The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About102191 PC AgendaAGENDA TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING October 21, 1991 6:00 PM VAIL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 29915 Mira Loma Drive Temecula, CA 92390 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Hoagland ROLL CALL: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, 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 Commission Secretary. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state vour 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 (3) minute time limit for individual speakers. COMMISSION BUSINESS 1. Approval of Agenda 2. Minutes 2.2 Approval of minutes of October 7, 1991 Planning Commission Meeting. NON PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Plot Plan Administrative 192 Lou Kashmere West Side of Front Street, North of Lower Highway 79. Center Signage/Freeway Sign Mark Rhoades Denial Case No: Substantial Conformance 23 Applicant: Bedford Properties/Costco Proposal: Change to Parking and Landscaping Case Planner: Mark Rhoades Recommendation: Approval Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Substantial Conformance 21 San Diego Trust and Savings Bank Southeast Corner of Front Street, and Moreno Road Automated Teller Machine Kiosk Mark Rhoades Recommendation: Continue Off Calendar PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: 6A. Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Tentative Tract 25277 and Zone Change 5724 Acacia Construction Southwesterly side of Pechanga Creek abutting the easterly side of Temecula Creek Inn Golf Course To change the zone from R-R, Rural Residential, to R-l, single family residential and to create 102 residential lots and 7 open space lots. Chariy Ray Continue Off Calendar and renotice. Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Television/Radio Antenna Ordinance City .of Temecula City Wide An Ordinance establishing regulations for Television/Radio Antennas Oliver Mujica Approval Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Adult Business Ordinance City of Temecula City Wide Ordinance to regulate Adult Business within Temecula City Limits. Oliver Mujica Approval 10. Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Case: Applicant: Location: Proposal: C se Planner: Recommendation: Conditional Use Permit (CUP 13) Mr. Daniel Branson 42245 Sarah Way, north side of Sarah Way, approximately 1/4 mile west of Diaz Road Tenant Improvement of an existing structure within the M-SC Zone for use as an indoor shooting range with accompanying retail sales of firearms and ammunition. Charly Ray Approval Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tract Map No. 23125 Sterling Builders Northeast Corner of DePortola and Butterfield Stage Road Subdivide 88.4 acres into 215 Single Family Residential Lots. Richard Ayala Approve Parcel Map 24085 Rancho California City Center Association No. 1 Westerly side of Diaz Road, north of the future extension of Winchester Road. To create 57 commercial/industrial parcel on a 73 acre site in the M-SC Debbie Ubnoske Recommend Approval 11. 12. Case: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Case: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Parcel Map 24086 Rancho California City Center Association No. 1 Westerly side of Diaz Road, north of the future extension of Winchester Road. To create 49 commercial/industrial parcels on a 70 acre site in the M-SC Debbie Ubnoske Recommend Approval Parcel Map 25139 50 City Center Associates West of Diaz Road and South of Cherry Street To create 66 commerical/industrial parcels on a 97 acre site in the M-SC Zone. Debbie Ubnoske Approval 13. Case: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Parcel Map 25408 Phillip T. See Southwesterly of future extension of Winchester Road Southwest of Diaz Road. To create 20 commercial/industrial parcels on a 36 acre site in the M-SC zone. Debbie Ubnoske Recommend Approval 14. Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Extension of Time Tentative Tract No. 22761 Coleman Homes, Inc. West Side of Ynez Road, North of Pierce Lane, Specific Plan 180. Second Extension of Time for a 50 Lot Residential subdivision on 16.7 acres. Mark Rhoades Continue to November 4, 1991 15. Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Extension of Time Tentative Tract No. 22762 Coleman Homes, Inc. West side of Terra Vista Road, South of Ynez Road. Second Extension of Time for an 80 lot residential Subdivision on 28 acres. Speicifc Plan 180. Mark Rhoades Continue to November 4, 1991 16. Case: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Case Planner: Recommendation: Vesting Tentative Tract No. 26828 Change of Zone No. 13 Dacin Development, Inc. Northwest corner of Rita Way and Seraphina Road. Change of Zone from R-R to R-l, and a proposal to subdivide 35.5 Acres into 130 residential lots. Mark Rhoades Approval Planning Director RePort Planning Commission Discussion Other Business ADJOURNMENT Next meeting: November 4, 1991, 6:00 p.m., Vail Elementary School, 29915 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula, California SJ/Ib pc/TAgn 10/21 ITEM # 2 NINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 7# 1991 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Planning Commission was called to order Monday, October 7, 1991, 6:10 P.M., at Vail Elementary School, 29915 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula, California. The meeting was called to order by Chairman John E. Hoagland. PRESENT: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Ford, Chiniaeff Hoagland ABSENT: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey Also present were Assistant City Attorney John Cavanaugh, Planning Director Gary Thornhill, Senior Planner Debbie Ubnoske, Deputy City Engineer Doug Stewart, Robert Righetti, Department of Public Works, Gary King, Park Development Coordinator, and Minute Clerk Gail Zigler. PUBLIC COMMENT None COMMISSION BUSINESS 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND advised that the applicant requests to continue Item No. 3, and that Item No. 13, be moved to the beginning of the agenda. GARY THORNHILL suggested that Item No. 13 be heard upon the arrival of the City Attorney John Cavanaugh. COMMISSIONER FORD moved to approve the agenda with Item No. 13 taken out of order and presented upon the arrival of the City Attorney, seconded by COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF. AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey COMMISSIONER FAHEY arrived at 6:15 P.M. TPCMIN10/07/91 -1- OCTOBER 11, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 07, 1991 MINUTES 2.1 Approval of minutes of September 16, 1991~Planning Commission Meeting. COMMISSIONER FORD amended the minutes as follows: Page 7, prior to motion, add paragraph to read, "Due to the fact that the zone change and adoption of the Negative Declaration of the E.I.R. and approval thereof occurred several months prior to this action, the previous motion was brought back for reconsideration."; Page 18, statement by Robert Kemble, correct to read" .... Paloma Del Sol development up stream." COMMISSIONER FAHEY amended Page 18 and 19, spelling corrected from "ridgeling" to "ridgeline". COMMISSIONER BLAIR amended Page 8, under her comments, " ..... densities in the area without allowing for adequate park lands within the total project.". COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF moved to approve the minutes of September 16, 1991 as amended, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None NON PUBLIC HEARING ITEM8 3. TELEVISION/RADIO ANTENNA ORDINANCE 3.1 Proposal for an ordinance establishing regulations for Television/Radio Antennas, city wide. COMMISSIONER FAREY moved to continue Item No. 3, Television/Radio Antenna Ordinance to the meeting of October 21, 1991, seconded by COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None TPCMIN10/07/91 -2- OCTOBER 11, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 7, 1991 13. CMANGE OF ZONE NO. 18; and SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 13.1 Proposal to amend the boundary of the Paloma Del Sol Specific Plan to include planning area No. 36. Located at the southeast corner of Margarita Road and DePortola Road. OANY THORNHILL advised that this item was continued due to the concern that the Homeowner's contention was that the CC&R provisions limited the use of the property to residential. JOHN CAVANAUGH stated that the City Attorney's office was directed to research the apparent conflict between the proposed zone change and the CC&R's that regulate the land use. Mr. Cavanaugh advised that zone changes are legislative acts authorized by the California Constitution and state government codes. These statutes, as well as the Constitution, grant specific authority to the local agencies under their police power to enact local land use regulations as long as they don't conflict with the general law of the state. The City will prevail on it's zoning decision when the City Council decides to zone or re-zone any property. The CC&R's are in essence deed restrictions between land owners. The covenants of the CC&R's are ineffective as to the City. The CC&R's to the extent they conflict with the proposed zone change, will be ineffective. COMMISSIONER FAHEY questioned if the Commission could base their decision on the zone change as to it's effect on the community. JOHN CAVANAUGH stated yes, the only constant fact is that this zone change will be consistent with the future general plan. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF questioned if the applicant was asking for additional commercial, could the Commission request additional park land. JOHN CAVANAUGH based on the overall effect to the specific plan, you could make the determination that there is a requirement for additional park land, and make that recommendation to the City Council. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 6:30 P.M. F.H. TAYLOR, 31531 Pio Pico Road, Temecula, stated that the Los Ranchitos CC&R's restricted commercial activities TPCMIN10/07/91 -3- 10/0s/91 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 7, 1991 and opposed the change of zone. He added that he did not agree with mixing commercial development with residential. JOHN MORAMARCO, P.O. Box 906, Temecula, representing the Los Ranchitos Homeowner's Association, requested that the Commission delay their decision for 30 days to allow the homeowners time to meet with the applicant and to discuss the CC&R's. Because the applicant was not present, CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND suggested postponing the item to later in the evening. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF moved to continue Change of Zone No. 18 and Specific Plan No. 219 to 7:30 P.M. to allow for additional testimony, seconded by COMMISSIONER FORD. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 4. EXPAND OLD TOWN HISTORICAL DISTRICT BOUNDARY Proposal to expand Old Town Historical District Boundary. Located in the Old Town District, generally located between Murrieta Creek, between 2nd and 6th Streets. JOHN MEYER presented the staff report. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF expressed a concern that the expansion should not delay the improvements to the Murrieta Creek. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 6:50 P.M. BILL PERRY, 28677 Front Street, Temecula, stated that his opposition is because he felt that the City was missing the target area and would endorse expansion if the boundaries include Pujol Street, Town Association Center and area south to Hwy 79/Hwy 15. COMMISSIONER BLAIR stated that she agreed with the decision to increase the boundaries and added that she would be willing to consider the boundaries expanded further as suggested by Mr. Perry. TPCMIN10/07/91 -4- 10/0s/91 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 7, 1991 COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF moved to close the public hearing at 7:00 P.M. and Adopt Resolution No. 91-(next) recommending approval of Change of Zone No. 19, amending the staff recommendation to expand the historic boundary to extend north to Rancho California Road including all four quadrants of the intersection, west to the backside of the lots that front Pujol, and south along the west side of Front Street, to Hwy 79/Hwy 15, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND advised that the City of Murrieta was requesting that Items 9, 10, 11 & 12 be continued to allow their staff to confer with the City of Temecula staff regarding circulation impacts. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 7:05 P.M. on Items No. 9, No. 10, No. 11 and No. 12. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF stepped down on these items due to a conflict of interest. COMMISSIONER BLAIR moved to continue Items No. 9, No. 10, No. 11 and No. 12 to the regularly scheduled meeting of October 21, 1991, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY. AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff 5. CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 17 AND FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT HAP NO. 23125 el Proposal to change the zoning on 88.4 acres from R-A-2-1/2 to R-1 and R-5; and subdivide 88.4 acres into 215 single family residential lots. Located at the northeast corner of DePortola and Butterfield Stage Road. RICHARD AYALA provided the staff report. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 7:15 P.M. TPCMIN10/07/91 -5- 10/0S/91 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 7o 1991 DAVID JAMES, RanPac Engineering, 27447 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula, indicated concurrence to the staff report and the Conditions of Approval. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAMD advised the applicant that staff had modified Condition 29, first sentence, to read "Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall offer for dedication". COMMISSIONER FAHEY moved to close the public hearing at 7:15 P.M. and recommend to the City Council Acceptance of Environmental Impact Report No. 263 for Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125; Adopt Resolution No. 91-(next] recommending approval of Change of Zone No. 17 and Adopt Resolution No. 91-(next) recommending approval of First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125. The motion failed due to lack of second. COMMISSIONER FORD expressed concerns for the following: that the Commission is relying on old county documents in regards to the HOA, referring to dormant; Conditions 10 and 11 were deleted and Commissioner Ford felt they should remain; and what improvements will be done to Area C, open space. GARY KING stated that Conditions 10 and 11 were deleted because it is an automatic when the tracts are conditioned through DRC, that TCSD goes into an agreement with the applicant for dedication of the slopes. GARY THORNHILL advised that the applicant has approved CC&R's with the City Attorney that requires an active HOA. Mr. Thornhill suggested modifying Condition 29 to read " ..... land, and execute an agreement with TCSD to improve the proposed 2.75 acre property in accordance with TCSD standards at the time of execution." COMMISSIONER FORD suggested that Condition 25 be modified with the same language as above. COMMISSIONER FAMEY moved to close the public hearing at 7:25 P.M. and recommend to the City Council Acceptance of Environmental Impact Report No. 263 for Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125; Adopt Resolution No. 91-[next) recommending approval of Change of Zone No. 17 and Adopt Resolution No. 91-(next) recommending approval of First Extension of TPCMIN10/07/91 -6- lo/oe/91 PLi~FNING COI,fi~ISSION HINUTES Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. by COMMISSIONER FAHEY. OCTOBER 7, 1991 23125, seconded AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, NOES: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Hoagland COMMISSIONER HOAGLAND declared a five minute recess. reconvened at 7:30 P.M. The meeting COMMISSIONER HOAGLAND opened the public hearing on Item No. 13. The applicant requested that the item be postponed to later in the public hearing to allow for his consultant to arrive. 6. TENTATIVE TRACT HAP NO. 25892 Proposal to sub-divide 20 acres into 34 single family residential lots. Located on the south side of Pauba Road between Ynez and Margarita Roads. CHARLES RAY provided the staff report. COMMISSIONER HOAGL~D opened the public hearing at 7:40 P.M. RICHARD HASYCZEH, 25262 Madrone, Murrieta, representing the applicant, concurred with the staff report; however, expressed a concern with Condition 49 requiring that CC&R's be provided to maintain slopes and common open space. He stated that there were some common drainage areas, which the applicant was requesting TCSD maintain. Mr. Masyczeh requested deleting Condition 49 and replace with a condition that TCSD maintain the drainage areas and that adequate warning be given to the property owners for the maintenance of these areas. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND asked if TCSD would be interested in maintaining these drainage areas. GARY KING advised that the TCSD was not interested in the applicants request to amend Condition 49. DAVE ASMUS, 40521 Calle Cansione, Temecula, spoke in favor of the request. RALPH NAVARRO, 30418 Colina Verde, Temecula, spoke in favor of the request. TPCMIN10/07/91 -7- 10/0S/91 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 7, 1991 NOEL PAINE, 30222 Corte Cantero, Temecula, spoke in favor of the request. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF stated that he felt there were some design issues that needed to be addressed before approving the request. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND stated that he would find it inappropriate to approve this map as part of an area that looks like approximately 220 acres with no coordinated circulation pattern. He stated that he felt that the developments should follow a circulation plan for the entire area. COMMISSIONER FORD stated that he felt the topography should also be looked at based on the fact that the project bisects a natural drainage course. COMMISSIONER BLAIR stated that she would feel more comfortable addressing this plan in areas such as this, in keeping with the general plan. CHAIRMAN CHINIAEFF moved to close the public hearing at 8:00 P.M. and continue off calendar Tentative Tract Map No. 25892, to allow the applicant to work with staff and address the issue of maintenance of large slopes along the creek, coordination of a drainage plan for this area, the coordination of a circulation plan for this property and properties between Santiago and Pauba Roads, and amount of major slopes and pad sizes related to the project setting a minimum size for a pad, using 10,000 as a reasonable pad to lot size (specifically looking at Lot 2) seconded by CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND for discussion. DOUG STEWART questioned if the Commission was requesting that the applicant redesign the drainage plan. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF suggested that staff work with the applicant to see that the drainage flows in that area. COMMISSIONER FAHEY stated that due to the fact that the Commission has expressed a number of concerns regarding this project, which appears to be in conflict with the future general plan, she would not be in favor of a continuation at this time. TPCMIN10/07/91 -S- 10/0S/9~ PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 7, 1991 CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND stated that until there is a general plan that clearly delineates what the City is going to do, he cannot support going forward with this project. AYES: 2 COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff, Ford NOES: 3 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Hoagland COMMISSIONER FAHEY moved to deny Tentative Tract Map No. 25892 based on the probable inconsistency with the future general plan, seconded by COMMISSIONER BLAIR. JOHN CAVANAUGH requested more specific findings on the probably inconsistencies. COMMISSIONER FAHEY outlined circulation, land use, grading and drainage. AYES: 3 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Hoagland NOES: 2 COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff, Ford CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND clarified that the motion was a recommendation to the City Council. 7. PARCEL HAP NO. 25059 MINOR CHANGE NO. I Proposal to modify or delete engineering conditions. Project located at Ridge Park Drive, south west side approximately 70 feet east of its intersection with Rancho California Road. RICHARD AYALA provided the staff report. CHAIRMAN HOA8LAND opened the public hearing at 8:10 P.M. ANTHONY POLO, Avalon Consultants, P.O. Box 2497, Temecula, representing the applicant, concurred with the staff report. COMMISSIONER FORD questioned if the language in Conditions 40, 41 and 45 shouldn't read "as necessary" rather than "as warranted". ROBERT RIGHETTI stated that staff would be relying on traffic studies for justification of the traffic signals and the proper terminology is "as warranted". T~C~0/07/9~ -9- 10/0S/91 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 7, 1991 COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF expressed a concern for the transportation conditions indicating that prior to recordation the applicant will get credit for the mitigation fee and contributing 46% of the construction costs and entering into a reimbursement agreement; however, they are building them. ROBERT RIGHETTI stated that Condition 39, credit given toward signal mitigation fee, is being deleted and the conditions outlined are taking the previous conditions and revising them. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF moved to close the public hearing at 8:15 P.M. and Deny Minor Change No. 1 for Parcel Map No. 25059 and Approve Parcel Map No. 25059 Minor Change No. 1, subject to the modification and deletion of Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map No. 25059, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None 8. PLOT PLAN NO. 239 - RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT el Proposal to construct three structures to house Rancho California Water District Headquarters functions as follows: 2 story office at 40,000 square feet; warehouse at 13,000 square feet and an Operations Building at 20,000 square feet. Located northwesterly of the intersection of Diaz Road and Rio Nedo. CHARLES HAY provided the staff report. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 8:25 P.M. JOHN HERBERT, 28061 Diaz Road, Temecula, concurred with the staff report. Mr. Herbert requested clarification of the following Conditions: Item 20, project is not subject to the Fish and Game review and therefore should not be subject to the fees; Item 15, applicant stated they did not have the funds to place all specimen trees in the project; and regarding Conditions 16, 33, 40 and 42, developer has paid these fees already. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND suggested modifying the first engineering condition to reflect "...at no cost to the City." TPCMIN10/07/91 -10- 10/08/91 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE8 OCTOBER 7, 1991 DOUG STEWART concurred with the amendment. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND suggested that the requirement for this fee be mitigated. MIKE GRAY advised that this was a standard fee on all buildings in the City and there is no proposal for deferment of the fee. CHAIRMAN HOAGLANDquestioned if Mr. Gray would be adverse to deleting Condition 54 which was a duplicate of Condition 52. MIKE GRAY concurred with the recommendation. COMMISSIONER FAHEY requested clarification on Condition 20. JOHN CAVANAUGH advised that this was a state mandated fee and the applicant can file a deminimous exemption. DAN GILLISS, 193 Hartford Drive, Newport Beach, answered questions regarding the proposed gas pumps that were referenced in the plans. COMMISSIONER FAHEY suggested clarifying what the Commission wanted to see in the way of trees. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF stated that he felt 24" box trees were appropriate, particularly along Diaz Road. COMMISSIONER FAHEY moved to close the public hearing at 8:35 P.M. and recommend Adoption of the Negative Declaration for Plot Plan No. 239 and Adopt Resolution 91-(next) approving Plot Plan No. 239, modifying Condition No. 15 to specify 24" box trees, No. 20, language to reflect whether or not the applicant must pay the fees, No. 54 deleted and top of page 20, to read "...at no cost to the City.", seconded by COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None 9. PARCEL MAP 24085 9.1 Proposal to create 57 commercial/industrial parcel on a 73 acre site in M-SC zone. Located on the westerly side TPCMINlO/07/91 -11- 10/08/91 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 7, 1991 of Diaz Road, north of the future extension of Winchester Road. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 7:05 P.M. COMMISSIONER BLAIR moved to continue Parcel Map 24085 to October 21, 1991, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY. AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff 10. PARCEL HAP 24086 10.1 Proposal to create 49 commercial/industrial parcels on a 70 acre site in M-SC zone. Located on the westerly side of Diaz Road, north of the future extension of Winchester Road. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 7:05 P.M. COMMISSIONER BLAIR moved to continue Parcel Map 24086 to October 21, 1991, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY. AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff 11. PARCEL HAP 25139 11.1 Proposal to create 66 commercial/industrial parcels on a 97 acre site in M-SC zone. Located west of Diaz Road and south of Cherry Street. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 7:05 P.M. TPCM*rN10/07/91 -12- 10/08/91 PL/~NNING COMMISSION MINUTE8 OCTOBER 7, 1991 COMMISSIONER BLAIR moved to continue Parcel Map 25139 to October 21, 1991, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY. AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff 12. PARCEL HAP 25408 12.1 Proposal to create 20 commercial/industrial parcels on a 36 acre site in M-SC zone. Located southwesterly of future extension of Winchester Road. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 7:05 P.M. COMMISSIONER BLAIR moved to continue Parcel Map 25408 to October 21, 1991, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY. AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff CHAIRMAN BOAGLAND re-opened the public hearing on Item No. 13 at 8:40 P.M. KEITH MOCANNJR., 43121 Margarita, Temecula, applicant, advised that after communication with the City Attorney's office, he has been advised that the enforcement of the CC&R's and release thereof is a civil matter to be addressed by the property owner and the Homeowner's Association. Mr. McCann stated that it was a concern of the NOA that being released from the CC&R's would set some sort of precedent; the CC&R's provide for this with the requirement of 51% approval of the homeowners. BARRY BERNELL, 3242 Haliday Street, Santa Ana, representing the applicant, explained the request for changing the designation of this property. Mr. Bernell advised that the original expectation of the area was large lots, very rural; however, in 1980 the county TPCMIN10/07/91 -13- 10/08/91 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER ?, 1991 approved a Specific Plan on this property and we proposed residential development; however, subsequent to that SWAP was approved designating commercial uses across the street at the northwest corner of Margarita and Highway 79. Bedford Properties processed an amendment to change their corner to commercial leaving this property. IRIS ABERNATHY, Margarita Road, Temecula, spoke in favor of the request and requested that the Commission consider approval of a zone change to her property as well. The following individuals spoke in opposition to the request: DON ROHRABACHER, 44281 Flores Drive, Temecula. Mr. Rohrabacher clarified that the applicant would need approval from 51% of the acreage not homeowners. JOHN PEPE, 28980 Vallejo, Temecula. NAYREE DAVIS, 28895 Vallejo, Temecula. CHAIIOfi~NCHINIAEFF asked what the official decision of the Homeowner's Association was. NAYREE DAVIS stated that the official decision would be denial; however, at the minimum, the Association would request the Commission delay their decision to allow them the opportunity to discuss the project with Mr. McCann. KEITH MCCANN advised the Commission that he had been contacted by various members of the Board requesting some sort of compensation for approval of his request. Mr. McCann also stated that he attended the public hearing when the 40 acre retail site was approved and no other homeowners were present from the Los Ranchitos Association. Mr. McCann added that his project would not have the impact that the 40 acre site will. COMMISSIONER FAHEY stated that she was not in favor of approval because she felt that overriding the CC&R's would be setting a precedent. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF stated that putting 2 1/2 acres of residential in commercial was not good planning and stated that he would be in favor of approving proposal and letting the City Council make the final decision. TPCMIN10/07/91 -14- lo/os/91 PLKNNING COIOflSSION HINUTES OCTOBER 7, 1991 CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND stated that he felt the issue was one that needed to be resolved between the land owner and the Association. COMMISSIONER BLAIR stated that she would not be in favor of the zone change until the general plan is complete. COMMISSIONER FORD stated that he would like to see both property owners meet and try to resolve their differences and provide written proof of a resolution. COMMISSIONER FORD moved to close the public hearing at 9:20 P.M. and send Change of Zone No. 18 and Specific Plan No. 219, Amendment No. 2 back to staff to allow the property owners to work out some sort of resolution, seconded by COMMISSIONER BLAIR. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None 14. PLOT 14.1 PLAN 240 Proposal to construct a 6,300 square foot restaurant on an approved building pad location on the site of Plot Plan 18 revised. Located on the northwest corner of Rancho California Road and Lyndie Lane. CHARLES HAY provided the staff report. CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 9:25 P.M. DANA BRUNANSKY, 98 Executive Circle, Suite 190, Irvine, representing the applicant, Red Robin International, concurred with the staff report. COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF requested that the applicant work with staff on enhancing the landscaping along the Lyndie Lane frontage. FRED GRIMES, 41530 Enterprise Circle, Temecula, answered questions regarding the other tenants in the proposed project. TPCMIN10/07/91 -15- 10/08/91 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE8 OCTOBER 7, 1991 COMMISSIONER BLAIR moved to close the public hearing at 9:30 P.M. and Adopt Resolution No. 91-{next) approving Plot Plan No. 240, seconded by COMMISSIONER FAHEY. AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Ford, Hoagland NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None PLANNING DIRECTOR REPORT GARY THORNHILL reminded the Commissioners that the meeting was adjourning to a joint meeting with the Temecula City Council on Thursday, October 10, 1991, 7:00 P.M., at Temecula City Hall. MIKE GRAY, County Fire Department, advised the Commissioners that according to the City Ordinance, oil is rated as a Class I liquid and must be stored in the tanks as described in Item 9, Rancho California Water District. PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION None OTHER BUSINESS None ADJOURNMENT COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF moved to adjourn at 9:35 P.M., seconded by COMMISSIONER FORD and carried unanimously. A special meeting will be held between the City of Temecula Planning Commission and the City Council, Thursday, October 10, 1991, 7:00 P.M., at Temecula City Hall, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula. The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Planning Commission will be held on Monday, October 21, 1991, 6:00 P.M., at Vail Elementary School, 29915 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula. John E. Hoagland, Chairman Secretary TPCMIN~0/07/91 -16- lo/o8/9~ ITEM # 3 RECOMMENDATION: STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 21, 1991 Case No.: Administrative Plot Plan No. 192 Prepared By: Mark Rhoades DIRECT Staff to DENY Administrative Plot Plan 192; APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PROPOSAL: LOCATION: EXISTING ZONING: SURROUNDING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: SURROUNDING LAND USES: PROJECT STATISTICS: Lou Kashmere Lou Kashmere Application for signage at an approved gasoline and carwash facility with a freeway oriented sign 29115 Front Street M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial) North: South: East: West: M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial) M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial) C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) R-R (Rural-Residential) None .-~quested Vacant North: Concrete Facility South: Vacant East: Vacant West: Murrieta Creek Proposed Freeway Sign Height: 45 feet Proposed Sign Square Footage: 148.5 square feet S\STAFFRPT\192 PPA ANALYSIS Administrative Plot Plan No. 192 was submitted to the City on August 14, 1991. The current application is a proposal for project identification for Conditional Use Permit No. 5 which was previously approved by the Planning Commission. The approved conditional use permit contains gasoline, carwash, mini market and automobile servicing facilities. Building Signs The proposed building signs consist of red illuminated channel letters applied to the building surface. The proposed signage conforms with the requirements of Ordinance No. 348. The applicant had originally proposed individual signs over each of the service bays at Staff's request. It is Staff's opinion that the individual signs over each of the service bays did not meet the intent of the Ordinance. The applicant has agreed to remove these signs from the application. Canopy Spandrels The applicant proposes internally illuminated spandrels which would band the perimeter of the canopy over the gasoline pumps. The proposed spandrels would be multi-colored and made of a flexible banding. Staff has determined that the illuminated spandrels do not meet the requirements of Ordinance No. 348. The area in question constitutes signage and exceeds the allowable square footage for wall signs. Free Standing Signs Originally the applicant proposed two signs, a 10'6" high monument sign and a 45' high freeway identification sign. Staff informed the applicant that only one free-standing sign would be permitted. The applicant was informed that if a freeway sign was chosen, a Planning Commission hearing would be required. Ordinance No. 348 allows a maximum freeway sign height of 45'. In order to establish what height is necessary for proper freeway visibility, staff requires a flag test on site. The flag test is a procedure for determining visibility while actually on the freeway. Site visibility is determined from the nearest corresponding freeway access point, three tenths of a mile from where the offramp begins the transition to the surface street. For this proposal, the flag was viewed from the I-15 Freeway and Highway 79 South. The following results were observed by Staff: I-15 Freeway Northbound - Sign glimpsed at 45' Southbound - Sign not visible S\STAFFRPT\392.PPA 2 Hiahwav 79 South Westbound - Sign visible at 45' For the minimal freeway exposure observed by Staff the proposed sign would need to be 45' high, the maximum allowed by Ordinance 348. An additional concern that Staff has with the freeway sign is the proposed location. Approximately 25' south of the proposed sign there is an existing full-size double billboard sign. Staff has determined that the proposed freeway sign could pose a conflict with the City's Future General Plan, because the Future General Plan may not allow 45 foot high signs that are not directly adjacent to the freeway. Ordinance No. 348 also requires a 500 foot separation between billboards. Realizing that the proposed freeway sign is not technically a billboard, the opinion of Staff is that the intent of the Ordinance is to keep to a minimum the visual impact of large signs. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Although the proposed wall signs meet the requirements of Ordinance No. 348, the proposed freeway sign could pose a conflict with the City's Future Adopted General Plan. FINDINGS There is a reasonable probability that Administrative Plot Plan No. 192 will not be consistent with the City's Future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State law. However, the project as proposed, conforms with existing applicable city zoning and development ordinances. Further, the proposal is not characteristic of similar development approved by the City to date. There is 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 significant scale in context of the broad goals and directives anticipated in the City's Future General Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION DIRECT Staff to DENY Administrative Plot Plan 192 vgw Attachments: 1. Exhibits S\STAFFRPT\192,PPA 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 EXHIBITS S%STAFFRPT\192PPA 4 CITY OF TEMECULA ) CASE NO.~ EXHIBIT NO. k,P.C. DATE CITY OF TEMECULA ) COMf r CASE NO. EXHIBIT NO. ~P.C. DATEtC-?-t~Lt Y CITY OF TEMECULA ) r CASE NO.~-~.A-t EXHIBIT NO. kP.C. DATE CITY OF TEMECULA ) CASE EXHIBIT NO. ~P.C. DATE CITY OF TEMECULA ~ r CASE NO. ~/% EXHIBIT NO. ~P.C. DATE CITY OF TEMECULA CABINET AND POLE COVER PAINTED DARK GRAY D/F PYLON SIGN r CASE 6XHIBIT NO. ~P.C. DATE ITEM # 4 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 21, 1991 Case No.: Substantial Conformance No. 23 Prepared By: Mark Rhoades RECOMMENDATION: APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PROPOSAL: LOCATION: EXISTING ZONING: SURROUNDING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: SURROUNDING LAND USES: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: DIRECT Staff to issue a Letter of Substantial Conformance in accordance with Exhibit No. 3 of the attachment. COSTCO Wholesale All Moayeri To modify compactor and bailer location, modify parking on west side, and modify grill work on canopies. Northwest corner of Winchester and Margarita Roads. C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) North: C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) South: C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) East: C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) West: C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) Not Requested Commercial Building (under construction North: Vacant South: Vacant East: Vacant West: Vacant S\STAFFRPT\23.SC ATTACHMENT NO. 1 EXHIBITS S\STAFFRPT\23.SC 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed substantial conformance is an application to change the computer and bailer area of the approved COSTCO site. Additional changes proposed are relative to parking, landscaping and trash enclosures on the west side of the site, and elevation changes on all four (4) building sides. ANALYSIS Elevation changes are limited to the elimination of grill work located in the minor arches on the building sides. All major archways, with the exception of one (west elevation) would retain the grillwork treatment. The changes to the trash enclosure include the reorientation of the bailer and compactor. The enclosure entrance will be reoriented to provide better access from the adjacent drive aisle. The change in parking is requested to facilitate the maneuvering of large trucks, and to permit the placement of an 8 foot high screen wall between the loading area and adjacent parking. The applicant proposes to add a small loading area and to add 30 tandem parking spaces to the west side of the building. The tandem parking configuration as proposed is not permitted under Ordinance No. 348, and upon further observation Staff realized that 15 of the tandem spaces are not necessary. The approved site plan for COSTCO provides over 100 spaces in excess of ordinance requirements. Therefore, Staff recommends that the easterly row of tandem spaces be converted to landscaping. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: DIRECT Staff to issue a Letter of Substantial Conformance of in accordance with Exhibit No. 3 of the attachment. Attachments: 1. Exhibits - page 3 A. Approved Site Plan B. Applicant Proposal C. Staff Proposal vgw CITY OF TEMECULA ~ MAJOR 2- 23,916 SF PARCEL 8 r ~ CASE NO.5. r_.Mo.~-~ EXHIBIT NO. I ~P.C. DATE CITY OF TEMECULA ~ PART CASE NO. ~/_~ M EXHIBIT NO. '2,-, ~,.P.C. DATE ~C>-Z-I-c~! ~,~ CITY OF TEMECULA ) PART :l 2 CASE NO. EXHIBIT NO. ~P.C. I:)ATE ITEM # 5 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning October 21, 1991 Substantial Conformance No. 21 Staff requests that consideration of Substantial Conformance No. 21 be continued off-calendar. At this point the applicant is not able to demonstrate parking capacity in conformance with Ordinance No. 348 relative to the project proposal. vgw ITEM 6 A MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Planning Commissioners Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning October 21, 1991 Tentative Tract Map No. 25277 (Acacia Homes), Change of Zone No. 5724 Planning Staff requests the Commission continue the public hearing for the Tentative Tract Map No. 25277 and associated Change of Zone 5724 off-calendar. Staff and the applicant are continuing negotiations on a map redesign that is intended to address the Commission's previously expressed concerns regarding potential impacts of the proposed subdivision. The proposal will be re-advertised and publicly noticed per applicable code requirements prior to the scheduled hearing date. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission Continue the public hearing for Tentative Tract Map No. 25277 and Change of Zone No. 5724 off-calendar. klb S\MEMOS\GAR~25277TM. MEM ITEM # 6 RECOMMENDATION: STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 21, 1991 Case No.: Antenna Ordinance Prepared By: Oliver Mujica 1. ADOPT Resolution No. P.C. 91- adoption of the Antenna Ordinance. recommending APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: City of Temecula PROPOSAL: An Ordinance establishing regulations for the use of Antennas. LOCATION: City Wide BACKGROUND: On January 8, 1990, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 90- 01, "a moratorium on the construction and use of commercial transmitting antennas". Through the adoption of Ordinance No. 91-01 in January, the City Council approved the final extension of the moratorium, to January 8, 1992. The purpose for preparing the proposed Antenna Ordinance is due to the inadequacy of the County Ordinance No. 348, in which the City Council's concerns include the following: Non-commercial antennas (i.e. ham radio, satellite dish and television/radio antennas) are permitted as assessory structures without specific development standards. Commercial transmitting antennas are permitted in zoning districts in close proximity to the City's center and Interstate 15, which may create a significant impact to the aesthetics of the City. A:OIRECTIONAL SIGN ANALYSIS: Based on these concerns, the City Council directed the Planning Department Staff to prepare an Antenna Ordinance which establishes regulations for all antennas within the City of Temecula. Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 provides the following requirements for antennas. Non-commercial antennas (i .e. satellite dish, television/radio and ham radio antennas) are permitted in all zoning districts as an accessory use. · Setback requirements are as follows: Side-yard Rear-yard Residential 5 feet 10 feet Commercial 2 feet for each foot by which the height exceeds 35 feet. Industrial 2 feet for each foot by which the height exceeds 35 feet. · Height requirements are as follows: Residential: 40 feet Commercial: 50 feet* Industrial: 50 feet* Height Exceptions (Section 18.20 b) - Structures necessary for the maintenance and operations of a building and flagpoles, wireless masts, chimneys, or similar structures may exceed prescribed height limits where such structures do not provide additional floor space. It should be noted that antennas (both commercial and non-commercial) fall within this category. Height Exceptions (Section 18.34.3) - For structures other than buildings, such as antennas, an A:DIRECTtONAL SIGN D-SIGN-A 2 DISCUSSION: application for a greater height limit in accordance with the limitations of the zoning classification may be made to the Planning Commission pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 (plot plan applications) of this Ordinance. If granted, the approved plot plan shall specifically state the allowed height. It should be also noted that the maximum height limitations for "other structures" in the commercial and industrial zoning classifications is 105 feet. · Screening Requirements: Within commercial and industrial zoning classifications, all roof-mounted mechanical equipment, including antennas, shall be screened from the ground elevation view to a minimum sight distance of 1,320 feet. Exhibit "A" graphically presents the zoning districts that currently permit commercial transmitting antennas, pursuant to Ordinance No, 348. Preparatory to drafting an Antenna Ordinance, Staff conducted background research, into a number of areas related to antennas in the community, and prepared a summary report, which is attached for the Planning Commission's review. This summary report analyzed the following: 1 ) existing conditions, such as the current moratorium ordinance, existing commercial transmitting antennas and current zoning requirements; 2) recent court decisions; 3) antenna regulations adopted by other selected California cities; and 4) key issues to address in the antenna ordinance. In order to provide the City of Temecula with specific and complete standards for regulating antennas, Staff has prepared the attached Ordinance which includes, in summary, the following main components: Non-Commercial Antennas Non-commercial antennas may be established in all zoning districts as assessory uses, subject to the following standards: A:DIRECTIONAL SIGN D-SIGN-A 3 (a) Five (5') foot minimum side yard setback, ten (10') foot minimum rear yard setback, and a ten (10') foot minimum separation from any other structure. (b) Within residential developments, maximum height is thirty-five (35') feet, except satellite dishes which shall not exceed fifteen (15') feet. (c) Roof-mounted antennas are prohibited within residential developments. (d) Within non-residential developments, the maximum height of an antenna shall not exceed the maximum height permitted in the zone. (e) Roof-mounted antennas are permitted within non- residential developments subject to screening requirements. Commercial Transmitting Antennas Commercial transmitting antennas are permitted in the M- SC, M-M and M-H zoning districts, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit; and subject to the following standards: (a) Ten (10') foot minimum setback from any property line; and a ten (10') foot minimum setback from any other structure. (b) Six (6') foot high screening around the base of the antennas is required. (c) The maximum height of an antenna shall not exceed the maximum height permitted in the zone. (d) Only one (1) antenna is permitted per'parcel. (e) A 1,500 foot mimimum setback from Interstate 15 is required. (f) A 1,000 foot mimimum setback from any other commercial transmitting antenna is required. A:DIRECTIONAL SIGN D-SIGN-A Exhibit "B" graphically presents the Planning Staff's recommendation regarding the zoning districts that should conditionally permit commercial transmitting antennas. CONCLUSION: As noted above, the proposed Antenna Ordinance provides the City with the standards to thoroughly review an applicant's proposal as well as providing the necessary control measures needed to ensure the public safety; to provide organization; and control the overall quality and number of such antennas. The new Antenna Ordinance will serve as interim regulations until the City's Zoning Development Code is prepared and adopted. This ordinance could be incorporated and/or modified into the final Zoning Development Code. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This Ordinance 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)(3). FINDINGS: The proposed Antenna Ordinance is necessary to bring about eventual conformity with the City's future Land Use Plan. There is reasonable probability that the proposed Antenna Ordinance will be consistent with the City's future General Plan, which wilt 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. FUTURE GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY: The proposed Antenna Ordinance is consistent with SWAP. addition, Staff finds it probable that this Ordinance will consistent with the new General Plan when it is adopted, In A:DIRECTIONAL SIGN D-SIGN-A 5 RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: ADOPT Resolution No. P.C. 91- recommending adoption of the Antenna Ordinance. OM/antenna Attachments: 2. 3. 4. 5. Resolution "Draft" Ordinance Exhibit "A" Current Zoning Districts Exhibit "B" Proposed Zoning Districts Antenna Ordinance - Summary Report A:DIRECTION ,L SIGN D-SIGN-A RESOLUTION NO, P.C. 91- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE ANTENNA ORDINANCE, WHEREAS, City Ordinance No. 90-04 adopted by reference certain portions of the non-codified Riverside County Ordinances, including Ordinance No. 348 ("Land Use Code"); and WHEREAS, such regulations do not contain adequate provisions for the use of antennas; and WHEREAS, the City of Temecula desires to regulate the use of antennas and to protect the health, quality of life, and the environment of the residents of Temecula; and WHEREAS, public hearing was conducted on October 21, 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: SECTION 1. That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula hereby finds that the proposed Antenna Ordinance will provide for the establishment of regulations for antennas in a fair and equitable manner. SECTION 2. That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula further finds that the proposed Antenna Ordinance is necessary to bring about eventual conformity with its land use plans. SECTION 3. That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula hereby recommends to the City Council adoption of the proposed Antenna Ordinance. The Ordinance is incorporated into this Resolution by this reference and marked Exhibit "A" and dated October 21, 1991 for identification. A:DIRECTIONAL SIGN D-SIGN-A 7 PASSED APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 21 st day of October, 1991. JOHN HOAGLAND 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 21st day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS A:DIRECTIONAL SIGN D-SIGN-A 8 ORDINANCE NO. 91- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADDING CHAPTER 6. TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO ANTENNA REGULATIONS AND ESTABI. ISHING REGULATIONS FOR THE USE OF ANTENNAS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. FINDINGS. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings: 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: (a) The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general plan. (b) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, each of the following: (1) 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. (2) There is little or not 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. (3) The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. 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 A:ANTENNA.ORD SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. The proposed land use regulations are consistent with the SWAP and meet the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit: (a) The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the General Plan. (b) The City Council finds, in adopting land use regulations pursuant to this title, each of the following: (1) There is reasonable probability that Ordinance No. 91- will be consistent with the General Plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. (2) 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. (3) The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. There is the need to control the location and design of antennas in order to protect the public health, safety, and welfare and to maintain community design objectives. It is recognized that large antennas and satellite dish antennas improperly located may pose a form of aesthetic blight on the community, in that the appearance of many antennas is in conflict with architectural standards required of developments within the community. Further, it is recognized that the location of antennas at certain heights and placement may constitute a hazard to the surrounding community. The following zoning regulations pertaining to antennas are required in order to control the size and location of these objects in order to minimize aesthetic blight and to ensure proper location, attachment, and structural integrity thereby protecting the public health, safety, and welfare. A:ANTENNA.ORD SECTION 2_=. Chapter 6 is hereby added to the Temecula Municipal Code, which shall read as follows: CHAPTER 6 ANTENNAS PURPOSE. The purpose of this ordinance is to set forth the development standards for the installation and maintenance of antennas within all land-use zones of the City. The purpose of these regulations is to ensure that the design and location of antennas are consistent with the health, safety, and aesthetic objectives of the City, while providing for the technical requirements of these antennas. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this ordinance, the following words, terms, phrases, and their derivations, shall have the meanings given herein. Then consistent with the context, words used in the present tense singular include the plural. (a) "Antenna" means any system of wires, poles, rods, reflecting discs, or similar devices of various sizes, materials and shapes including but not limited to solid or wire-mesh dish, horn, spherical, or bar configured arrangements, used for the transmission or reception of data, facsimile, television, voice or other forms of telecommunications. Any such system is further defined to be external to or attached to the exterior of any building. (b) "Antenna height or height of antenna" means the total maximum to which it is capable of receiving or being raised and shall be measured from the highest point of the finished grade, on the same property, adjacent to the structure. (c) "Antenna support structure" means a mast, pole, tripod or tower utilized for the purpose of supporting an antenna(s) as defined above. (d) "Amateur and/or citizen band antennas" means antennas used for the operation of amateur and/or citizen band radio stations and which are licensed by the Federal Communication Commission. (e) "Commercial transmitting antenna" means antennas used for transmitting television and/or radio and/or cellular telephone communications. A:ANTENNA.ORD (f) "Obstruction-free reception window" means the absence of man- made or natural physical barriers that would block the signal between a satellite and an antenna. (g) "Non-commercial antenna'" means any Ham radio, satellite dish or television/radio antenna. (h) "Reception window" means the area within the direct line between a land-based antenna and an orbiting satellite. (i) "Satellite dish antenna" means any apparatus capable of receiving communications from a transmittee or a transmitter relay located in planetary orbit. EXEMPT ANTENNAS. Antennas meeting the following standards end specifications are exempt from the requirements of this Section: (a) Common skeletal type radio and television antenna used to receive UHF, VHF, AM and FM signals of off-air broadcasts from radio and television stations, LOCATION OF NON-COMMERCIAL ANTENNAS. Non-commercial antennas may be established in all zoning districts as assessory uses and then shall conform to the regulations contained in this ordinance. .DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR NON-COMMERCIAL ANTENNAS. (a) All ground-mounted antennas shall be required to maintain their supporting structures at least five (5') feet from any side property line; ten (10') feet from any rear yard property line; and ten (10) feet from any other structure. (b) All antennas and their supporting structures shall be located in the rear yard or any side yard, except a street side yard. (c) No antenna or its supporting structure shall be located in the area between the front property line and the dwelling. (d) Within residential developments, no antenna shall be higher than thirty-five (35') feet above grade level, except satellite antennas which shall not exceed fifteen (15') feet in height. A:ANTENNA.ORD (e) A maximum of two (2) antennas including exempt antennas shall be allowed per lot. (f) All roof-mounted antennas within residential developments are prohibited. (g) Within non-residential developments, no antenna shall be higher than the maximum height permitted in the zone, measured from grade level. (h) Within non-residential developments, no antenna shall be roof- mounted except on a flat portion of the roof structure with parapets, and/or architecturally matching screening plan. LOCATION OF COMMERCIAL TRANSMITTING ANTENNAS. Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in this title, no commercial transmitting antenna shall be established or expanded except in the M-SC, M-M and M-H zoning district, subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit, and then shall conform to the regulations contained in this ordinance. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, No commercial transmitting antenna shall be erected or relocated except upon the granting of a conditional use permit therefore in accordance with Section 18.28 of Ordinance No. 348 hereof. The requirements of Ordinance No. 348 and of this ordinance first shall be construed in a manner to make them compatible. Where there is a conflict between the two, ,thie-Ordinance shall control. ~ 't~ ~,u,~,'s oF The r 'ements of s ordinanc be si ' cons wit -DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL TRANSMITTING ANTENNAS. (a) All ground-mounted antennas shall be required to maintain their supporting structures at least ten (10') feet from any property line and ten (10') feet from any other structure. (b) The base of all ground-mounted antennas shall be screened by walls, fences or landscaping at least six (6') feet in height obscuring visibility of the base of the antenna. Landscaping shall be of a type and variety capable of growing within one ( 1 ) year to a landscape screen which obscures the visibility of the base of the antenna. A:ANTENNA,ORD (c) All antennas and their supporting structures shall be located in the rear yard or side yard, except a street side yard. (d) No antenna or its supporting structure shall be located in the area between the front property line and the main structure or building. (e) No antenna shall be higher than the maximum height permitted in the zone, measured from grade level. (f) A maximum of one (1) antenna shall be allowed per lot. (g) No antenna or its supporting structure shall be located within 1,500 feet of Interstate 15. (h) No antenna or its supporting structure shall be located within 1,000 feet of any other such antenna. OPERATIONAL CRITERIA. The following regulations shall apply to the establishment, installation and operation of all antennas in all zones: (a) Antennas shall be installed and maintained in compliance with the requirements of the Building Code. Antenna installers shall obtain a building permit prior to installation. (b) No advertising material shall be allowed on any antenna. (c) All electrical wiring associated with any antenna shall be buried underground or hidden in a manner acceptable to the Building Official. (d) No portion of an antenna array shall extend beyond the property lines or into any front yard area. Guy wires shall not be anchored within any front yard area but may be attached to the building. (e) The antenna, including guy wires, supporting structures and accessory equipment, shall be located and designed so as to minimize the visual impact on surrounding properties and from public streets. The materials used in constructing the antenna shall not be unnecessarily bright, shiny, garish, or reflective. A:ANTENNA.ORD (f) Every antenna must be adequately grounded, for protection against a direct strike of lightning, with an adequate ground wire. Ground wires shall be of the type approved by the latest edition of the Electrical Code for grounding masts and lightning arresters and shall be installed in a mechanical manner, with as few bends as possible, maintaining a clearance of at least two inches from combustible materials. Lightning arresters shall be used that are approved as safe by the Underwriter's Laboratories, Inc., and both sides of the line must be adequately" protected with proper arresters to remove static charges accumulated on the line. When lead-in conductors of polyethylene ribbon-type are used, lightning arresters must be installed in each conductor. When coaxial cable or shielded twin lead is used for lean-in, suitable protection may be provided without lightning arresters by grounding the exterior metal sheath. (g) A wind velocity test shall be required, if deemed necessary by the Building Official. SE~TID~L:). NON-CONFORMING ANTENNAS. All antennas, in any zone, lawfully constructed and erected prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, which do not conform to the requirements of the provisions of this Chapter for the particular zone in which they are located, shall be accepted as non-conforming uses for a period of one (1) year from the date of adoption of this Ordinance. ~ ,. 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. SEt'TT"L~5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law. F~t'h,,,, F ,.qiZCT!n~J .~. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE. The City Council hereby finds that this project does not have a potential for causing a significant affect on the environment. Therefore, the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under Section 15061 {b){3}. ~tE~=gef{~'7_. 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. A:ANTENNA.ORO Section ~8~M~. _Variances· Pursuant to the procedures of Section 1~.~ ~E~ ~./~.~ 7 o~ ~ ^ la " ~g e~ ~jj~!%ss, any person may seek a variance from the provisions of this Ordinance· No fee shall be charged to an applicant for a variance that is required solely for the purposes of complying with this Ordinance. Any variance so granted is revocable for failure by the applicant or property owner to comply with the conditions imposed. A variance shall be issued for an antenna if it meets the following standards: Locating the antenna in conEormance with the specifications of this Section would obstruct the antenna's reception window or otherwise excessively interfere with reception, and such obstruction or interference involves factors beyond the applicant's control; or, the cost of meeting the specifications of this Section is excessive, given the cost of the proposed antenna. The variance application includes a certification that the proposed installation is in conformance with applicable City Building Code regulations. Furthermore, the application must contain written documentation of such conformance, including load distributions within the building's support structure and certified by a registered engineer. If it is proposed that the antenna will be located on the roof, where possible, the antenna shall be located on the rear portion of the roof and be consistent with neighboring improvements, uses, and architectural character.w 1991. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this dayof RONALD J. PARKS MAYOR ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK CITY CLERK A:ANTENNA.ORD STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) CITY OF TEMECULA ) S$, 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:AN~I'ENNA.ORD MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Gary Thornhill Oliver Mujica September 19, 1991 Antenna Ordinance - Summary Report As part of the proposed work program for the preparation of the Antenna Ordinance, this memorandum is intended to summarize the preliminary findings of our research; provide recommendations; and present the "Draft" Antenna Ordinance for your review and comments. INTRODUCTION On January 8, 1990, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 90-01, "a moratorium on the construction and use of commercial television and radio transmitting antennas". Through the adoption of Ordinance No. 90-01 in January, the City Council approved the final extension of the moratorium, to January 8, 1992. Since the current moratorium is due to expire by the end of the year, it is critical that permanent antenna regulations be implemented prior to January 8, 1992. The new Antenna Ordinance will serve as interim regulations until the City's Zoning Development Code is prepared and adopted. This ordinance could be incorporated and/or modified into the final Zoning Development Code. Preparatory to drafting an Antenna Ordinance, we conducted background research into a number of areas related to antennas in the community, including: Analyzing existing conditions. This section will discuss the current moratorium ordinance, existing commercial transmitting antennas and current zoning requirements. Analyzing recent court decisions. This section will discuss recent court decisions about antenna ordinances which could affect Temecula's future regulations. Analyzing other ordinances. This section will discuss antenna regulations adopted by other selected California cities. Identifying key issues. This section will discuss key issues to address in the antenna ordinance, including types of antennas to be regulated, zoning districts in which antennas should be allowed, design and performance standards for the installation of antennas and amortization, as well as specific recommendations. Summarizing recommendations. The conclusion of this memorandum will summarize our recommendations for the proposed antenna ordinance. The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize our initial findings with respect to the above areas, which will set the stage for a future zoning ordinance to permanently regulate antennas in Temecula. This memo will make recommendations as to the intent and content of Temecula's proposed Antenna Ordinance. EXISTING CONDITIONS Antenna Moratorium Ordinance At the present time, new television and radio transmitting antennas are restricted in Temecula, pursuant to City Ordinance No. 91-01. This moratorium ordinance was adopted by the City Council based on the following findings: The public and City staff had indicated to the Council that aesthetic and land use problems had arisen do to the construction of television and radio transmitting antennas within the City; It is necessary to re-examine all of the land use regulations of Riverside County which the City has adopted by reference, as they apply to television and radio transmitting antennas; It is necessary, pending the conduct of such study, and the enactment of such regulations based thereon, that a moratorium on the construction of any television and radio transmitting antennas be imposed pending the completion of such study and report; and If such moratorium were not imposed, construction of such television and radio transmitting antennas would be undertaken which could very well frustrate the zoning proposal to be examined and studied. Existine Commercial Transmittina Antennas We are currently in the process of completing our research of existing commercial transmitting antennas within the City of Temecula. It is anticipated that the results of our survey will be completed prior to September 23, 1991; and the survey results will be transmitted to you by a separate memorandum prior to September 27, 1991. Current Zonina ReQuirements Current City zoning requirements (which have been adopted by Ordinance No. 91-01 ) prohibit the construction of television and radio transmitting antennas within the City of Temecula. However, Section 2 of Oroinance No. 91-01 includes a provision for an exemption should any party believe that they have a vested right to build a television or radio transmitting antenna or would suffer a hardship if not permitted to build such an antenna. Such a request for an exemption may be filed in the form of a plot plan application, provided the the subject property is within the R-R, W-2, C-l/C-P, C-P-S, M-SC, M-M or M-H zoning district. Such exemption may be granted by the City Council only after due notice and public hearing. It should be noted that non-commercial antennas, such as Ham radio, satellite dish and television/radio antennas are exempt from Ordinance No. 91-01. Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 (which has been adopted by reference by City Ordinance No. 90-04) provides the following requirements for antennas (i.e. satellite dish and television/ radio antennas). Non-commercial antennas (i.e. satellite dish, television/radio and ham radio antennas) are permitted in all zoning districts as an accessory use. · Setback requirements are as follows: Side-yard Rear-yard Residential 5 feet 10 feet Commercial 2 feet for each foot by which the height exceeds 35 feet. Industrial: 2 feet for each foot by which the height exceeds 35 feet. · Height requirements are as follows: Residential: 40 feet Commercial: 50 feet* Industrial: 50 feet* Height Exceptions (Section 18.20.b) - Structures necessary for the maintenance and operations of a building and flagpoles, wireless masts, chimneys, or similar structures may exceed prescribed height limits where such structures do not provide additional floor space. It should be noted that antennas fall within this category. Height Exceptions (Section 18.34.3) - For structures other than buildings, an application for a greater height limit in accordance with the limitations of the zoning classification may be made to the Planning Commission pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 (plot plan applications) of this Ordinance. If granted, the approved plot plan shall specifically state the allowed height. It should be noted that the maximum height limitations for other structures in the commercial and industrial zoning classifications is 105 feet. · Screening requirements: For commercial and industrial zones, all roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from the ground elevation view to a minimum sight distance of 1,320 feet. As indicated in previous reports to the City Council, the major issue in Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 is that commercial transmitting antennas, which includes television/radio and cellular telephone transmitting antennas, are permitted in zoning districts in close proximity to the City's center and I-15. These locations may create a significant impact to the aesthetics of the City. In addition, non-commercial antennas (i.e. ham radio, satellite dish and television/radio antennas) should not be regulated as assessory uses only, since there is a potential of creating visual impacts especially in the commercial and industrial zoning districts, as well as residential areas. Therefore, in concurrance with the opinion of the City Council, it is our recommendation that the new Antenna Ordinance regulate all types of antennas. SUMMARY OF RECENT COURT DECISIONS Several recent court decisions directly impact the ways in which local governments can regulate antennas. This section of the memorandum provides a brief overview of our understanding of rolevent cases relating to the regulations of antennas. It should be noted, however, that the City Attorney should prepare an interpretation or specific legal opinion for the City of Temecula regarding this issue. History of FCC Order Partially Proembrine Local Reaulation of Satellite Antennas In March 1985, the FCC announced that it was considering preempting local regulation of satellite antennas. After receiving public comments, the FCC adopted the following rule: "State and local zoning or other regulations that differentiate between satelite receive- only antennas and other types of antenna facilities are preempted unless such regulations, (a) Have a reasonable and clearly defined health, safety or aesthetic objective; and (b) Do not operate to impose unreasonable limitations on, or prevent, reception of satellite delivered signals by receive-only antennas or to impose costs on the users of such antennas that are excessive in light of the purchase and installation cost of the equipment." In most cases, local zoning regulations will differentiate between satellite dish and other types of antennas. For example, amateur (HAM) radio antennas are typically permitted to be taller than satellite dish antennas. Consequently, so long as there is differentiation among antenna facilities, the local zoning ordinance must meet additional FCC criteria to be valid, to wit: 1 ) the zoning regulations have a reasonable and clearly defined health, safety or aesthetic objective; 2) the regulation may not unreasonal2!y regulate or prevent reception of satellite delivered singals; and, 3) the regulation may not !mpose excessive costs on satellite dishes. The FCC Order Only APPlies if LoCal ZOnina Differentiates Between Satellite and Other Antennas In most circumstances, local zoning regulations do apply different standards between satellite antennas and other types of antennas. However, if there is no such discrimination, then the FCC Order is wholly inapplicable. A case in point is Easlick v. City of Lansinq (1988), where the City merely subjected satellite antennas to its accessory use regulations. Accordingly, the Court found the ordinance valid, even though the plaintiff could not comply with the setback requirements of the ordinance and still obtain adequate reception. A more important question that has never been directly addressed is what constitutes differentiation among antennas. In particular, may a local ordinance differentiate between common broadcast television antennas and all other types of antennas. The FCC Order never directly answered this question. In its Order, the FCC explained that its reference to "other types of antenna facilities" referred to HAM radio and satellite master television antennas, not TV broadcast antennas. The Satellite Antenna Ordinance Must Serve a Clearly Defined Aesthetic, Health or Safety Obie(;tive 1. Discretionary review held not to serve a clearly defined objective. The first requirement of the FCC Order is that the aesthetic, health or safety objectives of local regulation be "clearly defined". This issue was addressed in Hunter v. City of Whittiqr (1989), where a conditional use permit had to be obtained prior to installing a satellite dish. Whittier had adopted its ordinance prior to the FCC Order, and consequently it did not contain the criteria for issuing a CUP that expressly took into account the need for a clear reception window to ensure reasonable reception. Rather, Whittier employed the "general welfare" criteria common to the typical CUP ordinance. The Court held that, by requiring a "clearly defined" health, safety or aesthetic objective, the FCC has imposed a limitation on local regulations which may require greater specificity than would otherwise be sufficient under local zoning law. Then noting that Whittier's ordinance does not enact specific screening or placement requirements, the Court concluded that the ordinance gave unduly broad discretion to administrative officials in light of the FCC's requirements that aesthetic objectives must be clearly defined. The Court explained that a specific placement requirement would have been valid, commenting that a community may enact reasonable screening and placement standards in order to make satellite television receiving antenna installations aesthetically acceptable. A similar result was reached in Van Meter v. Township of Maplewood (1988). The City argued that although no satellite antenna could obtain reception under the City's zoning standards, the solution was to grant a variance. The Court disallowed this solution, explaining that to regulate antenna placement by granting variances from an invalidated ordinance would allow the Board to exercise authority without bounds. Height, setback and location standards meet clearly defined health, safety or aesthetic objective. Although discretionary review was invalid in the HUntqr and Van Meter cases, expressed zoning standards do meet the clearly defined objective requirements, even in the absence of legislative findings. For example, in Van Meter, although Maplewood's height and screening requirements effectively prohibited reception, the Court did hold that the ordinance met the FCC's requirement that zoning have a reasonable and clearly defined aesthetic objective. The Court explained: "Satellite dish antennas are large and rather unsightly. Although it does not state its purpose explicity, the ordinance is clearly an attempt to diminish the visual impact of the antennas by requiring that they be installed in the rear yard and, where they can be viewed from the street or adjoining properties, requiring that the installation be screened with tall shrubbery." The Ordinance May Not Unreasonably Regulate or Prevent Reception of Satellite Delivered ~iqnalS 1. Height and setback regulations held invalid because they impair reception. Several cases involving the application of height, setback and screening regulations to satellite antennas address this issue. In each case, the Court held that while such location restrictions meet the "clearly defined" objective requirement of the FCC Order, they are invalid because they do not allow for reasonable reception. The ordinance at issue in Van Meter, limited dish antennas to six feet in height and completely screened rear yard locations. Initially, the Court noted that the FCC Order does not require that local zoning permit "optimal placement" but only prohibits "unreasonable" interference with satellite signal reception. However, Maplewood's restrictions effectively prohibited reception because a dish antenna must be at least ten feet wide and not blocked by screening to obtain reception. Consequently, the Court held that the Maplewood ordinance was preempted because it functioned as an unreasonable burden on reception and accordingly, the ordinance failed the FCC's second requirement that the zoning not impose an unreasonable limitation on reception. A very similar conclusion was reached in Viiiace of Elm Grove v. Protter (1989), where initially, the Court held that the Village's screening requirements for satellite antennas met the FCC's first requirement of clearly defined aesthetic objective. However, the Court interpreted the FCC's second requirement that zoning not operate to impose unreasonable limitation on or prevent reception of satellite delivered signals. Consequently, Elm Grove's requirement that dishes be less that eight feet in width and twelve feet in height failed this requirement. City Procedures May Not Impose Excessive Costs on Satellite Antennas The final requirement of the FCC Order preemption test is that the local ordinance not impose costs that are excessive in light of the purchase and installation cost of the antenna. This issue was considered in City of Bloomfield Hills v. Garclaro (1989), where Bloomfield's ordinance imposed an eight foot height and width limit on antennas and required very substantial screening. Like in Van Meter, it was undisputed that this limitation made reception impossible. Nonetheless, the Court held that the zoning met the FCC's first requirement of serving a reasonable and clearly defined objective. However, because the zoning restricted reception, the Court reversed the summary judgemerit granted in favor of the City. The Court then went on to address the "excessive costs" issue. Typically, satellite antennas cost between $2,500 to $7,500 to purchase and install. In Bloomfield Hills, the cost of screening to comply with the local ordinance was in excess of $12,000. While the appellate court also remanded this issue to the trial court for a determination as to whether such screening was an "excessive" cost, its discussion suggests that cost of the screening was problematic. SUMMARY OF OTHER ORDINANCES We have reviewed antenna ordinances of other selected California cities known to have regulations for the installation of antennas. Each of the ordinances were examined in terms of the types of antennas regulated, zoning districts in which antennas are allowed, development standards for installing antennas and any other relevent reatures of the ordinance that should be addressed and/or included in the new Antenna Ordinance. The cities surveyed were as follows: Agoura Hills Camarillo Colton Corona Costa Mesa Huntington Park Indian Wells Indio Norco Palm Desert Palm Springs Pittsburgh Rancho Mirage Riverside San Bernardino S.San Francisco Victorville West Covina ORDINANCE PROVISIONS Our analysis of ordinance provisions is as follows. Antennas Regulated Antennas regulated by a majority of ordinances surveyed included satellite dishes and television antennas. Of the eighteen (18) cities surveyed, only the City of Palm Desert had specific regulations for commercial transmitting antennas. The remaining seventeen (17) cities had regulations for antennas similar to Riverside County Ordinance No. 348. Allowed Zonine Districts All of the cities surveyed permit television and radio antennas, including satellite dishes, in all zoning districts, subject to the specific zone's development standards. Palm Desert specified that commercial transmitting antennas are permitted in the industrial zoning districts, subject to the approval by the Architectural Commission. Development Standards Location: Twelve (12) of the cities surveyed specified that antennas must be located in the side or rear yards, except the street side yard. The remaining six (6) cities (Agoura Hills, Camarillo, Palm Desert, Palm Springs, S. San Francisco and West Covina) permitted antennas in the rear yard only. Only the City of Colton permitted antennas to be located in the front yard, subject to the approval by the Director of Community Development. Setbacks: All of the cities surveyed re~luired at least a five (5') side-yard setback; and at least a ten (10') rear-yard setback. RECOMMENDATIONS This section of the report will identify key issues to address in the new Antenna Ordinance. Type of Antennas to be Reaulated As noted above, the purpose of the new Antenna Ordinance is to establish specific regulations for all types of antennas, due to the insufficient criteria under Riverside County Ordinance No. 348. Specifically, the new Antenna Ordinance is intended to regulate commercial transmitting antennas, which includes television/radio and cellular telephone transmitting antennas. In addition, television, radio and satellite dish antennas will be regulated through the use of specific design and performance standards. Recommendation: It is recommended that the new Antenna Ordinance regulate the following types of antennas: 1 ) Commercial Transmitting Antennas; 2) Television and Radio Antennas; 3) Satellite Dish Antennas; and 4) Ham Radio Antennas. It should be noted that due to the FCC's Order, Ham radio antennas are exempt from local regulations. Therefore, Ham radio antennas will be included in the new ordinance as "exempt" antennas. Identification of ADorooriate Zoning Districts As noted above, non-commercial antennas (i.e. satellite dish, television/radio and Ham radio), are currently permitted in all zoning districts as assessory uses. The chief weakness is that Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 does not have specific design and performance standards for antennas. Therefore, it is our recommendation that non-commercial antennas remain to be permitted in all zoning districts as assessory uses. However, specific design and performance standards should be included in the new ordinance. In regards to commercial transmitting antennas, they are currently permitted in the following zoning districts, subject to the approval of a plot plan application by the Planning Commission, R-R, W-2, C-1/C-P, C-P-S, M-SC, M-M and M-H. As noted above, the chief weakness with this requirement is that these antennas are permitted too close to the City's center, general commercial areas and Interstate 15, thus, creating a potential aesthetic impact. Based on this concern expressed by the City Council, it is our opinion that commercial transmitting antennas be limited to the manufacturing areas (such as the M-SC, M-M and M-H zones) subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit, since these zoning districts are intended to provide communication installations within the City. In addition, the conditional use permit process allows the City the opportunity to review such uses on a case-by-case basis. Recommendation: It is recommended that non-commercial antennas (i.e. satellite dish and television/radio) be permitted in all zoning districts as assessory uses, subject to specific design and performance standards. Since Ham radio antennas are exempt, they are permitted in all zoning districts. It is also recommended that Commercial Transmitting Antennas, which includes television/radio and cellular telephone transmitting antennas, be permitted to locate within the M-SC, M-M and M-H zoning districts, subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Design and Performance Standards Recommendation: Based on the preliminary findings of our research, it is recommended that the following design and performance standards be included in the new Antenna Ordinance. Non-Commercial Antennas All antennas and their supporting structures shall be located in the rear yard or any side yard, except a street side yard. No antenna or its supporting structure shall be located in the area between the front property line and the dwelling. All ground-mounted antennas shall be required to maintain their supporting structures at least five (5') feet from any side yard and ten (10') feet from any rear yard property lines; and ten ( 10 ') feet from any other structure. No antenna shall be higher than thirty-five (35') feet above grade level, except statellite antennas which shall not exceed fifteen (15') feet in height. A maximum of two antennas, including exempt antennas, shall be allowed per lot. · All roof-mounted satellite dish antennas are prohibited. Commercial Transmittinq Antennas All antennas and their supporting structures shall be located in the rear yard or any side yard, except a street side yard. No antenna or its supporting structure shall be located in the area between the front property line and the main structure or building. All ground-mounted antennas shall be required to maintain their supporting structures at least ten (10') feet from any property line and ten (10') feet from any other structure. No antenna shall be higher than the maximum height permitted in the zone, measured from grade level. The base of all ground-mounted antennas shall be sceened by walls, fences or landscaping at least six (6') feet in height. Landscaping shall be of a type and variety capable of growing within one (1) year to a landscape screen of six (6') feet in height, which obscures the visibility of the base of the antenna. · A maximum of one (1) antenna shall be allowed per lot. · No antenna shall be roof-mounted. During the previous public hearings, the City Council expressed the desire to impose a distance separation from Interstate 15, in order to reduce the potential visual impact along the designated scenic highway, and a separation requirement between commercial transmitting antennas, in order to minimize the clustering of such antennas, thus reducing the potential visual impacts within the City. Therefore, the following two (2) design and development standards are included as a recommendation only. However, the City Attorney should prepare an interpretation or specific legal opinion for the City of Temecula regarding this issue. No antenna or its supporting structure shall be located within 1,500 feet of Interstate 15. No antenna or its supporting structure shall be located within 1,000 feet of any other such antenna. Amortization Upon the completion of our survey of existing commercial transmitting antennas within the City, our ana!ysis and recommendations regarding amortization will be presented in our future memorandum, which is anticipated to be transmitted prior to September 27, 1991. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS The following is a list of the recommendations made regarding the content of Temecula's proposed Antenna Ordinance: Permit non-commercial antennas (i.e. satellite dish and television/radio) in all zoning districts as assessory uses, subject to specific design and performance standards. 2. Categorize Ham radio antennas as "exempt" from the Antenna Ordinance. Conditionally permit commercial transmitting antennas (i.e. television/radio and cellular telephone transmitting antennas) in the M-SC, M-M and M-H zoning districts. 4. Include design and performance standards. It is anticipated that this item will be scheduled for the Planning Commission public hearing of October 21, 1991. Therefore, I would appreciate receiving your comments prior to September 30, 1991, in order to complete the "Draft" Planning Commission staff report and revised "Draft" Antenna Ordinance for your review prior to October 4, 1991. Should you have any questions regarding this memorandum, please do not hesitate to contact me directly. ATTACHMENT: 1. Draft Antenna Ordinance cc: John Cavanaugh John Meyer Ross Geller ITEM # 7 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 21, 1991 Case No.: Adult Business Ordinance Prepared By: Oliver Mujica RECOMMENDATION: ADOPT Resolution No. P.C. 91- recommending adoption of the Adult Business Ordinance. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: City of Temecula PROPOSAL: An Ordinance establishing regulations for the establishment and operation of adult businesses. LOCATION: City Wide BACKGROUND: On October 9, 1990, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 90-18, "an interim urgency ordinance relating to adult businesses and requiring a permit". Through the adoption of Ordinance No. 91-XX on October 8, 1991, the City Council approved the final extension of the urgency ordinance, to October 9, 1992. The purpose for preparing the proposed Directional Sign Ordinance is due to the inadequacy of the County Ordinance No. 348 as it relates to adult businesses. Based on the concern of the City Council, the Planning Department Staff was directed to prepare an Adult Business Ordinance which establishes regulations for the establishment and operational standards for adult businesses, Exhibit "A" graphically presents the zoning districts that currently permit adult businesses, pursuant to Ordinance No. 348. A:DIRECTIONAL SIGN DISCUSSION: CONCLUSION: Preparatory to drafting an Adult Business Ordinance, Staff conducted background research into a number of areas related to adult businesses in the community and prepared a summary report, which has been attached for the Planning Commission's review. This summary report analyzed the following: 1) existing conditions, such as the current urgency ordinance, existing adult businesses and current zoning requirements; 2) recent court decisions; 3) adult business regulations adopted by other selected California cities; and 4) key issues to address in the adult business ordinance. In order to provide the City of Temecula with specific and complete standards for regulating adult businesses, Staff has prepared the attached Ordinance which includes, in summary, the following main components: Adult businesses are permitted in the C-1/C-P zoning districts, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. Adult businesses shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive uses (i.e. residential, churches, schools, parks, etc.). Adult businesses shall not be located within 200 feet of another adult business, As noted above, the proposed Adult Business Ordinance provides the City with the standards to thoroughly review an applicant's proposal as well as providing the necessary control measures needed to ensure the public safety; to provide organization; and control the overall quality and number of such businesses. Exhibit "B" graphically presents the Planning Staff's recommendation regarding the zoning districts that should conditionally permit adult businesses. The new Adult Business Ordinance will serve as interim regulations until the City's Zoning Development Code is prepared and adopted. This ordinance could be incorporated and/or modified into the final Zoning Development Code. A:DIRECTIONAL SIGN D-SIGN*A ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: FINDINGS: FUTURE GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY: This Ordinance 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)(3). The proposed Adult Business Ordinance is necessary to bring about eventual conformity with the City's future Land Use Plan. There is reasonable probability that the proposed Adult Business 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 Adult Business 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. A:DIRECTIONAL SIGN D-SIGN-A 3 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: ADOPT Resolution No. P.C. 91 - recommending adoption of the Adult Business Ordinance. OM:ks Attachments: 2. 3. 4. 5. Resolution "Draft" Ordinance Exhibit "A" Current Zoning Districts Exhibit "B" Proposed Zoning Districts Adult Business Ordinance - Summary Report A:DIRECTIOidAL SIGN D-SIGN-A RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 91- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OFTEMECULA RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE ADULT BUSINESS ORDINANCE. WHEREAS, City Ordinance No. 90-04 adopted by reference certain portions of the non-codified Riverside County Ordinances, including Ordinance No. 348 ("Land Use Code"); and WHEREAS, such regulations do not contain adequate provisions for the establishment and operational criteria for adult businesses; and WHEREAS, the City of Temecula desires to regulate the establishment and operation of adult businesses and to protect the health, quality of life, and the environment of the residents of Temecula; and WHEREAS, public hearing was conducted on October 21, 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: SECTION 1. That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula hereby finds that the proposed Adult Business Ordinance will provide for the establishment of regulations for adult businesses in a fair and equitable manner. SECTION 2. That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula further finds that the proposed Adult Business Ordinance is necessary to bring about eventual conformity with its land use plans. SECTION 3o That the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula hereby recommends to the City Council adoption of the proposed Adult Business Ordinance. The Ordinance is incorporated into this Resolution by this reference and marked Exhibit "A" and dated October 21, 1991 for identification. A:DIRECTIONAL SIGN D-SIGN-A 5 PASSED APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of October, 1991. JOHN HOAGLAND 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 21st day of October. 1991 by the following vote of the Commission AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS A:DIRECTIONAL SiGN D-SIGN-A ORDINANCE NO. 91- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADDING CHAPTER 5. TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO THE REGULATION OF ADULT BUSINESSES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. FINDINGS. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings: 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 deci- sions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the follow- ing requirements are met: (a) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general plan. (b) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, each of the following: (1) There is reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being consid- ered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time; (2) There is little or no probability of substan- tial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan; (3) The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. 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 1 proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. The proposed land use regulations are consistent with the SWAP and meet the requirements set forth in SeCtion 65360 of the Government Code, to wit: (a) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general plan. (b) The City Council finds, in adopting land use regu- lations pursuant to this title, each of the fol- lowing: (1) There is reasonable probability that Ordi- nance No. 91- will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. (2) There is little or no probability of substan- tial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. (3) The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. WHEREAS, studies conducted in various communities in other jurisdictions have demonstrated that the proximity and concentration of adult businesses adjacent to residential, religious, educational, or other adult businesses can cause other businesses and residents to move elsewhere. Adult businesses are linked to increases in crime rates in areas surrounding such businesses and such businesses may adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare of citizens; and WHEREAS, adult uses are recognized as having serious objectionable operational characteristics, particularly when several of them are concentrated under certain circumstances or located in direct proximity to residential neighborhoods, thereby having a deleterious effect upon the adjacent areas. Special regulation of these areas is necessary to ensure that these adverse effects will not contribute to the blighting or downgrad- ing of the surrounding neighborhood. The primary control or regulation is for the purpose of preventing the concentration or location of these uses in a manner that would create such adverse effects; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance provides a sufficient number of locations within the City in which all of the types of businesses regulated by this Ordinance be conducted. The location and design standards established by this Ordinance do not unreasonably restrict the development of adult-oriented businesses; and WHEREAS, permitting and/or licensing is a legitimate and reasonable means of accountability to ensure that operators of sexually oriented business comply with reasonable regulations and to ensure that operators do not knowingly allow their estab- lishments to be used as places of illegal sexual activity or solicitation. SECTION 2. Chapter 5. is hereby added to the Temecula Municipal Code, which shall read as follows: " CHAPTER 5. ADULT BUSINESSES Purpose and Intent. It is purpose and intent of this Ordinance to provide for the comprehensive and orderly regulation of adult businesses. It is recognized that these establishments by their very nature may have serious objectionable operational characteristics which, when concentrated, can have a deleterious effect upon areas. In order to protect and preserve the public health, safety and welfare of the citizenry, especially including minors, special regulation of the time, place and manner of the operation and location of these establishments is necessary. The provisions of this Ordinance have neither the purpose nor effect of imposing a limitation or restriction on the content of any commutative materials, including sexually oriented materials. Definitions. The following words and phrases shall, for the purposes of this chapter, be defined as follows, unless it is clearly apparent from the context that another meaning is intended. (a) "Adult Bookstore" means a commercial establishment which, as one of its principal business purposes, offers for sale or rental for any form of consid- eration any one or more of the following: (1) Books, magazines, periodicals, or other printed matter, or photographs, films, motion picture, video cassettes or video reproduc- tions, slides, or other visual representa- tions which depict or describe "specified sexual activities" or "specified anatomical areas"; instruments, devices, or parapherna- lia which are designed for use is connection with "specified sexual activities" a commer- (b) (c) (d) cial establishment may have other principal business purposes that do not involve the offering for sale or rental material depict- ing or describing "specified sexual activi- ties" or "specified anatomical ares" still be categorized as Adult Book Store or Adult Video Store. Such other business purposes will not serve to exempt to serve such com- mercial establishments from being categorized as an Adult Bookstore or Adult Video Store so long as one of its principal purposes is the offering for sale or rental for consideration the specified materials which depict or de- scribe "specified sexual activities" or "specified anatomical areas." "Adult business" means a business which is con- ducted exclusively for the patronage of adults and as to which minors are specifically excluded from patronage, either by law and/or by the operators of such businesses. "Adult business" also means and includes any adult arcade, adult bookstore, adult cabaret, adult hotel or motel, adult the- ater, adult model studio, body painting studio, massage parlor and any other business involving "specified sexual activities" or display or "spec- ified anatomical areas." "Adult cabaret" means any nightclub, bar, restau- rant, or similar establishment which is distin- guished or characterized by its emphasis in the entertainment presented on: (1) Live performances which is distinguished or characterized by an emphasis on specified sexual activities or specified anatomical area; and/or (2) Films, motion pictures, video cassettes, slides or other photographic reproductions whose dominant or predominant character and theme is the depiction of specified sexual activities or specified anatomical areas for the observation by patrons. "Adult hotel/motel" means a hotel, or similar commercial establishment which: (1) Offers accommodations to the public for any form of consideration; 4 (e) Provides patrons with close circuit televi- sion transmissions, films, motion pictures, video cassettes, slides, or other photograph- ic reproductions which are characterized by the depiction or description of "specified sexual activities" or "specified anatomical areas;" and has a sign visible for the public right of way which advertises the availabili- ty of this adult type of photographic repro- ductions; or (3) Offers a sleeping room for rent for a period of time that is less than ten (10) hours; or (4) Allows a tenant or occupant of a sleeping room to sub-rent the room for a period of time that is less than ten (10) hours. "Adult model studio" means any establishment open to the public where for any form of consideration of gratuity, human models who display specified anatomical areas are provided to be observed, sketched, drawn, painted, sculpted, photographed, or otherwise depicted by persons other than the proprietor paying such con- sideration or gratuity. This provision shall not apply to any school of art, a firm which operated by an individual, firm association, partnership, corporation or institution which meets the requirements established in the Education Code of the State of California of the issuance or conferring of a diploma. (f) "Adult picture arcade" means any place to which the public is permitted or invited wherein coin or token-operated, or electronically, electrically, or mechanically controlled still or motion picture machines, projectors, or other image producing devices are maintained to show images to five or fewer persons per machine, at any one time, and where the emphasis of the images so displayed is on depiction of specified sexual activities or specified anatomical areas. (g) "Adult theater" means a theater, concert hall, auditorium or similar establishment, either indoor or outdoor in nature, which presents live enter- tainment, films, motion pictures, slide photo- graphs, video cassettes or similar photographic reproductions which are distinguished or charac- terized by their emphasis on matter depicting, describing or relating to specified sexual activi- ty or specified anatomical areas. 5 (h) (i) (j) (k) (1) (m) (n) "Body painting studio" means any establishment or business which provides the service of applying paint or any other substance, whether transparent or not, to or on the human body when such body is wholly or partially nude in terms of specified anatomical areas. "Escort" means a person who, for consideration, agrees or offers to act as a companion, guide or date for another person, or who agrees or offers to privately model lingerie or to privately per- form a strip tease for another person. "Escort Agency" means any person or business asso- ciation who furnishes, offers to furnish, or ad- vertises to furnish escorts as one of its primary business purposes for a fee, tip, or other consid- eration. "Establishment" means and includes any of the following: The opening or commencement of any sexually oriented business; (2) The conversion Of an existing business, whether or not a sexually oriented business, to any sexually oriented business; (3) The additions of any sexually oriented busi- ness to any other existing sexually business; or (4) The relocation of any sexually oriented busi- ness. "Massage parlor" means any place where for any form of consideration or gratuity, massage, alco- hol rub, administration of fomentations, electric or magnetic treatments, or any other treatment of manipulation of the human body occurs. "Material relative to adult businesses" means and includes but is not limited to accessories, books, magazines, photographs, prints, drawings, paint- ings, motion pictures and pamphlets or any combi- nation thereof. "Permittee" means a person in whose name a permit to operate an adult business has been issued as well as the individuals listed as an applicant on the application for a permit. 6 (o) (p) (q) (r) (s) "Person" means an individual, proprietorship, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity. "Sexual Encounter/Rap Center" means any business or commercial enterprise that, as one of its pri- mary business purposes, offers any form of consid- eration: l) physical contact in the form of wres- tling or tumbling between persons of the opposite sex; or 2) activities between male and female persons and/or persons of the same sex when one or more of the persons is in a state of nudity or semi-nudity. "Specified anatomical areas" means and includes any of the following: (1) Less than complete and opaquely covered human genitals, pubic region, buttocks, anus or female breasts below a point above the top of the areola; or (2) Human male genitals in a discernible turgid state, even if completely or opaquely cov- ered. "Specified sexual activities" means and includes any of the following: (i) The fondling or touching of human genitals, public regions, buttocks, anus or female breasts, or (2) Sex acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated, including intercourse, oral copu- lation, or sodomy; or (3) Masturbation, actual or simulated; or (4) Excretory functions as part of, or in connec- tion with, any of the activities set forth in subsections 1 through 3 of this section; or (5) Human genitals in a state of sexual stimulation or arousal. "Transfer of ownership or control" of an adult business means and includes any of the following: (1) The sale, lease, or sub-lease of a business; (2) The transfer of securities which constitute a controlling interest in the business, whether by sale, exchange or other similar means; or (3) The establishment of a trust, gift or other similar legal device which transfers the ownership or control of the business, except for transfer by bequest or other operation of law upon the death of the person possessing the ownership or control. Restricted to Commercial Zones. Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in this Chapter, no adult business shall be established, expanded or conducted except in a C-1/CP zone and then shall conform to all regulations contained in this Chapter. Conditional Use Permit. No adult business shall be opened, established or relocated except upon the granting of a conditional use permit therefore in accordance with Section 18.28 of Ordinance No. 348 of the Non-Codified Codes of the County of Riverside as adopted by the City of Temecula pursuant to Ordi- nance No. 90-04 and Section 1 thereof, in addition to an Adult Business Permit required by this Chapter. The requirements of Ordinance 348 and of this Chapter first shall be construed in a manner to make them compatible. Where there is a conflict in provisions between the two, the provisions of this Chapter shall control. Operational Criteria. In addition to the base zone requirements governing use pursuant to Section and the minimum development standards pursuant to Section , the following additional requirements shall be satisfied by adult businesses. Such additional requirements shall be included in any approved Conditional Use Permit. (a) Locational Standards. (1) No adult business shall be located within one thousand (1,000) feet of: Any residential use, whether inside or outside of the Temecula City limits; Any church, chapel, or similar regular place of worship, whether inside or outside of the Temecula City limits; Any school or day care establishment, public or private, park or playground, whether inside or outside of the Temecula city limits; 8 Any retirement home or convalescent hospital, whether inside or outside of the Temecula City limits; (b) (c) Any recreational facility, such as game arcade, bowling alley, skateboard rink, skating rink, or similar area where minors regularly congregate, whether inside or outside of the Temecula City limits; City Hall, City Offices, and other pub- lic buildings; Libraries, whether inside or outside of the Temecula City limits. (2) An adult business may not be operated within two hundred (200') feet of another adult business, whether within or outside of the Temecula City limits. (3) An adult business may not be operated in the same building, structure, or portion thereof, containing another adult business. (4) For purposes of this Ordinance, all distance shall be measured in a straight line, without regard for intervening structures, from the nearest property line for which the adult business will be located to the nearest prop- erty line of a use or district listed above. (5) For purposes of subsection (2) of this sec- tion, the distance between any two adult businesses shall be measured in a straight line, without regard to intervening struc- tures or objects, from the closest exterior wall of the structure in which each business is located. A person may not operate an adult business without a valid permit, issued by the City for the partic- ular type of business. Said use shall have a separate business entrance adjacent to the required parking area. Additional off-street parking facilities may be required if deemed necessary by the City. 9 (d) (g) (h) (i) The City Planning Commission shall review and approve all signing and architectural graphics. Maximum Occupancy load, fire exits, aisles and fire equipment shall be regulated, designed and provided in accordance with the Fire Department and building regulations and standards adopted by the City of Temecula. No adult business shall be operated in any manner that permits the observation of any material de- picting, describing or relating to specified sexu- al activities or specified anatomical areas from any public way or from any location outside the building or area of such establishment. This provision shall apply to any display, decoration, sign, show window or other opening. Lighting in Parking Lots. Lighting shall be re- quired which is designed to illuminate all off- street parking areas serving such use for the purpose of increasing the personal safety of store patrons and reducing the incidents of vandalism and theft. Said lighting shall be shown on the required plot plans and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Community Develop- ment. Amplified Sound. No loudspeakers or sound equip- ment shall be used by an adult business for the amplification of sound to a level discernible by the public beyond the walls of the building in which such use is conducted or which violates any noise restrictions as may be adopted by the City of Temecula. The building entrance to an adult business shall be clearly and legibly posted by a notice indicat- ing that minors are precluded from entering the premises. Said notice shall be constructed and posted to the satisfaction of the Planning Direc- tor. (j) Picture Arcades. (1) No picture arcade shall be maintained or operated unless the complete interior of the picture arcade is visible upon entrance to such picture arcade. No partially or fully enclosed booths or partially or fully con- cealed booths shall be maintained. Notwith- standing this Ordinance, any picture arcade 10 (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) lawfully in existence prior to the adoption of this subsection shall conform to the pro- vision of this subsection within three (3) months of the effective date of this Section. This subsection shall also be applicable to any picture arcade which is not open for business prior to the date that this section takes effect. Minimum Lighting. No person shall operate a picture arcade unless a light level of not less that two (2) foot candles at floor level is maintained in every portion of said estab- lishment to which the public is admitted. Wall and Partition Construction. No person shall operate a picture arcade unless any wall or partition which is situated so as to create a room or enclosure in which any image producing device is located is constructed of not less than 1-hour fire resistive material. Minimum Aisle Width. No person shall operate a picture arcade in which the width of the aisles in any room where an image producing device is located is less than forty-two (42) inches. Minimum Doorways. No person shall operate a picture arcade unless there are no fewer than two (2) doorways of a width no less than thirty-six (36) inches which provide ingress or egress from any room from which an image producing device is located; provided, howev- er, that one (1) doorway shall be sufficient in the event the fire marshal should so de- termine. The doorway or doorways shall be unlocked during business hours. Lighted Exit Signs. No person shall operate a picture arcade unless over every doorway which provides egress from any room in which an image producing device is located, an internally illuminated exit sign with letters of at least five (5) inches in height is maintained. Maximum, Occupancy Load. No person shall operate a picture arcade in which the number of persons in any room or partitioned portion of a room where an image producing device is located exceeds one (1) person per thirty 11 (30) square feet. The maximum occupancy permitted in any room or partitioned portion of a room in which an image producing device is located shall be conspicuously posted by the operator and shall remain posted at the entrance to said room. (8) Maximum Number of Devices. No person shall operate a picture arcade in which the number of image producing devices exceeds the maxi- mum occupancy load permitted in any room or partitioned portion of ~ room in which an image producing device is located. (k) Adult Motels. (1) Evidence that a sleeping room is in a hotel, motel or a similar commercial establishment has been rented and vacated two (2) or more times in a period of time that is less than ten (10) hours creates a rebuttable presumption that the establishment is an adult motel as that term is defined in this Chapter. (2) A person is in violation of the provisions of this Chapter if, as a person in control of a sleeping room in a hotel, motel, or similar commercial establishment that does not have an adult business permit, he/she rents or sub-rents a sleeping room to that person and, within ten (10) hours from the time the room is rented, he/she rents or sub-rents the same sleeping room again. (3) For purposes of sub-section (2) of this sec- tion, the term "rent" or "sub-rent" means the act of permitting a room to be occupied. Adult Business conditional Use Permit. Application for conditional use permit for an adult business shall be accompanied by: (1) A statement that the site of the proposed business is not located: Within one thousand (1,000) feet of any district, structure or boundary as de- fined in Section ; 12 within two hundred (200) feet of another adult businesses, whether within or outside of the Temecula City limits. (2) A scale map or drawing accurately depicting land uses within a radius of one thousand (1,000) feet of the exterior boundaries of the property on which the adult business is proposed to be operated. Issuance of Adult Business Permit. An applicant for the operation of an adult businesses must obtain an adult busi- ness permit in addition to a conditional use permit. Such adult business permit shall be non-transferable and must be renewed on an annual basis on the anniversary date of the original applica- tion. The permit obtained is not transferable and a new permit must be obtained if the business is leased, sold or otherwise transferred for any reason. Applicants for such permits shall file a written, signed and verified application or renewal application on a provided by the Community Development Department. form (1) The name and permanent address of applicant. (2) The name and business address of the appli- cant. If the applicant is a corporation, the name shall be exactly as set forth in its Articles of Incorporation and the applicant shall show the name and residence address of each of the officers, directors and each stockholder owning no less than twenty-five percent (25%) of the stock of the corpora- tion. If the applicant is a partnership, the application shall show the name and residence address of each of the members, including limited partners; (3) A detailed description of the manner of pro- viding proposed entertainment, including type of entertainment and the number of persons engaged in the entertainment; (4) Hours of operation; (5) A location, address and floor plan showing where the specific entertainment uses are proposed to be conducted within the building; (6) The name or names of the person or persons having the management or supervision of 13 (c) (d) applicant's business and of any entertain- ment; (7) A statement of the nature and character of applicant's business if any, to be carried on in conjunction with such entertainment; and (s) For a renewal application, applicant in addi- tion shall indicate any changes since the filing of the initial application. All applications for a permit or renewal shall be filed with the City Police Department on forms prescribed by the Police Department. Each appli- cation determined by resolution of the City Coun- cil shall be accompanied by a non-refundable fee for filing or renewal determined by resolution of the City Council, which fees will be used to de- fray the costs of investigation, inspection and processing of such applicants. After an investigation, the Police Chief shall approve the issuance of a permit or renewal if he finds one or more of the following to be true: (l) That the building, structure, equipment and location used by the business for which a permit is required herein does not comply with the requirements and standards of the health, zoning, fire and safety laws of the State of California and of the City of Temecula; (2) That the applicant, his or her employee, agent, partner, director, officer, stockhold- er or manager has knowingly made any false, misleading or fraudulent statement of materi- al fact in the application for a permit, or in any report or record required to be filed with the Police Department, Sheriff or other department of the City; (3) That the applicant has had any type of adult business permit revoked by any public entity within two (2) years of the date of the ap- plication; (4) That on the date that the business for which a permit is required herein commences, and thereafter, there will be no responsible per- son on the premises to act as manage at all times during which the business is open; 14 (5) That the applicant has not shown how the on- premises manager will prevent the business from being used as a place where prostitu- tion, assignation or any lewd act could oc- cur; (6) That a conditional use permit has not been granted for the use; or (7) That an applicant is under eighteen (18) years of age. Decision Of Police Chief. The decision of the Police Chief regarding a permit application shall be issued within 45 days of the date of the filing of the application unless he has set the matter for hearing before the City Council. Such hearing must be held and a decision rendered within sixty (60) days from the date of the application, unless the matter is continued at the request of the applicant. No application for a permit shall be denied without giving the applicant an opportunity for a hearing before the City Council. Inspection. An applicant, or permittee shall permit representatives of the Sheriff's Department, Health Department, Fire Department, Code Enforcement, Planning Department, or other City Departments or Agencies to inspect the premises of an adult business for the purpose of insuring compliance with the law, at any time it is occupied or opened for business. A person who operates an adult business or his agent or employee is in viola- tion of the provisions of this section if he/she refuses to permit such lawful inspection of the premises at any time it is occupied or opened for business. Suspension or Revocation of Permit. After an investi- gation, notice and hearing, the Police Chief shall suspend or revoke and existing adult business permit, as shall be found necessary to assure the preservation of the public health and safety, if the evidence presented establishes that one or more of the following conditions exist: (1) The building, structure, equipment and loca- tion used by the business fails to comply with the requirements or fails to meet the standards of the health, zoning, fire and safety laws of the State of California, or of the ordinances of the City of Temecula; (2) The permittee, his or her employee, agent, partner, director, officer, stockholder or manager has knowingly made any false, mis- leading or fraudulent statement of material facts in the application for a permit, or in 15 any report or record required to be filed with the Police, Sheriff or other department of the City; (3) The permittee has had any type of adult busi- ness permit revoked by any public entity within two (2) years of the date the permit was issued; (4) There was not a responsible person on the premises to act as a manager at all times which the business was opened; (5) That the permittee, manager or any agent or employee of the permittee or manager has been convicted in a court of competent jurisdic- tion in conjunction with or as a result of the operation of the subject adult business and after the date of issuance of the condi- tional use permit for said business; (6) The picture arcade has been used as a place where sexual intercourse, sodomy, oral copu- lation, masturbation, prostitution, assigna- tion or other lewd acts occur or have oc- curred; (7) The permittee, his or her employee, agent, partner, director, officer, stockholder or manager has violated any provision of this Ordinance; or (8) The conditional use permit for the use has been suspended or revoked. Transfer of Permit. A permittee shall not transfer an Adult Business Permit to another, nor shall a permittee operate an adult business under the authority of a permit at any place other than the address designated in the application. Time Limits for Acion of a Conditional Use Permit. An application for a conditional use permit shall be reviewed and acted upon in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No. 348. Suspension and Revocation of a Conditional Use Permit. In addition to the grounds set forth at Section 18.31 of Ordi- nance No. 348, the City Council may suspend or revoke any condi- tional use permit if it is found that any of the following conditions exist in addition to the criteria set forth in this Ordinance: 16 (a) The operations conducted by the permittee does not comply with all applicable laws, including, but not limited to, the City's building, health, zoning and fire ordinances and this Ordinance; (b) That the approved use has been expanded without City Council approval; that the approved use has been partially or wholly converted to another adult business without City Council approval; that the conditional use permit has not been utilized within six months of its issuance; or (c) The Adult Business Permit has been suspended or revoked. Regulations Non-Exclusive. The regulations set forth in this Chapter are not intended to be exclusive and compliance therewith shall not excuse noncompliance with any other regula- tions pertaining to the operation of adult businesses as adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula. Violations/Penalties. Any firm, corporation or person, whether as principal, agent, employee or otherwise, violating or causing the violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or by imprisonment for not more than six (6) months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Any violation of the provisions of this Chapter which is committed and continues from day-to-day, constitutes a separate offense for each and every date during which such violation is committed or continued. Public Nuisance. In addition to the penalties set forth at Section above, any adult business which is operating in violation of this chapter or any provision thereof shall constitute a public nuisance and, as such, may be abated or enjoined from further operation. conflictinq Ordinances Repealed. All ordinances or parts of ordinances, or regulations in conflict with the provi- sions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed." SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, word or portion of this Ordinance is, for any reason held to be invalid, or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sen- tence, clause, phrase, work or portion thereof regardless of whether such other section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, 17 word or portion thereof regardless of whether such other section, be declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adop- tion of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law. SECTION 4. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE. The City Council hereby finds that this project does not have a potential for causing a significant affect on the environment. Therefore, the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under Section 15061(b)(3). SECTION 5. 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. 1991. PASSED, APPROVEDAND ADOPTED this__ day of RONALD J. PARK, MAYOR ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CITY CLERK 18 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) CITY OF TEMECULA ) 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 19 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Gary Thornhill Oilvet Mujica September 3, 1991 Adult Business Ordinance - Summary Report As part of the proposed work program for the preparation of the Adult Business Ordinance, this memorandum is intended to summarize the preliminary findings of our research; transmit our recommendations; and transmit the "Draft" Adult Business Ordinance for your review and comments. INTRODUCTION On October 9, 1990, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 90-18, "an interim urgency ordinance relating to adult businesses and requiring a permit", in order to allow the City staff the opportunity to prepare permanent adult business regulations. This urgency ordinance is due to expire on October 9, 1991. However, an extension of the urgency ordinance will be processed for adoption prior to it's expiration, via the City Council at a public hearing. Such an action by the City Council will extend the urgency ordinance to October 9, 1992. The new Adult Business Ordinance will serve as interim regulations until the City's Zoning Development Code is prepared and adopted. At that time, this ordinance will be incorporated and/or modified into the final Zoning Development Code. Preparatory to drafting an adult business ordinance, we conducted background research into a number of areas related to adult business in the community, including: Analyzing existing conditions. This section will discuss the current ugency ordinance, existing adult businesses and current zoning requirements. Analyzing recent court decisions. This section will discuss recent court decisions about adult businesses which could affect Temecula's future regulations. Analyzing secondary impacts of adult businesses. This section will identifying other potential secondary impacts of adult businesses within the community, including economic effects on surrounding properties. Analyzing other ordinances. This section will discuss adult business regulations adopted by other selected California cities. Analyzing significant adult business issues. This section will discuss the constitutional right of adult businesses to exist, dispersed vs. concentrated Iocational criteria and availability of sufficient land. Identifying key issues. This section will discuss key issues to address in the adult business ordinance, including type of adult businesses to be regulated, identification of appropriate zoning districts, conditional use permit provisions, and Iocational criteria, design and performance standards, amortization, as well as specific recommendations. Summarizing recommendations. The conclusion of this memorandum will summarize our recommendations for the proposed adult business ordinance. The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize our initial findings with respect to the above areas, which will set the stage for adult business regulations in Temecula. This memo will make recommendations as to the nature and content of Temecula's proposed Adult Business Ordinance. EXISTING CONDITIONS Adult Business Urgency Ordinance At the present time, new adult businesses are permitted in Temecula, pursuant to City Ordinance No. 90-18. This Urgency Ordinance was adopted following recent court decisions affecting local regulation of adult business operations and due to the City's concerns regarding these particular types of uses. The urgency ordinance allows the City of Temecula sufficient time to prepare permanent adult business regulations. Existing Adult Businesses Research was completed in August 1991, with the aid of the City's Code Enforcement Officer (Allen Marshall) regarding the number, type and location of existing adult businesses; and it was concluded that there are not any adult businesses existing in the City of Temecula. Current Zoninq Requirements Current City zoning requirements (which have been adopted by the adult business urgency ordinance) permits adult businesses to locate in the C-1/C-P (General Commercial) zoning district, subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit by the City of Temecula Planning Commission. The C-1/C-P District has been established to accomodate a full range of stores, offices, personal and business establishments in the central portion of Temecula to serve City- 2 wide and regional needs. Adult businesses are defined by Section 2 of Ordinance No. 90-18 to include the following: 1) adult bookstore; 2) adult cabaret; 3) adult hotel/motel; 4) adult picture arcade; 5) adult theater; 6) body painting studio; and 7) massage parlor. In addition to obtaining a conditional use permit, Ordinance No. 90-18 provides operational criteria in addition to the base zone requirements governing use and minimum development standards. In regards to existing adult businesses with the City, Section 9 of Ordinance 90-18 states, "This ordinance does not apply to adult businesses operating on the date of adoption". However, according to Section 18.8 (d) of Zoning Ordinance No. 348, which governs non- conforming uses, allows non-conforming uses to remain indefinitely without future amortization so long as such uses are not enlarged or extended and so long as they do not cease operations for more than one year. SUMMARY OF RECENT COURT DECISIONS Several recent court decisions directly impact the ways in which local governments can regulate adult businesses. This section of the memorandum provides a brief overview of our understanding of relevant cases relating to the regulations of adult uses. It should be noted, however, that the City Attorney should prepare an interpretation or specific legal opinion for the City of Temecula regarding this issue. Two key Supreme court decisions regarding adult businesses include Younil v. American Mini Theaters (1976) and City of Renton v. Playtime Theaters (1986). The Younq decision upheld the right of the City of Detroit to regulate the location of adult businesses within the community, noting that the City's desire to preserve the quality of life is important. Detroit's ordinance required a minimum distance of 1,000 feet between adult businesses and 500 feet between adult businesses and residential areas. The Renton decision, ten years later, reaffirmed the basic tenents of the Young case in terms of allowing communities to regulate adult businesses. Important concepts emanating from the Renton decision include the right of adult businesses to exist as a constitutional right of free expression and that any local regulation must be "content neutral" in nature. The term "content neutral" means that regulations c~nnot dictate the type of information disseminated at adult business operations. However, localities may regulate the time, place and manner of adult businesses with the express purpose of mitigating negative secondary impacts associated with adult businesses. Negative secondary impacts typically include an increase in criminal activity, lowering of property values in the immediate vicinity of adult businesses and a lowering of trading patterns near adult businesses. A source book consulted for this study, Time, Place and Manner Ret~ulation of Business Activity. notes that a 1968 Supreme Court decision, United States v. O'Brien, establishes a four-part test to justify the legitimacy of governmental regulation as related to businesses or activities where potential First Amendment (free speech) issues may be involved. 1, If it is within the constitutional power of the government. 2. If it furthers an important or substantial governmental interest. 3 3. ff the governmental interest is unrelated to the suppression of free expression. If the incidental restriction on First Amendment freedoms is no greater :hen essential to the furtherance of that interest. Any future adult business regulations drafted by the City of Temecula must meet the above test. Two other Southern California lower Court rulings further help define the limits of local agencies to regulate adult businesses. These cases are Walnut ProjTerties, Inc. v. City of Whittier (1988) and City of Stanton v. Cox (1989). Both cases speak to the issue of the restrictivehess of local adult business ordinances in terms of the number of sites made available in which to locate adult businesses in light of location criteria established by ordinance. In both instances, local regulations were invalidated by the courts with the Findings that local ordinances were overly restrictive, allowing only e handful of sites in each community in which an adult business could be situated. Instead, the courts mandated that local adult business regulations must provide an "adequate" number of adult business sites. No firm standard exists for defining an adequate number of sites - it must be determined on a community-by-community basis. SECONDARY IMPACTS OF ADULT BUSINESSES Economic Impacts Conclusions drawn from various research indicates the following about economic impacts of adult businesses: Adult businesses detract from the desirability and livability of adjacent neighborhoods. Negative secondary impacts found by a number of communities include a decline in residential rents and property values for properties adjacent to adult businesses. Negative economic impacts were also found for commercial properties adjacent .to adult businesses. Most impacted were neighborhood retail stores, which reported difficulty in retaining employees, reduced patronage and higher tenant turnover. Less impacted commercial businesses are more "regional" in nature. Summary of Other Surveys As part of our initial research, previous adult business studies completed by other jurisdictions have been reviewed. These include studies performed by the City of Phoenix, City of Los Angeles and City of Indianapolis, Indiana. Following is a synopsis of these studies. City of Phoenix The Phoenix study was completed in May of 1979. The study examined the relationship between adult businesses and criminal activity. Three neighborhoods within the community (the study ereas) were selected, all of which contained one or more adult businesses. For 4 comparison, three other neighborhoods were chosen (the control areas) which contained no adult businesses. Reports of criminal activity were gathered for both areas and compared. The results of the study show a statistical link between the presence of adult businesses and arrests for sexual crimes. The study also reported that the presence of adult businesses results in a lowering of the desirability and livability of an impacted neighborhood. Citv of Los Angeles The Los Angeles City Planning Department conducted a comprehensive study of adult businesses with the City of Los Angeles in 1977. A primary purpose of the study was to ascertain the effects of concentrating adult businesses with specific geographic areas as an alternative to allowing them to disperse throughout the City. The study concluded that a link did exist between a concentration of adult businesses and incidents of crime in the Hollywood area. The Los Angeles Planning Department also contacted a number of local realtors, brokers, appraisers and lenders with respect to their opinions and experiences with regard to the effects of adult businesses on adjacent property values, Those experts surveyed generally concluded that adult businesses exert a negative economic impact on surrounding properties and residences. The Los Angeles report did not find, however, a direct link between the presence of adult businesses and a lowering of assessed valuations on adjacent properties. City of Indianapolis Results of a 1984 adult business study completed by the City of Indianapolis essentially confirm that of the previous two studies: an increase in sex-related crimes in neighborhoods which contained at least one adult business as opposed to other neighborhoods with no adult businesses. SUMMARY OF OTHER ORDINANCES We have reviewed adult business ordinances recently enacted or proposed by the Communities of Chino, Upland, Rancho Cucamonga, La Verne and San Bernardino County. Each of the ordinances were examined in terms of the type and range of adult businesses regulated, zoning districts in which adult businesses are allowed, Iocational requirements imposed by the public agencies, design and performance criteria required, amortization requirements for non-conforming adult businesses and any other relevant features of the ordinance. ORDINANCE PROVISIONS Our analysis of ordinance provisions is as follows. Uses Requlated Adult businesses regulated by a majority of ordinances surveyed included adult bookstores, adult cabarets, adult motion picture theaters, massage studios and adult arcades. One ordinance, San Bernardino County, contains no specific listing of regulated uses. Chino and Upland ordinances regulate all of the uses enumerated above, plus encounter centers, modeling studios, adult hotels and motels, and sexual novelty stores. Allowed Zoninq Districts The most common allowed zoning districts for adult uses appear to be more intense commercial districts, typically General Commercial. Upland allows adult uses in specified industrial zones. La Verne allows such uses only in Industrial and Business Park districts. Three of the communities require conditional use permits. Locational Standards All of the ordinances require a minimum 1,000 foot distance between adult uses and other adult businesses. Four of the five ordinances require a minimum 1,000 foot separation between adult uses and: · l · schools parks, playgrounds, recreational areas churches, chapels, funeral parlors NOTE: La Verne's draft ordinance requires a minimum 500 foot separation for the above uses. Two of the five ordinances require a minimum 500 foot separation between adult uses and residential uses and residentially-zoned property (Upland and La Verne). the remaining three ordinances require a minimum 1,000 foot separation. Two other interesting requirements are noted: La Verne's draft ordinance limits adult uses to one such use per premise or building. Upland requires a minimum 250 foot separation between adult businesses and the sale of alcoholic beverages. Desian and Performance Standards Commonalities between four of the ordinances surveyed (San Bernardino County has established no design or performance criteria) include: · · · · · · No publicly visible explicit signs (3 of 4 ordinances). No loudspeakers (4 of 4 ordinances). No interior views of adult uses from public areas (4 of 4). Posting of "No Minors Allowed" sign (3 of 4). Lighting of parking areas (2 of 4). Individual use entrances for adult use (2 of 4). Amortization Three of the five ordinances (Rancho Cucamonga, La Verne and San Bernardino County) have no, or very liberal, amortization clauses. Chino's ordinance requires a one-year amortization schedule for non-conforming adult businesses. Upland's ordinance mandates a three-year amortization schedule. Other Features Other features of potential significance found in the ordinance survey include: Special administrative permit, with specific findings, to be made by the City of Upland for all new adult businesses. A late-night business permit is required by La Verne for adult uses open between midnight and 6 a.m. · La Verne also requires all adult businesses be kept in clean and orderly manner. SIGNIFICANT ADULT BUSINESS ISSUES Several preliminary issues have been identified as a result of this initial study, which are described below. Constitutional Right to Exist In Willdan's initial research, it became abundantly clear that adult businesses have a legitimate right to exist, protected as a constitutional guarantee of freedom of expression. However, there is also ample legal precedent for a local community to regulate such adult businesses, so that the community's health, safety and welfare is also protected. Care must be taken that any regulatory ordinance be content-neutral in character, only regulating the time, place and manner of adult businesses so that negative secondary impacts associated with an adult business can be controlled. The term "content-neutral" means that any land use regulation should not dictate or regulate the content of materials sold or activities which take place within adult businesses. This is considered by the Supreme Court as an infringement on First Amendment/free speech rights. Disoersed vs. Concentrated Locational Criteria Given that local governments can only regulate, not prohibit, adult businesses, two primary methods have evolved over the past twenty years in terms of adult business regulation. The concentrated approach was pioneered by the City of Boston, Essentially, the Boston Municipal Code as amended to allow adult businesses within a specific geographic portion of the community. Adult businesses were excluded from all other parts of town. 7 The dispersed model of adult businesses is closely associated with the City of Detroit, which involves deliberately spreading out adult businesses throughout a city to avoid a concentration in anyone sector. To accomplish this, minimum distances between adult businesses and similar uses and other sensitive uses have been enacted. This model was upheld in the YOUnq vs. American Mini-Theatre (1976) Supreme Court decision and has been used as the basis of the five local ordinances analyzed in this report. Availability of Sufficient Land A key issue is the acceptability of local adult business regulations is the provision of sufficient quantities of appropriately-zoned land within which adult businesses can locate. This is especially critical if a dispersed regulatory model is chosen. Depending on the number of sensitive uses identified in an ordinance and the minimum distance requirements incorporated in the ordinance, it is conceivable that few candidate sites would remain which could accommodate an adult business. In this instance, it is possible that a court would overturn such an ordinance. Whatever ordinance is finally adopted for Ontario, it must contain sufficient lands for adult operations. Unfortunately, there are no hard and fast rules to quantify what constitutes sufficient lands. RECOMMENDATION$ This section of the report will identify key issues to address in the new Adult Business Ordinance. Type of Adult Businesses to be Reoulated As noted above, Temecula currently regulates the following adult businesses; adult bookstores, adult cabarets, adult hotels/motels, adult picture arcades, adult theaters, body painting studios and massage parlors. The adult businesses that are regulated by other local communities include all of the above, plus the following; sexual encounter/rap centers, escort services and adult video stores. Recommendation: It is recommended that the adult businesses currently regulated in Ordinance No. 90-18 be maintained and that this list be expanded to include the above mentioned uses. It is also recommended that accupressure clinics be regulated as adult businesses, based upon input from various Police Departments and the fact that they are not currently regulated as medical or professional services by the State of California. The definitions of the additional uses have been included in the "Draft" Adult Business Ordinance. Identification of AooroDriate Zonina Districts As noted above, adult businesses are permitted to locate in the C-1/C-P (General Commercial) zoning district, subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Since the C-1/C-P zone is intended to provide the general commercial land uses within the City, this zoning district would be the logical area to allow adult businesses. In addition, the conditional use permit process allows the City the opportunity to review such uses on a case-by-case basis. 8 Recommendation: It is recommended that the zoning requirements currently regulated in Ordinance No. 90-18 be maintained. Conditional Use Permit Provisions As does Temecula (currently under Ordinance No. 90-18), three of the four local communities surveyed require the issuance of Conditional Use Permits for adult businesses: San Bernardino County, Rancho Cucamonga and La Verne. Chino does not require a CUP. Conditional Use Permits are typically required for certain specified land uses which, for various reasons, necessitate an extra level of review. Before a CUP may be granted, a public hearing must be held by the Planning Commission. A recent Court of Appeals decision, Peoole v. Library One (1991 ), upheld the right of local communities to require Conditional Use Permits for adult businesses. However, it was held that the Los Angeles County Code was invalid since the code did not specify a time limit for denial or approval of the Conditional Use Permit. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Conditional Use Permit requirement currently regulated in Ordinance No. 90-18 be maintained. It is also recommended that specific time limits for approval or denial of the application should be included as part of the new ordinance. Locational Criteria There are three (3) approaches to regulate the location of adult businesses: a concentrated approach, a dispersed approach and a combined approach. Concentrated Approach This method was pioneered by the City of Boston in the 1960's, which permits adult businesses within a single geographic area of the City and prohibits them elsewhere in the community. The City's intent is to protect residential neighborhoods while allowing sufficient sites for adult businesses to locate within the City. The City also provided funding for infrastructure and related public improvements within the adult business area to improve its visual appearance. Advantages to a concentrated approach include: 1) a high degree of protection for the remaining non-adult business neighborhoods; 2) simplified ordinance administration since minimal Iocational criteria are needed; and 3) potentially sufficient adult business sites, depending upon the size of the adult business zone established by the City. Disadvantages of the approach are two-fold: 1 ) it is difficult to select a single area as the adult business district; and 2) the City might be viewed as encouraging such uses. Dispersed Approach The City of Detroit was the first to use the dispersed approach toward adult businesses by requiring adult businesses to be spread throughout the community rather than be grouped 9 together. Detroit's ordinance mandates a minimum distance (1,000 feet) between adult uses. This zoning approach was held constitutional in the Youn<~ v. American Mini Theaters decision in 1976. The ordinance's intent was to reverse a "skid row" development trend in areas of the community by limiting those uses that the City administrators determined to be contributory toward that trend. Advantages of the dispersed approach are that: 1 ) it has already passed constitutional muster; 2) with proper controls on the exterior appearance of adult businesses, they could be blended into the neighborhood fabric; 3) limiting the number of adult businesses in a given area will significantly reduce incidents of crime and lowered property values; and 4) this approach has been successfully used by many other communitites across the nation. The primary disadvantage of the dispersed model is the need to devise a proper balance between limiting the number of potential sites for adult uses without over-restricting sites. Combined Approach Most recently, courts have approved an adult business regulation approach which combines the best features of both the concentrated and dispersed systems. This approach includes concentrating adult businesses within a limited number of zoning districts, combined with dispersing them within those permitted districts by specifying minimum distances between adult businesses and other sensitive uses. The combined approach is recognized by several recent court decisions, including S & G News v. City of Southaate (1986), 5297 Pulaski Hiahway v. Town of Perryvilla (1987) and International Food and Beveraaes Systems v. Ft. Lauderdale, and others. Advantages and disadvantages to the combined approach are essentially the same as the dispersed approach. Care must be taken to allow sufficient sites for future adult businesses to locate in the community. Recommendation: The Combined Approach is recommended as the basis for the future Temecula ordinance. A Combined Approach, which essentially involves dispersion, can provide: A court-approved, content-neutral method for regulating adult business locations. Locational standards to protect sensitive uses, such as schools, parks, playgrounds and the like. · Maintenance of property values near adult businesses. · Control of crime-related secondary effects of adult uses. Appropriate design standards to treat the exterior appearance of adult uses so that these uses can be integrated with surrounding buildings. 10 It is also recommended that the new ordinance include a provision for a 1,000 feet minimum distance requirement between adult businesses and sensitive uses, such as residential areas, parks, schools, playgrounds, churches and other recreational uses frequented by minor. In addition, a 200 foot minimum distance requirement between adult businesses should be included. Design and Performance Standards Under Ordinance No. 90-18, Temecula has design and performance standards for the following items; signing and graphics, limiting interior views into adult businesses from public areas, lighting, amplified sound, posting of signs at adult business entrances to prohibit patronage by minors, interior construction requirements and maximum occupancy permitted. These design and performance standards are typical for all cities that regulate adult businesses. Recommendation: It is recommended that the design and performance standards currently regulated in Ordinance No. 90-18 be maintained. Amortization Adult businesses enacted by surrounding communities contain relatively liberal attitudes towards amortization of non-conforming adult uses. One community (Chino) establishes a specific time frame for ordinance conformity, which is three (3) years. Since there are not any existing adult businesses currently within the City of Temecula, amortization is not an issue. Recommendation: No additional amortization provisions are recommended to be included in the proposed ordinance. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION$ The following is a list of the recommendations made regarding the content of Temecula's proposed Adult Business Ordinance: 1. Expand the type of adult businesses regulated. 2. Conditionally permit new adult businesses in the C-1/C-P District. Establish specific time frames for approving or denying adult business Conditional Use Permit applications. Implement a "Combined Approach" towards the location of adult businesses to include minimum distance criteria between adult businesses and sensitive uses; and a distance requirement between adult businesses. 5. Include design and performance standards. 11 6. Maintain current City policy toward amortization. As indicated in my previous memorandum, dated August 19, 1991, it is anticipated that this item will be scheduled for the Planning Commission public hearing of October 7, 1991. Therefore, I would appreciate receiving your comments prior to September 13, 1991, in order to complete the "Draft" Planning Commission staff report and revised "Draft" Adult Business Ordinance for your review prior to September 20, 1991. Should you have any questions regarding this memorandum, please do not hesitate to contact me directly. ATTACHMENT: 1. Draft Adult Business Ordinance cc: John Cavanaugh John Meyer Ross Geller 12 ITEM # 8 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 21, 1991 Case No.: Conditional Use Permit No. 13 Prepared By: Charly Ray RECOMMENDATION: ADOPT Resolution No, 91 - Approving Conditional Use Permit No. 13 based on the analysis and findings contained in the staff report and subject to the attached conditions of approval. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Mr. Daniel Branson REPRESENTATIVE: Westmar Commercial Brokerage PROPOSAL: Tenant improvement of an existing structure within the Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-SC) Zone, for use as an indoor shooting range with accompanying retail sales of firearms and ammunition. LOCATION: 42245 Sarah Way, (north side of Sarah Way, approximately ~A mile west of Diaz Road) ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER: 921-030-026 EXISTING ZONING: Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-SC) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: South: East: West: M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial) M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial) M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial) R-R (Rural Residential) PROPOSED ZONING: As existing, no change proposed EXISTING LAND USE: Developed with Commercial/Light Industrial Structures. SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: South: East: West: Light Industrial/Commercial Development Light Industrial/Commercial Development Light Industrial/Commercial Development Vacant S\STAFFRFT\I 3CUP. DOC 1 PROJECT STATISTICS Existing Structure - 6,670 +/- Square Feet Proposed Conditional Use Occupancy as follows: 10 booth Pistol Range - Retail Sales- Office/Storage/Classroom - Total Parking: 4,560 +/- Square Feet 1,150 +/- Square Feet 960 +/- Square Feet 6,670 +/- Square Feet 11 spaces dedicated to this use Additional adjacent parking areas will be utilized after 5 p.m. Proposed Hours of Operation: Daily, 10 a.m. - 10 p.m. BACKGROUND Conditional Use Permit Application (CUP) No. 13 was submitted to the City of Temecula Planning Department on August 27th, 1991. The proposal was considered by the City Development Review Committee (DRC) on September 12th, 1991. DRC concerns regarding this project and related mitigation measures are contained in the Project Analysis. The proposed use may be considered comparable to other uses constructed within the M-SC zone district. However, as it is not specifically identified as appropriate to the M-SC zone, the proposal is forwarded to the City Planning Commission for Public Hearing of the requested Conditional Use Permit and determination of the project's compatibility within the M-SC zone district. ANALYSIS As indicated above, the shooting range proposed by C.U.P. No. 13 is a use which may be conditionally permitted within the Manufacturing - Service Commercial zone district overlying the project site. In order to approve the requested use, the Commission must find that it is no more intense or objectionable than those uses specified as allowed or permitted within the M-SC district. Development Review Committee comments and concerns regarding C.U.P. No. 13 focused on the following issues: 1. Potential health hazards related to air quality within the shooting range area. 2. Necessary structural fire protective measures. 3. Building security and public safety. S\STAFFRPT\13CUP. DOC 2 Environmental Health/Air Quality The proposed use involves indoor firing of sidearms, resulting in potentially hazardous concentrations of toxic air borne materials, particularly lead. Air filtering and exchange systems proposed as mitigation to this potential hazard are detailed in Attachment No. 5. The proposed air filtering/exchange system is considered adequate in concept by the City Building Official. The specific air filtering plans proposed to be constructed for the requested shooting range occupancy shall be reviewed and approved by the City Department of Building and Safety prior to issuance of building permits. Air filtering systems, as installed, shall be field inspected and certified as to adequacy by the air filtering systems manufacturer. This certification shall be incorporated into the City Building Official's final inspection documentation for the proposed occupancy. The as-built systems shall also be inspected and approved by the City Department of Building and Safety prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. Fire Protection Floor plans, submitted in response to Riverside County Fire Department comments requesting interior space use details, provided the information necessary to generate appropriate fire protection Conditions of Approval as detailed in Attachment No. 2. As conditioned, potential fire hazards associated with the proposed use are mitigated below a level of significance. No reloading of ammunition, nor bulk storage of gunpowder shall be allowed in conjunction with the proposed occupancy. Building Security/Public Safety A portion of the proposed use includes retail fire arms and ammunition sales. Gun stores are considered historically attractive targets for burglaries. As such, the City Police Department shall review and approve building security plans and proposed alarm systems prior to issuance of building permits. The Police Department shall also field inspect and approve the adequacy of as-built alarm systems prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy. EXISTING ZONING/SWAP AND FUTURE GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY The project, as conditioned, conforms with existing zoning ordinances affecting the subject property, and is compatible with Southwest Area Plan (SWAP) land use recommendations for the site (Reference Exhibit "C"). As discussed previously, the proposal is also compatible with existing development in its immediate vicinity. As such, it is likely Conditional Use Permit No. 13 will be consistent with the City's General Plan recommendations for the property in question, upon the Plan's final adoption. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Pursuant to applicable portions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this project is determined to be categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA per Section 15301, which addresses minor interior modifications to existing facilities. S\STAFFRPT\13CUP.DOC 3 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Based on the analysis above, it is staff's determination that real and perceived impacts of the proposed use are similar to; and no more intense, nor objectionable than adjacent existing uses within the M-SC zone district. The project as designed and conditioned also conforms with exiting zoning ordinances and SWAP guidelines and as such will also likely conform with the City's future General Plan. Therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 13 subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. FINDINGS There is a reasonable probability that Conditional Use Permit No. 13 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 conditioned, conforms with existing applicable city zoning and development ordinances. Further, the proposal is similar to existing adjacent development and uses within the Diaz Road Business Park. 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 proposal is also compatible with existing development in its vicinity, minimizing potentials for future general plan inconsistencies. Further, if found to be ultimately detrimental, the use is subject to termination under City Ordinance provisions contained in Section 18.31 of City Ordinance No. 348. 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). 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 currently exist on the subject site. (Reference Exhibit "D".) m The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or welfare. Reference the project Conditions of Approval (Attachment No. 2). m 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 elements currently existing within the City. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic. The project draws access from Sarah Way; a dedicated City right-of-way, currently improved to it's ultimate design configuration. S\STAFFRPT~13CUP.0OC 4 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. No exterior alterations or additions to the existing, previously approved structure are proposed. Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. Supporting documentation is attached. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: ADOPT Resolution 91- approving Conditional Use Permit No. 13; based on the analysis and findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. Attachments: Resolution - page 6 Conditions of Approval - page 12 Exhibits - page 17 A. Vicinity Map B. SWAP C. Zoning Map D. Surrounding Land Use Map E. Site Plan F. Floor Plans Fee Check List - page 18 Proposed air exchange system/ manufacturer's specifications - page 20 S\STAFFRPT~13CUP.DOC 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION S\STAFFRPT~13CUP,DOC 6 ATTACHMENT NO. I RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 13 FOR TENANT FINISH OF AN EXISTING STRUCTURE FOR USE AS AN INDOOR SHOOTING RANGE WITH ACCOMPANYING FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION SALES LOCATED AT 42245 SARAH WAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'6 PARCEL NO. 921-030-026 WHEREAS, Mr. Daniel Branson filed Conditional Use Permit No. 13 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Conditional Use Permit 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 Conditional Use Permit on October 21st, 1991, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Conditional Use Permit; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission received a copy of the Staff Report regarding the Conditional Use Permit; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: 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: The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general plan. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: S\STAFFRPT\13CUP.DOC 7 (1) 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, (2) 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, (3) The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. 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. The proposed Conditional Use Permit is consistent with the SWAP and meet the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit: The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general plan. The Planning Commission finds, in approving of projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the following: (1) There is reasonable probability that Conditional Use Permit No. 13 proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. (2) 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. (3) The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. Pursuant to Sections 18.28(e) and 18.30(c), no Conditional Use Permit may be approved unless the following findings can be made: A conditional use permit shall not be granted unless the applicant demonstrates that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community. Any permit that is granted shall be subject to such conditions as shall be necessary to protect the health, safety or general welfare of the community. S\STAFFRPT\13CUP.DOC The proposed use must conform to all the General Plan requirements and with all applicable requirements of state law and City ordinances. 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. The Planning Commission, in approving of the proposed Conditional Use Permit, makes the following findings, to wit: (1) There is a reasonable probability that Conditional Use Permit No. 13 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 conditioned, conforms with existing applicable city zoning and development ordinances. Further, the proposal is similar to existing adjacent development and uses within the Diaz Road Business Park. (2) 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 proposal is also compatible with existing development in its vicinity, minimizing the potential for future general plan inconsistencies. Further, if found to be ultimately detrimental, the use is subject to termination under City Ordinance provisions contained in Section 18.31 of City ordinance No. 348. (3) 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). (4) 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 currently exist on the subject site. (Reference Exhibit "D".) (5) The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or welfare. Reference the project Conditions of Approval (Attachment No. 2). (6) 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 elements currently existing within the City. S\STAFFRFT\13CUP, DOC 9 (7) The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic. The project draws access from Sarah Way; a dedicated City right-of-way, currently improved to it's ultimate design configuration. (8) 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. No exterior alterations or additions to the existing, previously approved structure are proposed. (9) Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. Supporting documentation is attached. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Conditional Use Permit proposed conforms to the logical development of its proposed site, and is compatible with the present and future development of the surrounding property. SECTION II. Environmental Compliance. The proposed use is determined to be categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) per section 15301. SECTION III. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No, 13 allowing tenant finish of an existing structure for use as an indoor shooting range with accompanying firearms and ammunition sales located at 42245 Sarah Way and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 921-030-026 subject to the following conditions: 6. Attachment No. 2, attached hereto. SECTION IV. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 21 st day of October, 1991. S~STAFFRFT\13CUP.DOC 10 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 21 st day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS PLANNING COMMISSIONERS PLANNING COMMISSIONERS S\STAFFRPT%13CUP.DOC 11 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL S\STAFFRPT%13CUP.DOC 12 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Conditional Use Permit No. 13 Project Description: Tenant finish and improvement of an existing structure within the M-SC Zone District for use as an indoor shooting range with accompanying sales of firearms and ammunition; shooting range to be approximately 4,560 square feet, with 10 firing stations; retail sales area to be approximately 1,150 square feet and office/storage classroom areas at 960 +/- square feet. Assessor's Parcel No.: 921-030-026 Planning Department The use hereby permitted by this plot plan is for tenant finish and improvement of an existing structure within the M-SC Zone District for use as an indoor shooting range with accompanying sales of firearms and ammunition; shooting range to be approximately 4,560 square feet, with 10 firing stations; retail sales area to be approximately 1,150 square feet, and office/storage classroom area at 960 +/- 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 Conditional Use Permit No. 13. 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. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the one (1) year period which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. This approval shall expire on 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. S\STAFFRPT\13CUP.DOC 13 The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as shown on Conditional Use Permit No. 13 site plan and floor plans, marked Exhibits D and E respectively, or as amended by these conditions. 6. Daily hours of operation shall be limited to between 10:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m, City of Temecula Police Department The City Police Department shall review and approve proposed building security system(s) prior to issuance of building permits. Security systems, as built, shall be inspected and approved by the City Police Department prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy. The applicant shall comply with all state and federal laws pertaining to sales of firearms including documentation and reporting of sales to local agencies. Department of Public Works 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 CERTIFICATION OF OCCUPANCY Submit evidence that the Area Drainage Plan fees have been paid by the underlying Parcel Map. 10. Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed upon the property of project, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as required for the project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of 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 security to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the security shall be 92.00 per square foot, not to exceed 910,000. 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 from 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; orovided that developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. S\STAFFRPT\13CUP.DOC 14 Department of Building and Safety 11. Comply with all applicable provisions of the currently adopted edition of the Uniform Building Mechanical and Plumbing Codes, the 1990 edition of the National Electrical Code, California State Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Handicapped Regulations and the Temecula City Code. Riverside County Fire Department With respect to the Conditions of Approval regarding the above referenced conditional use permit, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection standards: 12. No reloading of ammunition will be conducted at this site. 13. It is prohibited to use/process or store any materials in this occupancy that would classify it as an "H" Occupancy per Chapter 9 of the 1988 UBC. 14. Applicant/Developer shall install panic hardware and exit signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code, Low Level Exit Signs, where exit signs are required by Section 3314(a). 15. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes. 16. Applicant/Developer shall install portable fire extinguishers with a minimum rating of 2A-10BC. Contact a certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. 17. 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. 18. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed in the Building and Safety Office. County of Riverside Department of Health The Environmental Health Services Department has reviewed Conditional Use Permit No. 13 and has no objections. Sanitary sewer and water services are available in this area. Prior to any building plan review for health clearance, the following items are required: 19. "Will-serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies. 20. A clearance letter from the Hazardous Services Material Management Branch (Jon Mohoroski, 358-5055), will be required indicating that the project has been cleared for: a. Underground storage tanks S\STAFFRPT\13CUP.DOC 15 Hazardous Waste Generator Services Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with AB 2185) Waste reduction management S\STAFFRPT\13CUP.DOC 16 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 EXHIBITS S%STAFFRPT\13CUP.DOC 17 CITY OF TEMECULA ) "' ./ ~'E HIBIT 14 X 'CASE k,P.C. DATE CITY OF TEMECULA ) "' E HI IT NO. ~ 'C~SE ,o. c.o.f.~.~,3 ~P,C, DATE '~0 ,'~-~.'~t ) CITY OF TEMECULA ) ./ CITY OF TEMECULA ~ CITY OF TEMECULA ~ r XH ~_. E IBIT NO. 'CASE ~'.C. OAT, ~/ CITY OF TEMECULA '~ "7/ 5ULLET TP, AP' c.t_AsSgO0,,4 ezl z-~t' tz, x PISTOL F~ANGE _L ~.~'( x °.-~ STORE LouNC~ EXHIBIT NO. 'CASE d'.C. DATE" ATTACHMENT NO. 4 FEE CHECKLIST S\STAFFRPT%13CUP, DOC 18 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST CASE NO.: CUP//13 The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project. Fee Habitat Conservation Plan (K-Rat) Parks and Recreation (Quimby) Public Facility (Traffic Mitigation) Public Facility (Traffic Signal Mitigation) Public Facility (Library) Fire Protection Flood Control (ADP) Condition of Aooroval Condition No. N/A Condition No. N/A Condition No. 10 Condition No. N/A Condition No. N/A Condition No. N/A Condition No. 9 S~STAFFRPT\13CUP. DOC 19 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 PROPOSED AIR EXCHANGE SYSTEM S\STAFFRPT\I 3CUF:OOC 20 TOTAL AIR SYSTEMS ,' ,' ScanCo Environmental Systems, Inc. /' / 'TT E E] ~'l--Air HElndler/Coil El--Filter Section T 2'0" ram. recommended on both sides for servicing filters. 75% RECIRCULATION/MAKE-UP PACKAGE R4 6'9~ 6'5~" R5 6'9~ 6'5~" R6 8'3~ 8'8" R8 8'3' R9 8'3" 8'8" K ,J_ El--Air Handler [~l--Filter Section ER5 PLAN ELEVATION H J K L G J_ C ._L [] L EXHAUST AIR PACKAGE 2'0" rain. recommended on both sides for servicing filters. PLAN ELEVATION El C O E F G H J (1) Base height 1" Turned in FIElnge-Typ (, Sides D ,, Air iDirection (1) Kl shown for right hind fan ~"tion - reverse for left hand fan section (2) Base height The System I air recirculation system can be installed in most new or existing indoor firing ranges. A significant energy saving of heating or cooling can be realized because 75% of the air is recirculated. The system has been designed with a slight negative pressure in the range that will not allow unfiltered air to contaminate adjacent rooms. MAKE-UP AND RECIRCULATION EXHAUST PACKAGE PACKAGE Exhaust fan unit is sized to remove 250/o of the supply air. Fan unit includes blower. motor and controls. Fan Housing has space available for installing cooling coils. The exhaust filtration section includes a 30% prefilter, The filtration section includes a 30% prefilter, 95% bag 95% bag filter and a 95% DOP filter. This is a very filter, and 99.97% HEPA final filter. This system is efficient system designed to meet government standards. designed for optimum maintenance cost and efficiency considerations. Unit FIltration AIr Handler Weight Unit FMtmUon Fen F. xhauet Weight Sis ~ Unit Unit HP Ib8, RI 3000 FR10-20 DR-08 50 1603 ER1 1000 FER05-10 [}ER03 3.0 581 R2 4500 FR10-25 DR-08 7_K 1747 EFI2 1500 FER10-10 DER03 3.0 684 R3 6000 FR10*30 DRoll 7.5 2085 ER3 2000 FER10-10 DER03 5.0 684 R4 7500 FFI15-30 DR-11 10.0 2315 ER4 2500 FER10-15 DER03 5.0 810 R5 9000 FFI15-30 DR-11 15.0 2315 ER5 3000 FERI0-15 DI=R03 5.0 810 R6 10500 FR15-40 DR-23 15.0 3181 ER6 3500 FER10-20 DI~R08 5.0 1120 R7 13000 FR20-35 DR-23 15.0 3347 ER7 4000 FER10-25 DI=R08 5.0 1264 R8 14500 FR2C-40 DR-23 200 3483 ER8 4500 FER10-25 DER08 7.5 1264 R9 16000 FR2Q-40 DR-23 20.0 3483 ER9 5000 FER10-25 DERD8 7.5 1264 RIO 17500 FR20-45 DR-23 25.0 3641 ER10 5500 FER15-20 DER08 7,5 1348 Rll 19000 FR20-50 OR-23 25.0 3696 ER11 6000 FER15-20 DER08 1G0 1348 R12 20500 FR20-55 DR-36 25.0 4666 ER12 5500 FER15-25 DER08 10.0 1503 R13 22000 FR20-55 DR-36 25.0 4666 ER13 7000 FER15-25 DER08 10.0 1503 R14 235~0 FR25-50 DR-39 30.0 5533 EFI14 7500 FER15*30 DERQ8 15.0 1784 R15 25000 FR25-50 DR-39 30.0 5533 R16 26500 FR30-45 DR-48 30.0 7234 NOTE: Horsepowers shown are based upon maximum internal static pressure and one R17 280~0 FR30-50 DR*48 30.0 7368 inchWG.externaistmicpressure. ContactScanCotoobtainrequiredrnotorselect~ons if external static exceeds one inch '~G. ScanCo developed the total exhaust system as a less expensive initial capital cost alternative to the 75% recirculation system. This system might be considered in milder climates where heating or cooling costs are not prohibitive. The system which is designed to meet EPA and OSHA standards can be installed in new or existing facilities. As the name implies, the system supplies 100% outside air. This air is then exhausted from the bullet stop end. A slight negative pressure is designed in the system. MAKE-UP AIR SECTION Make-up Air Fan The filter section includes a permanent filter designed to collect larger particulates and a rain hood to protect the air intake side. EXHAUST SECTION Exhaust fan unit is designed to remove all of the make-up air and create a slight negative pressure in the room. The filter section includes a 30% prefilter, 95% bag filter and 95% DOP filter designed for optimum efficiency. fJ~t Rltmi~n F~a E~t~umt Weight Ill ~ Unit Unit Its EM1 1100 FEMI0-10 DEM03 3.0 684 EM2 3300 FEM10-20 DEM03 7.5 923 EM3 5500 FEM15-20 DEM08 7.5 1348 EM4 7700 FEM15-30 OEM08 15.0 1612 EM5 9900 FEM15-35 OEM15 15.0 1888 EM6 12100 FEM20-35 DEM25 15.0 2324 EM7 14300 FEM20-40 DEM25 200 2460 EM8 16500 FEM25-35 OEM25 20.0 2537 EM9 18'/00 FEM25-40 DEM35 20.0 2845 EM10 20900 FEM25-45 DEM35 25.0 3012 EM11 23100 FI=M25-50 DEM35 30.0 3144 Suggested Specifications 75% AIR RECIRCULATION SYSTEM (SYSTEM I) The Recirculation System shall be as provided by ScanCo En- vironmental Systems. The system shah consist of two separate air handling and filtration packages. The recirculationlmakeup air package shall be ScanCo size (R1 to R17) and shall supply CFM, using a maximum BHP of.~at a maximum of inches W.G. static presure. The recirculation package shall be complete with fan section, motor, controls, and a filter section that includes 30% prefilter, 95% bag filter, and 99.97% HEPA final filter. The fan housing shall have space available for installing cooling coils. An exhaust filter package shall be ScanCo size (ER1 to ER14) and shall supply CFM using a maximum BHP of at a max- imum of___.inches W.G. static pressure. The package shatl include 30% prefilters, 95% bag and 95% DOP filter. Gages shall be installed to monitor static pressure (i.w.g.) for each filter section (prefilter section, bag sec- tion, final filter section). The combined packages are designed to operate in unison to meet regulatory standards, to obtain a negative pressure in the firing range, to achieve maximum filter life and to recirculate 75% of the supply air past the shooting positions. TOTAL AIR EXHAUST SYSTEM (SYSTEM II) The Total Exhaust System shall be as provided by ScanCo Environ- mental Systems. The system shall consist of two separate air hand- ling and filtration packages. The make-up air package shall be ScanCo size (M1-M11) and shall supply__ CFM using a maximum of BHP at a max- imum of inches W.G. static pressure. The system shall be complete with fan section, motor, controls and a filter section that includes a permanent galvanized filter and a rain hood with birdscreen. The exhaust air filter package shall be ScanCo size (EM1-EM11) and shall supply CFM using a maximum BHP of__.at a maxi- mum inches W.G. static pressure. The package shall consist of a fan/motor section and a filtra- tion section. The filtration section shall include 30% prefilter, 95% bag filter, and 95°/0 DOP final filter. Gages shall be installed to monitor static pressure (i.w.g.) for each filter section (prefilter section, bag section, final filter section). The combined packages are designed to operate in unison, to meet regulatory standards, to obtain a negative pressure in the firing range and to achieve optimum filter life. OPTIONS Computerlzed Control System ScanCo offers a Computerized Con- trol System to monitor and control heating and cooling equipment. Energy saving up to 25% have b~ realized using this system with a one year payback. The system can be adapted to control indoor and outdoor lighting and security systems. This system is offered as an option. Other Options · Weatherproof · Cabinet Insulation · Various Voltages · Special Coatings · Motor Starter · Custom designed systems for any size ranges or any special space requirement. ScanCo Environmental Systems has a policy of continuous product research and reserves the right to change design and specifications without notice. ScanCo Environmental Systems, Inc. 5000 Highlands Parkway, Suite 180, Atlanta, G 30082 (0~)~) 431-0025 A (4 4) 431-0028 Fax lts/~e" , ] G ;l~"H'h-- J 'I' MAKE-UP PACKAGE · TE l~--Rainhood w/Birdscreen ls5/li" ,I ~ F T ,TE [] L T 2'0" rain recommended on both s~des for 3" Base Height serv:cmg filters PLAN ELEVATION C D F G H J K L M N: G 2'0" ram. recommended on both sides for servicing filters, PLAN 8 c D E F 2'2" 1'9v," 2'6~/='' 8'3v4" 1'9~/4" 4'31~'' 1'9~/," 2'61~- 8,31/4 * 1,91/4" EXHAUST AIR PACKAGE ~L 3" Base Height ELEVATION 1" Turned In Flange-Typ (4) Sides ~/~/ (1) K1 shown for right hand fin section - reverse for left T! THE PROBLEM Indoor firing ranges generate lead contaminates in the air that can be toxic to inhabitants if the ventilation system is not properly designed and safety procedures are not carefully followed. Sourues of lead dust and fumes during firing include (1) the tead primer (2) vaporization and fragmentation of the projectile as it passes through the weapon being fired and (3) fragmentation of the bullet as it strikes the bullet stop. Many indoor firing ranges in the past have ignored problems with lead contamination either inside the ranges or with air exhausted into the atmosphere. These prac- tices will not likely be tolerated by a more sophisticated society in the future as evidenced by the forced closing of many ranges. THE SOLUTION ScanCo has developed two ventila- tion/filtration systems for indoor firing ranges that when properly installed and maintained can provide dollar savings as well MEET TARGETED LEVELS FOR NIOSH EPA 0SHA as meeting regulatory standards. These systems are the result of years of work in filtration, ventila- tion, heating, and air conditioning applications. ScanCo management strongly believes each range should have assigned to it a highly quali- fied specialist who has previously worked on dozens of similar appli- cations. In most cases the ScanCo representative will visit the range and/or the engineering firm design- ing the range at least once in order to minimize any potential problems. GOVERNMENT STANDARDS OSHA: Limits occupational exposure to 50 micrograms of lead per cubic meter of air, averaged over an eight hour period. EPA: Limits lead in exhaust air to 1.5 micrograms per cubic meter, averaged over a calendar quarter. BENEFITS TO YOU · Compliance with NIOSH, OSHA and EPA standards. · Greatly enhances user comfort and satisfaction with your range - resulting in increased patronage. · Reduces potential liability resulting from employee health problems. · Reduces absenteeism and sickr of employees, · New permits are easier to obtain with plans outlining these systems. · Reduces outside air intake by up to 75% resulting in energy savings for heating and cooling that over a period of time can pay for the system. MAKE-UP AIR SCANCO RECIRCULATION & FILTER SYSTEM FIRING LINE TYPICAL SCANCO INDOOR FIRING RANGE RECIRCULATION AND FILTRATION SYSTEM ITEM # 09 Case No.: RECOMMENDATION: STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 21, 1991 Second Extension of Time Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 Prepared By: Richard Ayala Forward the following recommendations to the City Council: APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PROPOSAL: LOCATION: EXISTING ZONING: SURROUNDING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: SURROUNDING LAND USES: ACCEPT Environmental Impact Report No. 263 for Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125; ADOPT Resolution No. 91 - approving Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. Sterling Builders, Inc. Ranpac Engineering Corporation Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 proposes a two hundred twenty-five (225) lot residential subdivision on 88.4 acres. Northeast Corner of De Portola and Butterfield Stage Road. R-A-2 ~ (Residential Agricultural - 2 ~ acre minimum) North: R-1 (One-Family Dwelling) South: R-R (Rural Residential} East: R-R (Rural Residential} West: SP (Specific Plan) R-1 (One-Family Dwellings) and R-5 (Open Area Combining Zone o Residential Developments} Vacant North: Vacant South: Vacant East: Vacant West: Vacant S\STAFFRPT~23125B.VTM PROJECT STATISTICS Project Area: Proposed No. of Lots: 88.4 acres 212 residential and 13 open space Proposed Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Density: SWAP Density: 7,200 square feet 2.3 DU/AC 2-4 DU/AC Acreage Designated by Proposed Zones: R-1 (One-Family Dwellings): R-5 (Open Area Combining Zone-Residential Development): 61.61 acres 22 acres BACKGROUND Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 were presented before the Planning Commission on July 15, 1991. Both applications were unanimously motioned to be continued to the following Planning Commission in order for both Staff and applicant to address slopes, homeowners association (HOA) and acceptability of the proposed park site for the subject project. On October 7, 1991, both Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 were presented once again to the Planning Commission in order to address the dedication of the proposed parkland and the maintenance of open spaces by the Homeowners Association. Both applications were approved by the Planning Commission that evening. The Planning Commission's approval of the First Extension of Time, extends the subject Tract Map (VTM 23125) to October 20, 1991. Due to the unique circumstances surrounding this tract map, a Second Extension of Time is necessary to continue the life of the subject tract map an additional year, in order for the applicant to process the map. Therefore, Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 was submitted to the City of Temecula on September 20, 1991 and was processed immediately after the approval of Change of Zone No. 17 and First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 proposes to subdivide the subject 88.4 acre site into a residential development consisting of 212 residential lots and 13 open space lots, with an overall density of 2.3 units per acre. The proposed development has been designed in accordance with the standards of the R-1 and R-5 zone. The project site is located at the Northeast corner of De Portola Road and Butterfield Stage Road. At present, the site is vacant. S\STAFFRPT~23125B.VTM 2 ANALYSIS Design Considerations The proposed subdivision has been designed in accordance with the standards of the R-1 and R-5 (One-Family Dwellings and Open Space Combining Zone-Residential Development) zones and Ordinance Nos. 348 and 460. The main access to the project is provided by De Portola Road. Open Space/Slopes The Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) has reviewed the subject tract and has concluded that Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 parkland dedication requirement (Quimby) is 2.75 acres of improved parkland identified on VTM 23125 as lot "A" which will be dedicated to the TCSD prior to recordation of the final map and be improved to TCSD standards prior to issuance of the 63rd building permit. Approximately 12 acres of undeveloped open space contiguous with the proposed parksite identified as lot "C" and approximately 2.6 acres of wetland identified as lot "B" will be dedicated to the TCSD upon completion of required improvements and prior to the issuance of the 63rd building permit. In addition, all interior slopes including lot "D" will be maintained by a homeowners association (see VTM 23125). The exterior slope maintenance areas are proposed to be maintained by the TCSD and will be properly identified on the final map. Density The proposed subdivision (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125) has a density of 2.3 DU/AC. The Southwest Area Community Plan (SWAP) calls for 2-4 DU/AC, therefore the Tract meets the SWAP residential density requirement. Quimby Act The proposed tract consists of 212 single family residential homes, The parkland dedication requirement (Quimby) is 2.75 acres or payment of the equivalent fair market value plus 20% for off-site improvements. The proposed tract has identified a proposed 2.75 acre park. With the required parkland dedication of 2.75 acres, the applicant meets the parkland dedication per TCSD sta.ndards. FUTURE GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY The proposed density of 2.3 units per acre is consistent with the Southwest Area Community Plan designation of 2-4 units per acre. In addition, Staff finds it probable that this project will be consistent with the new General Plan when it is adopted. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION In accordance with the procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Environmental Impact Report No. 263 was prepared in connection with the proposed project. All significant effects of the project on the environment and measures necessary to avoid or substantially lessen such effects were evaluated in accordance with the Riverside County Rules to implement CEQA. S\$TAFFRPT~23125B.VTM 3 Certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 263, was approved by the Riverside Board of Supervisors on October 25, 1988. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS As previously mentioned in the background section of the staff report, the First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 was approved by the Planning Commission on October 7, 1991, which extended the tract map to October 20, 1991. Therefore, a second extension of time for the subject tract map is necessary in order to extend the subject tract map an additional year. FINDINGS 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 project site's existing land use designation. 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 project's public and private frontages; and the internal circulation plan should not create traffic conflicts as design provisions are in conformance with adopted City standards. 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. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 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 proposed zoning of the subject site, and also consistent with the adopted Southwest Area Community Plan (SWAP) designation. S\STAFFRPT~23125B.VTM 4 The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural environment as determined in the Environmental Impact Report adopted by the County 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 two independent access points from De Portola Road which have been determined to be adequate by the City Engineer. 10. 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. 11. 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: Based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval, the Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward the following recommendations to the City Council: ACCEPTANCE of Environmental Impact Report No. 263 for Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125; ADOPTION of Resolution No. 91 - recommending approval of Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125. vgw Attachments: Resolution - page 6 Conditions of Approval - page 11 Exhibits - 16 A. Location Map B. SWAP Map C. Zone Map D. Surrounding Land Use E. Site Plan S\STAFFRPT~23125B.VTM 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION S\STAFFRPT~23125B.VTM 6 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 23125-A 225 RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION ON 88.4 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF DE PORTOLA ROAD AND BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 926-330-004 AND 926-070-020. WHEREAS, Sterling Builders, Inc., filed the Time Extension in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Time Extension application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Time Extension on October 21, 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 Time Extension. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: 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: The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general plan. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: (1) There is a reasonable probability that the Time Extension proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. S\STAFFRPT\23125B.VTM 7 (2) 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. (3) The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. 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. The proposed Time Extension is consistent with the SWAP and meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit: The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general plan. 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: (1) There is reasonable probability that the Time Extension proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. (2) 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. (3) The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. Pursuant to Section 18.30(c), no Time Extension may be approved unless the following findings can be made: The proposed use must conform to all the General Plan requirements and with all applicable requirements of state law and City ordinances, The proposed subdivision does not affect the general health, safety, and welfare of the public. The Planning Commission, in approving the proposed Time Extension, makes the following findings, to wit: 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 sit-~ amenities commensurate with existing and anticipated residential development standards. S\STAFFRPT~23125B.VTM 8 Cm 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 proiect 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 project site's existing land use designation. 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 project's public and private frontages; and the internal circulation plan should not create traffic conflicts as design provisions are in conformance with adopted City standards. 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. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 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 proposed zoning of the subject site, and also consistent with the adopted Southwest Area Community Plan (SWAP) designation. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural environment as determined in the Environmental Impact Report adopted by the County 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 two independent access points from De Portola Road which has 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. 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. S\STAFFRPT~23125B.VTM 9 As conditioned pursuant to SECTION II, the Time Extension proposed conforms to the logical development of its proposed site, and is compatible with the present and future development of the surrounding property. SECTION I1. Environmental Compliance. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby determines that the previous environmental determination (Adoption of Environmental Impact Report No. 263) still applies to said Tract Map (Extension of Time). SECTION III. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves the Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 for a 225 residential lot subdivision on 88.4 acres located on the northeast corner of De Portola Road and Butterfield Stage Road and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 926-330-004 and 926~070-020 subject to the following conditions: 1. Attachment III, attached hereto. SECTION IV. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of October 1991. JOHN HOAGLAND 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 21st day of October 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS S\STAFFRPT~23125B.VTM 10 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL S\STAFFRPT\23125B.VTM 11 ATTACHMENT 2 CITY OF TEMECULA ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 Second Extension of Time Commission Approval Date: Expiration Date: Planning Department Unless previously paid, 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. 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. This conditionally approved Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 will expire one (1) year after the original expiration date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance 460. The expiration date is October 20, 1992. The subdivider shall comply with the original Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 23125 (see attached} except as amended herein. Prior to recordationof Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23125, Change of Zone No. 17 shall be effective. The applicant shall comply with the California Department of Fish and Game (Streambed Alteration Agreement 5-381-90) recommendations outlined in the transmittal dated August 18, 1990, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the Los Angeles District, Corps of Engineers recommendations outlined in the transmittal dated February 8, 1991, a copy of which is attached. S\STAFFRPT~23125B.VTM 12 Engineering 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. The developer shall comply with all previous Conditions of Approval except as amended by the following conditions. 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 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; Parks and Recreation Department; and Temecula Community Services District. 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. 10. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act any Subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS 11. Prior t~ 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. 12. 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. PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT 13. 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. 14 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. S\STAFFRPT\23125B.VTM 13 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. 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 92.00 per square foot, not to exceed 910,000. 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 16. If construction of improvements are phased and completed prior to development occurring on adjacent properties, a 28' wide secondary access road shall be provided within a recorded private road easement as approved by the City Engineer. 17. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Transportation Engineering PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP 18. A signing plan shall be designed by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for all internal streets with 66' of right-of-way or less and shall be shown on the street improvement plans. 19. Condition No. 32 of the Riverside County Road letter dated June 28, 1988, shall be deleted. Temecula Community Service District (TCSD) Department 20. The exterior (perimeter) slopes proposed in the Tract Map No. 23125 may be dedicated to the TCSD by way of an irrevocable offer to dedicate for landscape maintenance purposes, upon compliance to existing standards as approved by the TCSD, and upon completion of the application process. 21. The Parkland Dedication Requirement (Quimby) is 2.75 acres of improved parkland to be dedicated to the TCSD prior to issuance of 63rd Building Permit. 22. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall offer for dedication 2.75 acres of land (lot "A") and execute with the TCSD and agreement to improve the proposed 2.75 acre park in accordance with TCSD standards at the time of execution for park purposes within the area currently designated as a wetland. In the event that it is determined to be infeasible to provide parkland within the wetland area, applicant shall S\STAFFRPT\23125B.VTM 14' 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. provide the required amount of land dedication and improvements at an alternate location within the project site. The responsibility for the maintenance and improvement of the remaining open space area (lot "B") shall be borne by the applicant and/or homeowners association until such time that improvements as required by State and Federal law are satisfied. Approximately 12 acres of undeveloped open space contiguous with the proposed park site identified as Lot "C" and approximately 2.6 acres of wetland identified as Lot "B" shall be dedicated to the TCSD upon completion of required improvements, and prior to the issuance of the 63rd Building Permit. All interior slopes including Lot "D" shall be maintained by an HOA. The exterior slope maintenance areas proposed to be maintained by the TCSD shall be properly identified on the final map. Riverside County Condition Nos. 18, d and e shall be replaced by the following condition: All non-arterial slopes shall be maintained by the established homeowners association for the subject tract (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23125). Prior to recordation of the final map, a grading plan for the project shall be approved by the City Engineer. S\STAFFRPT\23125B.VTM 15 =u.Uu;s :C', lT~7 Enterprise ,-"ircle W::¢ ?:m:cui~., Cmlif~rnia ~2~90 En:lc~:d -_re ~wo .:gp~e~ c.f B~reambe~l A~=e~aC:on Agreemen~ 5-38X-90. If The 'l~lxf:rn:'a Fish ~nd e~me ,:.:d: :':qu:r:~ ~a~ ie~r~men~ ~n vrxt;n~ v/~h;n l~ ~y~ :f r.-,:e~p~ rf th~ Proposal if you ~o viI1 void your r;gh~ ~o ~tk~xtt3r..lcn, I~ 1~ F:cc.~:nded ~h3~ you ccn~ac: ~he D:par~men., as so~n ~ pz~ble ~o ai~cuss .o~ss~bl: changes v~sh~n ~he pro.oozed A~reemen~. 2~ no~ sake ~ny chang:s or corrections ~o .-..h: proposed A~reement vt~h.~u~ firs~ r:ce~v~ng ::ncurr:nce, .D~hervt~e, changes ~h)ll '/01.~ cur ""."~ ~Tl~) e.-l~-eO"_l, ~,- ~_.~ r. he ".k-:ve "_.idr~.e.:. AGPF~ EEGAEDIN8 PROPOSED STILEAM CR LAKE ;~IS AGREEMENT, e~ere.~ u'.~ ke~';ee~ -.he ~e :f :~i:f:=~:~, Zep~r=zer,~ ,~f Fish ~nd ¢~me, !'.ere~n",ft~.r :-_~led :he Cep~r~=en~, ;~!~L:fe res~.urcee ~ncludin~: r:r. sr~_n ~nd ~sndv ';ash ~".h.~.1~ ~.':i if ~ke ,Dpe. rabor's vork chsn~es from th.a~ s~ated ~n the ~pe,:zfie-~ shove, ~.his Aimreemen~ x~ no [:.n~er vili,] and )nev r.~t~fi:~t4on s~z~i %e submitted t,: the Departmen~ .sf FLsh Ind ,3mme. Fs~Lure v;sh =~e Frcv,sxons .:.f this A.)reement )n.~ vtth ,:sher te.:~:::'.~. :nciud~n,) but n~ limited ~: Fish ~nd .}~me ,:.sis ~e,;t::ns L)nd :r Frcper~y, nor does It relieve she Operas,st ,:.f :~mpi~mce v~th !pplicible federsl, s~a~e..:r :cnsu:m~e.~ Agreemen~ ~ce~ not .:on~r4tur~e Oeparr~men~ end.sr~eten~ ,Dr th~ proposed ,:.perlt,.)n..:r )s(ure the Dep)rl~enr~': ::n,:urrence vLth Fermx~ required frcm .:~her zr..pi7 -.~at ,-.he Gperat,~r ~..r. rec!'Lie.J frzm :i.:,~n,~ or, her a;~iv.t.l*.i !5 ~he [::e 'le':::::'.s L{t)0 e~ -'.+.],, 2. T,'~e ,Z~pe. rate~r F-.rop~'.ee t.._~ m-[tar the ~.'.re.'mbed f:r placement of fill v~thzn a npartan and sandy wash habitat. f: !t :f a sm~tt r'.p._r~-.n -.tea and :re-.:;z.n .:f an )ddit~c,n.ml .5 acre( :f r:F..art'_n h_-blr.~r. =d~m,-~nr~ tD =-~reed vc. rk :n:luje-. -_.:~.:'.':~.:e=. -_-.-.c.c:.=~ed 'Jtt. h ';=. 2 .-bz,':e. .'.~e stem ~=. l,~car..e.J mpprcx:ma~.eiy ~(ulu)' ~N~{ .:.f Hvy 77 brz:vl:e :'.'er River :n ~.iver-.lde C,~un~.7. .--'r~c'-f'~.: v4.rk areas ~_re :r.d'~:mze,i :r I .:f 7rsc~ 23125 to a mxnxmum bc,~.:.m vx.j~h i:sc-;~e,] v~h Rmnpa,:'5 ~a,:|c Eaa~cn. ~i~e reve;~a~ed vtth vegetation natlye ~o the :. Fill ~lope. m alon~ ~4 ves~ern ~er::e~er ,:f Trac: 23121. L.~ [. lhail be vegetated vlth native ve~e~atlon and a mlnlm,,m of .~ acr~a ,Dr rlpar:an hab~zau shall be ,:re~ted w~hln L~ I near :is ~ou~hern ~undry adjacent ~o ~he '.~diat,:be.d rir~r~an habitat. 6. ~-,e ,Dpe. ra~or shall ~ubm~t ~.~ ~he Ee~artmen~ f.:r review and approval. prxtr to xnitiation of proJec~ ac~lvstle~, a detaxled planttn~ r~le~te for .:f z:iantxn~. Included v$th ~ha plmn~n~ palette shmll zurv:val after the first year'~ ~rcvth and 100% f.?r years ~vo thr~,~h Five. suc.:e~Iful the plante shall a~hxeve ~he mxnxm,,~ growth a~ the end .:,f three and f:ve year~. If th~ mxn~mum growth ;m no~ ich~eved ~hen ~h,e Z.oe. rat~r !hall he re~pon$xble for taking ~he appr~prxa~a .:orre¢~ve mea~twee ma ~e~ar::ned by Depar~men~ representatives. TF4 Operator ~h~ll !:e re~p~n~xble fTr ~y ,::t~ occlJrr~ during ~he rtvegt~a~l:,n cf In !ubae.?.:ent ::rra.:~;'/e 3PECiS] 8IZE ~T FLANTING HEIGHT PLANTING CENTERS ~ yearl i year~ (GALLCNB) ArrTl,'~ ~zl!.:w PB ~ ft 10 ft 15 ft I gallon ,] ft tO ft 15 ft Sycmzore 1 gallon 20 f~ S ft 9 fb 5 gallon 22.~ ft 7 ft l] ft ~ 1~ ~ail~n ~$ ft 10 ft I8 ft 9all.an · 7 ft 12 ft gallon · 3 ft 15 ft gallon · 13 ?t 20 ft -:lt.-ub - = .:!-.nt ...... Tke ,:?.eratot ~-~11 ann'~=_ily ~.here~f~.er ~..hr:,ugn year f;ve. 7, ~e OF, crater ~h)lI reccr~ s .=~n~erv~t~:n e~semen~ :n L;~ I, ;n the n~me z,f ~ ne Eepmr'tment cr :tm je~ ~,~nee For ~ ~r::e~er .:.f L.:: 1. Frocf :f reccrd~z)~n ,Dperst..-.r -.hail ,~sLuts),n<ue, e .DF !',~nd t.~ois and ~ppr~ved herb;tide-_) plant removal progr)m ~],z~ng the m~n~ensnce i~rogr~m. g, .'h.e Operator she 11 comply v;th all litter and pollutxon laws, All .:on~r~c~r¶. ~,~)~c~ntrmc~or~ and emplovee~ shall ml~o =sbe. y the~e laws ~nd it shall he ~he resDon~blxtv oF the Operator ~o insure ~hexr :,:mplimnce. channel or lake maroon vhere ~e. croleum srodu,::s or o~her Dolluranus From the e~uxument I.aV enter these .arems under any Flov, I1, ~',e ~s~mr~.men: resetyam t. he rtoh~ ~o enter the cro e,:~ (:re m~ mnv txme 12. ~e DeDarcmen~ reserves ~he rioh~ ~o ~u~Bend and/or revoke A.2ree~en~ IF ~he De~.mr~men~ determines ~b, sc ~b4 o:r:umstances varranc. czrcu=scances t~a~ ,:~ul~ rerautre S teevaluation xnc!ude, l:;zted to, :he foll,~vxn~: ~, Fmxlure to c:molv v~h the terms/cond~on~ .sf ~h~ ~,:ree~ent, b. The ~nForma~s.:n orovxded bY ~he O~era~or zn !poDart .:,f the A,2r~e=ent/No~xfz,zi~;:n ~ de~erm:ne,] by =he ~eBsrt:ent ~D be ;ncczale~e. ,;r Inaccurate. :. ~h4, n hey ~n~,sr~s~L,~n ~.ecc~es svaLIsble t,s the r~r~entat~ve<~) ~hs~ vss no~ knovn vhen cre~arina the .:r~znal ~er=s.'c:ndztb:ns .DF th~s A.]reemen~. j. ~e ~ro.]ect a~ .~e~cr~bed ~n the NatL~ca~cn/Aoreement .:hsn:ed..:r condors.phi a~ec~na F~sh and vLZdl~e re~o~ces cb, snae. 13. ~'~e ,Dce, rmsor ~hall provide e copy of this Aareemen~ to all conerectors. sub=onCrSctorS. and the OPerator's ~ro.jec~ supervLsors. Copies of the aareemen~ shsll be readily available a~ york si~es st'all times durinq uericrJs of ac~i~e york snd mus~ be pre~en~e~ ~o any ~oartmen~ ~e.r~onnel, or enFcrcemen~ oersonnel From another lQencv uD0n demand. l~. T!'.~ lz~,r=,t.:r shall n.,~tlfv '.?.~ ZeI:-_r-,-em~. in writing..st least five(~) ~avs :r~or to inltiabion of con=t~uctxon(:roj~t) activities and a~ least ~ive( ~ ) days ~r~or ~o completion o~ const~ction( ~.)~ ) activ~txe~. Xc.~f;:~;,:n !h~ll be ~n~ t.o the r~,sr~:en~ FLsh and ~}ame Office of the chief Regulatory Branch DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY February 8, 1991 Sterling Builders c/o RANPAC Corp. ATTN: John R. Easton 27447 Enterprise Circle West Temecula, California 92390 RE: File Number 91-201-MJ Gentlemen: This is in reply to your application dated June 29, 1991 for a Department of the Army Permit to place 20,000 c.y. of fill material in 0.56 acre of waters of the United States, of which 0.15 acre of wetland habitat. As mitigation, 0.3 acre of wetland habitat will be created on-site. The project is located in the streambed of an unnamed tributary of Temecula Creek, approximately 6000' west-northwest of State Highway 79 bridge crossing over Temecula Creek, in the city and county of Riverside, California. Regulations for our permit program, published in the Federal Register, include Part 330 - Nationwide Permits (see the enclosure). The Corps of Engineers has determined that your proposed activity complies with the terms and conditions of the nationwide permit at Part 330.5(a)(26) for discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands, that are located above the headwaters or are isolated waters and which would cause loss or substantial adverse modification of less than one acre of such waters. As long as you comply with the nationwide permit conditions described in Part 330.5(b) and submit mitigation site reports to the Corps every year for the next three years after mitigation has been completed, an individual permit is not required. This letter of verification is valid until the nationwide permit is modified, reissued, or revoked. All the nationwide permits are scheduled to be modified, reissued or revoked prior to 13 January 1992. It is incumbent upon you to remain informed of changes to the nationwide permits. We will issue a public notice announcing the changes when they occur. Furthermore, if you commence or are under contract to commence this activity before the date the nationwide permit is modified or revoked, you will have twelve months from the date of the modification or revocation to -2- complete the activity under the present terms and conditions of this nationwide permit. A nationwide permit does not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges. Also, it does not authorize any injury to the property or rights of others or authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal project. Furthermore, it does not obviate the need to obtain other Federal, state, or local authorizations required by law. If you have any questions please contact Mike Jewel1 of my staff at (213) 894-5606. Sincere ly, Diane K. Noda ~o f' Acting Chief, Southern Section Enclosure RZVERSZDE COUNTY PLANNZNG DEPARTHENT SUBDIVZSZON CONDZTZONS OF APPROVAL VESTZNG TENTATZVE TRACT NO. 23125 DATE: AHENDED NO. 2 STANDARD CONDITIONS The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County of Riverside, its agents, officers, and employees fron any claim, action, or >roceeding against the County of Riverside or its agents, officers, or enployees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the County )f Riverside, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23125, which action is brought sbout within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The County of Riverside will promptly notify the ;ubdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the County of ~iverside and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the County fails to >romptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or 'ails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, :hereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the :ounty of Riverside. 41 The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Hap Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule A, unless modified by the conditions listed below. 3. This conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors approval date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance 460. The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor subject to all the requirements of the State of California Subdivision ~p Act and Ordinance 460. The subdivider shall submit one copy of a soils report to the Riverside County Surveyor's Office end two copies to the Oepartment of Building and Safety. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. If any grading is proposed, the subdivider shall submit one print of comprehensive grading plan to the Oeparment of Bullding and Safety. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Boildang Code, Chapter 70 as mended by Ordinance 457 and as maybe additionally provided fo~ in these conditions of approval. VESTZtlG mufTA~IVE TRACT NO. 23125, Amd. fZ Conditions of Approval Page 2 7. A grading pemit shall be obtained from the Deparl~nent of Building and Safety prior to ccm,m,4ncernent of any grading outside of county maintained road right of way. 8. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. The subdivider shall comply ~th the street improvement recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Road Deparment's letter dated 6-2B-B8, a copy of Vnich is attached. Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract map boundary to a County 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 Road Commissioner. Street names shall be subject to approval of the Road Commissioner. Easements, when requi red 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 County Surveyor. Water and sewerage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance with the provisions set forth in the Riverside County Health Depar~ent's letter dated 6-23-B8, a copy of which is attached. 14. The subdivider shall comply with the flood control recommendations ~ outljbxa.d by the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated : ~-28-88~ a copy of which is attached. If the land division lies within an ~../~aa~)t~*~ood control drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of Ordinance 460, appro tiara fees for the construction of area drainage facilities shall be coVlected by t e Road Commissioner, The subdivider shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the County Fire 14arshal's letter dated 6-22-B8, a copy of which is attached, Subdivision phasing, including any proposed common open space area improvement phasing, if applicable, shall be subject to Planning Deparment 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, 17. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following: YESTTNG TEXTAI'[VE TRA~T ll0. 231-25, 'Amc[. t2 Conditions of Approval Page 3 a. All lots shall have a minimum size of 7200 square feet net. b. All lot length to width ratios shall be in conformance with Section 3.8C of Ordinance 460. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a ~ed-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. 1B. Prior to RECORDATION of the final map the following conditions shall be satisfied: Prior to the recordation of the final map the applicant shall submit written clearances to the Riverside County Road and Survey Department that all pertinent requirements outlined in the attached approval letters from the following agencies have been met: County Fire Department County Heal th Department County ~ood Control County Planning Department b. Prior to the recordation of the final map, Change of Zone No. 5122 shall be approved by the Board of Supervisors and shall be effective. Lots created by this land division shall be in conformance with the devel opnent standards of the zone ultimately applied to the property. ~ ~ -G,--_P_r_iar~ to_--cecq~dation of__t. he final r:pr~J~e_p~ojeetsi~i~b~ , ~ Jannexed i~to {3A 113' d. Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall convey to the County fee simple title, to all common or common open space areas, free and clear of all liens, taxes, assessment, leases (recorded and unrecorded) and easements, except those easements which in the sole discretion of the County are acceptable. As a conditions precedent to the County accepting title to such areas, the subdivider shall submit the following documents to the Planning Oeparbnent for review, which documents shall be subject to the approval of that depar~ent and the Office of the County Counsel: 1) 2) A declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions; and A sample document conveying title to the purchaser of an indivic~al lot or unit which provides that the declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions is incorporated therein by reference. YESTIE TENTATIVE TRACT W0. 23225, MId. t!2 CoeKlittons of Approval Page 4 The declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions submitted for review shall (a) provide for a term of 60 years, (b) provide for the establishrnent of a property owners' association comprised of the Owners of each individual lot or unit and (c) contain the following provisions verbatim: "Notwithstanding any provision in this Declaration to the contrary, the following provision shall apply: The property ~,ners' association established herein shall, if dormant, be activated, by incorporation or otherwise, at the request of the County of Riverside, and the property owners' association shall unconditionally accept from the County of Riverside, upon the County's demand, title to all or any part of the 'common area', more particularly described on Exhibit'A' attached hereto. The decision to require activation of the property owners' association and the decision to require that the association unconditionally accept title to the 'connon area' shall be at the sole discretion of the County of Riverside. In the event that the common area, or any part thereof, is conveyed to the ropetry owners' association, the association, thereafter shal~ own such 'common area', manage and shall continuously maintain such 'common area', or any part thereof, absent the prior written consent of the Planning Director of the County of Riverside or the County's successor-in-interest. The property ownerS' association shall have the right to assess the owners of each individual lot or unit for the reasonable cost of maintaining such 'common area', and shall have the right to lien the property of any such owner who defaults in the pennant of a maintenance assessment, An assessment lien, once created, shall be prior to all other liens recorded subsequent to the notice of assessment or other document creating the assessment lien, This Oeclaration shall not be terminated, 'substantially' amended or property deannexed therefrom absent the prior written consent of the Planning Director of the County of Riverside or the County'S successor-in-interest. A proposed amendment shall be considered 'substantial' tf it effects the extent, usage or maintenance of the 'common area'. In the event of any conflict between this Oeclaration and the Articles of Zncorporation, the Bylaws, or the property owners' association Rules and Regulations, if any, this Declaration shall control." Once approved, restrictions shall recorded. the declaration of covenants, conditions and be recorded at the same time that the final map is VES'TZlt TERTATIVE TRACT NO. 23125, Amd. 12 Conditions of Approval Page 5 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 (EC$) Shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be pennanentl filed with the office of the County Surveyor. A copy of the ECS shal ~ 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 Oeparl3ment and the Department of Building and Safety. The following note shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet: 'County Environmental Impact Report No. 263 was prepared for this property and is on file at the Riverside County Planning Deparl~nent. Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERHITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: a. All mitigation for seismic and liquefaction hazard shall be that which is found in Environmental Zmpact Report No. 263. b. The following tree preservation guidelines shall be incorporated the projects approved grading, building and landscaping plans as appropriate: 1. Every effort shall be made to prevent encroac~nent of structures, grading or trenching within the dripline or twenty-five (25) feet of the trunk of any trees, whichever is greater. If encroacl~nent within the dripline is unavoidable, no more than one third of the root area shall be disturbed, grading or covered with impervious materials. The root area is considered to extend beyond the dripline a distance equal to one half the radius. Building, gradin or improvements shall not occur within ten (10) feet of any tree irunk. Retaining walls shall be constructed where necessary to preserve h e ~ or caisson t footing rather than a continuous footing to minimize root damage. VESTlIE TE]ITATIYE TUCT I10. 23125, Mad. ~2 Conditions of Approval - Page 6 5. Alteration of natural drainage shall be avoided to the greatest extent possible. 6. Runoff channelled near trees shall not substantially change normal soil moisture characteristics on a seasonal basis. Runoff shall not be directed towards the base of trees so that the base of the trees remain in wet soil for an extended period. Where natural topography has been altered, drainage away fro~ trunks shall be provided where necessary to ensure that water will not stand at the crown. $edimentation and siltation in the drainage ways shall be controlled where necessary to avoid filling around the base of the trees. Land uses that w~uld cause excessive soil compaction within the dripline of trees shall be avoided. If the areas are planned for recreation, provide trails to restrict compaction to a mall area. Heavy use under trees shall be avoided unless measures to minimze compaction are undertaken. 10, Landscaping or irrigation shall not be installed within ten (10) feet of any trees. All existing native specimen trees on the subject property shall be preserved wherever feasible. Where they cannot be preserved they shall be relocated or replaced with specimen trees as approved by the Planning Director. Replacement trees shall be noted on approved landscaping plans. If any archaeological resources are uncovered during grading or trenchin , all activities shall cease and an archaeologist shall be consuite3. Any recommendations of the archaeologist shall be adhered to. All cut slopes located ad3acent to ungraded natural terrain and exceeding ten (10) feet in vertical height shall be contour-graded incorporating the following grading techniques: 1) The angle of the graded slope shall be gradually adjusted to the angle of the natural terrain. 2) A~gular foms shall be discouraged. The graded fom shall reflect the natural rounded terratn. 3) The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with curves with radii designed in proportion to the total height of the slopes where drainage and stability permit such rounding. VESTXMG TE)ITATIVE TRACT ~0. 23125, Amd. t2 Conditions of Appnwal Page 7 4) Where cut or fill slopes exceed 300 feet in horizontal length, the horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved in a continuous, undulating fashion. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall provide eviaence 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 pal eontol ogist 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 hal t grading activity to allow recovery of fossils. Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERHITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: No building permits shall be issued by the County of Riverside for any residential lot/unit within the project boundary until the developer's successor's-in-interest provides evidence of compliance with public facility financin measures. A cash sum of one-hundred dollars ($100) per lot/unit shall with the Riverside County Department be deposited of Building and Safety as mitigation for public library development. Prior to the submittal of building plans to the Department of Buildin and Safety an acoustical study shall be performed by an acousticaV engineer to establish appropriate mitigation measures that shall be ap 1 led to individual dwelling units within the subdivision to reduce aPmCient interior noise levels to 45 Ldn. All street lights en 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. Prior to issuance of building permits, detailed park site and riparian area development lens shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. T~ese plans shall conform with guidelines found in the approved design manual (Exhibit H). The park shall include active VESTZNG TEMTATIVE TRAL'r NO. 23125, Aid. Conditlofts of Ai~roval Page 8 recreational features such as picnic tables, barbecue areas, tot lots, etc. For the security and safety of future residents, the sh.l,. consid.r during following crime site and building a. Proper lighting in open areas; b. Visibil try of doors and windows from the street and between buildings; c. Fencing heights and materials; d. Adequate off-street parking; and e. A clearly understood method of street numbering to facilitate emergency response. 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, and shall conform to the standards set forth in the tract's approved Design Manual (Exhibit 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, and shall incorporate drip irrigation wherever possible. · Parkways and landscaped building setbacks shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or a transition into the primary use area of the site, Landscape elements shall include earth berming, ground cover, shrubs and specimen trees in conjunction with meandering sidewalks, benches and other pedestrian amenaries where appropriate as approved by the Planning Department. 3. Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent trees at key visual focal points within the project. 4. Where street trees cannot be planted within ri hi-of-way of interior streets and project parkways due to insufVicient road right-of-way, they shall be planted outside of the road right-of-way. VESTING TE)TTATIVE TRACT 1). 23125, Amd. 12 Conditions of Approval Page 9 5. Landscaping plans shall incorporate native and drought tolerant plants where appropriate. 6. All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow growing trees shall be steel staked· 7. Front and rear yard landscaping shall incorporate the use of shade trees. 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. h. All front yards shall be provided with landscaping and automatic irrigation· i. A plot plan shall be submitted to the Planning Deparb~ent pursuant to Section 18.30 of Ordinance No. 348 accompanied by all applicable filing fees, as a plot plan that is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act and is not transmitted to any governmental agency other than the Riverside County Planning Department. The plot plan shall ensure the conformante of the final site development w~th the tract's approved Design Nanual (Exhibit H), and shall contain the following elements: A final site plan showing the lots, building footprints, all setbacks, fences and/or walls, and floor plan and elevation assignments to individual lots. One (1) color and materials sample board (maximum size of 8 X 13 inches by 3/8 inch thick) containing precise color, texture and material swatches or photographs (which may be from suppliers; brochures). Indicate on the board the name, address and phone numbers of both the sample beard preparer end the project m plicent, tract number, and the manufacturer end product numbers w~ere (trade names possible elso acceptable). One (1) copy of the architectural elevations colored to represent the selected color combinations, with symbols keyed to the color end materials board. The written color and material descriptions shell be located on the elevation. Six (6) co ies of each of glossy photographic color prints (size 8 X 10 inches) of beth color end materials board and colored architectural elevations for permanent filing, hearing body review and agency distribution. All writing must be legible· VESTZRS TENTATIYE TRACT RO. E3125, Amd. f2 Conditions of Approval Page 10 Said plot plan shall r~quire the approval of the Planin9 Director o, .ny build,n nnits ,or lots includ. with,n submittal of plot plans prior to the issuance of building permits may be phased provided: A separate plot plan shall be submitted to the Planing Depar~ent for each phase, which shall be accompanied by appropriate filing fees. 2. Each individual plot ~an shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to the issuance of building permits for 1 ots included within that plot plan. 21. Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERHITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: a. Wall and/or fence locations shall conform to approved site plan. 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 n~asures shall be utilized as approved by the Planning Director and the Director of Building and Safety. c. Prior to occupancy, bike paths shall be installed along De Portola Road an<l Butterfield Stage Road. All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with ~pproved plans and shall be verified by a Planning Depar~ent field Inspection. Not withstanding the preceding conditions, wherever an acoustical study is required for noise attenuation purposes, the heights of all required mlls shall be determined by the acoustical study where applicable, f, Prior to occupancy, the park site and riparian enhancement area shall be developed in accordance with approved plans. GN:sc 9/02/88 INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MF. MORANDUM COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE Road and Survey Department May 11, 1988 RIVE. h~.,.,,. ~. dNTY PLANNING DEP~,"'~TMENT fee Johnson, Principal Engineering Technician FRO, N.: Edwin Studor, Transportation Planner Tentative Tract 23125 (Sterling Ranch) - Traffic Study We have reviewed the Traffic Study for Tentative Tract 23125, and generally agree with the analysis relative to traffic and circulation. Based upon our review of this proposal, it is reconunended that the following considerations be given in developing conditions of approval for this project. 1. The project proponent shall participate in the Traffic Signal Mitigation Program as approved by the Board of Supervisors. Butterfield Stage Road and De Pcrtola Road, adjacent to the project, should be improved to an arterial highway {110' foot right-of-way). A 1S0 foot left turn lane pocket should be provided for traffic on Butterfield Stage Road and De Portola desiring to turn left into each project entrance. ES:AE=lg Planning Department Subdivision file ~""' I!AR 09 1988 RIVERSIDE COUNT"r March 8, 3.988 PLANNING DEPARTMF' ' Officers: Start T. Mills G~n~r~ Manq~,r PhilUp L. Forbs Dir~t~r of Finance - Normin L. Thommz Du~c:~r of Thomes R. McAUeeteT DL-~cu>r of a Barbmrs J, Red Dinc~or of Administrmtion - Distrir4 Rut, s= susd Tucker Riverside County Planning Department 4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor Riverside, California 92501-3657 Subject: Water Availability Reference: Vesting Tract 23125 Gentlemen: Please be advised that t. he 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. Sites for additional water production facilities may be required within the proposed development depending upon the level of increased demand created by the proposal. If RCWD can be of further service to you, please contact ~his office. Very truly yours, RANCliO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Senga P. Doherty Engineering Services Representative F011/dpt84 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRIC~ 28061 DIAZ ROAD · POST OFFICE BOX 174 · TEMECULA. CA 92390-0174 · (714} 676-4101 · FAX {714) 676-061~ ATTACHMENT NO, 3 EXHIBITS S\STAFFRPT~23125B.VTM 16 CITY OF TEMECULA ~ LOCATION 'MAP · CASE NO. gr-rfzs/~r" CITY OF TEMECULA ~ .,' 2-~". DU!;AC' J ,-~,,/~/ VAixi~,,RANCH ,- SP 22,,3 SWAP MAP CASE NO.~/~,zs" P.c. DATE CITY OF TEMECULA ) Z 0 NE ,P3 ZONE SP ZONE \ SP ZONE L.~kR-A-Z x,\O . SP ZONE ZONE MAP CAS'' NO.~ p.c. OAT,',,~/~,,/~/ CITY OF TEMECULA ) //,~/ CASE NO.~'~'~,,~'~ Oft; . :~ U.l EXHIBIT CASE# ~/~ ~-~'~' ITEM # 10 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning October 21, 1991 Parcel Map 24085 The above case was scheduled to be heard before the Planning Commission on October 7, 1991. However, prior to the October 7, 1991 Planning Commission meeting the City of Murrieta requested a continuance to review the maps and provide comments. Recommendation: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the following recommendation to the City Council: 1. ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 24085; and ADOPT Resolution 91 -_ approving Tentative Parcel Map No. 24085 based on the analysis contained in the staff report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. vgw S\MEMOS~GAR\24085PM.MEM APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PROPOSAL: LOCATION: EXISTING ZONING: SURROUNDING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 7, 1991 Case No.: Parcel Map No. 24085 Prepared By: Scott Wright Recommendation: 1. ADOPT THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION; AND 2. ADOPT RESOLUTION 91- RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP NO. 24085 Rancho California City Center Association No. 1 NBS/Lowry To create 57 parcels on a 72.6 acre site Westerly side of Diaz Road, north of the future extension of Winchester Road Manufacturing-Service Commercial, (M-SC) North: South: East: West: Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial, (M- SC) Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial, (M- SC) Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial, (M- SC) Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial, (M- SC) Not Requested Vacant S%STAFFRPT\24085 1 SURROUNDING LAND USES: PROJECT STATISTICS: BACKGROUND: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: North: Vacant South: Vacant East: Murrieta Creek West: Vacant Gross Site Area: Net Site Area: No. of Parcels: Average Parcel Size: Earthwork: 72.6 acres 55.9 acres 57 0.98 acres Cut -- 363,000 yards Fill = 363,000 yards cubic cubic Tentative Parcel Map No. 24085 was submitted to the County on November 22, 1988. The application was continued at the Land Development Committee (LDC) meeting of January 12, 1989 pending submittal of paleontological and biological surveys, additional grading information, geology and liquefaction reports, flood plain information, and a traffic study. The LDC continued Parcel Map No. 24085 at four subsequent meetings, pending clearance from the County Geologist and the County Traffic Engineer, submittal of a paleontological report, submittal of a slope stability report, additional information regarding liquefaction, and clearance of the biological survey. Parcel Map No. 24085 was transmitted to the City on April 11, 1990. City Staff requested a copy of the geologic report showing a restricted use zone, a traffic study, an archaelolgy report, information regarding property boundaries and the alignment of Winchester Road, and landscape and architecture standards. The proposal is to create 57 parcels with an average parcel size of approximately one acre on a site with a gross area of 72.6 acres. There is an open space area 150 feet in width reflecting the restricted use S\STAFFRPT\24085 2 ANALYSIS: zone recommended in the geologic report. The easterly side of the site comprises a Murrieta Creek channel easement and a flood control easement to the County of Riverside. Traffic Impacts Future development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24085 is expected to generate 5,340 vehicle trip ends per day. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the project determined that projected future traffic based on existing traffic, project generated traffic, and traffic generated by other growth in the area will result in a peak hour Level of Service D or better at all intersections within the scope of the traffic study if recommended improvements are implemented. The recommendations include contributing to the extension of Diaz Road, providing traffic signals at certain intersection, contributing to the signalization of other intersections, providing a signing and striping plan, and contributing to the construction of the Overland overcrossing and the restriping of Winchester Road to six lanes. These improvements are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval. Fault Hazards The site is traversed by a potentially active fault which was previously unmapped. The geologic report prepared in conjunction with the parcel map defines a fault zone with two branches and recommends the establishment of a restricted use zone to include observed faults, their in-line projections, and a buffer zone. The larger branch of the restricted use zone is shown on the tentative parcel map as an open space area 150 feet in width. No habitable structure shall be constructed within either branch of the restricted use zone. S%STAFFRPT\24085 3 LiQuefaction Potential Liquefiable soils are present in the lower lying portion of the site. Liquefaction may induce surface subsidence on the site in the range of 0.1 to 1.4 inches. The geologic report recommends that thte effects of liquefaction, including the loss of bearing capacity, surface subsidence, and lateral spreading be re-evaluated for each individual structure on the site when grading and building plans become available. Soils reports addressing the issues delineated above shall be a condition of approval of the subject parcel map and of any future development proposals on the site. Flood Hazard A portion of the proposed parcels are located within the 100 year flood plain limits of Murrieta Creek. Measures to remove the project from the 100 year flood plain are listed in the Conditions of Approval (see County Flood Control District letter of November 16, 1990). Drainaqe The site is located within the limits of the Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan and payment of drainage fees is required. All lots are required to drain toward adjacent streets or an adequate outlet approved by the City Engineer. Parcel Map 21383 is located adjacent to and upslope from the site. If development of the subject property occurs before development of the site of Parcel Map No. 21383, adequate inlet facilities shall be constructed to collect all tributary flows and convey them to Murrieta Creek. On-site grading shall be designed to penetrate existing tributary drainage areas and outlet points, and development of the subject and adjacent properties shall be coordinated S~STAFFRPT\24085 4 to ensure that water courses remain unobstructed and that stormwaters are not diverted from one watershed to another. The site, including each phase if phasing occurs, shall be protected from 100 year tributary storm flows. Grading Parcel Map No. 24085 will involve 363,000 cubic yards of cut and fill. Cut slopes will be up to 25 feet in height, and fill slopes be up to 10 feet high. Some cut will penetrate into the Pauba formation which consists of sandstone and siltstone. No cut or fill slopes will exceed a slope ratio of 2:1. The slope stability report determined that the proposed 2:1 cut slopes will be grossly stable to a maximum height of 29 feet, and surficial erosion potential should be mitigated by directing drainage away from the slope faces and installing landscape planting on the slopes. The recommendations of the slope stability report are included in the conditions of approval. BioloQical Impacts Biological surveys of the site found no evidence of the presence of any plant or animal species classified as rare or endangered. The project will involve the loss of foraging habitat for a number of species of birds, reptiles, and mammals. This is an incrementally adverse but regionally non-significant impact which is mitigated by the retention of an open space park area in the larger restricted use zone. Further mitigations may be required by State and Federal resource agencies relative to channel improvements for Murrieta Creek. The use of native California shrubs and trees in the landscaping will enhance reoccupation of the bird community. S%STAFFRPT\24085 5 Landscape and Architectural Standards The applicant has provided a set of landscape and architectural standards to ensure that development of the site maintains a consistent level of quality. Conformity with the lanscape and architechural standards will be required of all future development of the site. Water and Sewer Availability Water and sewer service will be available from the Rancho California Water District upon completion of financial arrangements between the property owner and the District. Lot Line Adjustments and Street Realignments The formation of Assessment District 155 included a realignment of the right of way for the future extension of Winchester Road west of Diaz Road. Since the centerline of the right of way constituted the boundary between properties, the realignment resulting in changes to property boundaries. The subject parcel map was affected by a realignment resulted in changes to property boundaries. The subject parcel map was affected by a realignment of Winchester Road at the intersection with Avenida de Venta. In order to prevent discrepancies in the legal descriptions of the property at the time of recordation of the map, Staff has required that the applicant and other affected property owners eliminate the discrepancies by filing lot line adjustments, street vacations, and offers of rededication reflecting the new alignment of Winchester Road and the resulting changes in property boundaries. These requirements shall be completed prior to map recordation. S\STAFFRPT~24085 6 LOt Size All proposed lots encompass approximately one acre and are adequate to satisfy the minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet where sewers are available. All lots are over 100 feet wide and meet the minimum width requirement of 65 feet where sewers are available. Access All proposed parcels abut upon a street offered for public dedication. Access to the site is taken from Diaz Road and from the future extension of Winchester Road west of Diaz Road through streets "A", "B" and "C". No parcels shall take direct access from Winchester Road or Diaz Road. Archaeological Resources The site of Parcel Map No. 24085 contains a recorded archaeological site (CA-RIV-237) which is believed to encompass approximately 70,000 square meters, part of which is outside of the subject property. During an archaeological surface survey of the site conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of basalt and quartz debitage, fragmented manos and metares, fire-affected rocks, pestles, hammerstones, and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed. The recommendations of the Archaeological Assessment are to conduct a surface collection of the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and significance of the site. The resulting information shall be used to determine what additional measures may need to be implemented to preserve cultural resources prior to grading. The Archaeological Assessment also includes the recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted S\STAFFRPT\24085 7 FUTURE GENERAL PLAN, SWAP AND ZONNING CONSISTENCY: ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: FINDINGS: for any future grading activities. These recommendations shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map No. 24085. In addition, a Native American representative shall be present during the archaeological excavation and also during grading. Fossil Resources The site is located in the fossiliferous Pauba Formation. In accordance with the recommendation of the San Bernardino County Museum, the subdivider shall retain a paleontologist to monitor grading operations, evaluate any fossils encountered during grading, prepare a report of findings, and provide for preservation and curation of recovered specimens. Parcel Map No. 24085 is consistent with the Southwest Area Plan designation of the site for light industrial uses. The parcel map conforms to the requirements of the M-SC, Manufacturing-Service Commercial Zone. The project is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivisions in the vicinity, and there is a reasonable probability that the project will be consistant with the Future General Plan. The Initial Study prepared for Parcel Map No. 24085 indicates that the project will not have any impacts on the environment which cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance, and Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Neclaration. The proposed Parcel Map will not have a significant negative impact on the environment, as determined in the Initial Study performed for the project. A Negative Declaration is recommended for adoption. S\STAFFRPT\24085 8 There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the General Plan being prepared at this time in that the proposed commercial-industrial subdivision is consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial Land Use designation, the Manufacturing- Service Commercial Zone, and exising land uses in the vicinity. 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 in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivisions in the vicinity. The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project conforms to the current zoning for the site and Ordinance No. 460, Schedule "E". The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lot, access, and density. 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 prepared for this project. The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future passive energy control opportunities in that all parcels have adequate southerly exposure. All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of-ways w,~ich are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic. S\STAFFRPT\24085 9 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, 10. The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. 11. These findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the following recommendation to the City Council: ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 24085; and ADOPT Resolution 91 - approving Tentative Parcel Map No.24085 based on the analysis contained herein and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 2. 3. 4. Resolution Conditions of Approval Environmental Assessment Exhibits A. Vicinity Map B. SWAP Map C. Surrounding Zoning D. Tentative Parcel Map 24085 vgw S\STAFFRP'T~24085 10 RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP NO. 24085 TO SUBDIVIDE A 72.6 ACRE PARCEL INTO 57 PARCELS AT THE WESTERLY SIDE OF DIAZ ROAD NORTH OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL 909-120-022. WHEREAS, Rancho California City Associates I filed Parcel Map No. 24085 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 October 7, 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. Findinqs. 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: S\STAFFRPT\24085 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 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. 24085 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 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 S\STAFFRPT\24085 13 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: The proposed Parcel Map will not have a significant negative impact on the environment, as determined in the Initial Study performed for the project. A 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 in that the proposed commercial-industrial subdivision is consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial Land Use designation, the Manufacturing- Service Commercial Zone, and exising land uses in the vicinity. 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 in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivisions in the vicinity. The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project conforms to the current zoning for the site and Ordinance No. 460, Schedule "E". The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lot configuarations, access, and density. S\STAFFRPT\24085 14 The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidable injure fish or wildlife or their habitat as determined in the Initial Study prepared for this project. The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future passive energy control opportunities in that all parcels have adequate southerly exposure. All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic. 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. The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary to protect the public hearlth, safety and general welfare. These 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 prepared for this project indicates that the proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment, and a Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby granted. S\STAFFRPT~24085 15 SECTION 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Parcel Map No. 24085 for the subdivision of a 72.6 acre parcel into 57 parcels located at the westerly side of Diaz Road north of the future extension of Winchester Road, and known as Assessor's Parcel 909-120-022 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. SECTION 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of October, 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 7th day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS S\STAFFRPT\24085 16 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tentative Parcel Map No: Project Description: Assessor's Parcel No.: 24085 To create 57 parcels on a 72.6 acre site 909-120-022 Planning 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 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 parcel 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 I:ngineer. 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. S\STAFFRPT\24085 17 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 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 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: Be limited to a maximum slope ratio of 2 to 1 and a maximum vertical height of thirty (30) feet. Setbacks from top and bottom of slopes shall be a minimum of one-half the slope height. b. 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. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated September 17, 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 November 16, 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 460, 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 June 5, 1991, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the slope stability recommendations outlined in the County Geologist's transmittal dated September 6, 1989, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the County Geologist's transmittal dated October 16, 1989, a copy of which is attached. 15. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho Water District transmittal dated July 3, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 16. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following: 17. 18. Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the development standards of the Manufacturing - Service Commercial zone. 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. 19. The following notes shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet: 20. "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 Outdoor Lighting Policy as outlined in the Southwest Area Plan. "Archaeological and paleontological monitoring of grading is required, and summary reports shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits." "Part of the site is located in the 100 year flood plain of Murrieta Creek. Measures to remove the project site from the flood plain are listed in the Conditions of Approval." "The site is traversed by a potentially active earthquake fault. The map includes a restricted use zone in which no structures for human occupancy are allowed." Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: 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: S\STAFFRPT~24085 19 21. 22. 23. 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. 4. Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase. Prior to the issuance of grading permits a qualified archaeologist shall conduct a stratified surface sampling of archaeological site CA-RIV 237 and shall excavate 20 to 30 one cubic meter cubsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and significance of the site. Based on the results of these tests, the extent of further sampling and data collection will be determined. A qualified archaeologist shall also monitor grading activities and shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading activity to allow recovery of cultural resources. A Native American representative shall be present during archaeological testing and during grading and shall also have the authority to temporarily halt or divert grading activity. 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. A paleontologist shall be on-site to monitor grading operations. 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: 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. Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from view of surrounding property. S\STAFFRPT\24085 20 c. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 25 feet with at least 10 feet landscaped. 24. 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 and shall be verified by City field inspection and certified in writing by the landscape architect. 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. 25. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Mitigation 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. 26. 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. 24085, 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. 27. 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. Electrical lines rated 33kv or greater shall be exempted from the requirement to be installed underground. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements: S\STAFFRPT\24085 2 1 28. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer and City Attorney. The CC&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 CC&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 CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense. The CC&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 CC&R'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 CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage and facilities. The landscape and architecture standards shall be incorporated by reference into the CC&R's. The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the association or other means acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to the Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to issuance of building permits. S%STAFFRP'l~2408S 22 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 CC&R's or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrent with the map or prior to the issuance of building permit where no map is involved. 29. 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 CC&R'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 CC&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. 30. 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). 31. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall obtain approval of and record all lot line adjustments, street vacations, and dedications to reflect the realignment of the future right of way of Winchester Road. S\STAFFRPT\24085 23 DePartment of Public Works The following are the Department of Public Works 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 Department of Public Works. 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 RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 32. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Rancho California Water District; Eastern Municipal Water District; RiverSide County Flood Control district; City of Temecula Fire Bureau; Planning Department; Department of Public Works; Riverside County Health Department; CATV Franchise; CalTrans; and Parks and Recreation Department. 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 Department of Public Works. 34. 35. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Winchester Road shall be improved with 38 feet of half street improvement plus one 12' lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within a 65' dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 101 (38'/50'). S\STAFFRPT\240S5 24 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. Diaz Road shall be improved or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 101 (76'/100'). Streets "A", "B" and "C" shall be improved, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No, 111 (56'/78'). Avenida de Ventas and Street "D" shall be improved with 28 feet of half street improvement plus one 12' lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within a 51' dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 111 (28'/39'). If construction is to be phased, the landowner/developer shall acquire sufficient public offsite rights-of-way to provide for secondary access road(s) to a paved and maintained road as may be needed. Said access road(s) shall be constructed in accordance with County Standard No. 106, Section B, (32'/60') at a grade and alignment approved by the Department of Public Works. 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. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and Diaz Road and so noted on the final map with the exception of driveway openings and public street intersections as approved by the Department of Public Works. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage if required shall be delineated or noticed on the final map. Where applicable, 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, especially on Winchester Road and Diaz Road. 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 Department of Public Works. S\STAFFRPT\2409S 25 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 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 (street and parks). d. Sewer and domestic water systems. e. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. f. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. The street design, grading and improvement concept of this project shall be coordinated with Assessment District 155 and adjoining development. Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the Department of Public Works. Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department of Public Works 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 Building and Safety Department. The minimum centerline radii shall be 500 feet or as approved by the Department of Public Works. All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. S\STAFFRPT\24085 26 53. 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 Department of Public Works. 54. A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent. 55. 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 401 (curb sidewalk). 56. The subdivider shall submit two prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the Department of Public Works. 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 24" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil Engineer. 57. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. The report shall also address setback requirements for fault line areas. 58. The subdivider shall submit two copies of a soils report to the Department of Public Works. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. 59. A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the Department of Public Works. 60. 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." 61. A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the recorded drainage easement shall be submitted to the City for review prior to the recordation of the final map. 62. 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. 63. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. S\STAFFRPT~24085 27 64. 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. 65. A portion of 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 Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance 91-12 of the City of Temecula and the rules and regulations of FEMA for development within a Flood Zone "A" which may include obtaining a letter of map revision from FEMA. 66. The developer shall record an Environmental Constraint Sheet delineating the area within the 100-year floodplain. 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 Department of Public Works. 69. A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of- way. 70. 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 Department of Public Works. 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. 72. A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within its right-of-way. S%STAFFRPT%24,085 2 ~ 73. The subdivider shall submit a haul route plan, including but not limited to, specific information related to truck loads, destination, permission and clearance letters as requested. PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT: 74. A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 75. 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. 76. 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 (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: 77. 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. S\STAFFRPT%24085 29 78. Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Traffic control plans shall be provided as directed by the Department of Public Works, and may be required to be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. 79. 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 94 of the State Standard Specifications. TransPortation Enaineering PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 80. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works and shall be included in the street improvement plans. 81. Plans for traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of Avenida de Ventas at Diaz Road and Avenida de Ventas at Winchester Road, and shall be included in the street improvement plans with the second plan check submittal. 82. The developer shall execute a Reimbursement Agreement for the design and construction of traffic signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz Road, Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle East. The percent of costs and the warrants for these signals shall be as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to recordation. 83. The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with the City of Temecula to contribute a pro-rata share to the construction of the extension of Diaz Road to Washington Street/Rancon Center Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland overcrossing, Winchester Road restriping to six lanes, and the western bypass corridor as determined by a foc. Ised traffic analysis to be submitted by the subdivider and approved by ~ne Department of Public Works prior to recordation. S\STAFFRPT\24085 30 PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS: 84. 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 Department of Public Works. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: 85. All traffic signals, signing and striping shall be installed and operational per the approved plans and as directed by the Department of Public Works per the approved focused traffic analysis. 86. All landscaping installation within corner cutoff areas at all intersections and adjacent to all driveways shall provide for adequate site distance. 87. Stop signs shall be installed within the project site at the intersection of local streets. 88. Diaz Road shall be striped with left turn pockets at each intersection adjacent to the project. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 4065 COUNTY CIRCLE DR. RIVERSIDE, CA, 92503 (Mailing Address - P.O. Box 7600 92513-7600) FAX (714} 35a-452i September 17, 1991 CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT 43174 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE TEMECULA, CA 92590 AllN: Scott Wright: RE: PARCEL MAP NO. 24085: BEING A PORTION OF PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP N0. 4646 P.M. 6175 RECORDS, RIV~.MSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. (57 lots) Dear Gentlemen: The Department of Public Health has reviewed Parcel Map No. 24085 and recommends: A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the water company and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the water system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet, along with the original drawing to the City of Temecula, prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of valves and fire hydrants; plpe and 3olnt specifications, and the size of the main at the 3unction of the new system to the existing system. The plane shall comply in all respects with Div. 5, Part l, Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety'Code, California Administrative Code, Title 22, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of Californfa, when applicable. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in Parcel Map No. 24085, is in accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the water services, storage, and distribution system will be adequate to provide water service to such Parcel Map". City of Temecula Page Two Snptember 17, This certification does not constztute a guarantee that It will supply water to such Parcel Map at any speclfzc quantities, flows or pressures for fire pfOteCtl,Dn or any other Durpose". ThAs certification shall be szgned by a responsible offlclal of the water company. This subdivision has a statement from the Rancho California Water DlstFzct agreezng to serve domestic water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand provldlng satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It wlll be necessary for financial arrangements to be made prior to the recordatlon of the final map. This subdivision ~s within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be connected to the sewers of the DIstrict. The sewer system shall be installed accordlng to p[ans and specifications as approved by the District, the C~ty of Temecula and the Health Depa[tment. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submltted in triplicate, along with the original drawing, to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal Dlpe diameter, location of manholes. complete prof~ies, pipe and 3oint specifications and the size of the sewers at the nunorion of the new system to the existing 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 d~strlct with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the sewer system in Parcel Map N0. 24085 ~ ~r, accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that the waste d~sposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed parcel map. City of Temecula Page Three Attn: Scott Wright September 17, 1991 It w~li be necessary for f~nanclal arrangements to be completely finallzed prior to recordatlon of the flnal map, Env~ ronmenta SM:dr H,S, IV th Services KEh ~iETH L. EDWARDS RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA 92502 November 16, 1990 City of Temecula Post Office Box 3000 Temecula, CA 92390 Attn: Planning Department Scott Wright Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: Parcel Map 24085 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, t990 This is a proposal to divide 72.6 acres into commercial parcels in the City of Temecula. The site is located west of Diaz Road about 11OO feet south of Winchester Road. This property is approximately one year flood plain located adjacent to Murrieta Creek and half of the parcels are located within the limits of the creek. 100 The District is currently developing a final design for improvement of Murrieta Creek with the assistance of a seven member citizens' committee appointed by the Board of Supervisors. Because of the complexity of the hydraulic and environmental factors involved, and to ensure orderly development, the District will design the entire Murrieta Creek improvement. Piecemeal design of portions of this major regional flood control project is not acceptable to the District. Following development of an acceptable design, the District intends to pursue a funding mechanism for the required improvements, probably by means of an assessment district over the flood plain. The right of way needed for Murrieta Creek in this area is 250 feet each side of the centerline. This includes a 50 foot habitat mitigation strip on each side which will be returned if it is not needed. This is shown correctly on Amended Map No. 3. This site also receives offsite runoff from the hills to the southwest. Tentative Parcel Map 21383 is proposed in the hillside area west of this property. This map shows that the storm drain in Winchester Road would extend up the hill. Much of the offsite runoff tributary to this site would then be collected by the development of Parcel Map 21383 and conveyed to the storm drain system. Should Parcel Map 21383 not be constructed, adequate inlet facilities will need to be constructed to collect all of the tributary flows and convey them to Murrieta Creek. The storm drain in Winchester Road is proposed to continue nort; into Parcel Map 24086. Onsite flows are proposed to be collected and conveyed to the Creek by several storm drain systems. City of Temecula -2- Re: Parcel Map 24085 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 November 16, 1990 Following are the District's recommendations: A portion of the proposed project is in a floodplain and may affect "waters of the United States", "wetlands" or "jurisdictional streambeds", therefore, in accordance with the requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program and Related Regulations (44 CFR, Parts 59 through 73) and County Ordinance No. 458: A flood study consisting of HEC-2 calculations, cross sections, maps and other data should be prepared to the satisfaction of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the District for the purpose of revising the effective Flood Insurance Rate Map of the project site. The submittal of the study should be concurrent with the initial submittal of the related project improvement plans and final District approval will not be given until a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) has been received from FEMA. A copy of appropriate correspondence and necessary permits from those government agencies from which approval is required by Federal or State law (such as Corps of Engineers 404 permit or Department of Fish and Game 1603 agreement) should be provided to the District prior to the final District approval of the project. This parcel map 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 City of Temecula Re: Parcel Map 24085 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 -3- November 16, 1990 At the option of the land divider, upon filing a required affidavit requesting deferment of the payment of fees, the drainage fees may be paid to the Building 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. Murrieta Creek Channel should be constructed through the proposed project in conformance with the District's approved design including habitat mitigation measures which may be required by the various resource agencies. In lieu of constructing the channel improvements the applicant shall cooperate in the formation of and participate in a financial mechanism such as a community facilities district or an assessment district to pay for the cost of the District's proposed Murrieta Creek Channel improvements. The right of way for Murrieta Creek, including the area required for habitat mitigation should be dedicated to the District. The right of way needed for Murrieta Creek in this area is 250 feet each side of the centerline. This includes a 50 foot habitat mitigation strip on each side which will be returned if it is not needed. This site also receives offsite runoff from the hills to the southwest. Should Parcel Map 21383 not develop, adequate inlet facilities will need to be constructed to collect all of the tributary flows and convey them to Murrieta Creek. 6. Pads on this site should be elevated 12 inches above the 100 year water surface elevation in Murrieta Creek. 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" City of Temecula Re: Parcel Map 24085 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 -4- November 16, 1990 Offsite drainage facilities should be located within dedicated 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. All lots should be graded to drain to the adjacent street or an adequate outlet. The 10 year storm flow should be curb and the 100 year storm flow within the street right of way. criteria is exceeded, additional should be installed. contained within the should be contained When either of these drainage facilities 11. Drainage facilities outletting sump conditions should designed to convey the tributary 100 year storm flows. Additional emergency escape should also be provided. be t2. 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 and outlet points. An encroachment permit should be obtained for any work on District facilities or ~ithin District right of way. The encroachment permit application should be processed and approved concurrently with the improvement plans. Prior to initiation of the final construction drawings for those facilities required to be built as part oF the Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan, the developer should contact the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District to ascertain the terms and conditions of design, construction, inspection, transfer of rights of way, project credit in lieu of fees and reimbursement schedules which may apply. Title reports and title insurance must be provided for all right of way to be transferred to the District. The developer should note that if the estimated cost for required area drainage plan facilities exceeds the required drainage fees and the developer wishes to receive credit for reimbursement in excess of his fees, the facilities will be constructed as a public works contract. Scheduling for construction of these facilities will be at the discretion of the District. City Re: of Temecula Parcel Map 24085 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 -5- November 16, 1990 15. 16. 18. 20. If the tract is built in phases, each phase shall be protected from the 1 in 100 year tributary storm flows. Temporary erosion control measures should be implemented immediately following rough grading to prevent deposition of debris onto downstream properties or drainage facilities. Development of this property should be coordinated with the development of adjacent properties to ensure that watercourses remain unobstructed and stormwaters are not diverted from one watershed to another. This may require the construction of temporary drainage facilities or offsite construction and grading. Master Drainage Plan facilities to be constructed as part of this development's improvement obligation are to be inspected, operated and maintained by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. The developer should enter into an agreement with the District establishing the terms and conditions covering their inspection, operation and maintenance. Inspection and maintenance of the storm drain system to be built with this tract must be performed by either the County Transportation Department or the Flood Control District. The engineer (owner) must request (in writing) that one of these agencies accept the proposed storm drain system. The request should note the tract number, lbcation, and briefly describe the system (sizes and lengths). Request to the District should be addressed to Kenneth L. Edwards, Chief Engineer, Attn: Frank Peairs, Planning Engineer. If the District is willing to accept the system, an agreement between the owner and the District must be executed. A request to draw up an agreement must be sent to the District to the attention of Michael Rawson. All flood control facilities should be constructed to District standards. All facilities that the District will assume for maintenance will require the payment of a one time maintenance charge equal to the "present worth" of maintenance costs from the time of acceptance through 1998. City Re: of Temecula Parcel Map 24085 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, ~990 -6~ November 16, 1990 21. The applicant's engineer should contact the District's Plan Check section to schedule a pre-design meeting before the engineer starts detailed project design. A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations 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 the Subdivision section of this office at 714/275-12~0. o Civil Engineer c: NBS/Lowry ZS:slw RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE · PERRiS, CALIFORNIA 92370 ~ ' (714) 657-3183 GLEN J. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF -June 5, 1991 TO: ATTN: RE: CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPT PARCEL MAP 24085 AMD ~4 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: The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 5000 GPM and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant shall be 2500 GPM for 2 hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. Approved super fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2~"x2½") shall be located at each street intersection and spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction, with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, containing a Fire Department approval signature block, and shall conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow. Once plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Department for signature. 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. All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to the Planning and Engineering staff. RAYMOND H. REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner By Michael E. Gray, Fire Captain Specialist MEG / tm 71 1NDIO OFFICE 79-733 Country Club Drive, Suite F, lndio, CA 92201 (619) 342~886 · FAX (619) 775-2072 PLANNING DIVISION 71 RIVERSIDE OFFICE 3760 [2th Strict, Riv~r, ide, CA 9250t (714) 275-4777 · FAX (714) 369-7451 ["l TEMECULA OFFICE 41002 Count/Ccnte~ Drive, Suite 225, Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 694-5070 * FAX (714) 694-5076 ~ ~rinted on recycled paper September 6, 1989 OilmAIITMENTAI, LITTIll COUNTY* OF RIVERSIDE PLANNING DEPARTMENT FROH: RE: John Chtu - Team 5 Steven A. Kupferran - Engineering Geologist Tentative Parcel Naps 24085 and 24086 Slope Stability Report No. 149 The following report has been reviewed relative to slopo stability at the subject stte: "Slope Stability Assessment, Tentative Parcel Naps 24085, 24086, Rancho California, RIverside County, CA,' by Schaefer Dixon Associates dated August 16, 1989. This report determined that: Tentative Parcel Nap 24085 will be graded wtth cut slopes ranging up to 25 feet high and fill slopes approximately 10 feet high, both at 2:1 (horizontal: vertical). 2. Tentative Parcel Nap 24086 w11Tbe graded wtth 2:1 (H:V) cut and fill slopes less than 30 feet htgh. The Pauba formation tn the planned cut ares conststs prtmerlly of moderately hard to hard, moderately fractured, locally friable sandstones and siltstones. 4.. Proposed cut slopes wade tn Pauba formation sediments, havlng favorable-oriented beddtn planes, are expected to be grossly stable at 2:1 (H:V) to a mxtmum heVght of 29 feet. 5. Surftctal eroston is posstble in both cut and fill slopes of granular Pauba formation mtertals. This report recommended that: I. Cut slope excavations should be observed during grading by the project engineering geologist. John ~htu September 6, 1989 Drainage on cut and fill slopes should be dtrected away from the slope face. Drainage devtces should be constructed as per the Untform But]dtng Code. 3. Proper landscaping should be established 1minedlately after construction and mtntalned. 4. S]ope wash and topsot] mtertals exposed In cut slopes should be removed and replaced with coalacted ftll mterlals. Thts report satisfies the General Plan requtreeent for a slope stability report. the recommendations made In thts report should be adhered to tn the design and construction of thts project. SAK:al :IEVE:! EDE councu. pLannin6 DEEM:t ITIEn ~tober 16, 1989 Schaefer Dixon Associates 23 Nauchly Zrvlne, CA 92718 Attention: Mr. Paul Davis Mr. Ntcholas F. Selmeczy Mr. Mtchael L. Leonard, SUBJECT: Seismic-Geologic/Liquefaction Hazard Project No. 9R-4332C Tentative Parcel Naps 24085 and 24086 APN: 909-120-020,022 County Geologic Report No. 627 Rancho California Area Gentlemen: We have reviewed the seismic-geologic aspects of your report entitled "Report on Geotechntcal Investigation, Assessment District No. 155, Parcel Map 24085, 24086, 21029, 21382, and 21383, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA," dated June 7, 1989 and your responses to County Geologic Review, dated August 15, 1989 and September 21, 1989. It should be noted that previous reports prepared for this property were entitled 1.) 'Preliminary Geotechnfcal Investigation, Proposed Industrial/Commercial Site, West of Cherry Street and Otaz Road, A.D. No. 155, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA' by Leighton and Associates, dated June 23, 1986, and 2.) 'Engineering Geologic Investigation of Faulting and Anticipated Alluvial Removals, Proposed Industrial/Commercial Site, AD No. 155, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA,' by Leighton and Associates, dated August 18,-1987. This report did not recognize or address the potential for ground fissuring in the area, which occurred in late 1987. It is understood that your report non supercedes these previous reports for the subject property. Your report determined that: The surface trace of a previously unmapped, through going fault extends northwest-southeast across the center of the property. A short branch of this fault trends more northerly, coincident with a strong photolineament and the 1987 ground fissure. These faults are delineated on Plate 1, Geotechntcal Map, revised 8-15-89/9-21-89, in your report. 2. These faults are considered to be active in accordance with State of California, Division of Mines and G~ology criteria. 3. The Willard fault traces located at higher elevations on the westerly portion of the site are judged to be pre-Holocene in age. 4080 LEMON STREET. 9'" FLOOR RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA 92501 (714) 787'6181 46'209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304 INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201 Schaefer DIxon Associates - 2 - October 16, 1989 The ~hittler-Elstnore fault zone is considered capable of the highest ground motions at the site. A lO0-year probable magnitude earthquake of 6.3 on this fault would result in a peak horizontal ground acceleration of 0.41g at the stte. Llquefiable and mrglnally 11queftable zones are present in the lower-lying portton of the site, below a depth of approximately 15 fee~. The 11quefiable areas are delineated on Plate 1, Geotechntcal Hap, revised 8-15-89/9-21-89. Surface subsidence my be induced by liquefaction and the settlement ts estimated to be in the range of 0.1 Inch to 1.4 inches, however reduction of bearing capacity for shallow spread footings is not anticipated. The potential for lateral spreading is considered low based on the present geometry of the Nurrieta Creek Channel relative to the 11quellable zones at the site. 7. The potential for setches, earthquake-induced flooding and lurchtng ts considered to be extremely low at this site. 8. The mapped landslide at the northwest portton of the property is a shallow, surflclal failure. Ground Ytssurlng will most likely occur along the establish traces of historic and Holocene fault displacements. It is not expected that ground fissures will occur in portions of the property away from pre-existtng Holocene faults· Your report recommended that: No habitable structures shall be placed acrossed the actlye (Holocene) faults and ground fissures. A Restricted Use Zone (R.U.Z.) shall be established to include the observed faults, their ln-ltne projections and buffer zone. The total width end extent of the R.U.Z. is shown on Plate 1, Geotechnlcal Nap, revised 8-15-89/9-21-89. The effects of soil liquefaction, including loss of bearing capacity, surface subsidence end lateral spreading shall be re-evaluated for each individual structure on the site when grading and butlding plans b~come available. The mapped landslide at the northwest portion of the property shall be delineated on the project grading plans. In addition, the disturbed surfictal mterlals shall be completely remo~!d during grading, in conformrice with standard earthwork prectlcer. Schaefer Dixon Associates - 3 - October 16, 1989 Recommendations for removing the uncontrolled fill from the exploratory trenches, and for placement of structures adjacent to or astride any of these trenches, should be specifically provided as part of the geotechnical grading plan review report for the subject projects. 6. Final plans and specifications should be reviewed by the geotechnical consultant prior to site construction. It is our opinion that th~ 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 hereby given. We recommend that the following conditions be satisfied before recordation of Tentative Parcel ~aps 24085 and 24086 and/or issuance any County permits associated with this project: The recommended Restricted Use Zone shown on Plate 1, Geotechntcal Nap, revised 8-15-89/9-21-89 in the report shall be delineated on the project maps and/or Environmental Constraints Sheet (E.C.S.). The areas wi thin the Recommended Restricted Use Zone shall be labeled 'FAULT AND GROUND FISSURE HAZARD AREA.' 2. The following notes shall be placed on the E.C.S. and/or Subdivision mapS: ' (a) "The property is affected by earthquake faulting and ground fissures. Structures for human occupancy shall not be allowed in the Fault and Ground Fissure Hazard Area.' (b) 'County Geologic Report No. 627 was prepared for this property on June 7, 1989 by Schafer Dixon Associates, and is on file at the Riverside County Planning Department. Specific items of concern are as follows: earthquake faulting, ftssuring and ground subsidence, liquefaction, landsliding, and uncompacted trench backfill.' 3. The E.C.S. and/or project maps shell be submitted to the Planning Department Engineering Geologist for review and approval, 4. The exploratory trench backfill shall be addressed by the project geotechnlcal engineering prior to issuance of grading permits, Liquefaction reports for individual structures shall be submitted to the Planning Department Engineering Geologist for review and approval prior to Plot Plan approval. , · Schaefer Dixon Associates - 4 - October 16, 1989 The reconmnendations made in your report for mitigation of seismic/geologic hazards shall be adhered to in the design and construction of this project. Very truly yours, RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTHENT Roger S. S/~/eeter - Planning Director CEG-1205 SAK:al c.c. Johnson & Johnson, Inc. - Dean Allen CDMG - Earl Hart Building & Safety (2) - Norm Lostbom John Chtu - Team I Rant Wa r July 3, 1991 Jeffr,v L. Mirthlet Thomas R, MeAljester Edward P. Lemons City of Temecula Engineering Department 43180 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92592 SUBJECT: Water and Sewer Availability Parcel Map 24085 Gentlemen: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water and sewer service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. Currently, RCWD has an inter-agency agreement with Eastern Municipal Water District to provide sewer service to your area. All plan check submittals will be made to RCWD. Water availability would be contingent Upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. If RCWD can be of further service to you, please contact Ms. Senga Doherty. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT J-L~"~k~.4_. [,~...~.-,~,-~ Steve Brannon, P.E. Manager of Development Engineering SB:SD:ajw116 co: Senga Doherty, Engineering Technician CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY Background 1. Name of Proponent: 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: Date of Environmental Assessment: NBS Lowry 27403 Ynez Road, Suite 209 Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 676-6225 August 21, 1991 4. Agency Requiring Assessment: 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable: 6. Location of Proposal: Environmental Impacts CITY OF TEMECULA Parcel Map Nos. 24085 and 24086 Southwesterly of Diaz Road bounded by the future extension of Winchester Road on the northwesterly and southwesterly sides of the site. (Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.) Earth. 8, C m Yq~ Maybe No 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 Substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features? X S\STAFFRPT~24085 The destruction, covering or modi- fication of any unique geologic or physical features? Any substantial increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off site? Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earth quakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? Air. Will the proposal result in: Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? The creation of objectionable odors? Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, whether locally or regionally? Water. Will the proposal result in: Substantial changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? Substantial changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT~24085 2 d m Plant a, Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including, but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? Alteration of the direction or rate of flow or ground waters? Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct addi- tions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flood- ing or tidal waves? Life. Will the proposal result in: Change in the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants? Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegatation, or in a barrier to the nor, nal replenishment of existing species? Yq~ Maybe NQ X X X X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT~24085 3 10. 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? Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? Exposure of people to severe noise levels? Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce substantial new light or glare? Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: Substantial increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? Substantial depletion of any non- renewable natural resource? Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: Yq~ Maybe No X X X X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT~24085 4 11. 12. 13. 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? Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? Yes Maybe NQ X X X X X Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking? Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X X X X X S\STAFFRPT\24085 5 14. .16. 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: 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 NQ X X X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT~24085 Communications systems? Water? Sewer or septic tanks? Storm water drainage? Solid waste and disposal? 6 X 17. 18. 19. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? Exposure of people to potential health hazards? Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? YeS Maybe NO X X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT~24085 7 21. Mandatory Findings of Significance. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environ- mental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long- term impacts will endure well into the future.) Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumu- latively considerable? (A project's impact on two or more separate resources may be relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substan- tial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Yes M~ybe No X X X X S\STAFFRPT\24085 8 III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation 1.a,b,c. 1.d. 1.e. 1.f. 1.g. Yes. Parcel Map No. 24085 will involve 363,000 cubic yards of cut and fill, and Parcel Map No. 24086 will involve 349,000 cubic yards of cut and fill. Some cut will penetrate into the Pauba Formation which consists of sandstone and siltstone. Mitigation of liquefaction potential on the site may involve removal and recompaction of soil on the site. All cut and fill slopes will not exceed a 2:1 grade. Cut slopes on the site of Parcel Map No. 24085 will be up to 25 feet in height and fill slopes will be approximately 10 feet high. Cut and fill slopes on the site of Parcel Map No. 24086 will be less than 30 feet in height. The Slope Stability Report determined that the proposed 2:1 cut slopes will be grossly stable to a maximum height of 29 feet, and surficial erosion potential should be mitigated by directing drainage away from the slope faces and installing landscape planting on the slopes. The recommendations of the Slope Stability Report shall be included in the conditions of approval for the subject parcel maps. No. There are no unique geologic or physical features on the site. Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are replanted. The wind erosion impact is considered high and significant but will be mitigated through minimal grading, retention of natural vegetation whenever feasible, and use of watering trucks and hydroseeding disturbed areas after grading. After construction of the project, water run-off is likely to increase due to the addition of impermeable surfaces. Appropriate drainage control devices will have to be approved through the Engineering Department and will have to be designed in accordance with Temecula's standards and the conditions of approval. No. Any drainage into the Murrieta Creek channel will be via drainage improvements as approved by the City Engineer and will not result in erosion or siltation. Yes. Portions of the site are susceptible to liquefaction and subsidence, and the site is traversed by a potentially active fault. The Geology Report recommends that the effects of liquefaction, including loss of bearing capacity, surface subsidence and lateral spreading should be re- evaluated for each individual structure when grading and building plans become available. In accordance with the requirements of state law, a restricted use zone based on the geology report is shown on the map. The restricted use zone represents a setback from the earthquake fault S\STAFFRPT~24085 9 2.8,b,c. 3,8. 3.b. 3.c. 3.d. 3,e. 3.f,g. 3.h. on the site, and no structures for human occupancy will be permitted within the restricted use zone. Hazards to buildings outside of the restricted use zone due to groundshaking associated with the fault are addressed by the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. The geologic hazard mitigations recommended in the Geology Report and the County Geologists letter shall be conditions of approval. No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any impacts to air quality or the climate. Subsequent development proposals will be assessed for potential impacts to air quality and mitigation measures will be required if necessary. No. The portion of the property necessary for the future construction of Murrieta Creek flood control facilities is indicated on the tentative parcel map as a County Channel Easement, There will be no change in the course or direction of water in Murrieta Creek. Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in changes in the amount of surface runoff. The improvement of the site will provide for adequate drainage facilities as approved by the City Engineer. No. The project will result in minor, localized redirection of flood waters to the extent necessary to elevate the site above the 100 year flood plain elevation, but the overall direction and flow of flood waters will not be changed. Maybe. Grading and future development of the site may increase the amount of surface runoff flowing into the Murrieta Creek channel. This is not considered a significant impact and is consistent with the provisions of the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan and Assessment District 155. Yes. Grading may result in an increase in turbidity in local surface water. This impact is temporary and is not considered significant. No. Recompaction of soil to mitigate the potential for liquefaction is not expected to result in a significant impact on the direction or rate of flow of ground waters. No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any impact on public water supplies. S\STAFFRPT~24085 10 3.i. 4.a,b. 4.d. 5.a,b. 6,a. 6.b. 9.a,b. No. Prior to recordation of the proposed parcel map, the applicant shall obtain a Letter of Map Revision from the Federal Emergency Management Agency indicating that grading of the site or other improvements are adequate to ensure that the site will be above the 100 year flood plain elevation, No. A botanical survey of the site found no sensitive plant species on the site. Grazing and the introduction of non-native grasses have previously disturbed the natural native flora on the site. Maybe. Landscaping of the site may introduce some non-native species. This is not considered a significant impact. No. The site is not currently used as crop land. No. A biology survey of the site did not reveal the presence or any indications of any species classified as rare or endangered. Yes. The project will involve a loss of grass land and chaparral which provides foraging habitat for birds, mammals, and reptiles. In regional terms, the loss of foraging habitat is an incrementally adverse but non- significant impact. The biology report recommends the use of native California shrubs and trees to revegetate graded and open areas in order to enhance reoccupation of the bird community. Use of native plant life shall be a condition of approval. Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in increased noise levels during grading. This impact will be temporary and is not considered significant because the site is not near any noise sensitive land uses. No. Future development will be reviewed for potential noise impacts, · and land uses which generate severe noise impacts will be prohibited or required to provide adequate noise mitigation. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not cause new light or glare, and subsequent development of the site will be subject to standard conditions prohibiting lighting from impacting adjacent properties and requiring low-glare sodium vapor lights, No. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zone and the land use designation in which the property is located. No. The project will not involve a substantial increase in the rate of consumption of natural or non-renewable resources. S\STAFFRPT~24085 11 10.a,b. 11,12. 13.a. 13.b. 13.c,e. 13.d. No. The proposed parcel map will not involve the use of hazardous materials or interference with emergency response or evacuation plans. No. The proposal is not likely to alter the distribution or growth rate of the population or create a demand for new housing. Future development of the site will help address the irabalance of local jobs in relation to existing and approved housing. Yes. Future development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24085 is expected to generate 5,340 vehicle trip ends per day. 5, 150 trip ends per day are expected as a result of development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24086. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the project determined that intersections and roadways in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended improvements are implemented. The following recommended traffic impact mitigations are incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map No. 24085, A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works and shall be included in the street imporvements plans. Plans for traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of Avenida de Ventas at Diaz Road and Avenida de Ventas at Winchester Road, and shall be included in the street improverant plans with the second plan check submittal. The developer shall execute a Reimbursement Agreement for the design and construction of traffic signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz Road, Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle East. The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with the City of Temecula to contribute a pro-rata share to the construction of the extension of Diaz Road to Washington Street/Rancon Center Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland overcrossing, Winchester Road restriping to six lanes, and the western bypass corridor as determined by a focused traffic analysis approved by the Deaprtment of Public Works. No. Future development of the site will be required to provide adequate off-street parking as appropriate for the particular land use proposed. No. The project will have no impact upon existing transportation systems or upon water, rail, or air traffic. No. The proposed parcel maps will not alter present patterns of circulation. S\STAFFRPT\24085 12 13.f. 14.a-f. 15.a,b. 16.a-d,f. 16.e. 17.a,b. 18. 19. 20.a,b,c. No. The streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended street improvements are implemented. The street improvements will be conditions of approval for the proposed parcel map. No. The project will not result in a need for new public services. Future development will generate an increase in the need for public services in the areas of fire and police protection and road maintenance, Payment of the required traffic signal mitigation fee, the facility fee, and property taxes will fund the additional public services. No. The project will not result in a substantial use or increase in demand for fuel or other energy sources. No. Future development of the site will require only hook up to or service by existing utility systems and will not result in a need for new or substantially altered utility systems. Yes. The proposed Parcels Maps will involve the construction of the Murrieta Creek Channel through the site. The construction of channel improvements will be in compliance with the recommendations of the County Flood Control District and will be provided by the developer or by the developer's participation in an assessment district. No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any potential health hazards, Future development will be assessed for potential health hazards, and mitigations, if needed, shall be required. No. The proposal will not result in the obstruction of any scenic views. Future development will be reviewed in order to prevent the construction of aesthetically offensive structures or site layouts. No. The site is not currently used for recreational purposes. Maybe. The site of Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086 contain a recorded archaeological site (CA-RIV-237) which is beleived to encompass approximately 70,000 square meters, part of which is outside of the subject property. During an archaeological surface survey of the site conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of basalt and quartz debitage, fragmented manos and metates, fire-affected rocks, pestles, hammerstores, and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed. The recommendations of the Archaeological Assessment are to conduct a surface collection of the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and S\STAFFRPT~24085 13 significance of the site. The resulting information shall be used to determine whether the site is a unique resource for the area and whether measures to preserve the site or salvage some percentage of the cultural resources should be implemented. The Archaeological Assessment includes the recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted for any future grading activities. These recommendations shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Maps 24805 and 24806. In addition, a Native American representative shall be present during archaeological excavation and also during grading. 20.d. No. The site is not used for any religious or sacred purposes. 21 .a. No. Although the project will result in a reduction of foraging habitat, this impact is not considered regionally significant. The inclusion of native trees and shrubs in the landscaping will provide adequate mitigations for potential biological impacts due to reduction of foraging habitat. 21 .b,c. No. The long term and cumulative traffic impacts of the project will be adequately mitigated by the street improvements recommended by the traffic study which are conditions of approval for the proposed parcel map. Streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service. 21 .d. No. The proposed parcel map will not create any health hazards. Environmental review of future development of the site will address any potential health hazards and mitigations, if necessary, will be required. S\STAFFRPT\24085 14 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- ticant 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. X I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. August 12, 1991 Date For CITY OF TEMECULA S\STAFFRPT%24085 15 CITY OF TEMECULA ) VICINITY MAP CASE NO. P.C. DATE CITY OF TEMECULA ) .LI RLI / X: -~, ,.-,- SWAP MAP CASE NO. ~,,~t'--~y'¢::;'~' -- P.C. DATE/~/./:,;'/~/~,) I CITY OF TEMECULA ) / ' ,42. I ./' ZONE MAP CASE NO. C.C- DATE Z UJ I'- ITEM # 11 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning October 21, 1991 Parcel Map 24086 The above case was scheduled to be heard before the Planning Commission on October 7, 1991. However, prior to the October 7, 1991 Planning Commission meeting the City of Murrieta requested a continuance to review the maps and provide comments. Recommendation: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the following recommendation to the City Council: 1. ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 24086; and ADOPT Resolution 91-_ approving Tentative Parcel Map No. 24086 based on the analysis contained in the staff report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. vgw S\MEMOS\GAR\24086PM.MEM APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PROPOSAL: LOCATION: EXISTING ZONING: SURROUNDING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: SURROUNDING LAND USES: STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 7, 1991 Case No.: Prepared By: Recommendation: Parcel Map No. 24086 Scott Wright 1. ADOPT the negative declaration; and 2. ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending approval of Parcel Map No. 24086 Rancho California City Center Association No. 1 NBS/Lowry To create 49 parcels on a 69.7 acre site Westerly side of Diaz Read, north of the future extension of Winchester Road Manufacturing-Service Commercial, M-SC North: South: East: West: Not Requested Vacant North: South: East: West: Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial M-SC Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial M-SC Manufacturing-ServiceCommercial M-SC Manufacturing-Service Commercial M-SC Vacant Vacant Murrieta Creek Vacant S\STAFFRPT\24086 .PM 1 PROJECT STATISTICS: Gross Site Area: Net Site Area: No. of Parcels: Average Parcel Size: Earthwork: 69.7 acres 53.3 acres 49 1.09 acres Cut = 349,000 yards Fill = 349,000 yards cubic cubic BACKGROUND: Tentative Parcel Map No. 24086 was submitted to the County on November 22, 1988. The application was continued at the Land Development Committee (LDC) meeting of January 12, 1989 pending submittal of paleontological and biological surveys, additional grading information, geology and liquefaction reports, flood plain information, and a traffic study. The LDC continued Parcel Map No. 24086 at four subsequent meetings, pending clearance from the County Geologist and the County Traffic Engineer, submittal of a paleontological- report, submittal of a slope stability report, additional information regarding liquefaction, and clearance of the biological survey. Parcel Map No. 24086 was transmitted to the City on April 11, 1990. City staff requested a copy of the geologic report showing a restricted use zone, a traffic study, an archeology report, information regarding property boundaries and the alignment of Winchester Road, and landscape and architecture standards. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposal is to create 49 parcels with an average parcel size of approximately one acre on a site with a gross area of 69.7 acres. There is an open space area 150 feet in width reflecting the restricted use zone recommended in the geologic report. The easterly side of the site in Murrieta Creek comprises a channel easement and 8 flood control easement to the County of Riverside. S~STAFFRPT\24086.PM 2 ANALYSIS: Traffic Impacts Future development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24086 is expected to generate 5,150 vehicle trip ends per day. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the project determined that projected future traffic based on existing traffic, project generated traffic, and traffic generated by other growth in the area will result in a peak hour Level of Service D or better at all intersections within the scope of the traffic study if recommended improvements are implemented. The recommendation include contributing to the extension of Diaz Road, providing traffic signals at certain intersection contributing to the signalization of other intersection, providing a signing and striping plan, and contributing to the construction of the Overland overcrossing and the restriping of Winchester Road to six lanes. These improvements are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval. Fault Hazards The site is traversed by a potentially active fault which was previously unmapped. The geologic report prepared in conjunction with the parcel map defines a fault zone with two branches and recommends the establishment of a restricted use zone to include observed faults, their in-line projections, and a buffer zone. The restricted use zone is shown on the tentative parcel map as an open space area 150 feet in width. No habitable structure shall be constructed within either branch of the restricted use zone. Liauefaction Potential Liquefiable soils are present in the lower lying portion of the site. Liquefaction may induce surface subsidence on the site in the range of 0.1 to 1.4 inches. The geologic report recommends that the effects of liquefaction, including the loss of bearing capacity, surface subsidence, and lateral spreading be re-evaluated for each individual structure on the S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 3 site when grading and building plans become available. Soil reports addressing the issues delineated above shall be a condition of approval of the subject parcel map and of any future development proposals on the site. Flood Hazard Approximately one half of the proposed parcels are located within the 100 year flood plain limits of Murrieta Creek. Measures to remove the project from the 100 year flood plain are listed in the conditions of approval (see County Flood Control District letter of November 16, 1990). Drainaae The site is located within the limits of the Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan and payment of drainage fees is required. All lots are- required to drain toward adjacent streets or an adequate outlet approved by the City Engineer. Parcel Map No. 24086 is located adjacent to and upslope from the site. If development of the subject property occurs before development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24086 adequate inlet facilities shall be constructed to collect all tributary flows and convey them to Murrieta Creek. On-site grading shall be designed to penetrate existing tributary drainage areas and outlet points, and development of the subject and adjacent properties shall be coordinated to ensure that water courses remain unobstructed and that stormwaters are not diverted from one watershed to another. The site, including each phase if phasing occurs, shall be protected from 100 year tributary storm flows. Grading Parcel Map No. 24086 will involve 349,000 cubic yards of cut and fill. Cut slopes will be less than 30 feet in height, and fill slopes be up to 10 feet high. S\STAFFRPT\24086,PM 4 Some cut will penetrate into the Pauba formation which consists of sandstone and siltstone. No cut of fill slopes will exceed a slope ratio of 2:1. The slope stability report determined that the proposed 2:1 cut slopes will be grossly stable to a maximum height of 29 feet, and surficial erosion potential should be mitigated by directing drainage away from the slope faces and installing landscape planting on the slopes. The recommendations of the slope stability report shall be included in the conditions of approval. Biolo<3ical Imoacts Biological surveys of the site found no evidence of the presence of any plant or animal species classified as rare or endangered. The project will involve the loss of foraging habitat for a number of species of birds, reptiles, and mammals. This is an incrementally adverse but regionally non-significant impact which is mitigated by the retention of an- open space park area in the larger restrict use zone. Further mitigations may be required by State and Federal resource agencies relative to channel improvements for Murrieta Creek. The use of native California shrubs and trees in the landscaping will enhance reoccupation of the bird community. LandscaPe and Architectural Standards The applicant has provided a set of landscape and architectural standards to ensure that development of the site maintains a consistent level of quality. Conformity with the landscape and architectural standards will be required of all future development of the site. Water and Sewer Availability Water and sewer service will be available from the Rancho California Water District upon completion of financial arrangements between the property owner and the District. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 5 Lot Line Adjustments and Street Realiqnments The formation of Assessment District 155 included a realignment of the right of way for the future extension of Winchester Road west of Diaz Road, Since the centerline of the right of way constituted the boundary between properties, the realignment which resulted in changes to property boundaries. The subject parcel map was affected by a realignment which resulted in changes to property boundaries. The subject parcel map was affected by a realignment of Winchester Road at the intersection with Avenida de Venta. In order to prevent discrepancies in the legal descriptions of the property at the time of recordation, staff has required that the applicant and other affected property owners eliminate the discrepancies by filing lot line adjustments, street vacations, and offers of rededication reflecting the new alignment of Winchester Road and the resulting changes in- property boundaries. These requirements shall be completed prior to map recordation. Lot Size All proposed lots encompass approximately one acre and are adequate to satisfy the minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet where sewers are available. All lots are over 1 O0 feet wide and meet the minimum width requirement of 65 feet where sewers are available. Access All proposed parcels abut upon a street offered for public dedication. Access to the site is taken from Diaz Road and from the future extension of Winchester Road west of Diaz Road through streets "A", "B" and "C". No parcels shall take direct access from Winchester Road or Diaz Road. S\STAFFRPT\24086 .PM 6 Archaeoloaical Resources The site of Parcel Map No. 24086 contains a recorded archaeological site (CA-RIV-237) which is believed to encompass approximately 70,000 square meters, part of which is out site of the subject property. During an archaeological surface survey of the site conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of basalt and quartz debitage, fragmented manos and metares, fire-affected rocks, pestles, hammerstones, and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed. The recommendations of the Archaeological Assessment are to conduct a surface collection of the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and significance of the site. The resulting information shall be used to determine whether the site is a unique resource for the area and whether measures to preserve the site or salvage some percentage of the cultural resources- should be implemented. The Archaeological Assessment also includes the recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted for any future grading activities. These recommendations shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map No. 24086. In addition, a Native American representative shall be present during the archaelologaical excavation and also during grading. Fossil Resources The site is located in the fossiliferous Pauba Formation. In accordance with the recommendation of the San Bernardino County Museum, the subdivider shall retain a paleontologist to monitor grading operations, evaluate any fossils encountered during grading, prepare a report of finding, and provide for preservation and curation of recovered specimens. S\STAFFRPT\24086 ,PM 7 GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY: Parcel Map No. 24086 is consistent with the Southwest Area Plan designation of the site for light industrial uses. The parcel map conforms to the requirements of the M-SC, Manufacturing-Service Commercial Zone. There is a reasonable probability that the project will be consistent with the future General Plan in that the project is consistant with a existing land uses and approved subdivisions in the vicinity. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The Initial Study prepared for Parcel Map No. 24086 indicates that the project will not have any impacts on the environment which cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance, and Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration. FINDINGS: The proposed Parcel Map will not have a significant negative impact on the- environment, as determined in the Initial Study performed for the project. A 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 in that the proposed commercia-industrial subdivision is consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial Land Use designation, the Manufacturing- Service Commercial Zone, and existing land uses in the vicinity. 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 in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivisions in the vicinity. S\STAFFRPT\24088 .PM 8 The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project conforms to the current zoning for the site and Ordinance No. 460, 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. 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 prepared for this project. The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future passive energy control opportunities in that all- parcels have adequate southerly exposure. All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic. 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. 10. The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. 11. These findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 9 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the following recommendation to the City Council: ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 24086; and ADOPT Resolution 91 - approving Tentative Parcel Map No.24086 based on the analysis contained herein and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 2. 3. 4. Resolution Conditions of Approval Environmental Assessment Exhibits A. Vicinity Map B. SWAP Map C. Zoning Map D. Tentative Parcel Map No. 24086 vgw S%STAFFRPT\24086.PM 10 RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP NO. 24086 TO SUBDIVIDE A 69.7 ACRE PARCEL INTO 49 PARCELS AT THE WESTERLY SIDE OF DIAZ ROAD NORTH OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL 909-120-020. WHEREAS, Rancho California City Associates I filed Parcel Map No. 24086 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 October 7, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either- in support or opposition; WH EREAS, 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. Findin.qs. 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: S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 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 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. 24086 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. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 12 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 S\STAFFRPT\24086,PM be provided and that they will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to eesements of record or to eesements 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: The proposed Parcel Map will not have a significant negative impact on the environment, as determi'ned in the Initial Study performed for the project. A 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 in that the- proposed commercia-industrial subdivision is consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial Land Use designation, the Manufacturing- Service Commercial Zone, and existing land uses in the vicinity. 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 in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivisions in the vicinity. The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project conforms to the current zoning for the site and Ordinance No. 460, 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. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 14 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 prepared for this project. The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future passive energy control opportunities in that all parcels have adequate southerly exposure. All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic. 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. The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. These 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 prepared for this project indicates that the proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment, and a Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby granted. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 15 SECTION 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Parcel Map No. 27086 for the subdivision of a 69.7 acre parcel into 49 parcels located at the westerly side of Diaz Road north of the future extension of Winchester Road, and known as Assessor's Parcel 909-120-020 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. SECTION 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of October, 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 7th day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 16 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tentative Parcel Map No: Project Description: Assessor's Parcel No.: 24086 To create 49 parcels on a 69.7 acre site 909-120-020 Planning 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 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 parcel 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. S\STAFFRPT~24086,PM 17 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 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: 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Be limited to a maximum slope ratio of 2 to I and a maximum vertical height of thirty (30) feet. Setbacks from top and bottom of slopes shall be a minimum of one-half the slope height. b. 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. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations. outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated June 13, 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 November 16, 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 460, 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 June 5, 1991, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the slope stability recommendations outlined in the County Geologist's transmittal dated September 6, 1989, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the County Geologist's transmittal dated October 16, 1989, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho California Water District transmittal dated July 3, 1991, a copy of which is attached. S\STAFFRPT\24088.PM 18 16. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following: 17. 18. Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the development standards of the Manufacturing - Service Commercial zone. 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. 19. The following notes shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet: 20. "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 Outdoor Lighting Policy as outlined in the Southwest Area Plan." "Archaeological and paleontological monitoring during grading is required, and summary report shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits." "Part of the site is located in the 100 year flood plain of Murrieta Creek. Measures to remove the project site from the flood plain are listed in the conditions of approval." "The site is traversed by a potentially active earthquake fault. The map includes a restricted use zone in which no structures for human occupancy are allowed." Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: 1) 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: S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM 19 21. 22. 23. 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. 4. Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase. Prior to the issuance of grading permits a qualified archaeologist shall conduct a stratified surface sampling of archaeological site CA-RIV 237 and shall excavate 20 to 30 one cubic meter cubsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and significance of the site. Based on the results of these tests, the extent of further sampling and data collection will be determined. A qualified archaeologist shall also monitor grading activities and shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading activity to allow recovery of cultural resources. A Native American representative shall be present during archaeological testing and during grading and shall also have the authority to- temporarily halt or divert grading activity. 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. A paleontologist shall be on-site to monitor grading operations. 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: 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. Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from view of surrounding property. S\STAFFRPT~24086 ,PM 20 c. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 25 feet with at least 10 feet landscaped. 24. 25. 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 and shall be verified by City field inspection, and certified in writing by the landscape architect. 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 a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Mitigation 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. 26. 27. 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. 24086, 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. Electrical lines rated 33kv or greater shall be exempted from the requirement to be installed underground. S\STAFFRPT~24086 .PM 2 1 Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements: 28. 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 CC&R'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 CC&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. 29. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer and City Attorney. The CC&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 CC&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 CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense. The CC&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 CC&R'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 CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage and facilities. The landscape and architecture standards shall be incorporated by reference into the CC&R's. S\STAFFRPT\24086 .PM 2 2 30. 31. The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the association or other means acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to the Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to issuance of building permits. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds- and shall be recorded concurrent with the map or prior to the issuance of building permit where no map is involved. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall obtain approval of lot line adjustments, street vacations, and dedications to reflect the realignment of the future right-of-way of Winchester Road. 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). S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM 23 Deoartment of Public Works The following are the Department of Public Works 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 Department of Public Works. 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 RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 32. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Rancho California Water District; Eastern Municipal Water District; Riverside County Flood Control district; City of Temecula Fire Bureau; Planning Department; Department of Public Works; Riverside County Health Department; CATV Franchise; CalTrans; and Parks and Recreation Department. 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 Department of Public Works. 34. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements Of said section. 35. Winchester Road shall be improved with 38 feet half street improvements plus one 12' lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within a 65' dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 101 (38'/50'). 36. Diaz Road shall be improved, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 101 (76'/100'). S\STAFFRPT\240S6 .PM 24 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 45. 46. Streets "A", "B" and "C" shall be improved, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 111 (56'/78'). Street "D" shall be improved with 28 feet of half street improvement plus one 12' lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted within a 51 foot dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 111 (28'/39'). If construction is to be phased, the landowner/developer shall acquire sufficient public offsite rights-of-way to provide for secondary access road(s) to a paved and maintained road as may be needed. Said access road(s) shall be constructed in accordance with County Standard No. 106, Section B (32'/60'), at a grade and alignment approved by the Department of Public Works. A standard knuckle shall be constructed within the land division per Riverside County Standard No. 801. 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. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and Diaz Road and so noted on the final map with the exception of driveway openings and public street intersections as approved by the Department of Public Works. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage if required shall be delineated or noticed on the final map. Where applicable, 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, especially on Winchester Road and Diaz Road. 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 Department of Public Works. S\STAFFRPT\24086 .PM 2 5 47. 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. 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 (street and parks). d. Sewer and domestic water systems. e. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. f. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. 48. The street design, grading and improvement concept of this project shall be- coordinated with A.D. 155 and adjoining developments. 49. Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the Department of Public Works. 50. Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department of Public Works 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. 51. Street names shall be subject to the approval of the Building and Safety Department. 52. The minimum centerline radii shall be 500 feet or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 53. All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM 26 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 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 Department of Public Works. A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent. 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 401 (curb sidewalk). The subdivider shall submit two prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the Department of Public Works. 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 24" 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 report shall also address setback requirements for fault line areas. The subdivider shall submit two copies of a soils report to the Department of Public Works. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the Department of Public Works. 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." A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the recorded drainage easement shall be submitted to the City for review prior to the recordation of the final map. 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. 65. 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. 66. A portion of 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 Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance 91-12 of the City of Temecula and the rules and regulations of FEMA for development within a Flood Zone "A" which may include obtaining a letter of map revision from FEMA. 67. The developer shall record an Environmental Constraint Sheet delineating the area within the lO0-year floodplain. 68. 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: 69. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works. 70. A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of- way. 71. 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 Department of Public Works. 72. 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. 73. All conditions of Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District letter dated November 16, 1990, shall be complied with. S\STAFFRPT~24088.PM 28 74. A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within its right-of-way. 75. The subdivider shall submit a haul route plan, including but not limited to, specific information related to truck loads, destination, permission and clearance letters as requested. PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT: 76. A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 77. 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. 78. 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 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 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; orovided 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: 79. 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. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 29 80. Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. 81. Asphattic 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 94 of the State Standard Specifications. Transportation Engineering PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 82. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works and shall be included in the street improvement plans. 83. Plans for a traffic signal shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersection of Winchester Road North at Diaz Road, and shall be included in the street improvement plans with the second plan check submittal. 84. The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with the City of Temecula to contribute a pro-rata share to the construction of the extension of Diaz Road to Washington Street/Rancon Center Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland overcrossing, Winchester Road restriping to six lanes, and the Western bypass corridor as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to recordation. 85. The subdivider shall execute a reimbursement agreement for the design and construction of traffic signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz Road, Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle East. The percent of costs and the warrants for these signals shall be as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to recordation. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS: 86. 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 Department of Public Works. S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 30 PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: 87. All traffic signals, signing and striping shall be installed and operational per the approved plans and as directed by the Department of Public Works per the approved focused traffic analysis. 88. All landscaping installation within corner cutoff areas at all intersections and adjacent to all driveways shall provide for adequate site distance. 89. Stop signs shall be installed within the project site of the intersection of local streets. 90. Diaz Road shall be striped with left turn pockets at each intersection adjacent to the project. S\STAFFRPT\24086,PM 3 1 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CITY OF TEMECULA Planning Department 43180 Business Park Drive, Suite Temecula, CA 92390 200 A'rlN: Scott Wright: RE: PARCEL MAP NO. 24066: MAP 4646 P.M. 6/75 RECORDS, (57) lOTS PORTION OF PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. Dear Gentlemen: The Department of Public Health has reviewed Parcel Map No. 24086 and recommends: A water sVstem shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the water company and the Health Department, Permanent prints of the plans of the water system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet, along with the oriQinal drawing to the County Surveyor. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of valves and flFe hydrants; plpe and .3oint specifications, and the size of the main at the .]unction of the new system to the existing system, The plans shall comply in all respects with Div. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety Code, California Administrative Code, Title 22, Chapter 18, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, when applicable. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in Parcel Map No. 24086, is in accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the water services, storage, and distribution system will be adequate to provide water service to such Parcel map". City of Temecula PaGe Two Attn: Scott Wright June 13, 1991 This certification does not constitute a quarantee that it will supply water to such parcel map at any specific quantities, flows or pressures for 'ire protection or any other purpose". Thls certification shall be signed by a responsible official of the water company. Ih~_._D.!.a_n3 must be %u~m.i.t~.~._t.~+__Tb_~_.Co~Y $~_rvevor's Office to rey!~3 at least ~MQ._~k~_._.prlor to the reouest for the recordation of the This subdivision has a statement from Rancho California Water District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand providing satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be made prior to the recordat~on of the final map. This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water Dlstr~ct and shall be connected to the sewers of the District, The sewer system shall be ~nstalled 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 triplicate, along with the original drawinq, to the County Surveyor. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, plpe and 3oint specifications and the size of the sewers at the ~unctlon of the new system to the existing 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 siqned by a registered engineer and the sewer dlstrict with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the sewer system in Parcel Map No, 24086 is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water Distrlct and that the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed parcel City of Temecula Paqe Three Attn: Scott Wriqht June 13, 1991 Th~.._.~.l.~n~_.~u~l.__h._e__~bJ~itted to the County Survevor's OffiCe ~..review ~.._l_ealst two wee~s prior to the reouest foL_~/l~. ~.~_~/.~.i.~._QL...~.~_final map, It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be completely finalized prior to recordation of the final map. Sincerely, Environmental Health Services SM:dr KENNETH L. EDWARDS RECE!V-:F} NOV 2 !!9gO RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA 92ejO2 1995 MARKET STREET PO BOX 1033 TELEPHONE (714) 275-12OO FAX NO (714) 788-9965 November 16, 1990 City of Temecula Post Office Box 3000 Temecula, CA 92390 Attn: Planning Department Scott Wright Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: Parcel Map 24086 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 This is a proposal to divide 69.7 acres into con~mercial parcels in the City of Temecula. The site is located southwest of the intersection of Diaz Road and Winchester Road. This property is located adjacent to Murrieta Creek and approximately one half of the parcels are located within the 100 year flood plain limits of the creek. The District is currently developing a final design for improvement of ~rrieta Creek with the assistance of a seven member citizens' committee appointed by the Board of Supervisors. Because of the complexity of the hydraulic and environmental factors involved, and to ensure orderly development, the District will design the entire Murrieta Creek improvement. Piecemeal design of portions of this major regional flood control project is not acceptable to the District. Following development of an acceptable design, the District intends to pursue a funding mechanism for the required improvements, probably by means of an assessment district over the flood plain. The right of way needed for Murrieta Creek in this area is 250 feet each side of the centerline. This includes a 50 foot habitat mitigation strip on each side which will be returned if it is not needed. This is shown correctly on Amended Map No. 3. This site also receives offsite runoff from the hills to the southwest. This development assumes that Parcel Map 21029 will be constructed and the tributary flows will be collected in Winchester Road. Should Parcel Map 21029 not be constructed, adequate inlet facilities will need to be constructed to collect all of the tributary flows. Access for maintenance purposes should be provided to all inlet and outlet structures. Following are the District's recommendations: A portion of the proposed project is in a floodplain and may affect "waters of the United States", "wetlands" or "jurisdictional streambeds", therefore, in accordance with the requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program and Related Regulations (44 CFR, Parts 59 through 73) and County Ordinance No. 458: City of Temecula Re: Parcel Map 24086 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 -2- November 16, 1990 A flood study consisting of HEC-2 calculations, cross sections, maps and other data should be prepared to the satisfaction of the Federal Emergency ~nagement Agency (FEMA) and the District for the purpose of revising the effective Flood Insurance Rate Map of the project site. The submittal of the study should be concurrent with the initial submittal of the related project improvement plans and final District approval will not be given until a Conditional Letter of ~p Revision (CLOMR) has been received from FEMA. A copy of appropriate correspondence and necessary permits from those government agencies from which approval is required by Federal or State law (such as Corps of Engineers 404 permit or Department of Fish and Game 1603 agreement) should be provided to the District prior to the final District approval of the project. This parcel map 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 par- cel 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 required af- fidavit requesting deferment of the payment of fees, the drainage fees may be paid to the Building 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 sub- division 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. Murrieta Creek Channel should be constructed through the proposed project in conformance with the District's approved design including habitat mitigation measures which may be required by the various resource agencies. In lieu of constructing the channel improvements the applicant shall cooperate in the formation of and participate in a financial mechanism such as a community facilities district or an assessment district to pay for the cost of the District's proposed ~rrieta Creek Channel improvements. City of Temecula Re: Parcel ~p 24086 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 -3- November 16, 1990 1· 12. 13. The right of way for Murrieta Creek, including the area required for habitat mitigation should be dedicated to the District. The right of way needed for Murrieta Creek in this area is 250 feet each side of the centerline. This includes a 50 foot habitat mitigation strip on each side which will be returned if it is not needed. This development assumes that Parcel Map 21029 will be constructed and the tributary flows will be collected in Winchester Road. Should Parcel Map 21029 not be constructed, adequate inlet facilities will need to be constructed to collect all of the tributary flows. Access for maintenance purposes should be provided to all inlet and outlet structures. Pads on this site should be elevated 12 inches above the 100 year water surface elevation in Murrieta Creek. 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". Offsite drainage facilities should be located within dedicated 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. All lots should be graded to drain to the adjacent street or an adequate outlet. 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. T~nen either of these criteria is exceeded, additional drainage facilities should be installed. Drainage facilities outletting sump conditions should be designed to convey the tributary 100 year storm flows. Additional emergency escape should also be provided. 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 and outlet points. An encroachment permit should be obtained for any work on District facilities or within District right of way. The encroachment permit application should oe processed and approved concurrently with the improvement plans. City of Temecula Re: Parcel Map 24086 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 -4- November 16, 1990 14. Prior to initiation of the final construction drawings for those facilities required to be built as part of the Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan, the developer should contact the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District to ascertain the terms and conditions of design, construction, inspection, transfer of rights of way, project credit in lieu of fees and reimbursement schedules which may apply. Title reports and title insurance must be provided for all right of way to be transferred to the District. The developer should note that if the estimated cost for required area drainage plan facilities exceeds the required drainage fees and the developer wishes to receive credit for reimbursement in excess of his fees, the facilities will be constructed as a public works contract. Scheduling for construction of these facilities will be at the discretion of the District. 15. If the tract is built in phases, each phase shall be protected from the I in 100 year tributary storm flows. 16. Temporary erosion control measures should be implemented immediately following rough grading to prevent deposition of debris onto downstream properties or drainage facilities. 17. Development of this property should be coordinated with the development of adjacent properties to ensure that watercourses remain unobstructed and stormwaters are not diverted from one watershed to another. This may require the construction of temporary drainage facilities or offsite construction and grading. 18, ~ster Drainage Plan facilities to be constructed as part of this development's improvement obligation are to be inspected, operated and maintained by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. The developer should enter into an agreement with the District establishing the terms and conditions covering their inspection, operation and maintenance. 19, Inspection and maintenance of the storm drain system to be built with this tract must be performed by either the County Transportation Department or the Flood Control District. The engineer (owner) must request (in writing) that one of these agencies accept the proposed storm drain system. The request should note the tract number, location, and briefly describe the system (sizes and lengths). Request to the District should be addressed to Kenneth L. Edwards, Chief Engineer, Attn: Frank Peairs, Planning Engineer. If the District is willing to accept the system, an agreement between the owner and the District must be executed. A request to draw up an agreement must be sent to the District to the attention of Michael Rawso~. City of Temecula Re: Parcel Map 24086 Amended No. 3 Dated August 7, 1990 ~5- November 16, 1990 20, All flood control facilities should be constructed to District standards. All facilities that the District will assume for maintenance will require the payment of a one time maintenance charge equal to the "present worth" of maintenance costs from the time of acceptance through 1998. 21. The applicant's engineer should contact the District's Plan Check section to schedule a pre-design meeting before the engineer starts detailed project design. 22. A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations 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 the Subdivision section of this office at 714/275-t210. c: NBS/Lowry ZS:slw GLEN J. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE · PERRIS. CALIFORNIA 92370 (714) 657-3183 June 5, 1991 TO: ATTN: RE: CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPT PARCEL MAP 24086 AMD #4 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: The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 5000 GPM and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant shall be 2500 GPM for 2 hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. Approved super fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2½"x2~") shall be located at each street intersection and spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction, with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, containing a Fire Department approval signature block, and shall conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow. Once plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Department for signature. 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. All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to the Planning and Engineering staff. RAYMOND H. REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner By Michael E. Gray, Fire Captain Specialist ~iEG / tm ~1 INDIO OFFICE 79-753 Courier/Club Drive, Suite F. lr~io, CA 92201 (619) 342~88~ · FAX (619) 775-2072 PLANNING DIVISION f'l RIVERSIDE OFFICE 3760 12th Sttttt. Riverside, CA 92501 (714) 2754777 * FAX (714) 369-7451 I'1 TEMECULA OFFICE 41002 Count'/Center Drive, Suite 225, Temeguh, CA 92390 (714) 694-5070 * FAX (714) 694-5076 ~ lxklted on recycled paper September 6, 1989 DEPARTMENTAL LETTER COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO: FROM: RE: John Chlu - Team 5 Steven A. Kupferman - Engineering Geologist Tentative Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086 Slope Stability Report No. 149 The following report has been reviewed relative to slope stability at the subject site: "Slope Stability Assessment, Tentative Parcel Maps 24085, 24086, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA," by Schaefer Dixon Associates dated August 16, 1989. This report detemined that: 1. Tentative Parcel Map 24085 will be graded with cut slopes ranging up to 25 feet high and fill slopes approximately 10 feet high, both at 2:1 {horizontal: vertical). 2. Tentative Parcel Map 24086 will be graded with 2:1 (H:V) cut and fill slopes less than 30 feet high. The Pauba formation in the planned cut areas consists primarily of moderately hard to hard, moderately fractured, locally friable sandstones and siltstones. Proposed cut slopes made in Pauba formation sediments, having favorable-oriented bedding planes, are expected to be grossly stable at 2:1 (H:V) to a maximum height of 29 feet. 5. Surficial erosion is possible in both cut and fill slopes of granular Pauba formation materials. This report recommended that: I. Cut slope excavations should be observed during grading by the project engineering geologist. John Chtu - 2 - September 6, 1989 Drainage on cut and fill slopes should be directed away from the slope face. Drainage devices should be constructed as per the Uniform Building Code. 3. Proper landscaping should be established immediately after construction and maintained. 4. Slope wash and topsoil mterlals exposed in cut slopes should be removed and replaced with compacted fill materials. This report satisfies the General Plan requirement for a slope stability report. the recommendations made in this report should be adhered to in the design and construction of this project. SAK:al RiVERSiDE COUrt;,u PL, nnin6 DEP R filEr . October 16, 1989 Schaefer Dixon Associates 22 Mauchly Irvine, CA 92718 Attention: Mr. Paul Davis Mr. Nicholas F. Selmeczy Mr. Michael L. Leonard, St. SUBJECT: Seismic-Geologic/Liquefaction Hazard Project No. 9R-4332C Tentative Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086 APN: 909-120-020,022 County Geologic Report No. 627 Rancho California Area Gentlemen: We have reviewed the seismic-geologic aspects of your report entitled "Report on Geotechnical investigation, Assessment District No. 155, Parcel Map 24085, 24086, 21029, 21382, and 21383, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA," dated June 7, 1989 and your responses to County Geologic Review, dated August 15, 1989 and September 21, 1989. It should be noted that previous reports prepared for this property were entitled 1.} "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Industrial/Commercial Site, West of Cherry Street and Diaz Road, A.D. No. 155, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA" by Leighton and Associates, dated June 23, 1986, and 2.) "Engineering Geologic Investigation of Faulting and Anticipated Alluvial Removals, Proposed Industrial/Commercial Site, AD No. 155, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA," by Leighton and Associates, dated August 18, 1987. This report did not recognize or address the potential for ground fissuring in the area, which occurred in late 1987. It is understood that your report now supercedes these previous reports for the subject property. Your report determined that: The surface trace of a previously unmapped, through going fault extends northwest-southeast across the center of the property. A short branch of this fault trends more northerly, coincident with a strong photolineament and the 1987 ground fissure. These faults are delineated on Plate 1, Geotechnical Map, revised 8-15-89/9-21-89, in your report. 2. These faults are considered to be active in accordance with State of California, Division of Mines and Geology criteria. 3. The Willard fault traces located at higher elevations on the westerly portion of the site are judged to be pre-Holocene in age. 4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 (714) 787'6181 46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304 INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201 (619) 342-8277 Schaefer Dixon Associates - 2 - October 16, 1989 The Whittier-Elsinore fault zone is considered capable of the highest ground motions at the site. A lO0-year probable magnitude earthquake of 6.3 on this fault would result in a peak horizontal ground acceleration of 0.419 at the site. Liquefiable and marginally liquefiable zones are present in the lower-lying portion of the site, below a depth of approximately 15 feet. The liquefiable areas are delineated on Plate 1, Geotechnical Map, revised 8-15-89/9-21-89. Surface subsidence may be induced by liquefaction and the settlement is estimated to be in the range of 0.1 inch to 1.4 inches, however reduction of bearing capacity for shallow spread footings is not anticipated. The potential for lateral spreading is considered low based on the present geometry of the Murrieta Creek Channel relative to the liquefiable zones at the site. 7. The potential for seiches, earthquake-induced flooding and lurching is considered to be extremely low at this site. 8. The mapped landslide at the northwest portion of the property is a shallow, surficial failure. Ground fissuring will most likely occur along the establish traces of historic and Holocene fault displacements. It is not expected that ground fissures will occur in portions of the property away from pre-existing Holocene faults. Your report recommended that: No habitable structures shall be placed acrossed the active (Holocene} faults and ground fissures. A Restricted Use Zone (R.U.Z.) shall be established to include the observed faults, their in-line projections and buffer zone. The total width and extent of the R.U.Z. is shown on Plate 1, Geotechnical Map, revised 8-15-89/9-21-89. The effects of soil liquefaction, including loss of bearing capacity, surface subsidence and lateral spreading shall be re-evaluated for each individual structure on the site when grading and building plans become available. The mapped landslide at the northwest portion of the property shall be delineated on the project grading plans. In addition, the disturbed surficial materials shall be cumpletely removed during grading, in conformance with standard eart~lwork practices. Schaefer Dixon Associates - 3 - October 16, 1989 Recommendations for removing the uncontrolled fill from the exploratory trenches, and for placement of structures adjacent to or astride any of these trenches, should be specifically provided as part of the geotechnical grading plan review report for the subject projects. 6. Final plans and specifications should be reviewed by the geotechnical consultant prior to site construction. 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 hereby given. We recommend that the following conditions be satisfied before recordation of Tentative Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086 and/or issuance any County permits associated with this project: The recommended Restricted Use Zone shown on Plate 1, Geotechnical Map, revised B-15-89/9-21-89 in the report shall be delineated on the project maps and/or Environmental Constraints Sheet {E.C.S.). The areas within the Recommended Restricted Use Zone shall be labeled "FAULT AND GROUND FISSURE HAZARD AREA." 2. The following notes shall be placed on the E.C.S. and/or Subdivision maps: "The property is affected by earthquake faulting and ground fissures. Structures for human occupancy shall not be allowed in the Fault and Ground Fissure Hazard Area." (b) · County Geologic Report No. 627 was prepared for this property on June 7, 1989 by Schafer Dixon Associates, and is on file at the Riverside County Planning Department. Specific items of concern are as follows: earthquake faulting, fissuring and ground subsidence, liquefaction, landsliding, and uncompacted trench backfill." 3. The E.C.S. and/or project maps shall be submitted to the Planning Department Engineering Geologist for review and approval. 4. The exploratory trench backfill shall be addressed by the project geotechnical engineering prior to issuance of grading permits. Liquefaction reports for individual structures shall be submitted to the Planning Department Engineering Geologist for review and approval prior to Plot Plan approval. Schaefer Dixon Associates - 4 - October 16, lgBg The recommendations made in your report for mitigation of seismic/geologic hazards shall be adhered to in the design and construction of this project. Very truly yours, RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Roger S, S~Feeter - Planning Director StYyen )k, Kupfermanc'~/ ~./ Engineering Geologist / CEG-1205 SAK:al c.c. Johnson & Johnson, Inc. - Dean Allen CDNG - Earl Hart Building & Safety {2) - Norm Lostbom John Chiu - Team 1 Ran Wate July 3, 1991 City of Temecula Engineering Department 43180 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92592 SUBJECT: Water and Sewer Availability Parcel Map 24086 Gentlemen: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water and sewer service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. Currently, RCWD has an inter-agency agreement with Eastern Municipal Water District to provide sewer service to your area. All plan check submittals will be made to RCWD. Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement which assigns water management fights, if any, to RCWD. If RCWD can be of further service to you, please contact Ms. Senga Doherty. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E. Manager of Development Engineering SB:SD:ajw116 cc: Senga Doherty, Engineering Technician CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY Backaround 1. Name of Proponent: 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: Date of Environmental Assessment: NBS Lowry 27403 Ynez Road, Suite 209 Temecula. CA 92390 (714) 676-6225 August 21, 1991 II 4. Agency Requiring Assessment: 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable: 6. Location of Proposal: Environmental ImPacts CITY OF TEMECULA Parcel MaD Nos. 24085 and 24086 Southwesterly of Diaz Road bounded by the future extension of Winchester Road on the northwesterly and southwesterly sides of the site. (Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.) YeS Maybe No Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? X b. Disruptions, displacements, compac- tion or overcovering of the soil? X c. Substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features? X S\STAFFRPT~24088 .PM 34 The destruction, covering or modi- fication of any unique geologic or physical features? Any substantial increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off site? Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earth quakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? Air, Will the proposal result in: Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? The creation of objectionable odors? 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, jn either marine or fresh waters? Substantial changes in absorption '~ rates, drainage patterns, or the · rate and amount of surface runoff? Ye~ M~ybe NO X X X X X X X X X S%STAFFRPT\24088 .PM 3 5 d m Plant a, Ce Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including, but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? Alteration of the direction or rate of flow or ground waters? Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct addi- tions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flood- ing or tidal waves? Life. Will the proposal result in: Change in the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants? Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegetation, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? Yes Maybe NQ X X X X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 36 m -8. 10. 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? Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? Exposure of peopJe 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 an the rate of use of any natural resources? Substantial depletion of any non- renewable natural resource? Risk of Upset. Will the p~oposal involve: Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 3 7 11. 12. 13. 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? Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? Yes Maybe No X X X X X Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking? Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X X X X X S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 38 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have substantial effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? Parks or other recreational 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 S\STAFFRPT\24086,PM Communications systems? Water? Sewer or septic tanks? Storm water drainage? Solid waste and disposal? 39 X X X 17. 18. 19. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? Exposure of people to potential health hazards? Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? Recreation, Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20, Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d m Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X S\STAFFRPT~24086 ,PM 40 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 M~aybe No X X X X S\STAFFRPT\24086.PM 41 III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation 1 .a,b,c. 1.d. 1.e. 1.f. 1.g. Yes. Parcel Map No. 24085 will involve 363,000 cubic yards of cut and fill, and Parcel Map No. 24086 will involve 349,000 cubic yards of cut and fill. Some cut will penetrate into the Pauba Formation which consists of sandstone and siltstone. Mitigation of liquefaction potential on the site may involve removal and recompaction of soil on the site. All cut and fill slopes will not exceed a 2:1 grade. Cut slopes on the site of Parcel Map No. 24085 will be up to 25 feet in height and fill slopes will be approximately 10 feet high. Cut and fill slopes on the site of Parcel Map No. 24086 will be less than 30 feet in height. The Slope Stability Report determined that the proposed 2:1 cut slopes will be grossly stable to a maximum height of 29 feet, and surficial erosion potential should be mitigated by directing drainage away from the slope faces and installing landscape planting on the slopes. The recommendations of the Slope Stability Report shall be included in the conditions of approval for the subject parcel maps. No. There are no unique geologic or physical features on the site. Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are replanted. The wind erosion impact is considered high and significant but will be mitigated through minimal grading, retention of natural vegetation whenever feasible, and use of watering trucks and hydroseeding disturbed areas after grading. After construction of the project, water run-off is likely to increase due to the addition of impermeable surfaces. Appropriate drainage control devices will have to be approved through the Engineering Department and will have to be designed in accordance with Temecula's standards and the conditions of approval. No. Any drainage into the Murrieta Creek channel will be via drainage improvements as approved by the City Engineer and will not result in erosion or siltation. Yes. Portions of the site are susceptible to liquefaction and subsidence, and the site is traversed by a potentially active fault. The Geology Report recommends that the effects of liquefaction, including loss of bearing capacity, surface subsidence and lateral spreading should be re- evaluated for each individual structure when grading and building plans become available. In accordance with the requirements of state law, a restricted use zone based on the geology report is shown on the map. The restricted use zone represents a setback from the earthquake fault S\STAFFRPT\24086 ,PM 42 2.a,b,c. 3.a. 3.b. 3.c. 3.d. 3.e. 3.f,g. 3.h. on the site, and no structures for human occupancy will be permitted within the restricted use zone. Hazards to buildings outside of the restricted use zone due to groundshaking associated with the fault are addressed by the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. The geologic hazard mitigations recommended in the Geology Report and the County Geologists letter shall be conditions of approval. No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any impacts to air quality or the climate. Subsequent development proposals will be assessed for potential impacts to air quality and mitigation measures will be required if necessary. No. The portion of the property necessary for the future construction of Murrieta Creek flood control facilities is indicated on the tentative parcel map as a County Channel Easement. There will be no change in the course or direction of water in Murrieta Creek. Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in changes in the amount of surface runoff. The improvement of the site will provide for adequate drainage facilities as approved by the City Engineer. No. The project will result in minor, localized redirection of flood waters to the extent necessary to elevate the site above the 100 year flood plain elevation, but the overall direction and flow of flood waters will not be changed. Maybe. Grading and future development of the site may increase the amount of surface runoff flowing into the Murrieta Creek channel. This is not considered a significant impact and is consistent with the provisions of the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan and Assessment District 155. Yes. Grading may result in an increase in turbidity in local surface water. This impact is temporary and is not considered significant. No. Recompaction of soil to mitigate the potential for liquefaction is not expected to result in a significant impact on the direction or rate of flow of ground waters. No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any impact on public water supplies, S\STAFFRPT\24086 .PM 43 3.i. 4.a,b. 4.c. 4.d. 5.a,b. 5,c. 6,8, 6.b. 9.a,b. No. Prior to recordation of the proposed parcel map, the applicant shall obtain a Letter of Map Revision from the Federal Emergency Management Agency indicating that grading of the site or other improvements are adequate to ensure that the site will be above the 100 year flood plain elevation. No. A botanical survey of the site found no sensitive plant species on the site. Grazing and the introduction of non-native grasses have previously disturbed the natural native flora on the site. Maybe. Landscaping of the site may introduce some non-native species. This is not considered a significant impact. No. The site is not currently used as crop land. No. A biology survey of the site did not reveal the presence or any indications of any species classified as rare or endangered. Yes. The project will involve a loss of grass land and chaparral which provides foraging habitat for birds, mammals, and reptiles. In regional terms, the loss of foraging habitat is an incrementally adverse but non- significant impact. The biology report recommends the use of native California shrubs and trees to revegetate graded and open areas in order to enhance reoccupation of the bird community. Use of native plant life shall be a condition of approval. Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in increased noise levels during grading. This impact will be temporary and is not considered significant because the site is not near any noise sensitive land uses. No. Future development will be reviewed for potential noise impacts, and land uses which generate severe noise impacts will be prohibited or required to provide adequate noise mitigation. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not cause new light or glare, and subsequent development of the site will be subject to standard conditions prohibiting lighting from impacting adjacent properties and requiring low-glare sodium vapor lights. No. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zone and the land use designation in which the property is located. No. The project will not involve a substantial increase in the rate of consumption of natural or non-renewable resources. S\STAFFRPT\24086 .PM 44 10.a,b. 11,12. 13.a. 13.b. 13.c,e. 13.d. No. The proposed parcel map will not involve the use of hazardous materials or interference with emergency response or evacuation plans. No. The proposal is not likely to alter the distribution or growth rate of the population or create a demand for new housing. Future development of the site will help address the irabalance of local jobs in relation to existing and approved housing. Yes, Future development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24085 is expected to generate 5,340 vehicle trip ends per day. 5, 150 trip ends per day are expected as a result of development of the site of Parcel Map No. 24086. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the project determined that intersections and roadways in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended improvements are implemented. The following recommended traffic impact mitigations are incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map No. 24085. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works and shall be included in the street imporvements plans. Plans for traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of Avenida de Ventas at Diaz Road and Avenida de Ventas at Winchester Road, and shall be included in the street improverant plans with the second plan check submittal. The developer shall execute a Reimbursement Agreement for the design and construction of traffic signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz Road, Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle East. The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with the City of Temecula to contribute a pro-rata share to the construction of the extension of Diaz Road to Washington Street/Rancon Center Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland overcrossing, Winchester Road restriping to six lanes, and the western bypass corridor as determined by a focused traffic analysis approved by the Deaprtment of Public Works. No. Future development of the site will be required to provide adequate off-street parking as appropriate for the particular land use proposed. No. The project will have no impact upon existing transportation systems or upon water, rail, or air traffic. No. The proposed parcel maps will not alter present patterns of circulation. S~STAFFRPT\24086.PM 45 13.f. 14.a-f. 15.a,b. 16.a-d,f. 16.e. 17.a,b. 18. 19. 20.a,b,c. No. The streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended street improvements are implemented. The street improvements will be conditions of approval for the proposed parcel map. No. The project will not result in a need for new public services. Future development will generate an increase in the need for public services in the areas of fire and police protection and road maintenance. Payment of the required traffic signal mitigation fee, the facility fee, and property taxes will fund the additional public services. No. The project will not result in a substantial use or increase in demand for fuel or other energy sources. No. Future development of the site will require only hook up to or service by existing utility systems and will not result in a need for new or substantially altered utility systems. Yes. The proposed Parcels Maps will involve the construction of the Murrieta Creek Channel through the site. The construction of channel improvements will be in compliance with the recommendations of the County Flood Control District and will be provided by the developer or by the developer's participation in an assessment district. No. The proposed parcel map will not result in any potential health hazards. Future development will be assessed for potential health hazards, and mitigations, if needed, shall be required. No. The proposal will not result in the obstruction of any scenic views. Future development will be reviewed in order to prevent the construction of aesthetically offensive structures or site layouts. No. The site is not currently used for recreational purposes. Maybe. The site of Parcel Maps 24085 and 24086 contain a recorded archaeological site (CA-RIV-237) which is beleived to encompass approximately 70,000 square meters, part of which is outside of the subject property. During an archaeological surface survey of the site conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of basalt and quartz debitage, fragmented manos and metares, fire-affected rocks, pestles, hammerstores, and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed. The recommendations of the Archaeological Assessment are to conduct a surface collection of the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and S\STAFFRPT\24086 .PM 46 20.d. 21 .a. 21 .b,c. 21 .d. significance of the site. The resulting information shall be used to determine whether the site is a unique resource for the area and whether measures to preserve the site or salvage some percentage of the cultural resources should be implemented. The Archaeological Assessment includes the recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted for any future grading activities. These recommendations shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Maps 24805 and 24806. In addition, a Native American representative shall be present during archaeological excavation and also during grading. No. The site is not used for any religious or sacred purposes. No. Although the project will result in a reduction of foraging habitat, this impact is not considered regionally significant. The inclusion of native trees and shrubs in the landscaping will provide adequate mitigations for potential biological impacts due to reduction of foraging habitat. No. The long term and cumulative traffic impacts of the project will be adequately mitigated by the street improvements recommended by the traffic study which are conditions of approval for the proposed parcel map. Streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service. No. The proposed parcel map will not create any health hazards. Environmental review of future development of the site will address any potential health hazards and mitigations, if necessary, will be required. S\STAFFRPT\24086 ,PM 47 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 August 12. 1991 Date For CITY OF TEMECULA S\STAFFRPT~24086.PM 48 CITY OF TEMECULA ~ e \,,~/ // SITE / VICINITY MAP ,./' CASE NO. P.C. DATE CITY OF TEMECULA ) .LI RLI SWAP MAP r ~ CASE NO. ?~/~y~ ..c. ~,ATE ,~/~/~, e e CITY OF TEMECULA ~ /// ~;~,~ ,11/ ZONE MAP CASE NO. C.C. DATE h 0 o4 0 _1 LLt !0 nl ITEM # 12 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning October 21, 1991 Parcel Map 25139 The above case was scheduled to be heard before the Planning Commission on October 7, 1991. However, prior to the October 7, 1991 Planning Commission meeting the City of Murrieta requested a continuance to review the maps and provide comments. Recommendation: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make ~e following recommendation to the City Council: 1. ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 25139; and ADOPT Resolution 91 -_ approving Tentative Parcel Map No. 25139 based on the analysis contained in the staff report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. vgw SIMEMOS\GAR\25139PM.MEM STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 7, 1991 Case No.: Parcel Map 25139 Prepared By: Scott Wright Recommendation: 1. 2. Adopt the Negative Declaration; and Adopt Resolution 91- recommending approval of Tentative Parcel Map 25139 APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: 50 Center City Associates REPRESENTATIVE: Alba Engineering PROPOSAL: To create 66 parcels and a 6.8 acre open space area on a 97.3 acre site. LOCATION: Southwesterly of the future extension of Diaz Road and southeasterly of the future extension of Cherry Street. EXISTING ZONING: Manufacturing - Service Commercial (M-SC) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: South: East: West: Specific Plan, (SP) Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M- SC) Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M- SC) Residential Agricultural (R-A-20) PROPOSED ZONING: Not requested EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant S\S\25139.TPM 1 SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Vacant South: Vacant East: Murrieta Creek West: Vacant PROJECT STATISTICS: Gross site area: No. of Parcels: Average Parcel size: Area of Open Space: Cut and Fill Figures: Cut = Fill = 97.3 acres 66 0.98 acre 6.8 acres 1,430,000 cubic yards 880,000 cubic yards BACKGROUND: Tentative Parcel Map 25139 was submitted to the County on August 15, 1989. The County Land Development Committee (CLDC) reviewed the application on September 21, 1989 and requested clearance letters for the paleontology survey and the geology and liquefaction reports as well as clarification of the site's status as an agricultural preserve. The LDC continued the case on November 2, 1989 pending receipt of updated clearance letters for the biology, geology, and liquefaction reports and the need for additional information regarding the flood plain, slopes, agricultural preserve, review of the design manual, and a redesign to address concerns of the County Flood Control District. The file was transmitted to the City on April 18, 1990. City staff requested a traffic study, landscape and architecture standards, an updated letter from the County Flood Control District, and information regarding slope stability, soil export, archaeological resources, property boundaries, and the alignment of Winchester Road, PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposal is to create 66 parcels between 0.51 acre and 3.7 acres in size with an average parcel size of 0.98 acre. There will be an undisturbed 6.8 acre open space on the southwesterly side of the site in order to retain some hillside chaparral habitat. Parcels 58 through 66 will involve substantial cuts into the hillside and will be separated from the open space area by slopes over 1 O0 feet high with a slope S\S\25139.TPM 2 ratio of 1.5:1. The site is traversed by a fault setback zone within whic'.~ no structures for human occupancy will be allowed. The easterly side of the site lies within the Murrieta Creek Channel and is indicated as a channel easement to the County of Riverside. ANALYSIS: Grading and Slope Stability The project will entail 1,430,000 cubic yards of cut and 880,000 cubic yards of fill and will create 1.5:1 cut slopes up to 120 feet high. The project will involve the export of 550,000 cubic yards of soil from the site. It shall be a Condition of Approval for Parcel Map 25139 that information regarding the number of truckloads, the haul route, the destination point, and a stockpile permit or an approved grading plan for the recipient site shall be submitted and haul route permit obtained from the City prior to issuance of grading permits. The final disposition of the export soil will be subject to environmental review in conjunction with the project which will use the export soil as fill. The revised Slope Stability Analysis prepared for this project states that the cut slopes will be stable under normal and seismic conditions, provided they are free of adverse geologic conditions. The Revised Slope Stability Analysis includes recommendations that an engineering geologist conduct geological mapping during grading to verify that the soils and geologic conditions encountered do not differ significantly from those assumed in the Slope Stability Analysis. If significant differences are encountered, buttressing may be required to stabilize the slope. Cut and fill slopes should be provided with appropriate surface drainage and landscaped as soon as possible after grading. The Tentative Map shows a brow ditch and bench drain at 30 foot intervals in the cut slope. The recommendations of the Slope Stability Analysis shall be Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 25139. S\S\25139.TPM 3 Staff has concerns relative to grading on this site. However, with the absence of policy relative to grading, Staff'~ recommendation is to condition the map in such a way as to initiate the greatest extent possible, grading impaction mitigation measures relative to grading are determined in the Conditions of Approval. With respect to this issue, the City's General Plan effort will most likely include policies relative to grading. Flood Hazards A portion of the site is located in the 100 year flood plain. Measures to remove the project from the 100 year flood plain are listed in the conditions of approval (see County Flood Control District letter of July 9, 1990). Drainaoe The site is located within the limits of the Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan and payment of drainage fees is required. All lots are required to drain toward adjacent streets or an adequate outlet approved by the City Engineer. On- site grading shall be designed to perpetuate existing tributary drainage areas and outlet points, and development of the subject and adjacent properties shall be coordinated to ensure that watercourses remain unobstructed and that storm waters are not diverted from one watershed to another. The site, including each phase if phasing occurs, shall be protected from 1 O0 year tributary storm flows. Off- site drainage facilities shall be located within dedicated drainage easements obtained from the affected property owner(s). Said easements shall be recorded and a copy submitted to the Flood Control District prior to map recordation. Drainage facilities collecting and conveying flows down the steep cut slopes shall be designed in accordance with the District's Drainage Standards for high cut slopes dated November 8, 1990. S\S\25139.TPM 4 Geologic and Liquefaction Hazards A fault hazard and subsidence investigation was prepared for an earlier parcel map application on the subject property. The report determined that the site is traversed by an active branch of the Elsinore Fault, and that the possibility of ground rupture is high in the vicinity of the fault. The potential for fissuring and ground subsidence due to water withdrawal are high in the vicinity of the fault. There is also a potentially active Pre-Holocene fault which transects the extreme western portion of the site which will be maintained as open space. The report recommended a fault and fissure setback zone along the active trace of the branch of the Elsinore Fault in which no structures for human occupancy will be allowed. Other recommendations included continuation of a program to monitor ground movement associated with subsidence and use of at least 5 feet of recompacted fill and post-tensioned slabs for all structures within 200 feet of the fault setback zone. The liquefaction report prepared for an earlier parcel map on the site determined that the potential for liquefaction exists on the site. The reports recommendations included placement of fill on the lots susceptible to liquefaction or densification of subsurface alluvium to at least 92% relative compaction. The Riverside County Geologist reviewed both reports and found that they satisfy the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and County General Plan Policies regarding geological hazards. The recommendations of the reports shall be Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 25139. Traffic and Circulation Future development of the site is expected to generate 5, 180 vehicle trip ends per day. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the project determined that projected future traffic based on existing traffic, project generated traffic, and traffic S\S\25139.TPM 5 generated by other growth in the area will result in a peak hour level of Service D or better at all intersections within the scope of the traffic study if recommended improvements are implemented. The recommendations include contributing to the extension of Diaz Road, providing traffic signals at certain intersections and contributing to the signalization of other intersections, providing a signing and striping plan, and contributing to the construction of the Overland overcrossing and the restriping Winchester Road to six lanes. These improvements are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval. Additionally, this project, along with PM 25408, will be constructing the first portion of the western bypass corridor from the City's northerly boundary at Douglas Avenue. This portion of the proposed alignment of the corridor has been reviewed and approved by the City's Department of Public Work and found acceptable. Access Access to the site will be taken from Winchester Road and Via Industria. All proposed parcels will have frontage on and take access from dedicated streets. Parcels fronting Winchester Road, Diaz Road, Via Industria, and Cherry Street shall limit access to joint use access driveways. Parcel Size and Dimensions Development standards in the M-SC Zone require a minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet and an average width of at least 65 feet where sewers are available and will be utilized. The proposed parcels range from 0.51 acre to 1.37 acres and have an average lot widths of over 1 O0 feet. S\S\25139,TPM 6 Fossil Resources The site is located on the fossilferous Pauba Formation. In accordance with the recommendation of the San Bernardino County Museum, the subdivider shall retain a paleontologist to monitor grading operations, evaluate any fossils encountered during grading, prepare a report of findings, and provide for preservation and curation of recovered specimens. Archaeological Resources The site of Parcel Map 25139 contains a recorded archaeological site (CA-RIV-237) which is believed to encompass approximately 70,000 square meters, part of which is outside of the subject property. During an archaeological surface survey of the site conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of basalt and quartz debitage, fragmented manos and roerates, fire-affected rocks, pestles, hammerstones, and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed. The recommendations of the archaeological assessment are to conduct a surface collection of the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and significance of the site. The resulting information shall be used to determine what additional measures should be implemented to preserve cultural resources. The archaeological assessment also includes the recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted for any future grading activities. These recommendations shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 25139. In addition, a Native American representative shall be present during the archaeological excavation and also during grading. S\S\25139.TPM 7 The property in question also contains another site (WSP-1) which contains a 3/4 circle rock enclosure. The site is possibly a late period campsite. A 100% surface collection, mapping, soils testing, and subsurface testing by excavating 8-10 cubic meters of earth is recommended. In this case, testing procedures are likely to constitute final mitigation. Biological Impacts A biological survey of the site found no sensitive plant species. Two sensitive bird species were observed or detected on the site: the Long-eared Owl and the Grasshopper Sparrow. Neither bird had an official status as a sensitive species, but both were listed by experts as declining species. The Grasshopper Sparrow will be impacted by a reduction in foraging habitat which is considered a non-significant but incrementally adverse impact. Impacts on the Long-eared Owl are more difficult to assess. Recommended measures to reduce habitat impacts are maintenance of an undisturbed open space area on the western side of the site and enhancement of Murrieta Creek riparian corridor by planting Cottonwood and Sycamore trees adjacent to Diaz Road. The tentative map indicates an open space area on the western side of the site. The recommended planting of Cottonwood and Sycamore trees adjacent to Diaz Road may conflict with the need to use more drought resistant, low maintenance type of vegetation with less invasive root systems which would be less detrimental to public improvements. Appropriate alternatives to cottonwood or sycamore trees should be identified and planted. Water and Sewer Availability A will serve letter from the Rancho Water District indicates that water and sewer service are available to the site upon completion of financial arrangements and satisfaction of the District's other requirements. S\S\25139,TPM 8 Agricultural Preserve Status The site is designated as an Agricultural Preserve. Section 66474.4 of the Subdivision Map Act would normally preclude approval of a parcel map creating parcels of insufficient size for agricultural use. However, Section 66474.4 (d.3.) exempts lands subject to a Notice of Non-Renewal indicating that the Agricultural Preserve contract is due to expire within three years. The County Assessor's Office has informed City Staff that a Notice of Non- Renewal indicates that the contract for the property in question is due to expire on January 1, 1992. The same exemption is provided in Section 7.1 (H.3.b) of Ordinance 460. Lot Line Adjustments and Street Realignments The formation of Assessment District 155 included a realignment of the right of way for the future extension of Winchester Road west of Diaz Road. Since the centerline of the right of way constituted the boundary between properties, the realignment resulted in changes to property boundaries. The subject Parcel Map was affected by a realignment of Winchester Road adjacent to Tentative Parcel Maps 25408 and 24086. In order to prevent discrepancies in the legal descriptions of the property at the item of recordation, staff has required that the applicant and other affected property owners eliminate the discrepancies by filing Lot Line Adjustments, Street Vacations, and offers of Rededication reflecting the new alignment of Winchester Road and the resulting changes in property boundaries. These requirements must be completed prior to map recordation. S\S\25139.TPM 9 SOUTHWEST AREA PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY: The proposed parcels conform to the development standards of the M-SC Zone. The M-SC Zone is consistent with the SWAP designation of Light Industrial. There is a reasonable probability that the project will be consistent with the future General Plan in that the project is consistent with existing and approved developments and subdivisions in the area. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The Initial Study prepared for Parcel Map 25139 indicates that the project will not result in any environmental impacts which cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance, and a Negative Declaration is recommended. FINDINGS: The proposed parcel map will not have a significant negative impact on the environment, as determined in the Initial Study performed for the project. A 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 in that the proposed commercial - industrial subdivision is consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial Land Use Designation, the Manufacturing - Service Commercial Zone, and existing land uses in the vicinity. 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 in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivision's in the vicinity. s~s~2s~ 39 .m.M 10 10. 11. The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project conforms to the current zoning for the site and to Ordinance No. 460, Schedule E. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lots, access, and density. 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 prepared for this project. The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future passive energy control opportunities in that all parcels have adequate southern exposure. All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic. 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. The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. These findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. S\S\25139.TPM 11 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the following recommendation to the City Council: Adopt the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map 25139; and Adopt Resolution 91 - approving Parcel Map 25139 based on the findings contained herein and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. vgw Attachments: 2. 3. 4. Resolution Conditions of Approval Environmental Assessment Exhibits: A. Vicinity Map B. SWAP Map C. Zoning Map D. Tentative Parcel Map 2510~" J s~s~2s~39.~Pu 12 RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 25139 TO SUBDIVIDE A 97.3 ACRE PARCEL INTO 66 PARCELS AND A 6.8 ACRE OPEN SPACE ACRE LOCATED SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF DIAZ ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-120-018 WHEREAS, 50 Century City Associates filed Tentative Parcel Map No. 25139 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Tentative Parcel Map application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tentative Parcel Map on October 7, 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 Tentative Parcel Map; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Findinos. 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. S\S\25139.TPM 13 (2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: (8) 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 Tentative 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 recommending approval of 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 Tentative Parcel Map No. 25139 proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. S\S\25139,TPM 14 (b) There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interfcrence with the future adopted general plan i: 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 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 S\S\2S139.TPM 15 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) The proposed parcel map will not have a 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 in that the proposed commercial - industrial subdivision is consistent with the SWAP Light Industrial Land Use Designation, the Manufacturing - Service Commercial Zone, and existing land uses in the vicinity. 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 in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivision's in the vicinity. d) The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project conforms to the current zoning for the site and to Ordinance No. 460, Schedule E. e) The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lots, access, and density. s\s~2s~ s9 .TP~ 16 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 prepared for this project. g) The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future passive energy control opportunities in that all parcels have adequate southern exposure. h) All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic. 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. 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) These findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Tentative Parcel 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. s~s~2s~ 39.T,M 17 SECTION 3. Conditions. That the City of '1 emecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 25139 for the subdivision of a 97.3 acre parcel into 66 parcels and a 6.8 acre open space parcel located southwesterly of the future extension of Diaz Road and known as Assessods Parcel No. 909-120-018 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. SECTION 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of October, 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 7th day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS S\S\25139.TPM 18 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tentative Parcel Map No. 25139 Project Description: To create 66 parcels and a 6.8 open space acre on a 97.3 acre site Assessor's Parcel No.: 909-120-026 Planning 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 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 parcel 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. 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. S\S\25139.TPM 19 8. 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 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. 10. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated November 13, 1990, a copy of which is attached. 11. The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated July 9, 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 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits. 12. The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the County Fire Department's letter dated August 27, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 13. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the County Geologist's transmittals dated July 20, 1988 (revised November 3, 1989) and January 18, 1989 (revised November 3, 1989), which are attached. 14. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho Water District transmittal dated November 20, 1989, a copy of which is attached. 15. 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 M-SC 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. 16. 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. S%S\25139.TPM 20 17. 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. 18. The following notes shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet: 19. "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 outdoor lighting policy as outlined in the Southwest Area Plan. "Archaeological and paleontological monitoring of grading is required, and summary reports shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits." "Part of the site is located in the 100 year flood plain of Murrieta Creek. Measures to remove the project site from the flood plain are listed in the conditions of approval." "The site is traversed by a potentially active earthquake fault. The map includes a restricted use zone in which no structures for human occupancy are allowed." Prior to the issuance of GRADING 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. Parkways shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or a transition into the primary use area of the site. Landscape elements shall include earth berming, ground cover, shrubs and specimen trees. Front yards shall be landscaped and street trees planted. Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent trees at key visual focal points within the project. S\S\25139 .TPM 2 1 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. Landscaping plans shall incorporate native and drought tolerant plants where appropriate. All existing specimen trees and significant rock outcroppings on the subject property shall be shown on the project's grading plans and shall note those to be removed, relocated and/or retained. 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. Cut slopes shall be landscaped as soon as possible after grading. 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. 20. 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. 21. Prior to the issuance of grading permits a qualified archaeologist shall conduct a stratified surface sampling of archaeological site CA-RIV 237 and shall excavate 20 to 30 one cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and significance of the site. Based on the results of these tests, the extent of further sampling and data collection will be determined. A S\S\25139.TPM 22 22. 23. qualified archaeologist shall also monitor grading activities and shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading activity to allow recovery of cultural resources. A Native American representative shall be present during archaeological testing and during grading and shall also have the authority to temporarily halt or divert grading activity. A 100% surface collection, mapping, soils testing, subsurface testing and mapping a 3 to 5 cubic meters of excavation shall be conducted at archaeological site WSP-1 in order to determine the extent and significance of the site and whether further testing and/or collection is warranted. A report of findings shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of grading permits. A CA-RIV number shall be assigned to the site and shown on the environmental constraints sheet. Prior to issuance of grading permits a certified stephens kangaroo rat biologist shall ascertain if stephens kangaroo rats inhabit the site and shall submit a report to the Planning Department. If any stephens kangaroo rats are found, a 10(a) permit for incidental take must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits. Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: 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 of the map requiring landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to, parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front yard landscaping. Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from view of surrounding property. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of twenty five (25) feet with at least 10 feet landscaped. Archaeological and paleontological summary reports shall be submitted to the Planning Department delineating cultural or fossil resources encountered during grading, recovery procedures and an inventory of recovered items, and a statement of their scientific significance. 24. 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. s\s\2 s ~ 39 .TPM 23 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. 25. 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. 26. 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. 25139, 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. 27. All utility systems including gas, electric,(excepting electrical lines rated 33kv or greater), 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. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements: 28. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer and City Attorney. The CC&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 CC&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 CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense. The CC&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. S\S%25139.TPM 24 The CC&R'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 CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas and facilities. The landscape and architecture standards shall be incorporated by reference into the CC&R's. The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. g The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The 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. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the association or other means acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to the Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to issuance of building permits. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds, and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. 29. 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 CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet s~s\2s~ 39 .TPM 2 5 changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&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. 30. 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). Deoartment of Public Works The following are the Department of Public Works 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 appropriate staff person of the Department of Public Works. It is understood that the Developer has correctly shown on the tentative map all existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review. PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 31. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Rancho California Water District; Eastern Municipal Water District; Riverside County Flood Control district; City of Temecula Fire Bureau; Planning Department; Department of Public Works; Riverside County Health Department; CATV Franchise; and Parks and Recreation Department. S\S\25139.TPM 26 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall continue in force until the City acceptsor abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of Public Works. Prior to recordation all appropriate Lot Line Adjustments and street vacations shall be processed and recorded as directed by the Departments of Planning and Public Works. Additional property for Parcel 1 must be legally obtained and boundary adjusted to proposed centerline of Cherry Street. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Diaz Road shall be improved with 76 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. 101, (100'/76'). Via Industria shall be improved with 64 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. 102, (88'/64). Streets "A," "B," "C" and "D" shall be improved with 56 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. 111, Section (78'/56'). Winchester Road shall be improved with 38 feet of half street improvement plus one 12 foot lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within a 64 foot dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 101, Section (100'/76'). Cherry Street shall be improved with 28 feet of half street improvement plus one 12 foot lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted within a 54 foot dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 111, (78'/56'). If construction is to be phased, the landowner/developer shall acquire sufficient public offsite rights-of-way to provide for secondary access road(s) to a paved and maintained road as may be needed. Said access road(s) shall be constructed in accordance with County Standard No. 106, Section B, (32'/60') at a grade and alignment approved by the Department of Public Works. S\S\25139.TPM 27 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 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. Parcels fronting Winchester Road, Diaz Road, Via Industria and Cherry Street shall limit access to joip~ use access driveways. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Diaz Road and Winchester Road and so noted on the final map with the exception of Public Street Intersections and driveway openings as approved by the Department of Public Works and as shown on the Tentative Map. Cul de sacs shall be designed and constructed per County Standard No 800A. 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. Provisions shall also be made to provide for maintenance of all onsite drainage facilities as directed by the Department of Public Works. Where applicable 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. 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 Department of Public Works. 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, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate. b. Storm drain facilities. S\S\25139,TPM Landscaping (street and parks). Sewer and domestic water systems. 28 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. e. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. f. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. The street design, grading and improvement concept of this project shall be coordinated with Assessment District 155 and adjoining developments. Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in accordance with the requirements of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the Department of Public Works. Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department of Public Works 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 Building and Safety Department. The minimum centerline radii shall be 500 feet or as approved by the Department of Public Works. All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 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 Department of Public Works. A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent. 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 401 (curb sidewalk). The subdivider shall submit two (2) prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the Department of Public Works. 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 24" 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 report shall also address setback requirements for fault line areas. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. The subdivider shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report to the Department of Public Works. The repoP; shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. All drainage facilities shale be installed as required by the Department of Public Works. 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." A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the recorded drainage easement shall be submitted to the City for review prior to the recordation of the final map. 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. 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. A portion of 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 and with the rules and regulations of FEMA for development within a Flood Zone "A" which may include obtaining a letter of map revision from FEMA. 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. S\S\25139.TPM 30 PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 71. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public works. 72. A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of- way. 73. All Conditions of Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District letter dated July 9, 1991, shall be complied with. 74. 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. 75. The subdivider shall submit a haul route plan including, but not limited to, specific information related to truck loads, destination, permission and clearance letters as requested. 76. During grading, the slope should be geologically mapped by an Engineering Geologist to verify that the soils and geologic conditions encountered do not differ significantly from those assumed in the slope stability report prepared by Leighton and Associates dated November 17, 1988. If geologic conditions differ from those assumed, buttressing may be required to stabilize the slope. PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT: 77. A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 78. 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. 79. 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 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 S~S~2S~3S.T.M 31 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 security to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the security 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 thereof. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY: 80. 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. 81. Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Traffic control plans shall be provided as directed by the Department of Public Works, and may be required to be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. 82. 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 94 of the State Standard Specifications. Transportation Engineering PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 83. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works and shall be included in the street improvement plans. 84. Plans for traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of Winchester Road North at Diaz Road, Via Industria at Cherry Street and Winchester Road at Cherry Street, and shall be included in the street improvement plans with the second plan check. s~s~2s~ 3s.'rPu 32 85. The developer shall execute a Reimbursement Agreement for the design and construction of traffic signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz Road, Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle East. The percent of costs and the warrants for these signals shall be as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to recordation. 86. The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with the City of Temecula to contribute a pro-rata share to the construction of the extension of Diaz Road to Washington Street/Rancon Center Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland overcrossing, Winchester Road restriping to six lanes, and the western bypass corridor as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to recordation. 87. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering for the design requirements prior to recordation. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS: 88. 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 Department of Public Works. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS: 89. All traffic signals, signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan and as directed by the Department of Public Works per the approved focused traffic analysis. 90. All landscaping installation within corner cutoff areas at all intersections and adjacent to all driveways shall provide for adequate sight distance. 91. Stop signs shall be installed within the project boundary at the intersections of local streets. 92. Diaz Road shall be striped with left turn pockets at each intersection adjacent to the project. $\S\25139,TPM 33 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH RECEIVEEj ::: November 13. 1990 CITY OF TEMECULA 43180 BUSINESS P_RK DRIVE TEMECULA, CA 92390 AllN: S'l'~'E JIANNINO RE: PARCEL MAP NO. 25139: PORTION PARCEL I NO. 4646 P.M. 6175 RECORDS RIVP/~SIDE COUNTY. (64 LOTS) OF PARCEL MAP Dear Gentlemen: The Department of Public Health has reviewed Parcel MaD N0. 25139 and recommends that: A water system shall be installed accordina to plans and specifications as aDproved by the water company and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the water system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet. alonQ with the orlaxnal drawing to the County Surveyor. The prints shall show the internal Pipe d~ameter, locatlon of valves and fxre hydrants: p~pe and 3oint specifications, and the sxze of the main at the 3unct~on of the new system to the ex~stlna system. The plans shall comply in all respects with Div. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety Code, California Admln~stratlve Code, T~tle 22, Chapter 18, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utxllties Commission of the State of California, when applicable. The plans shall be s~qned bv a registered ena~neer and water company with the follow~nC certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in Parcel MaD 25139 is in accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water Dxstrlct and that the water service, storace. and d~str~butlon system w~ll be adequate to provide water service to such Parcel City of Temecula Paae Two Attn: Steve 3iannxno NovembeF 13, 1990 This certification does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to such parcel map at any specific quantities, flows or pressures for fire protection or any other Purpose". This certification shall be signed by a responsible official of the water company. T_ke plans m~ D_~..!~_~3_~ke~.i~..~h~_.Countv $urvevor'~ Office to reviej___~ This subdivision has a statement from Rancho California Water District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand providing satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It will be necessary for financial aFrangements to be made prior to the recordatlon of the final map. This subdivision is within the Rancho California Water District and shall be connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as aDproved by the District, the County Surveyor and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate. alon0 with the original drawing, to the County Surveyor. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, plpe and .3olnt specifications and the size of the sewers at the Junction of the new system to the existing 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 dlstrlct with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the sewer system in Parcel No. E5139 is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed parcel City of Temecula Pa(~e Three Attn: Steve Jiannlno November 13, 1990 Tb_e_]~.!~D s__..m_U__s_._t_.__._be._s_Wb_m.__x_t.~t ed___t__o__t b_~..___C_o_U.n_.t_ v Sur vevo r ' s _Q_f_f__x__c_e_ weeks Drlor._t__o_ the reque.sh_f__o_f___t_b_e. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be completely flnal~zed prior to recordat~on of the final maD. -- am nvxronmental Health Specialist SM:dr IV KENNETH L EDWARDS RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNkA 92502 July 9, 1991 City of Temecula City Hall 43180 Business Park Dr., Ste. Temecula, California 92390 200 Attention: Planning Department Steve Jiannino Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: Parcel Hap 25139 Amended No. 3 This is a proposal to divide 97.3 acres into commercial parcels located south of the intersection of Diaz Road and Cherry Street. This property is located adjacent to Murrieta Creek and approxi- mately one half of the parcels are located within the 100 year flood plain limits of the creek. The District is currently developing a final design for improvement of Murrieta Creek with the assistance of a seven member citizens' committee appointed by the Board of Supervisors. Because of the complexity of the hydraulic and environmental factor involved, and to ensure orderly development, the District will design the entire Murrieta Creek improvement. Piecemeal design of portions of this major regional flood control project is not acceptable to the District. Following development of an acceptable design, the District intends to pursue a funding mechanism for the required improvements, probably by means of an assessment district over the flood plain. The right of way needed for Murrieta Creek in this area is 250 feet each side of the centerline. This includes a 50-foot habitat mitigation strip on each side which will be returned if it is not needed. This property is also affected by the runoff which approaches it from the hills to the southwest. High, steep cut slopes up to 116 feet are proposed here which intersect flows from several canyons. These canyons can produce debris laden flows which must be safely and reliably collected and conveyed down the steep slopes to ensure protection of the proposed project. The collection/conveyance system for these slopes as proposed is not sufficient to meet the District's concerns. 5:, ,::f Temecu!a De: Parcel MaD 25129 Amended No. 2 - 2 - _'~l? 9, 1991 rc,'%D~,'ng a,-e the DIstrlct's recommendations In otter- t? pr_:eit t>e $-,~ L health and safety: A potLoon of the proposed project :s in a f!ooOpla~:~ ar'.d affect "waters of the Un~ed States", "~e~]ands" or d~ctional streambeds", ~herefo~e, ~n accordance w~th reCu:rements of the National Flood Insurance Program and Related Regulat~ons (44 CFR, Parts 59 through 73) and 2rd-nance NO. 458: A flood study consosting of HEC-2 calculations, ,srzss sections, maps and other data should be prepared to tr, e sa=:s~ast~on cf the Federal Emergency ~ana~eme-: (FEMA) and the C,~str~ct for the purpose of re,~s~ng effect~,,e F]ood Insurance Ra~e Map of the pro]oct. s4te. The submittal of the stud)' should be concurrent w~n the :n~tial submittal of the related project ~mpro',emen: a~-ts and final District approval w~lt not be unto7 a Conditional Letter of Map Re.,.:s on rCLOMR !':as ~een received from FEMA. A Copy of appropriate Correspondence ~ns recess~- permits from those government agencies from wP,~c!% proval is requared by Federal or S~ate law/sac!, as Corps of Engineers 404 permit or Department of F~sF-i and Game 1603 agreement) should be prov:ded to the D~str':L prio~ to the f~nal Distr~ct approval cf the proJet:. parcel map is located w~th-ln tile :lm~ts of the 'eta Creek/Temecu~a Val le) ~rea Stair, age Plan ~c: dro!r~age ~ees nave been aCopt:ed by the Board:. Z':'~ :;x~e '=ee: sha'i' De -a~d as set forth under t~e p:-c, ,s:cr:,~ cf "Rules and Pegu]a~qons for Adm-,n~strat~or~ u= Are~ P2ans", amended February 16, 1988: Drainage fees sha:] De palc to, the Tra'!tpcrt3t~ur' 2.-:,r- : t~ :f Temecu'a Parce'~ ~ap 25139 ~mendea ,'40, 3 3 Ju':) 9, I'391 At the option of the ian~ dl,/!der, upon f~3~n,;; a quire: affidavi~ '-equest~ng deferment of %Re :aymer:t fees, the drainage fees may be paid to the OHrector at the tame of :ssuance of a graa~r:g perm-% bu~:d~n9 permit for each approved parcel, whichever' be first obtained after ~he recording of the subd~ fsnal map or par:e3 map; provided however, this opt to defer the fees may not be exercised for any par:e: where grading cr :trusturea have been initiated on parcel w~thin the prior 3 year period, or permits either actffvity have been ~ssued on that pards: .~k. remain actlye. ;r~Or tO !n!t'iation of the flna3 Const, ructaon cra~':~G these fac,~it~es required to be built as part e~ tr, e Murr~eta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drannage Plat', :,,e de've:oper should contact the P~'/ers~de Count) Fq2. o: an: Water Conservatfion D~str~ct t'~ ascer-ta-,n the %e ,:.~qd-:t~ons of design, consLru:%icr,, ',napearners, tr~nzfe · ghts rcF way, proOect c~ed~t in qieu of fees arc meqt schedules which may' appi). Title reports and !ns~.raqce must be provided far a]~ r~ght of way t. be , zerreo to the D~strict. The de~elsper should r~c, te the e~t,fr:ated cost for required area drainage DTa:, za:, - tes e~,ceeds the required drainage fees and tr.e Qe,'e~c,~'6, ~:shes to receive credit for re]mDursement ~n e,~-ess ~'¢ the facisi+-es will be construote~ as a ~,,!c c. sntract, Scheduling for construction of these faci!%%~es ~,::l De at the dlscretson of the D-Ls~rict. Har.:eta Creek C~anne! should be consLructec ;.ropssec p~cSect des'igr: ,ncludin9 haL,tat mit!gat~ar: measures required by the various resource agencies. cor~st~uct4ng the channe~ ]mprcvemenLs :he cooperate ~n the formation of metban!am such as a cDmmun~ty assessment d~strsct tc Da> :Dr- tY, e cost of the pr'cposec Hurtlet: Cree~ Channel ~mprovements, r-gr!t ~ way =~ MuFF!eta ~reeF inc!ud~r:~ :r!e ares ~eC~,red for habitat m~t~gat~or, Should be dec-catcd t,:- t%e ~C'L. The r':~ht -f ~ ~: ~a>' needed for Nurr~eta ,2~ee~ :r area ~s 250 feet Sash side of ~he cen~erline. Th,s .~slu:es a 50-foot habitat m-rig:rich strip on each side ~l De redo'ned :~ ~ -s not needed. ~'+ of Temecu!3 ~e: Parcel Map e=l~a Amended NC. : - 4 - Jul> 9, !991 11. 12. The fac:]~t~es collecting and Conve)'lng flows down the cut scopes from :he n~!]s %o the southwest snOu:G De re- signed us:rig the Distr:ct's Drainage Standards re- Slopes. dated November e, !990, and attached noretc. Pads on th~s s~te shall be elevated a minimum of 12 in':'-e:: ago',,e the 'C:' year water surface elevation for a pea~ charge rate of 2e,500 cfs ~n Murr~eta Creek. Ons~te drainage fac,:i:t~es located outside of road rig]t .: way should be contained within drainage easements a-s~'-:.. the zlr~al map. A note should De added to the fq,,a~ ma~, sta:~qg, "D-all:age easements shall De Kept free .L~ :,~ 2 ,- an~ cbst!-uct~ons" Cf{s:te drainage facilities should be located w~Lh'zrl cared dra:r~age easements obtained from the offester owner(,~), Dccumer:t(sl should De recorded arc a cosy ted to the ~:str~ct prior to recordat~on of the f~na: map. A~' lots should be graded to drain to the adjacent s:'ee: '. an aeec~ate cut'iet. The 10 year storm flow should be conta~ne~ within t!'.e c.,rL ariC the 100 )ear storm flow should be contained street r~ght Of way. When e~ther of these Criteria e>;eeoed, adC~t~onal drainage fac(!ities should De :nst~l- led, Oralrage ~acl!itles Dtl=~t,na sump coRdcroons ShD';': des'gr'ed ~c. ccr. vey the :rsb!jtary 10'2' year SL©rff, ~C,w~. Additcna! emergency escape sr, ouic also De cro',~seC. The property's street and lot grading should be designed a manner that pe,petuates the e~ist~ng natara' patterns w~th respect to tributary drainage area arc points. encroachment permit should be obtained Distrqct fac:]~t,es or witPnn D]str:ct right of wa>, TMe en:rcachment Derm:: applecat',on should be crocesseC an~ ap:ro'veC concwrCentl2 w~th Lhe ~mprovement plat;s, If the tract ,s Du~:t :n phases, each phase shall be tested =--~ the -,!: Int ,,ea~ tr',butary storm f!ows. %'-, cf Temecu!a Pa¢cel Map 25139 ~mendec No. S 5 - jul~ B, 199! 19. 2O. Temporar? erosion controt measures shou;d Ce :msie~rer;:ec :mmediate!y following rough grading :o sre.~ent aep3s:t::~n debr:s on~o downstream properties Development of th:s property should be coordinate: ~th the development of adjacent propert3es to ensure tha~ water- courses remain unobstructed and stormwaters are no~ d~,,erte: from One watershed to another. Th~s may require the con-- struc, t~on of temporary dra3nage facilities or offsl~e str~:t::>n and grading, 7nspection and maintenance of the storm drain system to be built w:tff, th~s tract must be performed by e~the' the Transp'irt&t~on Department or the Flood .2or~tro~ The engineer (owner) must request !it, writing) t~-~at one %hose agencies accept the proposed storm dr'a-.n system. The request should note the tract number, location, af~d br~efl:,' describe the system (sizes and lengths). Request tc the gistr~ct shcu3d be addressed to Kenneth L. Edwards, C!*,-e En~!-,eer, Attn: Frank J. Peaits, Chief of P~anr::ng :f the 2,~strict is w~ll~ng to accept the system, a: agree merit between the owner and the District must be e,ecutec. request to draw up an agreement must be sen: t3 t. he ~:~t to the attention of N~chael D. Rawson. A~ ~!ood control facilities should be constructed t,~s: standards. All facilities that the Distr:c% assJme for maintenance will require the pa)ment of a one t~me maintenance cbarge equal to the "present woCth' m~ntenance costs from the time cf acceptance through 1998. The ~pplicant's engineer should so:Laot the :~-,.~', Zhec;, section to schedule a pre-des:gr: aeet'n~ be.~cre eng~leer slates detailed pro~ec~ desigr'i. Tf th~s project will disturb f~ve or more acres sr ~s par- of a larger project that will d~sturb fi,,e c. more acres ~,:l! require a Nattonal Pc!~utant Disor, argo Elim~nat~cn S)sLem (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources C::r,trc: Beard. Clearance for grading or resordat~an will t~st be 9~,en unt~~ the project has been granted a permit or ~s Showr! tG be ezempt. ; cop] cf the 3mprovernent plans, grading plans ant f a3cng w~:h supportan9 hyctologsc and hydraulic calcu!at shall be subm3~ted ts the Distric~ v~a the TranspDrta::c Department for review Dr:or So reccrdat~on of the f:n&i Grading plans should be &Sprn','eC prlor to issuance of grad- :nS perm:Ss. ~t~ ~f Temect~la Parce~ Map 25~39 Amended Nc. 3 July 9, 199! Effective July 29, 199!, per Ordinance 671, all subm:tta:s shal~ be aate st, amped by the engineer aria s~bm]tted d!rect]: tc the Fljod Control District along w~th a comp:etec Fmood Contro~ improvement Cost Sheet and the appropr~a:e plan cheep fee. Questions concernlng this matter may be referred to Zully Smlth of *i-.:s office at 7t4/275-1210. c: A]ba Eng]neerlng V ry ru~, OHN~~.KASHUBA · Civil En95neer ZS:blp RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT IN COOPERATION WITH THE GALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION GLEN J. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF AUGUST 27, 199L PLANNING & ENGINEERING 46,209 OASIS STREET, SUITE 405 INDIO, CA 92201 (619) 342-8886 PLANNING & ENGINEERING 3760 12TH STREET RIVERSIDE. CA 92501 (714) 275-4777 TO: CITY OF TEMECULA ATTN: RE: PLANNING DEPARTMENT PARCEL MAP 25139 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 fi~e protection standards: FIRE PROTECTION The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 5000 GPM and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant shall be 2500 GPM for hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. Approved super fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2-2½") shall be located at each street intersection and spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction, with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to 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 Dept." 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. All questions regarding the meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Fire Department Planning and Engineering staff. RAYMOND H. REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner ml Laura Cabral, Fire Safety Specialist RiVERSiDE COUrt;,u PL,Annin( DEP, R; IEnr July 20, 1988 (Revised November 3, 1989) Leighton and Associates 27715 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 109 Rancho California, California 92390 Attention: Mr. Mark Bergman Mr. Daniel Chu SUBJECT: Liquefaction Hazard Project No. 118602325-02 Tentative Parcel Map 25139 APN: 909-120-018 County Geologic Report No. 527 Rancho California Area Gentlemen: We have reviewed your report entitled "Phase I Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential for Parcel Map 21502, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA," dated June 23, 1988. Your report determined that the potential for liquefaction exists on the site for an earthquake of 6.0 magnitude and horizontal ground acceleration of 0.369. The site is within one mile of the Wildomar fault. The zone of liquefaction is shown on Plate 1, Geotechnical Map of your report. Your report recommended that one of the following alternatives should be considered. Placement of fill (approximately 10 feet in thickness total to an approximate elevation of 1,033 feet m.s.1) on Lots 48 through 51 ( Tentative Parcel Map 21502} to increase the overburden pressure. Based on the preliminary plans, the remaining lots identified as in the liquefiable zone will have between 15 feet to 28 feet of fill placed. This appears to be of adequate depth for mitigating the liquefaction potential. Densification of the alluvium between 20 feet to 40 feet of the subsurface cohesionless material to at least 92 percent relative compaction as determined by ASDTM D1557-78, by vibroflotation dynamic compaction, or other techniques. 3. Placement of the structures on piles to bypass the liquefiable zone. 4. Utilizing post tensioned slabs for the proposed structures. 4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 (714) 787'6181 46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304 INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201 (619) 342'8277 Leighton and Associates - 2 - July 20, 1988 (Revised November 3, 1989) Alternatives 1 and 2 will reduce the potential for liquefaction of the cohesionless material found in borings B-4 and B-5. Alternatives 3 and 4 will not mitigate the liquefaction potential, but will allow measures for mitigation should liquefaction occur. 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 hereby given. We recommend that the following note be placed on the Parcel Map prior to its recordation: "County Geologic Report No. 527 was prepared for this property on June 23, 1988 by Leighton and Associates and is on file at the Riverside County Planning Department. The specific items of interest are liquefaction and seismic design of structures. These items affect Parcels 1 through 9, 18 through 40, and 46 through 53." The recommendations made in your report for mitigation of liquefaction potential shall be adhered to in the design and construction of this project. Very truly yours, RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Roger S. Streeter - Planning Director / teven A. Kupferman ngineering Geologist CEG-1205 SAK:al c.c. Rancon Corp. Norm Lostbom - Building & Safety (2) Planning Team 1 - John Chiu RiVERSiDE count.u PL nnin( DEP, ARCfilEnr January 18, 1989 (Revised November 3, 1989) Leighton and Associates 27715 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 109 Rancho California, CA 92390 Attention: Mr. Mark Bergmann Mr. Daniel Chu SUBJECT: Fault Hazard-CEQA Project No. 11860325-02 Tentative Parcel Map 25139 APN: 909-120o018 County Geologic Report No. 527 F Rancho California Area Gentlemen: We have reviewed the fault hazard aspects of your report entitled "Geotechnical Report for a Phase II Fissure and Subsidence Investigation and Phase III Geotechnical Investigation for Parcel Map No. 21507, Rancho California, Riverside County, CA," dated August 29, 1988, your revised report dated November 17, 1988, and your response to County review dated November 17, 1988. Your report determined that: A previously unmapped, active branch of the Elsinore fault zone was encountered in exploratory trenches excavated on this project. This branch is tentatively being called the "Murrieta Creek Fault." Therefore, the possibility of damage due to ground rupture is high in the vicinity of this fault. The Willard Branch of the Elsinore Fault Zone transects the extreme western portion of the property in a northeasterly to southwesterly direction and was determined to be potentially active or Pre-Hol ocene. A peak bedrock acceleration of 0.61g could occur at the site should a magnitude 6.0 earthquake occur along the Wildomar fault, located 3200 feet northeast. 4. No landslide deposits were encountered nor are any ancient landslides known to exist at the site. 5. The eastern one-third of the site is located within the 100 year flood plain. 6. The >ossibility of seiches, tsunamis and inundation due to failure of large water storage facilities is considered very low. 4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 (714) 787-6181 46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304 INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201 (619) 342-8277 Leighton and Associates - 2 - January 19, 1989 {Revised November 3, 1989} A zone of open fissuring approximately 20 feet wide was observed within the alluvium in the exploratory trenching. The potential for fissuring and ground subsidence due to ground water withdrawal is considered to be high in the vicinity of the "Murrieta Creek fault." Your report recommended that: A fault and fissure setback zone should be established along the active trace of the "Murrieta Creek fault" encountered on the site. The setback zone should be established 50 feet from the furthest limits of faulting. Within the fault setback zone, structures for human occupancy may not be constructed. The location of the fault setback zone is shown on the Geotechnical Map, Plate 1 in your November 17, 1988 report. A monitoring program has been initiated at the site to evaluate the amount of ground movement associated with subsidence and possible variations in the depth to groundwater. The readings from this monitoring program will continue to be taken on a weekly basis until such time that site construction and development precludes procurring additional data, or the readings remain substantially unchanged. Proposed structures within 200 feet of the fault setback zone should be constructed with post-tensioned floor slabs to help mitigate potential problems with ground cracking. The post-tensioned slabs should be constructed in accordance with the recommendations of a qualified structural engineer. The engineer should design the slabs to withstand a I inch differential settlement in 5 horizontal feet. In addition, all building pads within 200 feet of the fault setback zone should have a 5 foot minimum fill below the pad. All cut lots and all fill lots with less than 5 feet of fill will need to be overexcavated and recompacted to provide the 5 foot minimum. This special foundation zone is shown on the Geotechnical Maps, Plate 1 in your report. 4. All surface runoff should be collected and directed offsite. Uncompacted, exploratory trench backfill should be completely removed and recompacted prior to placement of fills, where exposed at the pad finished grade or within 10 feet in depth from the pad finished grade to the top of the trenches. 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. We recommend that the following conditions be satisfied before final recordation of the map or issuance of any County permits associated with this project: Leighton and Associates - 3 - January 19, 1989 (Revised November 3, 1989) The Recommended Fault Setback Limits shown on the Geotechnical Map, Plate 1 in the report shall be delineated on the Environmental Constraints Sheet (E.C.S.). The areas within the Recommended Fault Setback Limits shall be labeled "FAULT HAZARD AREA." 2. The following notes be placed on the E.C.S.: CA) "This property is affected by earthquake faulting. Structures for human occupancy shall not be allowed in the Fault Hazard Area. This constraint affects parcel numbers 8, 9, 10, 18, 19, 39, 40, 46 and 47." (b) "County Geologic Report No. 527F was prepared for this property on November 17, 1988 by Leighton and Associates, and is on file at the Riverside County Planning Department. Specific items of concern are as follows: earthquake faulting, fissuring and ground subsidence, seismic design of structures, flooding, and uncompacted trench backfill." Notes 2(a} and 2{b) above shall also be placed on the final Parcel Map with the following addition to Note No. 2(a} "...as shown on the accompanying Environmental Constraints Sheet, the original of which is on file at the office of the Riverside County Surveyor." A copy of the final map and Environmental Constraints Sheet shall be submitted to the Planning Department Engineering Geologist for review and approval. The recommendations made in your report shall be adhered to in the design and construction of this project. Very truly yours, RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Roger S. Str eter - Planni g Direct?/ Engineering Geologist 7 CEG-1205 SAK:al c.c. Diaz Road InVestors c/o Rancon Corp. Greiner Engineering - Merl Schultz Earl Hart - CDMG Building & Safety - Norm Lostbom (2) Board of Directors: James A. Darby President Jeffrey L, Minkler 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 R, MeAljester Director of Operations & Maintenance Edward P. Lemons Director of Engineenng Linda M. Fregoso DIstrict Secretar~ McCormick & Kidman Legal Counsel November 20, 1989 Riverside County Planning Department 4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor Riverside, California 92501-3657 Subject: Water Availability Reference: Parcel Map 25139 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 (including all in-tract facilities) between RCWD and the property owner. Currently, the District has an inter-agency agreement with Eastern Municipal Water District to provide sewer service to your area. All plan check submittals will be made to Rancho California Water District. 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 F012B/jkth332f Attachment 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 CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY I Background 1. Name of Proponent: Alba Engineering 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 9968 Hibert Street, San Dieqo (619) 549-3303 3. Date of Environmental Assessment: August 21.1991 4. Agency Requiring Assessment: CITY OF TEMECULA 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Parcel MaD 25139 6. Location of Proposal: Southwest corner of Cherrv Street and Diaz Road II Environmental Impacts (Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.) Yes Maybe No 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? X __ b. Disruptions, displacements, compac- tion or overcovering of the soil? X _ c. Substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features? X __ d. The destruction, covering or modi- fication of any unique geologic or physical features? _ _ X S\S\25139.TPM 34 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? Cm Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X S\S\25139.TPM 35 Yes Maybe No Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? X Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including, but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X Alteration of the direction or rate of flow or ground waters? X Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct addi- tions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations7 X Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? X Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flood- ing or tidal waves? X 4. 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)? X Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants? X Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegetation, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? X S\S\25139.TPM 3 6 d. Substantial reduction in acreage Animal Life. Will the proposal result of any agricultural crop? Yes Maybe No X Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including rep- tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? Noise. Will the proposal result in: ao Increases in existing noise levels? Exposure of people to severe noise levels? Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce substantial new light or glare? Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: Substantial increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? Substantial depletion of any non- renewable natural resource? X X X X X X X X S\S\25139.TPM 37 10. 11. 12. 13. 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 area7 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? Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking? Ce 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? Yes Maybe N_.gq X X X X X X X X X X S\S\25139.TPM 38 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have substantial effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? Parks or other recreational 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? b. Communications systems? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid wasts and disposal? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X X X X X X S\S\25139.TPM 39 17. 18. 19. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? Exposure of people to potential health hazards? Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X s~s~2s~ 39.~PM 40 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 S\S\25139 .TPM 4 1 III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation 1 .a,b,c. Yes. The project will entail 1,430,000 cubic yards of cut and 880,000 cubic yards of fill and will create 1.5:1 cut slopes up to 120 feet high. The revised Slope Stability Analysis prepared for this project states that the cut slopes will be stable against deep-seated failure, arcuate failure under seismic conditions, and surficial failure provided it is free of adverse geologic conditions. The Revised Slope Stability Analysis includes recommendations that an engineering geologist conduct geological mapping during grading to verify that the soils and geologic conditions encountered do not differ significantly from those assumed in the Slope Stability Analysis. If significant differences are encountered, buttressing may be required to stabilize the slope. Cut and fill slopes should be provided with appropriate surface drainage and laf~dscaped as soon as possible after grading. The Tentative Map shows a brow ditch and bench drain at 30 foot intervals in the cut slope. The project will involve the export of 550,000 cubic yards of soil from the site. It shall be a Condition of Approval for Parcel Map 25139 that information regarding the number of truckloads, the haul route, the destination point, and a stockpile permit or an approved grading plan for the recipient site shall be submitted and haul route permit obtained from the City prior to issuance of grading permits. The final disposition of the export soil will be subject to environmental review in conjunction with the project which will use the export soil as fill. 1.d. No. There are no unique geologic or physical features on the site. 1.6. Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are replanted. The wind erosion impact is considered high and significant but will be mitigated through retention of natural vegetation whenever feasible, and use of watering trucks and landscaping disturbed areas after grading. After construction of the project, water run-off is likely to increase due to the addition of impermeable surfaces. Appropriate drainage control devices will have to be approved through the Engineering Department and will have to be designed in accordance with Temecula's standards and the Conditions of Approval. 1.f. No. The subject site is not located near any channel, lake or ocean that would be impacted by deposition or erosion as a result of this project. Drainage improvements and landscaping will prevent soil erosion. S\S\25139.TPM 42 1.g. 2.a,b,c. 3.a. 3.b. 3.c. 3.d. 3.e. 3.f,g. Yes. Portions of the site are susceptible to liquefaction and the site is traversed by an earthquake fault. Liquefaction mitigation measures were described above in item lb. In accordance with the requirements of state law, a restricted use zone based on the geology report is shown on the map. The restricted use zone represents a setback from the earthquake fault on the site, and no structures for human occupancy will be permitted within the restricted use zone. Groundshaking hazards to buildings outside of the restricted use zone are addressed by the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in any impacts to air quality or the climate. Subsequent development proposals will be assessed for potential impacts to air quality and mitigation measures will be required if necessary. No. The portion of the property necessary for the future construction of Murrieta Creek flood control facilities is indicated on the Tentative Parcel Map as a County Channel Easement. There will be no change in the course or direction of water in Murrieta Creek. Yes. The proposed Parcel Map will result in changes in the amount of surface run-off. Improvement of the site will provide for adequate drainage facilities as approved by the City Engineer. No. The project will result in minor, localized redirection of flood waters to the extent necessary to elevate the site above the 1 O0 year flood plain elevation, but the overall course and flow of floodwaters will not be changed. Maybe. Grading and future development of the site may increase the amount of surface run-off flowing into the Murrieta Creek channel. This is not considered a significant impact and is consistent with the provisions of the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan and Assessment District 155. Yes. Grading may result in an increase in turbidity in local surface water. This impact is temporary and is not considered significant. No. Recompaction of soil to mitigate the potential for liquefaction is not expected to result in a significant impact on the direction or rate of flow of ground waters. S\S\25139TPM 43 3.ho No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in any impact on public water supplies. 3.i. No. Prior to recordation of the proposed Parcel Map, the applicant shall obtain a Letter of Map Revision form the Federal Emergency Management Agency indicating that grading of the site or other improvements adequate to ensure that the site will be above the 100 year flood plain elevation. 4.a,b. No. A botanical survey of the site found no sensitive plant species on the site. 4.c. Maybe. Landscaping of the site may introduce some non-native species. This is not considered a significant impact. 4.d. No. The site is not currently used as crop land. 5.a,b. Maybe. Three grasshopper sparrows and evidence of breeding by the Iong-eared owl were observed on the site during the biological survey of the site. Although neither species had any official status when the biology report was written, they have been listed by the Audobon Society as declining species. The recommended mitigation is to retain an intact open area on the west side of the site. The Tentative Parcel Map shows a 6.8 acre open space area on the west side of the site. 5.c. Yes. The project will involve a los of grass land and chaparral which provides foraging habitat for birds, mammals, and reptiles. In regional terms the loss of foraging habitat is an incrementally adverse but non- significant impact which will be mitigated by the measures described above in section 5b. 6.a. Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in increased noise levels during grading. This impact will be temporary and is not considered significant because the site is not near any noise sensitive land uses. 6.b. No. Future development proposals will be reviewed for potential noise impacts and land uses which generate severe noise will be prohibited or required to provide adequate noise mitigation. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not cause new light or glare, and subsequent development of the site will be subject to standard conditions prohibiting lighting from impacting adjacent properties and requiring low-glare sodium rapor lights. sxs~2s~39.T.u 44 8. No. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zone and the land use designation in which the property is located. 9.a,b. lO.a,b. 11,12. 13.a,d. 13.b. 13.c,e. 13.f. No. The project will not involve a substantial increase in the rate of consumption of natural or non-renewable resources, No. The proposed Parcel Map will not involve the use of hazardous materials or interference with emergency response or evacuation plans. No. The proposal is not likely to alter the distribution or growth rate of the population or create a demand for new housing. Future development of the site will help address the imbalance of local jobs in relation to existing and approved housing. Yes. Future development of the site is expected to generate approximately 5,180 vehicle trip ends per day. Via Industria is part of a western corridor bypass road which will alter present patterns of circulation. The purpose of the by pass road is to relieve congestion on existing streets. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the project determined that intersections and roadways in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended improvements are implemented, and Via Industria will help to mitigate traffic impacts on Winchester Road approaching I-15. Recommended improvements include the extension of Diaz Road to the City limits, traffic signals at the intersections of Winchester Road and Enterprise Circle, Winchester Road and Diaz Road, Via Industria and Cherry Street, Diaz Road and Winchester Road north, and "A" Street and Diaz Road. These improvements shall be Conditions of Approval. No. Future development of the site will be required to provide adequate off-street parking as appropriate for the particular land use proposed. No. The project will have no impact upon existing transportation systems or upon water, rail, or air traffic. No. The streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended street improvements are implemented. The street improvements will be Conditions of Approval for the proposed Parcel Map. Parcels fronting on Winchester Road, Diaz Road, Via Industria, and Cherry Street shall limit access to joint use driveways. S%S\2513S.TPM 45 14.a.-f. 15.a,b. 16.a.-d,f. 16.e. 17.a,b. 18. 19. 20.a,b,c. No. The project will not result in a need for new public services. Future development will generate an increase .in the need for public services in the areas of fire and police protection and road maintenance. Fire impact mitigation fee, the public facility fee, and taxes will fund the additional public services. No. The project will not result in a substantial use or increase in demand for fuel or other energy sources. No. Future development of the site will require only hook up to or service by existing utility systems and will not result in a need for new or substantially altered utility systems. Yes. The proposed Parcel Maps will involve the construction of the Murrieta Creek channel through the site. The construction of channel improvements will be in compliance with the recommendations of the County Flood Control District and will be provided by the developer or by the developer's participation in an assessment district. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in any potential health hazards. Future development will be assessed for potential health hazards. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in the obstruction of any scenic views. Future development will be reviewed in order to prevent the construction of aesthetically offensive structures or site lay outs. Cut slopes will be landscaped as soon as possible after grading. No. The site is not currently used for recreational purposes. Maybe. The site of Parcel Map 25139 contains a recorded archaeological site (CA-RIV-237) which is believed to encompass approximately 70,000 square meters, part of which is out site of the subject property. During an archaeological surface survey of the site conducted in June of 1991, many pieces of basalt and quartz debitage, fragmented manos and roerates, fire-affected rocks, pestles, hammerstones, and fragments of bowls and pottery were observed. The recommendations of the Archaeological Assessment are to conduct a surface collection of the site and to excavate a sufficient number of one cubic meter subsurface units to determine the depth, spatial extent, and significance of the site. The resulting information shall be used to determine whether the site is a unique resource for the area and whether measures to preserve the site or salvage some percentage of the cultural resources should be implemented. The Archaeological Assessment also S\S%25139 .TPM 46 includes the recommendation that an archaeologist be consulted for any future grading activities. These recommendations shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 25139. In addition, a Native American representative shall be present during the archaeological excavation and also during grading. The property in question also contains another site (WSP-1) which contain a 3/4 circle rock enclosure. The site is possibly a late period campsite. A 100% surface collection, mapping, soils testing, and subsurface testing by excavating 8-10 cubic meters of earth are recommended. In this case, testing procedures are likely to constitute final mitigation. 20.d. No. The site is not used for any religious or sacred purposes. 21 .a. No, Although the project will result in a reduction or foraging habitat, this impact is not considered regionally significant. The 6.8 acres of undisturbed open space on the westerly side of the site for potential biological impacts due to reduction of foraging habitat. 21 .b,c. No. The long term and cumulative traffic impacts of the project will be adequately mitigated by the street improvements recommended by the traffic study which are Conditions of Approval for the proposed Parcel Map. Streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service. 21 .d. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not create any health hazards. Environmental review of future development of the site will address any potential health hazards and mitigations, if necessary, will be required. S\S%25139.TPM 47 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 S\S\25139,TPM 48 // CITY OF TEMECULA_~ *+ ..SITE~ \. VICINITY MAP CASE NO. P.C, DATE CITY OF TEMECULA .LI RLI SWAP MAP /~ O CASE P.C. DATEIO"'7--q~ CITY OF TEMECULA ~ ./ e II ZONE MAP 7~'~' // 7/ CASE NO. C.C. DATE ITEM # 13 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning October 21, 1991 Parcel Map 25408 The above case was scheduled to be heard before the Planning Commission on October 7, 1991. However, prior to the October 7, 1991 Planning Commission meeting the City of Murrieta requested a continuance to review the maps and provide comments. Recommendation: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the following recommendation to the City Council: 1. ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 25408; and ADOPT Resolution 91 -_ approving Tentative Parcel Map No. 25408 based on the analysis contained in the staff report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. vgw S\MEMO$\GAR\25408PM.MEM STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 7, 1991 Case No.: Parcel Map 25408 Prepared By: Scott Wright Recommendation: 1. ADOPT the negative declaration; and 2. ADOPT Resolution 91 -__ recommending approval of Parcel Map No. 25408 APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Phillip T. See REPRESENTATIVE: Greiner, Inc. PROPOSAL: To create 20 parcels and a 6.52 acre open space area on a 36.2 acre site in the Manufacturing-Service Commercial Zone LOCATION: West of Diaz Road, and southwesterly of the future extension of Winchester Road EXISTING ZONING: Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-SC) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: South: East: West: Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M- SC) Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M- SC) Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M- SC) Residential Agriculture, 20 acre minimum (R-A-20) PROPOSED ZONING: Not requested EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant S\Staffrpt\25408 ,PM 1 SURROUNDING LAND USES: PROJECT STATISTICS: BACKGROUND: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ANALYSIS: North: Vacant South: Vacant East: Vacant West: Vacant Gross Site Area: Net Site Area: No. of Parcels: Average Parcel Size: Area of Open Space: Cut = Fill = 36.21 acres 23.68 acres 20 1.18 acres 6.52 acres 1,800,000 cubic yards 500,000 cubic yards Tentative Parcel Map 25408 was submitted to the County on November 14, 1989. The application was reviewed by the County Land Development Committee on December 12, 1989 and was continued pending submittal of the following information: a traffic study, biological and paleontological surveys, soil and liquefaction reports, a slope stability report, and a Planned Industrial Development design manual. Parcel Map 25408 was transmitted to the City on May 1, 1990. City staff requested a traffic study and information regarding property boundaries, the alignment of Winchester Road, slope stability, soil export, archaeological resources, and landscape and architecture standards. The proposal is to create 20 parcels ranging in size from 0.95 acre to 1.39 acres with a total gross area of 36.21 acres. The site is zoned M-SC, Manufacturing - Service Commercial. A 6.52 acre area located in the southwesterly portion of the site will be maintained as an open space area comprising some undisturbed land and some 1.5: 1 cut slopes 80 to 100 feet in height. Gradina The project will involve 1,800,000 cubic yards of cut, 500,000 cubic yards of fill and 1,300,000 cubic yards of soil export. The Engineering Department S\Staffrpt\25408,PM 2 Conditions of Approval include the requirement to obtain a haul route permit and provide information regarding truck loads, the proposed haul route, destination site and stockpile permits and/or approved grading plan at the recipient site with the property owner's permission. These requirements shall be satisfied prior to issuance of grading permits. Staff has concerns relative to grading on this site. However, with the absence of policy relative to grading, Staff's recommendation is to condition the map in such a way as to mitigate, the greatest extent possible, grading impacts of this project. Mitigation measures relative to grading are contained in the project Conditions of Approval. With respect to this issue, the City's General Plan effort will most likely include policies relative to grading. Slope Stability The cut slopes at the southwesterly side of the site are indicated on the tentative map with slope ratios of 1.5:1. The revised slope stability analysis prepared for this project states that the cut slopes will be stable under normal and seismic conditions, provided it is free of adverse geologic conditions. The revised slope stability analysis included recommendations that an engineering geologist conduct geological mapping during grading to verify that the soils and geologic conditions encountered do not differ significantly from those assumed in the slope stability analysis. if significant differences are encountered, buttressing may be required to stabilize the slope. Cut and fill slopes should be provided with appropriate surface drainage and landscaped as soon as possible after grading. The Tentative Map shows a brow ditch and bench drain at 30 foot intervals in the cut slope. The recommendations of the slope stability analysis are Conditions of Approval for the Tentative Parcel Map S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM 3 Traffic and Circulation Future development of the site is expected to generate 1,730 vehicle trip ends per day. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the project determined that projected future traffic based on existing traffic, project generated traffic, and traffic generated by other growth in the area will result in a peak hour level of Service D or better at all intersections within the scope of the traffic study if recommended improvements are implemented. The recommendations include contributing to the extension of Diaz Road, providing traffic signals at certain intersections and contributing to the signalization of other intersections, providing a signing and striping plan, and contributing to the construction of the Overland overcrossing and the restriping Winchester Road to six lanes. These improvements are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval. Additionally, this project, along with PM 25139, will be constructing the first portion of the western bypass corridor from the City's northerly boundary at Douglas Avenue. This portion of the proposed alignment of the corridor has been reviewed and approved by the City's Department of Public Works and found acceptable. ACcess Access to the site will be taken from Winchester Road and Via Industria. All proposed parcels will have frontage on and take access from dedicated streets. Parcels fronting Via Industria shall limit access to joint use access driveways as approved by the Department of Public Works. S\Staffrpt\25408.PM Parcel Size and Dimensions Development standards in the M-SC zone require a minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet and an average width of at least 65 feet where sewers are available and will be utilized. The proposed parcels range from 0.95 acre to 1.41 acres and have average lot widths of over 100 feet. Drainage The site is located within the limits of the Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan and drainage fees shall be paid. All lots shall be graded to drain to the street or an adequate outlet as approved by the City Engineer. Drainage facilities must be designed to covey 100 year storm flows, including 100 year storm runoff tributary to the site, to Murrieta Creek. Street and lot grading will perpetuate existing natural drainage patterns. Evidence of a viable drainage facility maintenance mechanism must be submitted to the County Flood Control District prior to final map recordation. Fossil and Cultural Resources The archaeological assessment states that the site has low potential to be a small food processing site which could address limited archaeological research questions and recommends a 100% surface collection, soils testing, subsurface testing and mapping and 3 to 5 cubic meters of excavation. The site is located on the fossiliferous Pauba Formation. In accordance with the recommendation of the San Bernardino County Museum, the subdivider shall retain a paleontologist to provide monitoring during excavation as well as recovery, reporting, and preservation of specimens found during grading. S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM 5 Biological Impacts The project will result in loss of grassland and chaparral which typically provides foraging habitat for raptors, sparrows, rabbits, gophers, ground squirrels and reptiles. The only sensitive vertebrate observed during the biological survey was a golden eagle. The biologist recommended that a portion of the site abutting the up slope chaparral be maintained in a natural state in order to preserve some foraging habitat. Part of the open space slope at the southwesterly side of the site will be maintained in a natural condition. Although the Biological Survey of the site failed to disclose the presence or signs of Stephens Kangaroo Rats, the Conditions of Approval require the developer to submit a report by a certified Stephens Kangaroo Rat Specialist prior to issuance of grading permits. If any Stephens Kangaroo rats inhabit the site, a lO(a) permit for incidental take must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits. The only plant specimen on the site worthy of note in the biological report is an adolescent Engelmann oak. The oak tree shall be preserved, relocated or replaced at a 10 to 1 ratio or as approved by the Planning Director. Landscape and Architectural Standards The applicant has provided a set of landscape and architectural standards to ensure that development of the site maintains a consistent level of quality. Conformity with the landscape and architectural standards will be required of all future development on the site. The landscape and architectural standards shall be incorporated by reference into the project's Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions. S\Staffrpt\25408,PM 6 Water and Sewer Availability The Rancho California Water District has an interagency agreement with the Eastern Municipal Water District to provide sewer service to the area in which the site is located. Water and sewer service will be available from the Rancho California Water District upon completion of financial arrangements between the property owner and the District. Lot Line Adjustments and Street Realignments The formation of Assessment District 155 included a realignment of the right of way for the future extension of Winchester Road west of Diaz Road. Since the centerline of the right of way constituted the boundary between properties, the realignment resulted in changes to property boundaries. The subject parcel map was affected by a realignment of Winchester Road. In order to prevent discrepancies in the legal descriptions of the property at the time of recordation, staff has required that the applicant and other affected property owners eliminate the discrepancies by filing lot line adjustments, street vacations, and offers of rededication reflecting the new alignment of Winchester Road and the resulting changes in property boundaries. These requirements must be met prior to final map recordation. SOUTHWEST AREA PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY: The proposed parcels conform to the development standards of the M-SC Zone. The M-SC Zone is consistent with the Light Industrial Land Use Designation in which the site is located. There is a reasonable probability that the project will be consistent with the Future General Plan in that the project is consistent with existing development and approved subdivisions in the area. S%Staffrpt\25408.PM 7 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: FINDINGS: The Initial Study prepared for Parcel Map 25408 indicates that the project will not result in any environmental impacts which cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance and a Negative Declaration in recommended. The proposed parcel map will not have a significant negative impact on the environment, as determined in the initial Study performed for the project. A Negative Declaration is recommended for adoption. There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the Future General Plan being prepared at this time in that the proposed commercial-industrial subdivision is consistent with the Swap Light Industrial Land Use Designation, the Manufacturing-Service Zone and existing land uses in the vicinity. 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 in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivisions in the vicinity. The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project conforms to the current zoning for the site and to Ordinance No. 460, 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. S\StaffrPt\25408,1~M 8 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 10. 11. 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 prepared for this project. The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future passive energy control opportunities in that all parcels have adequate southern exposure. All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic. 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. The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. These findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the following recommendation to the City Council: 1. Adopt the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map 25408; and Adopt Resolution 91- approving Parcel Map 25408 based on the finding contained herein and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM 9 vgw Attachments: 2. 3. 4. Resolution Conditions of Approval Environmental Assessment Exhibits A. Vicinity Map B. SWAP Map C. Zoning Map D. Tentative Parcel Map 25408 S\Steffrpt\25408.PM 10 RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 25408 TO SUBDIVIDE A 36.21 ACRE PARCEL INTO 20 PARCELS AND A 6.52 ACRE OPEN SPACE AREA LOCATED WEST OF DIAZ ROAD SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-120-026 WHEREAS, Phillip T. See filed Tentative Parcel Map No. 25408 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Tentative Parcel Map application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tentative Parcel Map on October 7, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WH EREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said Tentative 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. S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 11 (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. (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 Tentative 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 recommending approval of 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 Tentative Parcel Map No. 25408 proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. S\Steffrpt\25408,PM 12 (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 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 S\Staffrpt~25408.PM 13 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) The proposed parcel map will not have a significant negative impact on the environment, as determined in the Initial Study performed for the project. A Negative Declaration is recommended for adoption. There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the Future General Plan being prepared at this time in that the proposed commercial-industrial subdivision is consistent with the Swap Light Industrial Land Use Designation, the Manufacturing-Service Zone and existing land uses in the vicinity. 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 in that the proposed commercial/industrial parcel map is consistent with existing and approved uses and subdivisions in the vicinity. The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law. The project conforms to the current zoning for the site and to Ordinance No. 460, 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. S\Staffrpt\25~.08.PM 14 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 prepared for this project. The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future passive energy control opportunities in that all parcels have adequate southern exposure. All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of-ways which are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic. 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. The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. These findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this applications and herein incorporated by reference. E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Tentative Parcel 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. S\Staffrpt\25408,PM 15 SECTION 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 25408 for the subdivision of a 36.2 acre parcel into 20 parcels and a 6.52 acre open space area located west of Diaz Road, and southwesterly of the future extension of Winchester Road and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 909-120-026 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. SECTION 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of October, 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 7th day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 16 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tentative Parcel Map No. 25408 Project Description: To create 20 parcels and a 6.52 acre open space area on a 36.2 acre site Assessor's Parcel No.: 909-120-026 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 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 parcel 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. 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 ~n each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and purpose of the subdivision approval. S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 17 8. 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: 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. a. 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 March 21, 1990, 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 May 1, 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 460, 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 August 27, 1991, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the San Bernardino County Museum transmittal dated December 11, 1989, a copy of which is attached. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the County Geologists letter of April 12, 1990. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho Water District transmittal dated November 14, 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 M-S-C zone. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed-free condition and shall be eiti~er planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the Director of Building and Safety, as soon as possible after grading. S\Steffrpt\25408,PM 18 17. 18. 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. 19. The following notes shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet: 20. "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 outdoor lighting policy as outlined in the Southwest Area Plan. "Archaeological and paleontological monitoring of grading is required, and summary reports shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits. A CA-RIV number shall be assigned and shown on the environmental constraints sheet." Prior to the issuance of GRADING 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 ~=ollowing: Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all landscaped areas requiring irrigation. Parkways shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or a transition into the primary use area of the site. Landscape elements shall include earth berming, ground cover, shrubs and specimen trees. Front yards shall be landscaped and street trees planted. Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent trees at key visual focal points within the project. S~Staffrpt\25408.PM 19 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. Landscaping plans shall incorporate native and drought tolerant plants where appropriate. All existing specimen trees and significant rock outcroppings on the subject property shall be shown on the project's grading plans and shall note those to be removed, relocated and/or retained. All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow growing trees shall be steel staked. Any oak trees removed with four (4) inches or larger trunk diameters shall be replaced on a ten (10) to one (1) basis as approved by the Planning Director. Replacement tress shall be noted on approved landscaping plans. 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. Cut slopes shall be landscaped as soon as possible after grading. 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. 4. Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase. 21. 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. A paleontologist shall be present to monitor grading operations. When necessary, the paleontologist or representative shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or ~alt grading activity to allow recovery of fossils. S\Steffrpt\25408,PM 2(~ 22. Prior to the issuance of grading permits a qualified archaeologist shall conduct a 100% surface collection of archaeological site WSP-2, soils testing, subsurface testing and mapping, and 3 to 5 cubic meters of excavation in order to determine the extent and significant of the site and whether further testing and/or collection is warranted. A report of findings shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of grading permits. A CA-RIV number shall be assigned to the site and shown on the environmental constraints sheet. 23. Prior to issuance of grading permits a certified stephens kangaroo rat biologist shall ascertain if stephens kangaroo rats inhabit the site and shall submit a report to the Planning Department. If any stephens kangaroo rats are found, a 10(a) permit for incidental take must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits. 24. Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: 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. Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from view of surrounding property. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of twenty five (25) feet with at least 10 feet landscaped. Archaeological and paleontological summary reports shall be submitted to the Planning Department delineating cultural or fossil resources encountered during grading, recovery procedures and an inventory of recovered items, and a statement of their scientific significance. 25. 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. 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. S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 2 1 26. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Mitigation 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. 27. 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. 25408, 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. 28. 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. Electrical lines rated 33 kv or greater shall be exempted from the requirement to be installed underground. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements: 29. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer and City Attorney. The CC&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 CC&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 CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense. The CC&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. S\Staffrpt\254OB.PM 22 The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's Association are subject to the approva! 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 CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas and facilities. The landscape and architecture standards shall be incorporated by reference into the CC&R's. The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The 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. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by homeowner's 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. 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 CC&R's or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. 30. 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 CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 23 changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&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. 31. 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). Deoartment of Public Works The following are the Department of Public Works 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 appropriate staff person of the Department of Public Works. It is understood that the Developer has correctly shown on the tentative map all existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review. PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 32. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Rancho California Water District; Eastern Municipal Water District; Riverside County Flood Control district; City of Temecula Fire Bureau; Planning Department; Department of Public Works; Riverside County Health Department; CATV Franchise; and Parks and Recreation Department. S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 24 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 Department of Public Works. 34. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. 35. Prior to recordation all appropriate Lot Line Adjustments and Street Vacations shall be processed and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. 36. Via Industria shall be improved with 64 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. 102, (88'/64'). 37. Calle Consumidor shall be improved with 56 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. 111, (78'/56'). 38. Winchester Road shall be improved with 38 feet of half street improvement plus one 12 foot lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within a 64 foot dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 101, 100'/76'). 39. Parcels 15, 6 and 11 shall take access from Calle Consumidor. 40. Parcels fronting Via Industria shall limit access to joint use access driveways as approved by the Department of Public Works. 41. If construction is to be phased, the landowner/developer shall acquire sufficient public offsite rights-of-way to provide for secondary access road(s) to a paved and maintained road as may be needed. Said access road(s) shall be constructed in accordance with County Standard No. 106, Section B, (32'/60') at a grade and alignment approved by the Department of Public Works. 42. 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. S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM 2 5 43. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and so noted on the final map with the exception of one driveway opening as shown on the Tentative Map and public street intersections as approved by the Department of Public Works. 44. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. 45. Where applicable, 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. 46. Private drainage easements for cross lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated or noticed on the final map. Provisions shall also be made to provide for maintenance of all onsite drainage facilities as directed by the Department of Public Works. 47. 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 Department of Public Works. 48. 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 (street and parks). d. Sewer and domestic water systems. e. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. f. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. 49. The street design, grading and improvement concept of this project shall be coordinated with Assessment District 155 and adjoining developments. 50. Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in accordance with the requirements of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the Department of Public Works. S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 26 51. Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department of Public Works 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. 52. Street names shall be subject to the approval of the Building and Safety Department. 53. The minimum centerline radii shall be 500 feet or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 54. All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 55. 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 Department of Public Works. 56. A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent. 57. 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 401 (curb sidewalk). 58. The subdivider shall submit two (2) prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the Department of Public Works. 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 24" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil Engineer. 59. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. 60. The subdivider shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report to the Department of Public Works. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. 61. A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the Department of Public Works. 62. 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." S\Steffrpt\25408.PM 27 63. A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the recorded drainage easement shall be submitted to the City for review prior to the recordation of the final map. 64. 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. 65. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 66. 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. 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 Department of Public Works. 69. A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of- way. 70. 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. 71. All Conditions of Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District letter dated May 1, 1990, shall be complied with. 72. During grading the slope should be geologically mapped by an Engineering Geologist to verify that the soils and geologic conditions encountered do not differ significantly from those assumed in the slope stability report prepared by Leighton and Associates March 8, 1990. if geologic conditions differ from thoseassumed, buttressing may be required to stabilize the slope. S\Steffrpt\25408,PM 28 PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT: 73. A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 74. 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. 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 security to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the security 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 thereof. 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. Traffic control plans shall be provided as directed by the Department of Public Works, and may be required to be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. 78. 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 94 of the State Standard Specifications. S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM 29 Transportation Engineering PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 79. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works and shall be included in the street improvement plans. 80. Plans for traffic signals shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the intersections of Winchester Road at Calle Consumidor and Via Industria at Calle Consumidor, and shall be included in the street improvement plans with the second plan check submittal. 81. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering for the design requirements. 82. The developer shall execute a Reimbursement Agreement for the design and construction of traffic signals for the intersections of Winchester Road at Diaz Road, Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle West and Winchester Road at Enterprise Circle East. The percent of costs and the warrants for these signals shall be as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to recordation. 83. The subdivider shall enter into an agreement with the City of Temecula to contribute a pro-rata share to the construction of the extension of Diaz Road to Washington Street/Rancon Center Boulevard overcrossing, the Overland overcrossing, Winchester Road restriping to six lanes, and the western bypass corridor as determined by a focused traffic analysis to be submitted by the subdivider and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to recordation. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS: 84. 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 Department of Public Works. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS: 85. All traffic signals, signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan and as directed by the Department of Public Works per the approved focused traffic analysis. S\Staffrpt~25408.PM 30 86. All landscaping installation within corner cutoff areas at all intersections and adjacent to all driveways shall provide for adequate site distance. 87. Stop signs shall be installed within the project boundary at the intersection of local streets. S\Steffrpt\25408.PM 3 1 JMFANNINGR. S,MRA 4050 Lemon Street SE"~ES RiVeFSlCie . CA 92502 ..,,, ~,~I~ ~ ..,L,. ATTN: John Ch i U RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANN)NG DEPARTMEN' RE: Parcel MaD 25408: Parcel I of Parcel MaD 6561. as shown by mad on file In book 30. PaQe 75 and 76. of Parcel Maps. records of RIverside, CA (2? lots) CAIA ILANCA CORONA Dear Gentlemen: The Department of Public Health has reviewed Parcel MaD No. 25408. and recommends that: A water system shall be Installed actordine to plans and speclficatlon as aDDroved by the water comPanY and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the water system shall be submitted in triplicate. wlth a minimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet, alone with the or~ulnal drawln~ to the County Surveyor. The prints shall show the internal D1De diameter, location of valves and fire hydrants: D1De and lolnt specifications. and the size of the main at the ~unct~on of the new system to the ex~stlnQ system. The plans shall COmplY ~n all respects w~th Ply. 5. Part 1. Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety Code. California Administrative Code. Title 22, Chapter 16. and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California. when applicable. The plans shall be s~Qned by a rec~stered enolneer and water company w~th the foliowine certification: "I certify that the desz~n of the water system zn Parcel Map 25408 zs in accordance w~th the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the water service, storage and distribution system will be adequate to provide water service to such parcel. Reply to; Riverside County Plannlno Dept. Paoe Two ATTN: John Chlu March 21. i990 This certification does not constitute a ~uarantee that it will suDDiV water to such parcel mad at any specific ouantltles, flows or pressures for fire protection or any other purpose". This certification shall be sioned bv a responsible offlclai of the water companY. This subdivision has a statement from Rancho California Water District aoreelno to serve domestic water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand Drov~dlno satisfactory financial arranoements are completed with the subdivider. It will be necessary for financial arranoements to be made prior to the Fecordatlon of the final map. This subdivision is within the Rancho California Water District and shall be connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed accordlno to plans and specifications as aDDroved by the District, the County Surveyor and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate. alono with the orlolnal drawlno, to the County Surveyor. The prints shall show the internal DiDO diameter. location of manholes. complete profiles, D1De and ~olnt specifications and the size of the sewers at the ~unctlon of the new system to the exlstlno system. A s~nole plat lndlcatlno location of sewer lines and water lines shall be a portion of the sewaoe plans and profiles. The plans shall be sloned by a reoisteFed enqlneer and the sewer district with the followlno certification: "I certify that the desion of the sewer system in Parcel MaD 25406 Is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water DlstFlct and that the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed parcel maD." ~lverslde County Plannlns Dept. Pane Three ATTN: John Ch~u March 21. 1990 It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be completely flnallzed Drlor to recordatzon of the final maD. Sincerely. am .H.S. IV Environmental Health Services SM:wdl KENNEaTH L EDWARDS 1995 MARKET STREET PO BOX 1033 TELEPHONE (714) 787'2015 FAX NO. (714) 788'9965 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA 92502 May 1, 1990 Riverside County Planning Department County Administrative Center Riverside, California Attention: Regional Team NO. 5 John Chiu Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: Parcel Map 25408 Amended No. 1 This is a proposal to divide 40 acres for manufacturing and com- mercial use in the Murrieta area. The site is located on the northwest corner of Winchester Road and Calle Consumidor. The site lies at the base of steep hills. Several natural water- courses are tributary to the southwest property line. The developer proposes to collect offsite flows tributary to Lot 8 in a storm drain. The storm drain as proposed would need to be con- structed to Murrieta Creek by this development or by Assessment District 155. Storm flows tributary to Lot 6 and Lot 7 would be collected in storm drains and outletted to the street. This conflicts with the approved Assessment District 155 storm drain plans which would convey the offsite runoff to the storm drain in Calle Consumidor. The assessment district plans will need to be amen- ded to reflect this map. A storm drain in Winchester Road would collect the street flows and outlet to Murrieta Creek. Grading shown on the tentative map would require a considerable amount of offsite grading on adjacent properties. The grading proposed does not agree with the approved Assessment District 155 plans. Following are the District's recommendations: This parcel map 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 provi- sions 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 ~f 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: Parcel Map 25408 Amended No. 1 -2- May 1, 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. Provisions should be made to collect the 100 year offsite runoff tributary to the site and, with onsite runoff, safely convey it to Murrieta Creek. This should be done by either this development or by amended Assessment District 155. Evidence Of a viable maintenance mechanism should be submitted to the District and County for review and approval prior to recordation of the final map. In this case, this will probably be a property owners association. 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. Temporary erosion control measures should be implemented immediately following rough grading to prevent deposition of debris onto downstream properties or drainage facilities. 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. Riverside County Planning Department Re: Parcel Map 25408 Amended No. 1 -3- May 1, 1990 8. All lots should be graded to drain to the adjacent street or an adequate outlet. Offsite drainage facilities should be located within dedicated 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. 10. 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". 11. 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: Greiner Engineering 2 ~/iy you s, lenior Civil Engineer KF:pln PLANNING & ENGINEERING 46-209 OASIS STREET, SUITE 405 INDIO. CA 92201 (619) 342-8886 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT IN COOPERATION WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION GLEN J. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF AITC, UST 27, 1991 PLANNING & ENGINEERING 3760 12TH STREET RIVERSIDE, CA 91501 (714) 275-4777 TO: ATTN: RE: CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT PARCEL MAP 25408 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 The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 5000 GPM and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant shall be 2500 GPM for 2 hours duration at 20 PSI.residual operating pressure. Approved super fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2~"x2½") shall be located at each street intersection and spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction, with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, containing a Fire Department approval signature block, and shall conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow. Once plans are eigned by the local water company, the originals shall be presented ' to the Fire Department for signature. 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. All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to the Planning and Engineering staff. RAYMOND H. REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner Laura Cabral, Fire Safety Specialist TO: Assessor Building and Safety - Land Us Building and Safety - Grading Surveyor - Ken Teach DEC Road Department Health - Ralph Luchs F~!VERS~[~ Fi re Protection Flood Control District Fish & Game U.S. Postal Service - Ruth E. Davidson U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services County Superintendent of Schools Rancho California Water District Southern California Edison - Doug Davies Southern California Gas Temecula Union School District Elsinore Union High School District :IEVE:DiDE coun;Y pL, nnin( DEP, :e filEn Commissioner Turner Temecula Town Association Temecula Chamber of Commerce San Bernardino Museum UCR - ARU Community Plans PARCEL NAP 25408 - (Tm 5) - E.A. 34500 - Philip T. See - Greinter, Inc., Merle G. Schulze - Temecula/Rancho California Area - First Supervisorial District S of Cherry St., W of Murrieta Creek - H-SC Zone 34.94 Acres into 23 commercial/industrial lots - Schedule E - No Waiver - Mod 119 - A.P. 909-120-026 Please review the case de~zribed abo~e. along with the attached case map. A Land Division Committee meeti~ ~as )ee~ tentatively scheduled-.fof December 14, 1989. If it clears, it will then go to public hearing. ~ Your comments and recommendat'~ns are reqOested prior tO December 14, 1989 in order that we may include them in the staff report for this particular case. Should you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact John Chiu at 787-~356. Planner COMMENTS: The parcel ~s located on the fossiliferous Pauba Formation. Construction excavation wll). ~mpact nonrenewable paleontologic resources. The developer must retain a qualified vertebrate paleontologist to develop a program to mitigate impacts to paleontolog~c resources. This program should ~nclude: {1) monitor~ng of excavation by a qualif~ed paleontologic monitor; {~) preparation of recovered specimens, including sediment processing for small vertebrate fossils; curat~on of specimens ~nto an established repository; and ~) a report of find~ngs with PLEASE print/ name and title !:.,-r:L~ ' -:_"'~T-2~_' L~_,./,J. Dr. Allan D. Griesemer, Museums Director 4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 (714) 787-6181 46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304 INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201 (619) 342-8277 DATE: April 12, 1990 TO: Devin Strand - Team 5 FROM: Steve A. Kupferman - RE: INTER-DEPARTMENTAL LETTER COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE PLANNING DEPARTMENT Engineering eologisr Tentative Parcel Map 25408 Slope Stability Report No. 230 The following report has been reviewed relative to slope stability at the subject site: "GeotechnicalAnalysis of Slope Stability, Tentative Parcel Map No. 25408, ±40 Acre Site, Proposed Industrial/Commercial Development, Winchester Road, Temecula, Riverside County, CA," by Leighton and Associates, dated March 8, 1990, and Response to County Review Letter, by Leighton and Associates, dated April 5, 1990. This report determined that: Cut and fill slopes are planned at 2:1 (horizontal: vertical) with maximum heights of 20 and 80 feet, respectively. 2. Fill and fill-over-cut slopes will be stable against both deep-seated failure and suxficial failure. Proposed cut slopes will expose fanglomerate facies of the Pauba formation. 4. Proposed cut slopes should be grossly and surficially stable under both static and seismic conditions. This report recommended that: Cut slopes shall be mapped by an engineering geologist during grading to verify the soil and geologic conditions. Cut and fill slopes shall be provided with appropriate surface drainage features and landscaped with drought-tolerant vegetation as soon as possible after grading. Berms shall be provided at the top of fill slopes and brow ditches shall be constructed at the top of cut slopes. 4. Lot drainage shall be directed such that surface runoff on the slope face is minimized. The outer portion of fill slopes shall be either overbuilt by 2 feet (minimum) and trimmed back to the finished slope or compacted in increments of 5 feet (maximum) by a sheepsfoot roller as the fill is placed and then trackwalked to achieve the final configuration. This report satisfies the General Plan requirement for a slope stability report. The recommendations made in this report shall be adhered to in the design and construction of this project. SAK:kcb Rancha Wmr Board of Directors: James A. Darby President Jeffrey L. Minklet St. Vice President Ralph Daily Doug Ku[berg Jon A. Lundin T. C. Rowe Richard D. Steffey Officers: John F. Hennigar General Manager Phillip L Forbes Director of Finance- Treasurer Thomas 1~ MeAljester Direcu}r of Operations & Maintenance Edward P. Lemons Director of Engineering Linda M. Fregoeo Dis~ict Secretcry McCormick & Kidman Legal Counsel November 14, 1989 Riverside County Division of Environmental Health Land Use Section Post Office Box 1370 Riverside, California 92502 Subject: Water and Sewer Availability Re: Parcel No. 25408 Gentlemen;, Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District. Water and sewer service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. Currently, the District has an inter-agency agreement with Eastern Municipal Water District to provide sewer service to your area. All plan check submittals will be made to Rancho California Water District. Water availability would be contingent Upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. If RCWD can be of further service to you, please contact Senga Doherty at (714) 676-4101. Very truly yours, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT /~"z/~Steve Brannon, P.E. Engineering Manager 'SB:jkm227 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 . 'FEMECt'LA. CA 92:t9o-0174 · (714) 676-4101 , FAX (714) 676-0615 CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY I Backaround 1. Name of Proponent: Greiner Engineering 2o Address and Phone 28481 Rancho California Road #101 Number of Proponent: Temecula. CA 92.591 (714) 676-8277 3. Date of Environmental Assessment: August 21, 1991 4. Agency Requiring Assessment: CITY OF TEMECULA 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Parcel Map 25408 6. Location of Proposal: SouthwesterIv of the future extension of Winchester Road II Environmental Impacts (Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.) Yes Maybe No 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? X __ b. Disruptions, displacements, compac- tion or overcovering of the soil? X __ c. Substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features? X _ d. The destruction, covering or modi- fication of any unique geologic or physical features? __ __ X S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 32 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? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 33 Plant 8. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including, but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? Alteration of the direction or rate of flow or ground waters? Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct addi- tions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flood- ing or tidal waves? Life. Will the proposal result in: Change in the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants? Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegetation, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM 3~0f 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? Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? Exposure of people to severe noise levels? Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce substantial new light or glare? Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: Substantial increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? Substantial depletion of any non- renewable natural resource? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X X S\Steffrpt\25408 .PM 3 5 10. 11. 12. 13. 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? Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? 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? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X X S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 36 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have substantial effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? Parks or other recreational 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 N_go X X X X X X X X X S\Steffrpt\25408.PM Communications systems? Water? Sewer or septic tanks? Storm water drainage? Solid waste and disposal? 37 X X X X X 17. 18. 19. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? Exposure of people to potential health hazards? Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X S\Staffrpt\25408,PM 38 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 S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 39 III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation 1 .a,b,c Yes. The project will involve 1,800,000 cubic yards of cut and 500,000 cubic yard of fill and will create 80-1 O0 foot high 1.5: 1 cut slopes in the southwesterly portion of the site. The Slope Stability Analysis prepared for this project states that the proposed cut slopes will be stable against deep seated failure, arcuate failure under seismic conditions, and surficial failure provided it is free of adverse geologic conditions. The Analysis recommends that an engineering geologist conduct geological mapping of the slopes during grading to verify that soils and geological conditions encountered during grading do not significantly differ from the assumptions of the Slope Stability Analysis. If significant differences are found, buttressing may be required to stabilize the slope. Cut and fill slopes should be provided with appropriate surface drainage and landscaped with drought tolerant vegetation as soon as possible after grading. The Tentative Map indicates bench drains at 30 foot intervals in the cut slope. All fill slopes have a slope ratio of 2:1 and should be stable due to their limited height. The project will involve exporting 1,300,000 cubic yards of earth from the site. It shall be a Condition of Approval for Parcel Map 25408 that information regarding the number of truckloads, the haul route, the destination point, and a stock pile permit or an approved grading plan for the recipient site shall be submitted and a haul route permit obtained from the City prior to issuance of grading permits. The final disposition of the export soil will be subject to environmental review in conjunction with the project which will use the export soil as fill. 1.d. No. There are no unique geologic or physical features on the site. 1.e. Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are replanted. The wind erosion impact is considered high and significant but will be mitigated through retention of natural vegetation whenever feasible, and use of watering trucks and landscaping disturbed areas after grading. After construction of the project, water run-off is likely to increase due to the addition of impermeable surfaces. Appropriate drainage control devices will have to be approved through the Engineering Department and will have to be designed in accordance with Temecula's standards and the Conditions of Approval. S\Steffrpt\25408,PM 40 1.f. No. The subject site is not located near any channel, lake or ocean that would be impacted by deposition or erosion. Drainage improvements and landscaping will prevent soil erosion. 1.g. No. The site is not located in a fault hazard zone or an area susceptible to liquefaction. Hazards due to groundshaking associated with a nearby fault are addressed by the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. 2.a,b,c. 3.a,c,d,i. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in any impacts to air quality or the climate. Subsequent development proposals will be assessed for potential impacts to air quality and the climate. No. There are no currents or bodies of water on the site. The site is not located in a flood plain. Therefore there will be no impact on the direction of water currents or flood waters or the amount of water in any water body. Neither people nor property will be exposed to flood hazards. 3.b. Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in changes in the amount of surface runoff. The improvement of the site will provide for adequate drainage facilities as approved by the City Engineer. 3.e. Yes. Grading may result in an increase in turbidity in local surface water. This impact is temporary and is not considered significant. 3.f,g. No. Excavation is not expected to encounter groundwater. There will be no impact to the direction or flow of groundwater. 3.h. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in any impact on public water supplies. 4.a,b. No. The only plant specimen on the site worthy of note in the biological report is an engelmann oak. The oak tree shall be preserved, relocated, or replaced at a 10 to I ratio or as approved by the Planning Director. 4.c. Maybe. Landscaping of the site may introduce some non-native species. This is not considered a significant impact. 4.d. No. The site is not currently used as crop land. 5.8, No. No evidence of rare or endangered species was found on the site. S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM 4 1 5.b. 5.c. 6.8. 6.b. 9.a,b. lO.a,b. Maybe. Although the biology survey encountered no sign of the presence of stephens kangaroo rats on the site, the biologist recommended that a certified stephens kangaroo rat biologist ascertain if they inhabit the site. A report by a certified specialist shall be required prior to issuance of grading permits. If any stephen kangaroo rats are found, a l O(a) permit for incidental take must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits. Yes. The project will result in loss of grass land and chaparral which typically provides foraging habitat for raptors, sparrows, rabbits, gophers, ground squirrels, and reptiles. The only sensitive vertebrate observed during the survey was a golden eagle soaring high above the site. The biologist recommended that a portion of the site abutting the upslope chaparral be maintained in a natural state in order to preserve some foraging habitat. Part of the open space slope at the southwesterly side of the site will be maintained in a natural condition. Yes. The proposed parcel map will result in increased noise levels during grading. This impact will be temporary and is not considered significant because the site is not near any noise sensitive land uses. No. Future development proposals will be reviewed for potential noise impacts and land uses which generate severe noise will be prohibited or required to provide adequate noise mitigation. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not cause new light or glare, and subsequent development of the site will be subject to standard conditions prohibiting lighting from impacting adjacent properties and requiring low-glare sodium rapor lights. No. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zone and the land use designation in which the property is located. No. The project will not involve a substantial increase in the rate of consumption of natural or non-renewable resources. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not involve the use of hazardous materials or interference with emergency response or evacuation plans. S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM 42 11,12. 13.a,d. 13.b. 13.c,e. 13.f. 14. a.-f. 15.a,b. No. The proposal is not likely to alter the distribution or growth rate of the population or create a demand for new housing. Future development of the site will help address the imbalance of local jobs in relation to existing and approved housing. Yes. Future development of the site is expected to generate approximately 1,730 vehicle trip ends per day. Via Industria is part of a western corridor bypass road which will alter present patterns of circulation. The purpose of the by-pass road is to relieve congestion on existing streets. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with the project determined that intersections and roadways in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended improvements are implemented. The recommendations of the traffic study are incorporated as conditions of approval. No. Future development of the site will be required to provide adequate off-street parking as appropriate for the particular land use proposed. No. The project will have no impact upon existing transportation systems or upon water, rail, or air traffic. No. The streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service if recommended street improvements are implemented. The street improvements will be Conditions of Approval for the proposed Parcel Map. Parcels fronting Via Industria shall limit access to joint use driveways. No. The project will not result in a need for new public services. Future development will generate an increase in the need for public services in the areas of fire and police protection and road maintenance. Fire impact mitigation fee, the public facility fee, and taxes will fund the additional public services. No. The project will not result in a substantial use or increase in demand for fuel or other energy sources. 16.a.-f. 17.a,b. No. Future development of the site will require only hook up to or service by existing utility systems and will not result in a need for new or substantially altered utility systems. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in any potential health hazards. Future development will be assessed for potential health hazards. S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 43 18. 19. 20.a,b,c. 20.d. 21 .a. 21 .b,c. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not result in the obstruction of any scenic views. Future development will be reviewed in order to prevent the construction of aesthetically offensive structures or site lay outs. Cut slopes will be landscaped as soon as possible after grading. No. The site is not currently used for recreational purposes. Maybe. The site contains a lithic scatter encompassing approximately 200 square meters which yielded a projectile point and 6 pieces of basalt debitages during the archaeological survey. The Archaeological Assessments states that the site has low potential to be a small food processing site which could address limited archaeological research questions and recommends a 100% surface collection, soils testing, subsurface testing and mapping and 3 to 5 cubic meters of excavation. These procedures are expected to constitute final mitigation and shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 25408. No. There are no existing religious or sacred uses of the site or in the vicinity. No. Although the biology survey encountered no sign of the presence of stephens kangaroo rats on the site, the biologist recommended that a certified stephens kangaroo rat biologist ascertain if they inhabit the site. A report by a certified specialist shall be required prior to issuance of grading permits. If any stephens kangaroo rats are found, a 10(a) permit for incidental take must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits. Payment of kangaroo rat habitant mitigation fees is a Condition of Approval for the proposed parcel map. The project will result in loss of grass land and chaparral which typically provides foraging habitat for raptors, sparrows and reptiles. The only sensitive vertebrate observed during the survey was a golden eagle soaring high above the site. The biologist recommended that a portion of the site abutting the upslope chaparral be maintained in a natural state in order to preserve some foregoing habitat. Part of the open space slope at the southwesterly side of the site will be maintained in a natural condition. No. The long term and cumulative traffic impacts of the project will be adequately mitigated by the street improvements recommended by the traffic study which are Conditions of Approval for the proposed Parcel Map. Streets and intersections in the vicinity will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service. S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 44 21 .d. No. The proposed Parcel Map will not create any health hazards. Environmental review of future development of the site will address any potential health hazards and mitigations, if necessary, will be required. S\Staffrpt\25408 .PM 45 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a signi- ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi- ficant effect on this case because the mitigation measures described on attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. X I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date For CITY OF TEMECULA S\Staffrpt\25408.PM 46 CITY OF TEMECULA ) SITE-,,, / ./ VICINITY MAP C, ASE NO. P.C. DATE CITY OF TEMECULA ~ RLI SWAP MAP r' NO.~!~5~C~O' CASE P.C. DATE CITY OF TEMECULA I (, V'AF_^ ,, ./' C ZONE MAP // // // r' CASE NO. Fr,1 C.C. DATE ITEM//14 ITEM # 15 MEMORANDUM FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Douglas M. Stewart, Deputy City Engineer October 21, 1991 Tract Map No. 22761, Second Extension of Time Tract Map No. 22762, Second Extension of Time On August 13, 1991, the Department of Public Works sent letters to all developers with active and inactive subdivisions within the City of Temecula. Said letter requested that all erosion and runoff control be in place no later than October 15th of this year. The developer for Tract Map No. 22761 and Tract Map No. 22762 has failed to comply with the established deadline in conformance with the conditions of their grading permit and the subdivision conditions of approval. Therefore, the Department of Public Works respectfully requests that both Second Extensions of Time for Tract 22761 and Tract 22762 be continued to the November 4, 1991, Planning Commission meeting to allow time for staff to resolve the issue with the developer. ITEM # 16 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 21, 1991 Case No.: Change of Zone No. 13 (CZ 13) and Tentative Vesting Tract Map No. 26828 (VTM 26828) Prepared By: Mark Rhoades RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Planning Commission: RECOMMEND ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26828 and Change of Zone No. 13; RECOMMEND that the City Council over rule the Airport Land Use Commission denial of Change of Zone No. 13 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26828. ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending approval of Change of Zone No. 13 based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report; and ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 26828 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: Dacin Development, Inc. Lohr and Associates, R.C.I. Change of Zone from R-R 2~ to R-1 and a 130 lot residential subdivision on 35.5 acres. Northwest corner of Rita Way and Seraphina Road Rural Residential, 2~ acre lot size minimum STAFFRPT\33.CZ 1 SURROUNDING ZONING: North: South: East: West: SP (Specific Plan) R-R2~ (Rural Residential 2~ acre lot size minimum) R-1 (Single Family Residential) SP (Specific Plan) PROPOSED ZONING: R-1 (Single Family Residential) EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Vacant South: Vacant East: Vacant West: Vacant PROJECT STATISTICS: Number of Acres: 35.5 Numer of Units: 130 Minimum Proposed Parcel Lot Size: Proposed Density: 3.6 D.U./acre Minimum Permitted Lot Size: 7,200 square feet 7,200 square feet BACKGROUND Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26828 and Change of Zone No. 13 were submitted on March 21, 1991. The proposed Change of Zone and Tentative Map were presented to the Development Review Committee at meetings held on April 11 th and August 29th of 1991. The proposed subdivision was reviewed by Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission on July 24, 1991. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Change of Zone No. 13 The proposed Change of Zone is an application to change the zone on 35.5 gross acres of land. The current zoning is R-R 2~ (Rural Residential-2~ acre minimum lot size) and the project proposes R-1 (Single-Family Residential). The current Southwest Area Plan designation for the proposed site is Residential, 2-4 dwelling units per acre. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26828 The proposed subdivision is an application to create 130 single family lots on 35.5 acres. The project is located at the northwest corner of Rita Way and Seraphina Road. The project is bounded on the north, east, and west by approved residential projects. To the south is vacant land located in flood plain area. STAFFRPT\13.CZ 2 ANALYSIS Area Compatibility The proposed project is surrounded on three sides by higher density zoning and approved single family projects. The area to the north and west is the Silver Hawk specific plan approved by Riverside County. The tracts immediately adjacent to this project site exhibit lot sizes which have areas as small as 4,500 square feet. The R-1 tract to the east was recently approved by the City of Temecula with 7,200 square foot lot sizes. Southerly of the proposed project site is vacant land which is zoned R-R 2 ~, and located in a designated flood zone. The current Change of Zone and Tentative Map propose R-1 zoning and minimum lot sizes of 7,200 square feet. The project is consistent with the current pattern of area development. DESIGN GUIDELINES The design guidelines for the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map provide descriptions relative to fencing, walls, lot layout and landscaping in accordance with the requirements of Ordinance Nos. 348 and 460. The architectural theme of the project is California ranch style, with wood frame and stucco construction. All trees within the project will be required to be a minimum of 15 gallons in size. The front yards of all proposed units will contain landscaping and irrigation prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. All cut and fill slopes with a ratio of 2:1 are required to be planted and irrigated. The design guidelines propose the use of smooth and split face concrete block. All walls adjacent to public rights of way will to be decorative block. SITE LAYOUT The proposed site is located in an area of gently rolling terrain with slopes that trend in a south-southwest direction. The proposed site design generally corresponds to the existing topography of the site. Approximately 380,000 cubic yards of earth (balanced cut and fill) will be moved on site to permit lot development. All of the proposed lots exhibit building pads which provide for maximum useable area. The majority of proposed lots have slopes which are less that 2~ feet in height. All internal slopes will be maintained by individual homeowners. No homeowners association is proposed. The project is adjacent to an existing elementary school, and the map provides for access to the school through the tract boundary. CIRCULATION The proposed project will take access from Willows Avenue, Rita Way and Seraphina Road. Ultimately traffic will flow onto Nicolas Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road when it is improved under Assessment District No. 161. The interior streets of the proposed site trend in an east/west and north/south pattern. Cul- de-sac streets are utilized to reduce traffic flows. The applicant has proposed a 10 foot wide improved path way between the cul-de-sac bulb of street "B", and the adjacent school site. This path will provide access for children travelling between the proposed subdivision and the school site. STAFFRPT\13,CZ 3 AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION Senate Bill 255 established a mandatory framework for counties in the State of California to formulate specific land use policies for airport areas, and review of those projects within airport influence boundaries. The Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission has adopted the State Airport Land Use guidelines which include a two mile radius requirement for project review. The radius of the influence area only allows residential lots with a minimum size of 2~ acres. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26828 propose 7,200 square foot lot sizes. The Riverside County A.LU.C. denied the project on July 18, 1991 based on S.S. 255 and the findings required for that action. Section 21675 of the Public Utilities Code allows that if the A.L.U.C. disapproves an application, the City may overrule the A.L.U.C. by a two thirds vote if it makes findings that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of the Public Utilities Code pursuant to A.L.U.C. provisions. As pointed out by the City Attorney (attachment No. 5), if the City is not the operator of the airport, the operator becomes immune from liability for damages to property or personal injury for the City's decision to proceed with the particular project. The City Council must make specific findings in order to overrule the A.L.U.C. decision. In overruling the decision of the Airport Land Use Commission, the City assumes the liability for damages relative to the tract. As a result of the A.L.U.C. recommendation for this project and the approved tentative map adjacent, a noise study was conducted (attachment No. 6) to examine the potential impact of airport noise. The study has shown that the proposed project is located well outside of the 65 Community Noise Equivalent Value Area (C.N.E.L) which the County of Riverside and the State of California Division of Aeronautics use as a standard for minimum outside noise levels in a residential area. The outside C.N.E.L. range for the project is 50~54 dB. Standard residential construction techniques will reduce the noise levels well below the Environmental Protection Agency standard of 45 dB for interior noise levels. The project is not located within a clear zone or an approach safety zone of the French Valley Airport. Based on the findings and data contained in the noise study completed by J.J. Van Houten and Associates on May 30, 1991, Staff is of the opinion that the proposed project will not be adversely impacted by the French Valley Airport. ZONING The current zoning for the proposed project is R-R 2 ~ (Rural Residential 2 ~ acre lot size minimum). The proposed zoning is R-l, which allows 7,200 square foot lot sizes. Zoning to the north and west of the site is currently zoned for high density single family residential under Specific Plan 213. East of the project site is R-1 (Single Family Residential) zoning. South of the project site is existing R-R 2~ zoning. Based on the surrounding zoning, Change of Zone No. 13 is a logical extension of the R-1 zoning to the east. Approval of the proposed zoning will provide a buffer between the higher density specific plan to the north and lower density zoning to the south. STAFFRPT\13.CZ 4 SOUTHWEST AREA PLAN AND FUTURE GENERAL PLAN The current SWAP designation for the proposed project is 2-4 dwelling units per acre. The proposed density of 3.6 units per acre is consistent with that designation. The designation to the north and west is specific plan, and the designation to the south and west is 2-4 dwelling units per acre. The proposed project is likely to be consistent with the City's Future Adopted General Plan because of the intensity of approved area development. ENVIRONMENTAL An Initial Study completed for the project identified potential impacts relative to wildlife, noise, circulation, and public services. Although the project area is located within potential habitat area, biological report completed on July 15, 1991, identified no individuals of the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat on site. However, the project is within the habitat conservation fee area and is conditioned for the payment of fees pursuant to Ordinance No. 663. The noise study for this project is discussed in this report under the section titled "Airport Land Use Commission". The potential for noise impact is insignificant. Potential impacts for circulation have been identified and mitigated relative to the traffic study completed for this project. The engineering department has reviewed and accepted said traffic study. Potential public services impacts will be mitigated by the payment of appropriate fees and through the conditions of approval. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Change of Zone No. 13 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26828 are consistent in size, scale, and design with adjacent and area development approvals. The proposed project is consistent with the SWAP which the City has adopted as a policy guideline. The zoning request is consistent with area development. Given the ultimate runway length and approach zones for the French Valley Airport and the noise contours associated with that length, the proposed Change of Zone and tentative subdivision will not have an impact on the regular operation of said airport nor will the airport have a substantial impact on the proposed subdivision. All other potential environmental impacts have been mitigated to a level of nonsignificance. FINDINGS Change of Zone No. 13 The proposed zone change will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment, as determined in the initial study performed for this project. A Negative Declaration is recommended for adoption. STAFFRPT%13.CZ 5 There is not a reasonable 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. The project is not of significant scope in the context of city-wide and regional development patterns. The proposed change in district classification is reasonable and beneficial at this time as it is a logical expansion of residential uses which are approved in the vicinity of the project site. The proposed change in district classification from R-R-2~ to R-1 will likely be consistent with the goals, policies and action programs which will be contained in the General Plan when it is ultimately adopted, The density and land use proposed are consistent with the Southwest Area Plan (SWAP) recommendations for the subject property. Further, densities and uses proposed are similar to existing densities and uses in the vicinity of the project. The site of the proposed change in district classification is suitable to accommodate all the land uses currently permitted in the proposed zoning district as it is of adequate size and shape for the proposed residential use. Possible land use conflicts are not likely to arise as the project proposes residential uses similar to those existing in the general vicinity of the subject site, Adequate access exists for the proposed residential land use from Rita Way and Seraphina Road. Additional internal access and required road improvements abutting proposed lots will be designed and constructed in conformance with City standards. Said findings are supported by analysis, minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. The Airport Land Use Commission is making substantial progress toward the completion of a land use plan. There is reasonable probability that the action, regulation, or permit will be consistent with the plan being considered by the Airport Land Use Commission. 10. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the Future Adopted Plan in the action, regulation, or permit is ultimately inconsistent with the future adopted Airport Land Use Plan. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26828 The proposed Parcel Map will not have significant negative impact on the environment, as determined in the Initial Environmental Assessment prepared for Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 26828. A Negative Declaration is recommended for adoption. STAFFRPT%13.CZ 6 10. 11. There is a reasonable probability that this proposal will be consistent with the General Plan being prepared at this time. The map together with the attendant zone change request are consistent with applicable subdivision and land use ordinances, and conform with the City's Southwest Area Plan (SWAP) guidelines affecting the subject property. 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. The project is consistent with surrounding development, and does not logically have the potential to generate significant adverse environmental impacts. The proposed use or action complies with City and State planning and zoning laws. Reference local Ordinances No. 348, 460, California Governmental Code Sections 65000-66009 (Planning Zoning Law), and Government Code Title 7, Division 2. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of parcel configurations, access, and density. The project has access to public rights-of-way, and is designed with sufficient parcel acreage allowing appropriate building pad sighrings. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural environment as determined in the initial study prepared for this project. Reference the attached Initial Environmental Study and Conditions of Approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26828. 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. Easement dedications are not evident in grant deeds describing the property. The site for the proposed use is provided legal access via Rita Way and Seraphina Road public rights-of-way. Development of these roads shall comply with City Engineering Conditions of Approval contained herein. The proposed project will not inhibit or restrict future ability to use active or passive solar energy systems. Adequate lot areas and exposures are provided for these alternatives. The proposed use will not have a substantial adverse affect on abutting properties or the permitted use thereof. The proposed map provides for residential development similar in character and densities evident on vicinity properties. Land use incongruities and associated adverse affects arising from implementation of this proposal are unlikely. The Airport Land Use Commission is making substantial progress toward the completion of the plan. STAFFRPT%13,CZ 7 12. There is reasonable probability that the action, regulation, or permit will be consistent with the plan being considered by the Airport Land Use Commission. 13. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the Future Adopted Plan in the action, regulation, or permit is ultimately inconsistent with the Future Adopted Airport Lands Use Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Planning Commission: RECOMMEND ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26828 and Change of Zone No. 13; RECOMMEND that the City Council over rule the Airport Land Use Commission denial of Change of Zone No. 13 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26828. ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending approval of Change of Zone No. 13 based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report; and ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 26828 based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Change of Zone Resolution - page 9 Vesting Tentative Tract Map Resolution - page 14 Conditions of Approval - page 20 Environmental Assessment - page 33 Exhibits - page 48 City Attorney Letter - page 49 Airport Studies - 50 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 CHANGE OF ZONE RESOLUTION STAFFRPT\13+CZ 9 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 91-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 13 CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-R-2~ TO R-1 ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF RITA WAY AND SERAPHINA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 914-260-039, 040, 041,042, 043, 044, 045, AND 046. WHEREAS, Dacin Development, Inc. filed Change of Zone No. 13 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 October 21, 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: 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: The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general plan. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: STAFFRPT\13.CZ 10 (1) 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. (2) 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. (3) The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. 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. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the proposed Change of Zone, makes the following findings, to wit: The proposed zone change will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment, as determined in the initial study performed for this project. A Negative Declaration is recommended for adoption. There is not a reasonable 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. The project is not of significant scope in the context of city-wide and regional development patterns. The proposed change in district classification is reasonable and beneficial at this time as it is a logical expansion of residential uses which are approved in the vicinity of the project site. The proposed change in district classification from R-R-2~ to R-1 will likely be consistent with the goals, policies and action programs which will be contained in the General Plan when it is ultimately adopted. The density and land use proposed are consistent with the Southwest Area Plan (SWAP) recommendations for the subject property. Further, densities and uses proposed are similar to existing densities and uses in the vicinity of the project. The site of the proposed change in district classification is suitable to accommodate all the land uses currently permitted in the proposed zoning district as it is of adequate size and shape for the proposed residential use. Possible land use conflicts are not likely to arise as the project proposes residential uses similar to those existing in the general vicinity of the subject site. STAFFRPT\13.CZ 11 Adequate access exists for the proposed residential land use from Rita Way and Seraphina Road. Additional internal access and required road improvements abutting proposed lots will be designed and constructed in conformance with City standards. Said findings are supported by analysis, minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. The Airport Land Use Commission is making substantial progress toward the completion of the plan. There is reasonable probability that the action, regulation, or permit will be consistent with the plan being considered by the Airport Land Use Commission. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the Future Adopted Plan in the action, regulation, or permit is ultimately inconsistent with the Future Adopted Airport Lands Use Plan. The Change of Zone 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. Recommendation. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Zone Change No. 13 to change the zoning on 35.5 acres of land from R-R-2 ~ to Rol on property generally located at the northwest corner of Rita Way and Seraphina Road and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 914-260-039,040, 041,042, 043, 044, 045, AND 046. SECTION 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of October 1991. JOHN HOAGLAND CHAIRMAN STAFFRPT',I 3.CZ 12 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 19th day of August, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS STAFFRPT\13.CZ 13 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 VESTING TRACT MAP RESOLUTION STAFFRPT%13.CZ 1 af ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 91-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 26828 TO SUBDIVIDE A 35.5 ACRES INTO 130 RESIDENTIAL LOTS. GENERAL LOCATION OF SAID MAP BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF RITA WAY AND SERAPHINA ROAD. WHEREAS, Dacin Development, Inc. filed Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26828 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Tract Map application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tract Map on October 21, 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 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: 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: The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general plan. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: STAFFRPT~13.CZ 15 (1) 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. (2) 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. (3) The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances, 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. The proposed Tract Map is consistent with the SWAP and meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit: A. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general plan. 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: (1) There is reasonable probability that Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26828 proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. (2) 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. (3} The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are made: That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. STAFFRPT\13,CZ 15 C. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of development. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the proposed density of the development. 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. That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 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. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to wit: The proposed Tract Map will not have significant negative impact on the environment, as determined in the Initial Environmental Assessment prepared for Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 26828. A Negative Declaration is recommended for adoption. There is a reasonable probability that this proposal will be consistent with the General Plan being prepared at this time. The map together with the attendant zone change request are consistent with applicable subdivision and land use ordinances, and conform with the City's Southwest Area Plan (SWAP) guidelines affecting the subject property. Cm 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. The project is consistent with surrounding development, and does not logically have the potential to generate significant adverse environmental impacts. De The proposed use or action complies with City and State planning and zoning laws. Reference local Ordinances No. 348,460, California Governmental Code Sections 65000-66009 (Planning Zoning Law), and Government Code Title 7, Division 2. STAFFRPT\13.CZ 17 m The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of parcel configurations, access, and density. The project has access to public rights-of-way, and is designed with sufficient parcel acreage allowing appropriate building pad sightings. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural environment as determined in the initial study prepared for this project. Reference the attached Initial Environmental Study and Conditions of Approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26828. 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. Easement dedications are not evident in grant deeds describing the property. The site for the proposed use is provided legal access via Rita Way and Seraphina Road public rights-of-way. Development of these roads shall comply with City Engineering Conditions of Approval contained herein. The proposed project will not inhibit or restrict future ability to use active or passive solar energy systems. Adequate lot areas and exposures are provided for these alternatives. Jm The proposed use will not have a substantial adverse affect on abutting properties or the permitted use thereof. The proposed map provides for residential development similar in character and densities evident on vicinity properties. Land use incongruities and associated adverse affects arising from implementation of this proposal are unlikely. The Airport Land Use Commission is making substantial progress toward the completion of the plan. There is reasonable probability that the action, regulation, or permit will be consistent with the plan being considered by the Airport Land Use Commission. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the Future Adopted Plan in the action, regulation, or permit is ultimately inconsistent with the Future Adopted Airport Lands Use Plan. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Tract Map proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. STAFFRPT\13.CZ 18 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 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26828 for the subdivision of a 35.5 acres into 130 residential lots, generally located at the northwest corner of Rita Way and Seraphina Road subject to the following conditions: A. Attachment 2, attached hereto. SECTION 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of October, 1991. JOHN HOAGLAND 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 21 st day of October, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS STAFFRPT%13.CZ 19 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL STAFFRPT%13.CZ 20 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26828 Project Description: Change of Zone No. 13 and 35.5 acres, 130 lot Residential Subdivision ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 914-260-039, 040, 041,042,043, 044, 045, AND 046. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, 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 460. 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. 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 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 and a maximum vertical height of thirty (30) feet. Setbacks from top and bottom of slopes shall be a minimum of one-half the slope height. B. 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. STAFFRPT%13.CZ 21 The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the County Health Department's transmittel dated August 27, 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 August 27, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 10. All proposed construction shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy, as outlined in the Southwest Area Plan. The following note 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. 11. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Eastern Municipal Water District transmittel dated February 8, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 12. 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-1 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. 13. 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 and the Temecula Community Service District. 14. 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. 15. 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. This property is located within a two (2) mile radius of the French Valley Airport. Interior noise levels shall be kept at a level below 45 dB by the use of proper procedures as recommended in an acoustical engineering study completed for this project. STAFFRPT\13,CZ 2:;) 16. 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: (1) Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all landscaped areas requiring irrigation. (2) Landscape screening where required shall be designed to be opaque up to a minimum height of six (6) feet at maturity. (3) 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. (4) Parkways shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or a transition into the primary use area of the site. Landscape elements shall include earth berming, ground cover, shrubs and specimen trees. Front yards shall be landscaped and street trees planted. (5) Wall plans shall be submitted for the project perimeter and along 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. (6) Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent trees at key visual focal points within the project. (7) 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. (8) Landscaping plans shall incorporate native and drought tolerant plants where appropriate. (9) All landscaping areas proposed for maintenance by the T.C.S.D., shall be reviewed and approved by the T.C.S.D. (10) All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow growing trees shall be steel staked. (11) Any oak trees removed with four (4) inches or larger trunk diameters shall be replaced on a ten (10) to one (1) basis as approved by the Planning Director. Replacement tress shall be noted on approved landscaping plans. STAFFRPT\I 3, CZ 2 3 (12) 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: (a) Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and sedimentation during and after the grading process. (b) Approximate time frames for grading and identification of areas which may be graded during the higher probability rain months of January through March, (c) Preliminary pad and roadway elevations. (d) Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase. (13) All cut slopes located adjacent to ungraded natural terrain and exceeding ten (10) feet in vertical height shall be contour-graded incorporating the following grading techniques: (a) The angle of the graded slope shall be gradually adjusted to the angle of the natural terrain. (b) Angular forms shall be discouraged. The graded form shall reflect the natural rounded terrain. (c) The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with curves with radii designed in proportion to the total height of the slopes where drainage and stability permit such rounding. (d) Where cut or fill slopes exceed 300 feet in horizontal length, the horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved in a continuous, unduleting fashion. (14) 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. 17. 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 preograde 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. STAFFRPT\13.CZ 24 18. Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: 19. 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 45 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. 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. Building separation between all buildings including fireplaces shall not be less than ten (10) feet. G. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of ten (10) feet. 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 front yards shall be provided with landscaping and automatic irrigation. 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. STAFFRPT\13.CZ 25 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. Prior to recordation of the FINAL MAP, the applicant or his assignee, shall conform to Ordinance No. 460.93 (Quimby) by paying IN FULL to the City of Temecula, TCSD the fair market value of 1.683 acres of land, as determined by the TCSD plus 20% for offsite improvements. 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 Vesting Tract Map No. 26828, 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. 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 66462 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 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. 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. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. 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 (925.00) 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). STAFFRPT\13.CZ 26 26. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26828 shall not be approved until such time as Change of Zone No. 13 has been adopted by the City of Temecula. 27. Prior to RECORDATION of the FINAL MAP, the applicant shall satisfy all fee requirements of the Temecula Valley Unified School District. BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT 28. Prior to final map approval, obtain street name clearance from Building and Safety. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS The following are the Department of Public Works 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 appropriate staff person of the Department of Public Works. It is understood that the Developer has correctly shown on the tentative map all existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review. PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 29. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Eastern Municipal Water District; Riverside County Flood Control district; City of Temecula Fire Bureau; Planning Department; Department of Public Works; Riverside County Health Department; CATV Franchise; Parks and Recreation Department; and Temecula Unified School District. 30. 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 Department of Public Works. 31. Streets "A", "B", "C", "D" and "F" shall be improved with 40 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. 104, Section A (60'/40'). 32. Streets "G", "H", "1" and "J" shall be improved with 36 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. 105, Section A (60'/36'). STAFFRPT\13,CZ 27 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. Rita Way shall be improved with 20 feet of half street improvement plus one 8 foot lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right- of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 104, Section A (60'/40'). These improvements shall be coordinated with Tract Map No. 25004 as directed by the Department of Public Works. Joseph Road shall be improved with 28 feet of asphalt concrete pavement from Nicolas Road to Rita Way, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 104, Section A (60'/40'}. These improvements shall be at ultimate grade and shall be coordinated with adjacent projects as directed by the Department of Public Works. If secondary access can be provided through Tract No. 23143 from Joseph Road, those improvements through Santa Gertrudis Creek to Nicolas Road may be deleted by the Department of Public Works. Seraphina Road shall be improved with 20 feet of half street improvement plus one 8 foot lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within a 60 foot dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 104, Section A (60'/40'). These improvements shall be coordinated with adjacent projects as directed by the Department of Public Works. In the event that Willows Avenue is not constructed from Street "A" to North General Kearny Road prior to the final map recordation, the developer shall construct or bond for the improvements to provide for full street improvements per Riverside County Standard No. 103 (66'/44'). The improvements shall be constructed prior to occupancy. Joseph Road north of Rita Way shall be vacated as directed by the City Engineer. Processing shall be per the requirements of a full general vacation as required by Riverside County Ordinance and Section 8300 of the California Streets and Highways Code. Prior to vacating Joseph Road, alternate access to the existing school and park site shall be provided. 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. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Rita Way and Seraphina Road and so noted on the final map with the exception of public street intersections as approved by the Department of Public Works. 40. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. STAFFRPT\13,CZ 28 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. Easements, when required for roadway slopes along arterial streets, 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 Department of Public Works. 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, and other traffic control devices as appropriate. B. Storm drain facilities. C. Landscaping (street and parks). D. Sewer and domestic water systems. E. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. F. Undergrounding of 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 requirements of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the Department of Public Works. Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department of Public Works 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 Building and Safety Department. The minimum centerline radii shall be 300 feet or as approved by the Department of Public Works. All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 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 Department of Public Works. STAFFRPT\13.CZ 29 50. A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent. 51. 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 401 (curb sidewalk). 52. All driveways shall be located a minimum of two (2) feet from the property line. 53. The subdivider shall submit two (2) prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the Department of Public Works. 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 24" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil Engineer. 54. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. 55. The subdivider shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report to the Department of Public Works. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. 56. A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the Department of Public Works. 57, 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." 58. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 59. 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. 60. Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CA'IV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of street improvements. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 61. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works. 62. A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-way. STAFFRFF\13.CZ 30 63. All lot drainage shall be to the street by side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot. 64. 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: 65. A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 66. 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. 67. 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 security to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the security 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 thereof. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY: 68. 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. 69. Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Traffic control plans shall be provided as directed by the Department of Public Works, and may be required to be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. STAFFRPT\13.CZ 31 70. 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 94 of the State Standard Specifications. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 71. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for general local streets or larger and shall be included in the street improvement plans. 72. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering for the design requirements. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS: 73. 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: 74. All signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan. 75. As warranted, traffic signals shall be installed and operational for the intersections of Murrieta Hot Springs Road at Willows Avenue and Murrieta Hot Springs Road at Town View Avenue. If warrants have been met prior to occupancy of the subdivision, as determined by the County of Riverside Transportation Department, occupancy shall be permitted with installation of said signals and as directed by the Department of Public Works. vgw STAFFRPT\13.CZ 32 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STAFFRPT\13.CZ 33 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY I Background 1. Name of Proponent: Dacin Development, Inc. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: Date of Environmental Assessment: 801 S. Garfield Ave #201 Alhambra, CA 91801 (818) 300-8883 September 23, 1991 4. Agency Requiring Assessment: CITY OF TEMECULA Name of Proposal, if applicable: Vesting Tentative Tract MaD No. 26828 and ChanQe of Zone No. 13 Location of Proposal: Northwest Corner of the Intersection of Rita Wav and Seraohina Road. II 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 Substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features? X The destruction, covering or modi- fication of any unique geologic or STAFFRPT\13.CZ 34 physical features? __ __ X 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? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X STAFFRPT\13.CZ 35 Yes Maybe No Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including, but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? Alteration of the direction or rate of flow or ground waters? Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct addi- tions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flood- ing 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? d. Substantial reduction in acreage X X X X X X X X X STAFFRPT\13.CZ 36 of any agricultural crop? __ __ X 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? Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? Exposure of people to severe noise levels? Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce substantial new light or glare? Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: Substantial increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? Substantial depletion of any non- renewable natural resource? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X STAFFRPT\I 3. CZ 3 7 10. 11. 12. 13. 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? Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? 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? f: Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X X STAFFRPT\13.CZ 38 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have substantial effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services: 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? ,16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: Power or natural gas? Communications systems? Water? Sewer or septic tanks? Storm water drainage? Solid waste and disposal? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X X X X X X X STAFFRPT\33,CZ 39 17. 18. 19. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? Exposure of people to potential health hazards? Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? Yes Maybe No X X X X X X X X STAFFRPT~ 3.CZ 40 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? X 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.) X 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.) X Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substan- tial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X STAFFRPT\13.CZ 41 III Earth 1.a. 1.b. 1 .c-d. 1.8. 1.f. 1.g. Air 2. a-c. Water 3.a, d-e. Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation No. The project site will be graded as part of a mass grading effort. There will be substantial grading for this project. However, a conceptual mass grading plan for the project was approved by the City Engineer and designed in accordance with Temecula's standards and the Conditions of Approval. Yes. All development disrupts the soil profile to some degree and results in soil displacement, compaction, and overcovering. This impact is not considered significant. No. The mass grading effort was designed to adhere to the gross natural topography of the site in its original condition. While substantial grading and recontouring of this site will occur in the immediate area, the overall plan is intended to promote general preservation of site topography. Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are replanted. The wind erosion impact is considered significant but will be mitigated through minimal grading, retention of natural vegetation whenever feasible, and use of watering trucks and hydro-seeding of disturbed areas after grading. After the project is completed, increased water run- off during floods may occur. 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. No. Since the project site is not adjacent to any creek or stream bed, the proposed project will not cause erosion of or deposition into any creek or stream bed. No. The subject site is designated as subject to liquefaction and subsidence by the Riverside County General Plan. To mitigate under hazard, a geological report has been prepared. This report contains mitigation measures addressed in the Conditions of Approval. No. The proposed project will not significantly impact the area's air quality. No. The proposed project will not impact any marine or fresh water bodies. The proposed project will incrementally affect the quantity and quality of run-off water in the City, however, the individual impact is not considered significant. STAFFRPT\13.CZ 42 3.b. No. The proposed project will inhibit the absorption of water into the ground through the construction of impermeable surfaces on the site. Run-off will increase but not substantially, 3.c. No, Flood waters will continue to be diverted to the streets and flood channels. 3.f-g. No. The proposed project will not significantly affect the flow or quantity of ground waters, 3,h. No. The proposed project will not significantly impact the public water supply. 3.i. No. Conditions of Approval are included for this project which require proper design and installation of drainage conveyance devices. Vegetation 4.a-c. No. No sensitive vegetational associations or species were identified on-site. 4.d. No. No agricultural production occurred on-site. Wildlife 5.a-c. Maybe. A survey for the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat prepared for this project identified no individuals of the species on the subject site. Evidence found on site indicate that some potential habitat does exist. As a result of this projects incremental impact on potential S,K,R, habitat, fees will be required in accordance with Ordinance 663 and the Habitat Conservation Plan adopted by the City of Temecula, Conformance with these procedures will mitigate the impact to a level of non-significance. Noise 6,a-b. Maybe. The proposed project is located within the French Valley Airport influence area. A noise study conducted by J.J. Van Houten and Associates indicated that the proposed development will not be affected by current or future aircraft noise. The proposed project is located well outside of the 65 C.N.E.Lo noise boundary which the State of California Division of Aeronautics considers an acceptable fly over noise level. The project C.N.E.L. range will be 50-54dB which also meets E.P.A. standards. The impact is not considered significant. It is further recommended that the final engineering design of the project be reviewed by a recognized acoustical engineer to ensure compliance with the County's noise standards. Light and Glare Yes. However, the project has been conditioned to comply with applicable lighting standards, specifically Ordinance No. 655, Palomar Lighting Standards. The impact will be mitigated to at level of non-significance. STAFFRPT\13.CZ 43 Land Use No. If the Change of Zone is approved the subdivision will be consistent with the Southwest Area Plan and Ordinance No. 348. The project is surrounded by approved medium density residential projects. Natural Resources 9.a-b. No. This project in itself will not significantly increase the rate of use of natural resources. Risk of Upset 10. a-b. No. The proposed project will not promote a risk of explosion or release hazardous substances, Construction materials and petroleum products will be used extensively to support the project during construction, however this impact is temporary and not considered significant. It will not interfere with emergency response plan or an emergency evaluation plan. Population 11. Yes. Although the project proposes to increase the density from zero dwelling unit to 130 units, the proposed project is consistent with the City Land Use Designation (according to SWAP). Housing 12. No. Since the proposed project will create housing, the proposed land use will not create a demand for additional housing. Transportation/Circulation 13.a. Maybe., 13. b-e. No. 13.f. Maybe. Public Services 14. a-f. The Traffic Study which was prepared for the proposed project has addressed potential traffic impacts and has concluded that the cumulative impacts will not be significant. Maybe. The proposed project may have an effect on public services, however, appropriate fees are required as conditioned to mitigate impacts to a level of non- significance. STAFFRPT\13,CZ 44 Energy 15. a-b. No. The proposed project will not result in the substantial use or increase in demand of fuel or energy. Utilities 16. a-f. No. The proposed project might require the use of utilities but will not require substantial alteration to the existing system. Human Health 17. a-b. No. The proposed project will not have significant adverse effect on human health. Aesthetics 18. No. Because the proposed project has been designed to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, there will be no significant impact on aesthetics. Recreation 19. Maybe. The proposed project will have the potential to increase the population, and impact City of Temecula recreation opportunities which are currently limited. However, Quimby fees are required of this project which will provide funds for the acquisition of future recreational facilities, mitigating the effect of this individual tract to a level of non-significance. Cultural Resources 20. a~d. As identified in the archaeological study prepared for this project, this project will have no impact. Mandatory Findings of Significance 21 .a. No. The proposed project will not have a significant impact on plant or wildlife species. However, if a project is located within an area designated by the Riverside County as habitat for the endangered Stephen's 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. STAFFRPT\13.CZ 45 21. c-d, No. The proposed project will not have impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable, nor will they have environmental affects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. STAFFRPT\I 3. CZ 4 6 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 requires _ Date For CITY OF TEMECULA STAFFRPT%13.CZ 47 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 EXHIBITS STAFFRPT\I 3.CZ 48 CITY OF TEMECULA ~ "N "DRI VE ~~ ( . 3428) %,~ ( R. 29004) \ ~ HO TR 2 R. J ~p;'STREET PROJECT WAR~,TA OSE H RD. VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE r c?_.u=.l:~ ~ CASE NO.VTl't'/tUo-'zbB7-,~ EXHIBIT NO. ~P.C. DATE CITY OF TEMECULA ) /d EXHIBIT NO. kP.C. DATEIO-Z~-q.I j CITY OF TEMECULA ) /~ CITY OF TEMECULA ) ~i'rE , Ii - II I CASE EXHIBIT NO. ~,P.C. DATE CITY OF TEMECULA ~ CASE NO.v'TTh~, EXHIBIT NO. ATTACHMENT NO. 6 CITY ATTORNEY LETTER BURKE, 'WILLIAIvIS 8c SOREbTSEI~T September 16, 1991 Gary Thornhill, Planning Director CITY OF TEMECULA 43180 Business Park Drive Suite 200 Temecula, CA 92390 Re: Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission/French Valley Airport Dear Gary: You requested this office to provide you with comments, recommendations and directions regarding the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commissionls ("ALUC") decisions to deny vesting tentative tract map 26828 and recommending denial for vesting tentative tract map 25004. You also requested direction on what options the City has in its relationship with the ALUC with respect to those land use decisions. As I understand the facts as were presented to me though your memorandum and supporting documentation, these two projects are within the proposed French Valley Airport areas of influence, which said airport is a public use airport. In 1984, the Riverside County ALUC adopted the Riverside County ALUC policy plan which is apparently an interim plan used for the French Valley Airport until a specific land use plan is adopted. On September'29, 1989, the French Valley Airport extended its sphere of influence to include those areas in which the two projects are now currently proposed. As was indicated in your memorandum to me, the ALUC denied vesting tentative tract map 26828 and has recommended denial for vesting tentative tract map 25004 based upon the following grounds: The ALUC is making substantial progress toward the completion of the French Valley Airport Land Use Plan; There is a reasonable probability that the project will be inconsistent with the plan; and Gary Thornhill September 16, 1991 Page 2 There is a probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the plan, if the project is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. Evidently, the ALUC's policy dictates that there be a minimum lot size of 2 1/2 acre minimum for proposed residential uses and the proposed projects have lot sizes smaller than those set forth in the ALUC policy. It is my further understanding that the City placed a condition on tract map 25004 which required clearance from the ALUC prior to issuance of any building permits. After receiving the Commission's recommendation for denial of the project, the applicant retained services of an airport consultant and a sound attenuation engineer to analyze the project, whereinafter the consultants determined that the project would have no adverse impact on the airport nor does the airport affect the project adversely. Based on this factual b~ckground, two issues need to be addressed. The first issue is what are the duties and obligations of an ALUC and from what authority does the ALUC derive its powers. The second issue is what is the legal relationship between the City of Temecula and the ALUC with respect to the land use decisions involving the French Valley Airport. Issue No. 1. What are the duties and obligation of an Airport Land Use Commission and from what authority does it derive its powers. The enabling authority for the creation, powers, duties and obligations of an Airport Land Use Commission stem from the provisions of SB 255 which said provisions were later codified in the Public Utilities Code pursuant to Section 21670, et sec. (a copy of these code sections is attached hereto for your review). The overall purpose of the ALUC statutes is to provide for the orderly development of each public use airport in this State and the area surrounding these airports so as to promote the overall goals and objectives of the California Airport Noise Standards adopted pursuant to Section 21669 of the Public Utilities Code and to prevent the creation of new noise and safety problems. Gar~ Thornhill September 16, 1991 Page 3 Therefore, state law requires that every County establish an Airport land Use Commission where there is located an airport which is either served by a scheduled airline or which is not served by a scheduled airline but is operated for the benefit of the general public. It is my understanding that the French Valley Airport is currently an airport which is a public use airport but which is not currently served by a scheduled airline. Since the Riverside County ALUC was created prior to the incorporation of the City of Temecula, the City is not currently being represented on the Commission as would otherwise be required under State law. Depending on when the Riverside ALUC was created, the term of office of each member is four years. If the current ALUC is the very first commission, the term of office for one Commissioner is one year, two members two years, two members three years and two members four years. Therefore, somewhere down the line a representative of the City may be placed on the ALUC as a member. Section 21674 sets forth the powers and duties of an ALUC. Part of its mandatory duties is to adopt a comprehensive land use plan for the orderly growth of each public airport and the area surrounding the airport within the Jurisdiction of the Commission which reflects the anticipated growth of the airport during at least the next twenty (20) years. This land use plan must be adopted by June 30, 1991. As part of its plan, the planning boundaries of the particular airport must be established by the Commission after hearing and consultation with the involved agencies which presumably would include the City of Temecula. The requirement that the ALUC shall adopt a comprehensive land use plan by June 30, 1991, is not permissive in nature~ rather, it is mandatory. The question arises whether the ALUC can now take any action regarding a particular project within its jurisdiction when it has failed to adopt this land use plan by the June 30, 1991 date. It does appear under the facts of these two projects, that the applications were considered prior to that date at a time in which the ALUC did not have its land use plan adopted~ rather, only an interim policy plan. Therefore, it appears that the current County ALUC had the proper authority to review and take the appropriate action regarding the projects at issue. Issue No. 2. What is the legal relationship between the City and the ALUC with respect to the land use decisions involving the French Valley Airport. Gary Thornhill September 16, 1991 Page 4 Section 21675.1 states that until a Land Use Commission adopts a comprehensive land use plan, the City must first submit all actions, regulations and permits within the vicinity of a public airport to the Commission for review and approval. Sefore the Commission approves or disapproves of any actions, regulations or permits, the Commission must give public notice in the same manner as the City is required to give for such actions. If the ALUC disapproves a particular application, the City may overrule the Commission by a two thirds vote if it makes specific findings that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of the Public Utilities Code dealing with the Airport Land Use Commission provisions. In the event the City does overrule the Commission and the City is not an operator of the publicly owned airport, the operator of the airport is immune from liability for damages to property or personal injury for the Cityts decision to proceed with the particular project. Therefore, with respect to the projects at issue, the City has two (2) options in accordance with the provisions of the Public Utilities Code~ The City may let stand the decision of the Airport Land Use Commission to deny tract map 26828 and affirm its recommendation for denial of map 25004 based on the findings of the Commission~ or Overrule the Commission's determination by two thirds vote of the City Council based on specific findings that the particular projects are consistent with the purposes of Section 21670 of the Public Utilities Code. I hope the above information is helpful to you and I will be happy to answer any questions you may have. cc: David F. Scott F. JEc\tem\l 1 F890. k t r Very truly yours, Dixon, City Manager, w/out enclosures Field, City Attorney, w/out enclosures ATTACHMENT NO. 7 AIRPORT STUDIES STAFFRPT%13.CZ 50 J.J. VAN HOlYFEN & ASSOCLATE$, Inc. JOHN J. VAN HOUTEN, PE. Principal Consulttoni DAVID L. WIELANe. Principal ~aMk4ne~ ROBERT W~. Senior Engineer Hay 30, 1991 !260EASTKATELLAAVENU~ ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92805 [714|978-7018 [714]635-9520 FAX|714)939*0C~8 Project File 2185-90(S) DIX DEVELOPMENT 22865 Lake Forest Drive E1 Tore, CA 92630 Attention: Mr. Gary Dix Subject: Assessment of Aircraft Noise Exposures, Tract 25004, County of Riverside Reference: "Noise Assessment and Noise Control Recommendations, Tract 25004, County of Riverside,n J. J. Van Houten and Associates, Inc., March 19, 1990 Gentlemen= As requested, this supplemental report has been prepared to specifically address the aircraft noise exposure at Tract 25004 generated by flight activity at French Valley Airport. Referring to Figure 1, the community noise equivalent level (CNEL) at the site ranges from 50 to 54 dB. In the following sections, this level of noise exposure is assessed relative to three recognized standards: County of Riverside The County specifies a CNEL standard of 65 dB for exterior residential areas. The aircraft noise exposure at the project site is 11 to 15 dB below the Countygs standard. State of California Division of aeronautios Title 21, Subchapter 6, Article 1, Section 5005 of the California Administrative Code etateal "The level of noise acceptable to a reasonable person residing in the vicinity of an airport is established as a community noise equivalent level (CNEL) value of 65 dB for purposes of these regulations. This criterion level has been chosen for ratsenable persons residing in urban residential areas wher~ houses are of typical California construction and may h6ve windows partially open. It has 1 S\STAFFRPT~28828 ,VTM 48 DIX DEVELOPMENT PROJECT FILE 2185-90(S) been selected with reference to speech, sleep, and community reaction.w Again, the aircraft noise exposure at the project site is signifi- cantly (11 to 15 dB) below the State standard. U.S. ~nvironmental Protection Agenov The EPA has identified a day-night average sound level (Ldn) of 55 dB as the requisite level to protect public health and welfare with an adequate margin of safety for both activity interference and hearing loss1. [Note: Ldn and CNEL are essentially identical measures of noise exposure. Title 24 of the State of California Administrative Code uses the two descriptors interchangeably.] This noise exposure level is considered by the EPA to be a guideline rather than a standard since the agency recognizes that this level is not always attainable, particularly in urban environments. In any event, the aircraft noise exposure at the project site will be I to 5 dB below the level identified by the EPA as requisite to protect the health and welfare of the resi- dents. Figure 2 provides the results of several case studies relating to community response, as reported by the EPA1. Referring to the figure, it is expected that there will be no "overt reaction" by the residents of Tract 25004 to an aircraft noise exposure of 50 to 54 dB at the site. INTERIOR AIRCRAFT NOISe L~*V'~L8 Both the County of Riverside and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identify an interior noise exposure standard of 45 dB (CNEL or Ldn) for residential living areas. The EPA identifies typical sound level reductions of 12 dB with windows open and 24 dB with windows closed for standard residential construction~. Applying these values to the exterior CNEL of 50 to 54 dB yields an interior CNEL of 38 to 42 dB with windows open and 26 to 30 dB with windows closed. These levels are well below the interior standard of 45 dB identified by the County and Federal Governments. 1 "Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare With an Adequate Margin of Safety," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, March 1974. 2 J.J. VAN HOUTEN & ASSOCIATES, Inc. DIX DEVEEOPMENT PROJECT FILE 2185-90(S) FURTHBR R~DUCTION OF INTBRIOR AXRC~J~FT NOXBB L~V~LS The referenced report identifies several recommendations for mitigating interior residential noise .levels at Tract 25004. Forced air ventilation has been recommended at every residence so that a habitable environment may be provided with windows closed. As indicated in the previous section, it is estimated that these recommendations, along with standard building construction, will reduce the interior CNEL to about 26 to 30 dB, This is 15 to 19 dB below the State and Federal standard, a significant amount. However, if it is desired to reduce the aircraft noise exposure still further, sound rated windows and sliding glass doors having a sound transmission class (STC) of 25 could be used throughout the project (with the exception of second floor windows facing Nurrietta Hot Springs Road, where STC ratings as high as 30 may be needed due to the traffic noise exposure). It is estimated that with STC 25 assemblies, the interior noise exposure will be reduced by another 2 to 4 dB. CONCLUSION The aircraft noise exposure of 50 to 54 dB at Tract 25004 due to flight activity at French Valley Airport is well below county, State, and Federal standards. No community reaction is expected from this level of exposure. ' With windows closed, the interior noise exposure within the homes will be 15 to 19 dB below the County and Federal standard of 45 dB. However, if desired, the interior aircraft noise exposure level may be further reduced by using sound rated glazing assemblies throughout the project. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at 714/978-7018. Very truly yours, , - / -- -j----'.-- JOhn J. Van uten, P.E. ~'~"' ' '/ ' consulti.g Engineer in Acoustics W ~er vJJV~/DLW/rrp .~~_--' Copy to: Mr. Richard Berg CM Engineering 41593 Winchester Road, Suite 210 Temecula, CA 92390 3 J.J. VAN HOUTEN & ASSOCIATES, Inc. DEN. I~ ~JIAC '*. 2.5 AC KZN ROAD Sf I0~ o% t. I, I I IZSIDDITTAL IL~NCHO IL'I, LA IlSTA SP N SCALE 1"'2200' Figure 1. Location of Project Site Relative to French Valley Airport Noise Contours J COMMUNITY R~CTiON VIGOROUS ACTION SEVERAL THREATS OF LEGAL ACTION OR STRONG APPEALS TO LOCAL O~RCtA~S TO STOP NOISE wlOESPREAO COMPLAINTS OR SINGLE THREAT OF LEGAL ACTION SPORAOIC COMPLAINTS OATA NORMALIZEO TO: RESIDENTIAL URBAN RESIDUAL NOISE SOME PRIOR EXPOSURE WINOOWS PARTIALLY OPEN NO PURE TONE OR IMPLUSES NO REACTION ALTNOUGH NOISE IS GENERALLY NOTICEABLE I 40 50 60 I0 80 90 NOF~ALIZED 0UTOOOR MY/NIGHT SOUND LEVEL OF INTRUDING NOISE IN dB Figure 2, Combi,,ed Data 'From Community Case Studies Adjusted for C~nd~.tions of Exposure May 30, 1991 To: Mr. Gary R. Dix Dix Development, Inc. 22865 Lake Forest Drive E1Toro, Ca. 92630 Fm: Gerald M. Dallas Airport Consultant 25242 Derby Cr. Laguna Hills, Ca. 92653 subj: Airport Land Use considerations of proposed residential project in relation to the French Valley Airport, Temecula, Ca. IF THE EXISTING RUNWAY WERE EXTENDED TO THE SOUTH 12OO FEET. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 135 single family sized lots with a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet. Density is 2j3 dwelling units per acre, with structural coverage per lot of approximately 16%. PROJECT LOCATION: The proposed project is located in the City of Temecula, east of Seraphina Road and north of Nicholas Road. The proposed project would be approximately 5,500 feet southeast of an extended runway 18/36 at the Frech Valley Airport. The project is within the "Interim Influence Area" of the Airport Land Use Plan for the French Valley Airport dated September 29, 1989. ISSUE: Would the proposed project be consistent with an Airport Land Use Plan that may be developed for the airport if the existing runway were extended to the south by 1200 feet, for a total length of 5800 feet? ANASYSIS: This analysis is limited to the future development and operation of the French Valley Airport as defined in this report and its relationship to the proposed project. These issues include consideration of the following three major areas: o Height Restrictions for Air Safety o Noise Compatibility o Safety to persons on the ground Height Restrictions for Air Safety Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 have been issued by the Federal Government to define height limits around airports. The principal purpose behind Part 77 is to provide standards for determining obstructions in navigable airspace. FAR part 77 has three major elements, (1) Notice Requirements (2) Obstruction Standards and (3) Definition of Substantial Adverse Effect. The Notice Requirements of FAR Part 77 for the French Valley Airport are that a notice of construction or alteration is required if any proposed construction is greater than 200 feet above the ground level at its site or penetrates a 100:1 plane for a distance of 20,000 feet from the nearest point of the runway. Since no structure in the proposed development would exceed thirty five feet and would be at least 5,500 feet from the extended runway, no notice to th~ Federal Aviation Administration under FAR Part 77 would be required. Therefore the proposed project would not impact on the safety of air operations in and around the French Valley Airport, with the runway extended 1200 feet to the south. Noise Compatability The California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautic's "Airport Land Use Planning Handbook" indicates the following guidelines for determining land use compatibility based on aircraft noise: Residential and Lodgings Within the 60-65 CNEL - potential for annoyance exists, accoustical studies should be performed, noise insulation should be included if appropriate, and all forms of housing can be accommodated. Within the 55-60 CNEL - little potential for intereference indoor or outdoor activities. With the extended runway a different mix ef aircraft could be accommodated at the airport than can presently utilize the airport. For this analysis the following assumptions were made. Assumption 1: The traffic patterns shown on the "Interim Influence Area" of the Airport Land Use Plan for the airport dated September 29, 1989 were used for the extended runway. (This is considered conservative in relation to the proposed project since with the longer runway, larger aircraft would be expected to approach and depart more directly aligned with the runway than indicated by the September 29, 1989 flight tracks). Assumption 2:. 192,000 annual operations; night operations 1.5%, evening operations 8%, day operations 90.5%; 85% of operations north to south. Assumption 3: The following fleet mix was used to determine the approximate location of future CNEL contours shown in Exhibit A: General aviation single engine piston aircraft - 76% General aviation twin engine piston aircraft 7% General aviation twin turboprop engine aircraft- 2% Civil and Military Helicopters - 13% General Aviation twin jet aircraft - 2% Exhibit A indicates that the proposed project would be well outside the 60 CNEL contour resulting from the assumed future aircraft operations. Therefore, the proposed project should conform to State criteria for noise compatability with regard to operations from the French Valley Airport with a 5800 foot runway with the assumed air- craft activity. Safety of Persons on the Ground The State of California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautic's "Airport Land Use Planning Handbook" identifies guidlines for land use restrictions in Safety Zones or Safety Areas associated with airports. The purpose for establishing land use restrictions iin safety zones is to minimize the number of people exposed to aircraft crash hazards. The two principal methods for reducing the risk of injury and property damage on the ground are to limit the number of persons in an area and/or limit the area covered by structures. The Safety Zones or Safety Areas have been divided into four categories. (1) Clear Zone, (2) Approach Safety Zone, (3) Outer Approach Surface Safety Zone, and Overflight Zone (including the traffic pattern area). Exhiit A indicates the proposed project is not in a clear zone or in an approach safety zone. However, the proposed project would probably be in a traffic pattern area. The Airport Land Use Planning Handbook indicates that in the Traffic Pattern Area, hazards to any site is quite low compared to the areas nearest the runway. However, the handbook recommends that large assemblages of people not be located in these areas because of the potential for injury if there were a crash. Therefore, schools and hospitals, spectator sport arenas, auditoriems, outdoor amphitheaters or industries with flammable materials or processes are not recommended in overflight zones or traffic pattern areas. The Airport Land Use Planning Handbook further recommends no more than three dwelling units per acre and the maximum structural coverage of the area be less that 20 percent in the traffic pattern areas.. Since the project proposes 2.3 dwelling units per acre and a structural coverage of sixteen percent, recommendations of the handbook are met for construction in a traffic pattern area. CONCLUSION: Since the proposed project would conform to the recommendations of the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautic's "Airport Land Use Planning Habdbook", in the areas of height restrictions for air safety, aircraft noise compatability and safety to persons on the ground; it is reasonable to conclude the French Valley Airport Land Use Plan when finalized for an airport with a 1200 foot runway extension to the south would indicate the proposed project will be consistent with the plan and that the proposed project will not effect the aeronautical activities at the airport; nor will operations from the 5800 foot runway effect this project.