HomeMy WebLinkAbout060391 PC AgendaA 13 E N:DA
TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
June 03, 1991 6:00 PM
VAIL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
29915 Mira Loma Drive
Temecula, CA 92390
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
Chairman Chiniaeff
~lalr, Fahey, Ford~
Chlniaeff
Hoagland,
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the
commissioners on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are
limited to three (3) minutes each. if you desire to speak to the Commissioners
about an item not listed on the Agenda, a pink 'Request to Speak' form should
be filled out and filed with the Commissioner Secretary.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and
address.
For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak~ form must be filed with the
Planning Secretary before. Commission gets to that item. There is a three
minute time I m t for~idual Speakers.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
1. Approval of Agenda
2. Minutes
2.1 Approval of minutes of May 20, 1991 Planning Commission Meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
Case No.
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Case P|anner:
Recommendation:
Variance No, 6
Superior Electrical Advertising, Inc.
Northwest Corner of Jefferson Avenue and Overland Drive
Variance in order to allow an additional freestanding sign
display in lieu of the maximum allowed freestandlng signs
per Ord. 348.
Richard Ayala.
Denial
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Case Planner:
R ecommen d ati on:
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
PropoSal:
Case Planner
Recommendation:
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Case Planner:
Recommendation:
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Case Planner:
Recommendation:
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Case Planner:
Recommendation:
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Case Planner:
R ecommendatlon:
Par;el'Map No. 26135
LUis Stah) .
North~vest
Subdivide 5.19 'a~r'es int~
Richard Ayala
Approval
Tentative Tract MapNo. 25055
Jack Hamry
Northside of Via Ea Vida. East of Margarita Rd.
29 Unit Condominium Map
Mark Rhoades
Approval
Tentative Tract Map No. 2~785-
Steve Lee
Northwest Corner of Liefer Rd. and Kimberly Ln.
Subdivide 5.0 acre site into two parcels
Mark Rheades
Approval
Conditional USe Permit No. 11
Robert C. VecchioneJEduardo Lopes
27919 Front Street
Request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow automotive
sales by indivldualowner atlan existing parking lot.
Mark Rhoades
Approval
Revised Conditional Use Permit No. 2
Larry Gabele
Westerly side of Ynez Road approximately 200 feet North
of Solana Way
To increase the building space of an approved automotive
service Center by approximately 300 square feet and
delete 3 parking spaces.
Scott Wright
Approval
Change of Zone No. 1 i, Parcel Map 26852 and
Plot Plan No. 22~,
Bedford Properties
Northwest corner of Margarita and Winchester Roads.
Change of Zone from R-R I Rural Residential) to
[Scenic Highway Commercial) qn 19.7 acres of a 57 acr~:
site. Subdivide the 57 acres into 1~ Parcels and 2
remainder parcels. Construct a
Commercial' Center on
Steve Jiannlno
Recommend ApproVal
177,000 square f00~
10.
11.
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Case Planner:
Recommendation:
Temporary Outdoor Activities Ordinance
City of Temecula
City Wide
Ordinance establishing Regulatlonsfor Temporary Outdoor
Activities.
Oilvet Mujica
Recommended Approval
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Case Planner:
Recommendation:
Outdoor Advertising Displays Ordinance
City of Temecula
City Wide
interim Ordinance establishing regulations for Outdoor
Advertising Displays.
Oliver Mujlca
Continue to June 17, 1991
Planninq Director Report
General Plan Update
Plannlnq Commission Discussion
Other Business
ADJOURNMENT
Next meeting: June 17, 1991, 6:00 p.m., Vail Elementary School, 29915 Mira Loma
Drive; Temecula, California
SJ/Ib
pc/Agn6/3
ITEM #2
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETINg
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
MONDAY, MAY 20, 1991
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Planning Commission was
called to order Monday, May 20, 1991, 7:00 P.M., at Vail Elementary
School, 29915 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula, California. The meeting
was called to order by Chairman Dennis Chiniaeff.
PRESENT: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland, Chiniaeff
ABSENT: 0
COMMISSIONERS: None
Also present were Assistant City Attorney John Cavanaugh, Planning
Director Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Engineer Doug Stewart and
Minute Clerk Gail Zigler.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
COMMISSION BUSINESS
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COMMISSIONER HOAGLANDmOVed to approve the agenda, with Item 10
taken prior to Item 3, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY.
AYES:
5 COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland, Chiniaeff
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
2. MINUTES
COMMISSIONER FORD moved to approve the minutes of May 6, 1991,
with the following modifications:
Page 11, ninth paragraph vote, move under the motion made by
Commissioner Hoagland.
COMMISSIONER HOARLAND seconded the motion to approve the
minutes as modified.
AYES:
5 COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland, Chiniaeff
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
PCMIN5/20/91 -1- MAY 24, 1991
PLANNING COMMISSION XINUTES HAY 20# ~991
GARY THORNHILL requested that a motion be made to continue Item 14
to the meeting of June 3, 1991.
COMMISSINEH FORD moved to continue Item No. 14 to the regular
Planning Commission meeting of June 3, 1991, seconded by
COMMISSIONER FAHEY.
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland, Chiniaeff
NOES: 0
COMMISSIONERS: None
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
10. PUBLIC USE PERMIT NO. 625 (REV.)
10.1
Request to allow Rancho Baptist Church three (3) On Site
Temporary Trailers. Located at 29775 Santiago Road,
Temecula.
OLIVER MUJICA provided the staff report.
CHAIRMAN CHINIAEFF opened the public hearing at 6:15
P.M.
JIM CARPENTER, Pastor, Rancho Baptist Church, 30933
Loma Linda Road, Temecula, provided a brief history
of the church.
JERRY TEDDER, 37797 Calle De Lobo, Murrieta, provided
background on the development of the church and the
phasing of construction.
DAVID CARPENTER, 41169 Vintage Circle, Temecula,
representing Rancho Baptist Church, requested that
Condition of Approval No. 14 be waived.
RICHARD SHAGGS, 29497 Rancho California Road, #675,
Temecula, requested clarification of where the proposed
improvements were going in at the church site and added
that he had no problem with the proposal.
BARBARA HUGHES, 44278 Cabo Street, Temecula, spoke
against the approval of the temporary trailers due to
insufficient screening between her property and the
church grounds.
BOB HINZ, 44264 Cabo Street, Temecula, spoke against
the appproval of the temporary trailers, also due to
PCMIN5/20/91 -2- HAY 24, 1991
PL~INe COMI(ISSION NINUTES I~Y 20, 1991
insufficient screening between the residential property
and the church.
STEVE JIANNINO advised the Commission that when the
original Public Use Permit was approved, a Variance
was approved deleting the requirement for a screen
wall for the entire project.
COMMISSIONER FORD suggested to the applicant that
temporary screening be placed and permanent screening
be in place prior to phase 2 construction, with Planning
staff working out the details with the applicant.
DAVID CHRISTIAN stated that they would be willing to
work that out with staff.
gARY THORNHILL added that the project could be
conditioned to have a permanent screen wall in place
prior to occupancy of the phase two structure.
JOHN CAVANAUGH advised the Commission, as well as the
applicant, that if the applicant wishes to contest the
amount of the development fee (Condition No. 14), they
may do so, by appealing the imposition of the fee at
the City Council level.
COMMISSIONER FANEY moved to close the public hearing
at 6:50 P.M. and Adopt Resolution 91-[next) approving
Public Use Permit No. 625 (rev.), subject to the
Conditions of Approval as submitted by staff, modifying
Condition No. 14 as presented by the Assistant City
Attorney and adding a condition requiring that the
temporary trailers be painted to match the existing
building, a maximum of 36 months approval on the use
of the temporary trailers, and temporary screening
of the chain link fence to include wooden slats and
landscaping, with the construction of a block wall
with construction of Phase Two, seconded by COMMISSIONER
BLAIR.
After Commission discussion, COMMISSIONER FANEY amended
her motion to require the temporary screening of the
chain link fence be in place prior to occupancy of the
trailers and the permanent block wall be constructed
within 36 months of approval of the PUP, seconded by
COMMISSIONER BLAIR.
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland, Chiniaeff
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
PCMIN5/20/91 -3- MAY 24, 1991
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE8 MAY 20, 1991
4. VEBTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 26861 AND VARIANCE NO. 7
el
Proposal to develop 145 detached condominium units on
approximately 14 acres and variance to allow for the
development of units below the required 1000 square
foot minimum ground floor living area per Ord. 348.
RICHARD AYALA provided the staff report.
CHAIRMAN CHINIAEFF opened the public hearing at 7:00 P.M.
RAY CASEY, 15090 Avenue of Science, #200, San Diego,
representing Presley of San Diego, answered questions by
the Commission reqarding the changes in the development.
COMMISSIONER FORD suggested that the project be
conditioned to complete the recreation area prior to
occupancy of Phase One.
RAY CASEY stated that he saw no problem in fulfilling
that Condition.
ALEXANDER ~RQD~RT, Crosby Mead Benton & Associates,
5650 E1 Camino Real, #200, Carlsbad, project engineering
manager, stated the applicants concurrence with the
changes to Condition 37 and answered questions by the
Commission about the development.
CHAIRMAN CHINIAEFF expressed a concern for the exterior
maintenance of the project. The applicant was proposing
that the individual homeowners maintain the exterior
walls and wood fencing and the Homeowners Association
maintain the front yard landscaping. After discussion
the applicant agreed to have the exterior walls as well
as the front yard landscaping maintained by the
Homeowners Association. The applicant was also proposing
that the CSD maintain the exterior walls of the project.
GARY THORNHILL stated that the exterior project walls
would be the Homeowners Association's responsibility as
well; however, CSD would maintain the exterior
landscaping.
COMMISSIONER FORD moved to close the public hearing at
7:25 P.M. and recommend that the City Council Adopt
the Addendum to EIR No. 281 for Tentative Tract Map No.
26861 and AdoPt Resolution No. 91-(next] recommending
approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26861, and
Variance No. 7, subject to the Conditions of Approval
with Condition 37 and Condition 68 modified and adding a
PCMIN5/20/91 -4- MAY 24, 1991
P~ING COMMISSION MINUTES
20, 1991
condition requesting construction of the recreation area
to be completed prior to first occupancy of Phase One
and the addition of a condition relating to the CC&R's
for the provisions of access and maintenance by the
Homeowners Association, seconded by COMMISSIONER
HOAGLAND.
AYES:
5 COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland, Chiniaeff
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
CHAIRMAN CHINIAEFF declared a five minute recess at 7:25 P.M.
The meeting reconvened at 7:30 P.M.
GARY THORNHILL advised the Commission that the presentation on the
Sphere of Influence (Item No. 3) would have to be postponed to
later in the meeting to allow the speaker to arrive.
CHAIRMAN CHINIAEFF stepped down on the following item, due to a
conflict of interest and turned the gavel over to Vice Chairman
Ford.
5. PLOT PLAN NO. 10969
Proposal to construction a 1700 square foot commercial
building with a 1700 square foot residential caretakers
unit on the second floor. Located on Main Street, south
side between Front and Mercedes.
STEVE JIANNINO provided the staff report.
VICE CHAIRMANFORD opened the public hearing at 7:35 P.M.
ROBPaT MORRIS, applicant, stated that he concurred with
the staff report and the Conditions of Approval.
COMMISSIONER HOAGLAND moved to close the public hearing
at 7:40 P.M. and Adopt the Negative Declaration for Plot
Plan No. 10969 and Adopt Resolution 91-(next] approving
Plot Plan No. 10969 subject to the Conditions of
Approval, seconded by COMMISSIONER BLAIR.
AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff
PCMIN5/20/91 -5- MAY 24, 1991
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
CBAIRMAN CHINIAEFF returned to his seat.
MAY 20, 1991
6. PARCEL MAP NO. 25349
6.1 Proposal for a three lot subdivision of 8.2 acres.
Located at the eastern terminus of Jeramie Drive.
STEVE JIANNINO provided the staff report.
DOUG STEWART advised that staff would like to change
the wording of Condition 31 to read "All weather access
road to the nearest access road."
CMAIRMANCHINIAEFF opened the public hearing at 7:50 P.M.
RICHARD CRUZEN, Alba Engineering, 9968 Hibert Street,
Suite 100, San Diego, representing the applicant,
requested that the Commission eliminate Condition 30
curb and gutter and proposed to pave the cul-de-sac;
Condition 35 modified to read "subdivider shall provide
or post security or an agreement shall be executed" and
delete the (A) requirement; regarding Condition 42,
Mr. Cruzen advised that the project has been designed
so that each property owner would be responsbile for
grading; and elimination of the requirement for Condition
52.
COMMISSIONER HOAGLAND moved to close the public hearing
at 8:00 P.M. and Adopt the Negative Declaration for
Tentative Parcel Map No. 25349 and AdoPt Resolution No.
91-(next] approving Tentative Tract Map No. 25349,
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval, deleting
the requirement for curb and gutter in Condition 30; with
Condition 31 modified to require an "all weather access
road to the nearest paved road"; and deletion of part
(A) of Condition 35; and deleting the requirements for
curb and gutter, street lights and sidewalks of Condition
52, seconded by COMMIBSIONER BLAIR.
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland, Chiniaeff
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
7. CHANGE OF ZONE 5755
7.1 Proposal to change zone from MSC to Cl/CP on 8 acres.
Located at the northwest corner of Diaz and Rancho
PCMIN5/20/91 -6- MAY 24, 1991
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 20, 1991
California Roads.
STEVE JIANNINO provided the staff report.
CHAIRMAN CHINIAEFF opened the public hearing at 8:10 P.M.
GARY KAT2, 28765 Single Oak Drive, Temecula, representing
Bedford Properties, concurred with the staff report.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR asked the applicant what types of
businesses would be going in if the zone was changed.
The applicant indicated that they currently did not have
any definite uses.
COMMISSIONER HOAGLAND questioned the control of the
proposed uses once the zoning is changed.
JOHN CAVANAUGH advised that if the applicant is proposing
a permitted use under the zone, the Commission would be
unable to do anything about it. He added that the
Commission could reject the application as presented
without any findings.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR moved to close the public hearing at
8:15 P.M. and recommend that the City Council Deny
adoption of a Negative Declaration for Change of Zone
No. 5755 and Deny adoption of Resolution 91-(next)
recommending approval of Change of Zone No. 5755,
seconded by COMMISSIONER HOAGLAND.
AYES:
5 COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland, Chiniaeff
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
Due to the busy intersection at this location the
COmmissiOn expressed a concern for approving a zone
change when the proposed uses was undetermined.
PLOT
8.1
PLAN 10675, EXTENSION OF TIME
Request for extension of time for Plot Plan 10675, a
two story office building. Located on the south side
of Single Oak Drive, 300 feet east of Business Park
Drive, Temecule.
STEVE JIANNINO provided the staff report.
PCMIN5/20/91 -7- MAY 24, 1991
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 20, 1991
CHAIRMAN CHINIAEFF opened the public hearing at 8:20 P.M.
GARY KATS, 28765 Single Oak Drive, Temecula, representing
Bedford Properties, concurred with the staff report.
COMMISSIONER FAHEY moved to close the public hearing at
8:20 P.M. and approve the extension of time for Plot Plan
10675, seconded by COMMISSIONER HOAGLAND.
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland, Chiniaeff
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
9. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 10
el
Request to operate a rental car facility from an existing
retail center. Located at 27472 Jefferson Avenue,
Temecula.
OLIVER MUJICA provided the staff report. Mr. Mujica
advised the Commission that the proposal was to operate
a rental "car only" facility.
COMMISSIONER FORD recommended that Condition 9 be
modified to read "stored, parked or rented."
C~IRMAN CHINIAEFF opended the public hearing at 8:25
P.M.
STEVE CANNING, 27472 Jefferson Avenue, Temecula,
requested that Condition 13 be deleted and confirmed that
the requirement under Condition 14 is $2.00 per square
foot; that Line (A) of Condition 9 be amended to read
"shall not be stored".
COMMISSIONER FORD questioned if the applicant would be
willing to restrict the rental to a one ton or less
truck.
The applicant expressed a willingness to concur.
COMMISSIONER FAHEY moved to close the public hearing at
8:30 P.M. and Adopt Resolution 91-/next] approving
Conditional Use Permit No. 10 subject to the Conditions
of Approval modified as follows: delete Condition 5;
Condition No. 9 modified to read "No truck over one ton
shall be stored as part of this use"; and Condition No.
14 as proposed by the City Attorney's office. Assistant
PCMINS/20/91 -8- MAY 24, 1991
PY.J~NNIN~ CONMISSION MINUTES
MAY 20, 1991
City Attorney JOHN CAVANAUGH read Condition 14 into the
records, seconded by COMMISSIONER HOAGLAND, who requested
that Condition 5 be modified to read "shall maintain a
maximum of 15 parking spaces for the use.", rather than
delete Condition 5. COMMISSIONER FAHEY concurred with
the amendment to the motion.
AYES:
5 COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland, Chiniaeff
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
11. PLOT PLAN 69 (REV.)
11.1
Proposal to add transmission and receiving equipment on
an existing antenna Tower. Located west of 1-15 and
south of Front Street.
OLIVER MUJICA provided the staff report.
C~IRMAN CHINIAEFF opened the public hearing at 8:30
P.M.
JEFF BROWN, Fastrax Developer Services, 17281 Shrier
Drive, Lake Elsinore, representing the applicant, was
available to answer any questions by the Commission.
COMMISSIONER HOAGLANDmoVed to close the public hearing
at 8:40 P.M. and Adopt Resolution 91-/next~
recommending that the City Council approve Plot Plan
No. 69 (Rev.), seconded by COMMISSIONER BLAIR.
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland, Chiniaeff
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
2e
PARCEL MAP 21769, SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME AMENDED #3 and
REVISZD PARCEL MAP 21769
12.1 Proposal for second extension of time for Parcel Map
21769 to create four parcels on a 91.4 acre site.
13.1 Proposal to create three parcels on a 91.4 acre site.
Located on Rainbow Canyon Road, immediately south of
Temecula Creek Inn.
PCMIN5/20/91 -9- MAY 24, 1991
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES HAY 20, 1991
STEVE JIANNINO provided the staff report.
CHAIRMAN CHINIAEFF opended the public hearing at 8:45
P.M.
DAVID JAMES, Ranpac Engineering, 27447 Enterprise Circle
West, Temecula, concurred with the Conditions of
Approval.
DF~NE MANNING, R Mansur, 44501 Rainbow Canyon Road,
Temecula, spoke in favor of the proposal and requested
that the following conditions of approval be deleted:
Conditions 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 18 and 20 and that
Condition No. 14 be moved to Condition No. 1.
STEVE JIANNINO advised the Commission that the purpose
of the map for for financing reasons only.
GARY THORNHILL concurred with Mr. Manning and requested
to delete Condition numbers 5, 6, 7, 9, 10 and modify 12
to read, "wherever feasible".
DOUG STEWART stated that staff would recommend leaving
Condition No. 18 as is and Condition No. 20 modified to
read "An agreement for development of a loop road shall
be executed for construction of internal loop roads at
the discretion of the City Engineer."
COMMISSIONER BLAIR moved to close the public hearing at
8:55 P.M. and AdoPt Resolution 91-(next) recommending
that the City Council approve a Second Extension of Time
for Parcel Map 21769 Amended No. 3, seconded by
COMMISSIONER FORD.
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland, Chiniaeff
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
COMMISSIONER HOAGLA]~)moved to close the public hearing
at 8:55 P.M. and recommend that the City Council Receive
and File Revised Parcel Map No. 21769 subject to the
Conditions of Approval as modified by staff, seconded by
COMMISSIONER FAREY.
AYES:
5 COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Noagland, Chiniaeff
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
PCMIN5/20/91 -10- HAY 24, 1991
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 20, 1991
14. VARIANCE NO. 6
14.1
Proposal for Variance in order to allow an additional
freestanding sign display in lieu of the maximum
allowed freestanding signs per Ordinance 348.
Applicant requested item be continue to meeting of
June 3, 1991.
15. SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE NO. 17 and
16. T~NTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 26766; and SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE
NO. 17
15.1
Proposal to allow the exchange of one (1) dwelling unit
of density from Planning area 14 to Planning area 13 of
Specific Plan No. 199. Located at the Southwest corner
of Rancho California Road and Vintage Hills Drive.
16.1
Proposal to subdivide 10.81 acres into one (1) single
family residential lot and one (1) open space parcel.
Located on the south side of Rancho California Road
between Butterfield Stage Road and Vintage Hills Drive.
OLIVER MUJICA provided the staff report.
COMMISSIONER FORD stepped down due to a conflict of
interest.
C~IRMAN CHINIAEFF opened the public hearing at 9:05
P.M.
ROBERT KEMBLE, Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates,
representing the applicant, stated that the applicant
has already participated in the payment of Quimby Fees
as required in Condition 14; and that Conditions 28 and
45 be amended to-reflect the wording provided by the
City Attorney.
JOHN CAVANAUGH advised that Condition 14 could be
deleted, and Conditions 28 and 45 could be deleted under
the Substantial Conformance; however, should remain
under the Tentative Parcel Map.
COMMISSIONER HOAGLANDmOVed to close the public hearing
at 9:10 P.M. and AdoPt Resolution No. 91-fnext)
approving Substantial Conformance No. 17, seconded by
COMMISSIONER FAHEY.
PCMIN5/20/91 -11- MAY 24, 1991
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 20, 1991
AYES:
4 COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Fahey, Hoagland,
Chiniaeff
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Ford
COMMISSIONER HOAGLANDmoved to close the public hearing
at 9:10 P.M. and Adopt Resolution No. 91-(next]
approving Tentative Parcel Map No. 26766 subject to the
Conditions of Approval, deleting Condition 14 and
modifying Conditions 28 and 45 per the language provided
by the City Attorney, seconded by COMMISSIONER BLAIR.
AYES:
4 COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Fahey, Hoagland,
Chiniaeff
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Ford
CHAIRMAN CHINIAEFF declared a recess at 9:15 P.M. The meeting
reconvened at 9:20 P.M.
17. WESTERN RIDGELINE POLICIES
17.1
Proposal to develop interim Hillside and Open Space
Policies to be used as the City of Temecula's Western
Ridgeline Policies until the General Plan is adopted.
OLIVER MUJICA provided the staff report.
CHAIRMAN CHINIAEFF opened the public hearing at
9:20 P.M.
MARK AC~VEDO, 27475 Ynez Road, Suite 136, Temecula,
representing the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce,
stated that the Chamber recognizes the importance of
having a plan in place. He added that the Chamber
feels that the Western Corridor is imperative to the
business of the community and that the Western Ridgeline
Policy should have language implemented to address this
corridor.
JOSEPH SCHNEIDER, 29951 Camino De1 Sol, Temecula,
stated that although he endorses a hillside/ridgeline
policy, he feels that the City is premature in
adopting policies in an area that has not yet been
determined in the City's sphere of influence;
PCMIN5/20/91 -12- MAY 24, 1991
PLANNING COIOfI88ION MINUTE8 MAY 20, 1991
however, if the City believes it is legal to adopt
these policies he would endorse staff's recommendation.
LEROY GRUNDER, 6012 Richfield Road, Yorba Linda,
advised the Commission that he has not received any
information on the proposal and therefore would
oppose the policy.
KELLY J~NE, 6242 Guthrie Street, San Bernadino,
stated that she opposed the proposed policies
due to the effects on her property.
JOHN PATTON, 4817 Bionz Drive, San Diego, stated that
this area was not in the City's sphere of influence
and therefore feels that the City should not be
adopting any policies that affect his property.
LARRY MARKHAM, Markham & Associates, 41750 Winchester
Road, Temecula, representing Judy Rosen and Associates,
stated that staff had deleted SWAP policy No. 9 and
would recommend that this policy be put back into the
Western Ridgeline Policy. Mr. Markham gave a picture
presentation on ways that the City could address the
development of the ridgeline.
GARY THORNHILL stated that although the ridgeline is
not in the City's sphere of influence, the City does
not have a sphere of influence in place; however, the
the upper portion of the ridgeline is in the City's
proposed sphere of influence that has been presented
to LAFCO.
Mr. Thornhill stated that he concurred with alot of
what Mr. Markham was proposing in his presentation
and would be willing to sit down and discuss some of
the issues.
CHAIRMAN CHINIAEFF suggested that staff take the policy
back and implement some of the recommendations made by
Mr. Markham. He suggested that they hold off approving
any policies until the sphere of influence has been
determined.
COMMISSIONER FAHEY moved to close the public hearing at
9:55 P.M. and continue the Western Ridgeline Policies
off-calendar to allow to work on some of the
recommendations presented in the public hearing,
seconded by COMMISSIONER BLAIR.
PCMIN5/20/91 -13- MAY 24, 1991
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS:
MAY 20, 1991
Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Hoagland, chiniaeff
None
NON PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
3. SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
3.1 Presentation by Bill Meecham on the status of the Sphere
of Influence process.
PLANNING DIRECTOR REPORT
GARY THORNHILL advised the Commission of the following:
* The City Council approved The Planning Center as the consultant
to prepare the general plan.
* Proposed joint meeting between the City Council and the
Commission for the middle of June.
* Currently working on the transition of contract staff to
permanent staff.
* Introduced Tim Serlet, City Engineer.
PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION
None
OTHER BUSINESS
None
PCMIN5/20/91 -14- MAY 24, 1991
PLANNIN~ COMMISSION MINUTES MAy 20, 1991
ADJOURNMENT
COMMISSIONER HOAGLAND moved to adjourn the meeting at 10:15 P.M.,
seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY.
The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Planning
Commission to be held Monday, June 3, 1991, 7:00 P.M. at Vail
Elementary School, 29915 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula.
CHAIRMAN DENNIS CHINIAEFF
SECRETARY
PCMIN5/20/91 -15- MAY 24, 1991
ITEM #3
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission
Gary Thornhill, Planning Director
June 3, 1991
Variance No. 6 lWinchester Square)
The above subject case was originally scheduled to be heard before the Planning
Commission on May 20, 1991. However, due to a prior commitment, the owner of the
subject property was unable to attend. Therefore, the applicant requested a
continuance of the subject case for the following Planning Commission meeting.
GT:ks
A:VAR6.MEH
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
June 3, 1991
Case No.: VarianGe No. 6
Prepared By: Richard Ayala
Recommendation: 1. ADOPT Resolution No. 91 -
denying Variance No. 6 based
on the analysis and findings
contained in the staff report.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
Superior Electrical Advertising, Inc.
Stan Janocha
Variance in order to allow an additional free-
standing sign display in addition to the two
maximum allowed free-standing signs per Ordinance
348.
Northwest corner of Jefferson Avenue and Overland
Drive.
C- 1 / C -P ~ General Commercial )
North:
South:
East:
West:
C- 1 / C-P ( General Commercial )
C-1/C/P (General Commercial)
C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial )
M-SC (Manufacturing - Service
Commercial )
Not Requested.
Shopping Center
North:
South:
East:
West:
Shopping Center
Shopping Center
Commercial
Industrial
A:VAR6 1
PROJECT STATISTICS: Number of acres: 12.12
Number of proposed free-standing signs: 3
BACKGROUND:
Administrative Plot Plan No. 57, the proposed
monument signage for the Winchester Square Center
was submitted on January 4, 1991. The Planning
Department notified the applicant in a letter dated
January 15, 1991, that the proposed signage did not
comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. 3u,8 and
the southwest area community plan standards for
outdoor advertising. The proposed signs did not
comply with the permitted number and height of
free-standing signs allowed per code and therefore,
the applicant filed a Variance on February 26, 1991,
in order to obtain approval of the proposed signage.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant is seeking approval through the
variance process, to erect three (3) free-standing
monument signs for the Winchester Square Center
located on the northwest corner of Jefferson Avenue
and Overland Drive. Two of the proposed
monument signs are 20 feet high and 9 feet wide
with a depth of 2 feet, the other is a freeway
oriented sign and is proposed at 35 feet in height.
They are proposed to be situated along Jefferson
Avenue at the entrances of the subject site.
ANALYSIS:
Maximum Number of Free-Standinq Siqns Allowed
Section 19.~, (a.~,) permits a shopping center with
more than one street frontage to have two free-
standing signs provided that they are not located on
the same street, are at least 100 feet apart, and the
second sign does not exceed 100 square feet in
surface area and 20 feet in height. Section 19.2(m)
of Ordinance 3u,8 defines a shopping center as a
parcel of land not less than three acres in size on
which there are four or more separate businesses
that have mutual parking facilities. The definition
does not include a maximum area or number of
separate businesses. Therefore, according to the
ordinance the proposed signage is not in compliance
with section 19.~,(a.~,) in that it proposes a total of
three free-standing signs.
A:VAR6 2
Hei.qht of Free-Standinq Siqns
Section 19. q ( a. 1,2 ) of Ordinance 3~,8 stipulates a
maximum height of L~5 feet for signs within 660 feet
of the freeway right-of-way and 20 feet for other
locations. The proposed signs comply with the
height restrictions. As stipulated in Ordinance No.
3L~8, Current City Policy is to encourage smaller
free-standing monument signs with a maximum
height of 6 feet.
Size and Location of Site
The Winchester Square Center encompasses
approximately 12.12 acres and abuts two streets,
Jefferson Avenue and Overland Drive. The site has
approximately 957 feet of frontage along Jefferson
Avenue and approximately 516 feet of frontage along
Overland Drive. The center provides access
through three driveways, two off Jefferson Avenue
and one off Overland Drive.
Visual Impact of Proposed 5iqns
All three proposed signs are monolith shaped
monument signs with the name, logo and major
tenants of the center at the top and articulate
sections which will contain the names of the other
tenants of the center. Planning staff has reviewed
the proposed signs and has determined that the
signs do not comply with the current ordinance
requirements and Staff cannot support the request
due to the amount of advertisement being proposed
and the possibility of setting a precedent for future
and existing shopping centers.
Face Area of Free-Standing Siqns
According to section 19.~, (a.3.a) of Ordinance 348
regarding shopping centers the maximum surface
area of a sign can not exceed 50 square feet or .25%
of the total existing building floor area in a
shopping center, but in no case can exceed 200
square feet in surface area. The applicant is
proposing three signs each approximately with 180
square feet of surface area, therefore, exceeding
the allowable face area per Ordinance
A:VAR6 3
Conclusion
Planning staff has reviewed the proposed signs for
the Winchester Square Center and has determined
that the proposal is inconsistent with the City
adopted ordinance in that the proposed signs
exceed the allowable limit, surface area, and finds
no special circumstances for a variance due to
centers adequate visibility from Jefferson Avenue
and Overland Drive.
GENERAL PLAN AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
A portion of the subject site is within the 660 feet of
the nearest edge of Interstate 15 which is an eligible
state scenic highway. General Land Use Policy 8If)
in the Southwest Area Community Plan states that
the size, height, and type of on-site outdoor
advertising displays within scenic corridors shall be
the minimum necessary for identification. The
Planning Commission may wish to consider more
specific size and design guidelines for scenic
highway corridor slgnage.
Pursuant to Section 15311 of the California
Environmental Act, the proposed signs are
categorically exempt from the requirement for
environmental review.
FINDINGS:
There are no exceptional circumstances
applicable to the subject property in that the
site is entirely flat, rectangular and has
adequate visibility from both Jefferson
Avenue and Overland Drive.
The variance is not necessary for
preservation of the applicant's ability to
adequately identify the subject shopping
center. The subject site location provides
for ultimate visibility from both adjoining
streets.
The granting of the variance may be
detrimental to the public welfare in that the
signs might obstruct the line of sight of
motorist passers-by. I n addition, the
variance if granted would set a precedent for
future and existing shopping centers.
A:VAR6 4
The granting of the variance will not be
contrary to 'r, he Southwest Area Plan Scenic
Highway Policy in that the freeway oriented
sign is substantially shorter than the
maximum height permitted by the ordinance.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
RA:bg
Attachments: 1.
2.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
ADOPT Resolution 91- denying variance
No. 6 based on the analysis and findings
contained in the staff report.
Resolution
Exhibits
A. Site Plan
B. Signage
A:VAR6 5
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING VARIANCE NO. 6 TO
PERMIT THREE FREESTANDING SIGNS AT THE
WINCHESTER SQUARE SHOPPING CENTER LOCATED ON
THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF JEFFERSON AVENUE AND
OVERLAND DRIVE.
WHEREAS, Superior Electrical Advertising, Inc. filed Variance No. 6
in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and
Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Variance application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Variance on June
3, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in
support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
denied said Variance;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
(a)
There is a reasonable probability that the
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
A:VAR6 6
(b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, {hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within
the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as
its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely
fashion with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed Variance is consistent with the SWAP.
However, the SWAP designation for the property that is the subject of
this proposed variance (hereafter the "Property") is inconsistent with
the future General Plan, to wit:
~1) The Planning Commission finds, in denying the
application that:
(a)
There is reasonable probability that Variance
No. 6 proposed will not be consistent with the
general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
(b)
There is a probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
(C)
The proposed use or action does not comply
with all other applicable requirements of state
law and local ordinances.
D. (1) Pursuant to Section 18.26(e), no Variance may be
approved unless the applicant demonstrates the proposed use will not
be detrimental to the health safety and welfare of the community, and
further, that any Variance approved shall be subject to such conditions
as shall be necessary to protect the health, safety and general welfare
of the community.
A:VAR6 7
12) The Commission in recommending denial of the
proposed variance, makes the following findings:
a)
There are no exceptional circumstances
applicable to the subject property in that the
site is entirely flat, rectangular and has
adequate visibility from both Jefferson
Avenue and Overland Drive.
b)
The variance is not necessary for
preservation of the applicant's ability to
adequately identify the subject shopping
center. The subject site location provides
for ultimate visibility from both adjoining
streets.
c)
The granting of the variance may be
detrimental to the public welfare in that the
signs might obstruct the llne of sight of
motorist passers-by. in addition, the
variance if granted would set a precedent for
future and existing shopping centers.
d)
The granting of the variance will not be
contrary to the Southwest Area Plan Scenic
Highway Policy in that the freeway oriented
sign is substantially shorter than the
maximum height permitted by the ordinance.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
Pursuant to Section 15311 of the California Environmental Quality Act,
on-site advertising signs are categorically exempt from environmental review.
SECTION 3.
That the city of Temecula Planning Commission hereby denies Variance
No. 6 for three free-standing signs located on the northeast corner of Jefferson
Avenue and Overland Drive, based on the above findings.
SECTION 4.
PASSED, DENIED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of June, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
A:VAR6 8
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held
on the 3rd day of June, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
A:VAR6 9
ITEM
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
June 3, 1991
Case No.: Tentative Parcel Map No. 26135
Prepared By: Richard Ayala
Recommendation: 1. ADOPT the Negative Declaration for
Tentative Parcel Map No. 26135; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 91-
approving Tentative Tract Map
No. 26135, based on the analysis
and findings contained in the
Staff Report and subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
Luis Stahl
California Geo Tek. Inc.
Subdivide 5.19 acres into three residential parcels.
Northwest corner of Santiago Road and Ormsby
Road.
R-R ( Rural Residential )
North: R-R (Rural Residential)
South: R-R (Rural Residential)
East: R-R ( Rural Residential)
West: R-R (Rural Residential)
Not requested.
Single Family Residence
North: Vacant
South: Vacant
East: Vacant Graded Pads
West: Vacant
A:PM26135 1
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
No. of Acres: 5.19 ac. gross
Proposed Lot Sizes:
Parcel 1: 1.23 ac, gross
Parcel 2: 1,17 ac. gross
Parcel 3: 2,78 ac. gross
residence )
(existing
The application for Tentative Parcel Map No. 26135
was submitted to the City of Temecula on June 15,
1990. The application has gone through Pre-
Development and Formal Review. During Pre-
Development Review, it was determined that a
qualified biologist should perform a Stephen's
Kangaroo Rat walk-over survey. A biological study
was submitted which indicated that no known
sensitive or endangered species would be adversely
impacted by the proposed development. The site is
located within the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat
Conservation Plan Area and will be subject to
mitigation fees. The project site contains an
existing residence within proposed Parcel 3. The
remainder of the site is basically undisturbed and
consists of gently rolling slopes.
The applicant is proposing to subdivide a 5.19 acre
gross parcel situated on the northwest corner of
Santiago and Ormsby Roads into three {3) parcels:
Parcel 1:
Parcel 2:
Parcel 3:
1.23 ac. gross
1.17 ac. gross
2.78 ac. gross (existing
residence )
Land Use and Zoninq
The site and the surrounding area is currently
zoned R-R (Rural Residential) with lot sizes of
approximately 1 acre or larger. The area farther
north has been developed as an R-1 single family
tract with some 1/2 acre lots developed to the
northeast. Therefore, Planning Staff has
determined that the proposed project is compatible
with the surrounding development.
This area retains a rural character with unimproved
roads and use of septic systems for sewage
disposal. The applicant is proposing to create three
(3) parcels over an acre in size which are consistent
with the Southwest Area Community Plan which calls
for 1-2 DU/AC for the subject site. Planning Staff
A: PM26135 2
has reviewed the proposed project and has
determined that the proposed one acre plus
residential parcels will not have a significant impact
on the rural character of the immediate surrounding
area.
Access and Circulation
Access to the new proposed parcels will be provided
from Santiago Road by a 30' wide reciprocal
driveway for Parcels 1 and 2 (see site plan). The
existing residence I Parcel 3) will have direct access
from Santiago Road by the existing driveway.
Gradin.q
The subject sirens existing topography will be
changed due to the 1,800 cubic yards of fill that will
be imported and the 50 cubic yards of onsite cut in
order to develop adequate building pads. However,
the grading and recontouring of the subject site is
not substantial and therefore, this impact is not
considered significant. Nevertheless, a conceptual
grading plan for the project was reviewed by the
City Engineer and was found to be designed in
accordance with Temecula's standards. Therefore,
the proposed project will not adversely change the
existing topography.
Erosion Control
All slopes over three feet in height will be
landscaped and irrigated according to the City
Development Code. Furthermore, graded but
undeveloped land will be maintained in a weed-free
condition and be planted with interim landscaping or
provided with other erosion control measures as
approved by the Director of Building and Safety.
Traffic
The Transportation Engineering Staff has reviewed
this project; and has determined that the proposed
project will have a minimal impact to the existing
road system and there will be no adverse
unmitigable significant traffic impacts resulting
from the development of this proposed project.
A: PM26135
3
GENERAL PLAN AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
However, the Engineering Department requests that
Ormsby Road be dedicated as a 30 foot half width
and improved with 20 feet of asphalt concrete
pavement, or bonds be posted for all road
improvements.
In addition, access along the westerly property line
of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 will be improved with 20 feet
of half street improvement within a 30' dedicated
right-of-way.
In the event that Santiago Road is not constructed
by an Assessment District prior to the final map
recordation, the developer shall bond for the
improvements to provide for one-half street
improvements plus one 12 foot lane per Riverside
County Standard No. 100 (86'/110'). The
improvements shall be constructed prior to
occupancy. Owner shall also waive all rights to
oppose formation of an Assessment District to
construct said improvements.
The proposed density of the project is consistent
with the Southwest Area Community Plan of 1-2
DU/AC. In addition, Staff finds it probable that
this project will be consistent with the New General
Plan when it is adopted.
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
FINDINGS:
An Initial Study was performed for this project
which determined that although the proposed
project could have a significant effect on the
environment, no significant impact would result to
the natural or built environment in the City because
impacts will be mitigated by adherence to the
attached Conditions of Approval which have been
added to the project, and a Negative Declaration has
been recommended for adoption.
The proposed Parcel Map will not have
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial
Study performed for the project. A Negative
Declaration is recommended for adoption.
A: PM26135 4
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is consistent with the
surrounding current residential development
zoning and SWAP.
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference
with, the future adopted General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan,due to the fact that the project is
consistent with surrounding development.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law due to the fact that
the project conforms to the current zoning
for the site and to Ordinance No. 1160,
Schedule H.
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density due to the fact that the project has
access to public roads and sufficient building
area.
The design of the subdivision or the
proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
initial study.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities due to
the fact that the lots are large enough to
provide sufficient southern exposure with
passive or active solar possibilities.
All lots have acceptable access to existing
and proposed dedicated rights-of-way which
are open to, and are useable by, vehicular
traffic, access is provided from 5antiago
Road.
A: PM26135 5
10o
11.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project as
conditioned. The project will not interfere
with any known easements.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Department Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for
Tentative Parcel Map No. 26135; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- approving
Tentative Tract Map No. 26135, based on the
analysis and findings contained in the Staff
Report and subject to the attached Conditions
of Approval.
RA:ks
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution
Conditions of Approval
Environmental Assessment
Exhibits
A: PM26135 6
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP NO. 26135 TO SUBDIVIDE A 5.19 ACRE PARCEL
INTO THREE PARCELS SITUATED ON THE NORTHWEST
CORNER OF SANTIAGO ROAD AND ORMSBY ROAD AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 945-080-009.
WHEREAS, Luis Stahl filed Parcel Map No. 26135 in accordance with the
Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which
the City has adopted by reference:
WHEREAS, said Parcel Map application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Parcel Map on June
3, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in
support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
approved said Parcel Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
a)
There is a reasonable probability that the
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
A: PM26135 7
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within
the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as
its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely
fashion with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed Parcel Map is consistent with the SWAP and
meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government
Code, to wit:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The Planning Commission finds, in approving projects
and taking other actions, including the issuance of
building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the
following:
a)
There is reasonable probability that Parcel
Map No. 26135 proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
A:PM26135 8
D. (1) Pursuant to Section 6.5, no parcel map may be
approved unless the applicant demonstrates the proposed use will not
be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community, and
further, that any Parcel Map approved shall be subject to such
conditions as shall be necessary to protect the health, safety and
general welfare of the community.
(2) ThePlanningCommission, inapprovingtheproposed
parcel map, makes the following findings, to wit:
a)
The proposed Parcel Map will not have
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial
Study performed for the project. A Negative
Declaration is recommended for adoption.
b)
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is consistent with the
surrounding current residential development
zoning and SWAP.
c)
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference
with, the future adopted General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan,due to the fact that the project is
consistent with surrounding development.
d)
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law due to the fact that
the project conforms to the current zoning
for the site and to Ordinance No. ~,60,
Schedule H.
e)
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density due to the fact that the project has
access to public roads and sufficient building
area.
f)
The design of the subdivision or the
proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
initial study.
A: PM26135 9
g)
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities due to
the fact that the lots are large enough to
provide sufficient southern exposure with
passive or active solar possibilities.
h)
All lots have acceptable access to existing
and proposed dedicated rights-of-way which
are open to, and are useable by, vehicular
traffic, access is provided from Santiago
Road.
i)
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project as
conditioned. The project will not interfere
with any known easements.
j)
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
k)
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Parcel Map
proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study was performed for this project when determined that
although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
no significant impact would result to the natural or built environment in the City
because impacts will be mitigated by adherence to the attached Conditions of
Approval which have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration,
therefore, is hereby granted.
A: PM26135 10
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves Parcel
Map No. 26135 for the subdivision of a 5.19 acre parcel into three parcels located on
the northwest corner of Santiago Road and Ormsby Road and known as Assessor's
Parcel No. 9~,5-080-009 subject to the following conditions:
A. Attachment 2, attached hereto.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of June, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHA I RMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held
on the 3rd day of June, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNINC COMMISSIONERS
A: PM26135 11
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Parcel Map No: 26135
Project Description: Subdivi de 5.19 Acres into
three residential parcels.
Assessor's Parcel No.: 9z~5-080-009
Planning Department
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 0,60, Schedule H, unless
modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in
accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request,
if made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
This conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the
approval date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance u,60. The expiration
date is
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final
map.
A copy of the final grading plan shall be submitted tothe Planning Department
for review and approval. All on-site cut and fill slopes shall:
Be limited to a maximum slope ratio of 2 to 1 and a maximum vertical
height of thirty [30) feet.
Be contour-graded to blend with existing natural contours.
c. Be a part of the downhill lot when within or between individual lots.
All slopes over three |3) feet in height shall be landscaped and irrigated
according to the City Development Code. A detailed landscaping and
irrigation plan, prepared by a qualified professional, shall be submitted to the
City Planning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of grading
permits.
The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations
outlined in the County Health Department~s transmittal dated February 7,
1991, a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined
in the County Fire Department~s letter dated May 28, 1991, a copy of which is
attached.
A: PM26135 12
All proposed construction shall comply with the California Institute of
Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy, as outlined in the
Southwest Area Plan.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Eastern
Municipal Water District transmittal dated March 7, 1991, a copy of which is
attached.
10. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following:
11.
12.
13.
Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
development standards of the R-R ~Rural Residential ) zone.
Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed-free
condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or
provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the
Director of Building and Safety.
The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all slopes,
landscaped areas and irrigation systems until such time as those operations
are the responsibilities of other parties as approved by the Planning Director.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a qualified paleontologist shall be
retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the proposed
grading with respect to potential paleontological impacts. Should the
paleontologist find the potential is high for impact to significant resources, a
pre-grade meeting between the paleontologist and the excavation and grading
contractor shall be arranged. When necessary, the paleontologist or
representative shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redlrect or halt
grading activity to allow recovery of fossils
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
No building permits shall be issued by the City for any residential
lot/unit within the project boundary until the developer~s successor's-
in-interest provides evidence of compliance with public facility
financing measures. A cash sum of one-hundred dollars i$100) per
lot/unit shall be deposited with the City as mitigation for public library
development.
All buildin9 plans for all new structures shall incorporate, all required
elements from the subdivisionIs approved fire protection plan as
approved by the County Fire Marshal.
All dwellings to be constructed within this subdivision shall be designed
and constructed with fire retardant { Class A ) roofs as approved by the
Fire Marshal.
A: PM26135 13
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the
subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving
devices shall be permitted with Planning Department approval.
Prior to the issuance of a gradin9 permit, the applicant shall comply with the
provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate fee set forth in
that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions
of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by
Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat
Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution.
The subdivlder shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officer, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officer, or employees
to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Tentative
Parcel Map No. :76135, which action is brought within the time period provided
for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will
promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding
against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the
City fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or
proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not,
thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of
Temecula.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable
TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required,
and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility
provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired
in the residence.
Prior to recordation of the Final Map, the developer or his assignee must
conform to the park district Quimby Ordinance, unless waived to time of
issuance of a building permit.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit written
verification to the Building and Safety Department that all pertinent
Conditions of Approval and applicable regulations have been met for the
following agencies:
Planning Department
Temecula Valley School District
Fire District
Engineering Department
County Health Department
Water District
Temecula Community Services District
A:PM26135 14
Flood Control District
Eastern Municipal Water District.
ZO.
Within forty-eight (~,8) hours of the approval of the project, the
applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand,
Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars ~$1,275.00), which includes the One
Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ~$1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB
3158, required by Fish and Came Code Section 711 ,~,{d)(2) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar ($25.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152
and lq Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight (~,8) hour
period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department
the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall
be void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code, Section
711 .~,(c).
Enqineerinq Department
The following are the Engineering Department Conditions of Approval for this
project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Engineering
Department.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
21.
The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act,
and all applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions,
22,
The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor or registered
Civil Engineer, subject to all the requirements of the State of California
Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance No. ~,60.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
23.
As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, the
developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
San Diego Regional Water Quality;
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Engineering Department;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise; and
Parks and Recreation Department.
A: PM26135
15
2q.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to
the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the
City Engineer.
Ormsby Road shall be improved with 20 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or
bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within a dedicated right-of-
way in accordance with County Standard No. 10u,, Section A {u,0~/60~).
Access along westerly property line of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 shall be improved
with 20 feet of half street improvement, or bonds for the street improvements
may be posted, within a 30~ dedicated right-d-way in accordance with County
Standard No. 10u,, Section A (u,0'/60').
)n the event that Santiago Road is not constructed by an Assessment District
prior to the final map recordation, the developer shall bond for the
improvements to provide for one-half street improvements plus one 12 foot lane
per Riverside County Standard No. 100 (86Vl10~). The improvements shall
be constructed prior to occupancy. Owner shall also waive all rights to
oppose formation of an Assessment District to construct said improvements.
Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard
No. 805.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage
facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located
within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances
shall be submitted and recorded as directed by the City Engineer.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Engineering Department a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation
towards traffic signal impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time
of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a written
agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a
building permit.
Street names shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineering
Department.
The subdivider shall submit two {2) prints of a comprehensive grading plan
to the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform
Building Code, Chapter 70, and as may be additionally provided for in these
Conditions of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 20? x 36" mylar by a
Registered Civil Engineer.
The subdivider shall submit two ~2 ) copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
A: PM26135 16
On-site drainage facilities, located outside of road right-d-way, shall be
contained within drainage easements 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."
The subdivider shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage
flowing onto or through the site. In the event the City Engineer permits the
use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Article XI of
Ordinance No. u,60 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street
capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the
subdivider shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Engineering
Department.
36.
Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface
drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
37.
The subdivlder shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by
alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow.
Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities,
including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement.
38.
Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City~s CATV Franchises of
the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time
of street improvements.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
39.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid
and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Department prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-d-
way.
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for
review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil
Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final
Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
Crading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The
final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough
grading plan.
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities
imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public
facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Nagative Declaration for the
project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of
A: PM26135 17
payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or
district has not been finally established by the date on which developer
requests its building permits for the project or any phase thereof, the
developer shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a
copy of which has been provided to developer. Concurrent)y, with executing
this Agreement, developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public
Facility fee, The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to
exceedS10,000. Developer understands that said Agreement may require the
payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement,
developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of
this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the
process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for
this project; provided that developer is not waiving its right to protest the
reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and
gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, and drive approaches on all interior public
streets.
Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all
times with adequate detours during construction.
Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 1~ days following
placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon
per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and
9q of the State Standard Specifications,
Transportation Enqineerinq
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
A signing plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved
by the City Engineer for Street "A" and Ormsby Road and shall be included
in the street improvement plans.
Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering
for the design requirements.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
A construction area traffic control plan shall be designed by a registered Civil
Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for any street closure and detour
or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the City Engineer.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
50, All slgnin9 shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan.
A:PM26135 18
Department of Buildinq and Safety
51. Submit approved parcel map to the Department of Building and Safety for
addressing.
52. Obtain all Land Use and Building Department clearances.
A: PM26135 19
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
FIRE DEPARTMENT
RIVERS .,..
_ 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE * PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92370.
~ (714) 65%3183
GLEN J. NEWMAN
FIRE CHIEF
DATE: Hay 28, 199t
TO: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: PARCEL MAP NO. 26135 Amended 112
With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land
division, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection
measures be provided in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or
recognized fire protection standards:
FIRE PROTECTION
Schedule H fire protection. An approved standard fire hydrant (6"x4"x2~")
shall be located so that no portion of the frontage of any lot is more
than 500 feel from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 GPM
for 2 hours duration at 20 PSI.
The applicant/developer shall provide written certification from the
appropriate water company that the required fire hydrants are either
existing or that financial arrangements have been made to provide them.
The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed
and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible
building material being placed on an individual lot.
MITIGATION
Prior to the recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with
the City of Temecula, a cash sum of $400.00 per lot/unit as mitigation
for fire protection impacts.
All questions regarding the meafiing of conditions shall be referred to
the Planning and Engineering staff.
RAYMOND H. REGIS
Chief Fire Department Planner
Laura Cabral, Fire Safety Specialist
LC/tm
FI INDIO OFFICE
79-733 Cramfly Club Drlve, Suite F, lmlio, CA 92201
(619) 342~886 , FAX (619) 775-2072
PLANNINGDIVISION
I"l RIVERS[DE OFFICE
3760 IZth Strtrl, Riverside, CA 92501
(714) 2754777 · FAX (714) 369-7451
II
Backqround
1.
2.
4.
5.
6.
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
Name of Proponent:
Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
Agency Requiring
Assessment:
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
Location of Proposal:
Environmental Impacts
Luis 5tahl
30270 Santiaqo Road
Temecula, CA 92390
April 12, 1991
CITY OF TEMECULA
Tentative Parcel Map No. 26135
Northwest corner of Santiaqo Road
and Ormsby Road
Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets. )
Yes Maybe No
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
X
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
X
X
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
The destruction, covering or modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
X
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
X
A: PM26135 20
Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudslides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
Air. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air
quality?
The creation of objectionable
odors?
Alteration of air movement,
moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, whether locally
or regionally?
Water. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or
fresh waters?
Substantial changes in absorption
rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
Discharge into surface waters, or
in any alteration of surface water
quality, including, but not limited
to, temperature, dissolved oxygen
or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow or ground waters?
Yes Maybe N_9o
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A: PM26135 21
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
Substantial reduction in the amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as flood-
ing or tidal waves?
Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any native species of
plants {including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare, or endangered species
of plants?
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop?
Animal Life. Will the proposal result
in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
{birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthlc
organisms or insects)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A: PM26135 22
10.
11.
12.
13.
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
Light and Glare. Will the proposal
produce substantial new light or glare?
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
5ubstantlal depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal
involve:
A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances l includlng,
but not limited to, oil, pest/c/des,
chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
Population. Will the proposal alter
the location, distribution, density, or
growth rate of the human population of
an area?
Housing. Will the proposal affect
existing housing or create a demand for
additional housing?
Transportation/Circulation. Will the
proposal result in:
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A: PM26135 23
Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking?
Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic?
Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
Public Services. Will the proposal have
substantial effect upon, or result in a
need for new or altered governmental
services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
f. Other governmental services:
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
16.
Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy?
Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A: PM26135 2~.
17.
18.
19.
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
Solid waste and disposal?
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)?
Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities?
20. Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A: PM26135 25
21.
Mandatory Findings of Significance.
Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into
the future. )
Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumu-
latively considerable? (A project's
impact on two or more separate
resources may be relatively small,
but where the effect of the total of
those impacts on the environment
is significant. )
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substan-
tial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? __
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
A: PM26135 26
III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
EARTH
1.a.
1.b.
1.C.
1 .d,f,g.
1.e.
AIR
2.a-c.
No. A conceptual grading plan for the project was reviewed by the City
Engineer and was found to be designed in accordance with Temeculals
standards and the conditions of approval include mitigation measures
in regards to grading. Therefore, the proposed project will not create
an unstable earth condition or change the geologic substructure.
Yes. All development disrupts the soil profile to some degree and
results in soil displacement, compaction, and over-covering.
Adherence to required City grading and building permits will mitigate
potential impacts.
Yes. The subject sirens existing topography will be changed due to the
1,800 cubic yards of fill that will be imported and the 50 cubic yards of
onsite cut in order to develop adequate building pads. However, the
grading and recontourlng of the subject site is not substantial and
therefore, this impact is not considered significant.
No. The proposed project will not create any significant impacts
regarding geologic features or conditions. No evidence of faulting was
found and indications of mass movement or major landsliding have not
been observed or reported on the site, nor will the proposed project
expose people to any geologic hazards.
Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the
construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are replanted
and the proposed drainage facilities are constructed. The wind erosion
impact is considered significant but will be mitigated through the use
of watering trucks and erosion control planting of disturbed areas after
grading. After the project is completed, water will be channeled to
drainage easements and streets. Appropriate drainage control devices
will have to be approved by the City Engineer and designed in
accordance with Temecula's standards and the Conditions of Approval.
Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant, due to the
fact that appropriate mitigation measures will be implemented with the
project.
No. The proposed project will not result in any substantial changes in
air quality or movement.
A: PM26135 27
WATER
3.a,c-i.
No. The proposed project will not have a substantial impact on any
water courses or supplies and the project lies outside of all 100 year
flood zones. Furthermore, the project will be free of ordinary storm
flood hazard when improvements have been constructed in accordance
with the approved plans. The project will not substantially effect
ground water basins.
3.b.
Maybe. The proposed project will slightly increase the impermeable
surface area. Thus, possibly allowing for changes in absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff on the
subject site. However, the amount of runoff water will not be
significant and will receive subsequent review.
PLANT LIFE
u,.a-d.
No. The proposed project will not have a substantial impact regarding
plant llfe.
ANIMAL LIFE
5.a-c.
No. Presently, the proposed project site is occupied and native animal
species have been displaced. Thus, no substantial impacts will be
imposed on any animal life. However, the subject site is in an area
shown as Stepbends Kangaroo Rat Habitat, thus, the project will be
subject to the appropriate mitigation fees to be used toward
implementing Riverside County's Habitat Conservation Plan.
NOISE
6.a,b.
No. The proposed project will not have significant impact on noise nor
expose people to severe noise levels.
LIGHT AND GLARE
No. Only two additional residential homes will be proposed on the
subject site.
LAND USE
No. The proposed project will not result in a substantial alteration of
the present or planned land use of the area.
NATURAL RESOURCES
No. The proposal will not increase the consumption rate of any natural
or non-renewable natural resource.
A: PM26135 28
RISK OF UPSET
10.a,b.
No. The proposed project will not promote a risk of explosion or release
hazardous substances nor will it interfere with emergency response
plan or an emergency evaluation plan due to the fact that only two
additional residential units are proposed.
POPULATION
11.
No. The proposal will not alter the location, distribution, density or
growth rate of the human population in the area, only two residential
units are proposed.
HOUSING
12.
No. The proposal will not affect existing housing or create additional
demand. Due to the fact that only two additional residential homes are
being proposed.
TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION
13.a-f. No. Proper transportation facilities are provided for, to the site.
PUBLIC SERVICES
Yes. The project adds to the cumulative impacts on City Facilities and
Resources. Mitigation will be achieved by payment of appropriate fees.
Maybe. See lu,.a-e.
ENERGY
15.a,b.
No. The proposal will not result in the use of substantial amounts of
fuel or energy or increase demand of existing sources of energy.
UTILITIES
16oa-c,
e,f.
No. No major utility extensions will be required.
16.d.
Yes. Septic tanks will be proposed for the project in the future.
Septic disposal must be approved by the Riverside County Health
Department. Soil percolation test must be completed and shown as
adequate prior to recordation.
HUMAN HEALTH
17.a,b.
No. No health hazards were apparent or hazardous uses proposed on
site.
A: PM26135 29
AESTHETICS
18.
No. The proposal will not result in the obstruction of any scenic view
open to the public.
RECREATION
19.
No. The subject site is not used for recreational purposes or planned
as a recreational site. The area is designated as residential on SWAP.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
20.a-d.
No. The proposal will not result in adverse effects to historic
structures, cultural values, or restrict religious or sacred uses in the
area. However, if any cultural resources are encountered as a result
of grading, a qualified paleontologist or archaeologist will provide the
proper mitigation for further development of this site as required in the
Conditions of Approval.
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
21 .a.
No. This project will not substantially degrade the quality of the
environment or reduce the habitat for a plant or animal species due to
the fact that the project is in an existing urbani zed area. However, the
project is located within an area designated by the Riverside County as
habitat for the endangered Stephents Kangaroo Rat. The project will
be subject to mitigation fees for the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat
Conservation Plan.
21 .b.
No. The proposed project will not have the potential to achieve short-
term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals.
21 .c.
No. The project does have individually limited impacts, however, if
these impacts are cumulatively considered, they do not have a
significant impact on the overall environment.
21 .d.
No. This project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings either directly or indirectly. All regulations and standards will
be imposed and maintained on the project so that adverse effects are
minimized or eliminated.
A: PM26135 30
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signi-
ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi-
ficant effect on this case because the mitigation measures
described on attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval
have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
X
April 12, 1991
Date
For
CITY OF TEMECULA
A: PM26135 31
ITEM #5
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
June 3, 1991
Case No.: Tentative Tract Map No. 25055
Prepared By: Mark Rhoades
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
ADOPT a Negative Declaration for Tentative
Tract Map No. 25055; and
ADOPT Resolution 91 - approving
Tentative Tract Map No. 25055 subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval, based on
the analysis and findings contained in the
Staff Report.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
P R OPOSA L:
LOCAT ION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
Jack Hamry
Markham F, Associates
Request to construct a 29 unit condominium
subdivision on 2.5 acres.
North side of Via La Vida, approximately 1,000~ east
of Margarita Road.
R-2 (Multiple Family Dwellings)
North:
South:
East:
West:
R-2 (Multiple Family Dwellings)
R-2 (Multiple Family Dwellings)
R-2 (Multiple Family Dwellings)
R-2 (Multiple Family Dwellings)
Not requested.
Vacant
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant
Apartments
Single Family Residential
Vacant
A: TM25055 1
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Gross Acres:
Net Acres:
Proposed Units:
Gross Density:
Open Space:
Required Parking:
Proposed Parking
2.55
2.05
29
11.3 DU/AC
.84 acres
73 spaces
7~ spaces
Tentative Tract Map No. 25055 was submitted to the
County of Riverside on August 20,, 1989. The
project was transferred to the City of Temecula in
May of 1990. The Project was taken to Preliminary
Development Review Committee ( Pre-DRC ) on
August lu,, 1990 and Final DRC on April 22, 1991.
During that time the applicant has made several
changes to the proposed project at the direction of
Staff. The changes suggested by Staff included the
movement of the pool to a centralized project
location and the addition of more useable common
open space. Increased common open space was
attained by deleting one proposed unit, thus
decreasing the total number of units to 29. The
applicant has also increased the building setback
along the east property line to a minimum of 17 feet.
Rear yard areas were also increased in the central
portion of the project.
On May 6, 1991, the Planning Commission reviewed
a project (Tentative Tract Map No. 25338) directly
adjacent to Tentative Tract Map No. 25055. TTM
25338 proposed a 32 unit condominium complex on
2.56 acres. TTM 25338 was continued by the
Planning CommisSion in order for the applicant to
come back with a project at a decreased density of
6-8 units per acre. The proposed project,
Tentative Tract Map No. 25055, has a density of
approximately 11.3 units per acre. However, the
applicant has complied with the direction provided
by Staff relative to project revisions.
Tentative Tract Map No. 25055 is an application for
a 29 unit condominium subdivision. The proposed
project is located on the north side of Via La Vida,
approximately 1,000 feet east of Margarita Road.
A: TM25055 2
Site Desiqn
The proposed units are placed on site in irregular
groupings of structures. Each unit is 2-story with
an attached garage. All of the units are oriented
toward the interior drive, which loops through the
site. The proposed units are provided with private
open space in the form of a fenced rear yard.
The proposed project has two main common open
space areas. One area contains a pool and cabana
facility, which is situated in the center of the site.
Another useable common open area is located in the
northeast corner of the proposed site. That area
will be improved with landscaping. A homoowners
association will be established to maintain all common
areas.
All of the proposed units exceed the setback
requirements of Ordinance 30,8. The units adjacent
to the east property line are setback a minimum of
17 feet. The units are set back from the interior
drive aisles a minimum of ten feet.
The proposed project includes three floor plans
which are comparable in square footage to the
adjacent single family detached units. Plan A
proposes 1,635 square feet, Plan B proposes 1,0,92
square feet, and Plan C proposes 1,611 square feet.
Architecture
The proposed architecture is contemporary in
design featuring beige stucco exteriors with brown
tile roofing. All fascia and garage doors will be
finished in white. Windows will consist of paned
glass. Columns are implemented to enhance front
entrance areas of each unit.
Landscapinq
Landscaping for the proposed project meets the
requirements of Ordinance No. 30,8. All proposed
trees, including street trees will be 15 gallon
minimum.
The project will be bordered by a six foot high
slumpblock wall. The wall elevation adjacent to the
public right-d-way will contain two foot square
slumpblock pilasters every 20 feet on center.
A: TM25055 3
GENERAL PLAN AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
Parkinq/Circulation
The project proposes to gain access from Via La
Vida. A 20, foot wide drive aisle loops through the
project for adequate vehicular and emergency
access. Each residential unit is provided with an
attached two-car garage. In addition, there are 16
spaces within the project to fulfill the parking
requirements of Ordinance 30,8.
Land Use
The project site is bordered on the northeast, south
and west by existing R-2 zoning. To the east of the
project site is an existing R-2 single family
subdivision. To the south is a high density
apartment complex. West of the site there is vacant
land. To the north of the project site is a vacant lot
{ TTM 25338).
Zoning
The proposed project is zoned R-2 (Multiple-Family
Dwellings). Multiple family dwellings are permitted
provided the proposed project conforms with
Planned Residential Development Standards. The
project as proposed conforms with the development
standards contained in the R-2 zone, and PRD
requirements.
The existing SWAP designation for the proposed site
is Residential, 2-0, dwelling units per acre.
Tentative Tract Map No. 25055 proposes 11.3
DU/AC, Although it was Staff~s opinion that this
designation was a County mapping error, the
Planning Commission determined that an appropriate
density for the area adjacent would be 6-8 dwelling
'units per acre. That determination was made on
May 6, 1991. However, Tentative Tract Map No.
25055 is bordered on the south by an existing high
density apartment complex. This adjacent high
density makes the proposed density of Tentative
Tract Map No. 25055 appropriate as a buffer
development. In addition, Staff finds it probable
that this project will be consistent with the City's
future General Plan.
A: TM25055 q
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
FINDINGS:
An initial study was prepared for the project which
identified possible impacts to earth disruption,
drainage, and public services. A clearance letter
will be required from the County Flood Control
Department and the site grading and drainage plan
has been deemed acceptable by the City Engineering
Department. Appropriate fees will be paid to
mitigate public service impacts. A Negative
Declaration is recommended for adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the City's
future General Plan, which will be completed
in a reasonable time and in accordance with
State law, due to the fact that the project is
consistent with existing site development
standards in that it proposes articulated
design features and site amenities
commensurate with existing and anticipated
residential development standards.
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to or interference with
the future and adopted general plan, if the
proposed use or action is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact
that the project is in conformance with
existing and anticipated land use and design
guidelines standards.
The proposed use or action complies with
state planning and zoning laws, due to the
fact that the proposed use conforms with
those uses listed as "allowed" within the R-2
zoning designation of Ordinance 3L~8.
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configuration, circulation
patterns, access, and density, due to the
fact that; adequate area is provided for all
proposed residential structures; adequate
landscaping is provided along the projectis
public and private frontages; and the
internal circulation plan should not create
traffic conflicts as design provisions are in
conformance with adopted City standards.
A: TM25055 5
10o
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the public health or
welfare, due to the fact that the conditions
stated in the approval are based on mitigation
measures necessary to reduce or eliminate
potential adverse impacts of the project.
Tentative Tract Map No. 25055 is compatible
with surrounding land uses. The harmony in
scale, bulk, height, density and coverage
creates a compatible physical relationship
with adjoining properties, due to the fact
that the proposal is similar in compatibility
with surrounding land uses; and adequate
area and design features provide for siting of
proposed development in terms of landscaping
and internal traffic circulation.
The proposal will not have an adverse affect
on surrounding property because it does not
represent a significant change to the present
or planned land use of the area, due to the
fact that the proposed project is consistent
with the current zoning of the subject site.
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the built or natural
environment as determined in the Initial
Study for the project, due to the fact that
impact mitigation is realized by conformance
with the project's Conditions of Approval.
The project has acceptable access to a
dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and
useable by, vehicular traffic, due to the fact
that the project currently proposes access
points from Via La Vida which have been
determined to be adequate by the City
Engineer.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed projects, due to
the fact that this is clearly represented in the
site plan and the project analysis.
A: TM25055 6
11.
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits and environmental documents
associated with these applicants and herein
incorporated by reference, due to the fact
that they are referenced in the attached Staff
Report, Exhibits, Environmental Assessment,
and Conditions of Approval.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Department Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission:
ADOPT a Negative Declaration for Tentative
Tract Map No. 25055; and
ADOPT Resolution 91 - approving
Tentative Tract Map No. 25055 subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval, based on
the findings contained in the Staff Report.
MR:ks
Attachments:
Resolution 91-
Conditions of Approval
Exhibits
Public Correspondence
A: TM25055 7
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 90-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NO. 25055 TO SUBDIVIDE A 2.55 ACRE PARCEL
INTO A 29 UNIT CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT KNOWN
AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-330-009, 010.
WHEREAS, Jack Hamry filed Tentative Tract Map No. 25055 in
accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision
Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Tentative Tract Map application was processed in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tentative Tract
Map on June 3, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify
either in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
approval of said Tentative Tract Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
A: TM25055 8
~a)
There is a reasonable probability that the
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
Ic)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, {hereinafter "SWAP" ) was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within
the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as
its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely
fashion with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the
SWAP and meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the
Government Code, to wit:
I1 ) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
( 2 ) The Planning Commission finds, in approving projects
and taking other actions, including the issuance of
building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the
following:
There is reasonable probability that
Tentative Tract Map No. 25055 proposed will
be consistent with the general plan proposal
being considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
¢b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
A: TM25055 9
~c)
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
D. {1 ) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No.
0,60, no subdivision or extension of time may be approved unless the
following findings are made:
a)
That the proposed land division is consistent
with applicable general and specific plans.
b)
That the design or improvement of the
proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
c)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the type of
development.
d)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the proposed density
of the development.
e)
That the design of the proposed land division
or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
f)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
g)
That the design of the proposed land division
or 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 land division.
A land division may be approved if it is found
that alternate easements for access or for use
will be provided and that they will be
substantially equivalent to ones previously
acquired by the public. This subsection
shall apply only to easements of record or to
easements established by judgment of a court
of competent jurisdiction.
A: TM25055 10
( 2 ) The Planning Commission in approving the proposed
Tract Map makes the following findings, to wit:
a)
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the City*s
future General Plan, which will be completed
in a reasonable time and in accordance with
State law, due to the fact that the project is
consistent with existing site development
standards in that it proposes articulated
design features and site amenities
commensurate with existing and anticipated
residential development standards.
b)
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to or interference with
the future and adopted general plan, if the
proposed use or action is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact
that the project is in conformance with
existing and anticipated land use and design
guidelines standards.
c)
The proposed use or action complies with
state planning and zoning laws, due to the
fact that the proposed use conforms with
those uses listed as "allowed" within the R-2
zoning designation of Ordinance 3u,8.
d)
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configuration, circulation
patterns, access, and density, due to the
fact that; adequate area is provided for all
proposed residential structures; adequate
landscaping is provided along the projectis
public and private frontages; and the
internal circulation plan should not create
traffic conflicts as design provisions are in
conformance with adopted City standards.
e)
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the public health or
welfare, due to the fact that the conditions
stated in the approval are based on mitigation
measures necessary to reduce or eliminate
potential adverse impacts of the project.
A: TM25055 11
f)
g)
h)
j)
k)
Tentative Tract Map No. 25055 is compatible
with surrounding land uses. The harmony in
scale, bulk, height, density and coverage
creates a compatible physical relationship
with adjoining properties, due to the fact
that the proposal is similar in compatibility
with surrounding land uses; and adequate
area and design features provide for siting of
proposed development in terms of landscaping
and internal traffic circulation.
The proposal will not have an adverse effect
on surrounding property because it does not
represent a significant change to the present
or planned land use of the area, due to the
fact that the proposed project is consistent
with the current zoning of the subject site.
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the built or natural
environment as determined in the Initial
Study for the project, due to the fact that
impact mitigation is realized by conformance
with the project's Conditions of Approval.
The project has acceptable access to a
dedicated right-d-way which is open to, and
useable by, vehicular traffic, due to the fact
that the project currently proposes access
points from Via La Vida which have been
determined to be adequate by the City
Engineer.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed projects, due to
the fact that this is clearly represented in the
site plan and the project analysis.
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits and environmental documents
associated with these applicants and herein
incorporated by reference, due to the fact
that they are referenced in the attached Staff
Report, Exhibits, Environmental Assessment,
and Conditions of Approval.
A: TM25055 12
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Tentative
Tract Map is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that although the
proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the
Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration,
therefore, is hereby granted.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves
Tentative Tract Map No. 25055 for the subdivision of a 2.55 acre parcel into 29
condominium units located on the north side of Via La Vida, 1,000 feet east of
Margarlta Road and known as Assessor~s Parcel No, 921-330-009, 010 subject to the
following conditions:
A. Attachment 2, attached hereto.
SECTION
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of June, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held
on the 3rd day of June, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
A: TM25055 13
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Tract Map No: 25055
Project Description: Application for 30 unit
condominium subdivision of 2.55 acres
Assessor~s Parcel No.: 921-330-009, 010
Planninq Department
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 0,60, Schedule A, unless
modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in
accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request,
if made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
This conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the
approval date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance 0,60.
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordat/on of the final
map.
Legal access as required by Ordinance 0,60 shall be provided from the tract
map boundary to a City maintained road.
Subdivision phasing, including any proposed common open space area
improvement phasing, if applicable, shall be subject to Planning Department
approval. Any proposed phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular access
to all lots in each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and
purpose of the subdivision approval.
A Homeowners Association shall be established for maintenance of Open
Space/Common Area and the developer/applicant shall pay for all costs
relating to establishment of the Homeowners Association.
A copy of the final grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department
for review and approval. All on-site cut and fill slopes shall:
a. Be limited to a maximum slope ratio of 2 to 1,
b. Be contour-graded to blend with existing natural contours.
A :TM25055 10,
10.
11.
12.
13.
15.
All slopes over three ~3) feet in height shall be landscaped and irrigated
according to the City Development Code. A detailed landscaping and
irrigation plan, prepared by a qualified professional, shall be submitted to the
City Planning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of
building permits.
The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations
outlined in the County Health Departmentts transmittal dated April 9, 1990,
a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in
the Riverside County Flood Control Distrlct~s letter dated April 24, 1990, a
copy of which is attached. If the project lies within an adopted flood control
drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of City of Temecula Land Division
Ordinance 0,60, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities
shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits.
The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined
in the County Fire Department's letter dated May 28, 1991, a copy of which is
attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Building
and Safety Department: Land Use Section's transmittal dated April 30, 1990,
a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Building
and Safety Department: Grading Sectionss transmittal dated April 30, 1990,
a copy of which is attached.
All proposed construction shall comply with the California Institute of
Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy, as outlined in the
Southwest Area Plan.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho
Water District transmittal dated September 25, 1989, a copy of which is
attached.
16. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following:
Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
development standards of the R-2 zone.
Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed-free
condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or
provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the
Director of Building and Safety.
A: TM25055 15
17.
18.
19.
The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all slopes.
landscaped areas and irrigation systems until such time as those operations
are the responsibilities of other parties as approved by the Planning Director.
Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet
(ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate
identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the
office of the City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the
Planning Department for review and approval. The approved ECS shall be
forwarded with copies of the recorded final map to the Planning Department
and the Department of Building and Safety.
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
Prior to the issuance of grading permits detailed common open space
area landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning
Department approval for the phase of development in process. The
plans shall be certified by a landscape architect, and shall provide for
the following:
Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all
landscaped areas requiring irrigation.
Landscape screening where required shall be designed to be
opaque up to a minimum height of six (6) feet at maturity.
All utility service areas and enclosures shall be screened from
view with landscaping and decorative barriers or baffle
treatments, as approved by the Planning Director. Utilities shall
be placed underground.
Parkways shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or a
transition into the primary use area of the site. Landscape
elements shall include earth betruing, ground cover. shrubs and
specimen trees.
Wall plans shall be submitted for the project perimeter and along
Via La Vida. Wooden fencing shall not be allowed on the
perimeter of the project. All lots with slopes leading down from
the lot shall be provided with gates in the wall for maintenance
access.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent
trees at key visual focal points within the project.
Where street trees cannot be planted within right-of-way of
interior streets and project parkways due to insufficient road
right-of*way, they shall be planted outside of the road right-of-
way.
A:TM25055 16
h. Landscaping plans shall incorporate native and drought tolerant
plants where appropriate.
20.
21.
All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow
growing trees shall be steel staked.
If the project is to be phased, prior to the approval of grading
permits, an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to
the Planning Director for approval. The plan shall be used as a
guideline for subsequent detailed grading plans for individual
phases of development and shall include the following:
Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and
sedimentation during and after the grading process.
Approximate time frames for grading and identification of
areas which may be graded during the higher probability '
rain months of January through March.
3. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase.
A separate drip line system shall be installed for the irrigation of
all trees and large shrub plantings located on site.
A separate drip line system shall be installed for the irrigation of
all trees and large shrub plantings located on site.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall
provide evidence to the Director of Building and Safety that all
adjacent off-site manufactured slopes have recorded slope
easements and that slope maintenance responsibilities have been
assigned as approved by the Director of Building and Safety.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a qualified paleontologist shall be
retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the proposed
grading with respect to potential paleontological impacts. Should the
paleontologist find the potential is high for impact to significant resources, a
pre-grade meeting between the paleontologist and the excavation and grading
contractor shall be arranged. When necessary, the paleontologist or
representative shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt
grading activity to allow recovery of fossils.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall obtain a letter of
clearance from the Riverside County Engineering Geologist.
A: TM25055 17
22.
23.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall submit letters of
clearance from the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the State of
California Department of Fish and Game relative to improvements impacting
portions of blueline stream on the project site.
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
No building permits shall be issued by the City for any residential
lot/unit within the project boundary until the developer's successor's-
in-interest provides evidence of compliance with public facility
financing measures. A cash sum of one-hundred dollars ($100) per
lot/unit shall be deposited with the City as mitigation for public library
development.
Prior to the submittal of building plans to the Department of Building
and Safety an acoustical study shall be performed by an acoustical
engineer to establish appropriate mitigation measures that shall be
applied to individual dwelling units within the subdivision to reduce
ambient interior noise levels to ~5 Ldn.
All building plans for all new structures shall incorporate, all required
elements from the subdivision~s approved fire protection plan as
approved by the County Fire Marshal.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and
irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval.
The plans shall address all areas and aspects the tract requiring
landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to,
parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front
yard landscaping.
All dwellings to be constructed within this subdivision shall be designed
and constructed with fire retardant ( Class A) roofs as approved by the
Fire Marshal.
Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the
subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving
devices shall be permitted with Planning Department approval.
All front yards shall be provided with landscaping and automatic
irrigation, separate drip line systems shall be installed for all trees and
large shrubs.
Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits.
A: TM25055 18
25.
26.
27.
28°
All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans and shall be verified by City field inspection.
Not withstanding the preceding conditions, wherever an acoustical
study is required for noise attenuation purposes, the heights of all
required walls shall be determined by the acoustical study where
applicable.
Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, the applicant shall enter
into an agreement for the refuse service to include the utilization of a
small pick-up truck equipped with a llft mechanism in order to move the
containers out and back into the project; thus, prohibiting the entering
of large refuse trucks into the project. Said agreement shall be
submitted to the Planning Director for approval.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the
provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate fee set forth in
that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions
of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by
Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat
Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution.
Prior to recordation of a final map, the subdivider shall submltto the Planning
Director an agreement with TCSD which demonstrates to the satisfaction of the
City that the land divider has provided for the payment of parks and
recreation fees in accordance with Section 10.35 of Ordinance No. 1~60. The
agreement shall be approved by the City Council.
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officer, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officer, or employees
to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Tentative
Tract Map No. 25055, which action is brought within the time period provided
for in California Government Code Section 661~99.37. The City of Temecula will
promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding
against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. if the
City fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or
proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not.
thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of
Temecula.
The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site
property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the developer shall
at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter into
an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code
Section 66~,62 at such time as the City acquires the property interests
required for the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by
the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property
interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion
A: TM25055 19
of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an
appraisal report obtained by the developer, at the developer~s cost. The
appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the
appraisal.
29.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable
TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required,
and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility
provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired
in the residence.
30.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements:
31.
The Covenants. Conditions and Restrictions I CCF, R's) shall be reviewed and
approved by the Planning Department prior to final approval of the tract map.
The CCBR~s shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining the
open space. recreation areas. parking areas. private roads. and exterior of
all buildings.
32.
No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation,
association, property owner~s group, or similar entity has been formed with
the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which
have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common
facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet
the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to
maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such
entity shall operate under recorded CCBR~s which shall include compulsory
membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of
assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services.
Recorded CCF, R~s shall permit enforcement by the City of Provisions required
by the City 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.
33.
Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such
dwelling unit or lot, either ( 1 ) an undivided interest in the common areas and
facilities, or (2) as share in the corporation, or voting membership in an
association, owning the common areas and facilities,
Maintenance for all landscaped and open areas, including parkways, shall be
provided for in the CCF, R's.
35. CCBR's shall prohibit parking in front of garages,
A: TM25055 20
36.
37.
Within forty-eight 10,8) hours of the approval of the project, the
applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand.
Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars ~$1,275.00), which includes the One
Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars I $1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB
3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.0,~ d ) ( 2 ) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar 1525.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152
and 10, Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight {0,8) hour
period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department
the check required above, the approval for the project granted hereln shall
be void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section
711.0,1c).
Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, all garage doors shall be required to
have automatic openers.
Enqineerinq Department
The following are the Engineering Department Conditions of Approval for this
project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Engineering
Department.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
38.
The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act,
and all applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions.
39.
The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor or registered
Civil Engineer, subject to all the requirements of the State of California
Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance No. 0,60.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, the
developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho CalifOrnia Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control district;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Engineering Department;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise; and
Parks and Recreation Department.
A: TM25055 21
~2.
0,3.
~1~.
All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to
the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the
City Engineer.
Handicap access ramps shall be provided at curb returns of entry access
points.
Five i5) foot wide PCC sidewalk shall be constructed on one side minimum of
all private interior streets.
Via La Vida shall be improved with 22 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or
bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-
of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 103, Section A
Dedicate a 29 foot easement for public utilities and emergency vehicles access
for all private streets and drives. Easement shall include 5 foot sidewalk
along all private streets.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage
facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located
within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances
shall be submitted and recorded as directed by the City Engineer.
A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions {CCSR's) shall be
prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City
Engineer and City Attorney. The CCI;R~s shall be signed and acknowledged
by all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed,
shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City.
The CCF, R~s shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The
CC~;R's shall be subject to the following conditions:
a. The CCSR's shall be prepared at the developer~s sole cost and expense.
The CCB;R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director
of Planning, 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 interest of the City and its residents.
The CCSR's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's
Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering
Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent
with the final map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City.
The CCi;R~s shall provide for the effective establishment, operation,
management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas and
facilities.
A: TM25055 22
50.
The CCF, R's shall provide that the property shall be developed,
operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance.
The CCF, RIs shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the
condition required by the CCF, RIs, then the City, after making due
demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and
perform, at the owneris sole expense, any maintenance required
thereon by the CCF, RIs 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.
The declaration shall contain language prohibiting further
subdivision of any lots, whether they are lettered lots or
numbered lots.
ii.
All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently
maintained by homeowneris association or other means acceptable
to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted
to the Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to issuance of
building permits.
iii.
Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements
ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads,
drives or parking areas shall be provided by CCF, RIs or by deeds
and shall be recorded concurrent with the map or prior to the
issuance of building permit where no map is involved.
The developer, or the developeris successor, shall execute a current Public
Facilities Agreement with the City of Temecula which provides for the payment
of the sum of money per residential unit then established by Resolution of the
City Council, prior to the issuance of any building permits for any individual
lots.
A Notice of Intention to form and/or join the Landscape and Lighting District
shall be filed with the City Council, The engineering costs involved in
District information shall be borne by the developer.
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformance with applicable City standards.
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb
and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing,
striping, and other traffic control devices as appropriate.
b. Storm drain facilities.
c. Landscaping {street and parks).
A: TM25055 23
51.
52.
53.
5~.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
d. Sewer and domestic water systems.
e. Undergrounding of existing and proposed utility distribution lines.
The street design and improvement concept of this project shall be coordinated
with adjoining developments.
Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in
accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 0,61 and as approved by the
City Engineer.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Engineering Department a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation
towards traffic signal impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time
of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a written
agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a
building permit.
The minimum centerline radii shall be 300 feet or as approved by the City
Engineer.
All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the
City Engineer.
Improvement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending a
minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and alignment
as approved by the City Engineer.
A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent.
Improvement plans per City Standards for the private streets or drives shall
be required for review and approval by the City Engineer.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards
and shall be shown on the street improvement plans in accordance with County
Standard 0,00 and 0,01 Icurb sidewalk).
The subdivider shall submit two 12) prints of a comprehensive grading plan
to the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform
Building Code, Chapter 70, and as may be additionally provided for in these
Conditions of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 20," x 36" mylar by a
Registered Civil Engineer.
A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and
submitted at the time of application for grading plan check.
The subdivider shall submit two 12 ) copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
A: TM25055 20,
63.
A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer.
All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer.
On-site drainage facilities, located outside of road right-d-way, shall be
contained within drainage easements 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."
65.
The subdivider shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage
flowing onto or through the site, In the event the City Engineer permits the
use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Article XI of
Ordinance No. 0,60 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street
capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the
subdivider shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Engineering
Department.
66.
Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface
drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
67.
Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City~s CATV Franchises of
the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time
of street improvements.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
68.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid
and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office.
69.
Prior to any work being performed on the private streets or drives, fees shall
be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's
Office.
70.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Department prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-
way.
71.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing
Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The
charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits.
If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to
this property, no new charge needs to be paid.
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
72.
A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for
review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil
Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final
Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
A: TM25055 25
73.
Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The
final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough
grading plan.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and
gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and
street lights on all interior public streets.
75.
Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all
times with adequate detours during construction.
76.
Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 14 days following
placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon
per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and
9~, of the State Standard Specifications.
77.
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities
imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public
facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Nogative Declaration for the
project, in the amount in affect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim
or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally
established by the date on which Developer requests its building permits for
the project or any phase thereof, the Developer shall execute the Agreement
for Payment of Public Facility Fee, a copy of which has been provided to
Developer. Developer understands that said Agreement may require the
payment of fees in excess of those now estimated |assuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees) and specifically waives its right to protest
such increase.
Transportation Enqineerincl
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
78.
A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer
and approved by the City Engineer for Via La Vida and shall be included in
the street improvement plans.
A: TM25055 26
DRC ITEM NO.
TRACT/PARCEL MAP NO...~"'O~~'
CITY OF TEMECULA
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
QUIMBY ORDINANCE
[~'he amount of land to be dedicated, or fees paid, shall be based ou the residential density of tile subdivision.
'The residential dea~sity shall be determined by multiplying the number of dwelllug units by the number of
persous per unit by the ratio of the number of acres of park land required for each 1,000 persons (i.e., .005).
Credits given for proposed parks will be uuder the discretiou of the Temecula Community Services District
(TCSD) Director.
Wilenever the actual amount of land to be dedicated is less than the amount of land required to be dedicated,
the subdivider shall pay fees for the fair market value of any additional land that otherwise would have been
required to be dedicated plus 20% for offsite improvements.
l~?a~ snbdivisions containing 50 parcels or less only the payment of fees may be required; provided however,
when coudominium project, stock cooperative or community apartment project exceeds 50 dwelling units,
Ihe dedication of land may be required even though the number of parcels may be less than 50.
['~Less than 5 Parcels
Subdivisions containing less than Eve (51 parcds wif l~e subject to the following conditfons: Upon the request of a
bu#Tding permit for oonsftucffon of re$idenffal structures on one or more of the parcels within four years following
approval of a tentative map, parcel map, or planned developmeaL real esl~t8 devdopme~ stock cooperaffve,
community apa, bi,ent project and condomicicm for which · ten~al~ve map or parcel map is filed, a predetermined
]uimby Act fee in the amount equal to the fair market value of required acreage (Plus 20% for offsite improvements)
shall be paid by the owner of each such parcel(s) as a condiXon to the issuance of such permit as authorized by
Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 as amended through Ordinance No. 460.93.
The following chart has been prepared to assist staff in calculating requirements of tile existing Quimby
Ordiuance:
Dwellings
F1 l{ea>
I'1 l{ea>
[] I (ca)
['3 2(ea)
1~ 3 or 4(ca)
1~ 5 or More
Persons Per
Type Dwelling Unit
Single Family (Detached Garage) 2.98
Single Family (Attached Garage) 2.59
Mobile home 2.64
Dwellings Units Per Structure 2.48
Dwelling Units Per Structure 2.34
Dwelllug Units Per Structure 2.72
* PIt~s 20% for of f site improvemeuts.
Gary L. King, Park Development Coordinator (TCSD)
Date:
Acres Required*
.01490
.01295
.01360
.01320
//,,I,l- it .01240 1~) ,I~Cf
18 ,,e,l..Jt .01170~ .ZlO~
· 3q.: O
September 25, 1989
Board of Directors:
James A. Darby
President
Jeffrey L. Minklet
Sr. Vice President
Ralph Daily
Doug Kulberg
Jon A, Lundin
T. C, Rowe
Richard D. Steffey
Officers:
John F. Hennigar
General Manager
Phillip L Forbes
Director of Finance-
Treasurer
Thomas P,, McAliester
Director of Operations
& Maintenance
Edward P. Lemons
Director of Engineenng
Linda M. Fregoso
District Secretary
McCormick & Kidmaa
Legal Counsel
Riverside County Planning Department
4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor
Riverside, California 92501-3657
Subject: Water Availability
Reference: Tract 25055
Gentlemen:
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located
within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District. Water
service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial
arrangements between RCWD and the property owner.
Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner
signing an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights,
if any, to RCWD.
If you have any questions, please contact Senga Doherty at (714)
676-4101.
Very truly yours,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brannon
Engineering Manager
F012/dpm269f
cc: Senga Doherty
R A N C H O C A L I F O R N I A W A T E R D I S T R I C T
28061 DIAZ ROAD · POST OFFICE BOX 174 · TEMECULA, CA 92390-0174 · (714) 676-4101 · FAX (714) 676-0615
FIRE DEPARTMENT
210 WEST SAN IACINTO AVENUE * PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92370
e ' (714) 657-3183
GLEN J. NEWMAN
FIRE CHIEF
May 28, 1991
TO: CITY OF TEMECULA
ATTN: PLA/qNING
RE: TRACT 25055 Amended #5
With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced
tract, the Fire Department requests an amended map with the following changes
prior to issuance of letter of conditions:
The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the
remodel or construction of all commercial buildings using the procedure
established in Ordinance 546.
Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 2000
GPM for a 2 hour duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure,
which must be available before any combustible material is placed
on the job site.
A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants, on a
looped system (6"x4"2~x2~), will be located not less than 25 feet
or more than 165 feet from any portion of the building as measured
along approved vehicular travelways. The required fire flow shall
be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system.
The required fire flow may be adjusted at a later point in the permit
process to reflect changes in design, construction type, area separation
or built-in fire protection measures.
Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to
the Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant
types, location and spacing, and, the system shall meet the fire flow
requirements. Plans shall be signed/approved by a registered civil
engineer and the local water company with the following certification:
"I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with
the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department."
Install a complete fire sprinkler system in all buildings requiring a
fire flow of 1500 GPM or greater. The post indicator valve and fire
department connection shall be located to the front, within 50 feet of
a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from the building(s). A statement
that the building(s) will be automatically fire sprinklered must be
included on the title page of the building plans.
["1 INDIO OFFICE
79-733 Country Club Drive, Sui,e F, lndio, CA 92201
(619) 342~886 · FAX (619) 775-2072
PLANNING DIVISION
[~ RIVERSIDE OFFICE
3760 12th Sm:et, Rive,side, CA 92501
(714) 2754777, FAX (714) 369-7451
t'l TEMECULA OFF1CE
41002 County Centtt Drive, Suite 225, Temecuh, CA 92390
~714) 694-5070, FAX (714) 694-5076
TRACT 25055 Amended #5 PAGE 2
Install a supervised waterfow monitoring fire alarm system. Plans
must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to
installation, as per UBC.
In lieu of fire sprinkler requirements, building(s) must be area separated
into square foot compartments, approved by the Fire Department, as per
Section 505 (e) of the Uniform Building Code.
A statement that the building will be automatically fire sprinklered
must appear on the title page of the building plans.
Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes.
Install portable fire extinguishers with a minimum rating of 2A-IOBC.
Contact a certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall'
be responsible to submit a check or money order in the amount of $558.00
to the Riverside County Fire Department for plan check fees.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall deposit
with the City of Temecula, a check or money order equaling the sum of
$400.00 per unit as mitigation for fire protection impacts. This amount
must be submitted separately from the plan check review fee.
Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed in
the Building and Safety Office.
All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to
the Planning and Engineering staff.
RAYMOND H. REGIS
Chief Fire Department Planner
By
Laura Cabral, Fire Safety Specialist
LC/tm
to: PLANNING / LAURIE DOBSON
RE: TP, 25055 AMENDHENT : 4
APN: 921-330-009 , 010
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
BL:~LD[NG AND SAFETY DEPARTHENT
GRADING SECTION
i
a u 03 1990 '
The "Grading Section" has reviewed a conceptual ~rading plan for this site.
The plan is acceptable. Consequently, the "Grading Section" recommends
approval of this pro.ject if the following conditions are included.
Prior no commencing any grading in excess of 50 cubic yards, the
applicant shall obtain a grading permit and approval to construct frown
the Building and Safety DeparLment.
All grading shall conform to the Uniform Building Code as and Ordinance
457.
Prior to issuance of any building
obtain a grading permit and approval
Safety Department.
permit, the property owner shall
to construct from the Building and
Plant and irrigate fill slopes greater than or equal to 3' in Lerticat
height with grass or ground cover. Slopes that exceed 15' in vertical
height are to be provided with shrubs and/or trees per count ordinance
457, see form 284-47.
Landscape plans are to be signed by a registered landscape architect and
bonded per the requirements of Ordinance 457, see form 284-47.
Grading in excess of 199 'cubic yards will require performance security
22 be posted with the Building and Safety department.
in instances where a grading plan involves import or export, prior
obtaining a grading permit, the applicant shall have obtained appro\ai
for the import/export location from the Building and Safety Departmen~
this may require a written clearance from the Planning Department.
All drainage facilities shall be designed to accommodate 100 year storm
flows.
The proposed retaining walls, shown on the conceptual grading plah,
require separate permits and shall be designed by a registered civil
engineer unless they conform to the County Standard Retaining Wall
designs shown on Building and Safety Department forms 284-197.
NOTE:
Observe slope setbacks per Section 2907, Figure 29-1, Section 7011, a~ru]
Figure 70-1 of the k'niform Building Code.
For the final grading plan, please provide the applicable information
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
4065 COUNTY CIRCLE DR, RIVERSIDE, CA, 92503 (Mailing Address - P,O, Box 7600 92515.
FAX [?14) 35e-4528
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLANNING DEFT.
4080 Lemon Street
Bxverszde. CA 92502
ATTN: Laurie Dobson
RE: Tract Map 25055: Be~n~ Parcels 3 and 4 of Parcel MaD
13271. RM Book 67. RaQe 80. RIverside County Records For.
Temecula Rancho.
(1 lots)
Dear tSentlemen:
The Department of Public Health has reviewed Tract Map No.
25055. and recommends that:
A water system shall be installed accordxnQ to
plans and specxf%catzon as aDDroved bY the water
company and the Health Department. Permanent
orlnts of the plans of the water system shall
be submitted in trlDllcate. with a minimum scale
not less than one Inch equals 200 feet, along with
the orlQznal drawxnq to the County $urvevor.
The prints shall show ~he Internal Dlpe diameter.
iocatzon of valves and fire hydrants: pipe and
nolnt specifications, and the slze of the main
at the ]unctZon of the new system to the
exlstlnQ system. The plans shall COmply In all
respects with Dlv. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the
California Health and Safety Code, California
Adm~nXstrative Code, Title 22, Chapter 16. and General
Order No, 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the
State of California, when applicable. The DIana shall
be sZQned by a reQlstered enQlneer and water companv
with the followlno cert%flcatxon: "1 certify that the
deszQn of the water system in Tract MaD 25,355
accordance with the water sVstem expansion DIana of the
Rancho California Water Dlstr~ct and that the water
service, storaQe and d~strlbutlon system will be
adequate to provide water servlce to such tract.
RIverside County Plannlno
PaGe Two
ATTN: Laurie Dobson
April 6. 1990
Dept.
This certification does not constitute a ouarantee
that it will SUDDIV water to such tract mad at any
sDec~flc quantities, flow~ or pressures for f%Fe
mrotect~on or any other purpose". Thls certificatIon
shall be slOned by a responsible official of the water
companY. The. Dlan~.~t~.~_~Q.~h~.~.~.~
This subdivision has a statement from Rancho California
Water D~strlct a~reelnG to serve domestic water to each and
every lot in the subdivision on demand Drovldln~
satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the
subd~vlder. It will be necessary for f~nanclal arranoements
to be made mrlor to the recordatlon of the final maD.
This subdivision is within the Rancho Callfofnla Wate~
DlstFlct and shall be connected to the sewers of the
District. The sewer system shall be installed according to
plans and specifications as approved by the District, the
County Surveyor and the Health Department. Permanent prints
of the Plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in
trxDllcate, along with the original drawinG, to the County
Surveyor. The prints shall show the xnternal Dips
diameter. locatlon of manholes. complete profiles, PlDe
and Joint specifications and the size of the sewers at
the Junction of the new system to the exlstlno system.
A single plat indicating location of sewer lines and
water lines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and
profiles. The plans shall be signed by a registered
engineer and the sewer district with the following
certification: "I certify that the design of the sewer
system in Tract Map 25055 is in accordance with the
sewer system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water
District and that the waste disposal system is adequate at
thxs time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed
tract maD."
Riverside County Plannlna Dept.
Page Three
ATTN: Laurie Dobson
ADrll 6. 1990
It w~ll be necessary for financial arranuements to be
completely finallzed Drior to recordatlon of the final
maD.
T~Lncere v. R
._,1/I Cb
Sam Mactlnez. . .H.S. IV
Environmental Health Services
SM:wdl
Administrative Office, 1777 Atlanta Avenue
Riverside, CA 92507
April 30, '1990
Riverside County Planning Department
Attention.' Lauri Dobson
County Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside, CA 92501
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: Tract 25055, Amended Map No. 4
Ladies and Gentlemen:
The Land Use Division of the Department of Building and Safety
has the following comments and conditions:
The developer shall obtain Planning Department approval for
all on-site and off-site signage advertising the sale of
the subdivision pursuant to Section 19.6 of Ordinance 348.
If approve.d elevations are required from the Planning Department
the approved plans must be submitted to the Land Use Division
concurrently with submittal of structural plans for review.
Prior to issuance of building permits, proposed lighting must
be in conformance with Mount Palomar Lighting Plan, Zone B,
per Ordinance 655.
Prior to acceptance of structural plans for Building and Safety
review, one complete set o.f approved conditions from Planning
Department must be attached.
Performance Securities Bond for maintenance of landscaping
may be required. Consult your Conditions of Approval.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, written clearance
is required from the following:
° Temecula Unified School District
(714) 682-8840 · (714) 275-1820 · Fax (714) 369-4084
Planning Department
Tract 25055
April 30, 1990
Page 2
Swimming pool to be fenced according to requirements specified
in Ordinance 421.1. Health Department clearance required on
pool plans.
Sincerely,
Vaugh~'~SSirkisi~n
Land Use Technician
VS:sml
KENNETH L. EDWARDS
CHIEF ENGINEER
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92502
April 24, 1990
~995 MARKET STREET
P,O, BOX 1033
TELEPHONE (714) 787-2015
FAX NO. (714} 788'9965
Riverside County
Planning Department
County Administrative Center
Riverside, California
Attention: Regional Team No. 1
Laurie Dobson
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re: Tract 25055
Amended No. 4
This is a proposal to construct condominiums on 2.55 acres in the
Rancho California area. The site is located on the north side of
Via La Vida about 1000 feet east of Margarita Road.
Major offsite storm runoff is tributary to the site via a 72"
storm drain from the development to the east. The developer
proposes to extend this storm drain through the site outletting
offsite to the west. Additionally, a small amount of local
runoff is tributary to the site along Via La Vida, this is pro-
posed to be collected and conveyed via a 36" storm drain to the
72" storm drain.
Following are the District's recommendations:
This tract is located within the limits of the Murrieta
Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan for which
drainage fees have been adopted by the Board. Drainage
fees shall be paid as set forth under the provisions of
the "Rules and Regulations for Administration of Area
Drainage Plans", amended February 16, 1988:
Drainage fees shall be paid to the Transportation
Commissioner as part of the filing for record of the
subdivision final map or parcel map, or if the
recording of a final parcel map is waived, drainage
fees shall be paid as a condition of the waiver prior
to recording a certificate of compliance evidencing
the waiver of the parcel map; or
Riverside County
Planning Department
Re: Tract 25055
Amended No. 4
-2- April 24, 1990
At the option of the land divider, upon filing a re-
quired affidavit requesting deferment of the payment
of fees, the drainage fees may be paid to the Build-
ing Director at the time of issuance of a grading
permit or building permit for each approved parcel,
whichever may be first obtained after the recording
of the subdivision final map or parcel map; provided
however, this option to defer the fees may not be
exercised for any parcel where grading or structures
have been initiated on the parcel within the prior 3
year period, or permits for either activity have been
issued on that parcel which remain active.
The property's street and lot grading should be designed
in a manner that perpetuates the existing natural
drainage patterns with respect to tributary drainage
area, outlet points and outlet conditions, otherwise, a
drainage easement should be obtained from the affected
property owners for the release of concentrated or di-
verted storm flows. A copy of the recorded drainage
easement should be submitted to the District for review
prior to the recordation of the final map.
Evidence of a viable maintenance mechanism should \~ sub-
mitted to the District and County for review and approval
prior to recordation of the final map.
Drainage facilities outletting sump conditions should be
designed to convey the tributary 100 year storm flows.
Additional emergency escape should also be provided.
The 10 year storm flow should be contained within the
curb and the 100 year storm flow should be contained
within the street right of way. When either of these
criteria is exceeded, additional drainage facilities
should be installed.
Offsite drainage facilities should be located within ded-
icated drainage easements obtained from the affected
property owners. The documents should be recorded and a
copy submitted to the District prior to recordation of
the final map.
Riverside County
Planning Department
Re: Tract 25055
Amended No. 4
-3- April 24, 1990
Onsite drainage facilities located outside of road right
of way should be contained within drainage easements
shown on the final map. A note should be added to the
final map stating, "Drainage easements shall be kept free
of buildings and obstructions".
A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final
map along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic cal-
culations should be submitted to the District via the
Transportation Department for review and approval prior
to recordation of the final map. Grading plans should be
approved prior to issuance of grading permits.
Questions concerning this matter may be referred to Kris Flanigan
Of this Office at 714/787-2333.
c: To-Mac Engineering
V ry ~u~
OHN H. KASHUBA
rCivil Engineer
KF:mcy
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
II.
Backqround
1. Name of Proponent:
Jack Hamry
Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
25381-C Alicia Parkway, Suite 192
Laquna Hills, CA 92653
{71~) 770-6092
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
March ~, 1991
Agency Requiring
Assessment:
CITY OF TEMECULA
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
Rancho Bahamas
Tentative Trace Map No. 25055
6. Location of Proposal:
North side of Via La Vida,
east of Marqarita Road
Environmental Impacts
{Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets. )
Yes Maybe No
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
X
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
X
X
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
The destruction, covering or modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
X
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
X
A: TM25055 27
Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudslides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
Air. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air
quality?
The creation of objectionable
odors?
Alteration of air movement,
moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, whether locally
or regionally?
Water. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or
fresh waters?
Substantial changes in absorption
rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
ee
Discharge into surface waters, or
in any alteration of surface water
quality, including, but not limited
to, temperature, dissolved oxygen
or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow or ground waters?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A: TM25055 28
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
Substantial reduction in the amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as flood-
ing or tidal waves?
Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any native species of
plants (including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare, or endangered species
of plants?
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop?
Animal Life. Will the proposal result
in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or insects)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Yes
Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A: TM25055 29
10.
11.
12.
13.
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
Yes Maybe No
a. Increases in existing noise levels? X __
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels? X
Light and Glare. Will the proposal
produce substantial new light or glare?
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
X
X
X
Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource? X
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal
involve:
A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances I including,
but not limited to, oil, pesticicles,
chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
Population. Will the proposal alter
the location, distribution, density, or
growth rate of the human population of
an area?
Housing. Will the proposal affect
existing housing or create a demand for
additional housing?
Transportation/Circulation, Will the
proposal result in:
X
X
X
X
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement? X
A: TM25055 30
Yes Maybe No
b. Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking? X
c. Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems? __ X
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods? __ X
e. Alterations to waterborne, tall or
air traffic? X
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X
lu,. Public Services. Will the proposal have
substantial effect upon, or result in a
need for new or altered governmental
services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection? X
b. Police protection? X
c. Schools? X
d. Parks or other recreational
facilities? X
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads? X
f. Other governmental services: __ X
15. Energy. Wil! the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy? __ __ X
b. Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy? __ ~ X
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas? ~ __ X
A: TM25055 31
17.
18.
19.
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)?
Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities?
20. Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A: TM25055 32
Yes Maybe No
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? {A short-term
impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into
the future. )
Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumu-
latively considerable? ( A project~s
impact on two or more separate
resources may be relatively small,
but where the effect of the total of
those impacts on the environment
is significant. )
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substan-
tial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X
X
X
X
A: TM25055 33
Ill. Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
Earth
1.a.
1.b.
1.C.
1.d.
1,6o
1.f.
1.g.
Air
2.a.
2.b.
No. Although the proposed project will result in cut and fill slopes
there will not be changes in the base geologic substructures. The
slopes shall be manufactured and compacted per the englneer's
requirements and as a result, should not result in unstable earth
conditions.
Yes. All development disrupts the soil profile to some degree and
results in soil displacement, compaction and over-covering. However,
a grading plan was completed which renders the level of impact to a
level of non-significance.
Yes. There will be a change to existing topography in the form of '
streambed alteration. However the site has been plowed and used as a
dirt dump within recent years, so the relatively minor changes to
existing topography do not represent a significant impact.
Maybe. However, a Condition of Approval has been included which
requires consultation with a licensed paleontologist who will mitigate
any identified impacts.
Yes. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the
construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are
replanted. The erosion impact will be mitigated through minimal
grading, retention of natural vegetation whenever feasible, use of
watering trucks and hydro-seedlng disturbed areas after grading.
No. There is no body of water near the project site which could be
affected by the proposed project.
No. The project is not located within an identified fault hazard or
liquefaction zone. A clearance letter will be required from the
Riverside County Geologist which will verify the absence of unforeseen
impacts.
Maybe. Depending upon the amount of trafflc generated by the project,
an increase in carbon monoxide and particulate emissions will occur.
This impact is not considered significant since the air emissions from
this project is only an incremental impact to the area~s air quality.
Maybe. Objectionable odors could be created during construction
activities. This impact is not significant because of the temporary
nature of construction activity.
A: TM25055 34
2,c,
Water
3.a,d-e.
3.b.
3.c.
3.f.
3-9.
3.h.
3.1.
Plant Life
~.a-d.
No. The proposed project will not alter air movement or climate.
No. The proposed project will not affect any body of water. The
closest body of water to the site is Murrieta Creek which is
approximately one-half mile away.
Yes. The proposed project will affect existing drainage and runoff
patterns. However, a drainage and grading plan has been accepted
which mitigates potential impacts to a level of non-significance.
Maybe. The proposed project contains a portion of a U.S.G.S. blue
llnestream. Priorto the issuanceof any grading permits, theappllcant
shall obtain a letter of clearance from the Amy Corps of Engineers and
the State Fish and Game relative to the channelization of the existing
stream. Because of previous disturbance to this stream due to adjacent
projects, the impact is not considered significant.
No. The proposed project will not interfere with the direction or rate
of flow of ground waters.
No. The proposed project will increase the amount of impermeable
surfaces on the site which will reduce the amount of water absorption.
However, the introduction of irrigation to the site will offset the water
absorption rate and mitigate any impact.
No. The proposed project will not affect the public water supply or
system.
Yes. The proposed project is within the Murrieta Creek/Temecula
Valley Area Drainage Plan and watershed area. To help mitigate the
project~s impact, a flood mitigation charge shall be paid.
No. Although the development of the site will remove any of the plant
species that currently exist on the site, no unique, rare or endangered
species should be affected. New species of plants will be introduced to
the site as part of the landscape requirements for the project. The
addition of the new species is not considered a negative impact.
The site is not currently used for agricultural purposes.
A: TM25055 35
Animal Life
5.a-c.
Maybe. The proposed project is in an area that has been experiencing
urbanization for a number of years. It is anticipated that the only
animal life on or in the vicinity of the site includes squirrels, rabbits,
lizards, and other animals common to the area. It is highly unlikely
that an endangered species habitates the site. HoweVer, the proposed
project is within the Riverside County Stephen~s Kangaroo Rat Habitat
Conservation Plan Fee Area and will be required to comply with
Ordinance 663.
Noise
6°8.
Yes. On-site noise levels will increase temporarily during
construction. Long-term noise impacts will occur due to increased
traffic volumes. This impact is not considered to be significant since
the surrounding land uses are not noise sensitive.
6.b.
Maybe. Adjacent residents may be exposed to severe noise as a result
of construction related activity. However, the noise would be
temporary and not considered a significant impact.
Liqht and Clare
Maybe. The proposed project is located within the Mt. Palomar
Observatory Street Lighting Policy Area which recommends the use of
low pressure sodium vapor {LPSV) lights to help avoid interference,
known as "Skyglow", with the Mt. Palomar telescope. The use of LPSV
lights will reduce the light and glare produced by the proposed project.
Land Use
No. Since the project is proposed in an area that currently contains
high density residential development, the addition of the proposed
development will not be a substantial alteration to future uses.
Natural Resources
9.a-b.
No. The proposed use will not increase the consumption rate of any
natural or non-renewable natural resource.
Risk of Upset
10.a.
No. Hazardous substances will not be used or stored on site.
10.b.
No. During construction, it should not be necessary to close any
streets which would interfere with emergency vehicles, If street or
land closure is necessary, it shall be coordinated with the City Engineer
and Police Department.
A: TM25055 36
Population
11.
Yes. The proposal will create new housing which will increase the
density and population of the area. But the project is consistent with
area development and is not considered a significant impact.
Housinq
12.
No. The proposed project will not create a demand for additional
housing,
Transportation/Circulation
13.a,c.
Maybe. The proposed project will generate additional traffic to and
from the site. However, it is not anticipated that this increase will be
significant. The traffic that is generated by the project may add an
incremental impact to the Solana Way/Ynez Road intersection which is
currently operating near capacity during peak hours. This potential
impact will be mitigated by a transportation improvement mitigation fee.
13.b.
Yes. The proposed project will require parking to support the
residential uses. The proposed plan illustrates spaces and garages.
13.d.
Maybe. The proposed project will improve a portion of Via La Vida Road
which loops around and connects to Margarita Road. However, the
Engineering Department has included Conditions of Approval with
traffic mitigation measures, which make the impact non-significant.
13.e.
No. The proposed project will not affect waterborne, rail or air traffic.
13.f.
Yes. Any increase in traffic will increase the potential hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians. However, design standards and
conditions of approval have been incorporated into the project which
provide safety and circulation standards making the potential for impact
non-significant.
Public Services
lu,.a-e.
Yes. The proposed residential use will require public services in the
areas of police, fire, schools, maintenance of roads, and public
facilities and parks. This impact is not considered significant. The
incremental impact will be evaluated and the appropriate fees assessed
for mitigation.
14.f.
No. The project should not have a substantial effect on other public
services.
A: TM25055 37
Enerqy
15.a,b.
Utilities
16.a-f.
No. The proposed project will not result in the substantial use or
increase in demand of fuel or energy.
No. The proposed project requires the use of utilities but will not
require substantial alteration to the exiting systems.
Human Health
17.a,b.
No. The proposed project does not present a potential health hazard,
nor will people be exposed to potential health hazards.
Aesthetics
18.
No. The proposed project will not obstruct any scenic vista open to the
public. The elevations of the proposed project are consistent in
architectural materials as the surrounding buildings.
Recreation
19.
Maybe. The proposed project is a residential development and will have
an incremental impact on the City~s currently over-capacitated
recreational opportunities. However, the relative size of this project
will not create a significant impact with the open space included within
the project, and the compliance of the project to the City adopted
Quimby Ordinance.
Cultural Resources
20.a-d.
No. The subject site has previously been mass graded and used as a
dump site, and it is unlikely that the project will result in the
destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site. If a site is
discovered, an archaeologist or paleontologist should be called on site
to supervise the digging and determine if the site is significant. The
proposed project will not impact any building of historic significance,
affect unique ethnic cultural values or restrict sacred uses.
Mandatory Findinqs of Siqnificance
21 .a-d.
No. The proposed project will not significantly affect the natural
environment, have long term environmental impacts or have
considerable cumulative impacts.
A: TM25055 38
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signi-
ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi-
ficant effect on this case because the mitigation measures
described on attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval
have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
X
Date
For
CITY OF TEMECULA
A: TM25055 39
CITY OF TEMECULA )
VICINITY MAP
CASE NO.'T"tT,~CX~5'
P.C. DATE~"?,_,~cll ,,/
~,,.
CITY OF TEMECULA )
/
," 112 A(:
SWAP MAP
CITY OF TEMECULA )
A-2-20
630
· ~ R'?-- CZ4689
"'CZ
CZ 4689
R' ,~0,000 C'Z
R-5 R.,.t
/
CZ 4tOZ
CZ 2757
CASE
ZONE MAP ) P.C, DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA )
~'~ITY OF TEMECULA ~
TENTATIVE TR,O, CT 25055
SITE PLAN
r
~,_',,..,~ I TE, l:::;)L.,k. k4 ) CASE NO.'TJ~"Z.~"Q~"~'
P.C.
RAY AND JILL BRASSA
29743 CALLE PALMAS
TEMECULA, CA 92~90
MAY 21, 1991
cc: BlanninB
MR. DIXON
CITY MANAGER
43172 BUSINESS PARK DR. -
TEMECULA, CA 92~90
DEAR MR. DIXON:
THIS LETTER IS IN RESPONSE TO THE PROF'OSED 29 UNIT
CONDOMINIUM PROJECT LOCATED ON THE NORTHSIDE OF VIA LA VIDA,
EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD (TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 25055).
MY WIFE AND I ARE IN STRONG OPPOSITION TO THE 29 UNIT CONDO
FROJECT FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
A> ENVIRONMENTAL DESTRUOTION OF NATURAL HABITAT FOR THE MANY
WILD ANIMALS THAT LIVE IN THE AREA, SUCH AS HAWKS,
OPOSSUM, SKUNKS, RABBITS AND SQUIRRELS.
B) INCREASED TRAFFIC IN OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD WHICH
WOULD ENDANGER OUR SMALL CHILDREN.
C) POSSIBLE ABSENTEE OWNERSHIP, WITH NO MANAGEMENT TO
ENFORCE CC&Rs.
WE BELIEVE THAT THE PROJECT IS NOT IN THE BEST INTERESTS
THE COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD OVERALL.
S I I'..{CEREL Y. /: , ,/" /
ITEM
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
June 3, 1991
Case No.: Tentative Parcel Map No. 24785
Prepared By: Mark Rhoades
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning
Commission:
ADOPT Resolution 91- approvlng
Tentative Parcel Map No. 24785 based
on the Findings contained in the Staff
Report and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCAT ION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
Steven Lee
Benesh Engineering
A request to subdivide a 5.0 acre parcel into two
parcels.
Northwest corner of Kimberly Lane and Lielet Road.
R-Ro2 1/2 (Rural Residential, 2 1/2 Acre Lot Size
Minimum)
North: R-R-2 1/2
South: R-R-2 1/2
East: R-R-2 1/2
West: R-R-2 1/2
Not requested.
Single Family
North:
South:
East:
West:
Single Family Residential
Single Family Residential
Vacant
Single Family Residential
A: PM24785 1
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ANALYSIS:
GENERAL PLAN AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
FINDINGS:
Existing Parcel Size:
No. of Proposed Parcels:
Proposed Parcel Size:
5.0 acres
2
2.5 acre gross
Tentative Parcel Map No. 24785 was submitted tothe
County of Riverside on May 15, 1989. The project
was transferred to the City of Temecula Planning
Department on April 24, 1990. After Staff received
requested information, a Preliminary Development
Review Committee (Pre-DRC) meeting was held on
September 13, 1990. Information was again
requested, and received in time to be scheduled for
Final DRC on March 11, 1991.
The proposed Tentative Parcel Map is an application
to subdivide a 5.0 acre parcel into two 2.5 acre
(gross) parcels. The project is located at the
northwest corner of Kimberly Lane and Liefer Road.
Both streets are currently unimproved. Proposed
Parcel No. 2 currently has a house, barn, and
chicken coop on site. No improvements exist on
proposed Parcel No. 1.
Zoninq
The proposed project is zoned R-R-2 1/2 (Rural
Residential, 2 1/2 Acre Lot Size Minimum). The
proposed gross lot sizes are in conformance with the
R-R-2 1/2 zoning designation. The project is
currently surrounded by R-R-2 1/2 zoning.
The SWAP designation for the proposed Tentative
Parcel Map is 1 to 2 dwelling units per acre. The
density. The proposed project is less than the
density allowed by SWAP. The proposed density is
.4 dwelling units per acre.
The proposed project is a Class 15 categorical
exemption per the California Environmental Quality
Act.
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time in that the
lots conform to the standards of the R-R-2
1/2 zone and the project has a density less
than that established by SWAP.
A: PM24785 2
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference
with, the future adopted General Plan, if the
proposed Parcel Map is ultimately inconsistent
with the plan due to the size of the parcels
and current surrounding development.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning laws. The project
conforms to the current zoning for the site
and to Ordinance No. u,60, Schedule H, map
improvements and standards.
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the type of
development due to the fact that the proposal
is for the creation of 2 lots with the minimum
lot size being 2.5 acres. The size of the lots
are appropriate for future development per
the current zoning designations.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities.
Potential residential units will have exposure
which allows for proper solar accessibility.
That the design of the proposed land division
or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat. The project will
have a minimal impact and is therefore
categorically exempt under CEQA guidelines.
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
The project does not conflict with any known
easements of record.
The lawful conditions stated in the project~s
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
A: PM2q,785 3
10.
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps and exhibits associated with these
applications and herein incorporated by
reference.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
ADOPT Resolution 91- approving
Tentative Parcel Map No. 2q785 based
on the Findings contained in the Staff
Report and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
MR:ks
Attachments:
Resolution
Conditions of Approval
Exhibits
A: PM24785
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 24785
TO SUBDIVIDE A 5 ACRE PARCEL INTO TWO PARCELS
AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF KIMBERLY LANE AND
LIEFER ROAD.
WHEREAS, Steven Lee filed Parcel Map No. 2~,785 in accordance with the
Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which
the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Parcel Map application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Parcel Map on June
3, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in
support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
approval of said Parcel Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
{2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
A: PM2u,785 5
a)
There is a reasonable probability that the
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, {hereinafter "SWAP" ) was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within
the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as
its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely
fashion with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed Parcel Map is consistent with the SWAP and
meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government
Code, to wit:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
12 ) The Planning Commission finds, in approving projects
and taking other actions, including the issuance of
building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the
following:
a)
There is reasonable probability that Parcel
Map No. 2L1785 proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
A: PM2L1785 6
c)
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
D. {1 ) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No.
460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are
made:
a)
That the proposed land division is consistent
with applicable general and specific plans.
b)
That the design or improvement of the
proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
c)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the type of
development.
d)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the proposed density
of the development.
e)
That the design of the proposed land division
or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
f)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
g)
That the design of the proposed land division
or 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 land division.
A land division may be approved if it is found
that alternate easements for access or for use
will be provided and that they will be
substantially equivalent to ones previously
acquired by the public. This subsection
shall apply only to easements of record or to
easements established by judgment of a court
of competent jurisdiction.
(2) The Planning Commission in recommending approval
of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to
wit:
A:PM24785 7
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time in that the
lots conform to the standards of the R-R-2
1/2 zone and the project has a density less
than that established by SWAP.
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference
with, the future adopted General Plan, if the
proposed Parcel Map is ultimately inconsistent
with the plan due to the size of the parcels
and current surrounding development.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning laws. The project
conforms to the current zoning for the site
and to Ordinance No. ~,60, Schedule H, map
improvements and standards.
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the type of
development due to the fact that the proposal
is for the creation of 2 lots with the minimum
lot size being 2.5 acres. The size of the lots
are appropriate for future development per
the current zoning designations.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities.
Potential residential units will have exposure
which allows for proper solar accessibility.
That the design of the proposed land division
or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildllfe or their habitat. The project will
have a minimal impact and is therefore
categorically exempt under CEQA guidelines.
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
The project does not conflict with any known
easements of record.
A: PM2~,785 8
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
j)
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps and exhibits associated with these
applications and herein incorporated by
reference.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Parcel Map
proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
Tentative Parcel Map No. 2u,785 is a Class 15 Categorical Exemption from
the CEQA Guidelines.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves Parcel
Map No. 24785 for the subdivision of a 5 acre parcel into 2 parcels located at the
northwest corner of Kimberly Lane and Lielet Road subject to the following
conditions:
A. Attachment 2, attached hereto.
SECTION
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of June, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held
on the 3rd day of June, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
A:PM24785 9
ATTACHMENT 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Parcel Map No: 2u~785
Project Description: Subdivision of a 5.0
acre parcel into two (2) 2.5 acre parcels
Assessor's Parcel No.: 91u,-280-020
Planninq Department
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance L~60, Schedule H, unless
modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in
accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request,
if made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
This conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the
approval date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance ~,60. The expiration
date is
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final
map.
Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract
map boundary to a City maintained road.
All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall
continue in force until the governing body accepts or abandons such offers.
All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the City
Engineer. Street names shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, 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 and recorded as directed by the City Engineer.
The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations
outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated June 7, 1989, a
copy of which is attached.
A:PM24785 10
10.
11.
12.
13.
The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in
the Riverside County Flood Control District~s letter dated June 1~, 1989, a
copy of which is attached. If the project lies within an adopted flood control
drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of City of Temecula Land Division
Ordinance ~,60, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities
shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits.
The applicant shall comply with the conditions outlined in the Riverside
County Fire Department letter dated March 25, 1991, a copy of which is
attached.
All proposed construction shall comply with the California Institute of
Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy, as outlined in the
5outhwest Area Plan.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho
Water District transmittal dated October 30, 1990, a copy of which is attached.
Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following:
Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
development standards of the R-A-2 1/2 zone.
Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed-free
condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or
provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the
Director of Building and Safety.
Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet
(ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate
identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the
office of the City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the
Planning Department for review and approval. The approved EC5 shall be
forwarded with copies of the recorded final map to the Planning Department
and the Department of Building and Safety.
1~,. The following notes shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet:
This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar
Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with
the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory
recommendations.
Portions of this parcel map lie within an area of potential ground
liquefaction. For specific information and recommendations for
mitigation consult the liquefaction report on file at the City of Temecula
Planning Department, and dated November 8, 1990.
A: PM24785 11
15.
16.
17.
18.
A natural watercourse traverses Parcels 1 and 2. Said watercourse
shall be kept free and clear of all buildings and obstructions. The
natural water course shall be shown on the map.
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall provide
evidence to the Director of Building and Safety that all adjacent off-site
manufactured slopes have recorded slope easements and that slope
maintenance responsibilities have been assigned as approved by the
Director of Building and Safety.
The paleontologlcal report identifies no resources on the subject site.
However, if paleontological resources are encountered during any grading
activity a qualified paleontologist shall be notified. When necessary, the
paleontologist or representative shall have the authority to temporarily
divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of fossils.
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
No building permits shall be issued by the City for any residential
lot/unit within the project boundary until the developeris successor~s-
in-interest provides evidence of compliance with public facility
financing measures. A cash sum of one-hundred dollars ($100) per
lot/unit shall be deposited with the City as mitigation for public library
development.
All dwellings to be constructed within this subdivision shall be designed
and constructed with fire retardant (Class A ) roofs as approved by the
Fire Marshal.
Building separation between all buildings including fireplaces shall not
be less than ten (10) feet.
d. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of ten (10) feet.
Applicant shall comply with recommendations set forth in the Riverside
County Geologist letter dated February 1~,, 1991.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the
provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate fee set forth in
that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions
of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by
Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat
Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution.
A:PM24785 12
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officer, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officer, or employees
to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Tentative
Parcel Map No. 24785, which action is brought within the time period provided
for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will
promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding
against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the
City fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or
proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not,
thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of
Temecula.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable
TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required,
and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility
provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired
in the residence.
Prior to recordat/on of the Final Map, the developer or his assignee must
conform to the park district Quimby Ordinance, unless waived to time of
issuance of a building permit.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall comply with the
condition set forth by the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission
letter dated January 4, 1991.
Enqineerinq Department
The following are the Engineering Department Conditions of Approval for this
project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Engineering
Department.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainege courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
24.
25.
The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act,
and all applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions.
The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor or registered
Civil Engineer, subject to all the requirements of the State of California
Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance No. ~,60.
A: PM24785 13
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
26.
As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative,
the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
San Diego Regional Water Quality;
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control district;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Engineering Department;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise;
Parks and Recreation Department.
27.
All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to
the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the
City Engineer.
28.
Kimberly Road and Liefer Road shall be improved with 22 feet of asphalt
concrete pavement, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted,
within the dedicated right-d-way in accordance with County Standard No.
103, Section A (66'/~,1~').
29.
Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard
No. 805.
30°
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformance with applicable City standards.
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb
and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, and signing, as appropriate.
b. Storm drain facilities.
c. Domestic water systems.
31.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Engineering Department a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation
towards traffic signal impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time
of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a written
agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a
building permit.
32.
AI) street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the
City Engineer.
A: PM2u,785 lu,
Improvement plans shall be based upon a centerllne profile extending a
minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and alignment
as approved by the City Engineer.
3Ll. A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent.
35.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards
and shall be shown on the street improvement plans in accordance with County
Standard 400 and Li01 Icurb sidewalk).
36.
All driveways shall be located a minimum of two {2) feet from the property
line.
37.
The subdivider shall submit two prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the
Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70, and as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions
of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 2~," x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil
Engineer.
38.
The subdivlder shall submit two copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
39.
Drainage
Engineer.
Engineer.
calculations shall be submitted to and approved by the City
All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City
On-site drainage facilities, located outside of road right-of-way, shall be
contained within drainage easements 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."
The subdivider shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage
flowing onto or through the site. In the event the City Engineer permits the
use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Article XI of
Ordinance No. u,60 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street
capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the
subdivider shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Engineering
Department.
Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City~s CATV Franchises of
the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time
of street improvements.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid
and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer~s Office.
A: PM2L~785 15
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Department prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-d-
way.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing
Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The
charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits.
If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to
this property, no new charge needs to be paid.
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The
final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough
grading plan.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and
gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, and drainage structures
on all public streets.
Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all
times with adequate traffic control during construction as approved by the
City Engineer.
Asphaltic emulsion {fog seal) shall be applied not less than lu, days following
placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon
per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, :39, and
9u, of the State Standard Specifications.
50.
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities
imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public
facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Nogative Declaration for the
project, in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim
or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally
established by the date on which Developer requests its building permits for
the project or any phase thereof, the Developer shall execute the Agreement
for Payment of Public Facility Fee, a copy of which has been provided to
Developer. Developer understands that said Agreement may require the
payment of fees in excess of those now estimated lassuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees) and specifically waives its right to protest
such increase.
Department of Buildinq and Safety
51.
Request for Street Addressing must be made prior to submittal for Building
Plan Review.
A: PM24785 16
DRC ITEM NO.
TRACT/PARCEL MAP NO. ,..2-q 7~7?2f
CITY OF TEMECULA
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
QUIMBY ORDINANCE
amount of land to be dedicated, or fees paid, shall be based on the residential density of the subdivision.
,esiden,ial density shall be determi,,ed by mn,,ip,ying ,he number of dwel,ing uni,s by the number of
persons per unit by the ratio of the number of acres of park land required for each 1,000 persons (i.e., .005).
Credits given for proposed parks will be under the discretion of the Temecula Community Services District
(TCSD) Director.
Whenever the actual amount of land to be dedicated is less than the amount of land required to be dedicated,
the subdivider shall pay fees for the fair market value of any additional land that otherwise would have been
required to be dedicated plus 20% for offsite improvements.
']For subdivisions containing 50 parcels or less only the payment of fees may be required; provided however,
that wheu condominium project, stock cooperative or community apartment project exceeds 50 dwelling units,
the dedication of land may be required even though the number of parcels may be less than 50.
~']Less than 5 Parcels
Subdivisions containing less than five (5) parcels wt71 be subject to the following condi~ons: Upon the request of a
bu#Iding permit for construction of residenlial sbltctures on one Or more of the parcels within four years foftowing
approval of a tonta~ve map, parcel map, or planned developmonk real estate development stock coopera~ve,
:omrnunity aparZment project and condominium for which a tentalive map or parcel map is filed, a predetermined
Quimby Act fee in the amount equal to the fair market value of reqdred acreage fPlus 20% for offsiN improvementsJ
shaft be paid by the owner of each such parcel(s) as a condRion to the issuance of such permit as authorized by
Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 as amended through Ordinance No, 460.93.
The lollowing chart has been prepared to assist staff in calculating requirements of the existing Quimby
Ordinance:
Dwellings
F1 l<ea
~_] l{ea)
["] 1 (ea)
['] 2(ea)
["] 3 or 4(ea)
["q 5 or More
Persons Per
Type Dwelling Unit Acres Required*
Single Family (Detached Garage) 2.98 .01490
Single Family (Attached Garage) 2.59 .01295
Mobile home 2.64 .01360
Dwellings Units Per Structure 2.48 .01320
Dwelling Units Per Structure 2.34 .01240
Dwelling Units Per Structure 2.72 .01170
* Plus 20% for offsite improvements.
Gary L. King, Park Development Coordinator (TCSD)
Date:
FIRE DEPARTMENT
_- 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE * PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92370
~. (714) 657-3183
GLEN J. NEWMAN
FIRE CHIEF
March 25, 1991
TO: CITY OF TEMECULA
ATTN: PLANNING DEPT
RE: PARCEL MAP 24785
With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land
division, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection
measures be provided in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or
recognized fire protection standards:
FIRE PROTECTION
Schedule H fire protection. An approved standard fire hydrant (6"x4"x2~")
shall be located so that no portion of the frontage of any lot is more
than 500 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 GPM
for 2 hours duration at 20 PSI.
The applicant/developer shall provide written certification from the
appropriate water company that the required fire hydrants are either
existing or that financial arrangements have been made to provide them.
The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed
and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible
building material being placed on an individual lot.
MITIGATION
Prior to the recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with
the City of Temecula, a cash sum of ,400.00 per lot/unit as mitigation
for fire protection impacts.
All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to
the Planning and Engineering staff.
RAYMOND H. REGIS
Chief Fire Department Planner
By fi~7
Laura Cabral, Fire Safety Specialist
C] INDIO OFFICE
79-733 Counw/Club Drive, Suite F. lndio, CA 92201
(619) 342~886 · FAX (619) 775-2072
PLANNING DIVISION
FI TEMECULA OFFICE
41002 CounB, C,-nte~ Drive, Suitt 225, Tensecub, CA 92390
(714) 694-5070 * FAX (714) 694-5076
FI R1VEIlSIDE OFFICE
3760 12th S~t, Riveside, CA 92501 ~ printed on recycledpaper
(714) 275-4777 · FAX (714) 369-7451
COUNTY OF RI\. .~SIDE DEPARTMENT OF HEAL%_
· ENVIRON~IENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DIVISION
LAND USE SECTION
3575 Eleventh Street Mall
Riverside, CA 92501
AZ CEL
REGIONAL TEAM
SCHEDULE --~ ORD. 460
WAIVER REQUEST? ~O
THE DEPA2~T~fENT OF HEALTH HAS REVIEWED THE ~P DESCRIBED ABOVE. IF
THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS TRAj~SM!TTAL, CONTACT 787-6543.
OUR REC0~{MENDATIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS:
~ Envkot~'tenlal Heilh 6enlca8 DIvision (~S~ ~ ~ the a~ve hr~
M~ a~ wh~e ~ ~e ~ ~l~ ~ mcek~ ~ Fellm~aq information relatl~ to
~b3~rfac9 ~la~ dis~l or co~tion to sewer~ or domestic ~; suCp~y, ff is
our ~nz~dem~ cphd~ that the ~Hs th~ rn~ht ~e encountcr~J ~n th: ~ a~',~a may
b~ conducive to eff~tive su~jrface u,~v~a~;e ~sal. Some dH~icu:~y may
~unt~r;~ in effi~t disposai front m~.~:dua; sewage disp~al ayeterns and
d ~lj ch~ct~M~s in t~ ~rea thefc ,~:y [~e a requirement for e~qnsive grad~q~
~p~Uon, ~tlng, et¢ ~1~ to r~ordaficn of the final map, an ~i ~ls~,
~INI~ ~ ~1 ~ ~1~ for review ~d apeoval W the ~SD.
FOR .IEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
HF "TH FOR EFv'iP~iNML~
E~ ZH
(Title)
KENNETH L. EDWANDe: lees MARKlIT STREET
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
June 14, 1989
Riverside County
Planning Department
County Administrative Center
Riverside, California
Attention:
Regional Team No. 1
Lisa Cooke
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re: Parcel Map 24785
This is a proposal to divide 5 acres into 2 lots in the Santa
Gertrudis Valley area. The site is located on the northwest
corner of Kimberly Lane and Liefar Road.
A large watercourse with a drainage area of about 70 acres tra-
verses the central portion of the site. There is adequate area
outside of the watercourse for building sites.
Following are the District's recommendations:
This parcel map is located within the limits of the
Murrieta Creek/Santa Gertrudis Valley Area Drainage Plan
for which drainage fees have been adopted by the Board.
Drainage fees shall be paid as set forth under the provi-
sions of the "Rules and Regulations for Administration of
Area Drainage Plans", amended February 16, 1988:
Drainage fees shall be paid to the Road Commissioner
as part of the filing for record of the subdivision
final map or parcel map, or if the recording of a
final parcel map is waived, drainage fees shall be
paid as a condition of the waiver prior to recording
a certificate of compliance evidencing the waiver of
the parcel map; or
At the option of the land divider, upon filing a re-
quired affidavit requesting defermerit of the payment
of fees, the drainage fees may be paid to the Build-
ing Director at the time of issuance of a grading
permit or building permit for each approved parcel,
whichever may be first obtained after the recording
of the subdivision final map or parcel map; provided
however, this option to defer the fees may not be
exercised for any parcel where grading or structures
have been initiated on the parcel within the prior 3
year period, or permits for either activity have been
issued on that parcel which remain active.
Riverside County
Planning Department
Re: Parcel Map 24785
- 2 - June 14, 1989
The natural watercourse that traverse Parcels 1 and 2
should be delineated and labeled on the environmental
constraint sheet. A note should be placed on the en-
vironmental constraint sheet stating that the watercourse
must be kept free of all buildings and obstructions.
A copy of the environmental constraint sheet and the
final map should be submitted to the District for review
and approval prior to recordation of the final map.
Questions concerning this matter may be referred to Kris Flanigan
of this office at 714/787-2333.
c: Benesh Engineering
~~~r~oH. KASHUBA
· r Civil Engineer
KF:bjp
October 30, 1990
Board of Dtrectors:
deffrey L. Minkler
Stephen M, Silla
Richard D. Steffey
John F. Hennigstr
Phillip L. Forbes
Thomas R. MeAljester
Edward P. Lemons
Linda M. Fregoso
McCormick Kidman
City of Temecula
City Hall
43172 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California 92390
SUBJF_.Er: Water Availability
Reference: Parcel Map 24785
Gentlemen:
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the
boundaries of Rancho California Water District. Water service, therefore,
would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between
RCWD and the property owner.
Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an
Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to
RCWDo
If you have any questions, please contact Senga Doherty at (714) 676-4101.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Engineering Manager
F186~kt423f
cc: Senga Doherty
Engr. Files
Rancho California Water District
February 14, 1991
~ -;7''~
:IiVE:DiDE COUntY
PLAnnin(E DEi a:eCmEnC
Geo Soils, Inc.
24890 Jefferson Avenue
P.O. Box 490
Murrieta, CA 92362
Attention: John P. Franklin
Subject:
Liquefaction Hazard
W.Oo 413-A-RC
Tentative Parcel Map 24785
A.P.N.: 9147-280-020
County Geologic Report No.
City of Temecula
776
Gentlemen:
We have reviewed your report entitled
Evaluation, Tentative Parcel Map 24785,
County, CA," dated November 8, 1990.
"Preliminary Liquefaction
Murrieta Area, Riverside
Your report determined that the liquefaction potential at the site
is considered to be low. Your report recommended that loose
alluvial soils within the ephemeral stream tributary on the site
shall be removed and recompacted in areas proposed for settlement
sensitive improvements.
It is our opinion that the report was prepared in a competent
manner and satisfies the additional information requested under the
California Environmental Quality Act review and the Riverside
County Comprehensive General Plan. Final approval of the report is
hrereby given.
The recommendations m~de in your report for mitigation of lique-
faction potential shall be adhered to in the design and
construction of this project.
Very t~uly yours, ~~
R VERSIDE OUNTY PLAN IN )E~ TMENT
J eph A Richards, la r
~ngin A. Kupfer~o istF~
CEG-1205
SAK:jb
cc: Benesh Engineering - Michael Benesh
City of Temecula, Planning - Steve Padovan
4080 LEMON STREET, 9TH FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787-6181
79733 COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE, SUITE E
BERMUDA DUNES, CALIFORNIA 92201
(619) 342-8277
RECE, ZVL;D ' 7
ALUC
RIVERSIDE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
3499 Tenth Street Riverside, California 92501 (714) 788-9770 (714) 788-1415 [FAX]
January 4, 1991
File No.: FV-90-115
Case: Parcel Map No.
Benesh Engineering
28991 Front Street, Suite 105
Temecula, California 92790
Dear Sir:
SUBJECT: RIVERSIDE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
On December 20, 1990, the Riverside County Airport Land
Commission (ALUC) approved the above-referenced project.
project was approved subject to the following conditions:
An avigation easement shall be granted by the property
to the French Valley Airport.
Should you have any questions, please contact
(714) 369-9577.
Very truly yours,
Marlene Hagman
Development Specialist
MH:sa
FV90115
cc: Steve Lee
City of Temecula /
24785
Use
The
owner
me at
CITY OF TEMECULA
ttk ~
VICINITY MAP
CASE NO.'~t
· ?,~tTe~
P.C, DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA )
pROPEF
:13 .--
/
/
~ \
SWAP MAP
CASE
P.C. DATE/O-,~I
CITY OF TEMECULA )
S P ZONE
CZ 5101
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 24785
r-
CASE ·
P.C. DATE
ITEM #7
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
June 3, 1991
Case No.: Conditional Use Permit No. 11
Prepared By: Mark Rhoades
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning
Commission:
ADOPT Resolution No. 91 -
approving Conditional Use Permit No.
11 based on the analysis and Findings
contained in the Staff Report and
subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
Robert C. Vecchione/Eduardo J. Lopes
Barbara Elias
Request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow
automotive sales by individual owner at an existing
parking lot.
27919 Front Street
M-M (Manufacturing - Medium)
North:
South:
East:
West:
C-P-S (Scenic Highway
Commercial )
M-M ( Manufacturing - Medium )
1-15 Freeway
M-M (Manufacturing - Medium)
Not requested.
Office Building
North:
South:
East:
West:
Retail Center
Parking Lot
Offices/I-15 Freeway
Packing House
A:CUP11
BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Within the M-M (Manufacturin9 - Medium) zone,
Section 11.26.f. of Ordinance 30,8 states that a use
may be permitted or conditionally permitted
provided that the use is similar in intensity and
character as other designations listed in that
section. The Planning Director has determined that
the proposed use of an automobile sales lot by
individual owner is similar in character to permitted
uses such as parking lots, truck and trailer sales
and rental and mobile home sales. The proposed use
was also determined to be similar to conditionally
permitted uses such as swap meets. The Planning
Director has also determined that this use is
appropriate, provided the Planning Commission
approves a Conditional Use Permit.
The proposed Conditional Use Permit is an
application to conduct automotive sales from an
existing parking lot. The proposed sales will take
place on weekends only, and will be conducted on an
individual by owner basis. The proposed parking
lot is located at the northwest corner of Front Street
and Las Haciendas Street.
The proposed site currently supports an office
building. The existing office building only has one
tenant that operates on weekends and parking for
that tenant has been adequately provided for. Of
the 116 parking spaces on site, 10, are set aside for
the tenant who will remain open on the weekend.
Required parking for the open sales area use is 11~
spaces. Those spaces will be kept available for
"customer" parking. A total of 28 spaces will be set
aside for uses other than auto sales. Staff has
received a letter from the property owner indicating
that with the exception of the one existing weekend
use, no future tenants will be permitted to operate
on weekends for as long as the proposed use exists.
A condition relevant to this matter has been
included in the Conditions of Approval.
The applicant will not be occupying any space
within the existing building, therefore, no signs
will be allowed. Temporary signs {i.e., weekend
use) are not permitted under Ordinance 3~8 except
for political purposes and real estate sales.
A:CUP11 2
GENERAL PLAN,
ZONING AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
FINDINGS AND
SUPPORTING FACTS:
If the Planning Commission approves the proposed
Conditional Use Permit, then the ordinance
interpretation will be that the use in question will be
in conformance with the M-M {Manufacturing -
Medium) zoning designation. Surrounding zoning
includes M-M and C-P-S { Scenic Highway
Commercial ).
The SWAP designation for the proposed site is
Commercial. The proposed use is commercial and
would therefore be consistent with SWAP.
The proposed Conditional Use Permit is a Class 1
Categorical Exemption per the CEQA Guidelines.
The site of the proposed use together with
the on-site parking required and provided is
suitable in size to accommodate the proposed
intensity of use.
The proposed use will not have a substantial
adverse effect on abutting property of the
permitted use there of. The proposed use is
not on scale of intensity to impact adjacent
USeS ·
The site for the proposed use has adequate
access to the fully improved Jefferson Avenue
as evidenced in the site plan for C.U.P. 11.
As conditioned, the project will not have a
si9nificant adverse effect on the environment
as the project is categorically exempt per the
CEQA Guidelines.
There is a reasonable probability that the
project will be consistent with the City's
General Plan once it is adopted, based on
analysis in the staff report and the proposal's
conformance with existing applicable
ordinances and Conditions of Project
Approval.
A:CUP11
There is not a probability of detriment to, or
interference with the future adopted General
Plan Land Use if the proposed use is
ultimately inconsistent with the new General
Plan. The proposed use is of insignificant
scale in the context of regional development.
Further, if found to be ultimately
detrimental, the use is subject to termination
under City ordinance provisions contained in
Section 18.30 of City Ordinance No. 348
These findings are supported by Staff
analysis, minutes, maps and exhibits,
associated with this application and herein
incorporated by reference.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- approving
Conditional Use Permit No. 11 based on the
analysis and Findings contained in the Staff
Report and subject to the attached Conditions
of Approval.
MR:ks
Attachments:
Resolution
Conditions of Approval
Exhibits
A:CUP11 4
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO, 11 TO PERMIT OPERATION OF AUTOMOBILE
SALES BY INDIVIDUAL OWNER LOCATED AT THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF FRONT STREET AND LAS
HACIENDAS STREET.
WHEREAS, Robert C. Vecchione and Eduardo J. Lopes filed CUP No. 11
in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and
Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said CUP application was processed in the time and manner
prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said CUP on June 3,
1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in
support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
approved said CUP;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
| 1 ) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
a)
There is a reasonable probability that the
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
A:CUPll 5
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, {hereinafter "SWAP" ) was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within
the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as
its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely
fashion with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed CUP is consistent with the SWAP and meets
the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to
wit:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The Planning Commission finds, in approving projects
and taking other actions, including the issuance of
building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the
following:
a)
There is reasonable probability that CUP No.
11 proposed will be consistent with the
general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
D. {1) Pursuant to Section 18.26{e), no CUP may be
approved unless the applicant demonstrates the proposed use will not
be detrimental to the health safety and welfare of the community, and
further, that any CUP approved shall be subject to such conditions as
shall be necessary to protect the health, safety and general welfare of
the community.
A:CUP11 6
12 ) The Planning commission, in approving the proposed
CUP, makes the following findings, to wit:
a)
The site of the proposed use together with
the on-site parking required and provided is
suitable in size to accommodate the proposed
intensity of use.
b)
The proposed use will not have a substantial
adverse effect on abutting property of the
permitted use there of. The proposed use is
not on scale of intensity to impact adjacent
USES ·
c)
The site for the proposed use has adequate
access to the fully improved Jefferson Avenue
as evidenced in the site plan for C.U.P. 11.
d)
As conditioned, the project will not have a
significant adverse effect on the environment
as the project is categorically exempt per the
CEQA Guidelines.
e)
There is a reasonable probability that the
project will be consistent with the City~s
General Plan once it is adopted, based on
analysis in the staff report and the proposal's
conformance with existing applicable
ordinances and Conditions of Project
Approval.
f)
There is not a probability of detriment to, or
interference with the future adopted General
Plan Land Use if the proposed use is
ultimately inconsistent with the new General
Plan. The proposed use is of insignificant
scale in the context of regional development.
Further, if found to be ultimately
detrimental, the use is subject to termination
under City ordinance provisions contained in
Section 18.30 of City Ordinance No. 348
g)
These findings are supported by Staff
analysis, minutes, maps and exhibits,
associated with this application and herein
incorporated by reference.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECT ION 3, the CUP proposed
is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
A:CUPll 7
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
The proposed Conditional Use Permit is a Class 1 Categorical Exemption
per the CEQA Guidelines.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves CUP
No. 11 for the operation of automobile sales by individual owner located at the
northwest corner of Front Street and Las Haciendas Street subject to the following
conditions:
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
SECTION 4.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3 day of June, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held
on the 3rd day of June, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
A:CUP11 8
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Conditions of Approval
Conditional Use Permit No. 11
Commission Approval Date:
Planninq Department
1. No signage shall be allowed by this permit.
This conditional use permit shall be subject to Planning Commission review
every five {5) years. The permit shall remain active until such times as the
Commission determines that the use is not in conformance with the approved
conditions of approval.
Applicant shall maintain a minimum of 12 parking spaces for use for the
existing weekend building tenant.
No repair or mechanical maintenance of vehicles will be permitted on site.
The conditional use permit may be revoked pursuant to Section 18.30 of
Ordinance 3~,8.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to any use allowed
by this permit.
The primary use of the property shall be restricted to the individual private
sale by owner of automobiles. No other uses shall be allowed by this permit.
The permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officers, and employees from any claims, action, or
proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officers, or employees
to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 11. The City of Temecula will promptly
notify the permittee of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City
of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to
promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails
to cooperate fully in the defence, the permittee shall not, thereafter, be
responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula.
Prior to any use allowed by this permit, a letter of clearance must be
submitted from the Riverside County Fire Department.
10.
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of approval date; otherwise
it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever.
A:CUP11 9
11. In the event the use hereby permitted ceases operation for a period of one ( 1 )
year or more, this approval shall become null and void.
12. Fourteen parking spaces shall be kept for "customer" use.
13.
For as long as this use exists no present or future tenants will be permitted
to conduct normal operating hours on Saturdays or Sundays, with the
exception of the Creative Arts Gallery.
Enqineerinq Department
The following are the Engineering Department Conditions of Approval for this
project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Engineering
Department.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, the
developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Engineering Department;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise; and
Parks and Recreation Department.
15.
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities
imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public
facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the
project, in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim
or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally
established by the date on which Developer requests its building permits for
the project or any phase thereof, the Developer shall execute the Agreement
for Payment of Public Facility Fee, a copy of which has been provided to
Developer. Developer understands that said agreement may require the
payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees) and specifically waives its right to protest
such increase.
A:CUP11 10
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
VICINITY MAP
CASE NO.
P.C- DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA )
RLI
C
CASE
SWAP MAP ) P.C. DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
!
/
CZ 5008
!
\ M -SC
~ CZ 3173
· ,~ CZ 915
M SC
CZ 4102
/C
CZ 1706
CASE
ZONE MAP ) P.C. DATEG'*2-/
CITY OF TEMECULA )
"~'
~'~ 0
<~"' ~ ."' ,, ,
.~T'- , J '
The. Creati~e Arts ~ui~in~
c~ss NO.Ctj.~"~t -
P.c. DATE(~-Z~,--q.t J
TOMISLAV GABRIC & ASSOCIATES
architecture - planning - interior
27919 Front St., Suite 201, Temecula, CA 92390
714/699-9115 213/404-3456 FAX 714/699-4428
l~ay 29, 1991
Plarrdng Depeu bl=nt
City of Tene~,l-
43180 Busin~ Park Drive
Temcu]a, c-l~ornia 923q0
Re: AP ~9Zl-050-013/Plot phn 9243
~he property o~er agrees that no present (excepting the Ck-eative Arts C~l lery) c~ future
teeants will he permitted to conduct nornnl operating hours on Saturdays or Sundays.
Further, the property o~ner undeTstands that conditions will be impesed with an approval
of C.U.P. No. 11. It is also understood that violation of said conditions will result
in the revocation of t. he C.U.P. pursuant to ~ 348 of the City of Ternera,In.
j ~
ITEM #8
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Prepared By: Scott Wright
June 3, 1991
Case No.:
Conditional Use Permit No. 2
Revision No. 1
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning
Commission:
ADOPT Resolution 91 -
approvin9 Conditional Use
Permit No. 2, Revision No. 1
subject to the Findings and
Analysis contained in this report
and subject to the Conditions of
Approval in the attached Staff
Report.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
Larry Gabele
Markham and Associates
To construct a multi-tenant automotive center with
8,663 square feet of retail area and 21,458 square
feet of service area.
Abutting the west side of Ynez Road and the east
side of 1-15, approximately 200 feet north of the
intersection of Ynez Road and Solana Way.
C-P-S
Scenic Highway Commercial
North:
South:
East:
West:
C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial)
C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial )
C-1 / CP { General Commercial )
1-15
Not requested.
Vacant
A:CUP2-A 1
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ANALYSIS:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant (approved auto dealership)
Vacant
Retail Commercial
)-15
No. of Acres:
Building Area:
Proposed Use:
Parking Provided:
No. of Service Bays:
3.0
21,458 sq.ft. auto service
8,663 sq.ft. retail
30,121 sq.ft.
Automotive retail and
service center
171 spaces
29
Conditional Use Permit No. 2 was approved by the
City of Temecula Planning Commission on September
17, 1990. On October 9, 1990, the City Council
approved a motion to Receive and File Conditional
Use Permit No. 2.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2 was originally
submitted to the Riverside County Planning
Department on December 19, 1989. The applicant
submitted a request for Special Review of Parking in
conjunction with the original a.pplication. The
applicant stated that the service uses in the
proposed center would be quick turn around
services such as lube and tune and tire shops
rather than engine repair, body shops, or other
automotive services which generate needs for longer
term parking. On this basis, County Planning Staff
was willing to allow 50% of the service bays to count
toward satisfying the parking requirement. The City
has also adopted the policy of counting the service
bays as parking spaces in similar cases. The
approved site plan provided 172 parking spaces
which was 93% of the total required by Ordinance
348.
The applicant requests a permit revision to allow an
increase of 274 square feet of auto service area to
Building "B" and to delete one parking space. The
proposed changes will result in a total of 21.458
square feet of auto service area and 8,663 square
feet of retail space.
Impact of Proposed Revision on Required Parkin.q
Ordinance 348 requires automotive service uses to
provide parking at the rate of one space per 150
square feet or four spaces per service bay,
whichever is greater. One space per 150 square
feet or 143 spaces is the larger figure. 43 spaces
A:CUP2-A 2
GENERAL PLAN AND
ZONING CONSISTENCY:
are required for the retail portion of the project.
The total parking requirement is 186 spaces. 171
spaces are provided. The number of spaces
provided is 92% of the total required by Ordinance
3q.8.
The parking requirement for automotive service
uses is even more stringent than the retail
commercial parking requirement of one space per
200 square feet. No distinction is made between
engine and body work shops and those which
provide quicker services. For these reasons Staff
is willing to support the applicant~s request that 15
of the 29 service bays be counted toward satisfying
the parking requirement.
The proposed revision does not effect the overall
site. Therefore, the Conditions of Approval
adopted for Condtional Use Permit No. 2 will remain
in force as they sufficiently cover the City's and
Staff's concerns regarding this project.
Land Use
The proposed multi-tenant automotive service and
retail center is consistent with the Southwest Area
Community Plan designation of the site for
commercial land uses. The Scenic Highway
Commercial zone permits automotive service uses
subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
Scenic Hiqhway Corridor
The site is located adjacent to 1-15 which is
designated as a scenic highway. The Southwest
Area Community Plan contains the following scenic
highway policies which are applicable to this
project: the design and appearance of new
structures within the scenic highway corridor shall
be compatible with the setting or environment: all
new development shall maintain a 50 foot setback
from the highway right-of-way; the size, height,
and type of on-site signage shall be the minimum
necessary for identification and shall blend with the
environment; and substantial landscaping and
vegetation shall be utilized to protect and enhance
the view from the scenic highway.
The site plan indicates a substantial landscaped
area 15 feet wide along the 1-15 right-of-way. The
building setback from the 1-15 right-of-way is 56
A:CUP2-A 3
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
FINDINGS:
feet. The site plan and elevations have been
revised to eliminate service bays from the west
elevation facing the highway. The site plan
satisfies the requirement to provide landscaping
equal to 11% of the parking area adjacent to State
and scenic highways.
A Negative Declaration was adopted in conjunction
with the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2.
The proposed revision is categorically exempt from
the requirements of CEQA per Section 15303, Class
3 because it involves a minor increase in approved
building area which will increase the total
occupancy load by fewer than 30 persons, and will
not generate a significant amount of additional
traffic.
The proposed use is in conformance with the
Southwest Area Plan designation of the site
for commercial uses and is permitted in the
Scenic Highway Commercial zone subject to
approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
The project will not adversely affect adjacent
properties in that the on-site parking
provided is adequate to serve the proposed
intensity of development, the developer is
required to protect downstream properties
from damages caused by any alteration of
current drainage patterns, and the project is
similar to those proposed and developed in
the area.
The site is adequate to allow the proposed
development in a manner not detrimental to
public safety in the area in which the site is
located in that the on-site parking is
adequate to serve the proposed intensity of
development. All drive aisles are of adequate
width to accommodate on-site traffic
circulation, and the amount of landscaped
area satisfies the applicable requirements.
The intersection of Ynez Road and Solana
Way, 200 feet south of the site, is currently
functioning at peak hour Level of Service F.
The project could temporarily aggravate the
poor level of service until new street
improvements provide an acceptable level of
service at the intersection. Construction of
the new improvements is expected to begin in
A:CUP2-A 4
December of 1991 as part of Community
Facilities District 88-12. The proposed
additional floor area is not expected to
generate enough additional traffic to
constitute a significant impact on the Level of
Service at the intersection.
A reciprocal access agreement with the
adjacent property owner north of the site is
required to provide adequate access to the
site.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
ADOPT Resolution 91 - approving
Conditional Use Permit No. 2, Revision No. 1
subject to the Findings and Analysis
contained in this report and subject to the
Conditions of Approval in the attached Staff
Report.
SW: ks
Attachments:
Resolution
Conditions of Approval
CUP No. 2 Staff Report
Exhibits
A. Vicinity Map
B. Revised Site Plan
C. Previously Approved Site Plan
A: CUP2-A 5
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 2, REVISION NO. 1 TO PERMIT OPERATION
OF AN AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE AND RETAIL CENTER
WITH AN INCREASE OF 274 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR
AREA AND THE DELETION OF ONE PARKING SPACE
LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD
APPROXIMATELY 200 FEET NORTH OF 5OLANA WAY.
WHEREAS, Larry Gabele filed CUP No. 2, Revision No. I in accordance
with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances,
which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said CUP Revision application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said CUP Revision on
June 3, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either
in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said CUP Revision;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE C)TY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findlnqs. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty {30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
~1 ) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
a)
There is a reasonable probability that the
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
A: CUP2-A 6
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 2, REVISION NO. 1 TO PERMIT OPERATION
OF AN AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE AND RETAIL CENTER
WITH AN INCREASE OF 274 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR
AREA AND THE DELETION OF ONE PARKING SPACE
LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD
APPROXIMATELY 200 FEET NORTH OF SOLANA WAY.
WHEREAS, Larry Gabele filed CUP No. 2, Revision No. 1 in accordance
with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances,
which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said CUP Revision application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said CUP Revision on
June 3, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either
in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said CUP Revision;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty 130) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
A:CUP2-A 6
a)
There is a reasonable probability that the
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within
the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as
its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely
fashion with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed CUP Revision is consistent with the SWAP
and meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government
Code, to wit:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The Planning Commission finds, in approving projects
and taking other actions, including the issuance of
building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the
following:
a)
There is reasonable probability that CUP No.
2, Revision No. 1 proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
b}
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
A:CUP2-A 7
D. {1) Pursuant to Section 18.26(e), no CUP may be
approved unless the applicant demonstrates the proposed use will not
be detrimental to the health safety and welfare of the community, and
further, that any CUP approved shall be subject to such conditions as
shall be necessary to protect the health, safety and general welfare of
the community.
12 ) The Planning commission, in approving the proposed
CUP, makes the following findings, to wit:
a)
The proposed use is in conformance with the
Southwest Area Plan designation of the site
for commercial uses and is permitted in the
Scenic Highway Commercial zone subject to
approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
b)
The project will not adversely affect adjacent
properties in that the on-site parking
provided is adequate to serve the proposed
intensity of development, the developer is
required to protect downstream properties
from damages caused by any alteration of
current drainage patterns, and the project is
similar to those proposed and developed in
the area.
c)
The site is adequate to allow the proposed
development in a manner not detrimental to
public safety in the area in which the site is
located in that the on-site parking is
adequate to serve the proposed intensity of
development. All drive aisles are of adequate
width to accommodate on-site traffic
circulation, and the amount of landscaped
area satisfies the applicable requirements.
d)
The intersection of Ynez Road and SoJana
Way, 200 feet south of the site, is currently
functioning at peak hour Level of Service F.
The project could temporarily aggravate the
poor level of service until new street
improvements provide an acceptable level of
service at the intersection. Construction of
the new improvements is expected to begin in
December of 1991 as part of Community
Facilities District 88-12. The proposed
additional floor area is not expected to
generate enough additional traffic to
constitute a significant impact on the Level of
Service at the intersection.
A:CUP2-A 8
e)
A reciprocal access agreement with the
adjacent property owner north of the site is
required to provide adequate access to the
site.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECT ION 2, the CUP proposed
is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
SECTION 2. Conditions.
That the city of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves CUP
No. 2, Revision No. 1 for the operation and construction of an automotive service
center with an increase of 27~, square feet of floor area and the deletion of one
parking space located on the westerly side of Ynez Road approximately 200 feet north
of Solana Way subject to the following conditions:
A. Attachment 2, attached hereto.
SECTION 3.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of June, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held
on the 3rd day of June, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
A:CUP2-A 9
ATTACHMENT 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Conditional Use Permit No. 2
Fdrmerly Plot Plan No. 1169q
Council Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
October 9, 1990
October 9, 1991
Planninq Department
The use hereby permitted by this Conditional Use Permit is for an automotive
center with 21,117 square feet of service area and 8,82q square feet of retail
area ·
The permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents officers, and employees from any claims, action, or
proceeding against the City or its agents, officers, or employees to attack,
set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City of Temecula, its advisory
agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Conditional User
Permit No. 2. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the permittee of any
such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will
cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the
permittee of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully
in the defense, the permittee shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend,
indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula.
This approval shall be used within one ( 1 ) year of approval date; otherwise,
it shall become null and void and of no affect whatsoever. By use is meant
the baginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval
within the one (1) year period which is thereafter diligently pursued to
completion, or the baginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this
approval.
The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as
shown on plot plan marked Exhibit 3, or as amended by these conditions.
In the event the use hereby permitted ceases operation for a period of one
( 1 ) year or more, this approval shall become null and void.
Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly
upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way.
The applicant shall comply with the street improvement recommendations
outlined in the Conditions of the City Division of Transportation Engineering
contained herein.
STAFFRPT\CUP2 1
10.
11.
12.
13.
15.
16.
17.
The applicant shall comply with the conditions of approval of the City
Engineering Department contained herein.
Water and sewerage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance with
the provisions set forth in the Riverside County Health Department's
transmittal dated January 19, 1990, a copy of which is attached.
Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County
Flood Control District's transmittal dated April 11, 1990, a copy of which is
attached.
Fire protection shall be provided in accordance with the appropriate section
of Ordinance No. 5~,6 and the County Fire Warden~s transmittal dated March
30, 1990, a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the
Riverside County Geologist's transmittal dated March 7, 1990, a copy of
which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the
Department of Transportation transmittal dated January LI, 1990, a copy of
which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the San
Bernardino County Museum transmittal dated December 22, 1989, a copy of
which is attached.
All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with approved
landscape, irrigation, and shading plans prior to the issuance of occupancy
permits. An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed and a)) landscaped
areas shall be maintained in a viable growth condition. Planting within ten
{ 10) feet of an entry or exit driveway shall not be permitted to grow higher
than thirty 130) inches.
Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, nine 19) copies of a
Parking, Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shadin9 Plans shall be submitted to
the Plannin9 Departmerrt for approval. The location, number, genus,
species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. Plans shall meet all
requirements of Ordinance No. 31)8, Section 18.12, and shall be accompanied
by a filin9 fee as set forth in Section 18.12, and shall be atrmTlpanied by a
filing fee as set forth in Section 18.37 of Ordinance No. 3LI8.
A minimum of 172 parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with
Section 18.12, Riverside County Ordinance No. 3u,8. 172 parking spaces
shall be provided as shown on the Approved Exhibit No. 3. The parking
area shall be surfaced with l asphaltic concrete paving to a minimum depth of
3 inches on u, inches of Class II base. ) Idecomposed granite compacted to a
minimum thickness of three 13) inches treated with not less than 1/2 gallon
per square yard of penetration coat oil, followed within six months by an
application of IIL~ gallon per square yard of seal coat oil. )
STAFFRPT\CUP2 2
18.
A minimum of 5 handicapped parking spaces shall be provided as shown on
Exhibit No. 3. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be
identified by a permanently affixed reflector/zeal sign constructed of
porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the international Symbol
of Accessibility, The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area
and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum
height of 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished
grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space
finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a
conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-street parking facility, not
less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously stating the
following:
"Unauthorized vehicles not displaying distinguishing
placards or license plates issued for physically
handicapped persons may be towed away at owner's
expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed at __
or by telephoning "
In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place
shall have a surface identification sign duplicating the symbol of accessibility
in blue paint of at least 3 square feat in size.
19.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain clearance
and/or permits from the following agencies:
City Engineering
Environmental Health
Riverside County Flood Control
Fire Department
Written evidence of compliance shall be presented to the Land Use Division
of the Department of Building and Safaty.
20.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the following additional and/or
revised plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval:
Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Plans
Parking and Circulation Plans
20 . a. The applicant shall submit a signing program prior to occupancy.
21.
Building elevations shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on
Exhibit No. 2.
22.
Materials used in the construction of all buildings shall be in substantial
conformance with that shown on Exhibit No. 1 IColor Board).
23.
Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from ground view. Screening
material shall be subject to Planning Department approval.
Prior to the final building inspection approval by the Building and Safaty
Department, a six foot high decorative block wall or combination landscaped
earthen berm and deco~'atlve block wall shall be constructed along the
STAFFRPT\CUP2 3
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
easterly 120 feet of the north property line and the entire length of the south
property line. The required wall and/or berm shall be subject to the
approval of the Director of the Department of Building and Safety and the
Planning Director.
If the owner of the property south of the subject property submits a
discretionary application within two years of the approval of this application
or prior to occupancy of the project in question, and said application shows
a building located on the south property line shall not be required to
construct said wall where the building on the adjacent property abuts the
property line.
The trash enclosures which are adequate to enclose a total of b, bins shall be
centrally located within the project, and shall be constructed prior to the
issuance of occupancy permits. Each enclosure shall be six feet in height
and shall be screened from external view.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen canopy trees along
streets and within the parking areas.
Any oak trees removed with four {u,) inch or larger trunk diameters shall be
placed on a ten 110) to one ( 1 ) basis as approved by the Planning Director.
All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans
submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check approval
and shall comply with the requirements of Riverside County Ordinance No.
655 and the Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan.
This project may be located within a subsidence or liquafaction zone. Prior
to issuance of any building permit by the City of Temecula, a California
Licensed Soils Engineer or Geologist shall submit a report to the Building and
Safety Department identifying the potential for subsidence or liquafaction.
Where hazard of subsidence or liquefaction is determined to exist,
appropriate mitigation measures must be demonstrated.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and
submit a written report to the Planning Director demonstrating compliance
with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of this permit and
its Initial Study which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a grading
permit.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall prepare and
submit a written report to the Planning Director of the City of Temecula
demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation
measures of this permit and its Initial Study which must be satisfied prior to
the issuance of a grading permit.
Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, the applicant shall prepare and
submit a written report to the Planning Director of the City of Temecula
demonstr.~ing complianca with all remaining conditions of approval and
mitigation measures of the permit and its Initial Study.
STAFFRPT\CUP2 ~
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall comply with
Ordinance No. 663 by paying the fee required by that ordinance which is
based on (the gross acreage of the parcels proposed for development) (the
number of single family residential units on lots which are a minimum of one-
half ~1/2 ) gross acre in size). Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by
the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the
fees required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required
under the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or
resolution.
1 Class III bicycle racks shall be provided in convenient locations to facilitate
bicycle access to the project area.
35.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, performance securities, in amounts
to be determined by the Director of Building and Safety to guarantee the
installation of plantinge, walls, and fences in accordance with the approved
plan, and adequate maintenance of the planting for one year, shall be filed
with the Department of Building and Safaty.
36.
Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, all required landscape planting
and irrigation shall have been inatalled and be in a condition acceptable to
the Director of Building and Safety. The plants shall be healthy and free of
weeds, disease, or peats. The irrigation system shall be properly
constructed and in good working order.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or
any use allowed by this permit.
39. Engine repair or body work services shall be prohibited.
Enqineerinq Department
The following are the Engineering Department Conditions of Approval for this
project, and shall be cornplated at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Engineering
Department.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmltted for further consideration.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
A detailed Drainage Study will be required to be submitted to the City
Engineer for review and approval. The Study shall be prepared by a
Registered Civil Engineer and shall include existing, interim, and proposed
conditions, including hydrolagy and hydraulic calculations.
STAFFRPT\CUP2 5
Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk
drains shall be installed to City Standards.
A permit shall be required from CalTrans for any work within their right-of-
way.
The developer shall submit two ( 2 ) copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
The developer shall submit two (2) prints of a comprehensive grading plan
to the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform
Building Code and Chapter 70 as may be additionally provided for in these
Conditions of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 21~"x36" mylar by a
Registered Civil Engineer.
The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance
of building permits.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the
prevailing Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new
development. The charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to
issuance of permits. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge
has already credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Department prior
to commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-
d-way.
No grading shall take place prior to the improvement plans being
substantially complete, appropriate clearance letters and approval by the
City Engineer.
If grading is to take place between the months of October and April, erosion
control plans will be required. Erosion control plans and notes shall be
submitted and approved by the Engineering Department.
50.
The developer shall comply with the requirements of the City Engineer based
on the recommendations of the Riverside County Flood Control District.
51.
The developer shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage
flowing onto or through the site.
52.
The applicant shall obtain clearance and/or permits from the following
agencies:
Eastern Municipal Water District
City Engineer
Environmental Health
Fire Department
Planning Department
Riverside County Flood Control
STAFFRPT\CUP2 6
Rancho California Water District
Riverside Transit Agency
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
53.
54.
All work done within the City right-of-way shall have an encroachment
permit.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards
and shall be shown on the street improvement plans.
55.
56.
Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall deposit with the
Engineering Department a cash sum as established per acre as mitigation for
traffic signal impact.
The design and construction of improvements for Ynez Road shall be bonded
for in the event that the Mello Roos does not construct the required public
improvements in accordance with County Standard No. 100A {110'/13~,' ).
57.
Dedication shall be made of the following right-of-way on the following
streets:
DEDICATE YNEZ ROAD TO 67' FEET FROM STREET CENTERLINE
58.
Non-vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for Ynez Road
except for one driveway located at the north property line.
59.
60.
The developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the
adjacent property.
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public
facilities imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and
public facility mitigation as required under the El R/Negative Declaration for
the project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time
of payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or
district has not been finally established by the date on which developer
requests its building permits for the project or any phase thereof, the
developer shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a
copy of which has been provided to developer. Concurrently, with
executing this Agreement, developer shall post a bond to secure payment of
the Public Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square
foot, not to exceed $10,000. Developer understands that said Agreement
may require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated {assuming
benoflt to the project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this
Agreement, developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this
Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee
district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic
impact fee for this project; provided that developer is not waiving its right
to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount
thereof.
61. Prior to building permit, the subdivider shall notify the City's C.A.T.V.
STAFFRPT\CUP2 7
Franchises of the intent to develop. Conduit shall be installed to C .A .T .V.
Standards prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATION OF OCCUPANCY:
62.
Construct full street improvements on Ynez Road including but not limited
to curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway
trees and street lights.
63.
Ynez Road shall be improved with concrete curb and gutter located 55 feet
from centerline and asphalt concrete paving, within a 67 foot half-width
dedicated right-of-way in accordance with Riverside County Standard No.
100A, (110/13~,).
Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along all public street frontages in
accordance with Riverside County Standard Nos. L~00 and u,01.
65.
The street design and improvement concept of this project shall be
coordinated with adjoining developments.
66.
All signing and striping shall be installed per the City standards and the
approved signing and striping plan.
67.
Prior to occupancy, a sign shall be installed prohibiting left turns from the
project site.
68.
The traffic signal at Ynez Road and Solana Way shall be installed and
operational per the City Standards, special provisions and the approved
traffic signal plan prior to occupancy.
69.
A signing and striping plan shall be under design by a registered traffic
engineer, and approved by the City Traffic Engineer and the City Engineer,
for all streets 66/q~, or wider and shall be included ~n the street improvement
plans.
70. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation
Engineering for the design criteria.
Buildinq S Safety Department
71.
The applicant shall fill out an application for final inspection. Allow two (2)
weeks processing time to obtain all required clearances prior to final
inspection.
STAFFRPT\CUP2 8
FIlM:
County of Riverside
DEPARTMENTOFHEALTH
P!VEPSiDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPT, 1ATE:
ATTN: Jonn Rlstcw
'~'/~ if '~N
~I ' TAL HEALTH SPECIALIST IV
PLOT PLAN 11694
The Environmental Health Servxce~ ha~ revlewed Flct
Plan 11694 and has no oblectlons. Sanitary sewer an~ water
services are available ~n th~s area. Prior first L.D.C
meetlno, the follow~nO ~tems w~ll De submitted:
1, "WIll-serve" letters from the water and sewerln~
If there are to De any hazardous materials, a
clearance le~r from the Environmental HeaLth
Services Hazardous Materials ManaGement Branch
<Jon Mohoroskl, 358-5055), w~ll De re~u~red
~ndlcatlno that the Drolect has Deen cleared for:
a. UnderOround storaue tanks,
b. Hazardous Waste Generator Services,
Hazardou~ Waste DIsclosure
accordance with AB 2185),
d, Waste reduction management,
SM:tac
cc: .3on Mohoroskl, Hazar'dous Materials Branch
jAN 3 1990
RIVER61DE COUNTY
PLANNING DcPARTMEN'F
April 25. 1990
Riverside County Division
of Environmental Health
Land Use Section
Post Office Box 1370
Riverside, California 92502
~UBJECT: Water. -.~'ailability
:ference: Parcel Map 23960, Lot 2
(Ynez Auto Center)
Gentlemen:
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the
boundaries of Rancho California Water District. Water service, therefore,
would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between
RCWD and the property owner.
Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing
an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to
RCWD.
If you have any questions, please contact Senga Doherty at (714) 676-
4101.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brannon, P. E.
Engineering Manager
F012A/dpw76f
cc: Senga Doherty
TO:
FROM:
RE:
MEMORANDUM
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
We have reviewed this case and ask that the following items be
addressed on an amended map.
Topography should be shown or corrected.
Show proposed grading and drainage.
Show how the project would be protected from storm flows.
Move structures/pads out of low area.
Proposed diversions should be corrected.
Show existing and proposed channels, culverts, drain pipes
and other such facilities.
Show existing watercourses.
c: Applica.t {,IL..-(.,,.',,-AI.I/
~o. Planning Dept. 'J,A^ ~.',~..~
PLANNING & ENGINEERING
46-209 OASIS STREET. SUITE 405
LNDIO, CA 92201
(619) 342-8~6
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
FIRE DEPARTMENT
~N COOPERATION WITH THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF ~ORESTRY
AND FIRE PROTECTION
GLEN J NExA'MAN
FIRE CHIEF
3-30-90
PLANNING & ENGINEERING
3760 IITH STREET
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
(714) 787,6606
TO:
ATTN:
RE:
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JOHN RIgTOW
PLOT PLAN 11694 - AMENDED #1
With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced plot
plan, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures
be provided in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or recognized
fire protection standards: :
The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel
or construction of all commercial buildings using the procedure established
in Ordinance 546.
Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 2500 GPM
for a 2 hour duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, which must be
available before any combustible material is placed on the job sits.
A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants, on a looped
system (6"x4"x2{x2{), will be located not less than 25 feet or more than
165 feet from any portion of the building as measured along approvsd
vehicular travelways. The required fire flow shall be available from
any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system.
Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to
the Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant
types, location and spacing, and, the system shall meet the fire flow
requirements. Plans shall be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer
and the local water company with the following certification: "I certify
that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements
prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department."
The required fire flow may be adjusted at a later point in the permit
process to reflect changes in design, construction type, area separation
or built-in fire protection measures.
Install a complete fire sprinkler system in all buildings requiring a
fire flow of 1500 GPM or greater. The post indicator valve and fire
department connection shall be located to the front, within 50 feet of
a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from the building(s). A statement
that the building(s) will be automatically fire sprinklered must be
included on the title page of the building plans.
Subject: Ploc Plan 11694 Page 2
Install a supervised waterflow monitoring fire alarm system. Plans must be
submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation, as
required by the Uniform Building Code.
In lieu of fire sprinkler requirements, building(s) must be area separated
into square foot compartments, approved by the Fire Department, as per
Section 505 (e) of the Uniform Building Code.
A statement that the building will be automatically fire sprinklered
must appear on the title page of the building plans.
Install panic hardware and exit signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform
Building Code.
i1. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes.
12. Install portable fire extinguishers with a minimum rating of 2A-10BC.
Contact a certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment.
13.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall be
responsible to submit a check or money order in the amount of $413.00
to the Riverside County Fire Department for plan check fees.
14.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall deposit
with the Riverside County Fire Department, a check or money order equaling
the sum of 25¢ per square foot as mitigation for fire protection impacts.
This amount must be submitted separately from the plan check review fee.
15. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed in the
Building and Safety Office.
All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to the
Planning and Engineering staff.
RAYMOND R. REGIS
Chief Fire Department Planner
Laura Cabral, Fire Safety Specialist
ama
:iiVEqNDE COUIlCu,
PLAIlrlirlG, DEPA:IL'GIErlC
Hatch 7, lggO
(Reviled June 15, IggO)
Geo Scale, Inc,
24890 Jefferson Avenue
P.O. Box 490
Murrteta, CA 92362
ATTENTION: John P. ;ranklan
Albert ~. Kletet
SUBJECT:
Alqu!st-PrfoIo Special Studies 2cne/Ltque#actton Hazard
W.O. 27B-A-PC
Plot Plan No. 11694
A.P.N.:
County ~eologtc Report Nos. 691 and 692
Tamecull Area
Gentl~en:
we nave reviewed the seismic/geologic aspects of your report entitled
"Prellm!nary Soils and 6eelogle Update Report, Pencol 4 of Parcel Hap
23960, Off Of Ynez Road, TemeCula, Ca," dated July ~g, lgGg, and your addannum
dated February 27, 1990.
Your report determined that:
NO evidence for faulting.was found in the area of the previously
established fault setback zone on this site. The potentiml for ground
rupture at the site t$ considered low.
The Wildmar fault has been mJpped ~ust westerly of the subject
property. Peak horizontal ground acceleration from a maximum credible
earthquake of 7.5 magnitude on thts fault could exceed 0,789, ~eak
horIiO~tal ~rOU~d acceleration from a maximum probable earthquake on
thlS fault could exceed 0.749.
Secondary earthquake effects of lurchtn9 and/or localized ground
cracking COuld OCCur at thts site.
The potential for ts~naml or sefche is noC considered pertinent to {ira
develo1~nt.
4080 LEMON ~i'REET, 9TH FLOOR
' ' RfVERSfDE, CALIF"~RNIA 9L~
.__~.C/14) .l~?:aqal ._
/g1"39 COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE, QUITE ~
BERMUDA OUNEE.~. C, AL.iFCDRH,%A ~-G'%
{61g) 342-82??
County Beelogic RepCrt Nee. 6)1 and 692
Revised June 15, 1990
Page Z
5. The potential for surface flooding at the site, although considered
low, Cannot be en~Inely precluded.
6. Intlcatlons of major mass movement Or major landsliding have not been
observed cr reported on the site.
Some of the sandy soil lenses present tn the vicinity of 2e feet at
Boring B-3 have a potential for liquefaction. SubSidence due to
liquefaction would be localized to nil and no manifestation of
liquefaction is likely t~ Occur at or near the ground SurfaCe.
Your report recommended that:
Structural setbacks for faults are not warranted on this site,
The potential for surface flooding should be further evaluated by the
design engineer.
Geologic inspections should be performed during st te grading to veri fy
geologic conditions relative to faulting encountered both within or
outside of the Alqulst-Priolo Speotal Studies Zone.
4. ~n order to mitigate liquefaction potential and/or seismically induce~
dynamic settlement, all existing fill and topsoil over the entire site
within areas of setfluent sensitive improvements shall be removed.
The average depth of removal ~s estimated at 3 to 4 feet, however
localized deeper removals may be necessary.
5. The exploratory trench beckfill Should be cleaned out inspected by the
soils end!need, processed and replaced with fil( which has been
moisture condittoned to at least optimum moisture sontent and compacted
to a t least 90 percent of laboratory standard.
It is our opi~lon that the report was prepared in a competent manner consistent
with the present "state-of-the-art" and satisfies the requirements of the
Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones ~¢t, the associated Riverside County
Ordinance No. 547. rlnel approval of this report is hereby given.
County Geologic Report Nos. 6gZ ard 692
Revtsed ~ne I$, lgg0
the -eCO~Tnendat~onS made 4n County geologtc Report No. 278 F~r thts specific
p~rcel, Th~s rcyi31on applfes to both ~he fault setback zone end liquefaction
mlttgaUon measures.
The reConarenCations made in your report shall be adhered to in the design and
ConstrdCtlOn of tnts project.
very truly yours,
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANN!N DEPARTMENT
A, R1 'bards, Plan lng Direct
Sa, K:Jg
co: ~arkham and Associates - ida 5anchez
CDNG - Earl Hart
Butlding & Safety - Nom Lostb~ (Z}
Planning Team 5 - John Rtstow
~EPART~ENT OF TRANSPORTATION'
JZ N 08 1990 elo=ment
O8-Riv-15-5.9~/6.0
Your Reference:
RIVER~DECOUNTy PP Ii694
Df 14NNiNG e')~PARTM~NT
Planning Department
Attention Mr. John Ristow
County of Riverside
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside, CA 92501
Dear Mr. Ristow:
Thank you for the
No. 11694 located
Solana Way in the
opportunity to review the proposed Plot Plan
between Route 1-15 and Ynez Road, north of
Temecula area.
Please refer to the attached material on which our comments have
been indicated by the items checked and/or used by those items
noted under additional comments.
If any work is necessary withln the State highway right of
the developer must obtain an encroachment permit from the
Caltrans District 8 Permit Office prior to beginning work.
way,
If additional information is desired, please call Mr. Thomas 3.
Neville at (714) 585-4584.
Very truly yours,
/
H. N. LEWANDOWSK I
District Permits Engineer
Art
k , , , ' / ~ ' ' TM
[Your Referencey Date
Plan c~ecKer [Co Rue
;~E ~,'OL'LD
LIKE TO NOTE:
Ccx~tructicr~DenDi iticm w~-d.~ pre~mt or propoeed State n.~,t of ~ey s~ould be mvest'.~ted for
potethel h~rCbus ~este (asbe~, petroomful% etc.) and mzt~ated as per requ:.rerents of
re~uJ~tory a~es.
W~ plarm are ~b~i tted, p3~c~ c~nform to the req~e~ants of t.) attached 'l~andout".
expedite t~e revie~ pr~ and t~ne required for Plan
· . Alth~ the traffic and drainage generated by th~ proposal do not appear to have a s~ificant effect
al ~ state hl~y sw. stem, calsideratlal must be ~lvel to the c~m,l~_ive effect of calt~ devel~.~lc
ill rj%i~ arm. Ally n~m~.~:es n~'~-~ry tO ~tiBata r. he c11n,l~j.v~ ]~l~t Of t~f-ic arN~ dr~e snej_l be
provtde~ prior to or ~th development of the arm that n~r~citatas them.
appears that U~ traffic and drainage 8er4rated by ~ proposal o:~ld have a significant effect on
r~ha state hiah~ey system of the arM. Any ~eastres rwr~./to mitigate the traffic and drainage
~ portion of state rtiSh~ay is included in the C~l ifornla Z~ester F~ of State Hi~l~mays ~l_i~i~le
for Official q-~n~c H~say PrediCtion, and m the future }~ur aaer~y my wish to Imve rJtts route
officially designated a~ a state ~-~nlc hi-j)ay.
~ portl<m of state ,bi~ay has t~ officially ~latad as a state sceuc hi~y, and
zn r~h~s cornd~r should be calmtible vl~h the sceuc hilt. my concept.
It i~ rec~ ~mt there is considerable pub]/c concern about no~se levels adjacent to heavily
traveled hi~r~eys. Land development, in order to be cc~tible ~ith th~s c~rr. ern, my require sl~
noLie attanuaticfi nmm~Ee~. Develv~,~ of property sh~d Include any r)e~ry noise attaluatlal.
t~l REQUEST ~iAT THE ITSqS CHECKED BELOW BE INCLUDED IN IHE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
THIS PROJECT:
Normal right of way dedication to provide
half-width on the state highway.
Normal street improvements to provide
half-width on tile state highway.
Curb and 8utter, State Standard
alonS the state highway.
Parkin8 shall be prohibited along the state highway by painting the curb red
and/or by the proper placement of "no parking" signs.
__ radius curb returns be provided at intersections with the state highway.
A standard wheelchair ramp must be provided in the returns.
A positive vehicular barrier alon8 the property frontage shall be provided to
limit physical access to the s~ate highway.
Vehicular access shall not be developed directly to the state hiRhway.
Vehicular access to the state highway shall be provided by existing public road
connections.
Vehicular access to the state highway shall b: provided by standard
driveways.
Vehlclr!nr _~'~'~ sraj_l ~o~ De provl~w3 wl~,~'-j~ of ~e lntarsec:loc a:
.X
%'ehimd~- aces t~ t~e state ni~y
','~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a= !~ ~-~ ~ rate r!~y n.~.[ 3f .ay.
for ~ ~ :~ su~ ~y.
~t~ Of ~ ~e ~y. ~C,,lip c~tim ~d ~ ~ve ~ c,--,]~ ~ ~orn
P!mse refer co acrac. xeu adaiuic~al ca~ren~s.
REQUEST:
A cow of ~y crm~t. ions of appro~/or rev~ed approval.
A co~ of ar~ ckcuumts providi~] ~M~UC/L~ state hi~may right of ~ay upm re:orda:~an of r_me ~mlL
REQUEST LIE OPRO;~TUNITY TO REVIEW DURING THE APPROVAL PROCESS:
Any pro,~n~ to f,i.-:ner dev~lop ~ ~y.
A ~ of U~ ~fic or ~~ shay.
a ~ ~t of ~ ~c~ ~ Y~: ~,~.
A ~ ~t of ~ ~m f~ ~y ~ ~q ~ nu ~y ~ of ~y.
January 4, !~0
(Co-R~e-P~
P~ 1ie94
(Your Reference;
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
_. The Transmlttai letter, dated 12/22/89, Indicates an Asses_=orls
Parcel number which does not agree wI~h the AP numDer shown on
submitted slle plan.
2. The CalTrans Right-of-Way (R/W) shall be delineated wz~h ~ne
"NO ACCESS" symbol (see Sta~e R/W maps!.
3. ?~e required cross-sections (see attached "HANDCUT"~ ~all ex~enC
a mlnlmum cf 15 f~. beyond bo~h sides of ~ne R/W line.
~ATE: December 22, 1989
TO:
Assessor
Building and Safety - Land Use
Building and Safety - Grading
Surveyor - Ken Tetch
Road Department
Health - Ralph Luchs
Ftre Protection
Flood Control Otstrtct
Ftsh& Game
U.S. Postal Service - Ruth E. Oavldson
U,S, Ftsh i Wlldllfe Services
County Superintendent of Schools
Rancho California Water Dlstrtct
Eastern Hunfctpal Water DIstrict
California Ed¢ton - Daoug Davies
Southern California Gas
General Tellphone
Colttans t8
Ctty of Temecula
Temecula Unton School Dtstrtct
iVER DE COUntY
PLAnnm DEPA::ICliIEnC
Cormissto~er Turner
Sen 8elmardfno County Iquseum
Comuntty Plans
JAN I C 1990
PLOT PLAN 11694 - (Te 5) - E.A. 34633 -
Colbourn-Currter-No11 Architecture, Peter
Noll - Rancho California Area - F~rst
Supervlsortal Dtstrtct- W side of Ynez
Rd., between Winchester Rd. & Solana Way
- C-1/C-P Zone 3 Acres - REQUEST:
Automotive retail and service - Rod 119 -
A.P, 921-08Q-e53,54
Please revle~ the case described above, along with the attached case map. A Land
Olvtston Committee meettng has ben r, entathel,y scheduled for January 18, 1990, If It
dears, tt wtll then go to public hearing,
Your comments and recommendations are requested prior to January le. 1990 in order that we
may tnclude the In the staff repor~ for this particular case.
Should you have any questions regarding thts Item, please do not hesitate to contact
John Rtsto~ at 787-6356.
Planner
CONqENTS:
The parcel is located On the fosslllferous Pauba Formation. ConstructiOn excavation
will impact nonrenewable paleontologic resources.
The developer must retain a qualified vertebrate paleontologist to develop a site-specific
program to mitigate impacts to paleontologic resources. This program should include:
D~: rnnnltnrir~ nf ~T~N1 hy a aualified oaleontolo<lic monitor; (2) Oreparatlon of
recovered specimens, lncludln9 sediment processing for small vertebrate fossils; (3)
P t
{(F.J~i~lr fit ~ill~ill~sttlt}8 an eslLabllshed repository; and (z~) a report of findings with
f%omplete specimen inventory.
1/7/90 (~Z/"~ ~
Dr. Allan D. Griesemer, Museums Director
40eOLEMON' TREET
9TM FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
[714) 7876181 , ,_
48-209 OA818 STREET, ROOM 304
INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201
· "', '~t ~ta~-eg_~Z
MazcD. 7, 1~90
RiVER)iDE
PLA nln DEPa:eEI EfiC
Gee Soils, Inc.
24890 JaZZarson Avenue
l.O, Box 490
Harriers, CA ~2362
John F. Franklin
Albert R. Kleist
SUBJECT:
Plot Plan 11694
A.P.N.Z 949-210-004
Count Geologic Report No.'s 691
end
Tomecola Area
Gentiemen~
we have reviewed the seismic/geologic aspects of ~our report
entitled "Preliminar Soils end Geologic Update Report, Parcel 4
of Parcel Map No. 2~960, off of Ynez ~osd, Temecula, CA," da~ed
July 28, 1989, end ~our addendum dated Febroar3/21, 1990.
Your report determined thatl
He evidence for faulting was found in the Ires of the
previouly established fault setback zone on this s~te. Toe
potential f~r ground EUptUEe et ~he site Is c~nlidered 1o~.
The Wildsmar faui~ his been mapped Just washotly of
subject property. Peek ~orizontal ground acceleration Erom
· maximum credlble ear~:hquske of ~.S magnitude on this faui~
c~uld exceed 0.Te 9. Peek hcrigon~ol ground acceleration
· maximum probable earthquake on this ~ault could eMceed 0.~4
3. Secondary earthquake effects of lurching end/or localized
gEou~d cracking could oceur st this site.
4. The potential for tinsemi or so/the is not considered
pertinent to sits develolx~ent,
5. T~o potential for surface flooding s~ the site, sighsugh
considered low, oanno~ be entirely proeluded.
i. Zndioations of major s~as movmen~ or major landel~ding have
not been observed or zeposted os the site,
4000 LEMON ~'TREET. frH FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CAUR~RNIA ~1
7W'ZS COUNTRY CLUe DRIVE. 8U~ E
BERMUQA DUNES, CAUFORNLA ~201
~lg~
nil
C, eo Soils.
March 7, leg0
WaVe -2-
Some o~ the sandy soil lenses present in the vicinity o~ 20
feet at Boring B-3 have a potential for liquefaction.
Subsidence due to liquefaction gould be localized to nil and
no manifestation of liquefaction is likely to occur et or near
the ground surface.
YQur report racemac,dad thstx
1. S~ructural setbacks for faults are not warranted on this site.
The ~otentiel for surface flooding should be further evaluated
b~ the design engineer.
Geologic inspections Should be performed during site grading
to verify geologic conditions relative to faulting encountered
both within or outside of the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies
Zone.
In order to mitigate liq~efactioni~ten~ial and/or seismically
induced dynamic settlement. 011 existing fill sad topsoil over
the entire site within areas of settlement sensitive
improvements shall be removed. The everage depth of removal
i0 estimated at 3 tea feet, however locallied deeper removals
may be neoessary.
The esplorator~ ~reneh backfill should be cleaned out,
insposted by the eelis engineer, proseteed and replaced with
fill wh/oh has I~en s~/stu:e toadgrinned to st least optimum
moisture on.tent end ~mpe~ted to at least g0 percent
It is our opinion that the report was prepared in m competent
man~er consistent vl~h the present setate-of-the-art" and satisfies
~he re~uirements of %he &~q~iet-Pr/oi~ SpasAul $~ed/es SQnos
Lhe aoe~letedKtvorsideC~un~y Ordinaries No, 047. final
o~ ~hle re~r~ 10 horny
lC ehQuld be noted that the reo~mmtnde~ions made in your report nov
euperc~le ~e recommendations mode in County Geologic Report ~o.
2~0 for tale specific parcel. This revision applies to both ~he
fault ee=l>eok sons and liquefaction mitigation metenEat.
Very trMly yours,
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Prepared By: Scott Wright
September 17, 1990
Case No.: Conditional Use Permit No. 2
Recommendation:
1. Adopt the Negative Declaration
2. Adopt the Resolution Approving CUP No. 2
3. Approve CUP No. 2
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
Larry Gabele
REPRESENTATIVE:
Markham and Associates
PROPOSAL:
To construct a multi-tenant automotive center with
10,02u, square feet of retail area and 21,801 square
feet of service area.
LOCATION:
Abutting the west side of Ynez Road and the east
side of 1-15, approximately 200 feet north of the
intersection of Ynez Road and Solana Way.
EXISTING ZONING:
C-p~S
Scenic Highway Commercial
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
C-P-S ( Scenic Highway Commercial )
C-P-S ( Scenic Highway Commercial )
C- 1 / CP { General Commercial )
1-15
PROPOSED ZONING:
Not requested.
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant lapproved auto dealership)
Vacant
Retail Commercial
1-15
PROJECT STATISTICS:
No. of Acres:
Building Area:
Proposed Use:
Parking Provided:
No. of Service Bays:
3.0
21,117 sq.ft. auto service
8,82~ sq.ft. retail
29,9~1 sq.ft.
Automotive retail and
service center
172 spaces
29
STAFFRPT\CUP2 I
BACKGROUND:
Conditional Use Permit No. 2 was originally
submitted to the Riverside County Planning
Department on December 19, 1989. as Plot Plan No.
1169u,. The site is located in the C-P-S, Scenic
Highway Commercial zone. Automotive service and
repair is permitted in the C-P-S zone subject to
approval of a Conditional Use Permit. County
Planning Staff mistakenly accepted the application
as a Plot Plan in the belief that the site is located in
the C-1/CP, General Commercial zone, which does
not require a Conditional Use Permit for the
proposed use. After the County transmitted the
application to the City of Temecula, City Planning
Staff informed the applicant of the requirement to
submit a Conditional Use Permit application. The
applicant submitted supplemental application
materials and Plot Plan No. 1169u, was redesignated
Conditional Use Permit No. 2 on June 15, 1990.
The applicant submitted a request for Special
Review of Parking (Attachment C) in conjunction
with the original application. The applicant stated
that the service uses in the proposed center would
be quick turn around services such as lube and
tune and tire shops rather than engine repair, body
shops, or other automotive services which generate
needs for longer term parking. On this basis,
County Planning Staff was willing to allow 50% of the
service bays to count toward satisfying the parking
requirement.
At the County Land Development Committee (LDC)
meeting of January 18, 1990, the application was
continued to the LDC meeting of April 12, 1990,
pending submittal of a Traffic Study and either a
geology/liquefaction study or clearance from the
County Engineering Geologist based on geologic
reports submitted in conjunction with the site's
underlying parcel map. The County Geologist
provided clearance in the attached letter dated
March 7, 1990. At the LDC meeting of April
1990, the application was continued to the LDC
meeting of June ~, 1990, pending submittal of
revised west elevations deleting the service bays
facing the 1o15 Scenic Highway Corridor and a
revised traffic study. The application was
transmitted to the City of Temecula on April 17,
1990.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2 was scheduled for the
Planning Commission hearing of September 10, 1990.
At the hearing of September 10, 1990, the applicant
STAFFRPT\CUP2 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ANALYSIS:
requested a continuance to the hearing of
September 17, 1990 in order to revise the site pian.
The project is to construct a multi-tenant
automotive service and retail center with a 9ross
floor area of 29,9Ltl square feet, including 21,117
square feet of service area and 8,82~, square feet of
automotive retail area. The application includes a
request for Special Review of Parking.
Geoloqlc Hazards
County Geologic Reports No. 691 and No. 692 were
prepared for the underlying parcel map which
includes the subject property. The County
Engineering Geologist reviewed the Geologic
Reports with regard to the project in question.
Although the site is located in an Alquist-Priolo
zone, no evidence for faulting was found on the
site. The County Engineering Geologist found that
the report satisfies the requirements of the AlquistT
Priolo Special Studies Act. The recommendations of
the report relative to liquefaction and seismic
potential shall be Conditions of Approval for this
project. I See Attachment B, letter from County
Geologist. )
Paleontoloqic Resources
The San Bernardino County Museum Director
commented that the property in question is located
on the fossiliferous Pauba Formation, and that
excavation may impact non-renewable paleontologic
resources. Staff is recommending a condition of
approval that the developer comply with the
recommendations of the Museum Director during
grading of the site in order to prevent the loss of
non-renewable fossil resources.
SteDhen's Kanqaroo Rat Habitat
The site is located within the area designated by
Riverside County as habitat for the endangered
Stephence Kangaroo Rat. The impact of
development within the Kangaroo Ratis habitat shall
be mitigated by paying fees which will contribute to
the implementation of Riverside Countyis Habitat
Conservation Plan. No SKR survey was requested
by the County of Riverside Planning Staff.
STAFFRPT\CUP2 3
Mr. Palomar Street Liqhtinq Policy Area
The proposed project is located in the Mr. Palomar
Observatory Street Lighting Policy Area. in order
to prevent '~skyglow~ interference with the Mr.
Palomar telescope, low preasure sodium vapor
lighting shall be used.
Drainage
The site slopes downward gradually to the west and
drainage will flow to 1-15. Comments from the
California Department of Transportation indicate
that site drainage does not appear to have a
significant impact on the highway, but care should
be taken to preserve the existing drainage pattern
of the highway. There is a surface water ponding
area along the northwesterly side of the parking
area which serves as a detention basin to collect
storm runoff and slow the rate of downstream storm
runoff along the highway to levels which
downstream drainage facilities can accommodate.:
The pondtrig area shall be preserved when the
subject property is excavated and graded.
Traffic
The site is approximately 200 feet north of the
intersection of Ynez Road and Solana Way. The
intersection currently functions at a peak hour level
of service F, the poorest level of service. A median
will be constructed on Ynez Road which will prevent
left turns into or out of the site. Project generated
traffic will increase southbound through traffic on
Ynez by approximately 10%, northbound traffic on
Ynez by approximately 3%, and southbound traffic
on Ynez turning left onto Solana by approximately
12%,
According to the Traffic Study submitted by the
applicant, signalization of the intersection,
additional through traffic lanes, and additional turn
lanes are necessary to provide a level of service
C/peak hour level of service D or better at the
intersection of Ynez and Solana. A temporary
traffic signal at the existing street width will be
installed in the near future. Street widening will be
necessary to accommodate the required number of
lanes.
The additional street width, construction of the
median, and relocation of the temporary signal will
STAFFRPT\CUP2 ~
be funded by a Mello-Roos district. The district
has been formed, but design engineers have not yet
been selected and design criteria have not yet been
developed. The process of selecting consultants
and designing and constructing improvements could
take 12 months. If the proposed automotive center
is built and occupied before the street improvements
are constructed, there will be a temporary
worsening of the existing Ix~r level of service at
the intersection of Ynez and Solaria.
The Traffic Study was deemed acceptable by the
Transportation Engineering Staff.
Access and Internal Traffic Circulation
The site plan indicates a driveway L~0 feet in width
which will provide site access from Ynez Road for
the subject property and the adjacent property
north of the site. A reciprocal access easement
would be required for the shared driveway. All on;
site drive aisles are 2u, feet in width and adequate to
accommodate two way traffic circulation. Turn radii
are adequate for delivery and refuse collection
trucks.
Parkinq and Loadinq Zones
Ordinance 3u,8 requires automotive service uses to
provide parking at the rate of one space per 150
square feet or four spaces per service bay,
whichever is greater. One space per 150 square
feet or lu,1 spaces is the larger figure. uA spaces
are required for the retail portion of the project.
The total parking requirement is 185 spaces. The
site plan provides 172 parking spaces which is 796
Short of the total required by Ordinance 31&8.
The applicant submitted a Request for Special
Review of Parking on the basis that the proposed
automotive service uses will be restricted to the
quick turn around types of services rather than
engine or body repair services which typically
generate a demand for longer term, overnight
parking. Because the turn-around time would be
relatively short, the applicant requests that 13 of
the proposed service bays be counted toward
satisfying the parking requirement.
The County Land Development Committee originally
reviewed the Request for S ecial Parking Review
and agreed to count up to 50~ of the proposed bays
STAFFRPT\CUP2 5
GENERAL PLAN AND
ZONINC CONSISTENCY:
as parking spaces. The appiicant proceeded in
good faith based on this agreement with the County
Staff. Moreover, in order to address the concerns
of the City Pianning Staff, the appiicant has
reduced the building area and added three loading
zones.
The parking requirement for automotive service
uses is even more stringent than the retail
commercial parking requirement of one space per
200 square feet. No distinction is made between
engine and body work shops and those which
provide quicker services. For these reasons and
the circumstances cited above, the Staff is willing to
support the applicant's request that 12 of the 29
service bays be counted toward satisfying the
parking requirement.
Land Use
:
The proposed multi-tenant automotive service and
retail center is consistent with the Southwest Area
Community Plan designation of the site for
commercial land uses. The Scenic Highway
Commercial zone permits automotive service uses
subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
Scenic Hiqhway Corridor
The site is located adjacent to 1-15 which is
designated as a scenic highway. The Southwest
Area Community Plan contains the following scenic
highway policies which are applicable to this
project: the design and appearance of new
structures within the scenic highway corridor shall
be compatible with the setting or environment; all
new development shall maintain a 50 foot setback
from the highway right-d-way; the size, height,
and type of on-site signage shall be the minimum
necessary for identification and shall blend with the
environment; and substantial landscaping and
vegetation shall be utilized to protect and enhance
the view from the scenic highway.
The site plan indicates a substantial landscaped
area 15 feet wide along the 1-15 right-of-way. The
building setback from the 1-15 right-of-way is 56
feet. The site plan and elevations have been
revised to eliminate service bays from the west
elevation facing the highway. The site plan
satisfies the requirement to provide landscaping
STAFFRPT\CUP2 6
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMI NAT ION:
equal to 1196 of the parking area adjacent to State
and scenic highways.
An initial Study was prepared for Conditional Use
Permit No. 2 and is attached to this Staff Report.
(See attachment A, Initial Environmental Study. )
Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration
for Conditional Use Permit No. 2.
FINDINGS:
The proposed use is in conformance with the
Southwest Area Plan designation of the site
for commercial uses and is permitted in the
Scenic Highway Commercial zone subject to
approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
The project will not adversely affect adjacent
properties in that the on-site parking
provided is adequate to serve the proposed
intensity of development, and the developer
is required to protect downstream properties
from damages caused by alteration of
drainage patterns.
The site is adequate to allow the proposed
development in a manner not detrimental to
public safety or the area in which the site is
located in that the on-site parking is
adequate to serve the proposed intensity of
development. All drive aisles are of adequate
width to accommodate on-site traffic
circulation, and the amount of landscaped
area satisfies the applicable requirements.
The intersection of Ynez Road and Solana
Way, 200 feet south of the site, is already
functioning at level of Service F. The project
could temporarily aggravate the poor level of
service until street improvements which will
be constructed in approximately 12 months
provide an acceptable level of service at the
intersection.
A reciprocal access agreement with the
adjacent property owner north of the site will
be required to provide adequate access to the
site.
STAFFRPT\CUP2 7
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration;
ADOPT Resolution 90- approvincJ
Conditional Use Permit No. 2; and,
APPROVE Conditional Use Permit No. 2,
based on the analysis and findings contained
herein.
SW: ks
Attachments:
Exhibits: 1.
2.
3.
A. initial Environmental Study
B. Conditions of Approval
C. Request for Special Review
of Parking with supporting
letters.
Color Board
Elevations
Site Plan
Vicinity Map
STAFFRPT\CUP2 8
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNINC DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
li
Beckqround
1. Nee of Pro~nent:
Larry Gabele
Address end Phone
Muli~r of Fz~,lent:
4725 Executive Square, Ste. 1040
Data of ~vLronm~ntal
~sesmnt:
La Jolla, California 92307
(619) 587-1985
August 10, 1990
4. ~qency Rmqu~j.ng
~sses~nt:
CItY OF TEMXCULA
/ of ~.~posal,
if applicsble:
Location of Proposal:
Conditional Use Permit No. 2
(Formerly Plot Plan 11694)
The West side of Ynez Road, approx.
200 feet NOrth Of Solana way.
Environmental Impacts
(Explanations of Ill "yes" and "maybe" Inswars Ire provided on
attached sheets. )
YeJ Maybe
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Unstable mmrth c~nditions or in
changes in geologic substructures? X
b. Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcavering of the soil?
Substantial change in t~raphy
or ground surface relief features?
The destruction, cavering or medi-
firstion of any unique geelogic or
physical fem. ures?
Any substantial increase in wind or
water or~sion of soils, either on or
or ef/site?
Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltslion, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of ·
river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
ge
Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudstides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
2. Air. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air
quality?
b. The creation of objectionable
odors?
Alteration of air movement,
moisture, or temperature, or
change in climate, whether locally
or regionally?
3. Water. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or
fresh waters?
Substantial changes in absorption
riles, drainage patterns, or the
rile and amount of surface runoff?
Ce
Alterations to the course or flow
of flmxl waters?
d, Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
DilchBrge into surface waters, or
in any alteration of surface water
quality, including, but n~t limited
t~, temperature, dissolved oxygen
~ tu~bidity?
Alteration of the direction ~r rate
of flow of ground wilere?
Yes Maybe
X
X
X
X
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawsis, or through
interception of an squifar by cuts
or excavations?
h$
Substantial reduction in the amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as flood-
ing or tidal waves?
Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any native species of
plants (including tress, shrubs,
grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare, or endangered species
of plants?
Introduction of new species of
plants into In area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
d. Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop?
Animal Life. Will the proposal result
in:
a. Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, lend animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
qanisms or insects)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deteriorltion to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Yes
Mjybe
No
x
x
6. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
b, Exposure of people to severe noise
Light and Clare. Will the proposal
produce substantial new light or glare?
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
usa of lay natural resources?
Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal
involve:
A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances (including.
but not limited to, oil, poeticides,
chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
P~!}ulation. Will the proposal alter
the I~catlon, distribution, density, or
growth me of the human population of
an Irel?
H~using. Will the proposal affect
existing h~using or create · demand for
additional I~using?
Trenaportati~nlCirculation. WIll the
proposal result in:
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
Yes
X
Maybe
X
X
Effects on existing parking facitl-
ties, or demand for new parking?
Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
Alterltions to waterborne, rail or
lit trlffic?
Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
Public Services. Will the proposal have
substantial effect upon. or result in a
need for new or Iltered governmental
services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational
facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roods?
f. Other governmental services?
Energy. Will the proposal result in:
Use of substantial aunts of fuel
or energy?
Substantial increase in den. nd
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy?
Utilities. Will the proposal result In
I need for new eyetime, or substantial
· miterations to the following utilities:
a. Pewer or natural gas?
Yes
x
Maybe
X
No
x
18,
19.
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
a. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard ( excluding
mental health)?
Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
Aesthetics, Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities?
20. Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
ef a prehistoric or historic
8rchaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to ·
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
Ce
Does the proposal have the potential
to cause t physical chBnge which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact ares?
Yes
Maybe
X
X
X
X
X
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
Does the project have thl potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildIlls
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below ·elf
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prohistory?
Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-tam, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one
which occurs in · relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into
the future. )
Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumu-
Istively ~nsideroble? (A p~oject's
impact on two or more separate
resources may be tel·lively small,
but where the effect of the total of
those imp~ct~ on the environment
is significant. )
dJ
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substan-
tial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Yes
Maybe
X
N_9o
Ill. Environmental Evaluation
1.a,b.
1 .c,d.
1.e.
1.f.
1.g.
2.a.
2.b,c.
3.a,c,
d,f.
Yes. Fill and topsoil replacement to a depth of 3 to u, feet will occur.
Topsoil replacement is necessary to mitigate the potential for
liquefaction and subsidence. This is not considered a significant
impact.
No. The project will not result in substantial changes in topography or
destruction of unique geologic features. The site is flat, and
substantial changes in topography will not be required.
Maybe. The potential for wind and water erosion will increase during
construction. Wind erosion will be mitigated by the use of watering
trucks and planting vegetation after grading. Increased water runoff
due to the addition of impermeable surfaces will be accommodated by
drainage facilities as approved by the Engineering Department.
No. The site is not located near any body of water which would be
impacted by siltation or deposition.
No. County Geologic Reports No. 691 and No. 692 were prepared for:
the underlying parcel map which includes the subject property. The
County Engineering Geologist reviewed the Geologic Reports with
regard to the projact in questions. Although the site is located in an
Alquist-Pr)olo zone, no evidence for faulting was found on the site.
The geologic report stated that structural setbacks for faults are not
warranted on this site. Secondary earthquake affects of lurching or
localized ground cracking can be adequately mitigated by proper
structural design. The report also states that the potential for
liquefaction and/or seismically induced ground subsidence can be
mitigated by replacement of topsoil and fill to a depth of 3 to u, feet.
Localized deeper rentovals may be necessary. The County Engineering
Geologist found that the report satisfies the requirements of the
Aiquist-Priolo Special Studies Act. The recommendations of the report.
shall be Conditions of Approval for this project.
No. The project will not result in an increase in vehicle trips or an
increase in auto emissions. The nature of the project is not such that
it wilt attract substantial volumes of new traffic to the region.
No. The project will not involve any process which would create
objectionable odors or cause any alterations in the climate.
No. The site is not located near any streams or bodies of water.
Drainage will be directed to streets or to drainage facilities. The
project does not include any structure or excavation which would alter
the flow of direction of ground water.
5TAFFRPT\CUP2 8
3.b.
Yes. Increased runoff due to the addition of impermeable surfaces
be accommodated by drainage facilities as approved by the Engineering
Department.
Yes. During construction, the proposed project wili increase turbidity
in local surface water. This impact is temporary and is not considered
significant.
3.g.
No. The project will be served by the Rancho Water District and will
not involve any direct withdrawals or additions to ground water. Due
to the limited depth of excavation for soil replacement and compaction,
it is unlikely that ground water will be encountered.
3.i.
No. The site is not located in a flood zone.
Lka-d.
No. No unique, rare, or endangered plant species have been identified
in the area in which the site is located. The possible introduction of
new species of plants to the site as part of the required landscaping is
not considered a significant impact. The site is not used for any
agricultural crops.
Yes. The subject site is located within the area designated by
Riverside County as habitat for the endangered Stephen's Kangaroo
Rat. The impact of development within the Kangaroo Rat's habitat will
be mitigated by paying fees which will contribute to the implementation
of Riverside County's Habitat Conservation Plan.
6.a.
Yes. On-site noise levels will increase temporarily during construction
and in the long term due to increased traffic volumes. This is not
considered a significant impact because the surrounding land uses are
not noise sensitive and noise levels are unlikely to exceed State daily
average noise level standards.
6.b.
No. The proposed project and existing and future surrounding land
uses are commercial in nature and will not create severe noise levels.
Yes. The proposed project is located within the Mt. Palomar
Observatory Street Lighting Policy Area. In order to prevent
"skyglow" interference with the Mt. Palemar telescope, low pressure
sodium vapor lighting shall be used.
No. The proposed project is consistent with the designation of the site
and its vicinity for commercial land uses.
9.s,b.
No. The project will not result in a substantial increase in the rate of
consumption of any natural or non-renewable natural resource.
10.a.
Yes, The proposed automotive center will involve the use of motor oil
and may involve the use of other hazardous substances, The applicant
shall provide a list of hazardous substances which will or may be used
on the site and a submit a plan for their disposal to the County Health
Department.
STAFFRPT\CUP2 9
lO,b.
Maybe. If closure of a lane on Ynez Road during construction is
necessary, emergency vehicle response may be inhibited. Any street
or lane closures during construction shall be coordinated with the Police
and Fire Departments.
11.12.
Maybe. The project will provide additional jobs and could attract more
population to the area. However, the number of new jobs created will
probably not exceed 100, and at least some of the jobs will be taken by
current residents of the area. The increase in population and demand
for housing in the area due to this project are unlikely to be a
significant impact.
13.a.
No. The on-site parking provided is adequate to meet the needs of the
proposed land uses.
13.b.
13.c,d,e.
Yes. The proposed automotive center is required by Ordinance 3u,8 to
provide 230 parking spaces. The proposed site plan shows 171 parking
spaces and no loading zones. The potential for on-site peak hour
circulation and parking impaction is high and could cause retail
customers to attempt to park on adjacent properties.
No. The project will not impact public transportation systems, air
water, or rail traffic, or alter present patterns of circulation.
l~.a,b,
e,f.
Yes. The proposed project will require public services in the areas of
police, fire, road maintenance, and public facilities. Fire impact
mitigation fees and property taxes will provide adequate mitigation for
the additional need for public services generated by the project.
14.c,d.
Maybe. Any impact on schools or recreational facilities resulting from
an increase in population due to new employment opportunities will be
mitigated by Conditions of Approval upon new housing.
15.a,b.
No, The proposed project will not result in a substantial use or
increase in demand for fuel or other energy sources.
16.a-f.
No. The proposed project will not result in a need for substantial
alterations of existing utility systems.
17 .a,b.
Maybe, The project will involve the use of motor oil and may involve
the use of other hazardous substances. A llst of hazardous materials
which will or may be used at the site and a disposal plan shall be
submittad to the City and to the County Department of Environmental
Health Services.
18.
Maybe. The proposed project will not obstruct any scenic view
currently available to the public. However, the site is located adjacent
to the 1-15 scenic highway corridor. Building materials, colors, and
free-standing signage shall be compatible with the natural environment
and existing development. Free-standing signs shall be the minimum
Size necessary for identification. The landsoaplng adjacent to the 1-15
STAFFRPT\CUP2 10
19.
20.a-d.
21 .a,
21 .b.
21 .c.
21 .d.
r~ght-ot-way shall be substantial and shall provide significant
screening of the site from view from the freeway.
No. The site is not currently used for recreational purposes and is not
located in or near a potential recreational trail alignment.
Maybe. The site is located in an area of paleontological sensitivity and
near an area of sensitivity for archaeological resources. The developer
shall retain a qualified vertebrate paleontologist to develop a site-
specific program to mitigate potential impacts to paleontologic
resources. The program shall include monitoring of excavation,
preparation and curation of specimens, and a report of findings with a
complete specimen inventory.
Maybe. The project will not degrade the environment. Any potential
reduction in Stephen's Kangaroo Rat habitat would be compensated by
participation in the Kangaroo Rat habitat conservation program.
No. Long term project generated traffic impacts will be mitigated by
planned street improvements.
Maybe. The project could contribute to the existing poor level of-
service at the intersection of Ynez Road and Solana Way if it is occupied
prior to construction of street improvements at the intersection. The
project would increase southbound through traffic by 10% and
southbound traffic turning left on Solana Way by 13%. These are
relatively small impacts, but will aggravate the poor level of service due
to existing traffic and projected traffic due to other projects and
growth in the area. The poor level of service will be mitigated by
construction of street improvements which will probably occur in
approximately 12 months.
Maybe. The project will involve the disposal of used motor oil. Used
oil will be recycled and will not be disposed in a manner which will
pollute soil or ground water. The use of any other hazardous materials
will require a clearance from the County Department of Health.
STAFFRPT\CUP2 11
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and z NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find thlt although the proposed project could have a aigni-
ticant effect on the environment, there will not be a aignl-
ticant effect in this case because the mitigation masures
described on attache ahleta and in the Condition· of approval
have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
S find the proposed project MAY have · significant effect on
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
t
For CITY OF TEMECULA
ATTACHMENT C
GABElF & (:]MAN, CPA'S
June 14,
1990
Bcott Wright
Planning Department
City of Temecula
Parking Re~uirements for Plot Plan II1694
Dear Scott:
The purpose of thz~ letter ~s to give you the background and
logic behind the parking layout for our proposed Plot Plan
~11694.
Prior to our first LDC meeting with Riverside County in
JanuaTy 3990, we had one in-person meeting end several phone
conferences with the Planning Department and Traffic
Department to discuss the parking requirements for our
project. We were fully aware cf =he exlsting parking
requirements for auto service centers and the reasoning
behind these requirements. In discussing these requirements
with the Planning Department, we pointed out that our center
was not going to be using long-term parking type tenants such
as auto body shops or engine rebuilding facilities and that
in fact the majority of our tenants were going to he quick
turn type tenants. By 'quick turn' I mean operations such as
Precision Tune, Midas Brake and Mufflers, Big-O Tires. These
type tenants work on a quick turn highly scheduled and in-
and-out t~e customer.
The Riverside Planning Department simply requested that we
give copies of our ~ropoled leases to them to substantiate
the fact that we were not going to be using long term parking
type clients. With this information at hand the Riverside
Planning Department wee going to allow us to count one out of
every. two interior service bays in our buildings as perking
to meet the parking requirements of the county.
In addition, we split the use of our property to be some
retail and some auto service. For ~he retail portion, our.
parking was calculated on fxve spots for ever~ thousand
square teat of usage and on the service side our parking was
calculated on six spots for ever3[ thousand square feet of
usage
Page
At our initial January 1990 meeting with the LDC, these
issues were discussed and approved by =he planning group end
our plans have reflected tha~ de~ermine~ion from the= ~ime
on.
Should you have any further questions regarding
please feel free to call me e= (619) 587-1985.
JLG:Je
this matter,
truly
,tre ion
28, I~
San Diego Regional Offic~
...~._. -- .
Larry Gat'~le
YNEZ PARTNERS
4275 Executiv~ Square #1040
La Jolts, CA 920,t7
This is to clarify Precision Tune*s position on parking requirements for the center that will
he located on Yncz road in Tomecute,
Since the bulk of our business is based on quick convenient services, I.e, off changes and
tune ups, ~, majorit7 of our customers wait tn our writing room provided for their
convenience at our factlit7 for serdcei to be completed.
Approximjttely 309~ of our customers come to our centers for. oil change service, this k
s drive through ,crYice and no parking is required.
Approzimntely 50~ of our customers are tune up customers that will wait at our faclli~
for the completion of the repair work. Parking is only required for a short period of time
to wTite up a service order. Upon completion of the service the customers pick-up their
vehicles and depart from the premises as soon as the paper work Is completed concluding
t!',e trnnsactlon.
Only about ~0~ of our cuslorners will leave their vehicles with us for a perk~ longer
than required to service it.
Since the majority nf our customers wait at our facfiltles and their vehicles are nlway.~
serviced ~thin the comer Itself, the bay spaces should be coaldared as parking stalls and,
outside parking requirements are st t very minimum.
you have any further queStiON or concerns please feet free to contact me.
Sincer~/~,~ ,
RIchard A, Jarvii
Director of OperatiOns
KAJ/hm
41E 10 UNIVERSITY CTR. LANE · SUITE 300. SAN DIEGO. CA 12122 · (019) 597-2435. FAX 455.0169
A Itmfi'~|~n Co~pan~
aUl~ ~ ~990
Mr. Lorry Gabale
YNEZ PARTNERS
4275 Execu~4ve Squire. f1040
LI Jol~e, California g2031
Dear Mr. Gabele~
This letter ts to discuss M4daS' typical park(hg requirements for
e loteaton w~thtn an auto Servtce cen~er.
The ml3or4ty of MIdaS' servIce tnvolveS exhaust work and brake
work. The average number of CuStomerS tn ~h~l typ4cal stze Mtdas
store Is 20 per d~y, The everage exhaust job lasts about 20
mlnu~ess and the lverlOe brake Job lists Z7 mtnutls. TherefOre,
e large number of our cuStomerS walt In our lobby ares for their
cars to be completee,
we haul nO nel~ for overnight pirklng end, as you can lie, ver~
14~tle need for long-term parking, We feel %hit your Vnez Rome
auto service center has an abundlnCe of park~ng and that
cOnStderltaOn for parkartS wathln the ~ay$ 45 Certeanly ~uStlfaed.
It tS Our experaence that the auto body end paths humanesees and
englne overhaul t~Pe tenants t 11 h
t.vp Ca y lye I heavy long-term
parking requ~rmnt. ~ do not locate tn centers wlth these type
of co-tenants. ~1 ere e~xlous to enter the Timecull m~rketplice
Is soon as poss~b11, Please keep us updated el to your Ipprovll
process.
If ;you should have any questionS, please feel free to cil! me at
714/870-0411.
Charles P. Livens
Regtonel Reel Estate Maneget
ktltorn Area
:| .:,:l,I
!
! r!
isL:: ,
Z
I
c.
l.\.,.//i/U !
/
YNL='Z AUTO
CENTER
EXHIBi'T ~
SITE
_ RANCHO CALIFORNIA
TEMECULA
VICINITY MAP .o ,cAL.
RESOLUTION NO. 90-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2 TO
PERMIT OPERATION OF AN AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE/RETAIL
CENTER LOCATED ON THE WESTERLY SIDE OF YNEZ ROAD, 200
FEET NORTH OF SOLANA WAY.
WHEREAS, Larry Gabella filed CUP No. 2 in accordance with the Riverside
County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has
adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said CUP application was processed in the time and manner
prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said CUP on September 17,
1990, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in
support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commissior~
recommended approval of said CUP;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNINC COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated
city shall adopt a general plan within thirty 130) months following
incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject
to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the requirements of
state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the
following requirements are met:
~ 1 ) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation
of the general plan.
~2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking
other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of
the following:
There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action
proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal
being considered or studied or which will be studied within
a reasonable time.
STAFFRPT\CUP2 1
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to
or interference with the future adopted general plan if the
proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
Ic) The proposed use or action complied with all other
applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest
Area Community Plan, (heroinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the
incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of
Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City.
At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while
the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General
Plan.
C. The proposed CUP is consistent with the SWAP and meets the
requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit:
( 1 ) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of
the general plan.
{2) The Planning Commission finds, in approving projects anc~
taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits.
pursuant to this title, each of the following:
~a)
There is reasonable probability that CUP No. 2 proposed
will be consistent with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
Ib)
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to
or interference with the future adopted general plan if the
proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
D. Pursuant to Section 18.26[e), no CUP may be approved unless the
applicant demonstrates the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health
safety and welfare of the community, and further, that any CUP approved
shall be subject to such conditions as shall be necessary to protect the
health, safety and general welfare of the community.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the CUP proposed is
compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
SECTION 2, Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that the proposed project
will not have a significant impact on the environment, and a Negative Declaration,
thorafore, is hereby granted,
STAFFRPT\CUP2 2
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the city of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves CUP No. 2
for the operation and construction of an automotive service/ retai) center located on
the west side of Ynez Road, 200 feet north of Solana Way subject to the foliowin9
conditions:
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of
· 1990.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on
the 10th day of September, 1990 by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
STAFFRPT\CUP2 3
APPLICANT'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I have read, understand and accept the conditions for approval set forth herein
above in this Resolution of approval for CUP No. 2.
DATED: By
Name
Title
STAFFRPT\CUP2 ~
CITY OF T'E~ECULA )
Sl
VICINITY MAP
CASE NO. CUP N,,...LR
P.C. DATE ~,!:~lq t ) ~
..
-!
/ 7!'~f/{
'~!: Colboum.curr~,r. no ll
G ® G
I;
ti~ YNLrZ AUTO
Icotbo~ou_r,n:_c_ur~r,._n.
ITEM #9
Recommendation:
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
June 3, 1991
Case No.:
Change of Zone No. 11
Plot Plan No. 224
Parcel Map No. 26852
Prepared By: Steve Jiannino
That the Planning Commission recommend to the
City Council:
ADOPT a Negative Declaration for Change of
Zone No. 11, Plot Plan No. 22~, and Parcel
Map No. 26852;
ADOPT Resolution 91 - recommending
approval of Change of Zone No. 11 based on
the Findings contained in the Staff Report;
ADOPT Resolution 91 - recommending
approval of Plot Plan No. 224 based on the
Findings contained in the Staff Report and
subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval; and
ADOPT Resolution 91 - recommending
approval of Parcel Map No. 26852 based on
the Findings contained in the Staff Report
and subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
Bedford Development Co.
J.F. Davidson Associates and Herron 8 Rumansoff
Change of Zone from R-R ( Rural Residential) to C-
P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) on 2u, acres of a
97.3 acre site, construction of a 149,500 square feet
commercial center on 19.7 acres and subdivide 97.3
acres into 13 parcels with two remainder parcels.
Northwest corner of Margarlta and Winchester
Roads.
A:PP224 1
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
R-R ( Rural Residential)
North: R-R (Rural Residential)
South: R-R (Rural Residential)
East: R-R J Rural Residential )
West: R-R { Rural Residential )
PROPOSED ZONING: C-P-5
EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
SWAP DESIGNATION:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
( Scenic Highway Commercial )
North: Vacant/Industrial Commercial
South: Vacant
East: Vacant
West: Vacant
C I Commercial )
Project Area:
No. of Lots:
Proposed Zone Change:
No. of Buildings:
Total Building
Square Footage:
Total Parking Provided:
Total Parking Required:
Buildings are
Proposed on Lots:
97.32 acres
13 + 2 remainders
C-P-S on Lots 1-13
3
149,696 sq.ft.
859 spaces
749 spaces
and 13
The Change of Zone, Parcel Map and Plot Plan were
submitted to the City Planning Department February
20, 1991. The Plot Plan was requested previously,
but could not be processed without the zone change
due to the fact that the proposed use was not
consistent with the R-R zoning.
The project has been reviewed by the Development
Review Committee (DRC), both at a Pre-DRC and a
Formal DRC meeting. This site is within the
boundaries of Assessment District No. 161.
Construction has begun on the first phase
development of the Assessment District.
This construction includes the widening of
Winchester Road between Margarlta and Ynez
Roads, along with the Santa Gertrudis Creek Flood
Channel improvements.
The project has involved negotiations with GaiTtans
on the location and access to driveways along
Winchester Road. CalTrans has also been involved
A:PP224 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ANALYSIS:
in the discussions involving the signalization of the
two intersections shown on Plot Plan No. 224. The
applicant has received approval of the proposed
improvements and signalization for Winchester Road
as proposed for Plot Plan No. 224.
This project proposes a Change of Zone from R-R
(Rural Residential) to C-P-S (Scenic Highway
Commercial) on 24 acres, on proposed Lots 1-13 of
Parcel Map No. 26852, to subdivide 97.3 acres into
13 parcels with two remainder parcels and to
construct three retail commercial buildings totaling
149,696 square feet on Lots 4, 7 and 13 of Parcel
Map No. 26852 located on the northwest corner of
Margarita and Winchester Roads.
ChanqeofZone No. 11
Change of Zone No. 11 proposes a change in zoning
classification from R-R to C-P-S on 24 acres
fronting the north side of Winchester Road between
Margarita Road and RCWD well site No. 108. The
Southwest Area Plan (SWAP) designation for the
area is C, Commercial. The proposed C-P-S zoning
is consistent with the SWAP designation. An
industrial park development has been constructed
to the northwest of the site and the proposed
regional mall is being processed to the south across
Winchester Road. Winchester Road is being
improved as part of Assessment District No. 161 to
a 134 foot right-of-way urban arterial. The
Assessment District is also responsible for the
construction of flood control drainage ways and
main sewer lines. The first phase of the
construction has begun with major infrastructure
being done around this site.
Parcel Map No. 26852
Parcel Map No. 26852 is a proposal for a 13 lot
commercial subdivision of the 24 acres fronting the
north side of Winchester Road between Margarita
Road and RCWD well site No. 108 with two large
remainder parcels on a 97 acre site. The 13 parcels
cover the same area as being proposed for Change
of Zone No. 11. The remainder parcels are
separated from the other lots by Santa Gertrudis
Creek and Margarita Road.
A:PP224 3
The site is within the boundaries of Assessment
District No. 161. The Assessment District was
formed to provide major infrastructure
improvements along Winchester road within the City
and County boundaries. The first phase of
construction for the Assessment District is already
under way. The first phase improvements include
construction of Winchester Road from Margarita
Road to Ynez Road, the channelization of Santa
Gertrudis Creek, and portions of Margarita Road.
These improvements provide necessary
infrastructure for the construction of the proposed
commercial center within the proposed Parcel Map
boundaries.
The proposed access points for the parcels have
been tentatively approved by CalTrans. The
remainder of the frontage along Winchester Road
would have restricted access. The access points
also provide access to Rancho California Water well
sites. The developer will also record reciprocal
access and maintenance agreements between the
parcels for access, drainage and parking facilities.
The proposed Parcel Map conforms to the proposed
development for Plot Plan No. 22~, and possible
future development along the Winchester Road
frontage. Development is currently being proposed
for Parcels q, 7 and 13, with the other parcels being
available for future development.
The City is requesting a 25 feet wide easement along
Winchester Road for a future transportation
corridor as required by SWAP. The applicant is
protesting this requirement since it does not exist
on current developments and will not be easily
obtained in some areas. The 25 feet is not a
requirement of CalTrans, it is a part of the adopted
SWAP Transportation Plan.
Plot Plan No. 224
Plot Plan No. 224 proposes the construction of a
149,696 square feet commercial center. The project
consists of 3 buildings with a major building being
115,280 square feet. The proposed tenant for this
building is Costco. The other buildings are 23,916
and 10,500 square feet.
The proposal provides for two access points on
Winchester and Margarita Roads. The access points
on Winchester Road have been tentatively approved
A: PP22q. 4
GENERAL PLAN AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
by CalTrans with the access drive closest to
Margarita providing access to RCWD well site No.
110 and the project.
The proposed development complies with current
code development standards in regards to parking
and interior traffic circulation. The site design has
been reviewed by City Staff at Pre and Formal
Development Review Committee meetings. The
applicant has addressed Staff's concerns regarding
the site design for the project. The applicant made
modification to the parking layout and eliminated the
proposed development along Winchester Road at
Staff's request. Staff had concerns regarding the
free standing pad concept originally proposed along
Winchester Road. A Plot Plan application or other
appropriate City application will be required to be
processed and approved prior to any building
construction on any parcels other than Parcels 4, 7
and 13 of Parcel Map No. 26852. The overall
circulation and access points to Winchester and
Margarita Roads are being established with this
development.
The proposed architecture for the project is Neo
Mediterranean incorporating the use of stucco,
concrete tile roof treatment, concrete block,
parapet wall and archways. The applicant is
providing architectural treatment to the building by
the use of plant-on features to provide movement in
the flat building face. The increased architectural
treatment is being provided on the elevations that
face the public right-of-way.
The project is consistent with the SWAP designation
of C (Commercial) and 2-5 DU/AC (dwelling units
per acre). The area encompassing Change of Zone
No. 11 and Plot Plan No. 224 is designated C
( Commercial ), while the area designated 2-5 DU/AC
is the remainder portion of Parcel Map No. 26852.
The remainder area designated as 2-5 DU/AC is a
part of Specific Plan no. 255 which is currently
being processed by the City. The proposed Parcel
Map, Zone Change and Plot Plan are consistent with
other proposed developments along Winchester
Road. As such, it is likely that Change of Zone No.
11, Parcel Map No. 26852 and Plot Plan No. 224 will
be consistent with the ultimate City General Plan
when it is adopted.
A: PP224 5
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
FINDINGS:
Pursuant to applicable portions of the California
Environmental Quality Act ICEQA), an Initial
Environmental Assessment was prepared for the
project. Based on the assessment, a Mitigated
Negative Declaration is being recommended for
adoption.
Chanqe of Zone No. 11
The proposed Change of Zone will not have
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial
Study performed for the project. A Mitigated
Negative Declaration is recommended for
adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is compatible with the
surrounding proposed development, zoning,
and SWAP.
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference
with, the future adopted General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan, due to the fact that the project is
compatible with surrounding development and
improvements.
The site is physically suited for the proposed
Change of Zone in that required
infrastructure exists or is being provided in
the area including commercial roadways,
drainage facilities, and main sewer and water
lines.
The proposed Change of Zone is consistent
with the SWAP designation of C ( Commercial ).
The zone change will be beneficial by
providing an area for needed services and
employment.
A:PP22~ 6
FINDINGS:
Parcel Map no. 26852
The proposed Parcel Map will not have
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial
Study performed for the project. A Mitigated
Negative Declaration is recommended for
adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is consistent with the
surrounding proposed development, zoning
and SWAP.
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference
with, the future adopted General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan,due to the fact that the project is
consistent with surrounding proposed
development.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law due to the fact that
the project conforms to the current zoning
for the site and to Ordinance No.
Schedule E.
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density due to the fact that the project has
access to public roads and sufficient building
area.
The design of the subdivision or the
proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
initial study.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities due to
the fact that the lots are large enough to
provide sufficient southern exposure with
passive or active solar possibilities.
A: PP224 7
FINDINGS:
10.
11.
All lots have acceptable access to existing
and proposed dedicated rights-of-way which
are open to, and are useable by, vehicular
traffic. access is provided from Winchester
and Margarita Roads.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project as
conditloned. The project will not interfere
with any easements.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
Plot Plan No. 224
There is a reasonable probability that Plot
Plan No. 224 will be consistent with the City's
future General Plan, which will be completed
in a reasonable time and in accordance with
State law. The project, as proposed,
conforms with existing applicable city zoning
and development ordinances. Further, the
proposal as characteristic of similar
development approved by the City to date.
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference with
the City's future General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan. The project is of insignificant scale
in context of the broad goals and directives
anticipated in the City's General Plan.
The proposed use or action complies with
State planning and zoning laws. Reference
local Ordinances No. 348, 460; and California
Governmental Code Sections 65000-66009
Planning and Zoning Law).
A: PP224 8
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configuration, circulation
patterns, access, and intensity of use.
Adequate site circulation, parking, and
landscaping are provided; as well as
sufficient area to appropriately construct the
proposed structure, reference proposed Plot
Plan No. 224, Exhibit E of the Staff Report.
The project, as designed and conditioned.
will not adversely affect the public health or
welfare; nor will it adversely impact the built
or natural environment as determined in the
Initial Environmental Assessment of this
proposal. Reference the attached project
Conditions of Approval and Initial
Environmental Study.
The proposal will not have an adverse effect
on surrounding property, because it does not
represent a significant change to the present
or planned land use of the area. The project
conforms with applicable land use and
development regulations, and reflects design
aspects currently existing in the proposal~s
general vicinity.
The project has acceptable access to a
dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and
useable by, vehicular traffic. The project
sltems primary frontage is on Winchester
Road, a dedicated CaITrans right-of-way.
Improvement of the abutting roadways shall
be as per the City Engineering Department
and CalTrans.
The design of the project together with the
type of supporting improvements are such
that they are not in conflict with easements
for access through, or use of the property
within the proposed project. None are
exhibited on the underlying parcel map, nor
are easements evident on deed{ s) describing
the property in question.
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference. Supporting
documentation is attached.
A: PP224 9
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
recommend to the City Council:
ADOPTION of a Negative Declaration for
Change of Zone No. 11, Plot Plan No. 220,,
and Parcel Map No. 26852;
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
approval of Change of Zone No. 11 based on
the Findings contained in the Staff Report;
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
approval of Plot Plan No. 220, based on the
Findings contained in the Staff Report and
subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval; and
ADOPT Resolution 91 - recommending
approval of Parcel Map No. 26852 based on
the Findings contained in the Staff Report
and subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval.
SJ:ks
Attachments:
2.
3.
5.
6.
7.
Resolution for Change of Zone No. 11
Resolution for Parcel Map No. 26852
Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map No. 26852
Resolution for Plot Plan No. 220,
Conditions of Approval for Plot Plan No. 220,
Initial Study
Exhibits
A. Vicinity Map
B. SWAP Map
C. Change of Zone No. 11
D. Parcel Map
E. Plot Plan
F. Elevations
A:PP224 10
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
CZ-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL ZONE NO. 11
CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-R ( RURAL RESIDENTIAL)
TO C-P-S (SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL) ON
PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
WINCHESTER AND MARGARITA ROADS AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 910-110-029, 031; 910-180-026,
027; AND 910-130-028, 029, 031.
WHEREAS, Bedford Properties filed Change of Zone No. 11 in
accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision
Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Change of Zone application was processed in the time
and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Change of Zone on
June 3, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either
in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Change of Zone;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission
hereby makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
12 ) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
A:PP22~ 11
CZ-11
a)
There is a reasonable probability that the
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, { hereinafter "SWAP" ) was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within
the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as
its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely
fashion with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the
proposed Change of Zone, makes the following findings, to wit:
a)
The proposed Change of Zone will not have
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial
Study performed for the project. A Mitigated
Negative Declaration is recommended for
adoption.
b)
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is compatible with the
surrounding proposed development, zoning,
and SWAP.
c)
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference
with, the future adopted General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan, due to the fact that the project is
compatible with surrounding development and
improvements.
A:PP22~, 12
CZ-11
d)
The site is physically suited for the proposed
Change of Zone in that required
infrastructure exists or is being provided in
the area including commercial roadways,
drainage facilities, and main sewer and water
lines.
e)
The proposed Change of Zone is consistent
with the SWAP designation of C ( Commercial ).
The zone change will be beneficial by
providing an area for needed services and
employment.
D. The Change of Zone is compatible with the health, safety
and welfare of the community.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study was performed for this project when determined that
although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
no significant impact would result to the natural or built environment in the City
because impacts will be mitigated by adherence to the attached Conditions of
Approval which have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration,
therefore, is hereby granted.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves Zone
Change No. 11 to change the zoning on 2~, acres of land from R-R { Rural Residential)
to C-P-S l Scenic Highway Commercial ) on property located at the northwest corner
of Winchester and Margarita Roads.
SECTION
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of June, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
A: PP224 13
CZ-11
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held
on the 3rd day of June, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
A:PP224 14
ATTACHMENT 2
PM-26852
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
PARCEL MAP NO. 26852 TO SUBDIVIDE A 97.3 ACRE
PARCEL INTO 13 PARCELS AND 2 REMAINDER PARCELS
AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF WINCHESTER AND
MARGARITA ROADS.
WHEREAS, Bedford Properties filed Parcel Map No. 26852 in accordance
with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances,
which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Parcel Map application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Parcel Map on June
3, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in
support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Parcel Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months
following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
A: PP224 15
PM-26852
a)
There is a reasonable probability that the
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal bein9
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within
the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as
its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely
fashion with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed Parcel Map is consistent with the SWAP and
meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government
Code, to wit:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
| 2 ) The Planning Commission finds, in approving projects
and taking other actions, including the issuance of
building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the
following:
a),
There is reasonable probability that Parcel
Map No. 26852 proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
A:PP22u, 16
PN-26852
c)
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
D. (1) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No.
b,60, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are
made:
a)
That the proposed land division is consistent
with applicable general and specific plans.
b)
That the design or improvement of the
proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
c)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the type of
development.
d)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the proposed density
of the development.
e)
That the design of the proposed land division
or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
f)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
g)
That the design of the proposed land division
or 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 land division.
A land division may be approved if it is found
that alternate easements for access or for use
will be provided and that they will be
substantially equivalent to ones previously
acquired by the public. This subsection
shall apply only to easements of record or to
easements established by judgment of a court
of competent jurisdiction.
A:PP224 17
PM-26852
(2) The Planning Commission in recommending approval
of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to
wit:
a) The proposed Parcel Map will not have
signlficant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial
Study performed for the project. A Mitigated
Negative Declaration is recommended for
adoption.
b)
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is consistent with the
surrounding proposed development, zoning
and SWAP.
c)
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference
with, the future adopted General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan,due to the fact that the project is
consistent with surrounding proposed
development.
d)
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law due to the fact that
the project conforms to the current zoning
for the site and to Ordinance No. L160,
Schedule E.
e)
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density due to the fact that the project has
access to public roads and sufficient building
area.
f)
The design of the subdivision or the
proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
initial study.
A:PP22Ll 18
PM-26852
g)
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities due to
the fact that the lots are large enough to
provide sufficient southern exposure with
passive or active solar possibilities.
h)
All lots have acceptable access to existing
and proposed dedicated rights-of-way which
are open to, and are useable by, vehicular
traffic, access is provided from Winchester
and Margarita Roads.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed project as
conditloned. The project will not interfere
with any easements.
j)
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
k)
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Parcel Map
proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study was performed for this project when determined that
although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
no significant impact would result to the natural or built environment in the City
because impacts will be mitigated by adherence to the attached Conditions of
Approval which have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration,
therefore, is hereby granted.
A: PP224 19
PM-26852
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends
approval of Parcel Map No. 26852 for the subdivision of a 97.3 acre parcel into 13
parcels located at the northwest corner of Winchester and Margarita Roads subject
to the following conditions:
A. Attachment 3, attached hereto.
SECTION 4.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of June, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held
on the 3rd day of June, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
A: PP224 20
PM-26852
ATTACHMENT 3
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Parcel Map No: 26852
Project Description: 14 Lot Commercial
Subdivision with 2 Remainders, on 97 acres
located at the northwest corner of
Winchester and Marqarita Roads.
Assessor's Parcel No.: 911-180-026
Planninq Department
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule E, unless
modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in
accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request,
if made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
This conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the
approval date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance 460. The expiration
date is
The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor subject to all the
requirements of the State of California Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance
460.
The subdivider shall submit one copy of a soils report to the City Engineer
and two copies to the Department of Building and Safety. The report shall
address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site.
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordatlon of the final
map.
Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract
map boundary to a City maintained road.
All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall
continue in force until the governing body accepts or abandons such offers.
All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the City
Engineer. Street names shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer.
A: PP224 21
10.
11.
12.
13.
PM-26852
Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, the following agencies shall provide
written verification to the Engineering Department that all pertinent
Conditions of Approval and applicable regulations have been met:
Planning Department
Temecula Valley School District
Fire District
Engineering Department
County Health Department
Water District
Temecula Community Services District
Flood Control District
Eastern Municipal Water District
CalTrans.
Provide reciprocal access, parking and maintenance agreements between all
the parcels through an REA or CC&R's prepared by the applicant, reviewed
and approved by the Planning Director and City Attorney. Document to be
recorded with the final map.
The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations
outlined in the County Health Department's transmlttal dated April 2u, o 1991,
a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in
the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated April 15, 1991, a
copy of which is attached. If the project lies within an adopted flood control
drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of City of Temecula Land Division
Ordinance ~,60, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities
shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits.
The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined
in the County Fire Department's letter dated March 7, 1991, a copy of which
is attached.
All proposed construction shall comply with the California Institute of
Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy, as outlined in the
Southwest Area Plan.
Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following:
Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
development standards of the C-P-S { Scenic Highway Commercial ) zone.
Craded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed-free
condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or
provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the
Director of Building and Safety.
A:PP22u, 22
15.
16.
17.
18o
PH-26852
Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet
(ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate
identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the
office of the City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the
Planning Department for review and approval. The approved ECS shall be
forwarded with copies of the recorded final map to the Planning Department
and the Department of Building and Safety Geology Report on file.
The following note shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet:
"This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount PaiDmar
Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the
California Institute of Technology, PaiDmar Observatory.
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
~ 1 ) Prior to the issuance of grading permits detailed common open space
area landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning
Department approval for the phase of development in process. The
plans shall be certified by a landscape architect, and shall provide for
the following:
Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all
landscaped areas requiring irrigation.
Landscape screening where required shall be designed to be
opaque up to a minimum height of six (6) feet at maturity.
All utility service areas and enclosures shall be screened from
view with landscaping and decorative barriers or baffle
treatments, as approved by the Planning Director. Utilities shall
be placed underground.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent
trees at key visual focal points within the project.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate native and drought tolerant
plants where appropriate.
All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow
growing trees shall be steel staked.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a qualified paleontologist shall be
retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the proposed
grading with respect to potential paleontological impacts. Should the
paleontologist find the potential is high for impact to significant resources, a
pre-grade meeting between the paleontologist and the excavation and grading
contractor shall be arranged. When necessary, the paleontologist or
representative shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt
grading activity to allow recovery of fossils.
A: PP224 23
19o
20.
21.
22.
23.
PM-26852
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
All building plans for all new structures shall incorporate, all required
elements from the subdivision's approved fire protection plan as
approved by the County Fire Marshal.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and
irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval.
The plans shall address all areas and aspects the tract requiring
landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to,
parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front
yard landscaping.
Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. If seasonal
conditions do not permit planting, interim landscaping and erosion
control measures shall be utilized as approved by the Planning Director
and the Director of Building and Safety.
All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans and shall be verified by City field inspection.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the
provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate fee set forth in
that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions
of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by
Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat
Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution.
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officer, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officer, or employees
to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Tentative
Parcel Map No. 26852, which action is brought within the time period provided
for in California Government Code Section 660,99.37. The City of Temecula will
promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding
against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the
City fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or
proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not,
thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of
Temecula.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
A: PP22u,
PM-26852
24.
Within forty-eight (48) hours of the approval of the project, the
applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand,
Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars ($1,275.00), which includes the One
Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars ( $1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB
3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d) (2) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar ($25.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152
and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour
period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department
the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall
be void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section
711.4(c).
25. Dedicate right-of-way along Winchester Road along remainder parcel.
26.
The applicant shall comply with recommendations set forth in the County
Geologist transmittal dated April 23, 1991.
27.
A 25 foot wide transportation corridor easement shall be dedicated along
Winchester Road.
Enqineerinq Department
The following are the Engineering Department Conditions of Approval for this
project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Engineering
Department.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
28.
The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act,
and all applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions.
29.
The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor or registered
Civil Engineer, subject to all the requirements of the State of California
Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance No. 460.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
30.
As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, the
developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control district;
A: PP224 25
31.
32.
33.
35.
36.
37.
38.
DM-26852
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Englneerin9 Department;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise;
CalTrans; and
Parks and Recreation Department.
All road easements and Jot street dedications shall be offered for dedication to
the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the
City Engineer.
Margarita Road from Highway 79 to the proposed bridge over Santa Gertrudis
Creek shall be improved with full improvements or bonds for the street
improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance
with County Standard No. 100 (86'/110').
In the event that Winchester Road (Highway 79) is not constructed by
Assessment District 161 prior to the final map recordatlon, the developer shall
construct or bond for the improvements to provide for one-half street
improvements plus one 18 foot lane per CalTrans Standard (110'/134') . The
improvements shall be constructed per CalTrans letter dated March 14. prior
to occupancy.
In the event road or off-site right-d-way are required to comply with these
conditions, such easements shall be obtained by the developer; or, in the
event the City is required to condemn the easement or right-of-way, as
provided in the Subdivision Map Act, the developer shall enter into an
agreement with the City for the acquisition of such easement at the
developer's cost pursuant to Government Code Section 66462.5, which shall
be at no cost to the City.
Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road (Highway 79) and
Margarita Road and so noted on the final map with the exception of access
points and public street intersections as approved by the City Engineer and
CalTrans.
Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard
No. 805.
Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall
be delineated or noticed on the final map.
An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to approval of the
Final Map or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first.
A:PP224 26
39.
PM-26852
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage
facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located
within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances
shall be submitted and recorded as directed by the City Engineer.
A Notice of Intention to form and/or join the Landscape and Lighting District
shall be filed with the City Council. The engineering costs involved in
District information shall be borne by the developer.
Notice of Intention to join the median island Landscape Maintenance District
shall be filed with the City Council. The engineering costs involved in
District information shall be borne by the developer.
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformance with applicable City standards.
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb
and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights.
signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control
devices as appropriate.
b. Storm drain facilities.
c. Landscaping Istreet and parks).
d. Sewer and domestic water systems.
e. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans.
f. Undergrounding of existing and proposed utility distribution lines.
The street design and improvement concept of this project shall be coordinated
with adjoining developments.
Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in
accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. ~,61 and as approved by the
City Engineer.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Engineering Department a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation
towards traffic signal impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time
of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a written
agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a
building permit.
Street names shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineering
Department.
A:PP22~ 27
q7.
q8.
q9.
50,
51.
52.
53.
55.
56,
57.
58.
59.
PH-26852
The minimum centerline radii shall be 300 feet or as approved by the City
Engineer.
All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the
City Engineer.
Improvement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending a
minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and alignment
as approved by the City Engineer.
A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent.
Improvement plans per City Standards for the private streets or drives shall
be required for review and approval by the City Engineer.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards
as determined by the City Engineer and shall be shown on the street
improvement plans in accordance with County Standard ~,00 and ~,01 icurb
sidewalk).
The subdivider shall submit two {2) prints of a comprehensive grading plan
to the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform
Building Code, Chapter 70, and as may be additionally provided for in these
Conditions of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 2~," x 36" mylar by a
Registered Civil Engineer.
If grading is to take place between the months of October and April, erosion
control plans will be required. Erosion control plans and notes shall be
submitted and approved by the Engineering Department
A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and
submitted at the time of application for grading plan check.
The subdivider shall submit two ~2 ) copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer.
All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer.
On-site drainage facilities, located outside of road right-of-way, shall be
contained within drainage easements 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."
As deemed necessary by the Engineering Department, a copy of the
improvement plans, grading plans and final map, along with supporting
hydrologic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the Riverside
County Flood Control District for review.
A: PP22~, 28
PM-26852
60.
The subdivider shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage
flowing onto or through the site. In the event the City Engineer permits the
use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Article XI of
Ordinance No. D,60 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street
capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the
subdivider shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Engineering
Department.
61.
The subdivider shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by
alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow.
Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities,
including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement.
62.
The site is in an area identified on the Flood Hazard Maps as Flood Zone A
subject to flooding of unclerefrained depths. Prior to the approval of any
plans, this project shall comply with Ordinance 91-12 of the City of Temecula
regarding flood damage protection for development within a Flood Zone "A" ,
which may include obtaining a letter of map revision from FEMA.
63.
The developer shall record an Environmental Constraint Sheet delineating the
area within the 100-year floodplain.
Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City~s CATV Franchises of
the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time
of street improvements.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
65.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid
and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer"s Office.
66.
Prior to any work being performed on the private streets or drives, fees shall
be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer~s
Office.
67.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Department prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-d-
way.
68.
Prior to any work being performed, an application for a Development Permit
shall be submitted per Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance 91-12 of the City
of Temecula, All requirements of this ordinance shall be complied with as
directed and approved by the City Engineer.
69.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing
Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The
charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits.
If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to
this property, no new charge needs to be paid.
A:PP224 29
PM-26852
70.
A permit shall be required from CalTrans for any work within the followin9
ri9ht-of-way:
Winchester Road ( Hiqhway 79)
71.
A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within
its right-of-way.
72.
Should this project lie within any assessment/benefit district, the applicant
shall prior to recordation make application for and pay for their
reapportionment of the assessments or pay the unit fees in the benefit district
unless said fees are deferred to building permit.
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
73.
A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for
review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil
Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final
Soils Report addressing compactlon and site conditions.
Gradin9 of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The
final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough
grading plan.
75.
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities
imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public
facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the
project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of
payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or
district has not been finally established by the date on which developer
requests its building permits for the project or any phase thereof, the
developer shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a
copy of which has been provided to developer. Concurrently, with executing
this Agreement, developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public
Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to
exceed $10,000. Developer understands that said Agreement may require the
payment of fees in excess of those now estimated lassuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement,
developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of
this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the
process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for
this project; provided that developer is not waiving its right to protest the
reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof.
A: PP22~ 30
PM-26852
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
76.
Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and
gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and
street lights on all interior public streets.
77.
Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all
times with adequate detours during construction.
78.
Asphaltic emulsion {fog seal) shall be applied not less than 1L~ days following
placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon
per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and
9u, of the State Standard Specifications.
Transportation Enqineerinq
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
79.
A signing and striping plan shall be under design by a registered Civil
Engineer for approval by CalTrans and the City Engineer for Winchester Road
{Highway 79) and Margarita Road and shall be included in the street
improvement plans as determined by the City Engineer.
80.
Plans for a traffic signal shall be under design by a registered Civil Engineer
for approval by CalTrans and the City Engineer for the intersection of
Winchester Road {Highway 79) and Margarita Road and shall be included for
reference with the second plan check submittal of the street improvement
plans.
81.
Traffic signal interconnect shall be under design by a registered Civil
Engineer to show 11/2" rigid conduit with pull rope, and #3 pull boxes on 200
foot centers along the property fronting Winchester Road ( Highway 79). This
design shall be shown on the traffic signal plans and must be approved by
CalTrans and the City Engineer.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
82.
All signing and striping shall be installed and functional per the approved
plans and as approved in the field by CalTrans and the City Engineer.
83.
The traffic signal for the intersection of Winchester Road (Highway 79) and
Margarita Road shall be operational and complete per the approved plans.
The traffic signal interconnect shall be installed in place per the approved
plans.
A:PP224 31
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
April 15, 1991
J.F. Davtdson Associates,
Post Office Box 340
Tamsouls, CA 92390
Inc.
Attention: David 8. Saar~
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re:
Parcel Hap 26852
Plot Plan 224
City of Temecula
You have sent us material regarding these cases for our "review
as a Land Use Case and as a land subdivision". We do not make
floodproofing recommendations or write flood hazard reports for
projects in incorporated cities. But i% is appropriate that we
comment on Santa Gertrudis Creek Channel since we are involved
with the flood control aspects of Assessment District 161.
We have recently approved the plans for Santa Gertrudia Creek
Channel, The channel will capture and safely convey the 100 year
storm runoff in that stream when it has been constructed in its
entirety according to plans, and when surrounding land
developments have been brought up to grade as proposed. If the
project is constructed in stages, as we understand is now being
considered, additional study would be necessary to determine its
performance.
It should also be noted that Assessment District 161 has not yet
made application for a Conditional Letter of Hap Revision (CLOMR)
from the Federal Emer9ency Management Agency (FEMA). Properties
within the FEMA mapped floodplain will remain subject to flood
insurance requirements until FEMA has issued a letter of Map
Revision (LOMR), and the District cannot guarantee that FENA will
find the proposed improvements acceptable. The District wi)l not
accept the Santa Gertrudis Channel for operation and maintenance
until it has been completed, all necessary grading adjacent to
the channel has been completed, and the improvements have been
approval by FEHA.
r~~u~,
OHN H. KASHUBA
c: ' r Ctvil Engineer
City of Temecula
Engineering Department
Bedford Properties
Attn: Grog Erickeen
RANPAt
Attn: Chuck Collins
JHK:pln
I F'I~..; CNT!,' F'L~q~I~illli3 [!EF'T,
:liVr-.:l)iDE COLInC..:'
f II
April 23, 1991
Ranpac Soils, Inc.
41710 Enterprise Circle South
Temecu!a, CA 92390
Attention: Christopher Krall
Won S. Yoo
Subject:
Liquefaction Hazard
Work Order No. 690-161
Plot Plan 224
A.P.N.: 910-110-029
County Geologic Report No.
City of Temecula
793
Gentlemen:
We have reviewed the liquefaction aspects of
"Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation,
Commercial Center, Winchester and Margarita
dated November 1, 1990.
your report entitled
Margarita Meadows
Road, Temecula, CA,"
Your report determined that:
The potential for liquefaction of the subsurface soils at
this site during a seismic event is considered to be
moderate.
The most significant effect of liquefaction at the site
would be settlement of the ground surface. Indicated
settlement on the order of one inch would be possible on
localized areas of the site. Differential settlement at
the site from zero to one inch is likely to occur across
distances of 300 feet or more.
other effects of liquefaction including 10ss of bearing
capacity, sand boils and lateral spreading are considered
unlikely.
Your report recommended that:
All foundations shall be constructed entirely
compacted fill. The depth of fill shall extend a minimum
of two footing widths beneath the base of the footing
withe minimum of 2 feet end maximum of 8 feet. The area
of recompaction shall extend f£ve feet' outside the
foundation,per~meter.
LEMON STREET, ~TH FLOOR
l~ORr~'t
:79733 COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE: SUITE E
· B'ERMUDA DUNES, CAUFQRNIA 9220'
(E" 3z2,82:
2. All pavements &rid cnncre~e ~lab~ shall ba c~u-~t~uctc~ on
4 m{nimUm of ~wo tee~ o~ ~ac~p~te6 native ~oil~ ond/or
Cuntinuous footi~ ~h~ll ~ ~ minimum Z2 ~nc~es Wid~ and
1~ inches ~low lowest adJ$~'en~. ~rade. Is,,1 ated ~ootin,~s
pressure for thesc footings ~er c~,mbine~ dm~d
statio 1Ave lo~do l~ 2000 p~f. A] ~owable bearing
preucure m.y b~ increa~ by 10 ~erc~nt
4.Conoret~ slabs -0~- grade shell ~a~e a minimum
o~ ~ in~1te5 nominal for tightly loaded
Fill ~lopes o~all k,* properly keyeS, ~e~ch~a ~nd
compactea with ~ain~e devices Insf. allc~ in ~t:cordanco
With Otapter v0 of th. l~toit Un] rol~ Building code and
App~{w B oI VO~ report.
IL is our opinion tha~ ~ report wa~ prepared In a
manner arid sat j~fies ~ho addit {anal tnformdtion rcque~ted
California ~v~o~unta% 9-~lity Aot revi~. [anal apUroval
~e~or= Is h~reb~
liq~CfaCtlO~ hazards shall ~c a~m~rmd %o in t.he
Vu~ truly your~
City o~ Tarantula, ~ll~]ng -'~eve 3iannino
Hcrron & ~umansoff Ar~hJ.~ec~ - Russell
DISTRICT 8,P.O. BOX 231
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92402
TDD (714} 383-4609
April 16, 1991
08-Riv-79-R2.86/R3.18
Planning Department
Attention: Steve Jiannino
City of Temecula
43180 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, CA
Suite 200
92390
Your Reference: Plot Plan 224, Parcel Map 26852,
Change of Zone 11
Dear Mr. Jiannino:
An Encroachment Permit will be required for the proposed
Signage and Landscaping within the State R/W. In addition,
Development Review branch has the following concerns:
Grading,
Caltrans'
~he connection to State Highway 79 (SH 79) called out as a 50'
Driveway, approximately 1200 feet southwest of Margarita Road, must
be a street connection, not a driveway, as shown on Permit
application 90-1868 and as agreed to in several previous meetings
between Caltrans personnel and JF Davidson engineers.
Access to the proposed development must be taken off this local
street, not off of the State highway. Perhaps the developer might
consider a cul-de-sac configuration to accomplish this.
The Traffic Study done for Assessment District 161 (widening of
Winchester Road) by Kunzman and Associates did not study this
intersection to determine the need for signalization. If signals
are to be constructed, warrants must be met.
The access shown approximately 500 feet southwest of margarita Road
is intended to serve the Rancho California Water District property
only. It may not be used as an additional access to the proposed
development.
Also, it must conform to the configuration shown on Permit
application 90-1868 (see attached, highlighted mockup of that
access point).
The Water District access shall be a Caltrans standard NS-A,
Case A, type of driveway. Curb returns are not permitted.
Details and elevations of the proposed Pylon Signage at the Site
Entry from SH 79 must be submitted a part of the Permit application
package.
In addition to the above-noted concerns, this office must see the
following:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
Conditions of Approval
Grading and drainage Plans (not conceptuals)
A copy of any documents providing additional State R/W
A copy of the Traffic Study
A check print of the Parcel Map (not Tentative Map). The map
need not be signed and recorded, but must be stamped with the
City's "Stamp of Approval".
A check print of any plans for improvements within the State
R/W (including Landscaping Plans)
If you should have any questions, please call Mr. Ahmad Salah or
Mr. Mike Sim at (714) 383-4384. Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Tim Chowdhury c
District Development Review Engineer
STATE OF CALIFC~NIA--JJUSINESS, TRANSPCX~TATICh%I AND HOUSING AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT 8, P.O. BOX 231
SAN B~RNARDINO. CALIFORNIA 92402
TDD (714) 383-4609
March 14, 1991
PETE WILSON, Governor
Development Review
08-Riv-79-R3.180
Your Reference:
PP 224/PM 26852/CZ 11
Planning Department
City Hall
City of Temecula
43172 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92390
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed PP 224/PM
26852/CZ 11 located northwest corner of Winchester Road and
Margarita Road near Rancho California area.
Please refer to the attached material on which our comments have
been indicated by the items checked and/or by those items noted
under additional comments.
If any work is necessary within the State highway right of way,
the developer must obtain an encroachment permit from the
Caltrans District 8 Permit Office prior to beginning work.
Please be advised that this is a conceptual review only. Final
approval will be determined during the Encroachment Permit
process.
If additional information 'is desired, please call Mr. Nahro Saoud
of our Development Review Section at (714) 383-4384.
TIM CHOWDHURY
Chief, Developme~
Review Branch
Att
DA~E
( Co RTE PM)
CHECKED BELOW BE INCLUDED IN THE CONDITIONS OF
/
_ NORMAL RIGHT OF UAY DEDICATION TO PROVIDE ~7r NALF--glOTH ON THE STATE HIGHgAY.
/
__ NORMAL STRE"ET 1NPROVENENTS TO PROVIDE ~"~' HALF--WIDTH QN THE STATE HIGHWAY,
__ CUR8 AND CUTTER, STATE STANDARD/%/::~_/a~, TYPE/g2-~5 ALONe THE STATE HIGHWAY.
__ PARKING SHALL 8E PROHIBITED ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY 8Y PAINTING THE CUR8 RED AND/OR 8Y THE PROPER PLACEMENT
OF NO PARKING SIGNS·
RADIUS CURB RETURNS SHALL BE PROVIDED AT INTERSECTIONS WITH THE STATE HIGHgAY· STATE STANDARD WHEELCHAIR
RANPS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE CURD RETURNS,
A POSITIVE VEHICULAR BARRIER ALONG TNE PROPERTY FRONTAGE SHALL BE PROVIDED TO LINIT PHYSICAL ACCESS TO THE
STATE HIGHWAY ·
VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL NOT DE DEVELORED DIRECTLY TO THE STATE HIGHWAY·
VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY EXISTING PUBLIC ROAD CONNECTIONS,
VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY STANDARD DRIVSWAYS,
VEHIOJI..AR ACCESS SHALL NOT BE P~OVIDE~ WITHIN Q~ THE INTERSSCTIOR AT
VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY A ROAD--TYPE CORNECTIOR,
VEHICULAR ACCESS CONNECTZORS SHALL BE PAVED AT LEAST WITHIN THE STATE NIGHgAY RIGHT OF NAY,
ACCESS POINTS TO THE STATE HIGHgAY SHALL BE DEVELOPED IN A NANHER THAT gILL PROVIDE SIGHT DISTANCE FOR .
NPH ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY,
65'
I.ANDSCAOlNG ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL PROVIDE FOR SAFE SIGHT DISTANCE., CONPLY WITH F|XED OSJECT SET BACK
AND BE TO STATE STANDARDS ·
__ A LEFT--TURN LANEt INCLUDING SHCULDERS AND ANY NECESSARY WIDENINGf SHALL BE PROVIDED ON THE STATE HIGHWAY,
__ A TRAFFIC STUDY INDICATING ON AND OFF--SITE FLOU PATTERNS AND VOLUMESt PROBABLE IMPACTS AND PROPOSED NZTIGATIQN
MEASURES SHALL BE PREPARED,
__ PARKING SHALL BE DEVELOPED IN A NANNER THAT gILL NOT CAUSE ANY VEHICULAR NOVENENT CONFLICTS., INCLUDING PARKING
STALL ENTRANCE AND EXIT ., WITHIN OF THE ENTRANCE FROM THE STATE HIGHWAY,
CARE SHALL BE TAKEN WHEN DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTy TO PRESERVE AND PERPETUATE THE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERN
OF THE STATE HIGHWAY, PARTICULAR CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO CUMULATIVE INCREASED STORN RUNOFF TO INSURE
THAT A HIGHWAY DRAINAGE PROBLEM IS NOT CREATED ·
//PLEASE REFER TO ATTACHED ADDITIONAL COWqENTSo PROVIDE TO APPLICANT.
CONSTRUCTION/DEMOLITIQW WITHIN PRESENT OR PROPOSED STATE RIGHT OF ~AY SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED FOR POTENTIAL
HAZARDOUS WASTE ( I . E. ASBESTOS t PETRQCHEMICALS# ETC.) AND MITIGATED AS PER REQUIREMENTS OF REOULATORY AGENCIES
reqHEN PLANS ARE $USIqITTED# PLEASE CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ATTACHED **I"ZANDOUTI;· THIS WILL EXPEDITE
THE REVIEW PROCESS AND TIME REQUIRED FOR PLAN CHECK. P!~OVZD1~ TO APPT.ZC~lsJ%TT.
ALTHOUGH THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE GENERATED BY THIS PROPOSAL DO NOT APPEAR TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT
ON THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM# CONSIDERATION RUST BE GIVEN TO THE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CONTIHUED DEVELOPMENT
IN THIS AREA. ANY MEASURES NECEBGARY TO MITIGATE THE CURULATIVE IMPACT OF TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE SHALL BE
PROVIDED PRIOR TO OR WITH DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA THAT NECESSITATES THEM.
CORSIDERATIOR SHALL BE GIVEN TO THE PROVISION/ OR FUTURE PROVISIORt OF SIGMILIZATION AND LIGHTING OF THE
INTERSECTICN OF AND THE STATE HIGtf~YMEN ~i~RRANTS ARE NET,
L/IT APPEARS THAT THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE GENERATED BY THIS PROPOSAL COULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON
THE STATE HIGHHAY SYSTEM QF THE AREA. ANY MEASURES TO MITIGATE THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE IMPACTS SHALL BE
INCLUDED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT ·
THIS PONTION OF THE STATE HIGHWAY IS INCLUDED IN THE CALIFORNIA t/,JkSTER PLAN OF STATE HIGHWAYS ELIGIBLE FOR
OFFICIAL SCENIC I'~IGHWAY DESIGNATION AND IN THE FUTURE YOUR AGENCY MAY WISH TO HAVE THIS ROUTE OFFICIALLY
DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC I~IGHWAY.
THIS PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHWAY HAS BEEN OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC HIGHWAYt AND DEVELOPMENT
IN THIS CORRIDOR SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SCENIC HIGHWAY CONCEPT ·
TT IS RECOGNIZED THAT THERE IS CONSIDERABLE PUBLIC CONCERN ABOUT NOISE LEVELS ADJACEHT TO HEAVILY TRAVELLED
HIGHWAYS. ILAND DEVELO~MENTf IN ORDER TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THIS CONCERNI MAY REQUIRE SPECIAL NOISE ATTENUATION
MEASURES. DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY SHOULD INCLUDE ANY NECESSARY NOISE ATTENUATION.
CALTRANS DISTRICT 8
DEVELOPMENT PaVlEW BRANCH
P,O, Box 23 Z
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92402
A COPY OF ANY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OR REVISED APPROVAL.
//A COPY OF ANY DOCUHEHTS PROVIDING ADDITIONAL STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY UPON RECQRDAT[ON OF THE NAP ·
ANY PROPOSALS TO FURTHER DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY.
A CORY OF THE TRAFFIC OR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY ·
A CHECK PRINT OF THE PARCEL OR TRACT MAP.
Z//A CHECK PRINT OF THE PLANS FOR ANY IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO THE STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY.
/A CHECK PRINT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS FOR THIS PROPERTY WHEN AVAILABLE.
Date: March 13, 1991
Riv-79-R3.180
(Co-Rte-PM)
PP 224/PM 26852 / CZ 11
(Your Reference)
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
We need cross-sections at 50 ft intervals, from
of the project limits, within state Right-Of-Way
sections must conform to the requirements
"HANDOUT".
100 ft each side
(R/W). The cross-
of the attached
e
The Caltrans Right-Of-Way (R/W) line must be shown and labeled on
the next submittal.
The driveways connections should be compatible with the existing
and future road system of the area.
The centerline of proposed driveway shown approximately 520 ft
southwesterly of Margarita Road must be located and constructed as
shown on PERMIT NO 90-1868, SHEET NO 5. The Rancho California water
district property shall not have a separate access to state
highway.
Show the existing state stationing along the highway centerline
according to the stations shown on PERMIT NO 90-1868.
The Right-OF-Way in the Vicinity of Rancho California water
district property does not agree with our record.
The proposed driveway shown northwest of Winchester Road (HWY 79)
must accommodate the DETECTOR SETBACK requirements See attached
sheet).
State law requires Outdoor Advertising clearance for signs proposed
adjacent to interstate and primary highways. Clearance must be
obtained form:
Highway Outdoor Advertising Branch
California Department of Transportation
1120 N street
Sacramento, CA. 95814
(916) 445-3337
N~F9
U~F9
//
0
~-
t,) 0,,.
~tJ
~ o
,_~ +~
· RIVERSIDE COUNTY
' FIRE DEPARTMENT
_ 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE * PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92370
~ (714) 657-3183
GLEN J. NEWMAN
FIRE CHIEF
March 7, 1991
TO:
ATTN:
RE:
City of Temecula
Planning Department
CZ I1 & PM 26852
The Riverside County Fire Department has no comments regarding the above
referenced projects. All fire protection requirements will be addressed
on related Plot Plan 224.
All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to
the Planning and Engineering staff.
RAYMOND H. REGIS
Chief Fire Department Planner
By
Laura Cabral, Fire Safety Specialist
LC/tm
O INDIO OFFICE
79-733 Country Club Drive, Suite F, Indio, CA 92201
(619) 342-8886 * FAX (619) 775-2072
PLANNING DIVISION
71 TEMECULA OFFICE
41002 County Center Drive. Suite 225, Temecuh, CA 92390
(714) 694-5070 · FAX (714) 694-5076
71 RIVERSIDE OFFICE
3760 12th Strtt"t, RivenMe, CA 92501
(714) 2754777 · FAX (714) 369-7451
County of Riverside
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
TO: DATE:
CITY OF TEMF~CULA
A'rTN: Steve lzannlno
'!Fonment~i He~h :5oe~l~!l~t IV
U4~-24-,~i
The Envinenmenta[ Healfh Services D~vzs~,_nn has reviewed
+he F'~,rcel Mare No, 2~.~-5z fc, F this mcenect and
C:lllf-rni~ Pe_qional Water Oualitv ConEtel
P_,,r, afc]. NtDU'E= For oreroots within the
:5an Dieor, Water 'Duality Centr:i 8card
shil'~ be Feqtlired prIOr r.O Lssuance Of
a S %N 5 ~ .
two coDlos of the Parcel MaD.
A :'will-serve' letter from the
agencv/aOencles seFvln~ potable water.
Shotlid tile prOJeCt be salved sanltary sewer service%.
this Department would n~ed only:
A "will-serve" letten frnm the
{]. c~ne CODV of ~he tentat ive maD.
: eq:~tred ' con%act ~ne EHSD, Engineel inct -Sectsign at _75 -
'_",ta~!l!) , The ne,qulremenr. s for a water SUpS'iV perturk
'~s fOiIiWF'.
0(SHaA~)02 (REV. 11/81
City of Temecula
Page Two
ATTN: Steve 31annlno
April 34, 1991
Satisfactory laboratory tests
genecal Dnv~lcal, and General
mlneFal} to Drove the wateF Dotable.
A comDlete
details off
wa~er 9vstems: sizes and tVpes of
pipe and calculations showing that
~Snandards Caitfornla Health and
Safety Code and Calzfornla
administrative Code. Title 22>,
These plans must be s~ned bY a
set of plans showing
the proposed and existing
SM:dz
ATTACHMENT
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
PP-22~
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
PLOT PLAN NO. 22~ TO CONSTRUCT lq.9,500 SQUARE
FEET COMMERCIAL CENTER ON A PARCEL CONTAINING
2~ ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
WINCHESTER AND MARGARITA ROADS.
WHEREAS, Bedford Properties filed Plot Plan No. 224 in accordance with
the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances,
which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Plot Plan application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing
pertaining to said Plot Plan on June 3, 1991, at which time interested persons had
opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Plot Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission received a copy of the Staff Report
regarding the Plot Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the foilowing findings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly
incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months
following incorporation. During that 30~month period of time, the city
is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
{1 ) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
A: PP224 32
PP-224
~a)
There is a reasonable probability that the
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
Ib)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
(C)
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, {hereinafter "SWAP" ) was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within
the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as
its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely
fashion with the preparation of its General Plan.
C. The proposed Plot Plan is consistent with the SWAP and
meet the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government
Code, to wit:
I1 ) The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
|2) The Planning Commission finds, in recommending
approval of projects and taking other actions, including
the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title,
each of the following:
There is reasonable probability that Plot Plan
No. 224 proposed will be consistent with the
general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
b)
There is little or no probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
A: PP224 33
PP-224
c)
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
D. (1) Pursuant to Section 18.30(c), no plot plan may be
approved unless the following findings can be made:
a)
The proposed use must conform to all the
General Plan requirements and with all
applicable requirements of state law and City
ordinances.
b)
The overall development of the land is
designed for the protection of the public
health, safety and general welfare; conforms
to the logical development of the land and is
compatible with the present and future logical
development of the surrounding property,
12 ) The Planning Commission, in recommending approval
of the proposed Plot Plan, makes the following findings, to wit:
a)
There is a reasonable probability that Plot
Plan No. 224 will be consistent with the City's
future General Plan, which will be completed
in a reasonable time and in accordance with
State law. The project, as proposed,
conforms with existing applicable city zoning
and development ordinances. Further, the
proposal is characteristic of similar
development approved by the City to date.
b)
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference with
the City's future General Plan, if the
proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan. The project is of insignificant scale
in context of the broad goals and direct(yes
anticipated in the City~s General Plan.
c)
The proposed use or action complies with
State planning and zoning laws. Reference
local Ordinances No. 348, 460; and California
Governmental Code Sections 65000°66009
(Planning and Zoning Law).
A: PP224 34
d)
f)
g)
h)
PP-224
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configuration, circulation
patterns, access, and intensity of use.
Adequate site circulation, parking, and
landscaping are provided; as well as
sufficient area to appropriately construct the
proposed structure, reference proposed Plot
Plan No. 22u,, Exhibit E of the Staff Report.
The project, as designed and conditioned,
will not adversely affect the public health or
welfare; nor will it adversely impact the built
or natural environment as determined in the
Initial Environmental Assessment of this
proposal. Reference the attached project
Conditions of Approval and Initlal
Environmental Study.
The proposal will not have an adverse effect
on surrounding property, because it does not
represent a significant change to the present
or planned land use of the area. The project
conforms with applicable land use and
development regulations, and reflects design
aspects currently existing in the proposal's
general vicinity.
The project has acceptable access to a
dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and
useable by, vehicular traffic. The project
site's primary frontage is on Winchester
Road, a dedicated CalTrans right-of-way.
Improvement of the abutting roadways shall
be as per the City Engineering Department
and CalTrans.
The design of the project together with the
type of supporting improvements are such
that they are not in conflict with easements
for access through, or use of the property
within the proposed project. None are
exhibited on the underlying parcel map, nor
are easements evident on deed I s ) describing
the property in question.
A: PP22~, 35
PP-224
i)
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference. Supporting
documentation is attached.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Plot Plan
proposed conforms to the logical development of its proposed site, and
is compatible with the present and future development of the
surrounding property.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that although the
proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the
Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration,
therefore, is hereby granted.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends
approval of Plot Plan No. 22~, to construct a 149,500 square feet commercial center
located at the northwest corner of Winchester and Margarita Roads subject to the
following conditions:
A. Attachment 5, attached hereto.
SECTION 4.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of June, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held
on the 3rd day of June, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMI551ONER5
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
A: PP224 36
PP-224
ATTACHMENT 5
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Plot Plan No:
Project Description: Retail Center of
approximately 150,000 square feet.
Assessor~s Parcel No.: 910-110-029 and
910-180-019
Planninq Department
The use hereby permitted by this plot plan is for 3 buildings for 115,280
square feet; 23,916 square feet; and 10,500 square feet.
The permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officers, and employees from any claims, action, or
proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officers, or employees
to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Plot Plan
No. 22~. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the permittee of any such
claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate
fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the permittee of any
such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the
permittee shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold
harmless the City of Temecula.
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of approval date; otherwise,
it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial
construction contemplated by this approval within the two {2) year period
which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of
substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. This approval shall
expire on
The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as
shown on Plot Plan No. 22~, marked Exhibit E, or as amended by these
conditions.
Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly
upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way.
The applicant shall comply with the Engineering Department's Conditions of
Approval which are included herein.
A:PP22~, 37
10.
11.
12.
13.
PP-224
Water and sewerage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance with the
provisions set forth in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittal
dated March 11, 1991, a copy of which is attached.
Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County
Flood Control District's transmittal dated April 15, 1991, a copy of which is
attached.
Fire protection shall be provided in accordance with the appropriate section
of Ordinance No. 5~,6 and the County Fire Warden's transmittal dated April 23,
1991, a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County
Geologist's transmittal dated April 23, 1991, a copy of which is attached.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, three ~3) copies of a Parking,
Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Plans shall be submitted to the Planning
Department of approval. The location, number, genus, species, and
container size of the plants shall be shown. Plans shall meet all requirements
of Ordinance No. 3L~8, Section 18.12, and shall be accompanied by the
appropriate filing fee.
All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with approved landscape,
irrigation, and shading plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. An
automatic sprinkler system shall be installed and all landscaped areas shall be
maintained in a viable growth condition. Planting within ten ~10) feet of an
entry or exit driveway shall not be permitted to grow higher than thirty ~30 )
inches.
A minimum of 71~9 parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with Section
18.12, Riverside County Ordinance No. 3~,8. 7~,9 parking spaces shall be
provided as shown on the Approved Exhibit E. The parking area shall be
surfaced with asphaltic concrete paving to a minimum depth of 3 inches on ~,
inches of Class II base or as may be recommended by a qualified Soils
Engineer.
A minimum of 9 handicapped parking spaces shall be provided as shown on
Exhibit E. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be
identified by a permanently affixed reflectorlzed sign constructed of porcelain
on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the International Symbol of
Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and
shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height
if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade,
or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished
grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous
place, at each entrance to the off-street parking facility, not less than 17
inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously stating the following:
A: PP224 38
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
PP-224
"Unauthorized vehicles not displaying distinguishing
placards or license plates issued for physically
handicapped persons may be towed away at owner's
expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed at __
or by telephone "
In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall
have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in
blue paint of at least 3 square feet in size.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain clearance
and/or permits from the fo)lowing agencies:
Planning Department
Engineering Department
Environmental Health
Rancho Water District
CalTrans
School District
Riverside County Flood Control
Fire Department
Eastern Municipal Water District
A Plot Plan application for a Sign Program shall be submitted and approved by
the Planning Director prior to occupancy.
Building elevations shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on
Exhibit F.
Materials used in the construction of all buildings shall be in substantial
conformance with that shown on Exhibit F (Color Elevations) and Exhibit G
( Materials Board ).
Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from ground view. Screening
material shall be subject to Planning Department approval.
All trash enclosures shall be constructed prior to the issuance of occupancy
permits. Each enclosure shall be six feet in height and shall be made with
masonry block and a steel gate which screens the bins from external view.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen canopy trees along
streets and within the parking areas.
All street lights and other outdoor lighting shah be shown on electrical plans
submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check approval
and shall comply with the requirements of Riverside County Ordinance No.
655.
A: PP22~ 39
23.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
PP-224
This project is located within a subsidence or liquefaction zone. Prior to
issuance of any building permit by the Department of Building and Safety, a
California Licensed Soils Engineer or Geologist shall submit a report to the
Building and Safety Department identifying the potential for liquefaction or
subsidence. Where hazard of liquefaction or subsidence is determined to
exist, appropriate mitigation measures must be demonstrated.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall comply with
Ordinance No. 663 by paying the fee required by that ordinance which is
based on (the gross acreage of the parcels proposed for development) (the
number of single family residential units on lots which are a minimum of one-
half (1/2 ) gross acre in size). Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by
the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fees
required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required under
the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or
resolution.
23 Class I I bicycle racks shall be provided in convenient locations as approved
by the Planning Director to facilitate bicycle access to the project area. The
area does not have to be enclosed.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, performance securities, in amounts
to be determined by the Director of Building and Safety to guarantee the
installation of planrings, walls, and fences in accordance with the approved
plan, and adequate maintenance of the Planting for one year, shall be filed
with the Department of Building and Safety.
Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, all required landscape planting
and irrigation shall have been installed and be in a condition acceptable to the
Director of Building and Safety. The plants shall be healthy and free of
weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed
and in good working order.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or
any use allowed by this permit.
Within forty-eight 148) hours of the approval of the project, the
applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand,
Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars ($1,275.00), which includes the One
Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars ~$1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB
3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4i d ) ~ 2 ) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar ($25.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152
and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight {48) hour
period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department
A: PP22u, 40
PP-22~
the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall
be void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section
711 .~,(c).
31.
A minimum of seven 17) loading spaces shall be provided as shown on
approved Exhibit A,
32.
A plot plan application must be processed for any approvals for any additional
buildings other than the three approved by this plot plan.
33.
Dedicate a 25 foot wide transportation corridor easement along Winchester
Road prior to issuance of building permits.
Enqineerinq Department
The following are the Engineering Department Conditions of Approval for this
project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Engineering
Department.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
34.
As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, the
developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control district;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Engineering Department;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise;
CalTrans; and
Parks and Recreation Department.
35.
The developer shall submit two (2) prints of a comprehensive grading plan to
the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building
Code and Chapter 70 as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions
of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 2~,"x36" mylar by a Registered Civil
Engineer.
36.
The developer shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
A: PP22q.
37.
38.
39.
41.
42.
LI5.
46.
q.7.
PP-224
A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and
submitted at the time of application for grading plan check.
Prior to any work being performed, an application for Development Permit
shall be submitted per Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance 91-12 of the City
of Temecula. All requirements of this Ordinance shall be complied with as
directed and approved by the City Engineer.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Department prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-
way.
No grading shall take place prior to the improvement plans being substantially
complete, appropriate clearance letters and approval by the City Engineer and
all appropriate agencies.
If grading is to take place between the months of October and April, erosion
control plans will be required. Erosion control plans and notes shall be
submitted and approved by the Engineering Department.
All site plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans, and street
improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency with approved plans.
Street improvement plans including parkway trees and street lights prepared
by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer and all
appropriate agencies shall be required for all public streets prior to issuance
of an Encroachment Permit. Final plans and profiles shall show the location
of existing utility facilities within the right-of-way.
Prior to any work being performed on the private parking areas or drives,
fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City
Engineer's Office.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid
and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office.
Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all
times with adequate detours during construction.
A permit shall be required from CalTrans for any work within the following
right-of-way.
Winchester Road ( Hiqhway 79)
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformance with applicable City standards.
A: PP224 42
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
55.
56.
PP-224
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb
and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights,
signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control
devices as appropriate.
b. Storm drain facilities.
c. Landscaping Istreet and parks).
d. Sewer and domestic water systems.
e. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans.
f. Undergrounding of existing and proposed utility distribution lines.
The developer shall comply with the requirements of the City Engineer based
on the recommendations of the Riverside County Flood Control District.
A permit from the Riverside County Flood Control District is required for
work within its right-d-way.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing
Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The
charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits.
If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to
this property, no new charge needs to be paid.
The developer shall obtain an encroachment permit from Riverside County
Flood Control District to outlet storm flows directly into the flood control
channel.
A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer.
All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer.
As deemed necessary by the Engineering Department, a copy of the
improvement plans, grading plans and final map, along with supporting
hydrologic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the Riverside
County Flood Control District for review.
Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface
drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
All concentrated drainage directed toward the public street shall be diverted
through the undersidewalk drains.
A: PP22~, ~3
PP-224
57.
The site is in an area identified on the Flood Hazard Maps as Flood Zone A
subject to flooding of undetermined depths. Prior to the approval of any
plans, this project shall comply with Ordinance 91-12 of the City of Temecula
regarding flood damage protection for development within a Flood Zone "A",
which may include obtaining a letter of map revision from FEMA.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT:
58.
A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for
review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil
Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final
Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
59.
Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall deposit with the
Engineering Department a cash sum as established per acre as mitigation for
traffic signal impact.
60.
If deemed necessary by the Engineering Department, private drainage
easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be recorded.
61.
Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road I Highway 79) and
Margarita Road with the exception of access points and public street
intersections as approved by the City Engineer and GaiTtans.
62.
In the event that Winchester Road |Highway 79) is not constructed by
Assessment District 161 prior to the final map recordatlon, the developer shall
construct or bond for the improvements to provide for one-half street
improvements plus one 18-foot lane per GaiTtans Standards {110'/134~ ). The
improvements shall be constructed per GaiTtans letter dated March 14, prior
to occupancy.
63.
Margarita Road from Winchester Road (Highway 79) to the proposed bridge
over Santa Gertrudis Creek shall be improved with full improvements, or
bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-
of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 100 {86'/110') .
64.
Prior to building permit, the subdivider shall notify the City's C.A.T.V.
Franchises of the intent to develop. Conduit shall be installed to C.A.T.V.
Standards prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy.
65.
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities
imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public
facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negatlve Declaration for the
project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of
payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or
district has not been finally established by the date on which developer
requests its building permits for the project or any phase thereof, the
developer shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a
copy of which has been provided to developer. Concurrently, with executing
A: PP224
PP-224
this Agreement, developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public
Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to
exceed $10,000. Developer understands that said Agreement may require the
payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement,
developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of
this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the
process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for
this project; provided that developer is not waiving its right to protest the
reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount theroof.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATION OF OCCUPANCY:
66. A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent.
67.
Improvement plans per City Standards for the private streets or drives shall
be required for review and approval by the City Engineer.
68.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards
as determined by the City Engineer, and shall be shown on the street
improvement plans in accordance with County Standard ~,00 and ~,01 (curb
sidewalk).
69.
Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in
accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. ~,61 and as approved by the
City Engineer.
70. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along all public street frontages in
accordance with Riverside County Standard Nos. ~,00 and u,01.
71.
Im.p.rovement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending a
m~n~mum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and alignment
as approved by the City Engineer.
72.
This minimum centerline radii shall be 300 feet or as approved by the City
Engineer.
73.
All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the
City Engineer.
Construct all street improvements including but not limited to curb and
gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and
street lights on all interior public streets.
A: PP22u, ~5
PP-224
75.
In the event road or off-site right-of-way are required to comply with these
conditions, such easements shall be obtained by the developer; or, in the
event the City is required to condemn the easement or right-of-way, as
provided in the Subdivision Map Act, the developer shall enter into an
agreement with the City for the acquisition of such easement at the
developer's cost pursuant to Government Code Section 66462.5, which shall
be at no cost to the City.
76.
Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard
No. 805.
Transportation Enqineerinq
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS:
77.
A signing and striping plan shall be under design by a registered Civil
Engineer for approval by CalTrans and the City Engineer for Winchester Road
~Highway 79) and Margarita Road and shall be included in the street
improvement plans as determined by the City Engineer.
78.
Plans for a traffic signal shall be under design by a registered Civil Engineer
for approval by CalTrans and the City Engineer for the intersection of
Winchester Road (Highway 79) and Margarita Road and shall be included for
reference with the second plan check submittal of the street improvement
plans.
79.
Plans for a traffic signal shall be under design by a Registered Civil Engineer
for approval by CalTrans and the City Engineer for the intersection of
Winchester Road {Highway 79) and the approved entry point, and shall be
included for reference with the second plan check submittal of the street
improvement plans.
80.
Traffic signal interconnect shall be under design by a Registered Civil
Engineer to show 11/2" rigid conduit with pull rope, and #3 pull boxes on 200
foot centers along the property fronting Winchester Road ~ Highway 79). This
design shall be shown on the traffic signal plans and must be approved by
CalTrans and the City Engineer.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
81.
All signing and striping shall be installed and functional per the approved
plans and as approved in the field by CalTrans and the City Engineer.
82.
The traffic signals for the intersections of Winchester Road l Highway 79) at
both Margarita Road and the approved access point shall be operational and
complete per the approved plans.
83.
The traffic signal interconnect shall be installed in place per the approved
plans.
A: PP224 46
T0:
FROM:
RE:
County of Riverside
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
CITY OF TEMECULA DATE:
ATTN: Steve Jiannino
..~A~A~IN,~/jEnvironmental Health Specialist IV
PLOT PLAN NO. 224
03-11-91
The Environmental Health Setricer has reviewed Plot Plan No.
224 and has no objections. Sanitary sewer and water
services should be available in this area. Prior to any
building plan submittals, the following items will be
required:
"Will-serve" letters from the appropriate
water and sewering agencies.
Three complete sets of plans fop each food
establishment will be submitted, including a
fixture schedule, a finish schedule, and a
plumbing schedule in order to ensure compliance
wlth the California Uniform Retail Food
Facilities Law. For specific reference.
please contact Food Facility Plan
examiners at (714) 350-5172).
A cJ.~E~G;~___L~_~.~.~! from the Hazardous Materials
Management Branch Services (Jon Mohoroski,
358-5055), will be required Indicating that the
project has been cleared for:
a. Underground storage tanks.
b. Hazardous Waste Generator Services.
Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with
AB 2185).
d. Waste reduction Management.
SM:dr
cc: Jon Mohoroski, Hazardous Materials Branch
%L"7 7 RIVERSIDE COUNTY
FIRE DEPARTMENT
GLEN J, NEWMAN
FIR~ CM~P
IG: CITY 0F TEPeEeLla
A~Ms ~LANNING DE~T
P~: ~LOT PLAN 224
With respect rc the conditions o~ a;proval re~ardin~ the above ~e~e~enced
~lot pla~, the ~irs Department ~ecom~en~s ~hs following ~ire protection
measures be provi~e~ in accordance w~th Eiversids County 0rdinanc~s and/or
:scoinized fire pro~ecCion standards:
The Yire Department is required rc set a minimum fire flow for
the r~model or cons:rucnion of el! c. cm~ercia! buildings using the
procedure established in Ordinance 54~0
Provxde or show there exists a water sys~.en'~ c~pable of delivering ~000
GYM for s 3 hour duration at 20 }bI realdual opera=inS pressure,
which u:u~t he available before any ccm~us~ible material is placed
on the Job site, ~
A combinauidn o~ on-sAte and of{-si:e super fire hydrants, ~cn a
loo~ed system (6"X4"2~X2½)o will be located not less than 25 feet
or m,~re t~ari 165 feec frcm any portion of the building as measured
a~on8 aptroved vehicular trays!ways. l~e required fire fl~w shall
~e available from anF edJscent hydrant(s) i~ the system. ~
THe required ~zre flow m~ be ad]Dsted aCa later point in ~the permit
process co reflect chan~es in de~i~n, construction type, area separation
or built-in ~ire protect{on measures.
Applicant/=eveloper abel{ furnish one cop}' of the water system plans to
Fire Department ~or review. Flats shall con!orm to the fire hydrant
tTpoa, location and spacing, and, ~_ha system shall meet the fire flow
requirements. Plane shall be stgned/apprcved by a registered civil
r - r . , , ' ; ~ ' :
r~quiremer.~s prescribed by the Riverside Caunty Fire Departmen[.'
PLANNING DIV1SDI~
(714) 69~$070 e FAX (714} 69A~7~
~LOT
front, within 5~ fset ·~ · hydrant, and s minimum
bu~in~(~). A statement rhet ~he buildtn~(s] will be ~utom~.tica11~
~ire ~pr~nkle=ed ~uae be included on the title page Of the
inscalli~ion~ ee pet UBC,
8, A s;a;emen= =~m~ :he buildin~ will be ·u=oms=!celly fire sprinklered
9. Occupancy separatist will be re~ui=ed a~ per =he Ur~iEerm Bu~Id!~S Code,
panic hardware and e~it si~e as per Chepzer 33 oE the Uniform
BUli~n~ Co~e,
11. Certain designated areas ~111 be required tc be msi~tainea as fire lanes.
insta!l ?oft·hie tire extin~ulsheYa with a mini~um zatinB of 2A-iO~C.
ConCat: a certified e~tinguleher company for proper placeman~ of equipmen=.
Prior :O the !science of bulldl~8 permira, the aFplic·nt/d~v~l=per shell
be responsible to eub~= a chac~ or money order In the amount of $558.00
tO the Riverside Sounty Fire Departman~ for plan check fee~.
Prior CO the issuance of buildln~ perm~ne, =he ~e~eloper shell deposit,
w~th tee C~Cy o~ Temacu/a~ a check or money order equal~nE the sum of
per ·qu~re foct ae mltiSaulon for [ire protection impacts. This
amount must be subm~:te~ separete!~ from ~he plan check revle~ fees.
~inal conditions ~ili be addressed when b~lld!u~ plans are reviewed
Al= queer!one reEarain~ the mean!~ of conditions shall be referred re
:he Planning and En~iuserin~ staff.
RAYMOND M. R~GiS
Chief Fire Department Planner
By
Laura Cabrel~ Fire Safety Specialist
Lc/tm
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
April 15, 1991
J.F. Davidson Associates,
Post Office Box 340
Temecula, CA 92390
Znc,
Attention: David B. Saari
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re:
Parcel Hap 26852
Plot Plan 224
City of Temecula
You have sent us material regardin9 these cases for our 'review
as a Land Use case and as a land subdivision". We do not make
flOodproofing recommendations Or write flood hazard reports for
projects in incorporated cities. But It is appropriate that we
comment on Santa Gertrudts Creek Channel since we are involved
with the flood control aspects of AsseSsment Oistrict 161.
We have recently approved the plans for Santa Gertrudis Creek
Channel. The channel will capture end safely convey the 100 year
storm runoff in that stream when it has been constructed in its
entirety according to plans, and when surrounding land
developments have been brought up to grade as proposed. If the
project is constructed in stages, as we understand is now being
considered, additional study would be necessary to determine its
p~rformance.
It should also be noted that ASsessment District 161 has not yet
made application for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR)
from the Federal Emergency Management AgenCy (FEMA). Properties
within the FEMA mapped floodplain will remain subject to flood
insurance requirements until FEMA has issued a letter of Map
Revision (LOMR}, and the District cannot guarantee that FEMA will
find the proposed improvements acceptable. The District will not
accept the Santa Gertrudis Channel for operation and maintenance
until it has been completed, all necessary grading adjacent to
the channel has been completed,
approval by FEMA,
City of lemecula
Engineering Department
Bedford Properties
Attn: Gre9 Erickson
RANPAC
Attn: Chuck Collins
and the improvements have been
OHN H. KASHUBA
· r Civil Engineer
JHK:pln
April 23, 1991
Ranpac Soils, Inc.
41710 Enterprise Circle South
Temecula, CA 92390
Attention: Christopker Krall
Won S. Yoo
subject:
Liquefaction Hazard
Work Order No. 690-161
Plot Plan 2~4
A.P.N.: 910-110-029
County Geologic Report
City of Temecula
793
Gentlemen:
We have reviewed the liquefaction aspects of your report entitled
"Preliminary Geotechnical InveStigation, Margarita Meadows
Commercial Center, Winchester and Margarita Road, Temecula, CA,"
dated November 1, 1990.
Your report determined that:
The potential for liquefaction of the sUbsurface soils a
this site during a seismic event is considered to be
moderate.
The most significant effect of liquefaction at the site
would be settlement of the ground surface. Indicated
settlement on the order of one inch would be possible on
localized areas of the site. Differential settlement at
the site from zero to one inch is likely to occur across
distances of 300 feet or more.
other effects of liquefaction including loss of bearing
capacity, sand boils and lateral spreading are considered
unlikely.
Your report recommended that:
All foundations shall be constructed entirely in
Compacted fill. The depth of fill shall extend a minimum
of two footing widths beneath the base of the footing
withe minimum of = feet end maximum of 8 feet, The area
of reoompaction shall extend five feet' outside the
foundation,perimeter.
46~"' I_~}%'ON STREET, bTH FLOOR
I~Or~!,"~ 9.':':'
~9733 COUNTRY 'CLUB DRIV_E, rE
BERMUDA DUNES, CAL FORNIA 922,
;F'ON RIU C':v',' F'L ti /IIIG OU'T. e' .2.L1991 12:59
· ~n~m~%m Of two ~ee~ O~ rec~mpa~ted native ~oil~
co,~p~cted fll~.
3. CnntinUou~ footin~ 8hall ~ ~ minimum 12 inches Vide and
1~ inches ~1o~ lowes~ adjacent. gra~e. Isn]
~hali be · mi~m~ 1~ lnch~ ~are. Allowable bearj,,g
pressure fo~ these footings ~der cumbtned dead and
static live leado 12 2000 ~2f. A~]cwable bearing
prepcure m~y b~ incTem~ by 10 DercHut lot each Foot
oI ~ incl,~s nominal for li~htl~ loaded
compacted with ~in~le devices ins~.allc~ ip ~:cordance
Wi=h Chapter 70 or th. latest un] rot~ Buildin
I[. is OUr opin{on ~na~ ~e re~or~ wa~ prepared
man~e~ add eat i~fies %he addit 4enal inform~tion rcque~te~ un~e/
California ~lv{To~ental ~uality A~t review. Final ai~i~roval of th~
~epor~ Is h.reby given.
The reComm~nd~tiong sad~ in your repOr~ ~or mitigation of
l~q~cfactlon h~za~d2 ~hall ~e a~,er~a tO In I.he accign and
con~tructJc, n Of' the p:oj~ct,
Vc~ truly your~
RIVERSInE CO~TY P NG D~
Ja~eph~Richarde, ~ anni t Di ct,nr
Herron S ~umansoff Ar~hJ~ecto - Russell
/
DISTR=CT 8,P.O, BOX 231
5AN BERNARDINO, CA 92402
TDD (724) 383-4609
April 16, 1991
08-Riv-79-R2.86/R3.18
Planning Department
Attention: Steve Jiannino
City of Temecula
43180 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, CA
Suite 200
92390
Your Reference: Plot Plan 224, Parcel Map 26852.
Change of Zone 11
Dear Mr. Jiannino:
An Encroachment Permit will be required for the proposed
Signage and Landscaping within the State R/W. In addition,
Development Review branch has the following concerns:
Grading
Caltrans
~he connection to State Highway 79 (SH 79) called out as a 50
Driveway, approximately 1200 feet southwest of Margarita Road, must
be a street connection, not a driveway, as shown on Permit
application 90-1868 and as agreed to in several previous meetings
between Caltrans personnel and JF Davidson engineers.
Access to the proposed development must be taken off this local
street, not off of the State highway. Perhaps the developer might
consider a cul-de-sac configuration to accomplish this.
The Traffic Study done for Assessment District 161 (widening of
Winchester Road) by Kunzman and Associates did not study this
intersection to determine the need for signalization. If signals
are to be constructed, warrants must be met.
The access shown approximately 500 feet southwest of margarita Road
is intended to serve the Rancho California Water District property
only. It may not be used as an additional access to the proposed
development.
Also, it must conform to the configuration shown on Permit
application 90-1868 (see attached, highlighted mockup of that
access point).
The Water District access shall be a Caltrans standard NS-A,
Case A, type of driveway. Curb returns are not permitted,
Details and elevations of the proposed Pylon Signage at the Site
Entry from SH 79 must be submitted a part of the Permit application
package.
In addition to the above-noted concerns, this office must see the
following:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
Conditions of Approval
Grading and drainage Plans (not conceptuals)
A copy of any documents providing additional State R/W
A copy of the Traffic Study
A check print of the Parcel Map (not Tentative Map). The map
need not be signed and recorded, but must be stamped with the
City's "Stamp of Approval".
A check print of any plans for improvements within the State
R/W (including Landscaping Plans)
If you should have any questions, please call Mr. Ahmad Salah or
Mr. Mike Sim at (714) 383-4384. Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Tim Chowdhury
District Development Review Engineer
STATE Of CALIFOeNIA--BUSINESS. TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT 8. P.O. BOX 231
TDD (714) 383.4609
March 14, 1991
PETE WILSON, Governor
Development Review
08-Riv-79-R3.180
Your Reference:
PP 224/PM 26852/CZ 11
Planning Department
City Hall
City of Temecula
43172 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92390
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed PP 224/PM
26852/CZ 11 located northwest corner of winchester Road and
Margarita Road near Rancho Calif9rnia area.
Please refer to the attached material on which our comments have
been indicated by the items checked and/or by those items noted
under additional comments.
I'f any work is necessary within the State highway right of way,
the developer must obtain an encroachment permit from the
Caltrans District 8 Permit Office prior to beginning work.
Please be advised that this is a conceptual review only. Final
approval will be determined during the Encroachment Permit
process.
If additional information is desired, please call Mr. Nahro Saoud
of our Development Review Section at (714) 383-4384.
Chief, Development
Review Branch
Att
CAL=.RAN8 D~V2LOPMENT R~VIEW FORM
YOUR ~FEREUCE
PLAN CHECKER
WE REQUEST THAT THE ITEMS CHECKED
APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT:
BELOW BE
DAT~
- .C
( Co RTE PM)
INCLUDED IN THE CO~ITIONS OF
/
NORPiAL RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION TO PROVIDE ~7 HALF--SlOTH QN THE STATE HIGHWAY.
/
NORHAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO PROVIDE ~a~" HALF--NIDTH ON THE STATE HIGHWAY,
CURS AND GUTTER, STATE STANDARD/V'F-/r?, TYPE/"72--~ ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY.
PARKING SHALL BE PROHIBITED ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY BY PAiNTiNG THE CURB RED AND/OR BY THE PROI>ER PLACEMENT
OF NO PARKING SIGNS.
RADIUS CURS RETURNS SHALL BE PROVIDED AT INTERSECTiONS WITH THE STATE NIGHWAY · STATE STANDARD WHEELCHAIR
RAMPS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE CURB RETURNS.
A POSITIVE VEHICULAR BARRIER ALONG THE PROPERTY FRONTAGE SHALL BE PROVIDED TO LiMiT PHYSICAL ACCESS TO THE
STATE HIGHWAY.
VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL NOT 8E DEVELOPED DIRECTLY TO THE STATE HIGHWAY.
VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED 8Y EXIST|NG PLJBLXC ROAD CONNECTIONS.
VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL 8E PROVIDED BY STANDARD DRIVEWAYS.
VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL NOT BE I:qtOVIDE~ WITHIN O~ THE INTER$~CTIQNAT
VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY A ROAD--TYPE CONNECTION.
VEHICULAR ACCESS CONNECTIONS SHALL BE PAVED AT LEAST WITHIN THE STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY.
ACCESS POINTS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE DEVELOPED IN A MANNER THAT WILL PROVIDE SIGHT DISTANCE FOR
NPH ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY.
LANDSCAPING ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL PROVIDE FOR SAFE SIGHT DISTANCEt COMPLY WiTH FIXED OeJECT SET BACX
AND BE TO STATE STANDARDS .
A LEFT-TURN LANEt INCLUDING SHCULDERS AND ANY NECESSARY WiDENiNG; SHALL BE PROVIDED ON THE STATE HIGHWAY.
A TRAFFIC STUDY INDiCATiNG ON AND OFF--SITE FLO~ PATTERNS AND VOLUMES# PROBABLE IMPACTS AND PROPOSED MiTiGATiON
MEASURES SHALL BE PREPARED ,
PARKING SHALL BE DEVELOPED IN A MANNER THAT WiLL NOT CAUSE ANY VEHICULAR MOVEMENT CONFLICTSt iNCLUDiNG PARKING
STALL ENTRANCE AND EXiT # WiTHiN OF THE ENTRANCE FROR THE STATE HIGHuAY ·
CARE SHALL BE TAKEN WHEN DEVELOPING THiS PROPERTY TO PRESERVE AND PERPETUATE THE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERN
OF THE STATE NIGHWAY. PARTICULAR CONSIDERATION BHGULD BE GIVEN TO CtJNULATIVE INCREASED STORM RUNOFF TO iNSURE
THAT A HIGHWAY DRAINAGE PROBLEM IS NOT CREATED .
//PLEASE REFER TO ATTACHED ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. pROVTDE TO APPLZC~NTT.
COt4STRUCTION/DENOLITION gITHIN PRESENT OR PRCXoOSED STATE RIGHT OF gAY SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED FOR POTENTIAL
HAZARDOUS &IASTE ( I, E ,ASBESTOS~, PETRO4;NEMICAL$~ ETC, ) AND MITIGATED AS PER REQUIREMENTS OF REGULATORY AGENCIES.
rkqHEN PLANS ARE SUBMITTED, PLEASE CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ATTACHED tt~{ANDOUTI*. THIS gILL EXPEDITE
THE REVIEg PROCESS AND TIME REQUIRED FOR PLAN CHECK. PROVIDE TO APPLICANT,
ALTHOUGH THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE GENERATED BY THIS PROPOSAL DO NOT APPEAR TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT
OR THE STATE HIGHgAY SYSTEMt CONSIDERATION MUST RE GIVEN TO THE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CONTINUED DEVELQPHENT
IN THIS AREA. bY MEASURES NECESSARY TO MITIGATE THE CtJMULATIVE IMPACT OF TRAFFIC AND/ON DRAINAGE SHALL BE
PROVIDED PRIOR TO OR glTH DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA THAT NECESSITATES THEM.
CONSIDERATION SHALL BE GIVEN TO THE PROVISIONf OR FUTURE PROVISIORf OF $1GNILIZATION AND LIGHTING OF THE
INTERS~CTIOR OP AM) THE STATE NIGtI~Y kMEN ~4~RRANTS ARE HET.
L/IT APPEAR, Y.AT Y.E TRAFFIC ANO/OR DRAINAGE GENERAYED .Y T.IS PROPOSAL COULD .AVE A .,GH,F,CANT EFFECT O.
THE STATE HIGHgAY SYSTEM OF THE AREA. ANY MEASURES TO MITIGATE THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE IMPACTS SHALL BE
INCLUDED gITH THE DEVELOPMENT .
THIS PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHgAY IS INCLUDED IN THE CALIFORNIA }/'.ASTER PLAN OF STATE HIGHgAYS ELIGIBLE FOR
OFFICIAL SCENIC HIGHgAY DESIGNATION AND IN THE FUTURE YOUR AGENCY NAY gISH TO HAVE THIS ROUTE OFFICIALLY
DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC HIGHgAY.
THIS PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHgAY HAS BEEN OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC HIGHWAYt AND DEVELOPHENT
IN THIS CORRIDOR SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SCENIC HIGHWAY CONCEPT ·
IT IS RECOGNIZED THAT THERE IS CONSIDERABLE PUBLIC CONCERN ABOUT NOISE LEVELS ADJACENT TO HEAVILY TRAVELLEL
HIGHgAYS. T_~ND DEVELOPMENTt IN ORDER TO BE COMPATIBLE gITH THIS CORCERN~ MAY REQUIRE SPECIAL NOISE ATTENUATION
MEASURES. DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY SHOULD INCLUDE ANY NECESSARY NOISE ATTENUATION.
//
CALTRANS DISTRICT 8
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BRANCH
P.O. Box 231
SAN BERNAROINO, CA 92402
A copy OF ANY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OR REVISED APPROVAL .
COPY OF ANY DOCUMENTS PROVIDING ADDITIONAL STATE HIGHgAY RIGHT OF gAY UPON RECORDATIOR OF THE NAP.
ANY PROPOSALS TO FURTHER DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY.
A COPY OF THE TRAFFIC OR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY.
CHECK PRINT OF THE PARCEL ON TRACT MAP.
CHECK PRINT OF THE PLANS FOR ANY IMPROVEMENTS gITHIN OR ADJACENT TO THE STATE HIGHgAY RIGHT OF WAY.
CHECK PRINT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS FOR THIS PROPERTY i/HEN AVAILABLE.
Date: March 13, 1991
Riv-79-R3.180
(Co-Rte-PM)
PP 224/PM 26852 / CZ
(Your Reference)
11
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
We need cross-sections at 50 ft intervals, from 100 ft each side
of the project limits, within state Right-Of-Way (R/W). The cross-
sections must conform to the requirements of the attached
"HANDOUT".
The Caltrans Right-Of-Way (R/W) line must be shown and labeled on
the next submittal.
The driveways connections should be compatible with the existing
and future road system of the area.
The centerline of proposed driveway shown approximately 520 ft
southwesterly of Margarita Road must be located and constructed as
shown on PERMIT NO 90-1868, SHEET NO 5. The Rancho California water
district property shall not have a separate access to state
'highway.
Show the existing state stationing along the highway centerline
according to the stations shown on PERMIT NO 90-1868.
The Right-OF-Way in the Vicinity of Rancho California water
district property does not agree with our record.
The proposed driveway shown northwest of Winchester Road (HWY 79)
must accommodate the DETECTOR SETBACK requirements (See attached
sheet).
State law requires Outdoor Advertising clearance for signs proposed
adjacent to interstate and primary highways. Clearance must be
obtained form:
Highway Outdoor Advertising Branch
California Department of Transportation
1120 N street
Sacramento, CA. 95814
(916) 445-3337
n~r9 1
1
I
0
~.~,
C~
=!
ATTACHMENT 6
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
Backqround
1. Name of Proponent:
Bedford Properties/Costco
Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
PO Box 9016
Temecula, CA 92390
(71~) 676-56~,1
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
April 25, 1991
Agency Requiring
Assessment:
CITY OF TEMECULA
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
Location of Proposal:
Plot Plan No. 224, Change of Zone
No. 11, and Parcel Map No. 26852
Northwest corner of Marqarita and
Winchester Roads
7. Proposal:
Chanqe of Zone from R-R (Rural
Residential ) to C-P-S ( Scenic Hiqhway
Commercial) on 2~ acres of a 57 acre
site; subdivide the 57 acres into 13
commercial lots and a remainder; and
construct a 175,000 square foot
commercial center on 19.7 acres
proposed for commercial zoninq.
Environmental Impacts
( Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets. )
Yes Maybe No
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
X
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
X
A:PP224
~7
The destruction, coverin9 or modi-
fication of any unique 9eolo9ic or
physical features?
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudslides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
Air. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air
quality?
The creation of objectionable
odors?
Alteration of air movement,
moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, whether locally
or regionally?
Water. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or
fresh waters?
Substantial changes in absorption
rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A:PP224 ~8
Discharge into surface waters, or
in any alteration of surface water
quality, including, but not limited
to, temperature, dissolved oxygen
or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow or ground waters?
Change in the quantity of 9round
waters, either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
Substantial reduction in the amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as flood-
ing or tidal waves?
Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any native species of
plants I including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare, or endangered species
of plants?
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop?
Animal Life. Will the proposal result
in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or insects)?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A:PP224 49
10.
11.
12.
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
Light and Clare. Will the proposal
produce substantial new light or glare?
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal
involve:
A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances {including,
but not limited to, oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
Population. Will the proposal alter
the location, distribution, density, or
growth rate of the human population of
an area?
Housing. Will the proposal affect
existing housing or create a demand for
additional housing?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A:PP224 50
13.
15.
Transportation/Circulation.
proposal result in:
a.
b.
c.
d.
Will the
Yes Maybe No
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement? X
Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking? __ X
Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems? __ X
Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods? __ __ X
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic? X
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicycllsts or pedestrians? __ X
Public Services. Will the proposal have
substantial effect upon, or result in a
need for new or altered governmental
services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection? __ X
b. Police protection? __ X
c. Schools? X
d. Parks or other recreational
facilities? X
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads? __ X
f. Other governmental services: __ X
Energy, Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy? __ __ X
b. Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy? __ __ X
A:PP22~ 51
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)?
Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities?
Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A:PP224 52
21.
Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
Mandatory Findings of Significance.
Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildllfe
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into
the future. )
Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumu-
latively considerable? (A project's
impact on two or more separate
resources may be relatively small,
but where the effect of the total of
those impacts on the environment
is significant. )
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substan-
tial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? __
Yes Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
A:PP224 53
I II Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
Earth
1.a.
1.b.
1.C.
1.d.
1.e.
1.f.
1.g.
Air
2.a.
2.b.
2.c.
No. The area is not with any known fault zones and is flat, vacant
land.
Maybe. All new development causes displacement and overcovering of
soils. The project will incorporate open landscape areas, along with
obtaining and adhering to City grading and building permits which will
provide mitigation measures for this impact. The impact will not be
significant.
No. The area is currently flat vacant land and will not require
substantial amounts of cut or fill to establish the proposed building
pads.
No. No unique geologic or physical features exist on site. The site is
flat.
Maybe. Wind and water erosion increase during grading activities.
The potential for water erosion is low due to the fact that the site is
flat. Wind erosion will be mitigated by standard grading practices and
adherence to grading and building permits.
Maybe. The area is traversed by Santa Gertrudis Creek which is being
channelized as part of Assessment District No. 161. The flood control
improvements are currently under construction. Construction of the
channel per approved improvement plans will mitigate significant
impacts.
Maybe. The area is within a liquefaction hazard zone. A geotechnical
investigation of the site was performed. Adherence to the
recommendations made in County Geologic Report No. 793 will provide
mitigation for possible impacts.
Maybe. The project will impact local air quality due to the increased
auto traffic in the area. Although the project should decrease overall
travel miles by providing a shopping opportunity in closer proximity to
the urban population. No overall impact.
No. There are no industrial or commercial activities proposed that
would cause objectionable odors.
No. There are no industrial or commercial activities proposed that
should alter air movement or temperature.
A: PP22u, 5~
Water
3.a.
3.b,
3.e.
3.f.
3og.
3.h.
3.i.
Plant Life
4.a.
No. The project is adjacent to Santa Gertrudis Creek which is an
intermittent flowin9 creek. The creek is currently beln9 channelized
with approval of Assessment District 161. The channelization is not a
result of this project. This project is bein9 designed to drain into the
channelized flood control facilities. This dralnage pattern will not
result in any substantial change in either marine or fresh waters.
Maybe. The project will cause changes in the absorption rate due to the
overcoverin9 of soil The natural drainage pattern will remain
unchanged. Obtaining and adhering the gradin9 and building permits
will provide mitigation for possible impacts.
No. The natural drainage pattern will remain the same and will not be
altered by this project.
No. The project will not increase the amount of water in any body of
water. The site is not located in close proximity to any standin9 bodies
of water.
No. The surface runoff does not run directly into any bodies of water.
No. The project does not propose any ground cuts or construction that
would alter the direction or rate of flow of ground water.
Maybe. The decrease in absorption rate will decrease the amount of
ground water available from the site, but providing irrigated
landscaping areas will mitigate for potential decreases, There will be
no overall impact.
No. The amount of water consumed will be a small increase in the
overall water demand of the area.
Maybe, The area is within a liquefaction zone and flood zone.
Adherence to County Geologic Report No. 793 recommendation will
provide mitigations for liquefaction impacts. The current
channellzation of Santa Gertrudis Creek will provide mitigation for the
flood zone potential.
Maybe. The mass grading of the site will eliminate the current
vegetation on site. No rare species of plant were seen on site and the
overall native vegetation of the area will not be significantly effected by
this project.
No. No rare or unique plant species were observed on this site,
A:PP22~ 55
Maybe. The project includes proposed landscape areas that will
introduce new plants to the area. The plants will be required to be
drought tolerant and include native species. The impact will not be
significant. The channelization of Santa Gertrudis Creek and
Winchester Road are larger physical barriers.
No. The area is not currently used for agricultural crops.
Animal Life
5,a.
Maybe. The project~s mass grading will eliminate existing animal
species. The area is impacted currently and increased commercial and
industrial activity within the area does not make this site viable for
maintaining native species.
5.b.
Maybe. The site is within the historic range of the Stephen~s Kangaroo
Rat which is a listed endangered species. The County and City have
received a 10-A permit for the incidental take of the rat. The payment
of a fee in this area has been deemed proper mitigation for the impact
of habitat loss.
5,c.
No. No unique wildlife habitats exist on site.
Noise
Maybe. The noise level will increase during construction of the site,
which will be a temporary impact. The economical use will generate
increased noise level mainly from vehicle use of the site. No residential
structures are located near the site and the noise level will not be a
significant impact to the area.
6.b.
No. Severe noise generations are not anticipated at this site.
Light and Glare
Maybe. The project will require parking lot and outside lighting. The
project will be conditioned to have lights hooded and directed away from
public rights-of-way and adjoining properties. The project must
conform to the requirements of the Palomar Observatory for lighting
impacts.
Land Use
No. The project will alter the current vacant use of the site and the
development doesn't conform to the current zoning for the site. The
project does conform to the General Plan Guideline SWAP designation for
the site of C { Commercial ) and other commercial developments proposed
or being constructed in the vicinity.
A:PP22~ 56
Natural Resources.
9.8.
No. The proposed commercial uses will not substantially increase the
rate of use of natural resources,
9.b.
No. The project will not substantially deplete non-renewable
resources. The commercial use proposed will not generate a large
demand on non-renewable resources.
Risk of Upset
10.a.
No. The commercial uses proposed do not include uses that would
result in a risk of explosion.
10.b.
No. The project will not interfere with emergency response plans or
evacuation plans. Proper circulation has been conditioned to be
maintained with development of the project.
Population
11.
No. The proposed commercial project will not alter the current
population location or density. The project will provide an employment
area for existing residence of the City and surrounding area. The
project will not require an increased population demand.
Housing.
12.
No. The project is a proposed commercial center and will not affect
housing demand.
Transportation/Circulation
13.a.
Yes. The commercial project will increase traffic and vehicular
movement. The improvements being constructed with Assessment
District No. 161 and improvements conditioned on the project will
mitigate the impacts to a level of insignificance. The conditions include
recommendations required per the Traffic Study submitted and
approved for the project.
13.b.
Maybe. The project will result in a demand for increased parking. The
required parking for the proposed project will be provided on-site per
City Codes as part of the project design.
13.c.
Maybe. The project will impact the existing road system, but the
impacts will be mitigated by the improvements required as Conditions
of Approval on the project.
13,d.
No. The project will not alter the existing road patterns. The project
has been conditioned to improve the existing roadways.
A:PP224 57
13.e.
No. The project will not require or impact waterborne, rail or air
traffic. The site will be served by an improved roadway system.
13.f.
Maybe. The increased traffic will increase possible vehicle hazards.
The project has been conditioned to provide adequate street
improvements and safety controls to mitigate the possible impacts.
Public Services
14.a,b,c,
e,f.
Maybe. The proposed development will impact these public services.
The project has been conditioned to construct necessary improvements
and pay appropriate fee mitigation for these impacts.
14.d.
No. The project is a commercial center and will not impact current or
planned recreational facilities.
Energy
15.a,b,
No. The project is for the development of a standard type retail
commercial center and will not require the use of substantial amounts of
fuel or require new sources of energy to be developed.
Utilities
16.a-f.
No. The surrounding area has the current utilities available or they
are being constructed with Assessment District No. 161. No additional
utility systems will be required to be constructed with this project.
Human Health
17.a.
No. The project is a standard retail commercial type center and no uses
are proposed that will cause a health hazard.
17.b.
Maybe. The project is within a liquefaction zone. County Geologic
Report No. 793 was completed for the project. Adherence to the
recommendation contained within the report will mitigate the potential
liquefaction impacts.
Aesthetics
18.
No. The project is not within any designated view sheds and does not
obscure scenic vistas.
Recreation
19.
No. The project is not being proposed on an existing or planned
recreation or open space site.
A:PP224 58
Cultural Resources
20.a-d.
No. A preliminary cultural survey was conducted on the site and no
cultural resources were identified on site.
Mandatory Findings of Significance
21 .a.
No. The area does not contain any environmentally sensitive areas and
no rare or endangered species exist on site.
21 .b.
No. The project as conditioned will not significantly impact short or
long term environmental goals.
21 .c.
Maybe. The project, while not causing a significant impact to traffic
circulation because of proposed improvements contained within the
project design, will add to the accumulative effect on the transportation
system. The current construction and additional improvements
proposed by Assessment District No. 161 will provide mitigation
measures for the accumulative impacts on the transportation system.
A:PP224 59
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signi-
ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi-
ticant effect on this case because the mitigation measures
described on attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval
have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
April 25, 1991
Date
For CITY OF TEMECULA
X
A:PP224 60
®, o ~ ' ® ~'9.~ nm~-=" -.I
E} ""'0 "rl-' a,I r-,.Zo a}
5'~om- -::rock- = -® ®-. = cn
~..., o
_.=rll=l -.s m o ugm =~ m --
I1 IZC 0-13 ..... '
(.C~,.~ IM'O :~
I n_.
O"'O,n ~
-~ o,-, '~B" "
" "aS']a' a~ o®
~ Z
o m
zr-
9~
mO
r---I
::o0
:~ Z
~0 o
mZ
'10
u~
mZ
"s "'s
Z
m
'~ ~'~ -.s mO
< r--~
~ rD ~0
~a ~] m::o
· -h ~ mZ
Z
r'n
CITY OF TEMECULA )
~, 'rE
LOCATION 'MAP
r
CASE NO.
P.C. DATE
,i
CITY OF TEMECULA )
$P
-, c;,
RAN
SWAP MAP
p.C. DATE
i/ "
ITEM #10
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
June 3, 1991
Case No.: Temporary Outdoor Activities Ordinance
Prepared By: Oliver Mujica
Recommendation: 1. ADOPT Resolution No. P.C. 91-
recommending adoption of
the Temporary Outdoor
Activities Ordinance.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
PROPOSAL:
BACKGROUND:
DISCUSSION:
City of Temecula
An Ordinance establishing regulations for
Temporary Outdoor Activities.
The purpose for preparing the proposed Temporary
Outdoor Activities Ordinance is due to the
inadequacy of the County Ordinance No. 3u,8 as it
relates to temporary outdoor events, in which
Section 19.50 (attached) provides the following
standards and requirements:
a. Major Outdoor Event (5,000 or more people).
b. Minor Outdoor Event ( 100 to 5,000 people).
No time limitations for major or minor outdoor
events.
d. No public notice requirements for
applications.
No advanced submittal requirements for
applications processing.
In order to provide the City of Temecula with
specific and complete standards for regulating
Temporary Outdoor Activities, the City Attorney
has prepared the attached Ordinance which
includes, in summary, the following main
components:
A: OUTDOOR. ACT 1
Major Outdoor Activity Permit. Temporary
outdoor activities involving more than five
hundred (500) people which may be expected
to attend at one time shall be permitted after
a review by the Planning Department, subject
to the approval of the City Planning Director.
An application for a Major Outdoor activity
Permit shall be made no later than sixty {60)
days in advance of the proposed scheduled
activity.
Major Outdoor Activity Permits shall not be
9ranted for periods exceeding five (5)
consecutive days or for events or activities
held more than twice a calendar year.
Minor Outdoor Activity Permits. Temporary
outdoor activities involving one hundred fifty
( 150 ) people but less than five hundred ( 500 )
people which may be expected to attend at
one time shall be permitted after review by
the Planning Department, subject to the
approval of the Planning Director or his
Designee. An application for a Minor Outdoor
Activity Permit shall be made no later than
thirty (30) days in advance of the proposed
scheduled activity.
Minor Outdoor Activity Permits shall not be
granted for periods exceeding five (5)
consecutive days or for events or activities
held more than twice a calendar year.
Activity Permits. Temporary outdoor
activities involving less than one hundred
fifty (150) people which may be expected to
attend at one time shall be permitted subject
to the approval of the Planning Director or
his Designee. An application for an Activity
Permit shall be made no later than thirty (30)
days in advance of the proposed scheduled
activity.
Activity Permits shall not be granted for
periods exceeding four (LI) consecutive days
or for events or activities held more than four
(4) times a calendar year with a minimum of
thirty (30) days separating each event or
activity.
A:OUTDOOR.ACT 2
CONCLUSION:
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
FINDINGS:
GENERAL PLAN AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
A:OUTDOOR.ACT
Application requirements, including a list of
all current owners of property within three
hundred J 300 ) feet of the exterior boundaries
of the subject property. The list shall be
keyed to an Assessor~s Parcel Map showing
the location of these properties; and a set of
mailing labels for this list shall be provided.
As noted above and outlined in the attached
proposed Ordinance, the proposed Temporary
Outdoor Activities Ordinance provides the City with
the standards to thoroughly review an appllcant's
proposal as well as providing the necessary control
measures needed to ensure the public safety; to
provide event organization; and control the overall
quality and number of such events.
This project does not have a potential for causing a
significant affect on the environment. Therefore,
Staff has determined that the project is exempt from
CEQA under Section 15061 (b) J 3).
The proposed Temporary Outdoor Activities
Ordinance is necessary to bring about
eventual conformity with the City~s future
Land Use plans.
There is reasonable probability that the
proposed Temporary Outdoor Activities
Ordinance will be consistent with the City's
future General Plan, which will be completed
in a reasonable time and in accordance with
the goals and/or policies of the City~s future
General Plan.
There is not a likely probability of
substantial detriment to or interference with
the future General Plan, if the proposed
policies are ultimately inconsistent with the
plan, due to the fact that policies will be
adopted for the new General Plan.
Therefore, it is likely that the City will
consider these policies during their
preparation of the General Plan.
The proposed Temporary Outdoor Activities
Ordinance is consistent with SWAP. In addition,
Staff finds it probable that this Ordinance will be
consistent with the new General Plan when it is
adopted.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission:
ADOPT Resolution No. P.C. 91 -
recommending adoption of the Temporary
Outdoor Activities.
OM:ks
Attachments:
Resolution
"Draft" Ordinance
Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (Section 19.50)
A:OUTDOOR.ACT 4
RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 91-
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCI L
ADOPT THE TEMPORARY OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES
ORDINANCE.
WHEREAS, City Ordinance No. 90-04 adopted by reference certain
portions of the non-codlfled Riverside County Ordinances, including Ordinance No.
348 ~ "Land Use Code" ); and
WHEREAS, such regulations do not contain adequate provisions for
Temporary Outdoor Activities; and
WHEREAS, the City of Temecula desires to further regulate the
Temporary Outdoor Activities and to protect the health, quality of life, and the
environment of the residents of Temecula; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on June 3, 1991, at which
time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition;
and
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall,
County Library, Rancho California Branch, the U.S. Post Office and the Temecula
Valley Chamber of Commerce;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECT ION 1. That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula
hereby finds that the proposed Temporary Outdoor Activities Ordinance will provide
for the establishment of regulations for temporary outdoor activities and events.
SECT ION 2. That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula
further finds that the proposed Temporary Outdoor Activities Ordinance is
necessary to bring about eventual conformity with its future land use plans.
SECT ION 3. That the Plan n ing Commission of the City of Temecula
hereby finds that the proposed Temporary Outdoor Activities Ordinance is exempt
from the California Environmental Quality Act under Section 15061 {b)(3).
SECT ION ~,. That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula
hereby recommends to the City Council adoption of the proposed Temporary Outdoor
Activities Ordinance. The Ordinance is incorporated into this Resolution by this
reference and marked Exhibit "A" and dated June 3, 1991 for identification.
A:OUTDOOR.ACT 5
PASSED APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of June, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held
on the 3rd day of June, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS
A:OUTDOOR.ACT 6
ORDINANCE NO. 91-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ADDING CHAPTER 9.14, PERTAINING TO
TEMPORARY OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 9.14 is hereby added to the Temecula
Municipal Code, which shall read as follows:
CHAPTER: 9.14
TEMPORARY OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES
Sections:
9.14.010
9.14.012
9.14.014
9.14.016
9.14.018
9.14.020
9.14.022
9.14.024
9.14.026
9.14.028
9.14.030
9.14.032
9.14.034
9.14.036
9.14.038
Purpose
Definitions
Categories
Application and Fees
Standards of Operations
Overnight Camping
Sale of Dispensing of Alcoholic Beverages
insurance
Performance Bonds
Action Upon Application
Grounds for Denial of a Temporary Outdoor Activity Permit
Notification of City Departments
Variances
Appeals
Revocation
9.14.010 Purpose. This Ordinance is intended to provide for the
regulation and control of temporary outdoor activities that occur on private property
that are not otherwise permitted or regulated in order to protect the public health,
safety,and general welfare.
9.14.012 Definitions. Forthepurposeofthis Chapter, certain terms
used herein are defined as follows:
"Temporary Outdoor Activity" means an activity to which the
public is invited with or without charge, which is held outside a building, on private
property, on a temporary basis including, but not limited to, concerts, musical
festivals, stage or theatrical shows, fairs, carnivals, exhibits, displays, sports
events, automobile or animal races or competitions, tent revival meetings, off-road
A: OUTDOOR. ACT - 1 ~
vehicle events and also including private parties or outdoor activities not open to the
public but held on vacant property not associated with a building or established
facility otherwise permitted under this Ordinance.
9.1~,.01u, Cate~Jories. The following categories of permits shall be
granted subject to the approvals set forth herein following application and payment
of fees as set forth herein and provided compliance is demonstrated with the
standards and provisions of this Chapter.
(a) Major Outdoor Activity Permit. Temporary outdoor
activities involving more than five hundred (500) people which may be expected to
attend at one time shall be permitted after a review by the Planning Department,
subject to the approval of the City Planning Director. An application for a Major
Outdoor activity Permit shall be made no later than sixty (60) days in advance of the
proposed scheduled activity.
Major Outdoor Activity Permits shall not be granted for
periods exceeding five (5) consecutive days or for events or activities held more
than twice a calendar year.
(b) Minor Outdoor Activity Permits. Temporary outdoor
activities involving one hundred fifty { 150) people but less than five hundred (500)
people which may be expected to attend at one time shall be permitted after review
by the Planning Department, subject to the approval of the Planning Director or his
Designee. An application for a Minor Outdoor Activity Permit shall be made no later
than thirty (30) days in advance of the proposed scheduled activity.
Minor Outdoor Activity Permits shall not be granted for
periods exceeding five (5) consecutive days or for events or activities held more
than twice a calendar year.
(c) Activity Permits. Temporary outdoor activities involving
less than one hundred fifty (150) people which may be expected to attend at one time
shall be permitted subject to the approval of the Planning Director or his Designee.
An application for an Activity Permit shall be made no later than thirty {30) days in
advance of the proposed scheduled activity.
Activity Permits shall not be granted for periods exceeding
four (4) consecutive days or for events or activities held more than four It) times
a calendar year with a minimum of thirty ~ 30) days separating each event or activity.
9.1LL016 Application and Fees. Application for a permit to hold a
Temporary Outdoor Activity shall be filed with the Planning Department on a form
provided by the City and approved by the Planning Director and shall include, but
not be limited to, the following:
ia) Names and addresses of the sponsor, operator, and
owner~s) of the property. If the same be a corporation, the names of its principal
officers, or if the same be a partnership, association, organization or fictitious
company, the names of the partners or person comprising the association,
organization or company with the address and telephone number of each.
A:OUTDOOR.ACT ~2-
(b) Affidavit of the property owner authorizing use of the
property for the proposed activity.
(c) Address and/or legal description of the property
( Assessor's Parcel Number ).
(d ) Statement describing the proposed activity together with
all information pertinent to the consideration and granting of the requested permit,
including, but not limited to:
Number of people anticipated to attend at any one
time;
Total number of people anticipated to attend;
(3) Dates and hours of operation;
The number and amplifying range of any sound
system to be used.
( 5 ) Security Plan.
(el A vicinity map.
(f) A dimensional site plan showing the boundaries of the
property where the activity or event is proposed and illustrating the location of the
major elements of the activity or event, including parking, access and circulation,
water, sanitary facilities, and necessary medical support system.
(g) A list of all current owners of property within three
hundred (300) feet of the exterior boundaries of the subject property. The list shall
be keyed to an Assessor~s Parcel Map showing the location of these properties; a set
of mailing labels for this list.
Exception: This list is not necessary for an Activity
Permit.
(hi Types of goods, wares, merchandise, food, or beverages
to be sold or otherwise provided to persons at the activity or event.
(i) Other information and plans as may be required by the
Planning Director. The Planning Director may also authorize omission of any
information or plans if he finds they are not necessary for the proposed activity.
Application shall be signed by the applicant and shall be
accompanied by a base fee of three hundred twenty-five dollars {$325.00). Hours
in excess of the base fee shall be charged upon final approval or denial of the
permit.
9. lu,.018 Standards of Operations. Except as otherwise provided,
in this Ordinance, temporary outdoor activities may be permitted in any Zoning
District, provided a valid permit is granted pursuant to the provisions of this
A:OUTDOOR.ACT -3-
Ordinance. The following standards set forth below shall be applied to all temporary
outdoor activities and compliance with these standards shall be demonstrated by the
applicant as a condition of issuance of any permit provided for under this Chapter.
A sign-off form will be provided to the applicant for distribution to each applicable
department head. Prior to the issuance of a permit, the applicant shall provide the
Planning Director the sign-off forms with any noted conditions or comments.
(a) Police/Security Protection. Every applicant shall employ
at his own expense police/security protection as may be determined to be necessary.
The number and type of officers shall be determined and specified by the Police
Chief to provide for the preservation of order and protection of property in and
around the place of the proposed activity. Funds to employ any law enforcement
officers shall be at the current hourly salary rate for policemen and may be required
to be deposited in advance with the City no later than ten (10) days prior to the date
of the proposed activity.
(b) Fire Protection. Every applicant shall provide, at his own
expense, adequate fire protection as determined by the Fire Department having
jurisdiction where the proposed activity or event is to be conducted. If the activity
or event is located in a hazardous fire area as defined by the Riverside County Fire
Code, a suitable number for fire guards shall be employed by the applicant. Any
fire guards, shall be approved by the Chief of the responsible fire protection agency
or agencies. Flammable vegetation and other fire hazards shall be removed in a
manner and in such quantity as determined by the Fire Department. First-aid and
fire extinguishment equipment shall be provided as directed by the Department.
Traffic lands and other adequate space shall be designated and kept open for access
and travel for ambulance, helicopter and other emergency vehicles to transport
patients, or staff to appropriate on-site and off-site treatment facilities.
Parking Areas:
( 1 ) Everyapplicantshall provideadequateparkingspace
for persons attending the activity by motor vehicle.
{2) Persons desiring to operate or conduct an activity
may be called upon to provide parking space for every three ~3) persons expected
to attend the activity by motor vehicle.
A parking plan shall be required to be submitted and
approved by the City Police Chief and Traffic Engineer prior to the issuance of a
permit.
( d ) Access and Parking Control. Every applicant shall provide
adequate ingress and egress to the activity premises and parking areas therefore.
Necessary roads, driveways and entrance ways shall exist to insure orderly flow of
traffic into the premises from a highway or road which is a part of the City system
of highways or which is a highway maintained by the State or County. A special
accessway for fire equipment, ambulances and other emergency vehicles may be
required. The City Engineer. or designee, must approve the applicant's plan for
ingress and egress before a permit is issued.
A:OUTDOOR.ACT -4-
Additionally, any applicant may be required to show that
traffic guards are under his employ to insure orderly traffic movement and relieve
traffic congestion in the vicinity of the activity.
{el Water Facilities. Every applicant shall provide from a water
purveyor operating under a permit as required under the State Health and Safety
Code, an ample supply of potable water for drinking and sanitation purposes on the
premises of the activity. Location of the water facilities on the premises must be
approved by the County Health Officer prior to issuance of a permit.
If) Sanitation Facilities. Adequate sanitation facilities shall be
provided as determined by the County Health Officer based upon State and local
health laws. The applicant shall also provide for the handicapped.
Ig) Food Concessions. Concessions must be licensed and
operate under a valid Health Department permit pursuant to local ordinances and
State laws.
(hi Hours of Operation. All activities which are subject to a
permit under this Ordinance shall close and cease operation continuously between the
hours of twelve o'clock {12:00) midnight and six oreclock ~6:00) a.m. of each and
every day.
(i) Illumination. Every applicant planning to conduct an
activity after dark, or planning to allow persons who attend the activity to remain
on the premises after dark, shall provide electrical illumination to insure that those
areas which are occupied are lighted at all times. The Chief Building Official must
approve the applicant~s lightlng plan prior to issuance of a permit. An applicant may
be required to illuminate specific areas on the premises in accordance with the
following scale of lighting intensity:
Illumination
Watts/Square Feet
Open areas reserved
for spectators
0.05
Stage areas 5.00
Parking and overnight areas
0.25
Restroom and concession area
1.00
(j) Medical Facilities. Where a proposed activity is expected
to attract a large number of persons for a site located at substantial distance from
adequate existing treatment facilities, the applicant shall be required to provide
emergency medical treatment facilities ont he premises.
{k) Trash and Refuse. An adequate number of trash
receptacles shall be provided on-site and shall be emptied or removed as necessary
at the applicant's expense. The applicant shall clean and otherwise restore the
event site to the condition in which it existed prior to the conduct of the event.
A: OUTDOOR. ACT -5-
(I) Noise. The amount of noise generated by the event shall
not disrupt the activities or nearby land uses.
(m) Communication System. Applicant shall be required to
establish a communication system for public use where ordinary communications are
not available.
In) Health and Safety Codes. All applicable laws and
ordinances with respect to equipment used, construction, plumbing, mechanical,
electrical, and all other respects shall be observed. Building and Safety structural
inspections shall be required when the proposed activity includes: amusement rides,
bleachers, large tents, temporary electrical supplies or other temporary structural
improvements.
(o) Sales of Goods and Services. All sales of goods and
services at the proposed activity or event shall be limited to or sponsored by one ( 1 )
of the following:
( 1 ) Non-profit organizations;
(2) Existing Community organizations;
(3) Existin9 licensed businesses with an existing
established business location within the City;*
Groups authorized by the event sponsor. All sales
or service groups shall require a Business License
from the City of Temecula.**
9.1~,.020 Overniqht Campin.q. Overnight camping shall only be
permitted by approval of the Planning Director or his Designee and shall comply with
the following guidelines:
(a) Overnight campin9 shall be permitted only for those
persons conducting the event or activity; participants in the event or activity;
spectators, or security personnel.
(b) Overnight campin9 shall be limited to only fully self-
contained vehicles which have toilet facilities. This limitation may be waived by the
Planning Director if the event sponsor elects to provide portable toilet facilities at
the overnight camping site.
{ c) Any overnight camping shall obtain a permit from the event
sponsor which shall be clearly displayed in the lower left corner of the vehicles front
window.
* When business licenses are required by the City of Temecula.
** All sales and service groups shall obtain a permit from the event sponsor
which shall be clearly displayed during the course of the outdoor activity,
A: OUTDOOR. ACT -6-
(d) A temporary Trailer Park Permit shall be required to be
issued by the County Health Officer pursuant to the provisions of the California
Health and Safety Code.
9.1LI.022 Sale of Dispensinq of Alcoholic Beveraqes. Sale or
dispensing of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted only by approval of the Planning
Director or his Designee and shall comply with the following guidelines:
(a) Anyone proposing to sell or otherwise serve alcoholic
beverages at any temporary outdoor activity, shall make application to the Police
Department for review and recommendations.
(b) A temporary license shall be obtained from Alcoholic
Beverage Control.
(c) All conditions and recommendations of the Police
Department and Alcoholic Beverage Control and the City shall be complied with prior
to issuance of a permit. The Police Department may require the provision of Police
Officers at any event where alcoholic beverages are served. A minimum of one ( 1 )
off-duty officer shall be required where more than one hundred (100) people are
anticipated to attend.
9.14.024 Insurance. Prior to the issuance of any permit, the
applicant shall submit to the City proof of public liability and property damage
insurance, written by an insurance company acceptable to the City and the limits
determined by the City's Risk Manager naming the City as an additional insured; in
the alternative, the City may require execution of a hold harmless agreement,
indemnifying the City for any personal injury or property damage arisin9 from such
event or activity.
9.1LL026 Performance Bonds. Performance bonds may be required
as a condition of approval of any permit requiring the permittee to execute an
agreement with the City of Temecula secured by a cash bond in the amount necessary
to guarantee performance of the agreement and to restore the site to its original
condition.
9.1u,.028 Action Upon Application. Following review and comments
from the appropriate City Department~s set forth hereinabove, the Planning Director
may approve, conditionally approve or deny the application for the temporary
outdoor activity. Approval, conditional approval or denial of the application shall
be made by the Plannin9 Director within thirty (30) days after its filing with the
City Planning Department. The applicant shall be promptly notified in writing of the
decision of the Plannin9 Director.
9.1u,.030 Grounds for Denial of a Temporary Outdoor Activity
Permit. An application for a Temporary Outdoor Activity Permit may be denied on
any of the following grounds:
( a ) The applicant has fai led or refused to provide the City with
the information referenced in the sections above or any other information requested
by the City which is reasonably related to the conduct of the proposed activity or
event;
A:OUTDOOR.ACT -7-
(b) The applicant has knowingly made any false, misleading or
fraudulent statement of material fact in the application for a permit;
(c) The building, structure, equipment or location of such
event or activity does not comply with or fails to meet applicable health, zoning, fire
or safety requirements imposed by law;
(d)
to unreasonably limit,
street or sidewalk;
The activity or location of the activity or event is such as
obstruct, or curtail the free flow of traffic on any public
(el The applicant has failed to comply with any of the
conditions imposed by the Planning Director, or any other City Department;
(f) The conduct of the event or activity will unreasonably
interfere with the public peace, health, safety or welfare;
( g ) The applicant refuses to agree to or abide to all conditions
and regulations attendant to issuance of the permit.
9.1u,.032 Notification of City Departments. Upon approval of the
permit application, the Planning Director shall so notify the following:
Police Department;
(b) Fire Department;
{c) Risk Manager;
(d) City Manager.
9.1u,.03~, Variances. Variances or modifications to the strict
interpretation of any provisions of this Ordinance may be granted by the Planning
Director provided it is found that the purpose and intent of this Ordinance has been
complied with.
9.1LL036 Appeals. Anapplicantoranyinterestedperson(s)mayfile
an appeal to the City Manager from the decision of the Planning Director or his
Designee within ten (10) calendar days of the date of the Planning
Director/Designeels decision. The appeal must be in writing, on forms provided by
the City, and accompanied by a fee set by resolution by the City Council.
The City Manager shall consider the appeal at a hearing wherein
the City Manager shall consider the application, any reports submitted by City
Department and other pertinent subject matter to the conditions, terms and
regulations set forth in this Chapter. The decision of the City Manager shall be
final.
The Planning Director shall, within five (5) calendar days after
the decision of the City Manager, notify the applicant in writing of the decision of
the City Manager.
A:OUTDOOR.ACT -8-
9.14.038 Revocation. Any permit issued pursuant to this Chapter
may be summarily revoked or suspended and the activity ordered closed by the City
Manager or his Designee for breach of any of the conditions of the permit or the
provisions of this Chapter, or for the violation of any laws of the State if at any
time, the applicant fails to immediately correct any such deficiencies.
Notice of such suspension or revocation shall be made in writing
to the applicant.
SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY. The City Council hereby declares
that the provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of
competent jurisdiction shall hold any sentence, paragraph, or section of this
Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
parts of this Ordinance.
SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this
Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law.
SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in full
force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to
the adoption of this Ordinance and cause copies of this Ordinance to be posted in
three designated posting places.
SECTION 5. A summary of this Ordinance shall be published in
a newspaper published and circulated in said City at least five {5) days prior to the
City Council meeting at which the proposed Ordinance is to be adopted. A certified
copy of the full text of the proposed Ordinance shall be posted at City Hall. Within
fifteen (15) days after adoption of the Ordinance, the summary with the names of
those City Council members voting for and against the Ordinance shall be published
again· and the City Clerk shall post a certified copy of the full text of such adopted
Ordinance.
PASSED· APPROVED AND ADOPTED this __ day of
· 1991.
RON PARKS
MAYOR
ATTEST:
JUNE S. GREEK
CITY CLERK
A:OUTDOOR.ACT -9-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
CITY OF TEMECULA )
SSo
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify
that the foregoing Ordinance No. 91- was duly introduced and placed upon its
first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the __ day of ,
1991, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the __ day of , 1991, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
JUNE S. GREEK
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Scott F. Field
City Attorney
A:OUTDOOR.ACT -10-
Ordinance No.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
CITY OF TEMECULA )
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
JUNE S. GREEK, being first duly sworn, deposes and says:
That she is the duly appointed and qualified City Clerk of the City of
Temecula;
That in compliance with City Resolution No. 89-9 on December 1, 1989,
ORDINANCE NO. 91- was caused to be posted in three (3) places in the City of
Temecula, to wit:
[CHOOSE THREE]
Temecula Library
Temecula Chamber of Commerce
Temecula Community Center
Temecula Post Office
Temecula City Hall
JUNE S. GREEK
CITY CLERK
A:OUTDOOR.ACT -11-
ARTICLE XlXa
TEMPORARY OUTDOOR EVENTS
SECTION 19.51. PURPOSE. The purpose of this article is to provide for
the regulation and control of temporary outdoor events that ere conducted in
the unincorporated area of the County of Riverside. The Board finds, as a
legislative matter, that the occurrence of large temporary outdoor events at a
location other than an existing permanent facility that is ~esigned,
constructed and authorized to conduct such events iS a danger tom and is
detrimental to, the health safety and general welfare of the public. The Board
determines, therefore, that tenporary outdoor events, with an anticipated
attendance at any One time of 5,OOD or more persons proposed to be conducted in
the untncorporated area of Riverside County shall be held only in an
established facility intended for such purposes.
SECTION 19.52. DEFINITIONS. The following terms shall have the following
meanings for the purposes of this article:
Temporary Outdoor Event is an event to which the public is invited,
with or without charge, which is held out of doors on a temporary
basis including, but not limited to, music festivals, stage or
theatrical shows, Sports events, fairs, carnivals, autor~obile or
animal races, tent revival meetings, and off-road vehicle events.
Temporary outdoor events are classified as follows:
1. Major Dutdoor Event. A temporary outdoor event at which five
thousand (5,000) Or more people may be expected to be in
attendance at any one time.
2. Minor Outdoor Event. A te~erary outdoor event at which less than
five thousand (5,000} peop but more than one hundred {100}
people may be expected to be in attendance at any one time.
3. Regularly Scheduled Event. A minor outdoor event not held at an
established facility but held on an annual or semiannual basis.
It may be a continuation of an event that has been held at the
s a~e site on a minimum of three previous occasions.
'Established facility" means an existing permanent facility that is
designed and constructed to conduct outdoor events therein, which is a
legally authorized location with the facilities to conduct an event
which is proposed to be held therein, including, but not limited to
seating areas, vehicle parking, sanitary and health facilities and
potable water.
SECTION lg.53. In the unlncorporated area of the County of Riverside,
State of California:
No major outdoor event shall be held except at an established facility
desl gned, constructed and authorized to conduct such an event, which
has sufficient facilities to accommodate the n~ber of people expected
to attend the event.
257
No minor outdoor event shall be held except at an established facility
designed, constructed and authorized to conduct such an event, which
has sufficient facilities to accommodate the number of people expected
to attend the event, except as provided in Subsection c or d of this
section.
Minor outdoor events that are not held at an established facility are
permitted to any location in the unincorporated area provided that a
permit is granted in accordance with the provisions of this Article.
Regularly scheduled events that are not held at an established
facility are permitted to be held at any location in the
untncorporated area provided that a permit is granted in accordance
with the provisions of this Article.
No person shall operate, maintain, conduct, advertise, sell or furnish
tickets for a tenporary outdoor event unless the event conforms to the
provisions of this Article and, if required, a permit has been finally
issued pursuant to Section 19.54.
SECTION 19.54. PERMITS. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this
ordinance, Minor Outdoor Events and Regularly Schedule~ Events may be pennitted
in any zone ClassifiCation provided that a permit is granted pursuant to the
provisions of this Section.
Applications. Applications for permits for a Hinor Outdoor Events and
Regularly Scheduled Events shall be made to the Planning Director in
accordance with the procedural provisions of Section 18.30 of this
ordinance. All of the procedural provisions of Section 18.30 shall
apply to the permit, except Subsection {c) thereof relating to
requirments for approval, Subsection {e} relating to appeals, and
Subsection (f} relating to the use of a permit.
Special Transmittel Provisions. Upon receipt of a c~nplete
application, the Planning Director shall transmit copies of the
application to the County Sheriff, the Deparb~ent of Public Health,
Road Depar)ent, County Fire Warden, Deparl~ent of Building and
Safety, California Highway Patrol, and cities within whose sphere of
influence or mutual aid agreement area the proposal is located, for
review and written Comments and recommendations to the Planning
Director. Applications may then be approved, conditionally approved,
or denied.
Requirements for Approval. No application for a permit for a
Temporary Outdoor Event shall be approved unless the applicant
affimatively d~nonstrates that the holding of the event will not be
detrimental to the envtroment, health, safety and general welfare of
the community in the area of the proposed event and that:
1. There is adequate area to conduct the event and to acc~,,,odate the
antlet pated attendance·
258
2. Sufficient automobile parking will be provided for the anticipated
attendance.
3. Food service operations, medical facilities, solid waste
facilities, sewage disposal methods and potable water service are
approved by the Health Officer.
4. Fire protection plans and facilities are approved by the County
Fire Warden,
5. Security operations plans are approved by the County Sheriff.
6. The site will be cleaned and restored to its original condition or
better at the conclusion of the event.
7. Public roadways providing access to the event are capable of
accommodating the anticipated traffic volumes in a reasonable and
safe n~nner with minimal disruption to local traffic circulation.
8. The hours of operation allowed for the event shall be compatible
with the uses adjacent to the activity. Lighting for night
activities should be directed so as not to illuminate adjoining
properties.
g. Noise generated by the event shall not disrupt the activities of
adjacent land uses.
APPEALS. An applicant or any interested person may file an appeal
from the decision of the Planning Director within 1D days of the date
of mailing Of the notice of decision to the applicant. The appellant
may appeal that decision, in writing, to the Board of Supervisors, on
the forms provided by the Planning Department, which shall be
accompanied by a filing fee of $25.00. Upon receipt of a completed
appeal, the Clerk of the Board shall set the matter for hearing before
the Board Of Supervisors not less than five days or more than 30 days
thereafter and shall give written notice of the hearing to the
appellant and the Planning Director. The Board of Supervisors shall
render its decision within 30 days following the close of the hearing
on the appeal.
SECTION 19.55. CAMPING. If overnight camping is proposed, a temporary
trailer park permit shall be required to be issued by the County Health Officer
pursuant to the provisions of the California Health and Safety Code.
SECTION 19.56. INSURANCE AND BOND. As a condition of approval of a
permit, the permittee may be required to execute an agreement with the County
of Riverside, secured by a cash bond in the amount considered necessary to
restore the site to its original condition. In addition, the permittee my be
required to obtain sufficient indemnity or liability insurance naming the
County of Riverside as a named insured.
SECTION 19.57. REVOCATION. An issued Minor Outdoor Event may be revoked
by the Planning Director at any time if the permittee does not fulfill all of
the conditions of approval. An issued Regularly Scheduled Event permit may be
revoked in accordance with the provisions of Section 18.31.
259
ITEM #11
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission ~
Oliver Mujica, Senior Planne
June 3, 1991
Case No.: Outdoor Advertising Displays Ordinance
The Outdoor Advertising Displays Ordinance was scheduled for the Planning
Commission meeting of June 3, 1991; and a Public Hearing Notice was placed in The
Californian pursuant to the California Government Code.
On May 23, 1991, the City Attorney decided to continue this item to the Planning
Commission Public Hearing date of June 17, 1991, in order to allow the City Attorney
and Planning Staff the opportunity to refine the existing Outdoor Advertising
Displays Moratorium Resolution.
It should be noted that since this item is recommended to be continued to a date
specific, the readvertising of the Public Hearing is not required.
R ECOMMEN DAT I ON:
The Planning Department Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission CONTINUE the Outdoor Advertising
Displays Ordinance to their meeting of June 17, 1991.
OM:ks
A: OUTDOOR. ADV-A