.JCkp irQtr 3 Iri/sii Ak_ y44 - 1 SSS r . ioi. , 44 , . _ , I.. 0 i . .. Project Site . '� r 4f.. �. o 0 111\\\\, Ill l N 4" : . ,, ok . I 1M ' # \ 001111,1166,- li ‘11011 11111 ' 11111011 -ilhihhk*LIIL? 1° ' ,_‘ , \\, ,t "kw ,44. , AO. ' I i, '44/6 ........, . . . ,, , , , . . y* ". , ' • r i -', ,. .icil-adir , 1%''"\\\\\\... t , ki 444 PIP C +, 14 E 4 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. Aesthetics Mineral Resources Agriculture and Forestry Resources Noise Air Quality Population and Housing Biological Resources Public Services Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recreation _ Cultural Resources _ Transportation and Traffic Geology and Soils Utilities and Service Systems Hazards and Hazardous Materials Mandatory Findings of Significance Hydrology and Water Quality None Land Use and Planning 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 NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not X 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 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 required, but it must analyze only 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. _ fAtkQ. '3-111 Signature Date Matthew D. Peters, AICP City of Temecula Printed Name For 5 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? _ X b Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings X within a state scenic highway? c Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? X d Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? X Comments: 1.a. Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the Project will not result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. The Community Design Element of the City of Temecula's General Plan ("General Plan") identifies important scenic view sheds to ensure that all new public and private development projects will not obstruct the public views of scenic resources. According to General Plan Figure CD-1, a view shed is located west of the Project site to identify the views of the western hillsides. While adjacent to this view shed, the Project site has been designed to be consistent with the height requirements of the High Density Residential zone and the adjacent development. The Project is expected to have a less than significant effect on a scenic vista. No mitigation measures are required. 1.b. No Impact: The Project will not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. The site has been previously graded and no trees of significance, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings are located on-site. Interstate 15 is not classified as a State scenic highway in the vicinity of the Project. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 1.c. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. The site was previously graded in its entirety. Backbone infrastructure, including sewer, water, storm drain, curb, gutter, sidewalk and dry utilities are all available to the site. Construction of the Project will result in individually owned condominium units, hardscape for streets, parking areas, and landscaping within the site and along the slopes. The proposed development will be consistent with the City's General Plan, the Development Code, and the Citywide Design Guidelines. Consistency with these requirements will ensure that the Project will enhance the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Lastly, the townhomes along Pujol Street are designed to give the appearance of attached, single-family residences with private entrances, and will be compatible and complementary to the Vineyard apartments to the north. Impacts are considered less than significant; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 1.d. Less Than Significant Impact: According to Figure 5.1-1 (Palomar Observatory Lighting Impact Zone) of the Temecula General Plan Update Final EIR (March 2005), the Project is located within Zone B, which is within a 45-mile radius of the Observatory. The Project will create new sources of light or glare that could adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. However, the Project will be required to comply with the Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance (Ordinance No. 655). Compliance with this Ordinance will ensure that all lighting will be of an acceptable type and wattage and that parking lot lighting will be required to be shielded in order to not adversely affect the Mt. Palomar Observatory. Lighting issues will be addressed during the building plan check and inspection process. Therefore, since the Project will comply with Ordinance No. 655, it will not adversely affect the day or nighttime views or create substantial light or glare, resulting in a less than significant impact and no mitigation measures are required. 6 2. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST 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 Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a 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 California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? X b Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? X c Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)? X d Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use X e Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? X Comments: 2.a. No Impact: Implementation of the Project will not 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 California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural. The site has been previously graded and is not being used for agricultural purposes. According to Figure 5.2-1 (Agricultural Resources) of the Temecula General Plan Update Final Environmental Impact Report (March 2005), the majority of the Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance is located to the east of the City in Wine Country and to the north, within French Valley. None of these designations exist on the Project site. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 2.b. No Impact: Implementation of the Project will not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract. According to the Initial Study contained within the Temecula General Plan, the area is not under a Williamson Act contract. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation is required. 2.c. No Impact: The Project site is not suitable for forest and/or timberland uses as defined by the Public Resources and Government Codes. Forest land is defined as land that can support 10 percent native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation and other public benefits. The Project site is zoned High Density (H) residential and not as a Timberland Production Zone as defined by Section 51104(g) of the Government Code. Implementation of the Project will not conflict with existing zoning for forest land, timberland or timberland zoned Timberland Production. The site has been previously graded and is not being used for these purposes. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation is required. 2.d. No Impact: Implementation of the Project will not result in the loss of forest land. The site is vacant and has been previously graded. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation is required. 2.e. No Impact: Implementation of the Project will not involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use. The Project site is not utilized for agricultural cultivation. Please refer to the response to 2a, above. 8 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: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact - Impact a Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality_plan? X b Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? X 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 quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? X d Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? X e Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? X Comments: Comments: A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted with the City's General Plan EIR for City- wide Air Quality impacts, primarily from mobile sources. 3.a. Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed residential project is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). The South Coast Air Quality Management District and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) are the responsible agencies for preparing the Air Quality Management Plan for the SCAB. The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The proposed project is subject to the requirements of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the California Air Resources Board (CARB), and SCAQMD. A project is deemed inconsistent with air quality plans if it results in population and/or employment growth that exceed growth estimates in the applicable air quality plan. The Air Quality Impact Analysis prepared by Kunzman Associates, Inc, January 10, 2014, states that the proposed project does not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality management plan. The project is consistent with regionally adopted growth projections for the study area. 3.b. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: Although much of the construction activity (mass grading/street cuts) have been completed, the following mitigation measures should be applied to the remainder of the project to avoid significant impacts. Air quality impacts for operational activity do not exceed the thresholds set forth by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The analysis results demonstrated that with the appropriate mitigation measures implemented, any short-term construction impact can be reduced to less than significant. The following mitigation measures will ensure that impacts are reduced to a less than significant level: 9 MITIGATION MEASURES AirQual1 During grading and construction activities, the applicant/builder shall comply with the requirements of the SCAQMD Rule 403. The purpose of this rule is to reduce the amount of particulate matter entrained in the ambient air as a result of man-made fugitive dust sources by requiring actions to prevent, reduce or mitigate fugitive dust emissions. AirQual2 The following mitigation measures are necessary to reduce construction related emissions of NOR, PM10 and VOCs: •Apply soil stabilizers to inactive areas • Replace ground cover in disturbed areas within 72 hours of disturbance •Suspend all excavating and grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 m.p.h. •Water the haul route and exposed surfaces a minimum of two times per day or as conditions require • Use of construction equipment with low emission factors and high energy efficiency • Perform regularly scheduled engine maintenance to minimize equipment emissions • Use of alternative fuels such as ultra-low sulfur diesel or off-road construction vehicles/equipment where feasible •Use of electric or diesel powered equipment rather than gasoline powered engines where feasible •Where applicable limit the application of exterior architectural coatings (i.e. paint, etc.) to average no more than 225 gallons per week and/or use Zero-VOC paint The construction related emissions will not exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds during the construction phase of the project if there is compliance with the mitigation measures outlined above. Therefore, the project impacts are considered less than significant after mitigation is incorporated. Likewise, air quality standards will not be violated. Since future projects resulting with the proposed applications will be required to comply with Air Quality standards and thresholds, the proposed applications will not result in any significant adverse air quality impact. 3.c. Less Than Significant Impact: CEQA Guidelines Section 15064 (h)(3) stipulates that for an impact involving a resource that is addressed by an approved plan or mitigation program, the lead agency may determine that a project's incremental contribution is not cumulatively considerable if the project complies with the adopted plan or program. In addressing cumulative effects for air quality, the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan is the most appropriate document to use because it set forth comprehensive programs that will lead the South Coast Air Basin, including the project area, into compliance with all Federal and State air quality standards. It also utilizes control measures and related emission reduction estimates based upon emissions projections for a future development scenario derived from land use, population, and employment characteristics defined in consultation with local governments. Because the proposed Project is in conformance with the AQMP and the Project is not significant on an individual basis, it is appropriate to conclude that the Project's incremental contribution to criteria pollutant emissions is not cumulatively considerable. Therefore the Project's incremental contribution to criteria pollutant emissions is not anticipated to result in a cumulatively considerable increase, and a less than significant impact is anticipated. 3.d. Less Than Significant 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. Sensitive receptors as shown on page 10 AQ-7, Figure AQ-2 "Sensitive Receptors," within the Air Quality and Land Use Element of the City of Temecula General Plan, identifies that the nearest school (a private school) is more than 1,500 lineal feet east of the Project site. The proposed residential development is not anticipated to generate substantial pollutant concentrations and therefore, there is no opportunity for any exposure. The Project will not result in any significant impact. 3.e. Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the Project will create minimal objectionable odors associated with construction activity which will be temporary. During construction, the proposed Project will have odors associated with equipment and materials. The site is not located within the immediate vicinity of sensitive receptors and these odors are normally not considered offensive so as to cause sensitive receptors to complain. Diesel fuel odors from construction equipment and new asphalt paving fall into this category. These impacts will be of short duration and are considered less than significant. No objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people will be created during when the Project is operational as an attached single-family residential development. No mitigation measures are required. 11 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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 California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? X b Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service? X c 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, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? X _ d 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? X e Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? X f Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? X Comments: 4.a. Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the Project will not 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 California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Project site is vacant and disturbed. According to the Biological Constraints Analysis and Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Consistency Analysis (Analysis), performed by Helix Environmental Planning, April 2013, a total of six vegetation communities occur on site. These communities consist of mule fat scrub, Riversidean sage scrub, coastal sage scrub/non-native grassland ecotone, non-native grassland, disturbed and developed. A general biological survey was completed and no sensitive plant species were observed on the property. Also, no Riparian/Riverine or vernal pool habitats exist on site, and no species associated with these habitats are expected to occur. None of the plant or animal species listed in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP was observed or expected to occur in the Project area. 12 The analysis recommended that, due to the presence of the one suitable burrowing owl habitat element, a qualified biologist survey the property 30 days prior to the issuance of a grading permit, to check for occupied ground burrows, which has been included as a condition of approval for the Project. 4.b. No Impact Riparian/Riverine areas are lands which contain habitat dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergent vegetation, or emergent mosses and lichens, which occur close to, or which depend upon, soil moisture from a nearby fresh water source; or areas with fresh water flow during all or a portion of the year. Implementation of the Project will not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service. According to the Biological Constraints Analysis and Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Consistency Analysis (Analysis), performed by Helix Environmental Planning, April 2013, no Riparian/Riverine or vernal pools exist on site, nor were any species associated with these habitats observed onsite. No impacts are anticipated; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 4.c. No Impact The Project site does not contain federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. To be considered a wetland, a site must meet three criteria: hydric soils, wetland hydrology, and hydrophytic vegetation. Hydric soils are defined by the national Technical Committee as soils that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the grow season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part of the soil. Wetland hydrology is present when, under normal circumstances, the land surface is either inundated or the upper portion of the soil is saturated at a sufficient frequency and duration to create anaerobic conditions. These conditions are also required in order for hydrophytic vegetation to be present. Implementation of the project will not have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. The project site is not characterized by any riparian habitat or wetland. No impacts are anticipated; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 4.d. Less Than Significant Impact_ A portion of the project site is located within an MSHCP Criteria Cell and within Constrained Linkage 13. A Joint Project Review (JPR # 13-04-16-01) was prepared in May 2013 that determined the project is consistent with the MSHCP. The Project does not propose any conservation. Therefore, it is not anticipated that implementation of the Project would conflict with Reserve Assembly in this area. Impacts anticipated are less than significant, therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 4.e. No Impact The construction and development of the Project will not conflict with any local ordinances or policies as they relate to the protection of biological resources. The City of Temecula has recently adopted a Heritage Tree Ordinance designed to protect certain species of trees within the City. However, no trees designated in the Ordinance were located on the subject property. The City of Temecula General Plan outlines a number of policies which emphasize the interrelationship between the built and natural environment. The General Plan recognizes the importance of conserving important biological habitat and protecting plant and animal species of concern. As a result, the General Plan requires that development proposals identify significant biological resources. The Biological Assessment that was completed for the proposed project site did not identify any sensitive plant species, sensitive bird species, sensitive mammal species, sensitive reptile or amphibian species on site. Additionally, a Burrowing Owl survey was completed to identify any potential habitat which would assess the likelihood that Burrowing Owls would utilize the property. No Burrowing Owls were found on-site. The Project will be conditioned for a 30-day pre-construction survey report prior to grading. As a result, no impacts will occur. 4.f. Less Than Significant Impact The proposed development of the project will not conflict with the provisions of the Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). The MSHCP is a comprehensive, multi- jurisdictional plan which focuses on the conservation of 146 species and their associated habitats in Western Riverside County. The Plan's overall goal is to maintain a biological and ecological diversity within the rapidly urbanizing area. The Plan Area encompasses approximately 1.26 million acres and includes the City of Temecula within its boundaries. According to the Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) for the Proposed 13 Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) the project site is located within the boundaries of Cell No. 7264, Independent — Subunit (SU) 1 Murrieta Creek. This Cell has been developed to preserve and enhance biological resources in the vicinity of the Murrieta Creek (Creek). The nearest portion of the project site is located approximately 150 feet from the Creek and separated from the Creek by Pujol Street. A Joint Project Review (JPR# 13-04-16-01) was prepared in May, 2013 that determined the project is consistent with the MSHCP. The project does not propose any conservation. The JPR concludes that the project site is located in the southeastern-central portion of Cell 7264, not the western and eastern portion of the Cell described for conservation. Therefore, development of the project would not conflict with the Reserve Assembly goals of the MSHCP. 14 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? X b Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? .............._._ X c Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? X d Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? X Comments: 5.a- d. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: The site has been previously disturbed and graded. According to the Cultural and Paleontological Resources Survey Report for the Shearwater Creek project prepared by Dudek, their review of record search data and intensive pedestrian survey identified only a single resource in the project area. The resource is an isolated quartz handstone. Isolates are not considered significant under CEQA and are not eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR). However, consultation by Dudek and the City with the Pechanga Tribe indicates that there is a high possibility that subsurface resource may be discovered during ground disturbing activities. Furthermore, the project site is located in the vicinity of and possibly contains components of a culturally significant Pechanga/Luiseno village, known as exva Temeku and/or associated cultural properties, including a Traditional Cultural Property (TCP). The Project area and TCP contain not only archaeological components, but also resources with cultural values, including, but not limited to ceremonial components. As a result, the following mitigation measures will ensure that impacts are reduced to a less than significant level: MITIGATION MEASURES CultRes 1 Prior to issuance of grading permit, the Project Applicant shall retain a Riverside County qualified archaeological firm to monitor all ground-disturbing activities. CultRes 2 Pechanga Tribal monitors shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities. Prior to issuance of grading permit, Project Applicant must submit a fully executed Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement, by and between the Pechanga Tribe the Project Applicant, and the landowner. The Agreement shall address the treatment of cultural resources on the Project property, the designation, responsibilities, and participation of Pechanga Tribal monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities; project grading and development scheduling; terms of compensation for the monitors; and treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site. CultRes 3 Prior to issuance of grading permit, the Project Applicant shall file a grading plan with the City, and a copy to the Pechanga Tribe, which sets forth the plan and methodology for grading activities, including a timeline, locations and nature of grading, details concerning the observation of grading 15 activities by the archaeological firm and the Pechanga Tribe. Said plan or methodology shall include the requirement for a qualified archaeological monitor and Pechanga Tribal monitor to be present and to have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. At least 7 business days prior to project grading, the Project applicant shall contact the Pechanga Tribe to notify the Tribe of grading, excavation and the monitoring program/schedule, and to coordinate with the Tribe on the monitoring work schedule. In accordance with the Agreement required in MM 2, the archaeological monitor's authority to stop and redirect grading will be exercised in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe in order to evaluate the nature and significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. Such evaluation shall include culturally appropriate temporary and permanent treatment pursuant to the Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement, which may include avoidance of cultural resources, in-place preservation and/or re-burial on Project property so they are not subject to further disturbance in perpetuity. Any reburial shall occur at a location predetermined between the landowner and Pechanga, details of which to be addressed in the Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement in CR MM2. CultRes 4 If human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur in the vicinity of the find(s) until the Riverside County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission must be contacted within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission must then identify the "most likely descendant(s)", which parties agree will likely be the Pechanga Band based upon the Tribe's ancestral ties to the area and previous designation as MLD on projects in the geographic vicinity. The landowner shall engage in consultations with the most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD will make recommendations concerning the treatment of the remains within 48 hours as provided in Public Resources Code 5097.98 and the Treatment Agreement described in CR MM 2. CultRes 5 The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods and all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area to the Pechanga Tribe for proper treatment and disposition pursuant to the Agreement required in CR MM2. CultRes 6 All sacred areas, should they be encountered within the project area, shall be avoided and preserved. CultRes 7 It is understood by the Applicant, the City and the Tribe that this Project area is located in the vicinity of and possibly contains components of a culturally significant Pechanga/Luiseno village, known as exva Temeku and/or associated cultural properties, including a Traditional Cultural Property (TCP). The Project area and TCP contain not only archaeological components, but also resources with cultural values, including, but not limited to ceremonial components. If inadvertent discoveries of subsurface archaeological or cultural resources are discovered during grading, the Developer, the project archaeologist, and the Tribe shall assess the significance of such resources and shall meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources, which may include avoidance of cultural resources, in-place preservation and/or re-burial on Project property so they are not subject to further disturbance in perpetuity. Any reburial shall occur at a location predetermined between the landowner and Pechanga, details of which to be addressed in the Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement in CR MM2. Pursuant to Calif. Pub. Res. Code § 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred 16 method of preservation for archaeological resources and cultural resources. If the landowner and the Tribe cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for the archaeological or cultural resources, these issues will be presented to the City Planning Director for decision. The City Planning Director shall make the determination based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological resources and shall take into account the cultural and religious principles and practices of the Tribe. Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the decision of the City Planning Director shall be appealable to the City Planning Commission and/or City Council. 17 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 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 Geology Special Publication 42. X ii Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? f X iv Landslides? X b Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X 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 spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? X 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 property? X e Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? _ X Comments: 6.a.i.,ii, and iii. Less Than Significant Impact- According to the Geotechnical Report for the Shearwater Creek Development Plan, "No faults (active, potentially active, or inactive) are known to project through the site." The site does not lie within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Hazard Zone as defined by the State of California. The possibility of damage due to ground rupture is considered negligible since active faults are not known to cross the site. Furthermore, secondary effects of seismic shaking resulting from large earthquakes on the major faults in the Southern California region, which may affect the site, include soil liquefaction and dynamic settlement. Based on laboratory testing and field exploration, the old axial channel deposits do not appear to be potentially liquefiable. 6.a.iv. No Impact: According to the Geotechnical Report for the Shearwater Creek Development Plan secondary effects of seismic activity, such as landsliding, is considered unlikely at the Project site. The Project site and surrounding areas have not been subjected to any recent landslides according to the City of Temecula General Plan Update, March 2005. Therefore no impacts are anticipated and no mitigation is required. 6.b. Less Than Significant Impact: The site may be susceptible to soil erosion during the short-term construction activities. Short-term erosion effects during the construction phase of the project would be prevented through implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which is required in accordance with the Countywide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Activity Permit. The SWPPP includes standard construction methods such as sandbags, silt fencing, and temporary detention basins to control on-site and off-site erosion. Therefore, with the implementation of an approved SWPPP, impacts resulting from erosion during construction would be less than significant. 18 6.c. Less Than Significant Impact: According to page 10 of the Geotechnical Report for the Shearwater Creek Development Plan, "The site is underlain by undocumented artificial fills in Quaternary old axial channel deposits, and Cretaceous granodiorite." From a geotechnical perspective, the existing onsite soils appear to be suitable material for use as fill, provided they are relatively free from rocks (larger than 6 inches in maximum dimension), construction debris, and organic material. The proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. Compliance with standard measures contained in the Uniform Building Code (UBC) and City Municipal Code will ensure that significant impacts will not result. 6.d. No Impact: The Project is not located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),that would create substantial risks to life or property. Therefore no impacts are anticipated. 6.e. No Impact: The proposed development will not be serviced by septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 19 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? X b Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse •ases? 1 X 1 Comments: The Project is consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan. The property is designated as High (H) residential (13-20 DU/AC) in the General Plan. 7.a.b. Less than Significant Impact: According to the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis prepared by Kunzman Associates, Inc. dated January 10, 2014 the GHG emissions as identified in the CalEEMod run for the Project would generate 1,695.31 MTCO2e per year. According to the Thresholds of Significance, a cumulative global climate change impact would occur if the GHG emissions created from the on-going operation would exceed 3,000 metric tons per year of CO2e. In addition, operation of the proposed Project would not create a significant cumulative impact to global climate change. Project Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Metric Tons/Year) Category Bio-0O2 NonBio-0O2 CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Area Sources 14.98 31.16 46.13 0.05 0.00 47.44 Energy Usage3 0.00 351.81 351.81 0.01 0.00 353.52 Mobile Sources 4 0.00 1,157.48 1,157.48 0.04 0.00 1,158.27 Solid Wastes 13.17 0.00 13.17 0.78 0.00 29.51 Waterb 2.91 52.64 55.56 0.30 0.00 64.24 Construction' 0.00 42.15 42.15 0.01 0.00 42.33 Total Emissions 31.06 1,635.24 1,666.29 1.19 0.00 1,695.31 Threshold 3,000 Exceeds Threshold? No Source: Kunzman Associates 20 Operational Criteria Pollutants Regional Air Emissions Summer Emissions Pollutant Emissions(pounds/day) Activity VOC NOx CO 502 PM10 PM2.5 Area Sources2 40.41 1.07 82.62 0.11 10.83 10.83 .Energy Lsage3 0.09 0.73 0.31 0.00 0.06 0.06 Mobile Sources4 2.94 9.28 32.85 0.09 6.07 1.71 Total Emissions 43 11 116 0 17 13 SCAQMD Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No , Winter Emissions Pollutant Emissions(pounds/day) Activity VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Area Sources2 40.41 1.07 82.62 0.11 10.83 10.83 (Energy Usage3 0.09 0.73 0.31 _ 0.00 0.06 0.06 Mobile Sources4 2.86 9.67 30.65 0.08 6.07 1.71 Total Emissions 43 11 114 0 17 13 SCAQMD Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No Source: Kunzman Associates Also, identified in the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis prepared by Kunzman Associates, Inc. dated January 10, 2014, the Project is consistent with all applicable plans, policies and strategies for reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases and the Project would result in a less than significant impact. The Project's operational GHG emissions do not exceed the draft SCAQMD threshold for all land uses, and is consistent with the goals of the City of Temecula Sustainability Plan. Although the Project would generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, these emissions would not have a significant impact on the environment. 21 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? _ X b 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? X c 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? X d Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? X e 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 result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? X f For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? X g Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X h Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? X Comments: 8.a. No Impact: The Project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use or disposal of hazardous materials. The proposed land use is a residential Project and will not involve routinely transporting, using or disposing hazardous materials. The Project will consist of residential uses that do not involve significant potential for routine transport or use of hazardous materials or routine generation of hazardous wastes beyond those normally encountered in a residential setting, typically termed "household hazardous wastes." The generation of such wastes from residential uses is not considered to rise to a level of a significant potential for significant risk of accidental release of hazardous materials or accidental explosion. The City provides a program to accept and dispose of household hazardous wastes. No impact is anticipated and no mitigation is required for the long-term residential use of the site. 8.b. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project would not 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. Any impacts would be considered less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. 22 8.c. No Impact: The Project will emit emissions and utilize substances that are commonly associated with the development and operation (occupancy) of similar residential uses. There are no schools within a quarter mile radius of the Project site. There is no potential for any school to be impacted. No mitigation measures are required. 8.d. No Impact: According to the "Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report, Pujol Multi-Family," dated June 18, 2004 prepared by Geocon Consultants, Inc. for the Project by a previous applicant, the Project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. According to this limited environmental review, no evidence of recognized environmental conditions were identified on the Project or on surrounding properties. No impacts are foreseen; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 8.e. No Impact: The Project site is not located within any airport land use plan. The closest airport with an associated Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) is the French Valley Airport, which is located approximately 4.5 miles to the north/northeast of the Project site. There is no potential for any airport or CLUP to be impacted or for the Project to result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project area. No mitigation measures are required. 8.f. No Impact: The Project site is not located near any private airstrip. There is no potential for the Project to result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project area. No mitigation measures are required. 8.g. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The Project will take access from Pujol Street, and construction along all nearby streets will be in accordance with the City requirements for traffic control and will not significantly impact emergency responses within the City. Once occupied by residents, on-site circulation will be sufficient to provide necessary access for emergency responses. Any Project impacts would be considered less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. 8.h. No Impact: According to the City of Temecula Geographic Information System, the Project site is 1,500 feet east of a High Fire Hazard area. Also, Calle Cerillo is a partially paved street, which serves as the western property boundary of the subject property and provides a gap between the development and natural hillside vegetation. Therefore, the Project will not expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residents are intermixed with wildlands. Since the Project is not located within a High Fire Hazard area and is not located in the immediate proximity of a High Fire Hazard area, injury, death and loss of life resulting from a wildfire is not likely to occur. Additionally, the City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau has reviewed and conditioned the Project to ensure that it meets all fire code requirements, and that the Project will be provided with fire protection, if needed, in the case that fire does occur on-site. No impacts are anticipated; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 23 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade water quality? _ X b Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer 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 granted)? X c Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the 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-site? X d Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the 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 result in flooding on- or off-site? X e Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? X f , Require the preparation of a project-specific WQMP? - - X g Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? _ X h Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? X i 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? X j Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X I Comments: 9.a. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The Project is required to comply with all current soil erosion and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards in effect at the time of grading permit issuance. As a condition of approval for this Project the developer will be required to comply with the requirements of the NPDES permit from the State Water Quality Resources Control Board. A less than significant impact is anticipated. 9.b. No Impact: The Project will not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. The Project will be supplied from a water agency, the Rancho California Water District (RCWD), which utilizes both groundwater and imported water supplies to ensure adequate water is available for consumers. Imported water is utilized to ensure that significant overdraft of local ground water 24 supplies does not occur. No adverse impacts to groundwater resources are forecast to occur from implementing the proposed Project. No mitigation is required. 9.c. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the 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 result in flooding on- or off-site. A Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) was reviewed and approved for this Project. There are no anticipated negative downstream impacts that would result from implementation of the Project. Project drainage design will insure that increases in surface runoff from the site as a result of increased impervious surface will be reduced to an insignificant level of flow before leaving the Project site. Storm flows will be controlled to a level that does not cause any significant increases in runoff downstream. The onsite facilities will control the increased runoff in a manner consistent with the General Plan's requirements for flood control. No potential for significant adverse impacts due to the increased volume of flows is forecast to occur and no mitigation is required. 9.d. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the 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 result in flooding on- or off-site. There are no anticipated negative downstream impacts that would result from implementation of the Project. Please reference Response No. 9.c. No potential for significant adverse impacts due to the increased volume of flows is forecast to occur and no mitigation is required. 9.e. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Please reference Response No. 9.c. No potential for significant adverse impacts due to the increased volume of flows is forecast to occur and no mitigation is required. 9.f. Less Than Significant Impact: 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. The water quality control measures identified in the WQMP have either been incorporated into the design of the Project or have been added to the Project with specific conditions of approval and are expected to eliminate potential adverse impacts to receiving waters. With the implementation of the WQMP, impacts are anticipated to be less than significant. 9.g. No Impact: The Project will not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows. According to the Figure PS-2 of the City's General Plan, the Project site is not located within a flood hazard zone or a dam inundation area. No mitigation is required. 9.h. No Impact: The Project will not place people or structures within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows. According to the Figure PS-2 of the City's General Plan, the Project site is not located within a flood hazard zone or a dam inundation area. No mitigation is required. 9.i. No Impact: The Project will 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. According to the Figure PS-2 of the City's General Plan the Project site is not located within a flood hazard zone or a dam inundation area. No mitigation is required. 9.j. No Impact: The Project will not expose people to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. The Project site is not located in an area that is proximate to these natural occurrences. No impacts are anticipated. 25 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Physically divide an established community? X b 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 mitigating an environmental effect? X c Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X Comments: 10.a. No Impact: The Project will not physically divide an established community. The Project site is adjacent to existing residential development to the north, proposed Western Bypass and proposed residential uses to the west, Pujol Street and Murrieta Creek to the east, and proposed Western Bypass to the south. The Project is considered "in-fill" development. The Project is consistent with the City's General Plan, and the City's Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan. Through this consistency, the Project serves to further connect and become integrated with the established community. No impacts are anticipated; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 10.b. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the Project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Please refer to Response 10.a. Other Sections of this Analysis discuss the applicable plans, policies and regulations from local, state and federal agencies that are in addition to those under the jurisdiction of the City of Temecula. Any impacts have been determined to be less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. 10.c. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. The Project site is located within Multiple Species Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Cell No. 7264 (Cell) of Subunit 1, in the Southwest Area Plan of the MSHCP. The Project comprises approximately 4.4 percent of the 160-acre Cell. The property has previously been at least partially developed and is currently comprised of a mix of mainly non-native grassland and Riversidean sage scrub and disturbed habitat along with the remains (concrete pads) of the previous development. According to the RCA Joint Project Review (JPR) in their review of the Habitat Acquisition and Negotiation Strategy (HANS) application, JPR#13-04-16- 01, "The Project is consistent with both the Criteria and Other Plan requirements and zero (0) acres are proposed for conservation." Given this information, the Project is consistent with the adopted HCP (MSHCP). The Project will not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. A Report was generated for the Project from the Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) for the Proposed Multiple Species Conservation Plan (MSHCP). Impacts are considered less than significant and no mitigation measures are required. 26 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No _ Impact Incorporated _ Impact Impact a 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? X b Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? X Comments: 11.a. No Impact: The Project will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state. According to the General Plan EIR, the City is within Mineral Resource Zone -3a (MRZ-3) as classified by the State Geologist. The MRZ-3 areas contain sedimentary deposits that have the potential to supply sand and gravel for concrete and crushed stone for aggregate. However, these areas are not considered to contain deposits of significant economic value, based on available data. Also, while the Project Site is in close vicinity to Murrieta Creek where these resources have a higher likelihood to exist, a sand and gravel pit would be inconsistent with the General Plan. No impacts are anticipated; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 11.b. No Impact: The Project will not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. Please reference Response No. 11.a. No impacts are anticipated; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 27 12. NOISE. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact a Result in 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 agencies? X b Result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? X c Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? X d Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? X e If 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? _..... X f If located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X Comments: 12.a. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: A Noise Study was prepared by PCR Services Corporation in January, 2014 and analyzed ambient noise levels in comparison to estimated noise levels during construction and after the Project is built (operational noise). Consideration was given to the City's Noise Ordinance and Maximum Noise Levels (Ldn, or CNEL, dBA). The report concluded that there would be temporary impacts during construction. In order to mitigate these impacts to meet the exterior noise standards, the following mitigations are required: MITIGATION MEASURES NoiseI Noise-generating construction equipment operated at the Project site shall be equipped with effective noise control devices, (i.e, mufflers, lagging, and/or motor enclosures). All equipment shall be properly maintained to assure that no additional noise, due to worn or improperly maintained parts, would be generated. Noise2 Ensure that during construction, trucks and equipment are running only when necessary. 28 Noise3 To the extent feasible, construction activities shall be scheduled so as to avoid operating several pieces of heavy equipment simultaneously, which causes high noise level nearby residential uses. After these mitigation measures are incorporated, construction noise impacts will be considered less than significant. 12.b. Less Than Significant Impact. Residential development is adjacent to the Project site on the north and therefore, there are persons that may be exposed to groundborne vibration or noise. This impact would occur during the site grading phase of the Project. It should be noted that this impact will be considered less than significant as the site has been previously graded; therefore, proposed grading operations will be of a short duration and will be of a less intensive nature than if no grading had previously occurred on the Project site. In addition, people working near the heavy equipment will be exposed to high noise levels for short periods of time. This level, however, is below the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) noise exposure limit of 90 dBA for 8 hours per day. The City and its private contractors are required to comply with OSHA requirements for employee protection during construction. Impacts are considered less than significant; therefore, no additional mitigation measures are required. 12.c. Less Than Significant Impact: For reasons described above, the proposed Project will not result in substantial increases in ambient noise levels above levels existing without the Project. Any noises generated by the Project will be less than the roadway noise generated primarily from 1-15. Impacts, while incremental, are considered less than significant. Therefore, no additional mitigation measures are required. 12.d. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will result in a temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project, but impacts will be considered less than significant. Please reference Response No. 12.b. No additional mitigation is required. 12.e. No Impact: The Project site is not located within any airport land use plan. The closest airport with an associated Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) is the French Valley Airport, which is located approximately 4.5 miles to the north/northeast of the Project site. There is no potential for the Project to expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels. No mitigation measures are required. 12.f. No Impact: The Project site is not located near any private airstrip. There is no potential for the Project to expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels. No mitigation measures are required. 29 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No _ Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? X b Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X c Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X Comments: 13.a. Less Than Significant Impact: As proposed, there will be a maximum of 140 units permitted on the Project site. The density is proposed at 20 dwelling units per acre, which is within the intensity range identified in the General Plan and the Development Standards of the High Density Residential District in the Development Code. Based on US Census data, Temecula's estimated persons per household is 3.26. Therefore, the Project will create 140 new residential units with a potential population of 456 persons. Relative to the total number residents of Temecula, the population generation of the Project is not significant and will not result in significant population growth or exceed population projections. The Project is consistent with the City's General Plan and therefore has been included in City population projections. The Project will not extend any major infrastructure into or through the general area. No potential for substantial growth is forecast to occur from implementing the Project. Impacts are considered less than significant; therefore, no mitigation is required. 13.b No Impact: No homes are located on the Project site; therefore, none will be displaced as a result of the development. No impacts will occur; therefore, no mitigation is required. 13.c. No Impact: The site is vacant. There is no opportunity to displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No impacts will occur; therefore, no mitigation is required. 30 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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 acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a Fire protection? _ _ _ X b Police protection? X c Schools? X d Parks? X e Other public facilities? X Comments: 14.a Less Than Significant Impact: Fire Protection The Riverside County Fire Department provides fire protection and safety services to the City. The nearest fire station is No. 12, at 28330 Mercedes Street in Old Town Temecula, approximately 1.5 miles from the Project site. The Project will result in incremental impacts to existing fire protection resources. Payment of the City's Development Impact Fees ensures that any potential impact will be reduced to an insignificant level. No additional mitigation measures are required. Police Protection Law enforcement services are provided to the City through a contractual agreement with the Riverside County Sheriffs Department. The nearest police station is located at 28690 Mercedes Street, approximately 0.9 miles from the Project site and the main station is located at 30722 — A Auld Road, in the French Valley area. The Project will result in incremental impacts to existing police protection services. Payment of the City's Development Impact Fees ensures that any potential impact will be reduced to an insignificant level. No additional mitigation measures are required. Schools The Project site is located within the jurisdiction of the Temecula Valley Unified School District (TVUSD). The site does not currently have any residences and does not place any demand on the existing school District. The Project will put an additional demand on school facilities. The Project is expected to generate students at a rate commensurate to that of the TVUSD, which are the following ratio of students per dwelling unit: 0.3754 elementary students, 0.1718 middle school students, and 0.2011 high school students. For the 140 proposed dwelling units, this would result in 53 new elementary school students, 24 junior high school students, and 28 high school students at buildout. The student generation total for the Project is forecast to be 125 new students. 31 The District requires payment of impact fees per dwelling unit. The development impact fee mitigation program of the TVUSD adequately provides for mitigating the impacts of the Project in accordance with current State law. As a result, the Project will not have a significant impact on the provision of school services and no additional mitigation measures are required. Parks The Project will increase population and associated burden on parks in the area. The Project will contribute to cumulative demand for public services within the City of Temecula. The City of Temecula's Quimby Requirements and Development Impact Fees (DIF) are designed to offset the potential impacts to fire, police, park and recreation and public facility maintenance, including roads. The Project's payment of these fees can reduce the potential service demand impacts related to the 140-units to a less than significant level. Since the Quimby Requirements and DIF are mandatory for development within the City, no additional mitigation is required for the public service issues. Impacts are incremental, but are considered less than significant. Other Public Facilities The Project will incrementally increase population and associated burden on other governmental services, including the library. To offset any impacts, the development will be required to pay the DIF which contains components to offset impacts to other governmental facilities. Since the DIF is mandatory for development within the City, impacts are considered less than significant and no additional mitigation is required. 32 15. RECREATION. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incor.orated Im.act Im.act a Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? X b Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? X Comments: 15.a. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will incrementally increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities; however this increase will not be so great that it will result in a substantial physical deterioration of these facilities. The Project will contain on-site private recreation areas (open space, pool, and clubhouse). Also, the City requires the payment of fees for park and recreation services as part of its Development Impact Fee (DIF) structure. Fees are considered sufficient to fund park and recreation facilities to support the population generated by the Project. In addition, the Project will be required to pay fees to satisfy the Quimby requirement generated by the subdivision of the land. With payment of the DIF park and recreation fees and satisfaction of the Quimby requirement, the Project's contribution to cumulative demand for park and recreation resources is reduced to a less than significant level of impact. No additional mitigation is required. 15.b. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project includes recreational facilities including a central green, a tot lot and a pool with recreation building. Please reference Response No. 15.a. above. With payment of the DIF and satisfaction of the Quimby requirement, the Project's contribution to cumulative demand for park and recreation resources is reduced to a less than significant level of impact. No additional mitigation is required. 33 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths and mass transit? X b Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? X c 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? X d Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? _ X _ e Result in inadequate emergency access? X f Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? _ X Comments: 16.a.b. Less Than Significant Impact: According to the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by Kunzman Associates, Inc. for the Project, "The study area intersections are projected to operate within the acceptable Levels of Service during the peak hours for Opening Year (2016) with Project Plus Cumulative traffic conditions." The proposed development is projected to generate approximately 819 daily vehicle trips, 62 of which occur during the morning peak hour and 73 of which occur during the evening peak hour. Furthermore, the TIA states, "The study area intersections are projected to operate within acceptable Levels of Service during the peak hours for Existing Plus Project/Opening Year (2016) Without Project/Opening Year (2016) With Proiect/Opening Year (2016) With Project Plus Cumulative ." It is anticipated that the proposed Project will have a less than significant impact. 16.c. No Impact: The proposed Project will not have an impact on air traffic patterns and will not result in a substantial safety risk. The Project is not within with the French Valley Comprehensive Land Use Plan, nor is the Project within the vicinity of a private airstrip. No impact is anticipated. 16.d.e.f. No Impact: The proposed Project will not result in hazards to safety from design features. The Project is designed to current City standards and does not propose any hazards. The proposed Project provides for adequate ingress and egress from the site. The Fire and Police Departments have reviewed and approved the emergency access only to Pujol Street, and on-site circulation. The proposed Project will not conflict with adopted plans, policies, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed Project. 34 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? X b Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? X c 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? X d Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? X e Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? X f Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? X g Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? X Comments: 17.a Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will likely create urban pollutants typical of any development, including oils and other substances. However, water quality standards and discharge requirements will not be violated if the following is satisfied: Given that the Project site exceeds five acres, the Project is required to acquire a Notice of Intent from the Regional Water Quality Board, in accordance with the City's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The NPDES permit is required for any discharge of wastes to surface waters, resulting from dewatering during construction, stormwater runoff from construction, and construction sites. The permit includes a list of Best Management Practices which outlines measures to be undertaken by the applicant to guard against accidental contamination of ground waters and surface waters. Compliance with the foregoing ensures significant water quality impacts will not result. 17.b. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will generate demand for wastewater service system capacity and have a potential to contribute to a cumulative demand impact on the wastewater system. Through the payment of sewer connection fees, the impact of implementing the Project on sewage systems is forecast to be less than significant. Other than mandatory fees and installation of onsite utility infrastructure, no additional mitigation is required. 17.c. Less Than Significant Impact: Consistent with the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for the Project, there are a series of on-site treatment solutions for water run-off. It is anticipated that the Project will not create a significant amount of storm water to require or result in the expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Considering the limited scope of the Project, and the required Conditions of Approval, the Project is anticipated to have a less than significant impact. 35 17.d. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project is located within the service boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). The Project will not significantly impact existing water supplies nor require expanded water entitlements. While the Project will have an incremental impact upon existing systems, the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's General Plan states, "RCWD anticipates supplying water to 167,640 persons within its service area in 2020 (pg. 5.14-3)." The Project is not subject to Senate Bill 221 requirements because it is not a residential development of 500 or more units, and it will not increase the number of water service connections by 10 percent or more in a district with fewer than 5,000 service connections. This Project is not subject to Senate Bill 610 because it is not a large-scale development. Other than mandatory fees and installation of onsite utility infrastructure, no mitigation is required. Since the Project is consistent with the City's General Plan, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the this Project. 17.e. Less Than Significant Impact: Please reference Response No 17.b. Other than mandatory fees and installation of onsite utility infrastructure, no additional mitigation is required. 17.f. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will generate demand for solid waste service system capacity and has a potential to contribute to potentially significant cumulative demand impacts on the solid waste system. Solid waste disposal capacity has been increased under the County to provide adequate disposal capacity for cumulative demand over the planning horizon (minimum of five years). The Project area's solid waste is collected and disposed of at the El Sobrante Sanitary Landfill located at 10910 Dawson Canyon Road east of Interstate 15. According to the State of California's Solid Waste Information System, the landfill is active and permitted with a projected closure date of January 1, 2030. The Project is not expected to generate solid wastes other than typical municipal solid waste generated by residential uses. Combined with the City's mandatory source reduction and recycling program, the Project is not forecast to cause any adverse impact to either the solid waste collection or landfill disposal system. 17.g. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project does not propose activities that will significantly impact solid waste services or facilities. The Project must comply with construction and debris removal and recycling requirements and shall contract with the City's waste hauler/franchisee for all bins and their removal in accordance with City Ordinance. Impacts are considered less than significant and no additional mitigation measures are required. 36 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a 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 1 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 prehistory? X b 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 protects)? X c Have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? - X Comments: 18.a Less Than Significant Impact: Based on evaluations and discussions contained in the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, the proposed 140 unit multi-family residential Project will have limited potential to degrade the quality of the environment. This site is previously disturbed (grading and abandoned concrete slabs) and is developed on two sides (north and east) with proposed development of the Western Bypass to the south and west. Also, the site does not contain any viable habitat for fish or wildlife species. This is an in-fill development and it does not 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 prehistory. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this Project. 18.b. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will not have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable. The effects from this Project are less than significant from a cumulative impact perspective. None of the impacts associated with the Project will be considerable when viewed in connection with the effect of the past projects, current projects and future projects. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this Project. 18.c. Less Than Significant Impact: The Project will not have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, directly or indirectly. The Project will be designed and developed consistent with the Development Code and the General Plan. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this Project. 37 19. 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. a Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the above 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 by mitigation measures based on the earlier anal sis. c Mitigation 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 project. a. The following sources are available at the City of Temecula Community Development Department located at 41000 Main Street and on the City's website at http://www.cityoftemecula.org/Temecula/Government/CommDev/Planning/cega.htm 1. City of Temecula General Plan 2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report 3. South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook 4. Temecula Foothills Project, Habitat Evaluation and Acquisition Negotiation Strategy Biological Analysis, April 2, 2013, Helix Environmental Planning 5. General MSHCP Habitat Assessment and Regulatory Constraints Analysis for the 7.15-acre Shearwater Creek Project Site, December 19, 2013 6. Noise Study for the Shearwater Creek Development Plan, January 2014, PCR Services Corporation 7. Shearwater Creek Air Quality and Global Climate Change Impact Analysis, January 10, 2014, Kunzman Associates, Inc. 8. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Pujol Multi-Family, June 18, 2014, Geocon Consultants, Inc. 9. Cultural and Paleontological Resources Survey Report for the Shearwater Creek Project, January 2014, Dudek 10. Shearwater Creek Development Plan Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), February 5, 2014 11. See attached Mitigation Monitoring Program b. None. c. See attached Mitigation Monitoring Program 38 Mitigation Monitoring Program Project Description: Planning Application No. PA13-0155, the Shearwater Creek Project ("Project") includes a Development Plan to construct a 140-unit attached residential project consisting of 13 buildings, including two-story townhomes and three-story walk-up flats, a pool, and clubhouse for Project residents, located on approximately 7 acres at the southernmost terminus of Pujol Street (on the west side). Planning Application No. PA13-0156, a Tentative Tract Map for Condominium Purposes (Condo Map) to define private and common ownership areas for the proposed 140 attached residential units. Location: The Project is generally located on the west side of the southernmost terminus of Pujol Street in the City of Temecula Applicant: Rob Honer, Ambient Communities 2917 Canon Street San Diego, CA 92106 Air Quality The project has the potential to impact air quality unless the following mitigation measures are included: AirQual1 During grading and construction activities, the applicant/builder shall comply with the requirements of the SCAQMD Rule 403. The purpose of this rule is to reduce the amount of particulate matter entrained in the ambient air as a result of man-made fugitive dust sources by requiring actions to prevent, reduce or mitigate fugitive dust emissions. AirQual2 The following mitigation measures are necessary to reduce construction related emissions of NOR,PM10 and VOCs: •Apply soil stabilizers to inactive areas. • Replace ground cover in disturbed areas within 72 hours of disturbance. •Suspend all excavating and grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 m.p.h. •Water the haul route and exposed surfaces a minimum of two times per day or as conditions require. • Use of construction equipment with low emission factors and high energy efficiency. •Perform regularly scheduled engine maintenance to minimize equipment emissions. • Use of alternative fuels such as ultra-low sulfur diesel or off-road construction vehicles/equipment where feasible. • Use of electric or diesel powered equipment rather than gasoline powered engines where feasible. •Where applicable limit the application of exterior architectural coatings (i.e. paint, etc.) to average no more than 225 gallons per week and/or use Zero-VOC paint. Specific Process: Place the above Mitigation Measures as Conditions of Approval on the Project to reduce air quality impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Milestone: Prior to grading permit. Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning Division and Public Works Department. Cultural Resources The project has the potential to impact cultural resources unless the following mitigation measures are included: CultRes 1 Prior to issuance of grading permit, the Project Applicant shall retain a Riverside County qualified archaeological firm to monitor all ground-disturbing activities. CultRes 2 Pechanga Tribal monitors shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities. Prior to issuance of grading permit, Project Applicant must submit a fully executed Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement, by and between the Pechanga Tribe the Project Applicant, and the landowner. The Agreement shall address the treatment of cultural resources on the Project property, the designation, responsibilities, and participation of Pechanga Tribal monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities; project grading and development scheduling; terms of compensation for the monitors; and treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site. CultRes 3 Prior to issuance of grading permit, the Project Applicant shall file a grading plan with the City, and a copy to the Pechanga Tribe, which sets forth the plan and methodology for grading activities, including a timeline, locations and nature of grading, details concerning the observation of grading activities by the archaeological firm and the Pechanga Tribe. Said plan or methodology shall include the requirement for a qualified archaeological monitor and Pechanga Tribal monitor to be present and to have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. At least 7 business days prior to project grading, the Project applicant shall contact the Pechanga Tribe to notify the Tribe of grading, excavation and the monitoring program/schedule, and to coordinate with the Tribe on the monitoring work schedule. In accordance with the Agreement required in MM2, the archaeological monitor's authority to stop and redirect grading will be exercised in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe in order to evaluate the nature and significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. Such evaluation shall include culturally appropriate temporary and permanent treatment pursuant to the Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement, which may include avoidance of cultural resources, in-place preservation and/or re-burial on Project property so they are not subject to further disturbance in perpetuity. Any reburial shall occur at a location predetermined between the landowner and Pechanga, details of which to be addressed in the Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement in CR MM2. 2 CultRes 4 If human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur in the vicinity of the find(s) until the Riverside County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission must be contacted within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission must then identify the "most likely descendant(s)", which parties agree will likely be the Pechanga Band based upon the Tribe's ancestral ties to the area and previous designation as MLD on projects in the geographic vicinity. The landowner shall engage in consultations with the most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD will make recommendations concerning the treatment of the remains within 48 hours as provided in Public Resources Code 5097.98 and the Treatment Agreement described in CR MM2. CultRes 5 The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods and all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area to the Pechanga Tribe for proper treatment and disposition pursuant to the Agreement required in CR MM2. CultRes 6 All sacred areas, should they be encountered within the project area, shall be avoided and preserved. CultRes 7 It is understood by the Applicant, the City and the Tribe that this Project area is located in the vicinity of and possibly contains components of a culturally significant Pechanga/Luiseno village, known as exva Temeku and/or associated cultural properties, including a Traditional Cultural Property (TCP). The Project area and TCP contain not only archaeological components, but also resources with cultural values, including, but not limited to ceremonial components. If inadvertent discoveries of subsurface archaeological or cultural resources are discovered during grading, the Developer, the project archaeologist, and the Tribe shall assess the significance of such resources and shall meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources, which may include avoidance of cultural resources, in-place preservation and/or re-burial on Project property so they are not subject to further disturbance in perpetuity. Any reburial shall occur at a location predetermined between the landowner and Pechanga, details of which to be addressed in the Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement in CR MM2. Pursuant to Calif. Pub. Res. Code § 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method of preservation for archaeological resources and cultural resources. If the landowner and the Tribe cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for the archaeological or cultural resources, these issues will be presented to the City Planning Director for decision. The City Planning Director shall make the determination based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological resources and shall take into account the cultural and religious principles and practices of the Tribe. Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the decision of the City Director of Community Development shall be appealable to the City Planning Commission and/or City Council. Specific Process: Place the above Mitigation Measures as Conditions of Approval on the project to reduce potential cultural resource impacts to a less than significant level. 3 Mitigation Milestone: Agreements and conditions prior to issuance of a grading permit, monitoring ongoing through grading operations, and final reports upon completion of grading. Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning Division and Public Works Department. Noise The project has the potential to have noise impacts unless the following mitigation measures are included: Noise 1 Noise-generating construction equipment operated at the Project site shall be equipped with effective noise control devices, (i.e, mufflers, lagging, and/or motor enclosures). All equipment shall be properly maintained to assure that no additional noise, due to worn or improperly maintained parts, would be generated. Noise2 Ensure that during construction, trucks and equipment are running only when necessary To the extent feasible, construction activities shall be scheduled so as to avoid operating several pieces of heavy equipment simultaneously, which causes high noise level nearby residential uses. Specific Process: Place the above Mitigation Measures as Conditions of Approval on the project to reduce potential noise impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Milestone: Grading permit issuance and building permit issuance. Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning Division and Public Works Department. 4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA—CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY EDMUND G.BROWN Jr.Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION iF,+! DISTRICT 8 tAi PLANNING(MS 722) 464 WEST 4th STREET.6th Floor SAN BERNARDINO.CA 92401-1400 Flex your power' PHONE (909)383-4557 Be energy efficient' FAX (909)383-5936 TTY (909)383-6300 www.dot.ca.gov/dist8 February 20, 2014 ft' 4, 2014 Matt Peters Associate Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 Shearwater Creek APNs: 922-110-013 and -014 (Riv15 PM 3.38) Mr. Peters, We have completed our initial review for the above mentioned proposal to construct a 140-unit attached residential project consisting of 13 buildings, including two-story townhouse and three- story walk-up flats located on approximately 7 acres at the southernmost terminus of Pujol along the west side. As the owner and operator of the State Highway System (SHS), it is our responsibility to coordinate and consult with local jurisdictions when proposed development may impact our facilities. As the responsible agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), it is also our responsibility to make recommendations to offset associated impacts with the proposed project. Although the project is under the jurisdiction of the City of Temecula due to the Project's potential impact to State facilities it is also subject to the policies and regulations that govern the SHS. We recommend the following to be provided: Traffic Study • A Traffic Impact Study (TIS) is necessary to determine this proposed project's near-term and long-term impacts to the State facilities and to propose appropriate mitigation measures. The study should be based on Caltrans' Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (TIS) which is located at the following website: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ocp/ilr ceqa files/tisguide.pdf Minimum contents of the traffic impact study are listed in Appendix"A" of the TIS guide. 1. further away from the project is typically not required because a project's potential impacts to the SHS dissipate to less than significant levels as traffic disperses throughout the transportation system. • The data used in the TIS should not be more than 2 years old. "Caltrans improves mobility across California" Mr. Peters February 20, 2014 Page 2 • The geographic area examined in the traffic study should include as a minimum all regionally significant arterial system segments and intersections, including State highway facilities where the project will add over 100 peak hour trips. State highway facilities that are experiencing noticeable delays should be analyzed in the scope of the traffic study for projects that add 50 to 100 peak hour trips. • Traffic Analysis Scenarios should clearly be exhibited as exiting, existing + project, existing +project+cumulative, and existing +project+ cumulative + ambient growth. • Caltrans endeavors that any direct and cumulative impacts to the State highway system be eliminated or reduced to a level of insignificance pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA) standards. • The LOS for operating State highway facilities is based upon Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) identified in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). Caltrans endeavors to maintain a target LOS at the transition between LOS "C" and LOS "D" on State highway facilities; however, Caltrans acknowledges that this may not always be feasible and recommends that the lead agency consult with Caltrans to determine the appropriate target LOS. If an existing State highway facility is operating at less than this target LOS, the existing MOE should be maintained. In general, the region-wide goal for an acceptable LOS on all freeways, roadway segments, and intersections is "D". For undeveloped or not densely developed locations,the goal may be to achieve LOS "C". • Clearly indicate LOS with and without improvements. • It is recommended that the Synchro Analysis includes all intersections from the Project site to the proposed study areas. A PHF of 0.92 in urban areas is recommended to be used in the Synchro Analysis. • All freeway entrance and exit ramps where a proposed project will add a significant number of peak-hour trips that may cause any traffic queues to exceed storage capacities should be analyzed. If ramp metering is to occur, a ramp queue analysis for all nearby Caltrans metered on-ramps is required to identify the delay to motorists using the on- ramps and the storage necessary to accommodate the queuing. The effects of ramp metering should be analyzed in the traffic study. For metered freeway ramps, LOS does not apply. However, ramp meter delays above 15 minutes are considered excessive. • Proposed improvements should be exhibited in preliminary drawings that indicate the LOS with improvements. • Submit a hard copy of all Traffic Impact Analysis documents and an electronic Synchro Analysis file. Caltrans improves mobility across California' Mr. Peters February 20, 2014 Page 3 We appreciate the opportunity to offer comments concerning this project. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Talvin Dennis at (909) 806-3957 or myself at (909) 383-4557 for assistance. Sincerely, DANIEL KOPULSKY Office Chief Community and Regional Planning "Caltrans improves mobility across California'. 7,... o� 1Eilip.N\1 „.,, ,, ,,,,„ -., , ,,,„ ,iJ Notice of Public Hearing _. ,,,„5„,,, ,„ , '4,,p 1989 .? °l.NM new A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the City of Temecula PLANNING COMMISSION to consider the matter described below: Case No: PA13-0155 (Development Plan) and PA13-0156 (Tentative Tract Map 36568) Applicant: Rob Honer, Ambient Communities Proposal: The Shearwater Creek Project ("Project") includes a Development Plan to construct a 140-unit attached residential project consisting of 13 buildings, including two-story townhomes and three-story walk-up flats, a pool, and clubhouse for Project residents. The Project also includes Tentative Tract Map 36568 for Condominium Purposes (Condo Map) to define private and common ownership areas for the proposed 140 attached residential units. The Project consists of 7.05 gross acres on two parcels. APN 922-110-013 is 3.73 acres. APN 922-110- 014 is 3.32 acres Environmental: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed project will not have a significant impact upon the environment based upon a completed Environmental Initial Study and Mitigation Monitoring Plan. As a result, a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be adopted in compliance with CEQA. Case Planner: Matt Peters, (951) 694-6408 Place of Hearing: City of Temecula, Council Chambers Date of Hearing: March 19, 2014 Time of Hearing: 6:00 p.m. I% W i,1 Project Site �‘, `, • 10 a e 0 r AO iii \, \ f 1 h vyo9 I c4 worE.BYPAgs en 1 ` \, 0 400 800 1,800 F TFM CU b ''�� ■ Feet ini �A'ORr The agenda packet (including staff reports) will be available for viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula) after 4:00 p.m. the Friday before the Planning Commission Meeting. At that time, the packet may also be accessed on the City's website — www.cityoftemecula.orq. Any Supplemental Material distributed to a majority of the Commission regarding any item on the Agenda, after the posting of the Agenda, will be available for public review in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula), 8:00 a.m. — 5:00 p.m. In addition, such material will be made available on the City's website — www.cityoftemecula.orq — and will be available for public review at the respective meeting. If you have any questions regarding any item of business on the Agenda for this meeting, please call the Planning Department, (951) 694-6400. r � ITEJ1 5 L J STAFF REPORT— PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF MEETING: March 19, 2014 TO: Planning Commission Chairperson and members of the Planning Commission FROM: Armando G. Villa, AICP, Director of Community Development PREPARED BY: Stuart Fisk, Case Planner PROJECT Planning Application No. PA13-0217, a Tentative Tract Map revision SUMMARY: application (TTM 33584) to change the number of lots from 4 lots (one condominium lot, one recreation building lot, and two open space lots) for 62 detached condominium units to 4 lots (one condominium lot, one recreation building lot, and two open space lots) for 59 detached condominium units located at the northeast corner of Rancho Vista Road and Mira Loma Road RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution recommending project approval subject to conditions CEQA: Mitigated Negative Declaration PROJECT DATA SUMMARY Name of Applicant: Jim Ahmad, Inland Communities General Plan Medium Density Residential (M) Designation: Zoning Designation: Mira Loma PDO-11 Existing Conditions/ Land Use: Site: Vacant (M) North: Multi-Family Residential/Edison Sub-Station (H/PI) South: Single-Family Residential (LM) East: Single-Family Residential/Vail Elementary School (LM/PI) West: Multi-Family Residential (H) Existing/Proposed Min/Max Allowable or Required Lot Area: 7.2 acres existing/2,400 2,400 square feet minimum square feet minimum Total Floor Area/Ratio: NA NA Landscape Area/Coverage: NA NA Parking Required/Provided: NA NA 1 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. ANALYSIS Tentative Tract Map 33584 was reviewed by the Planning Commission on November 15, 2006 and was approved by City Council in conjunction with the Mira Loma PDO-11 on April 10, 2007. The previously approved Tentative Tract Map subdivided 7.2 acres into four (4) lots (one condominium lot, one recreation building lot, and two open space lots) for 62 detached condominium units. The proposed revised map would remain as four (4) lots (one condominium lot, one recreation building lot, and two open space lots), however the map would reduce the number of detached condominium units from 62 to 59 detached condominium units in order to reconfigure the site to both reduce the number and height of retaining walls on the site. The proposed map revision results in a density of 8.2 units per acre, which is consistent with the Medium Density General Plan density range of 7.0 to 12.9, and the minimum proposed condominium exclusive use area of 2,400 square feet is consistent with the existing Mira Loma PDO-11 minimum lot size of 2,400 square feet and maximum of 10 dwelling units per acre. As previously approved, vehicular access to the site will be taken from two ingress/egress driveways along Mira Loma Road. The Fire Department has reviewed the site plan and determined that there is proper access and circulation to provide emergency services. LEGAL NOTICING REQUIREMENTS Notice of the public hearing was published in the U-T San Diego on March 5, 2014 and mailed to the property owners within the required 600-foot radius. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Staff has reviewed the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and based on an Environmental Initial Study, it has been determined the project will not have a significant impact on the environment; therefore, Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project. A Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated for the project with a comment period from December 23, 2013 to January 21, 2014. The results of the Initial Study show environmental impacts for the project are all less than significant with the mitigation proposed in the Mitigation Monitoring Program developed for the project. Two comment letters were received with regard to the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration. A comment letter was received from the Native American Heritage Commission providing general information on California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements relating to archeological resource and providing a list of Native American contacts for consultation concerning the project site. Pechanga Cultural Resources also provided correspondence, stating that "After reviewing this revised Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) which analyzes the changes to the Project (a reduction in the number and change of type of residential units to 59 detached condominiums), the Tribe is in agreement with the measures as posed. Please incorporate them into the final MND and as Conditions of Approval." 2 FINDINGS Tentative Tract Map (Code Section 16.09.140) 1. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, Subdivision Ordinance, General Plan, and the City of Temecula Municipal Code. As designed and conditioned, the proposed subdivision map is consistent with the development standards within the proposed Planned Development Overlay, Development Code, Subdivision Ordinance, and General Plan. 2. The Tentative Map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, nor is the land subject to a Land Conservation Act contract. The proposed land division does not divide land designated for conservation or agricultural use. 3. The site is physically suitable for the uses and proposed density as shown on the tentative map as proposed by the Tentative Map. The site is physically suitable for the uses and proposed density as shown on the tentative map as proposed by the Applicant. 4. The design of the proposed subdivision and the proposed improvements, with appropriate conditions of approval, is not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project is not anticipated to affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. 5. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project has been reviewed and commented on by Fire Prevention, the Public Works Department, and Building and Safety. As a result, the project has been appropriately conditioned to protect public health. Further, provisions are made in the General Plan to ensure that the public health, safety, and welfare are safeguarded, and the project is consistent with this document. 6. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. Prior to the construction of buildings, the applicant will be required to submit building plans to the Building and Safety that comply with the Uniform Building Code, which contains requirements for energy conservation. 7. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public will be provided. 3 All required rights-of-way and easements have been provided on the Tentative Map or required by Conditions of Approval. The City has reviewed these easements and has found no potential conflicts. 8. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). This is a map for residentially zoned property and will therefore be subject to applicable Quimby fees at the time that building permits are issued for the project site. ATTACHMENTS Aerial Map Plan Reductions Resolution Exhibit A - Draft Conditions of Approval Initial Study Mitigation Monitoring Program Public Correspondence Notice of Public Hearing 4 AERIAL MAP City of Temecula Project Site - t'� , I Wit VW. �. s. (may • a j i .� �� i •1 --;I7a i itla: r1.' -A°5 4.41 V . ,4%, —,, , 411166 c - *-1* ," " 4. sp...0C°14z. y R.. ,..3 .• 71-00, f. -, It_ -vs z: idik 0o ,b 0‘.14110, Ak_.",.- 'i' Iti> '',„,/,.!' ;II o� WW1. ,,f ' , f , ,R fir i �' Project Site .. .. r, illlikAih..1 / j 4 is • Y t ".. .el , . - 4,- .T. 4 / . . '1 _--- g-----r---- _7"_,, 4, --- 41%, 1 1 ( yp. /r I r i.... ,.. ..... ...... .... ., -- , • ,.,,, ,r, at% ,,loit . 1,..x,„ ......1.,.. / (.0 . .. rik .; ., • , . . . ...f.f _it .. . _ , . ...1- ,Illt Mil L. - - .,. ,,:.,:::,--:::::;..-,-:0000::::. . ,t,..:1'a,4,:i1111Wtffilerki..; ,,,..".4.,_:::,....":1,',L, i. ,, -. ''','.i.: : it .„ ,.. idi, Ji 4444, • ,,,,,,4 , .. . , 4,,,,,Avi- ...,0 , , . , „„,„ , ... „......, ,:,_ . ,. , , . „...•., .. • it :. ,., , ''i\, ' )N, , .. . ILIIIV "'2 This map was made by the City of Temecula Geographic Information System. ' The map is derived from base data produced by the Riverside County Assessor's y V Department and the Transportation and Land Management Agency of Riverside a� Aerial -2012 County.The City of Temecula assumes no warranty or legal responsibility for the sxv ", information contained on this map.Data and information represented on this map are subject to update and modification.The Geographic Information System and 0 125 250 500 other sources should be queried for the most current information. This map is not for reprint or resale. Feet CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA .0 I G FI TENTATIVE TRACT 33584 f;-r' ��;, 1, [ FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES I h . i W ]r t l(4_ 1 1T % •rte Il+w9 I.- - _ + -_.; ;\ f A r---,---, 1' _-� r:6 I1ew I l r ppI r r.''''T.:1+`". r/ i�)�rr,/l `Y1 r .,' .] !t`/ ' ::=1. 11`y� ,Y ^i . �_,. j J: 5, l� 5 Y•l� ' ' - `� Fps+^I). • X11. l 1 r oI - FIRE HYDRANT DETAIL• VICINITY MAP '� "A - - _ tt�F NOT TO SCALE - r I - ;a'�1 I TO SCALE TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH,RANGE J WEST,SECTION I 1I _ _•'� y90(A[f MOM=(IT IYY'�9Yr ( J f .0 P0CATIS EWNG FRE RIMI, OWNER/APPLICANT ENGINEER 116 1.11 r 1, /,I ...A trANlw°'n"°AS MIRA LOMA RECOVERY LLC VSL ENUWCCRING 6930 WEST SUNSET BM D.SUITE 460 31605 TEMECULA PARKWAY,4129 9.Y�� ',1 \Y _ .. / IC I OS ANGELES,CA 90029 TEMECULA,CA 92593 ! e Z�'3',PHONE:1323161+100 PHONE'051)296-393D !Jr � FAX 565]1 1396 D tI r FAX 11311814-800 F. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ; ._ 8 �' h , f -[ ear DAVID NEAULTS ASSOCIATES ^ '•�„ - \, P 1 419/(ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTH,9140 )7---_ R T,IJ � --^ - - —•�. TEMECULA-CA 92590 Tr PHONE 19511296-3430 `' ✓P FAX 1951)296393 J- -. '�- / A,B,&C STREETS(FRI VATS) ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER fJJJ r 1� ' 1 'I r ��1 i NmroSGIP 444-060-AR ( J �,^ LEGAL DESCRIPTION: S Y I�•r J Lry-JF6'. J PARCEL 3 AS SHOWN BY PARCEL MAP 21014 IN PARCEL MAP BOOK 1 J 105,PAGES II&19,RECORDS OF RIVERSI DE COUNTY.STATE OF I / x" �'9 'fy. 1 CALIFORNIA } EXISTING ZONING' t '`� {VEST F1L6TI EXISTING DESIGNATION. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY(P00-11) - ` ^ - �' ~M- PROPOSED DESIGNATION: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVE RCA,'IPIXI-1 I) ����� MAP '41i ` NUMBER OF 1_01„,X [__,66* 300 s SY —19_�T OO' C IW 1o0 xm SCALE)•_100' N3 MBCR OF OPEN SPACE LOTS ' EXIST � rtMy �E%IST mut E'+Yon' ^I I��R�+ AVERAGE CONDOMINIUM 11NEE SIZE: {II,��, 1.9, �6 2,501 SF GENERAL NOTES -l; [ '�� L TN ERE ARE NO EXISTING STRUCTURES LOCATED ONTFIE SITE. MINIMUM Ear SIZE EXIST. • ECIST. 2,400SF 1 EXISTING POWER POLES TO BE PLACED UNOERGROU N D. GUTTE CONE 1 EXISTING EDISON FACILITIES WILL BE RELOCATED B EXISTING GUTTER GUTTER GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION EASEMENT WILL OE VACATED. EXISTING DESIGNATION: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL II-1200/AC) A THIS OF THE LAND DIVIDERiE ENTIRE CONTIflIOU$ MIRA LOMA DRIVE SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATION: 5 THIS MAP IS AAIAP OF A RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUAI PROJECT AS Cf1YQ1F]AE Sro. A(COT'1'6,'100.1 THIS SITE IS NOT WITHIN A SPECIFIC PLAN fi DEFINED IN SECTION 1350 OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA C111L CODE ALL LANDSCAPING,INCLUDING PARKWAYS,STREET LIGHTS ON LAN XI USE: STLAND USE VACANT PRIVATE STREETS..RECREATIONAL AMENITIES,INCLUDING LOTS), EST 3,S 4,SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY TI IE 110A. PROP,LAND USE: MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL(CONDOMINIUMS/ TOTAL GROSS AREA. SOURCE OFTOPO TO CENTERLINE OF RANCHO VISTA RDl AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY FLOWN BY HUNSAXER S ASSOCIATES ON AMA COMA ROAM 9:fi5 ACRES MARCH 29,2005 NORTH SOUTH LESS AREA USED FOR COLLECTOR STREET: -0.73ACRE.S )MIRA LOMA ROADI LESS AREA USED FOR ARTERIAL STREET: -0,TA ACRES (RANCHO 11STA ROAD) TOTAL NET AREA: 1.25 ACRES 1 I MIItt ORK VVAKIIIH! CUT 25,000CV A9F1ML 1" "P11LYB^ _ T.FI •y1 FILL- _.,000 CY. yL AFTIIMOYI[ llft[3F5 / PUBLIC UTILITIES/SERVICES � --� � .��•�i {'iF><tP���' r SCI OOL DISTRICT: TEMECULA UNIFIED 5CIIOOL DISIRICE GAS: SOIIT1iERN CALIFORNIA GAS COAIPANY cur �>;01giY,l EXIST. EXIST. 0350 RANCHO VISTA ROAD 1951 lY LUGONIA •8 O DI ick, DRUGS �� 9 LY- TEMECULA CA 92592 PA1.DUX 1611 G 05 I)4162611 REDLANDS,CA 9 2313 RANCHO VISTA ROAD WATER RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT 1-600-021.2200 '5 42135 WINCHESTER ROAD TELEPHONE: YERIZON NOTTO SCAZE�01N ) TEMECULA,CA 92590 P.O.BOX 0001 LTfY0F1F1WLUlASN.R0.101 ARY ARTERIAL) (1511296!900 LMUI.F.WY.NYU(A Wilk LOT SUMMARY SEINER: EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT I-600-063-4000 EOTL_ 30.1411 If 9T1 WCRSS. 2770TRUMOLE ROAD CA LE 1ERIZON LDTF! _S:I10SF 0.11 A(RFY; PRRPAREDLNRL'R IlIE FIKECT PAOF. - - - - -- `- /'1 PERRIS,CA 92572 PO BBX00D1 WI 1, *9,1133F818W 3}'a ILLS - 3-- CITY OF TEMECULA 195I)928-]111 INGLEWOOD,CA 90313 -- „—; ELECTRIC SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 1-600JS3-7000 )LCLt; WkSF ASS AClLt -- ----- — TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 335$0 IRITV>,temta 43m. ' ID1%40CAIIACAftSl3 RICHARD YALDEZ DATE - '� uv $HEEY'1 L7f'2 I ias R.CE 48060,EXP.12-31-13 ear R=� •msurs ,, j_--- 1 — ` I TR4010 Cake wolErr4 - LOT 82 �, f PUBLICINSTrTUfIONAL / j I• -°j——�-- — .._\ / MB 64/92 //; g— I ! I I r I I \ y , / 1 f I I IM964421 � \\ /�� _-------- ---- — // / I _ __ _L_ r i Y ---------------- LOT 83 / ' III MB 64/92 / -' fff LOT44$ OPEN SPACE , PARCEL BOUNDARY s yr F LOT 3 / i � _ ° �. OPEN SPACE /// / I �y OPEN SPACE '' '. oPCa SPICE _ — I \ / \ LEGEND II LRr 4 -- — �-�-�`J•._ / y OPEN SPACE vb {} —_ _ w�crc`der n'� RsEai} =:=.1,1,1=—L } _ 1 �1 / I ` �'// ` a,.a. . .._m r k—^i—i _ LOT 1 — ~am ~` i ! a •(. „„t a+snanFU ACCESS _.�..1■.,. fff 664 , �--ter= _ _ / �r,. � - r!/, _ • __ —— = — �•aEe sr+E =�� rioT 1t I j ■ II▪ �� \ LOT x LOT 1 -_ SOT 1 / , ° PEN SPACE LOT 2 LOT.r / / \ 111 Ac k3yy �, /r c . r / / \ ` _ i/ y/ Rai �� ,r,^ ''/jam AAA / �., \ \\ ,t\+ 8 ter! _BASTRREET — /��4.. / /�'r / \�� \\ LOT 1 ~� pltem„ `�� / `L, / EASEMENT NOTES• PM 21014 \ +\ - r rr MYYtt"� •• ie / + y' A u�.tws rwn of r zrrn. ai rn r 'wcs 1 r _ Rr MIA Mai 0010&F- 4040:0rt c0 MD HIGH RESIDENTIAL \ r r "•- -{ A rvetweRue mn+a++eacc.'.rownswmra. PM 133/13 \ •\, 0..s: i.+ rr / '' w:r ello \ \ +�E4 Irk 1tl 1 • Wt E[SEV1L _ w'OrF 0,5MP0 k \\ ■\ LOT ■1 4i^.r . r r . ' \� �� DE5.50DER 3.5 _ .5,5 \ I. y \ - LOT 3 E 4., t '�c • u...r. R. si K - ..• OPEN SPACE 1' /\ aa.m^.r r q . _ 0c 4 __ cPSonr�F c au Eo Pna TO /\ �` _ _ r' �� 0 x eat or F m ors ,o m rrcw m / \ sr. w -�-. !' / 4�`� I 40 TEL( h 0 R- Be Noce_EF PRltti9£KC or// �� - .�.��� � / �-,� � -•.� ' s 0EoRFSF,PEREOWrsm�,-i;roMY25205 CF' '\ ♦.PER1 T l0. r / e! /// _ MAR Mq OR \�Y'-•.,� l ' l 11 .R \ u�rHEin•.�w� .,co vi��nE,TO a<ocr...rm `'+.,� f / MSEAIENT RELOCATION NOTE / '� I/ I ■ �ns+E�.ac+w�.WA.t4r 0«010`° 0�0 EE 40000.01/ / ^` °--., / I x.P.._H50 CMS 5001 22 NE IPAOT / _ JJ / I / fOGH2/0/4 ....I/1 1 I // PM/3m ,1 f / II // ' ) ! I/ — ..........0.Mr AM e I 'IN / / ———— CITY OF TEMECULA I. r �- --1 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33584 SHEET 2 OF 2 ‘,.. CITY OF TEMECULA,STATE OF CALIFORNIA 1. t COO' RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE ` `4,;�. ' € FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES `�-' EXHIBIT LTA" 1 et A" :y. fn - (?-7--- .. ... ' .6d --. I @�1 T^ate i -..�.r"-�'+Irf t+ �•..a . y a J/ // PW pTri e T .rY�Hi 't� f""f," .t 1 P J is .J--,4-1_1_4.....),,-'I I I 5 / \\\\ , VICINITY MAP 1 t`rA!�r� z""��`4 % A1 "' FIRE HYDRANT DETAIL NOT TO SCALED , f e •,l .�a�a�k tAf ro�CAW TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTI I.RANGE 3 WEST,SECTION I -1 f _ '. i % YNO WAITS MD. 8lWllli I �1 ro WAITS E+SAG rM wow MO NT ENGINEER �.,. + 1� 3?' - �`• Y Z 1p'1rfwN 'H(LVRI 11R LOMA RECOVERY LLC SSL ENGINEERING "I ° '-via ( J ! ,l nr .I WEST SINS LT DEVIL SUITE 460 0805 TEMECULA PARKWAY P129 r: r '' SANGCI CS CA 90012 TEMECULA C 959_ , A S}' 2 -'� /± ! - -- - - - PHONE(9 1 9639W -A' ..I 4TTT PHONE IJ:31824a0W �_`� l -_JI I R■4AX 18381531 096 / _Jr_ 5/II FAX Il2J)8]4-sBW .•. * } `�...� ., f{ 4. ! ff. �..•:r `ASEYDI!R AM LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT [ ,1 :' .A�,wl ! t-r ISLE 0 .. DAVID NLAULT.ASSOCIATES l"! C �. ! pI .If, -.--- J WI¢w • N7ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTH 2140 1 .r� ! ------"-- TEAIECIl1A,CA921W Y .- f r0. ` . C - .1.1, FHpNE I9511:9634]11 ` '''-'25-.._'''.42 9YIII FAX 020'963431 11 ,+„rl •_ �'`- A,B,&C STREETS(PRIVATE) i, : COUNTY, `Sp L� I ' !:I• (YF = a BDrroscAlE :'y a 1.5. •..q} 4 f f - .ASSESSO S PARCEL NUMBER, 944-0 r//9 J ''d a• { y'f I:4' LEGAL �' , PARCEL SHOWN IN PARCEL MAP BOO r t/. � 1f e . J EST IJI,PAGES 1 l.14,RfCORDS O-RIVERSI DE STAIL OF 01 ' t 1;-..21 F CALIFORNIA J AST EXISTING ZONING Ji! Ww EXISTING DESIGNATION- POSEDDESN ATTON PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY(POU.113 _Num DER OF S. INDEX MAP - - 1H ,_' V T� .SCALE I"-WV +: 7=' r NUMBER OF OPEN SPACE LOTS: Iw J� 1 EXIST EXIST ILSnuLiY�A1YT1.'i iAxwn�t " �y`y sulc N•f94` A V CRAG C CON DO.MINIUAI UNIT SIZE: }3, 1'61 1,523 SF. GENERAL NOTES A 'r -A..-_�.r �_ >W---- Jr(FP 1. TIIERF ARE NO EXISING STRUCTURES LOCATED ON TILE SITE I-; g s�' y.“b�� CCL .-y ' MINIMUM LOT SIZE E%1ST✓] EXIST 1JW SE, 2 EX1STTNG POWER POLES TO DE PLACED UNDERGROUND, C GUTTER J EXISTING EDISON FACILITIES WRL BE RELOCATED.EXISTING GUTTER IUITER GENERAL PLAN D[SICNAMOIJ•' EASEMENT WILL BE VACATED EXISTNG DESIGNATION: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL II-IIDUiAC) J THIS TENTATIVE A1AP INCLUDES THE ENTIRE CONTIGUOUS MIRA LOMA DRIVE THIS OWNERSHIP OF THE LAND DIVIDER SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATION: A THIS MAP IS A MAP OF A RESIDE NI SAL CONDOMINIUM PROJECT AS QiraFTU1FQ .1�. (fD111Y'TD111 SCALE THIS SITEISNDE IVITIIINA$PECIFIC''PLAN 6 DEFINED IN SECTION 1330 OF TH E STATE OF CAL FORMA CRTL CODE SA T O OR A P E O O A E C I R O TR S A HTS ON LAND UST'. PRIVATE STREETS.RECREATIONAL pMENRTES.INCLUDING LOTS 2, EXIST.LAND USE- VACANT 3,d 4,SHALL BE MA NTANED BY THE 1-10k PROP.LAND USE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAI(CONDOSIMUNIM TOTAL CROSS AREA SOURCE OF TOPO /TO CENTERLINE OF 865 ACRES RD/ AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY F LON EDIT IIIMAkL.R A AYi11C1A1Lteel MARCH 29,2005 NORTH SOUTH MIRA LOMA ROAD LESS AREA USED FOR COLLECT OR STREET -076 ACRES 1.4, MIRA LOMA ROAD) Jl Jr C651ARVALPSWIVRARTIAPAL111117 d d'1rti JA A 'I er IRANC110 4151 D)A ROAM --✓ TOTAL NET AREA 725 ACRES 2, - P. „? EARTIIIVURK QUANTITIES EXIST. LL fi II CUT° 25 E 6 A1fINLl'111[11 FILL= 25,000 CY -- 7T - PUBLIC UTILITIES/SERVICES EARTHWORK QUANTITIES SCHOOL D151 NICE TEMECULA UNIFIED SCIi0TJL DIS I OCT SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CA5 COMPANI' A Y 1 -` l'I'M 31350 RANK 110 VISTA ROAD 1981 W.LUGO,. I CURTER CUTEK TEMECULA,CA 92592 I DBOX 300.3 �� 00DCY. G rvs D 616-2661 REDLANDS,CA v373 RANCHO VISTA ROAD SVp.a, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT I-800 427-2200 QTY OFIf)D1111Aa]D.N0.101 YAPTfs1e1 J21J5 WNCHESTER ROAD TELEPHONE: VERIZON tiOTroI SBCWJDAR ) .MECL'LA,CA DM% PO„BOX 0001 LOT SUMMARY 19511 E ESS E WOOD,CA 90313 RESTER EASTERN MUNICIPAL WA]ER DISTRICT 1-100-1714000 LOP.' )M III 31 6.T#Al'/J'3 0TR11M01T:0.0.513 SHELL rI'JI00X PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF CITY OF TEMECULA PEHRIS,['A 9:512 Pp W%0001 �� -- 031J 9257777 IN'GLEWOOD,CA TOMS EIE�RIG SOUTHERN CAL1FORnlAEOISON 1-wW-JXJ<1Rw ( TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33584 16100 MENTFEE ROAD • IIkee47,fap.0 IT1,IL5 RICHARD VALDEZ DAIS SHEET I OF 2 14.3-4..60:1 RC r.rrocar 11AI.el mI .n...r. I - I _ alit v1L�e[nA _— }.. PUBLIC R'rEi J1 O Al a• ▪ ! ''1 I ■M I r i 1 I �Lf}19hs 6?SI4AL f ,, r ! ;_ F — _ �� .nn rr � 1 1 r - , f i : 1 $1 e. H ,__I.-._ ._.!___-_i__ fi Y. " _ ___ -r-- Ors e / Lei r ! �'. _-- - _ - ti \..,4' - `R~ • OWL m YR WINN• vA OrkxSPACES " `. / �''! / N ° '; r `., -f^ ter `` ,r�� p./.1..C. ,e7 //7/,/ ,'is / .. W es" paAC(i nauwaFNr.r sW , u '- f /v !! / ,q • 1 I T I �,,,. _ F rmW.etT `"._�...� A Lots w+ F-7.0=-.. /J r 1. { A 1 i1 q" z..,—,:7-^-- ■„LOT li y s1rs�SL9T 3j 1`-t7 ! .d ,i-..�„ / / L LEGEND 11 yr �_ fi�os r„ ,;.-7.":":„r:-.....--:-.`" x ?_ d _�7 ozi `� A !fir `' M.PONT 1 4 .1.-. .�.[ .woe ! i .°. z _ r - t. f-___r- a J'.!:1 //l \ f // `` LOW PONT LP l h s Fg �t �!1QI+ Rio �. "tiw4-� Y7a< {.. i I yq L_- !� o:s // r. D c OS 4 L 1 °.�s^' - .�.� L-� oD z D r f."i I A e�//,..%, WATER arwm e.�wE i'' C .`�1..- r i ,,ff, 1 , �_fe Fry j — »r / WOE ~� � = w 1 (tf 4 / 14x/ �. / 9.WALK s`w ' 7'.Y ° ill �r o a ,, I f _ ME xrosart t //f --- °•t ai a Fr z} � / 'r. �.+ ,,/ ' / i�• RAC,ammo,. 1 * ' e ;°r- '� h T - '' / c - ' ''f.// I,. % RETAKING WALL IGVADIWAIW 5 � r-at^ Sj7..:A. :�E 9D.A i 4 ° s2.4.-_ LOT t 'Y'.'� 14-' '� r_-__1 i _ ,� _ ,, / / err SAN(zL MA.) Y . , ++4 i sa.s t ° A 'r ' to eels aa'� m ++ -d° r! ( I eAanc wN �.-. 1., c •it x -7 .-..k ss r T, r , e 4 r vT- •°'1�.. -1 a, '' p I . ENDEMIC'WATER s- '1., \ . f,,i�ITK GIS -..-"� r r ! +17. I. .war t -^ / Ft� I / 4" PROPOSED SEDER q revs a / / _ . 41 s^ 'I' c a r.c` � �1 a T' ° i a v r / /// { . x PROPOSED WA. •_. \ \ ° r� i1°f m -7 'r r` a dsx / 1 a 7 ., , a �� f / $alie,l/ n°nwtte snw wr/ y �"' Mr "�` �'-. dl�r 1 I @] ° -r .., r_ rx / ,A' �N� .'F'ti PROPOSED PAVEMENT 1... . I \ r\t d er- '�, r r r ' / ✓. 1; /.�. nsatTd smut note * 4 \ 4\ .'� --1- oa L-.. .'I as eJ ar � .4 d)s 5... e *.r I" r tip•. ;.•V. . \` ri /_ " u ' a, _.sit.. rr _ c r / ' w r 1/ / -. r ! \ \ . t' �1.. Err A '9D' ''4, f . \ \ >' _ .; '-�da \. rt..A .95,9 !ll \. y �,__d� cast .. ..� �`• A `T9'EaTT aA 1 f EASEMENT NOTES rM2i914 '`\ \ ti ♦s v c +--� ci - � - - - f Di mxLCDrw M,Tt.1,.! 1114iiimuk!'LVAL \ '"•N ^•`, `--5 _. ase Orr r r :I - a.,y J F. r upu, arto.t Pot i1l33 . 1 i;;,4-4-.1c":, C4,0/1,1 N -E DEL.,. ' 1J"! '�•..., ..��- Y•, 1.P , r °t.° :d} Y / ` 1 Yy � jtS`'rZe / ```�.. - ``�---_f r ,nip L ■ rt *y / 1 1 .i ;\ E LDr E,>n "� ,F � ti � ~'' r L rsT r ,I ,� s LW:N a m t t r: . ,f '-`-',.;41,.,- i»:v''` ' LOt 3 �{ L u 1 ti• ' �,n.o reRP�s. l r-`�!L yy� �\ ` --- rn �_`---`y�µ� !_ e,�_�_y I 4 r „y .. ;�� rr..,Fsci vr_ao Er.n co nso xA M^c 21,.;` 1,:r C' f N'1, p \ >... ,t r.,ti:`�- . �_cr ,1 4 k v�/' ro �r A. +� V 4 0 Mkri a• 7,..FE'VT SEE ESLOVIIM NOTE ELM r `- \.' '. `ice� ' �` _h..�,%I` e e PAIN 10 D. _ 3, `8Y iI " ,. iD n'PM rw LE D BE MIS P<: Y.� A . � J�}V .a'-''f:'4. 5es a '^..P I su▪e'F�. s I /' 4.F 1 �o /• .!s ,is '4'• r gtt�, �lT Z ^h �r i ` �._. =„ ,Wrgc- c+ac.R F �:.. /�1 / J ` LL. D,ToPO.9 rD ,\ -X, rt l''''.,,. }LIC u+pa{ ��--.'-'1„.-::x ��$ .''''',013'''*, q 1 f { r L:nuTED .,THE BAAL LEAP' - fis ,. IT �� 4 � !1 I f� s{ iL�rn�sttyrnraaNr+�te .F u ' - A 1:1,1::1 j t J `"��' Pws PELC,L CO Lr uIc D Tx a'„ »LLn,w Ewa , , ,,�y r f 1 +' Y' s — Bare, \▪' �� � F 9 :0"..• el)., 1, 1, *.• ,�• : rXIV../i.VS,LD%Iitt mw.2T a+urdr.. - - - S irar-9�f—.L CCTV OF CT TEMECULA 33 �,� T>rrrArrrs'DUCT MAP 33584 r+.e wcNARD VALDEL DATE ®e ,� 5HL'LT]OF3 /LC E.18044 DEP 12-n-u MATEY "" �I�---��� PC RESOLUTION NO. 14- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA13-0217, A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP REVISION APPLICATION (TTM 33584) TO CHANGE THE NUMBER OF LOTS FROM 4 LOTS (ONE CONDOMINIUM LOT, ONE RECREATION BUILDING LOT, AND TWO OPEN SPACE LOTS) FOR 62 DETACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS TO 4 LOTS (ONE CONDOMINIUM LOT, ONE RECREATION BUILDING LOT, AND TWO OPEN SPACE LOTS) FOR 59 DETACHED CONDOMINIUM UNITS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND MIRA LOMA ROAD (APN 944-060-006) Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On April 10, 2007, the City Council approved Planning Application No. PA05-0109, Tentative Tract Map No. 33584 (for condominium purposes) to subdivide 7.2 acres into three lots (one residential condominium lot, one recreation lot, and one open space lot) at 29601 Mira Loma Drive, generally located at the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road. B. On September 12, 2013, Jim Ahmad, representing Inland Communities, filed Planning Application No. PA13-0217, a Tentative Tract Map revision application, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. C. The Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. D. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on March 19, 2014, 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. E. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission approved Planning Application No. PA13-0217 subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder. F. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby finds, determines and declares that: Tentative Tract Map, Subdivision Ordinance Section 16.09.140 A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, Subdivision Ordinance, General Plan, and the City of Temecula Municipal Code; As designed and conditioned, the proposed subdivision map is consistent with the development standards within the proposed Planned Development Overlay, Development Code, Subdivision Ordinance, and General Plan. B. The Tentative Map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, nor is the land subject to a Land Conservation Act contract; The proposed land division does not divide land designated for conservation or agricultural use. C. The site is physically suitable for the uses and proposed density as shown on the Tentative Map as proposed by the Tentative Map; The site is physically suitable for the uses and proposed density as shown on the Tentative Map as proposed by the Applicant. D. The design of the proposed subdivision and the proposed improvements, with appropriate conditions of approval, is not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project is not anticipated to affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. E. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems; The project has been reviewed and commented on by Fire Prevention, the Public Works Department, and Building and Safety. As a result, the project has been appropriately conditioned to protect public health. Further, provisions are made in the General Plan to ensure that the public health, safety, and welfare are safeguarded, and the project is consistent with this document. F. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible; The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. Prior to the construction of buildings, the applicant will be required to submit building plans to Building and Safety that comply with the Uniform Building Code, which contains requirements for energy conservation. G. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public will be provided; All required rights-of-way and easements have been provided on the Tentative Map or required by Conditions of Approval. The City has reviewed these easements and has found no potential conflicts. H. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby); This is a map for residentially zoned property and will therefore be subject to applicable Quimby fees at the time that building permits are issued for the project site. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Tentative Tract Map revision, Planning Application No. PA13-0217: A. Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA), City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the approval of the Tentative Tract Map revision application, as described in the Initial Study ("the Project"). Based upon the findings contained in that study, City staff determined that there was no substantial evidence that the Project could have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. B. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the (Mitigated) Negative Declaration as required by law. The public comment period commenced on December 23, 2013, and expired on January 21, 2014. Copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Planning, located at City Hall, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590. C. Two written comments were received prior to the public hearing and are incorporated into the administrative record of the proceedings. D. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the March 19, 2014 public hearing, and based on the whole record before it finds that: (1) the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; (2) there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment; and (3) Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. E. Based on the findings set forth in the Resolution, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project. Section 4. Conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approves Planning Application No. PA13-0217, a Tentative Tract Map revision application (TTM 33584) to change the number of lots from 4 lots (one condominium lot, one recreation building lot, and two open space lots) for 62 detached condominium units to 4 lots (one condominium lot, one recreation building lot, and two open space lots) for 59 detached condominium units located at the northeast corner of Rancho Vista Road and Mira Loma Road, subject to the Conditions of Approval set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 19th day of March, 2014. Stanley Harter, Chairman ATTEST: Armando G. Villa, AICP Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Armando G. Villa, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 14- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 19th day of March, 2014, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS Armando G. Villa, AICP Secretary EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA13-0217 Project Description: Planning Application No. PA13-0217, a Tentative Tract Map revision (TTM 33584) application to change the number of lots from 4 lots (one condominium lot, one recreation building lot, and two open space lots) for 62 detached condominium units to 4 lots (one condominium lot, one recreation building lot, and two open space lots) for 59 detached condominium units located at the northeast corner of Rancho Vista Road and Mira Loma Road Assessor's Parcel No.: 944-060-006 MSHCP Category: Residential (Between 8.1 and 14.0 du/ac) DIF Category: Residential —Attached TUMF Category: Residential — Single Family Quimby Category: Single Family Attached (Attached Garage) Approval Date: March 19, 2014 Expiration Date: April 10, 2017 (per Section 16.09.220.0 of the Temecula Municipal Code, revised map approval shall not alter the original expiration date of the map) PLANNING DIVISION Within 48 Hours of the Approval of This Project PL-1. Filing Notice of Determination. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Two Thousand Two Hundred Thirty-One Dollars and Twenty-Five Cents ($2,231.25) which includes the Two Thousand One Hundred Eighty-One Dollars and Twenty-Five Cents ($2,181.25) fee, required by Fish and Wildlife Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Fifty Dollars ($50.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said 48-hour period the applicant/ developer has not delivered to the Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void due to failure of condition [Fish and Wildlife Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirements PL-2. Indemnification of the City. 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. PL-3. Modifications or Revisions. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this project. PL-4. Expiration. Pursuant to Section 16.09.220.0 of the Temecula Municipal Code, revised map approval shall not alter the original expiration date of the map. Tentative Tract Map 33584 was approved by City Council on April 10, 2007 with an initial expiration date of April 10, 2010. California Senate Bill 1185 extended the map expiration to April 10, 2011; California Assembly Bill 333 extended the map expiration to April 10, 2013; California Assembly Bill 208 extended the map expiration to April 10, 2015; and California Assembly Bill 116 extended the map expiration to April 10, 2017. PL-5. Time Extension. The Director of Community Development may, upon an application being filed prior to expiration, and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to 5 one-year extensions of time, one year at a time. PL-6. Consistency with Specific Plans. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Planned Development Overlay 11. PL-7. Compliance with Mitigated Negative Declaration. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures identified within the Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted for PA13-0217. PL-8. Signage Permits. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. PL-9. Conformance with Approved Plans. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved site plan and elevations contained on file with the Planning Division. PL-10. Graffiti. All graffiti shall be removed within 24 hours on equipment, walls, or other structures. PL-11. Water Quality and Drainage. Other than stormwater, it is illegal to allow liquids, gels, powders, sediment, fertilizers, landscape debris, and waste from entering the storm drain system or from leaving the property. To ensure compliance with this Condition of Approval: a. Spills and leaks shall be cleaned up immediately. b. Do not wash, maintain, or repair vehicles onsite. c. Do not hose down parking areas, sidewalks, alleys, or gutters. d. Ensure that all materials and products stored outside are protected from rain. e. Ensure all trash bins are covered at all times. PL-12. Subdivision Map Act. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless modified by the conditions listed below. An Extension of Time may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request, prior to the expiration date. PL-13. Subdivision Phasing. If subdivision phasing is proposed, a phasing plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Community Development Director. PL-14. Construction and Demolition Debris. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris and shall provide the Planning Division verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul demolition and construction debris. PL-15. Public Art Ordinance. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City's Public Art Ordinance as defined in Section 5.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code. PL-16. Property Maintenance. All parkways, including within the right-of-way, entryway median, landscaping, walls, fencing, recreational facilities, and on-site lighting shall be maintained by the property owner or maintenance association. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) PL-17. Placement of Transformer. Provide the Planning Division with a copy of the underground water plans and electrical plans for verification of proper placement of transformer(s) and double detector check prior to final agreement with the utility companies. PL-18. Archaeoloqical/Cultural Resources Grading Note. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "If at any time during excavation/construction of the site, archaeological/cultural 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 Community Development at his/her sole discretion may require the property owner 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 archaeological/ cultural resource, the Director of Community Development shall notify the property owner of such determination and shall authorize the resumption of work. Upon determining that the discovery is an archaeological/cultural resource, the Planning Director 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 Community Development." PL-19. Cultural Resources Treatment Agreement. The developer is required to enter into a Cultural Resources Treatment Agreement with the Pechanga Tribe. This Agreement will address the treatment and disposition of cultural resources and human remains that may be impacted as a result of the development of the project, as well as provisions for tribal monitors. PL-20. Discovery of Cultural Resources. 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. PL-21. Archaeological Monitoring of Cultural Resources. A qualified archaeological monitor will be present and will have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities, in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe and their designated monitors, to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. PL-22. Tribal Monitoring of Cultural Resources. Tribal monitors from the Pechanga Tribe shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities, including all archaeological surveys, testing, and studies, to be compensated by the developer. PL-23. Relinquishment of Cultural Resources. The landowner agrees to relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area, to the Pechanga Tribe for proper treatment and disposition. PL-24. Preservation of Sacred Sites. All sacred sites are to be avoided and preserved. PL-25. MSHCP Pre-Construction Survey. A 30-day preconstruction survey, in accordance with MSHCP guidelines and survey protocol, shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance. The results of the 30-day preconstruction survey shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to scheduling the pre-grading meeting with Public Works. PL-26. Burrowing Owl Grading Note. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "No grubbing/clearing of the site shall occur prior to scheduling the pre-grading meeting with Public Works. All project sites containing suitable habitat for burrowing owls, whether owls were found or not, require a 30-day preconstruction survey that shall be conducted within 30 days prior to ground disturbance to avoid direct take of burrowing owls. If the results of the survey indicate that no burrowing owls are present on-site, then the project may move forward with grading, upon Planning Division approval. If burrowing owls are found to be present or nesting on-site during the preconstruction survey, then the following recommendations must be adhered to: Exclusion and relocation activities may not occur during the breeding season, which is defined as March 1 through August 31, with the following exception: From March 1 through March 15 and from August 1 through August 31 exclusion and relocation activities may take place if it is proven to the City and appropriate regulatory agencies (if any) that egg laying or chick rearing is not taking place. This determination must be made by a qualified biologist." PL-27. Rough Grading Plans. A copy of the Rough Grading Plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Division. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) PL-28. Paved Access Easement. The Developer shall provide a paved 10-foot wide ingress/egress easement with a 15 percent maximum slope within Lot 3 from Mira Loma Drive to Lot 83 of Tract Map No. 4010. PL-29. Access Road Barrier. A gate or chain fence, subject to approval by the Director of Community Development, shall be installed at the entrance to the access road through Lot 3 of the project from Mira Loma Drive to Lot 83 of Tract Map No. 4010 to prevent unauthorized access to Lot 3 and the access road. PL-30. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). The City of Temecula adopted an ordinance on March 31, 2003 to collect fees for a Riverside County area wide Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). This project is subject to payment of these fees at the time of building permit issuance. The fees are subject to the provisions of Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. PL-31. Development Impact Fee (DIF). The developer shall comply with the provisions of Title 15, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all its resolutions by paying the appropriate City fee. PL-32. Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans. Four (4) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division. These plans shall be submitted as a separate submittal, not as part of the building plans or other plan set. These plans shall conform to the approved conceptual landscape plan, or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, height and spread, water usage or KC value, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance and Water Storage Contingency Plan per the Rancho California Water District. The plans shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal) and one copy of the approved Grading Plan. PL-33. Landscaping Site Inspections. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note stating, "Three landscape site inspections are required. The first inspection will be conducted at installation of irrigation while trenches are open. This will verify that irrigation equipment and layout is per plan specifications and details. Any adjustments or discrepancies in actual conditions will be addressed at this time and will require an approval to continue. Where applicable, a mainline pressure check will also be conducted. This will 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 are operating properly, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The third inspection will verify property landscape maintenance for release of the one-year landscape maintenance bond." The applicant/owner shall contact the Planning Division to schedule inspections. PL-34. Agronomic Soils Report. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note on the plans stating, "The contractor shall provide two copies of an agronomic soils report at the first irrigation inspection." PL-35. Water Usage Calculations. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance), the total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with approved plan). Applicant shall use evapotranspiration (ETo) factor of 0.70 for calculating the maximum allowable water budget. PL-36. Landscape Maintenance Program. A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted to the Planning Division for approval. The landscape maintenance program shall detail 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. PL-37. Specifications of Landscape Maintenance Program. Specifications of the landscape maintenance program shall indicate, "Three landscape site inspections are required. The first inspection will be conducted at installation of irrigation while trenches are open. This will verify that irrigation equipment and layout is per plan specifications and details. Any adjustments or discrepancies in actual conditions will be addressed at this time and will require an approval to continue. Where applicable, a mainline pressure check will also be conducted. This will 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 are operating properly, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The third inspection will verify property landscape maintenance for release of the one-year landscape maintenance bond." The applicant/owner shall contact the Planning Division to schedule inspections. PL-38. Irrigation. Automatic irrigation shall be installed for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from view of the public from streets and adjacent property for private common areas; front yards and slopes within individual lots; shrub planting to completely screen perimeter walls adjacent to a public right-of-way equal to 66 feet or larger; and, all landscaping excluding City maintained areas and front yard landscaping which shall include, but may not be limited to, private slopes and common areas. PL-39. Temporary Landscaping Requirement for Phased Development. If any phase or area of the project site is not scheduled for development within six months of the completion of grading, it shall be temporarily landscaped and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control. PL-40. Hardscaping. The plans shall include all hardscaping for pedestrian trails within private common areas. PL-41. Wall and Fence Plans. Wall and fence plans shall be consistent with the Conceptual Landscape Plans showing the height, location and the following materials for all walls and fences: Walls or fencing for the perimeter of the project adjacent to a public right-of-way equal to 66 feet or larger and the side yards for corner lots. Wrought iron or decorative block and wrought iron combination to take advantage of views for side and rear yards. Wood or vinyl fencing shall be used for all side and rear yard fencing when not restricted/conditioned as outlined above. PL-42. Precise Grading Plans. Precise Grading Plans shall be consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements. PL-43. WQMP Treatment Devices. All WQMP treatment devices, including design details, shall be shown on the construction landscape plans. If revisions are made to the WQMP design that result in any changes to the conceptual landscape plans after entitlement, the revisions will be shown on the construction landscape plans, subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development. PL-44. Utility Screening. 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 ensure that there are no conflicts with trees. PL-45. Building Construction Plans for Outdoor Areas. Building Construction Plans shall include detailed outdoor areas including but not limited to trellises, decorative furniture, and hardscape to match the style of the buildings subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development. Prior to Release of Power, Building Occupancy or Any Use Allowed by This Permit PL-46. Front Yard and Slope Landscaping. Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots shall be completed for inspection. PL-47. Private Common Area Landscaping. Private common area landscaping shall be completed for inspection prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit. PL-48. HOA Landscaping. HOA landscaping shall be completed for inspection for those lots adjacent to HOA landscaped area. PL-49. Performance Securities. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Community Development, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Planning Division 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 Community Development, the bond shall be released upon request by the applicant. PL-50. Installation of Site Improvements. All site improvements, including but not limited to, parking areas and striping shall be installed. PL-51. TCSD Service Levels. It shall be the developer's responsibility to provide written disclosure of the existence of the Temecula Community Service District (TCSD) and its service level rates and charges to all prospective purchasers. PL-52. Compliance with Conditions of Approval. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map PL-53. Final Map. A copy of the Final Map shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Planning Division. PL-54. Environmental Constraint Sheet. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Planning Division with the following notes: a. This property is located within 30 miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations, Ordinance No. 655. b. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for this project and is on file at the City of Temecula Planning Division. c. This project is within a Liquefaction Hazard Zone. PL-55. Submittal of CC&Rs. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall be submitted and approved by the Director of Community Development. The CC&Rs shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, exterior of all buildings, and all landscaped and open areas, including parkways. PL-56. Form and Content of CC&Rs. The CC&Rs shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Community Development, City Engineer, and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem necessary to protect the interests of the City and its residents. PL-57. Preparation of CC&Rs. The CC&Rs shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense. PL-58. Review of CC&Rs. The CC&Rs and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owners Association are subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development, Public Works Director, and the City Attorney. PL-59. CC&Rs and Management and Maintenance of Common Areas. The CC&Rs shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair, and maintenance of all common areas, drainage facilities, and pollution prevention devices outlined in the project's Water Quality Management Plan. PL-60. CC&Rs and Public Nuisance. The CC&Rs shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated, and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. PL-61. Termination of CC&Rs. The CC&Rs shall provide that the association may not be terminated without prior City approval. PL-62. CC&Rs and Maintenance of Property. The CC&Rs shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&Rs, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&Rs or the City Ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. PL-63. Interest in Association. Every owner of a suite or lot governed by CC&Rs shall own as an appurtenance to such suite or lot, either: (1) an undivided interest in the common areas and facilities, or (2) a share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association owning the common areas and facilities. PL-64. Maintenance of Open Areas. All open areas and landscaping governed by CC&Rs shall be permanently maintained by the association or other means acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to the Planning Divisions and Public Works Department prior to the issuance of building permits. PL-65. Reciprocal Easements. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives, parking areas, drainage facilities, and water quality features, shall be provided by the CC&Rs or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrent with the map or prior to the issuance of building permit where no map is involved. PL-66. Consent of City of Temecula. An Article must be added to every set of CC&Rs to read as follows: Article CONSENT OF CITY OF TEMECULA 1. The Conditions of Approval of Tentative Tract Map Number requires the City to review and approve the CC&Rs for the Parcel. 2. Declarant acknowledges that the City has reviewed these CC&Rs and that its review is limited to a determination of whether the proposed CC&Rs properly implement the requirements of the Conditions of Approval for the Parcel. The City's consent to these CC&Rs does not contain or imply any approval of the appropriateness or legality of the other provisions of the CC&Rs, including, without limitation, the use restrictions, private easements and encroachments, private maintenance requirements, architecture and landscape controls, assessment procedures, assessment enforcement, resolution of disputes or procedural matters. 3. In the event of a conflict between the Conditions of Approval of the land use entitlements issued by the City for the Parcel or Federal, State, or local laws, ordinances, and regulations and these CC&Rs, the provisions of the Conditions of Approval and Federal, State or local laws, ordinances, and regulations shall prevail, notwithstanding the language of the CC&Rs. 4. These CC&Rs shall not be terminated, amended or otherwise modified without the express written consent of the Director Community Development of the City of Temecula. PL-67. Consent of City of Temecula. An Article must be added to every set of CC&Rs, following the Declarant's signature, to read as follows: CONSENT OF CITY OF TEMECULA The Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. require the City of Temecula to review and approve the CC&Rs for the Parcel. The City's review of these CC&Rs has been limited to a determination of whether the proposed CC&Rs properly implement the requirements of the Conditions of Approval for the Parcel. The City's consent to these CC&Rs does not contain or imply any approval of the appropriateness or legality of the other provisions of the CC&Rs, including, without limitation, the use restrictions, private easements and encroachments, private maintenance requirements, architecture and landscape controls, assessments, enforcement of assessments, resolutions of disputes or procedural matters. Subject to the limitations set forth herein, the City consents to the CC&Rs. Armando G. Villa, AICP Director Community Development Approved as to Form: Peter M. Thorson City Attorney PL-68. Operation of Association. No lot or suite in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owners group or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&Rs, which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or suites and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&Rs shall permit enforcement by the City for provisions required as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. PL-69. Recordation of CC&Rs. CC&Rs shall be finalized and recorded at the time of Final Map Recordation. PL-70. Copies of CC&Rs. Three copies of the final recorded CC&Rs shall be provided to the Planning Division. PL-71. Quimby Requirements. The developer shall satisfy the City's park land dedication (Quimby) requirement through the payment of in-lieu fees equal to 0.66 acres of park land, based upon the City's then current appraised park land valuation. Said requirements include a 25% credit for private recreational opportunities provided. OUTSIDE AGENCIES PL-72. Compliance with EMWD. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Eastern Municipal Water District's transmittal dated October 4, 2013, a copy of which is attached. BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION No conditions. FIRE PREVENTION General Requirements F-1. Requirements. Any and all previous existing conditions for this project will remain in full force and effect unless superseded by more stringent requirements here. F-2. Fire Flow (Residential). The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all residential buildings per CFC Appendix B. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 4,000 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure for a 4-hour duration for multi-family projects. The fire flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided (CFC Appendix B and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-3. Fire Hydrants. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix C. Standard fire hydrants (6" x 4" 2 %2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart at each intersection, and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant for multi-family projects. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required (CFC Appendix C and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-4. Construction Phasing. If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection prior to any building construction (CFC Chapter 5) Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) F-5. Turning Radius (Dead End Roadway). Prior to building construction, dead end roadways and streets in excess of 150 feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus (CFC Chapter 5 and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-6. All Weather Access Roads. Fire apparatus access roads and driveways shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be with a surface to provide all-weather driving capabilities. Access roads shall be 80,000 lbs. GVW with a minimum of AC thickness of .25 feet. In accordance with Section 3310.1, prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have fire apparatus access roads. (CFC Chapter 5 and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-7. Access Road Widths. Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 24 feet for commercial and track home roads and 20 feet for custom homes residential driveways with an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches (CFC Chapter 5 and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) F-8. Two Point Access. This development and any street within serving more than 35 homes or any commercial developments shall have two points of access, via all- weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau (CFC Chapter 5). F-9. Required Submittals (Fire Underground Water). The developer shall furnish three copies of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation for all private water systems pertaining to the fire service loop for the underground water system. 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. Hydraulic calculations will be required with the underground submittal to ensure fire flow requirements are being met for the on-site hydrants. The plans must be submitted and approved prior to building permit being issued (CFC Chapter 5 and Chapter 33). F-10. Required Submittals (Residential Fire Sprinkler Systems). Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of sprinkler plans must be submitted by the installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. These plans must be submitted prior to the issuance of building permit. F-11. Required Submittals (Residential Fire Alarm Systems). Fire alarm plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of alarm plans must be submitted by the installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. These plans must be submitted prior to the issuance of building permit. These are required for multi-family residential projects only. Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy F-12. Hydrant Markers. Hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers (blue dots) per Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-13. Knox Box. All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates obstructing Fire Department access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry system for emergency access by firefighting personnel (CFC Chapter 5). POLICE DEPARTMENT No Conditions PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT General Requirements PW-1. Conditions of Approval. The developer shall comply with all Conditions of Approval, the Engineering and Construction Manual and all City codes/standards at no cost to any governmental agency. PW-2. Subdivision Map. The developer shall submit a complete Tract Map submittal for review and approval. Any omission to the representation of the site conditions may require the plans to be resubmitted for further review and revision. PW-3. Grading Permit. A grading permit for rough and/or precise grading shall be obtained from Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within private property. Grading shall be in accordance with the approved grading plan, grading permit conditions and City codes/standards. PW-4. Encroachment Permits. Prior to commencement of any applicable construction, encroachment permit(s) are required and shall be obtained from Public Works for public offsite improvements PW-5. Improvement Plans. The developer shall submit improvement plans (to include public/private street plans, storm drain plans, signage and striping plans) as required for review and approval by Public Works. The designs shall be in compliance with Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and City codes/standards. PW-6. Drainage and Water Quality Facility Maintenance. All onsite drainage and water quality facilities to be privately maintained. Prior to Recordation of the Tract Map PW-7. Right-of-Way Dedications. All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public or other appropriate agency and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by Public Works. PW-8. Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS). The developer shall prepare and record an ECS with the Tract Map to delineate identified environmental concerns. The developer shall comply with all constraints per the recorded ECS along with any underlying maps related to the property. PW-9. Required Clearances. As deemed necessary by Public Works, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. Rancho California Water District; b. Eastern Municipal Water District; c. Cable TV Franchise; d. Verizon; e. Southern California Edison Company; f. The Gas Company; or other affected agencies. PW-10. Right of Access. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from: a. Rancho Vista Road on the Tract Map with no opening as delineated on the approved Tentative Tract Map. b. Mira Loma Drive on the Tract Map with the exception of two (2) openings as delineated on the approved Tentative Tract Map. PW-11. Easements. Note the following: a. An easement shall be dedicated for public utilities and emergency vehicle access for all private streets as shown on the Tentative Tract Map. b. Easements (when required for roadway slopes, landscape, drainage facilities, utilities, etc.) shall be shown on the Final Map if they are located within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted for review and recorded, as directed by Public Works. Onsite drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the Tract Map. A note shall be added to the Tract Map stating: "Drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions." PW-12. Public Street Improvements and Securities. The developer shall design and guarantee construction (i.e., posting of security and entering into agreements) of the following public improvements (including parkways) to the City's General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be approved by Public Works. All street improvement designs shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans' standards to join existing street improvements. a. Improve Rancho Vista Road (Secondary Arterial (4 lanes undivided) Standard No. 102 — 88' R/W) to include installation of streetlights, drainage facilities, signing and striping and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). b. Improve Mira Loma Drive (Collector (2 lanes undivided) Standard No. 103A— 66' R/W) to include installation of streetlights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). PW-13. Parkway Landscaping. All parkway landscaping areas shall be privately maintained. PW-14. Undergrounding Wires. All existing and proposed electrical and telecommunication lines, except electrical lines rated 34KV or greater, shall be installed underground per Title 15, Chapter 15.04 of the Temecula Municipal Code and utility provider's standards. The developer is responsible for any associated costs, for making arrangements with each utility agency and for obtaining the necessary easements. PW-15. Undergrounding Utility Systems. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer and cable TV shall be provided underground (with the required easements); and shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City codes and utility provider's standards. Telephone, cable TV and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. The developer shall notify the City's cable TV franchisees of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable TV standards at time of street improvements. PW-16. Property Taxes. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. PW-17. Acquisition of Offsite Property. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire required offsite property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the developer shall, prior to submittal of the Tract Map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Subdivision Map Act, Sections 66462 and 66462.5. The agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the offsite property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer (at developer's cost). The appraiser shall be approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. PW-18. Parcel Geometry. The applicant shall submit an editable projected digital version of the parcel geometry in a drawing exchange format (pursuant to Riverside County standards). Prior to final approval, the City's GIS Division shall conduct quality control on the data to verify accuracy and compatibility. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) PW-19. Required Clearances. As deemed necessary by Public Works, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board; b. Army Corps of Engineers; c. California Department of Fish and Wildlife; d. Southern California Edison Company; e. The Gas Company; or other affected agencies. PW-20. Grading/Erosion & Sediment Control Plan. The developer shall submit a grading/erosion & sediment control plan(s) to be reviewed and approved by Public Works. All plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. The approved plan shall include all final WQMP water quality facilities and all construction-phase pollution-prevention controls to adequately address non-permitted runoff. Refer to the City's Engineering & Construction Manual at: http://www.cityoftemecula.orq/Temecula/Government/PublicWorks/engineeringconst manual.htm PW-21. Grading/Erosion & Sediment Control Securities. The developer shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 24, Section 18.24.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code by posting security and entering into an agreement to guarantee the grading and erosion & sediment control improvements. PW-22. Habitat Conservation Fee. The developer shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in the ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. PW-23. Area Drainage Plan (ADP) Fee to RCFC&WCD. The developer shall demonstrate to the City that the flood mitigation charge (ADP fee) has been paid to Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD). If the full ADP fee has already been credited to this property, no new charge will be required. PW-24. Letter of Permission/Easement. The developer shall obtain documents (letters of permission or easements) for any offsite work performed on adjoining properties. The document's format is as directed by, and shall be submitted to, Public Works for acceptance. The document information shall be noted on the approved grading plan. PW-25. NPDES General Permit Compliance. The developer shall obtain project coverage under the State National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Construction Activities and shall provide the following: a. A copy of the Waste Discharge Identification number (WDID) issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB); b. The project's Risk Level (RL) determination number; and c. The name, contact information and certification number of the Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD). Pursuant to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) requirements and City's storm water ordinance, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be generated and submitted to the Board. Throughout the project duration, the SWPPP shall be routinely updated and readily available (onsite) to the State and City. Review www.cabmphandbooks.com for SWPPP guidelines. Refer to the following link. http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/programs/stormwater/construction.sht ml PW-26. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and O&M Agreement. The developer shall submit a final WQMP (prepared by a registered professional engineer) with the initial grading plan submittal, based on the conceptual WQMP from the entitlement process. It must receive acceptance by Public Works. A copy of the final project-specific WQMP must be kept onsite at all times. In addition, a completed WQMP Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement shall be submitted for review and approval. Refer to the WQMP template and agreement link below: http://www.cityoftemecula.org/Temecula/Government/PublicWorks/WQMPandNPD ES/WQMP.htm PW-27. Soils Report. A soils report, prepared by a registered soil or civil engineer, shall be submitted to Public Works with the initial grading plan submittal. The report shall address the site's soil conditions and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. PW-28. Drainage Study. A drainage study shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and submitted to Public Works with the initial grading plan check in accordance with City, Riverside County and engineering standards. The study shall identify storm water runoff quantities (to mitigate the 100-year storm event) from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed offsite or onsite, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) PW-29. Tract Map. Tract Map shall be approved and recorded prior to the issuance of the first building permit. PW-30. Traffic Control Plans. A construction area traffic control plan (TCP) will be required for lane closures and detours or other disruptions to traffic circulation; and shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works. The TCP shall be designed by a registered civil or traffic engineer in conformance with the latest edition of the Caltrans Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and City standards. PW-31. Street Lights. The developer shall submit a completed SCE street light application, an approved SCE Streetlight Plan and pay the advanced energy fees. If not obtaining a building permit, this shall be done prior to installation of additional street lighting. All costs associated with the relocation of any existing street lights shall be paid by the developer. PW-32. Precise Grading Plan. A precise grading plan shall be submitted to Public Works for review and approval. The plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan; and shall show all lot drainage directed to the driveway by side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot. The building pad shall be certified by a registered civil engineer for location and elevation; and the soils engineer shall issue a final soils report addressing compaction and site conditions. Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy PW-33. Completion of Improvements. The developer shall complete all work per the approved plans and Conditions of Approval to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. This includes all onsite work (including water quality facilities), public and private improvements and the executed WQMP Operation and Maintenance agreement. PW-34. Utility Agency Clearances. The developer shall receive written clearance from applicable utility agencies (i.e., Rancho California and Eastern Municipal Water Districts, etc.) for the completion of their respective facilities and provide to Public Works. PW-35. Replacement of Damaged Improvements/Monuments. Any appurtenance damaged or broken during development shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of Public Works. Any survey monuments damaged or destroyed shall be reset per City Standards by a qualified professional pursuant to the California Business and Professional Code Section 8771. PW-36. Certifications. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by Public Works. RECF FED EASTERN MUNICIPAL C`'T 0 8 PM WATER DISTRICT. A SINCE 1950 t=— Board of Directors October 4, 2013 President Philip E.Paule City of Temecula Vice President P.O. Box 9033 Randy A.Record Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Joseph J.Kuebler,CPA Re: Project No. PA13-0217, Rancho Vista Vig TTM Revision, APN 944060006, David J.Slawson Tent. Tract Map 33584 Ronald W.Sullivan Attn: Mr. Stuart Fisk General Manager Paul D.Jones II,P.E. In order to receive sewer service from Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD), the Treasurer following information will be helpful to the project proponent: Joseph J.Kuebler,CPA EMWD requires beginning dialogue with the project proponent at an early stage in site Director of The design and development, via a one-hour complimentary Due Diligence meeting. To set Metropolitan Water up this meeting, the project proponent should complete a Project Questionnaire (form District of So.Calif NBD-058) and submit to EMWD. To download this form or for additional information, Randy A.Record please visit our "New Development Process" web page, under the "Businesses" tab, at Board Secretary and www.emwd.orq. This meeting will offer the following benefits: Assistant to the General Manager '1. Describe EMWD's development work-flow process Rosemarie V.Howard 2. Identify project scope and parameters Legal Counsel 3. Preliminary, high level review of the project within the context of existing Lemieux&O'Neill infrastructure 4. Discuss potential candidacy for recycled water service Following the Due Diligence meeting, to proceed with this project, a Plan Of Service (POS)will need to be developed by the developer's engineer, and reviewed/approved by EMWD prior to submitting improvement plans for Plan Check. The POS process will provide the following: 1- Technical evaluation of the project's preliminary design 2- Defined facility requirements, i.e. approved POS 3- Exception: for feasibility evaluation of a purchase acquisition, only a conceptual facilities assessment may be developed. If you have questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely ' 04 ^ ( Maroun El age, M.S., P.E. Senior Civil Engineer New Business Development (951) 928-3777 x4468 El-hagem(a�emwd.orq Mailing Address: Post Office Box 8300 Penis,CA 92572-8300 Telephone: (951)928-3777 Fax: (951)928-6177 Location: 2270 Trumble Road Penis,CA 92570 Internet: www.emwd.org City of Temecula 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 Environmental Checklist Project Title Rancho Vista Village Lead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula 41000 Main Street, Temecula, CA 92590 Contact Person and Phone Number Stuart Fisk, Senior Planner; (951) 506-5159 Project Location Located at the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road, Temecula Project Sponsor's Name and Address Jim Ahmad; Inland Communities Corp 6430 W Sunset Blvd, Suite 460 Los Angeles, CA 90028 General Plan Design ation Medium Density Residential Zoning Mira Loma Planned Development Overlay District-11 (PDO-11) Description of Project PA13-0217, a revision to a previously approved Tentative Tract Map (TTM 33584) to minimize retaining wall heights, balance earthwork quantities onsite, provide a water quality basin, and to reduce the density from 62 units to 59 units on a 7.24 acre site. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting The project site is surrounded by residential development including several single-family residences, apartment buildings, and an elementary school (Vail Elementary) that is located to the east of the project site. The site has a steep slope below Mira Loma Drive and flattens out for the majority of the project site. Elevation ranges from approximately 1,095 to 1,144 feet above mean sea-level. A small drainage feature occurs adjacent to the project site, along the eastern boundary of the project site. Surrounding General Plan land use designations include High Density Residential to the north and to the west, Low-Medium Residential to the south, and Open Space, Public/Institutional and Low-Medium Residential to the east. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval None is Required 4.14 :: ---e eij -::,'‘ -, ° WAWA* 4,0,,roitoo. 8.-01,_ \-. ---\"\s. ,. .4, d 4 �. L . .1 Project P-ojectSiie rl1�� �, T V` .1-> J ' fir, *•" 1 y4 , -,is �� '. , � ,. 7i ' iir -I •,, ir 11` 1---Ny>4C :.."3 iiii ii:;$4 -------2 .--A :.\\,,A ' 4 '4" / II */04.0 S' 04; 0 % \4'6. _..---- >,, A \f di-Ia.*:0,0. \,.. 'I** l' A Ab - '''''''''—r–:i N N _. 0 U 3.700 3,4DC r Fa r G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial 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. Aesthetics Mineral Resources Agriculture and Forestry Resources Noise Air Quality Population and Housing Biological Resources Public Services Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recreation Cultural Resources Transportation and Traffic Geology and Soils Utilities and Service Systems Hazards and Hazardous Materials Mandatory Findings of Significance Hydrology and Water Quality None _ Land Use and Planning 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 NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not X 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 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 required, but it must analyze only 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 im•osed u•on the •ro•ased project, nothing further is required. l Al if %� ,/21/x' ,I':l'atu a Date Stuart Fisk City of Temecula Printed Name For G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 2 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a I Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings X within a state scenic hi•hwa ? c Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality X of the site and its surroundin•s? d ? Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would X adversel affect da or ni•httime views in the area? Comments: 1.a.-c. No Impact: The proposed project is not located on or near a scenic vista; therefore, there will not be an adverse impact on a scenic vista. The project site is not located on a scenic highway. The project site consists of undeveloped land covered with vegetation and a small area of asphalt from what was a parking area for a small school (The Carden Academy). Existing vegetation includes wild grass, mature trees, and shrubbery. Topographically, the property is sloped downward to the northeast with steep banks along the southern and western boundaries. The elevation of the property is generally lower than surrounding Rancho Vista Road and Mira Loma Drive. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially damage scenic resources, including trees, rock outcroppings or historic buildings. Due to the fact that the project site contains no scenic vistas or resources, the project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 1.d. Less Than Significant Impact: The majority of 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 typically associated with residential development. The City of Temecula requires all new development to comply with the Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance (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. Lighting issues are addressed during the City's plan review and inspection process, and impacts resulting from the project are anticipated to be less than significant. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 3 2. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST 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 Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and X Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a X Williamson Act contract? c Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources X Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)? d Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land X to non-forest use e Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of X Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Comments: 2.a.-e. No Impact: The project site is not currently in agricultural production, nor has the site been used for agricultural purposes in the recent or historic past. The site is not under a Williamson Act contract nor is it zoned for agricultural uses. The site is not zoned forest land or timberland nor is it adjacent to or in proximity to property zoned forest land or timberland. 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 that would result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. No impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 4 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: ' Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable X air quality plan? b Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially X to an existing or projected air quality violation? c 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 X air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant X concentrations? e Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number X of people? Comments: 3.a. Less Than Significant Impact: An air quality assessment was prepared by Entech Consulting Group in July of 2012 to assess the impacts of the construction and operation of the then proposed 120 apartment unit project. The Entech assessment stated that: "The South Coast Air Basin is currently designated as nonattainment for 03, PM10, and PM2.5, a maintenance area for CO and NO2, and in attainment for all other federal criteria pollutants. Emissions calculated by the California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod) were far below the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds, indicating that the construction and operation of the proposed project will create a less than significant impact to the surrounding area." The project, therefore, will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan and a less than significant impact is anticipated. An updated letter report from Entech Consulting Group dated August 21, 2013 addressing the currently proposed 59 single family detached condominium unit project concluded that: "Construction activities, duration and schedule assumptions made for the multifamily apartment unit development would still apply to the single family development. The greatest source of construction emissions would still occur from site preparation and paving activities, construction equipment emissions and worker commuting patterns. Therefore, estimated daily construction emissions from the single family development are similar to emissions from the multifamily apartment unit development which are below all criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas CEQA thresholds, resulting in a less than significant impact." 3.b.c. Less Than Significant Impact: The air quality assessment conducted by Entech Consulting Group for the 120 apartment unit project and then updated on August 21, 2013 for the currently proposed project concludes that the proposed project will cause a less than significant impact to the ambient air quality. The basin is currently in nonattainment for 03 and NO2. VOC and NO emissions, precursors to 03, are far below the thresholds established by the SCAQMD. The project's demonstration of compliance with the SCAQMD thresholds is consistent with the federal National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The basin is also in nonattainment for PM,() and PM2_5. However, the impact analysis performed demonstrates that minimal PM10 and PM2,5 will be generated throughout the operation of the proposed project. The PM10 and PM2.5 emissions G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 5 generated from the proposed project is far below the thresholds established by the SCAQMD and impacts are therefore anticipated to be less than significant. In addition, the Entech air quality assessment concluded that the proposed project will not cause a significant impact to the surrounding area. As shown in Table 6 of the Entech study provided below, the calculated emissions results from CaIEEMod demonstrate that the construction of this project will not exceed average daily thresholds created by the SCAQMD. Thus, construction related impacts on regional air quality will be less than significant. Construction of the proposed project will not worsen ambient air quality, create additional violations of federal and state standards, or delay the basin's goal for meeting attainment standards. Table 6. Peak- Day Construction Emissions(Ibskday) by Phase Construction Year and Season J ROG I NOx CO [ S©7 1 Ma PMz.s 2013 Summer 9.99 80.09 46.54 0.08 22.24 13.88 Winter 9.99 80.10 46.39 0.07 22.24 13.88 SCAQMD Significance Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Exceed Significance? No No No No No No 2014 Winter 47.41 32.18 21.50 0.03 2.94 2.75 SCAIQM]Significance Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Exceed SOnificencse' No No No No No No Sour Enre.th Consulting GGraug,2012 Entech also calculated operational emissions related to area source emissions and mobile source emissions. Typically, area sources are small sources that contribute very little emissions individually, but when combined may generate substantial amounts of pollutants. Examples of generated area source emissions are gas for residential space and water heating, gasoline-powered landscaping and maintenance equipment, and consumer products such as household cleaners and chemicals. Area specific defaults in the CaIEEMod were used by Entech to calculate area source emissions. Entech also assumed that the surrounding residences will utilize natural gas for space and water heating. Entech also used CaIEEMod to calculate pollutant emissions from vehicular trips generated from the proposed project. CaIEEMod default inputs, vehicle mix and trip distances, were unaltered for this anlaysis. In addition to the default inputs, Entech assumed that occupancy of the multi-family residences will begin in 2014. CaIEEMod estimated emissions from the operation of the proposed project as shown in Table 8 of the Entech study, provided below. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 6 Table S. Operational Emissions Ohs/day) Source ROG I N CO I SO2 PMio PM/5 Summer Emissions Area 1524 0.71 49.99 0.10 6.40 6.40 Energy 0.06 0.51 022 0.00 0.04 0.04 Mobiles 4.35 10.66 47.34 0.08 8.53 0.73 Total Emissions 20.15 11.88 97.55 0.18 14.97 7.17 SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55 Exceed thresholds? No No No No No No Winter Emissions Area 15.74 0.71 49.99 0.10 6.40 6.40 Energy - - 0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.04 0.04 Mobitel 4.21 11.36 43.76 0.07 8.54 0.74 Total Emissions 20.01 12.58 93.97 0.17 14.98 7.18 SCA ThID Significance Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55 Exceed Thresholds? No No No No No No Swrce:&ench CcnsdUng Grocp,20x2 1. Moe arnissans were estirnaled ufiiring CR EEMod defaults based on trip genoralion rates based upon data cdlected by the Institute of Transportation Enginecas(ITE)Trip Generation,8th Edition. Emission calculations generated from CaIEEMod demonstrate that the operation of the proposed project will not cause a significant impact to the surrounding area. Entech used CaIEEMod to calculate average daily emissions for both area source and mobile source emissions. Project-related emissions do not exceed the SCAQMD's established thresholds. Calculated emissions for ROG, NOR, CO, PM10, and PM25 are far below the thresholds. Therefore, the operation of the Project does not cause a significant impact to the surrounding area. Furthermore, the updated Entech Report of August 21, 2013 addressing the currently proposed 59 single family residential detached condominium units states: "For operational impacts, the single family residential development would generate less vehicular trips and area sources than the multifamily apartment unit development due to the decrease in the number of dwelling units. Therefore, adjusting the assumptions utilized in CaIEEMod to reflect lower vehicular trips generated for the single family development would result in lower daily emissions. These daily emissions would remain far below the criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas CEQA thresholds, resulting in a less than significant impact." 3.d. Less Than Significant Impact: According to the City of Temecula General Plan, as defined in figure AQ-2 of the General Plan, there is one known sensitive receptor (hospitals, schools, libraries, child care centers, and adult-assisted care facilities) that may be exposed to pollutant concentrations in the immediate vicinity. The Vail Elementary school is located immediately east of the project site. In addition, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) classifies the surrounding residences as sensitive receptors. The elementary school and surrounding residences may be exposed to some pollutant concentrations on a short- term basis during construction and grading activities. However, the July 2012 air quality assessment and updated August 2013 assessment conducted by Entech Consulting Group concluded that "After a detailed analysis, it has been determined that no significant impact will be created from the construction and operation of the proposed project, thus no mitigation measures are required." The Entech Consulting Group air quality assessment did, however, recommend that the following Best Available Control Measures be implemented to minimize the emissions of PM10 and PM2.5 during construction as a preventative measure: • Minimize land disturbances • Utilize watering trucks to minimize dust • Cover trucks when hauling dirt • Put grading and earth moving on hold when wind gusts exceed 25 miles per hour unless the soil is wet enough to prevent dispersion. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 7 • Stabilize the surface of dirt piles if they are not removed immediately • Sweep nearby paved streets at least once per day if there is evidence of dirt that has been carried onto the roadway • Revegetate disturbed land as soon as possible • Remove unused materials The Development Plan for the project will be conditioned that these Best Available Control Measures be implemented and that these Best Available Control Measures be included in the grading plan notes. 3.e. Less Than Significant Impact: No objectionable odors are expected as a result from operation of the proposed project. Odors are typically associated with industrial projects involving use of chemicals, solvents, petroleum products, and other strong-smelling elements used in manufacturing processes. Odors are also associated with such uses as sewage treatment facilities and landfills. Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include the use of architectural coatings and solvents. SCAQMD Rule 1113 limits the amount of volatile organic compounds from architectural coatings and solvents. Via mandatory compliance with SCAQMD Rules, no construction activities or materials are proposed which would create objectionable odors. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur and no mitigation measures would be required. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 8 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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 X local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California X Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c 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, vernal pool, X coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with X established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or X ordinance? f Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation X Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Comments: 4.a. Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is located within the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) and lies within the Southwest Area Plan of the MSHCP. The project site is not part of a criteria cell and is not part of a MSHCP sub unit. Michael Brandman Associates (MBA) prepared an MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment for the project in July, 2012 and updated the assessment on August 29, 2013 to address the currently proposed 59 single family detached condominium unit project, and determined that the project site contains a limited amount of foraging habitat suitable for Burrowing Owls (4.27 acres), which is a California Species of Special Concern, however no suitable burrows were observed within the project area. There is no suitable habitat within the 500-foot buffer area outside of the project areas as the project site is surrounded by development, and no Burrowing Owls were observed on site or within the 500-foot buffer area. The MBA report concluded that the project area does not contain sufficient foraging habitat to support a Burrowing Owl pair, is surrounded by development, and is not adjacent to any other suitable habitat. The MBA report concluded that Burrowing Owl has no potential to occur on the project site. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 9 The MBA report identified suitable avian nesting habitat for a variety of species. If any construction activities for the project site occur during the avian breeding season (February to August), a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting birds will be required (see mitigation requirements for 4.d below). The MBA report did not identify 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 California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 4.b. Less Than Significant Impact: The MBA report states that the project side contains 0.1 acre of riparian habitat that will be impacted, but does not contain any riverine connectivity. Natural Resources Assessment, Inc. conducted a jurisdictional delineation on the drainage feature that occurs along the eastern boundary of the site. The drainage contains areas under CDFW and USACE jurisdiction. The project was designed to avoid the areas of the drainage. The willows to be impacted are within an upland area outside of the active drainage area and are not connected to the riparian area east of the project site. The MBA analysis of the site determined that there are no vernal pools, or areas suitable for support of sensitive fairy shrimp species within the property. Due to the limited impact to riparian areas, the MBA report recommended no further action or mitigation measures and less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 4.c. Less Than Significant Impact: There is an adjacent drainage feature located along the eastern border of the project site that falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and California Department of Fish and Wildllife based on a 2012 Jurisdictional Delineation prepared by Natural Resources Assessment, Inc. (contained in Appendix D of the MBA report). Based on the findings of Natural Resources Assessment, Inc.'s Jurisdictional Delineation the adjacent unnamed ephemeral feature connects to the Margarita River. The drainage contains areas under CDFG and USACE jurisdiction. The project was designed to avoid the areas of the drainage. As discussed in 4.b above, the 0.1 acre area of willows to be impacted are not connected to the channel or the associated riparian corridor and are therefore not under CDFG jurisdiction. The construction of the project, including retaining walls, will be done adjacent to and within close proximity to the channel and riparian area. However, no impacts to the riparian area or drainages are permitted without obtaining appropriate regulatory permits from USACE, CDFG, and RWQCB. The project was specifically designed to avoid the jurisdictional drainage areas and, therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 4.d. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: The MBA report, which was updated in August 29, 2013 to address the currently proposed 59 single family detached condominium unit project, states that the project site does contain suitable avian nesting habitat for a variety of species, and that if the clearance of vegetation is required and occurs during the avian breeding season (February to August), a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting birds will be required. If construction activities occur outside of the avian breeding season (September to July) no mitigation is required. For any clearance of vegetation during the avian breeding season (February to August), the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: Required Mitigation: If the clearance of vegetation is required and occurs during the avian nesting season (February to August) the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: • A pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted prior to any vegetation disturbance activities. • If passerine birds are found to be nesting or there is evidence of nesting behavior inside or within 250 feet of the impact area, a 250-foot buffer will be required around the nest where no vegetation disturbance will be permitted. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 10 • For birds of prey, such as hawks and owls, the buffer shall be expanded to 500 feet. • A qualified biologist is required to closely monitor the nest until it is determined that the nest is no longer active, at which time vegetation removal could continue. 4.e. No Impact: The project site is located within the Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Fee Area. The project will be conditioned to comply with provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation), which requires payment of the Stephens Kangaroo Rat fee prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Additionally, trees subject to the City's Heritage Tree Ordinance are not present on the site. The project is consistent with local policies and ordinances protecting biological resources and no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 4.f. No Impact: The project has been designed and necessary mitigation measures will be implemented to be consistent with the provisions of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and no impact is anticipated as a result of this project. An MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment (Burrowing Owl) was prepared in August 2012 for an apartment project at the project site by Michael Brandman Associates and was updated and submitted to the City in September 2013 for the currently proposed 59 single-family detached condominium unit project. This report contains the results of a Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Consistency Analysis and habitat assessment. The project site lies within the Southwest Area Plan. The project site is not part of a criteria cell and not part of a plan sub unit. The project site is also not within any designated corridor, potential corridors, or areas or potential core areas. MBA assessed the project site to determine consistency with the requirements set forth in the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software was used to map the site in relation to MSHCP areas including Criteria Cells; conservation areas and wildlife movement corridors and linkages; Criteria Area Species Survey Areas for plant, bird, mammal, and amphibian species; Narrow Endemic Plants Survey Area; and survey requirements for inadequately covered species. The Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) Conservation Summary Report was queried to determine habitat assessment and potential survey requirements for the site (see Appendix A of the MBA report). The MSHCP also requires that an assessment be completed to determine the potentially significant effects of the project on riparian/riverine areas and vernal pools. According to the MSHCP, the documentation for the assessment shall include mapping and a description of the functions and values of the mapped areas with respect to the species listed in MSHCP Section 6.1.2, Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools. As part of the MSHCP requirements, an Urban/Wildlands Interface Analysis is required to address the indirect effects associated with locating proposed development in proximity to MSHCP conservation areas. The development may result in edge effects, which could potentially affect biological resources within the MSHCP Conservation Area. According to the MSHCP, the analysis should include an assessment of the potential indirect project impacts that may result from drainage, toxics, noise, invasive species, barriers, access, and grading/development, as listed and described in the MSHCP's Section 6.1.4, Guidelines Pertaining to Urban/Wildlands Interface. Details of this assessment can be found in the August 29, 2013 MBA report. MBA conducted a riparian/riverine habitat assessment of the project site concurrent with the habitat assessment. The riparian/riverine habitat assessment focused on the drainage feature adjacent to the project site that was considered to meet the minimum criteria to be considered riparian/riverine habitat per the definition provided within the MSHCP. The targeted drainage feature was carefully inspected for the presence of riparian habitat characteristics and suitability to support associated species, including a dominance of hydrophytic vegetation, suitable topography and hydrology, and suitable soil substrate where necessary. As discussed in 4.b above, the project site contains 0.1 acre of riparian habitat that will be impacted, but these areas do not contain any riverine connectivity. The willows to be impacted are within upland areas and are not connected to the riparian area northeast of the project site. There are no vernal pools, or areas suitable for support sensitive fairy shrimp species within the property. The total area of riparian within the project site is 0.29 acre. A single ephemeral drainage occurs along the northeastern project site boundary and contains G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 11 narrow-leaved willows, arroyo willows, and Fremont cottonwood trees. The majority of this riparian area is outside of the project parcel. The project site does not contain habitat that supports any of the sensitive species contained in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP; contains no vernal pool areas; and does not contain any areas capable of supporting any fairy shrimp species. In addition to the MSHCP requirements, other biological constraints associated with the project site were identified. As discussed in 4.c above, there is one adjacent drainage feature located along the eastern border of the site that appears to fall under the jurisdiction of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) based on Natural Resources Assessment, Inc.'s Jurisdictional Delineation (2012) and update letter of August 23, 2013. The project was specifically designed to avoid the jurisdictional drainage areas. As discussed in the MBA report, the project site is located within an MSHCP-designated habitat assessment survey area for Burrowing Owls. According to the MBA report, marginally suitable habitat occurs on site for Burrowing Owls; however, there were no suitable burrows present, there is not sufficient habitat within the project area to support Burrowing Owls, and the project site surrounded by development and isolated from other suitable habitat. Based on the habitat assessment it was determined that focus surveys for Burrowing Owls were not required. MBA determined that based on the disturbed nature of the site and the lack of sensitive species, no significant impacts are anticipated that would jeopardize the County's ability to achieve its conservation goals. Minimal riparian vegetation will be impacted; however, it is not connected to the adjacent drainage and riparian area. The project was designed specifically to avoid the drainage and riparian area. G:\PLANNING\20131PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 12 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? b Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? c Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological X resource or site or unique geologic feature? d Disturb any human remains, including those interred X outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: 5.a. No Impact: A Cultural Resources Assessment was prepared in June, 2012 by LSA Associates, Inc. and a Paleontological Resource Assessment was prepared by LSA Associates in September 2012. LSA conducted a records search at the Eastern Information Center (EIC) located at the University of California, Riverside. The EIC is the local branch of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS). Cultural resource maps at the EIC were checked for possible prehistoric and historic resources previously recorded within and adjacent to the project area. To supplement the CHRIS data, a review was conducted of the National Register of Historic Places Index, the Office of Historic Preservation Directory of Properties, and historic USGS topographic maps. LSA also conducted a pedestrian survey for the project by walking approximately 10-meter parallel transects within the project's boundaries and focusing on the visible portions of the project area. LSA was accompanies by Loran Garcia, monitor from the Pechanga Cultural Resources Office. Based on LSA's records search and field survey, no cultural resources will be affected by the project as the site is not known to contain a resource listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. Based on written correspondence from LSA dated December 12, 2013, the findings of the 2012 assessments are still valid and applicable to the proposed TTM 33584 revision and there is no need to update these assessments. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 5.b.d. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: A cultural Resources Assessment was prepared by LSA in June 2012. No cultural resources were identified during the field survey. Exposed boulders and portable cobbles were examined for worked surfaces, and no such surfaces were found. Soil profiles were examined for cultural stratigraphy and rodent back dirt was checked for cultural remains. The LSA study identifies that the project has been graded and has had stone fill materials deposited on it, and that ground visibility was approximately 20 percent with a cover of matted, dry grasses. The LSA study indicates that the records search and field survey did not identify any cultural resources that will be affected by the project. LSA states that the graded alluvial setting offers little potential for undiscovered cultural resources to be present within the project boundaries, and there is only a low potential that such resources may be in secondary deposits. LSA concluded that no further archaeological investigation or monitoring is recommended. However, LSA did recommend that if previously undocumented cultural resources are identified during earthmoving activities, a qualified archaeologist shall assess the nature and significance of the find, temporarily diverting construction excavation if necessary. Based on written correspondence from LSA dated December 12, 2013, the findings of the 2012 assessment are still valid and applicable to the proposed TTM 33584 revision and there is no need to update the assessment. To ensure cultural resources, if identified on the site, are properly treated and preserved, the following mitigation measures shall be followed: G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 13 Required Mitigation: • If previously undocumented cultural resources are identified during earthmoving activities, a qualified archaeologist shall assess the nature and significance of the find, temporarily diverting construction excavation if necessary. • The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods and all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area to the appropriate Tribe for proper treatment and disposition. • All sacred sites, should they be encountered within the project area, shall be avoided and preserved as the preferred mitigation, if feasible. • If inadvertent discoveries of subsurface archaeological/cultural resources are discovered during grading, the Developer, the project archaeologist, and the Tribe shall assess the significance of such resources and shall meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources. Pursuant to Calif. Pub. Res. Code § 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method of preservation for archaeological resources. • If the Developer, the project archaeologist and the Tribe cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for such resources, these issues will be presented to the Community Development Director for decision. The Community Development Director shall make the determination based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological resources and shall take into account the religious beliefs, customs, and practices of the Tribe. Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the decision of the Planning Director shall be appealable to the Planning Commission and/or City Council. In addition to the cultural resource mitigation measures recommended by LSA, Pechanga Cultural Resources (the Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians) also requested that the following mitigation measure be included: Required Mitigation: • Prior to beginning project construction, the project Applicant shall retain a Riverside County qualified archaeological monitor to monitor all ground-disturbing activities in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources. Any newly discovered cultural resource deposits shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation. • At least 30 days prior to beginning project construction, the project Applicant shall contact the Pechanga Tribe to notify the Tribe of grading, excavation and the monitoring program, and to coordinate with the City of Temecula and the Tribe to develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall address the treatment of known cultural resources, the designation, responsibilities, and participation of professional Native American Tribal monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities; project grading and development scheduling; terms of compensation for the monitors; and treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site. • Prior to beginning project construction, the project Archaeologist shall file a pre-grading report with the City of Temecula (if required) to document the proposed methodology for grading activity observation which will be determined in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe. Said methodology shall include the requirement for a qualified archaeological monitor to be present and to have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. In accordance with the agreement required above, the archaeological monitor's authority to stop and redirect grading will be exercised in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe in order to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. Tribal and archaeological monitors shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities, and shall also have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 14 • If human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission must be contacted within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission must then immediately identify the "most likely descendant(s)" of receiving notification of the discovery. The most likely descendant(s) shall then make recommendations within 48 hours, and engage in consultations concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public Resources Code 5097.98 and the Treatment Agreement described above. 5.c. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: A paleontological resources assessment was prepared for the project by LSA Associates, Inc. in August 2012. Based on written correspondence from LSA dated December 12, 2013, the findings of the 2012 assessment are still valid and applicable to the proposed TTM 33584 revision and there is no need to update these assessment. As part of this study, the San Bernardino County Museum (SBCM) conducted a search of the Regional Paleontological Locality Inventory (RPLI) housed at the SBCM. The results of the record search indicated that no previously-known paleontological localities are recorded within the boundaries of the proposed project property. However, seven resource localities are recorded from within ' mile to the north of the proposed project area. Though the project site has been graded and has had stone fill materials deposited on it, and no paleontological resources were observed during the field survey, the abundance of fossils from the proposed project area, as well as from the other 400 fossil localities mapped from the Pauba Formation, demonstrate the high paleontological sensitivity of the region. The presence of sediments suitable to contain paleontological resources and the positive results of the literature review reinforce the high potential for encountering significant nonrenewable vertebrate fossils on the proposed project site. As such, the LSA Associates, Inc. study recommends the following mitigation measures: Required Mitigation: • A trained paleontological monitor will be present during ground-disturbing activities within the project area in sediments determined likely to contain paleontological resources. The monitoring for paleontological resources will be conducted on a full-time basis. The monitor will be empowered to temporarily halt or redirect construction activities to ensure avoidance of adverse impacts to paleontological resources. The monitor will be equipped to rapidly remove any large fossil specimens encountered during excavation. During monitoring, samples will be collected and processed to recover microvertebrate fossils. Processing will include wet screen washing and microscopic examination of the residual materials to identify small vertebrate remains. The project paleontologist may reevaluate the monitoring program after 50 percent of the excavation has been completed. • Upon encountering a large deposit of bone, salvage of all bone in the area will be conducted with additional field staff and in accordance with modern paleontological techniques. • All fossils collected during the project will be prepared to a reasonable point of identification. Excess sediment or matrix will be removed from the specimens to reduce the bulk and cost of storage. Itemized catalogs of all material collected and identified will be provided to the museum repository along with the specimens. • A report documenting the results of the monitoring and salvage activities and the significance of the fossils will be prepared. • All fossils collected during this work, along with the itemized inventory of these specimens, will be deposited in a museum repository for permanent curation and storage. Compliance with these recommendations will ensure that excavation impacts to the paleontological resources are maintained below a level of significance. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 15 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 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 X substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. _ ii Strong seismic_ground shaking? X iii Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? X iv Landslides? X b Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and X potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks X to life or property? - e Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems X where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: 6.a.i. No Impact: The City of Temecula General Plan and Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan do not identify any faults or fault zones through the project site, nor does the State of California Department of Conservation/California Geological Survey's Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map (http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/download/ap/pdf/MRIETA.PDF). Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 6.a.ii. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: There may be a potentially significant impact from seismic ground shaking. Although, there are no known fault hazard zones on the property, the project is located in Southern California, an area that is seismically active. Any potential significant impacts will be mitigated through building construction, which will be consistent with the Uniform Building Code standards. Further, the project will be conditioned to provide soil reports prior to grading and if conditions warrant mitigation, recommendations contained in this report will be followed during construction. The soil reports will also contain recommendations for the compaction of the soil, which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure, liquefaction, subsidence and expansive soils. After mitigation measures are performed, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Required Mitigation: • Building construction shall be consistent with the Uniform Building Code Standards. • All recommendations set forth in the Geotechnical Report completed by GeoMat Testing Laboratories, Inc. dated February 11, 2012, and then updated on August 31, 2013 to address the currently proposed G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 16 59 single-family detached condominium unit project, shall be followed, including but not limited to recommendations for earthwork, clearing and grubbing, preparation of surfaces to received compacted fill, preparation of building areas, preparation of slab and paving areas, placement of compacted fill, field/laboratory testing during grading, wet soils, slopes, retaining wall design foundation recommendations, and grading and foundation plan review shall be followed. 6.a.iii.6.c. Less Than Significant: The project is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project. A geotechnical report has been prepared for the project by GeoMat Testing Laboratories, Inc. that did not identified any geologic unit or unstable soils that would become unstable. The geotechnical report concludes that, based on SCEC (1999) guidelines, a potential for loss of bearing capacity due to liquefaction is not expected at the project site. Therefore, a less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project. 6.a.iv. Less Than Significant: A subsurface soil investigation prepared for the site by GeoMat Testing Laboratories, Inc., analyzed slope stability based on Safety Factor ratings and the analysis indicates that "the planned fill and/or cut slopes constructed at an inclination of 2H:1 V or flatter will be grossly and surficially stable." Furthermore, the project site and surrounding area have not had a history of landslide activity. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 6.b. Less Than Significant Impact: The project will not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. The project site will be developed in accordance with City standards, including National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards, which require the implementation of erosion control and best management practices (BMPs). The Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Temecula General Plan has not identified any known landslides or mudslides located on the site or proximate to the site. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 6.d. Less Than Significant Impact: The project is not located on expansive soil as defined in Table 18-1- B of the Uniform Building Code (1994) and is not anticipated to create substantial risks to life or property. According to the Geotechnical Report completed by GeoMat Testing Laboratories, Inc. dated February 11, 2012, and updated on August 31, 2013 Expansion Index (El) testing was performed on soil samples obtained from their exploration of the site. Based on the laboratory test results, the soils in the upper 15 feet of the site have a very low expansion potential. Therefore, a less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the project. 6.e. No Impact: The project will not utilize septic tanks, but will instead be connected to the public sewer system. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 17 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the X environment? b Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse X •ases? Comments: 7.a.b. Less Than Significant Impact: Entech Consulting Group prepared an air quality and greenhouse gas study in July of 2012 for the then proposed 120 unit apartment project. An update letter from Entech Consulting Group dated August 21, 2013, states that air quality and greenhouse gas impacts for the single family detached condominium project would be similar to the initial evaluation performed for the 120-apartment unit project, resulting in air quality and greenhouse gas impacts remaining less than significant for the project. The study determined that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions will result from construction activities related to the project. The study states that temporary GHG emissions are expected to occur for the duration of the construction of the proposed project. CalEEMod was utilized to estimate CO2e emissions from the construction of the proposed project. The Entech study estimated emissions for each stage of construction scheduled. Table 7 from the Entech report, provided below, displays the CalEEMod results. Table 7. CO2c Emissions for Construction of Proposed Project Construction Year CO 2e Emissions, and Season metric tons+year Annually 2013 648k 2013 Emissions 2212 amortized over 20 years 2014 324 2014 Emissions 1.1 b amortized over 30 years - Total CO20 Emissions 23.1° Sovca•Entedi Carwiang CrcuR 2D r2 a) Total errwssiotrs far 0 conalruclian phases b) Following MOM guidance 2013 and 2014 coretructicn emission totals were spread cut over a 30 year period. c) 2tYt S and 20f4 amortized emissions were added together to determirQ the toad 00B Emissions tot the construction of the proposed project. The Entech report states that draft guidance from the SCAQMD recommend amortizing construction emissions over a 30-year period to account for their contribution to project lifetime greenhouse gas emissions. The 2013 and 2014 annual MTCO2e emissions were amortized over a 30-year period, total construction emissions would be estimated at 23.1 MTCO2e per year, which is far below the 3,500 MTCO2e residential screening threshold suggested by SCAQMD. The Entech study identified that GHG emissions are expected to decrease in 2014 because construction will only occur for two months in the year 2014, as compared to the 11 months in 2013. Construction emissions would therefore have a less that cumulatively contribution to global climate change impacts. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 18 Entech also calculated GHG operational emissions from activities that would occur from tenant use, mechanical building operations, and trip generations associated with vehicular traffic. CaIEEMod was utilized to estimate CO2e from the operation of the proposed project. Identified within CaIEEMod are specific sources of GHG emissions in the form of area, energy, mobile, waste, and water. Table 9 of the Entech study, provided below, displays the CaIEEMod results. Table 9. CO2e Emissions for Operation of Proposed Project Construction Year CO2e Emissions, and Season metric tons/year Annual( Area 91 • .i 108 Mobile 1 081 Waste 25 W. 7 Total 1,312 Source:Entach Cansiitang Group,2012 Entech states that draft guidance from the SCAQMD recommend a significance threshold for residential projects of 3,500 MTCO2e. The total annual GHG emissions were estimated to be 1,312 MTCO2e per year, which is below the 3,500 MTCO2e residential screening threshold suggested by SCAQMD. Operational emissions, therefore, would also have a less than cumulatively contribution to global climate change impacts. At this time there are no adopted statewide guidelines for greenhouse gas emission (GHG) impacts, but this is being addressed through the provisions of Senate Bill 97 (SB 97). In addition, the City of Temecula does not have any plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. For the proposed project, the project would be considered to have a significant impact if the project would be in conflict with the AB 32 State goals for reducing GHG emissions. Staff assumes that AB 32 will be successful in reducing GHG emissions and reducing the cumulative GHG emissions statewide by 2020. It is not anticipated that the project could have a major impact (either positively or negatively) on the global concentration of GHG. GHG impacts are considered to be exclusively cumulative impacts; there are no non-cumulative greenhouse gas emission impacts from a climate change perspective per the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA, 2008). The proposed project would contribute to global climate change as a result of emissions of GHGs, primarily CO2, emitted by construction activities. However, the project will not conflict with the CARB's thirty-nine (39) recommended actions in California's AB 32 Climate Change Scoping Plan. The project is expected to have a less than significant impact with regard to greenhouse gas emissions. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 19 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im.act a Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of X hazardous materials? _ _ b Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident X conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? _ c Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely hazardous X materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code X Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e 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 result X in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or X working in the project area? • g Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency X evacuation plan? h Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where X wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: 8.a. Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project will not involve the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.b. Less Than Significant Impact: The project proposes to subdivide the property and to construct single family residential detached condominium homes. It is not anticipated that this 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. 8.c. Less Than Significant Impact: A school is located near the southeast corner of the project site. The proposed single family residential detached condominium homes do not include any activities or uses that would pose a potential health hazard to the local population or the nearby school. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 20 8.d. No Impact: 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. 8.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 LU-2 in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Therefore, no impact upon airport uses will result from this proposal. 8.g. No Impact: The project will not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The project will take access from maintained public streets and will not impede emergency response or evacuation plans. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 8.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\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 21 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade water X quality? b Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of X pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a X stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount X of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage X systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f Require the preparation of a project-specific WQMP? X g Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood X Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which X would impede or redirect flood flows? i Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a X result of the failure of a levee or dam? j Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? I X Comments: 9.a. Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project is required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations in effect at the time of grading permit issuance. As a condition of approval, the applicant is also required to generate a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) as specified in the City of Temecula's NPDES Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit issued by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board that will ensure that the project implements specific water quality features to remove pollutants from the project's runoff in perpetuity. As such, the project will not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. By complying with the NPDES requirements, and potential impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 22 9.b. Less than Significant Impact: The water quality measures proposed for this project include a water quality basin and the utilization of porous pavement that will allow for a permanent post-construction storm water infiltration in addition to open space located throughout the site in order to maximize infiltration into the ground and assist with restoring groundwater supplies. As such, the proposed project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. The project is not anticipated to have a significant effect on the quantity and quality of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals. The proposed project is required to comply with local development standards, including lot coverage and landscaping requirements, which will allow percolation and ground water recharge. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 9.c. Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The proposed project will include an on-site drainage plan; however it will not alter off-site drainage patterns or alter the course of a stream or river, and will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site. During construction activities, erosion and siltation issues will be controlled to a less than significant level of impact by implementing construction-phase best management practices (BMP's). Following the completion of construction activities, the project will implement permanent post-construction infiltration devices to control increases in the rate, volume, and pollutant-load from surface runoff, and, as a result, will prevent erosion, sediment discharges, and sedimentation onsite and offsite. The Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the project by JLC Engineering and Consulting, Inc. states that the project shall implement various techniques to minimize urban runoff. Specifically, there are a vegetated detention and water quality basins, underground storm drain and storage devices, and "A" Street, portion of"B" Street, and "C" Street are designated for porous pavement. With this design, the project's runoff flow rate, volume, velocity and duration for the post-development condition do not exceed the pre-development condition for the 2-year, 24-hour and 10-year 24-hour rainfall events. In addition to being required to implement the WQMP design features, the project is also required to comply with Best Management Practices (BMP's), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulations as well as National Pollution Elimination Discharge System (NPEDS) standards, which addresses drainage, siltation and erosion. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 9.d. Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river. As discussed in 9.c above, the project will not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site because the project will not alter the course of a stream or river. The City of Temecula Public Works Department reviews all drainage plans and determines adequate drainage facilities are in place capable of on-site drainage. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project 9.e. Less than Significant Impact: As discussed in 9.c above, the proposed project would not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems. Through implementation of the WQMP the project will not provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. The project is required to comply with Best Management Practices (BMP's), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulations as well as National Pollution Elimination Discharge Elimination System standards, which address drainage and polluted runoff. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 9.f. No Impact: 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 San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. The WQMP must be accepted prior to issuance of a G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 23 grading permit for the project site. The water quality control measures to be identified in the WQMP will either be incorporated into the design of the project or be added to the project with specific conditions of approval and will be expected to eliminate potential adverse impacts to receiving waters. 9.g. No Impact: The proposed project is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project 9.h. No Impact: The proposed project is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area and therefore will not place improvements that could impede or redirect flood flows within a 100-year flood hazard area. No impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 9.i. No Impact: The proposed project is not located in a dam inundation area or a 100-year floodplain. Therefore, no impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 9.j. No Impact: The proposed project is not located near a coast line or large body of water which would subject the site to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Therefore, no impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 24 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incor•orated Impact Impact a Physically divide an established community? X b 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 X plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or X natural community conservation plan? Comments: 10.a. No Impact: The proposed project would not divide an established community or conflict with the applicable land use plan. Adjacent zoning includes High Density Residential (H), Low Medium Density Residential (LM), and Public Institutional (PI). The project site is surrounded by existing development, including apartments to the west and to the north, an Edison substation to the north, single family residential units, Vail Elementary School, and a drainage feature to the east, and single family residential units to the south. Surrounding development to the north and west of the project site includes apartments on property with a General Plan Designation of High Density Residential. The proposed revised TTM 33584 is consistent with the General Plan designation and impacts from the proposed revisions are not anticipated to result in impacts. The project would contribute to providing the City with diverse residential opportunities. 10.b. No Impact: The project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The project is not proposing to change the existing Medium Density Residential General Plan designation nor does it propose to change the existing Planned Development Overlay 11 (PDO-11) zoning designation. The existing PDO-11 allows for 62 units, however the proposed project revision will decrease the number of units to 59 units. As such, the project would not result in significant environmental impacts beyond those already anticipated for the property under the current General Plan designation and zoning regulations and would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 10.c. No Impact: The project has been designed and necessary mitigation measures will be implemented to be consistent with the provisions of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and no impact is anticipated as a result of this project. An MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment (Burrowing Owl) was prepared for this project by Michael Brandman Associates and was submitted to the City in August, 2012. The study was updated and submitted again to the City in August, 2013, to address the proposed TTM 33584 revisions. This report contains the results of a Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Consistency Analysis and habitat assessment. The project site lies within the Southwest Area Plan. The project site is not part of a criteria cell and not part of a plan sub unit. The project site is also not within any designated corridor, potential corridors, or areas or potential core areas. MBA assessed the project site to determine consistency with the requirements set forth in the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software was used to map the site in relation to MSHCP areas including Criteria Cells; conservation areas and wildlife movement corridors and G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 25 linkages; Criteria Area Species Survey Areas for plant, bird, mammal, and amphibian species; Narrow Endemic Plants Survey Area; and survey requirements for inadequately covered species. The Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) Conservation Summary Report was queried to determine habitat assessment and potential survey requirements for the site (see Appendix A of the MBA report). The MSHCP also requires that an assessment be completed to determine the potentially significant effects of the project on riparian/riverine areas and vernal pools. According to the MSHCP, the documentation for the assessment shall include mapping and a description of the functions and values of the mapped areas with respect to the species listed in MSHCP Section 6.1.2, Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools. As part of the MSHCP requirements, an Urban/Wildlands Interface Analysis is required to address the indirect effects associated with locating proposed development in proximity to MSHCP conservation areas. The development may result in edge effects, which could potentially affect biological resources within the MSHCP Conservation Area. According to the MSHCP, the analysis should include an assessment of the potential indirect project impacts that may result from drainage, toxics, noise, invasive species, barriers, access, and grading/development, as listed and described in the MSHCP's Section 6.1.4, Guidelines Pertaining to Urban/Wildlands Interface. Details of this assessment can be found in the MBA report. MBA conducted a riparian/riverine habitat assessment of the project site concurrent with the habitat assessment. The riparian/riverine habitat assessment focused on the drainage feature adjacent to the project site that was considered to meet the minimum criteria to be considered riparian/riverine habitat per the definition provided within the MSHCP. The targeted drainage feature was carefully inspected for the presence of riparian habitat characteristics and suitability to support associated species, including a dominance of hydrophytic vegetation, suitable topography and hydrology, and suitable soil substrate where necessary. As discussed in 4.b above, the project site contains 0.1 acre of riparian habitat that will be impacted, but these areas do not contain any riverine connectivity. The willows to be impacted are within upland areas and are not connected to the riparian area northeast of the project site. There are no vernal pools, or areas suitable for support sensitive fairy shrimp species within the property. The total area of riparian within the project site is 0.29 acre. A single ephemeral drainage occurs along the northeastern project site boundary and contains narrow-leaved willows, arroyo willows, and Fremont cottonwood trees. The majority of this riparian area is outside of the project parcel. The project site does not contain habitat that supports any of the sensitive species contained in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP; contains no vernal pool areas; and does not contain any areas capable of supporting any fairy shrimp species. In addition to the MSHCP requirements, other biological constraints associated with the project site were identified. As discussed in 4.c above, there is one adjacent drainage feature located along the eastern border of the site that appears to fall under the jurisdiction of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) which will not be impacted by the proposed project revisions based on Natural Resources Assessment, Inc.'s Jurisdictional Delineation (2012) and updated in August 23, 2013. The project was specifically designed to avoid the jurisdictional drainage areas. As discussed in the MBA report, the project site is located within an MSHCP-designated habitat assessment survey area for Burrowing Owls. According to the MBA report, marginally suitable habitat occurs on site for Burrowing Owls; however, there were no suitable burrows present, there is not sufficient habitat within the project area to support Burrowing Owls, and the project site surrounded by development and isolated from other suitable habitat. Based on the habitat assessment it was determined that focus surveys for Burrowing Owls were not required. MBA determined that based on the disturbed nature of the site and the lack of sensitive species, no significant impacts are anticipated that would jeopardize the County's ability to achieve its conservation goals. Minimal riparian vegetation will be impacted; however, it is not connected to the adjacent drainage and riparian area. The project was designed specifically to avoid the drainage and riparian area. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 26 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than I' Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a l Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the X residents of the state? b Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local X general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? y Comments: 11.a.b. No Impact: The project will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource nor in the loss of an available, locally important mineral resource recovery site. The State Geologist has classified the City of Temecula as MRZ-3a, containing areas of sedimentary deposits which have the potential for supplying sand and gravel for concrete and crushed stone for aggregate. However, these areas are determined as not containing deposits of significant economic value based upon available data in reports prepared in accordance with the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) of 1975. Furthermore, the project site is not identified as an important site known to contain such resources as shown in the Final EIR for the City of Temecula General Plan. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 27 12. NOISE. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local X general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b Result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise X levels? c Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing X without the project? d Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels X existing without the project? e 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 X project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the X project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: 12.a.d. Less than Significant Impact: The project may result in temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels during construction. Construction machinery is capable of producing noise in the range of 100+ DBA at 100 feet, which is considered annoying. However, noise from construction of the project will comply with City ordinances regulating the hours of activity to Monday through Friday from 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. and Saturday from 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. Furthermore, based on the use of standard construction equipment (dozer, backhoe, cement truck, air compressors and air tools, generators, etc.), no activities are anticipated within the proposed project that would result in exposure to 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 agencies. If equipment were required that would exceed the City's noise regulations, an application for a construction related exception must be made on a minor exception form in conformance with Section 9.20.070 of the Temecula Municipal Code. Since no activities are anticipated within the proposed project that would result in exposure to 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 agencies, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 12.b. Less than Significant Impact: Construction activities that would occur within the project site would include grading and excavation, which would have the potential to temporarily generate low levels of groundborne vibration. However, no activities are anticipated within the proposed project that would expose persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 28 12.c. Less than Significant Impact: Although the project may result in temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels during construction, substantial permanent increases in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project are not anticipated. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 12.e.-f. No Impact: This project is not within two miles of a public airport or private airstrip. Therefore, the project will not expose people to excessive noise levels generated by an airport and no impacts will result from this project. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 29 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact IInduce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and X businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing X elsewhere? c Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the X construction of replacement housin• elsewhere? Comments: 13.a-c. No Impact: The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The proposed project is a 59 unit single family detached condominium residential project that will utilize existing roads and infrastructure. The project site consists of undeveloped land covered with vegetation in the south and asphalt from a small parking are for a school (The Carden Academy) that occupied a portion of the site in the north until approximately 2007, when all structures associated with the school were removed. Therefore, the project will not displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing. The project will neither displace housing nor people and will not necessitate the construction of replacement housing. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 30 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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 acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a. Fire protection? X b. Police protection? X c. Schools? X d. Parks? _ X e. Other public facilities? X Comments: 14.a-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 project will incrementally increase the need for some public services. However, the increase is expected to be a very small increment and payment of the City's Development Impact Fees will ensure that any potential impact will be reduced to an insignificant level. As a result, the project is anticipated to have a less than significant impact upon the need for new or altered public facilities. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 31 15. RECREATION. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial X physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an X adverse physical effect on the environment? Comments: 15.a. Less than Significant Impact: The project proposes single family detached condominium housing on residentially zoned property. The project will not displace recreationally zoned lands or remove vacant lands that are used for recreational purposes. The project will include open space and recreational facilities for its residents and is not anticipated to significantly increase the use of neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities to a point that would cause significant physical deterioration of these facilities. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 15.b. Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project does include open space and recreational facilities for its residents and is not anticipated to require construction or expansion of additional public recreational facilities. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 32 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized X travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths and mass transit? b Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards X established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results X in substantial safety risks? d Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible X uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e Result in inadequate emergency access? X f Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise X decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? Comments: 16.a.b. Less than Significant Impact: A traffic study was prepared for the project by RK Engineering Group, Inc. and was submitted to the City in order to ensure compliance with all appropriate traffic regulations. Based on the intersections and roadways evaluated, the study reveals that the proposed project will not result in a conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system in the project area. Further, the project will not conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the County congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. The RK Engineering Group's study indicates that the proposed project's peak hours differ from the adjacent Vail Elementary School's peak hour traffic and the proposed 59 unit single family detached homes project can be accommodated with no required mitigation measures. At the December 6, 2012 meeting of the Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission, the Commission discussed school area traffic circulation at Vail Elementary School and the Commission agreed with the traffic analysis prepared for the project and did not perceive any additional impacts to Mira Loma Drive or Vail Elementary School as a result of the project. Additionally, Jason Osborn, Director of Transportation for Temecula Valley Unified School District, concurred with the findings of the analysis and indicated that due to the close proximity of the school, children from the then project would be more likely to walk to school based on existing pedestrian travel patterns for the surrounding neighborhood. In addition, the Traffic analysis conducted by RK Engineering Group did take into account the traffic volume counts that were collected by Linscott, Law & Greenspan when the Vail Elementary School was in session in January 2013 in their analysis. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 33 16.c. No Impact: The project is not anticipated to 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. The project area is not within the French Valley Airport influence area. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 16.d.e. Less Than Significant Impact: The project will be accessed from existing roads and will not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature of the project. On-site access roads will be required to be consistent with City standards, including street design and emergency access. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 16.f. No Impact: The project will be required to be consistent with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks). The project will include a public pedestrian/bicycle path from Mira Loma Drive to Rancho Vista Road that will help to support alternative transportations. No impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 34 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the X _ applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing X facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the X construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or X expanded entitlements needed? e Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has X adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to X accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X regulations related to solid waste? Comments: 17.a.b.e. Less than Significant Impact: The project will not exceed wastewater treatment requirements, require the construction of new treatment facilities, nor affect the capacity of treatment providers. Though the project will have an incremental effect upon existing systems, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 17.c. Less than Significant Impact: The project will require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities on site that will connect to the existing system currently in place along Mira Loma Drive and to an existing flood control channel located east of and adjacent to the project site. The design of the existing system is sufficient to handle the runoff from this project and will not require the expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 17.d. Less than Significant Impact: The project will not significantly impact existing water supplies nor require expanded water entitlements. While the project will have an incremental impact upon existing systems, the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's General Plan states: "RCWD anticipates supplying water to 167,640 persons within its service area in 2020 (p. 5.14-3)." The FEIR further states: "EMWD anticipates supplying water to 756,699 persons within its service area in 2020, (p. 5.14-3)." This anticipated water supply includes a portion of Temecula and less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 35 17.f.g. Less than Significant Impact: The project will not result in a need for new landfill capacity. Any potential impacts from solid waste created by this development can be mitigated through participation in Source Reduction and Recycling Programs, which are implemented by the City. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 36 1 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a 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 X 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 prehistory? b Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable ("cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are X considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either X directl or indirectly? Comments: 18.a. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: As discussed in the sections above, the project would involve a revision to an approved Tentative Tract Map (TTM No. 33584) and is not proposing to change the land use designation of Medium Density Residential. The project is not anticipated to significantly reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, or threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community. According to the MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment (Burrowing Owl) prepared for the project by Michael Brandman Associates, the project site does contain suitable avian nesting habitat for a variety of species. The report states that if the clearance of vegetation is required and occurs during the avian breeding season (February to August), a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting birds will be required. If construction activities occur outside of the avian breeding season (September to July) no mitigation is required. For any clearance of vegetation during the avian breeding season (February to August), mitigation measures shall be required. A cultural Resources Assessment prepared by LSA in June 2012 recommends mitigation measures to ensure that if any cultural resources are identified on the site, they are properly treated and preserved. Additionally, a paleontological resources assessment was prepared for the project by LSA Associates, Inc. in August, 2012. The study concluded that the presence of sediments suitable to contain paleontological resources and the positive results of the literature review reinforce the high potential for encountering significant nonrenewable vertebrate fossils on the proposed project site. As such, the LSA Associates, Inc. study recommends mitigation measures to properly treat and preserve paleontological resources. 18.b. Less Than Significant Impact: No significant cumulative impacts have been identified with the implementation of the proposed project. 18.c. Less Than Significant Impact: No substantial environmental effects that would cause adverse effects on human beings have been identified. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 37 19. 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. a Earlier anal ses used. Identif earlier anal ses and state where the are available for review. b Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the above 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 by mitigation measures based on the earlier anal sis. c Mitigation 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 project. 19.a. The City's General Plan, Final Environmental Impact Report and the City of Temecula's Geographic Information System (GIS) Map Sets were used as a referenced source in preparing the Initial Study for this project. The City's General Plan and Final Environmental Impact Report are available for review at the City of Temecula Planning Department located at 41000 Main Street in Temecula. The GIS Map Sets are available online at www.cityoftemecula.org. 19.b. On April 10, 2007, the City of Temecula City Council approved Planning Application Nos. PA05-0234 (PDO) and PA05-0109 (TTM) and adopted the associated Mitigated Negative Declaration. The current proposal, PA13-0217, involves a revision to the previously approved TTM 33584 and will not revise the previously approved PDO and nor amend the current General Plan designation is not the same as the project previously analyzed. This Initial Study has been prepared to specifically address the current proposal. 19.c. See attached Mitigation Monitoring Program. SOURCES 1. City of Temecula General Plan. 2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report. 3. South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook. 4. MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment (Burrowing Owl), Michael Brandman Associates, updated August 29, 2013. 5. Wetland/Jurisdictional Delineation, Natural Resources Assessment, Inc., February 9, 2012 and update letter dated August 23, 2013. 6. Traffic Impact Study, RK Engineering Group, Inc., update letter dated September 9, 2013. 7. Geotechnical Report, Tract Map 33584, A.P.N. 944-060-006, GeoMat Testing Laboratories, Inc., August 31, 2013. 8. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study, Entech Consulting Group, July 2012 and update letter dated August 21, 2013. 9. Cultural Resources Assessment, LSA Associates, Inc., June 2012 and update letter December 12, 2013. 10. Paleontological Resources Assessment, LSA Associates, Inc., September 2012 and update letter dated December 12, 2013. 11. Water Quality Management Plan, JLC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., September 3, 2013 and revised update November 18, 2013. 12. Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulic Study, JLC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., November 18, 2013. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 38 13. State of California Department Conservation. G:\PLANNING\2013\PA13-0217 Rancho Vista Village MOD\Planning\CEQA\Initial Study.doc 39 Mitigation Monitoring Program Project Description: PA13-0217, a revision to a previously approved Tentative Tract Map (TTM 33584) to minimize retaining wall heights, balance earthwork quantities onsite, provide a water quality basin, and to reduce the density from 62 units to 59 units on a 7.24 acre site. Location_ The Project is generally located at the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road, Temecula Applicant: Jim Ahmad; Inland Communities Corp 6430 W Sunset Blvd, Suite 460 Los Angeles, CA 90028 Biological Resources General Impact: A report by MBA for the project states that the project site does contain suitable avian nesting habitat for a variety of species, and that if the clearance of vegetation is required and occurs during the avian breeding season (February to August), a pre- construction clearance survey for nesting birds will be required. If construction activities occur outside of the avian breeding season (September to July) no mitigation is required. For any clearance of vegetation during the avian breeding season (February to August), the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: Mitigation Measures: Bio-1 A pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted prior to any vegetation disturbance activities. Bio-2 If passerine birds are found to be nesting or there is evidence of nesting behavior inside or within 250 feet of the impact area, a 250-foot buffer will be required around the nest where no vegetation disturbance will be permitted. Bio-3 For birds of prey, such as hawks and owls, the buffer shall be expanded to 500 feet. Bio-4 A qualified biologist is required to closely monitor the nest until it is determined that the nest is no longer active, at which time vegetation removal could continue. Specific Process: Place the above Mitigation Measures as Conditions of Approval on the project to reduce potential biological resource impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Milestone. Prior to Grading Permit Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning Department and Public Works Department 1 Cultural Resources General Impact: A cultural Resources Assessment was prepared by LSA that recommend that to ensure cultural resources, if identified on the site, are properly treated and preserved, mitigation measures shall be followed. In addition the Pechanga Tribe of Luiseno Mission Indians also requested specific cultural resource mitigation measure to be in place. Mitigation Measures: Cultural-1 If previously undocumented cultural resources are identified during earthmoving activities, a qualified archaeologist shall assess the nature and significance of the find, temporarily diverting construction excavation if necessary. Cultural-2 The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods and all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area to the appropriate Tribe for proper treatment and disposition. Cultural-3 All sacred sites, should they be encountered within the project area, shall be avoided and preserved as the preferred mitigation, if feasible. Cultural-4 If inadvertent discoveries of subsurface archaeological/cultural resources are discovered during grading, the Developer, the project archaeologist, and the Tribe shall assess the significance of such resources and shall meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources. Pursuant to Calif. Pub. Res. Code § 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method of preservation for archaeological resources. Cultural-5 If the Developer, the project archaeologist and the Tribe cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for such resources, these issues will be presented to the Planning Director for decision. The Planning Director shall make the determination based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological resources and shall take into account the religious beliefs, customs, and practices of the Tribe. Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the decision of the Planning Director shall be appealable to the Planning Commission and/or City Council. Cultural-6 Prior to beginning project construction, the Project Applicant shall retain a Riverside County qualified archaeological monitor to monitor all ground- disturbing activities in an effort to identify any 2 unknown archaeological resources. Any newly discovered cultural resource deposits shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation. Cultural-7 At least 30 days prior to beginning project construction, the Project Applicant shall contact the Pechanga Tribe to notify the Tribe of grading, excavation and the monitoring program, and to coordinate with the City of Temecula and the Tribe to develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall address the treatment of known cultural resources, the designation, responsibilities, and participation of professional Native American Tribal monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities; project grading and development scheduling; terms of compensation for the monitors; and treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site. Cultural-8 Prior to beginning project construction, the Project Archaeologist shall file a pre-grading report with the City of Temecula (if required) to document the proposed methodology for grading activity observation which will be determined in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe. Said methodology shall include the requirement for a qualified archaeological monitor to be present and to have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. In accordance with the agreement required above, the archaeological monitor's authority to stop and redirect grading will be exercised in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe in order to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. Tribal and archaeological monitors shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities, and shall also have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. Cultural-9 If human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission must be contacted within 24 hours. 3 The Native American Heritage Commission must then immediately identify the most likely descendant(s)" of receiving notification of the discovery. The most likely descendant(s) shall then make recommendations within 48 hours, and engage in consultations concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public Resources Code 5097.98 and the Treatment Agreement described above. Cultural-10 A trained paleontological monitor will be present during ground-disturbing activities within the project area in sediments determined likely to contain paleontological resources. The monitoring for paleontological resources will be conducted on a full-time basis. The monitor will be empowered to temporarily halt or redirect construction activities to ensure avoidance of adverse impacts to paleontological resources. The monitor will be equipped to rapidly remove any large fossil specimens encountered during excavation. During monitoring, samples will be collected and processed to recover microvertebrate fossils. Processing will include wet screen washing and microscopic examination of the residual materials to identify small vertebrate remains. The project paleontologist may reevaluate the monitoring program after 50 percent of the excavation has been completed. Cultural-11 Upon encountering a large deposit of bone, salvage of all bone in the area will be conducted with additional field staff and in accordance with modern paleontological techniques. Cultural-12 All fossils collected during the project will be prepared to a reasonable point of identification. Excess sediment or matrix will be removed from the specimens to reduce the bulk and cost of storage. Itemized catalogs of all material collected and identified will be provided to the museum repository along with the specimens. Cultural-13 A report documenting the results of the monitoring and salvage activities and the significance of the fossils will be prepared. Cultural-14 All fossils collected during this work, along with the itemized inventory of these specimens, will be deposited in a museum repository for permanent curation and storage. 4 Specific Process: Place the above Mitigation Measures as Conditions of Approval on the project to reduce potential cultural resource impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Milestone: Agreements and conditions prior to issuance of a grading permit, monitoring ongoing through grading operations, and final reports upon completion of grading. Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning Department and Public Works Department Geology and Soils General Impact: There may be a potentially significant impact from seismic ground shaking. Although, there are no known fault hazard zones on the property, the project is located in Southern California, an area that is seismically active. After mitigation measures are performed, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Mitigation Measures: Geology & Soils-1 Building construction shall be consistent with the Uniform Building Code Standards. Geology & Soils-2 All recommendations set forth in the Geotechnical Report completed by GeoMat Testing Laboratories, Inc. dated February 11, 2012, and then updated on August 31, 2013 to address the currently proposed 59 single-family detached condominium unit project, shall be followed, including but not limited to recommendations for earthwork, clearing and grubbing, preparation of surfaces to received compacted fill, preparation of building areas, preparation of slab and paving areas, placement of compacted fill, field/laboratory testing during grading, wet soils, slopes, retaining wall design foundation recommendations, and grading and foundation plan review shall be followed. Specific Process: Place the above Mitigation Measures as Conditions of Approval on the project to reduce potential seismic-related ground failure impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Milestone: Grading permit issuance and Building Permit issuance Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning Department, Public Works Department and Building Department 5 SATE OF CALIFORNIA Edmund G.Brown,Jr.,Governor NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION 1550 Harbor Boulevard,Suite 100 West Sacramento,CA 95691 (916)373-3715 Fax(916)373-5471 Web Site www.nahc.ca.gov Dsnahc@pacbell.net e mail: ds_nahc@pacbell.net December 31, 2013 Mr. Stuart Fisk, Senior Planner City of Temecula Community Development Department Planning Division 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 RE: SCH#20120910020; CEQA Notice of Completion; proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for the "Rancho Vista Villas (formerly Mira Loma Apartments) Project" located at Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road; City of Temecula; Riverside County, California Dear Mr. Fisk: The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) has reviewed the above-referenced environmental document. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) states that any project which includes archeological resources, is a significant effect requiring the preparation of an EIR (CEQA guidelines 15064.5(b). To adequately comply with this provision and mitigate project-related impacts on archaeological resources, the Commission recommends the following actions be required: Contact the appropriate Information Center for a record search to determine if a part or all of the area of project effect (APE) has been previously surveyed for cultural places(s), The NAHC recommends that known traditional cultural resources recorded on or adjacent to the APE be listed in the draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). If an additional archaeological inventory survey is required, the final stage is the preparation of a professional report detailing the findings and recommendations of the records search and field survey. We suggest that this be coordinated with the NAHC, if possible. The final report containing site forms, site significance, and mitigation measurers should be submitted immediately to the planning department. All information regarding site locations, Native American human remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum, and not be made available for pubic disclosure pursuant to California Government Code Section 6254.10. A list of appropriate Native American Contacts for consultation concerning the project site has been provided and is attached to this letter to determine if the proposed active might impinge on any cultural resources. Lack of surface evidence of archeological resources does not preclude their subsurface existence. California Government Code Section 65040.12(e) defines "environmental justice" to provide "fair treatment of People...with respect to the development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations and policies" and Executive Order B-10-11 requires consultation with Native American tribes their elected officials and other representatives of tribal governments to provide meaningful input into the development of legislation, regulations, rules, and policies on matters that may affect tribal communities. Lead agencies should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the identification and evaluation of accidentally discovered archeological resources, pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) §15064.5(f). In areas of identified archaeological sensitivity, a certified archaeologist and a culturally affiliated Native American, with knowledge in cultural resources, should monitor all ground-disturbing activities. Also, California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2 require documentation and analysis of archaeological items that meet the standard in Section 15064.5 (a)(b)(f). Lead agencies should consider first, avoidance for sacred and/or historical sites, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15370(a). Then if the project goes ahead then, lead agencies include in their mitigation and monitoring plan provisions for the analysis and disposition of recovered artifacts, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2 in consultation with culturally affiliated Native Americans. Lead agencies should include provisions for discovery of Native American human remains in their mitigation plan. Health and Safety Code §7050.5, CEQA §15064.5(e), and Public Resources Code §5097.98 mandates the process to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location other than a dedicated cemetery. 7in.-rely, I;.. .e i - =s,. Program Analy- .} CC: State Clearinghouse Attachment: Native American Contacts list Native A, rican Contacts Riverside County California December 31, 2013 Pala Band of Mission Indians Rincon Band of Mission Indians Historic Preservation Office/Shasta Gaughen Vincent Whipple, Tribal Historic Preationv. Officer 35008 Pala Temecula Road, PMB Luiseno 1 West Tribal Road Luiseno Pala , CA 92059 Cupeno Valley Center, CA 92082 PMB 50 jmurphy @rincontribe.org (760) 891-3515 (760) 297-2635 sgaughen @palatribe.com (760) 297-2639 Fax (760) 742-3189 Fax Pauma & Yuima Reservation Santa Rosa Band of Mission Indians Randall Majel, Chairperson John Marcus, Chairman P.O. Box 369 Luiseno P.O. Box 391820 Cahuilla Pauma Valley CA 92061 Anza , CA 92539 paumareservation @aol.com (951) 659-2700 (760) 742-1289 (951) 659-2228 Fax (760) 742-3422 Fax Pechanga Band of Mission Indians Rincon Band of Mission Indians Paul Macarro, Cultural Resources Manager Bo Mazzetti, Chairperson P.O. Box 1477 Luiseno 1 West Tribal Road Luiseno Temecula , CA 92593 Valley Center, CA 92082 (951) 770-8100 bomazzetti @aol.com pmacarro @pechanga-nsn. (760) 749-1051 gov (760) 749-8901 Fax (951) 506-9491 Fax Ramona Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians Pechanga Band of Mission Indians Joseph Hamilton, Chairman Mark Macarro, Chairperson P.O. Box 391670 Cahuilla P.O. Box 1477 Luiseno Anza , CA 92539 Temecula , CA 92593 admin @ramonatribe.com (951) 770-6100 (951) 763-4105 hlaibach @pechanga-nsn. (951) 763-4325 Fax gov (951) 695-1778 FAX This list is current only as of the date of this document Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of the statutory responsibility as defined In Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. his list s only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources for the proposed SCH#2012091020;CEQA Notice of Completion;proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Rancho Vista Villas Project;located in the City of Temecula;Riverside County,California. Native k rican Contacts Riverside County California December 31, 2013 William J. Pink 48310 Pechanga Road Luiseno Temecula , CA 92592 wjpink @hotmail.com (909) 936-1216 Prefers e-mail contact Cahuilla Band of Indians Luther Salgado, Chairperson PO Box 391760 Cahuilla Anza , CA 92539 Chairman @cahuilla.net 760-763-5549 760-763-2631 - Tribal EPA Pechanga Cultural Resources Department Anna Hoover, Cultural Analyst P.O. Box 2183 Luiseno Temecula , CA 92593 ahoover@pechanga-nsn.gov 951-770-8104 (951) 694-0446 - FAX SOBOBA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS Joseph Ontiveros, Cultural Resource Department P.O. BOX 487 Luiseno San Jacinto , CA 92581 jontiveros @soboba-nsn.gov (951) 663-5279 (951) 654-5544, ext 4137 This list is current only as of the date of this document Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of the statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. his list s only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources for the proposed SCH#2012091020;CEQA Notice of Completion;proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Rancho Vista Villas Project;located in the City of Temecula;Riverside County,California. Chairperson: Mary Bear Magee x PECHANGA CULTURAL RESOURCES Vice Chairperson: Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians Darlene Miranda Committee Members: /11 j Post Office.Box 2183•Temecula,CA 92593 Brid Gerber Barcello Maxwell Telephone(951)308-9295•Fax(951)506-9491 g Richard B.Scearce,III �!IwiS'6 Germaine Arenas <'sy1 l!q!hugki i',pui January 21, 2014 {` ' Director: Gary DuBois Coordinator: 6 t ",'; Paul Macarro VIA E-MAIL and USPS Cultural Analyst: Mr. Stuart Fisk Anna Hoover Senior Planner City of Temecula Community Development 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92589 Re: Pechanga Tribe Comments on the Recirculation of the Notice for a Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Rancho Vista Villas Project(Formerly Mira Loma Apartments) Dear Mr. Fisk; This comment letter is written on behalf of the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians (hereinafter, "the Tribe"), a federally recognized Indian tribe and sovereign government. Please continue to notify and involve the Tribe, pursuant to Public Resources Code §21092.2, in the entire CEQA environmental review process for the continued duration of the above referenced project (the "Project"). Please also incorporate these comments into the record of approval for this Project. The Tribe previously submitted comments to the City for the previously proposed 120 unit apartments Project on June 1, 2012 (SB 18); August 3, 2012 (Archaeological study); October 15, 2012 (MND); and January 10, 2013 (Revised MND). After reviewing this revised Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) which analyzes the changes to the Project (a reduction in the number and change of type of residential units to 59 detached condominiums), the Tribe is in agreement with the measures as posed. Please incorporate them into the final MND and as Conditions of Approval. The Tribe again thanks the City for the inclusion of the Tribe in the development process. The Pechanga Tribe looks forward to working together with the City of Temecula in protecting the invaluable Pechanga cultural resources found in the Project area. Please contact me at 951-770-8104 or at ahoover @ pechanga-nsn.gov if you have any comments or questions. Thank you. Sincerely, Anna Hoover Cultural Analyst Cc Pechanga Office of the General Counsel Sacred Is The Duty Trusted Unto Our Care And With Honor We Rise To The Need o\\f%1F G f;\ - Notice of Public Hearing ,,, , .„,,.4,„;_._ 1989`..._... \s..,,�'vv°" A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the City of Temecula PLANNING COMMISSION to consider the matter described below: Case No: PA13-0217 Applicant: Jim Ahmad; Inland Communities Proposal: Tentative Tract Map revision application to change the number of lots from 4 lots (one condominium lot, one recreation building lot, and two open space lots) for 62 detached condominium units to 4 lots (one condominium lot, one recreation building lot, and two open space lots) for 59 detached condominium units located at the northeast corner of Rancho Vista Road and Mira Loma Road. Environmental: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed project will not have a significant impact upon the environment based upon a completed Environmental Initial Study and Mitigation and Monitoring Program. As a result, a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be adopted in compliance with CEQA. Case Planner: Stuart Fisk, (951) 506-5159 Place of Hearing: City of Temecula, Council Chambers Date of Hearing: March 19, 2014 Time of Hearing: 6:00 p.m. `_, . WE'„?'` '/.A LAS00‘"\N� 'ENV"∎'•_��"*T /M �`_r m Pl., �� ,24 it,cos.coR . 'LEYANDER� . � g r. .. P A S E X0.5 ,• , !'I,,, `� �. ACEgUP°0. ./% gGEA(4 ST '11"',;,`1 G talk Pa ' �., oP I� Py�atir R�� , vr- �°��, op ` Project Site -� (` `�j -, ' ... i�� �. a i U of two �R ,`� 11sarc ci;; �O�S �, ri _ == `�s �, M�NTI. 9 VS I+ " M° �GHLAND p0.'o: c2,,,, 9 ' , II\ �.o° � F� ♦`,`GPM\NO �1 Wit\I�∎♦I;�.id�o �r� ► ;:�� "��I \�, . 0 750 1,500 3.000 Feet Notice of Public Hearing The agenda packet (including staff reports) will be available for viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula) after 4:00 p.m. the Friday before the Planning Commission Meeting. At that time, the packet may also be accessed on the City's website — www.citvoftemecula.org. Any Supplemental Material distributed to a majority of the Commission regarding any item on the Agenda, after the posting of the Agenda, will be available for public review in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula), 8:00 a.m. — 5:00 p.m.). In addition, such material will be made available on the City's website — www.cityoftemecula.orq — and will be available for public review at the respective meeting. If you have any questions regarding any item of business on the Agenda for this meeting, please call the Planning Department, (951) 694-6400.