The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About110193 PC AgendaAGENDA TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION November 1, 1993, 6:00 PM VAIL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 29915 Mira Lome Drive Temecula, CA 92390 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Ford ROLL CALL: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Hoagland and Ford 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 your name and address. For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Planning Secretary before Commission gets to that item. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers. COMMISSION BUSINESS 1. Approval of Agenda 2.1 Approval of minutes from the October 4, 1993 Planning Commission meeting. 3. Director's Hearing Update NON-PUBLIC HEARING Note: Pursuant to Senate Bill 428, the following non-public hearing cases may receive automatic approvals: Case No.: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Environmental Action: Planner: Recommendation: PA93-0163, First Extension of Time Michael Lanni East side of Ynez Road, approximately 200 feet south of Calle Halcon First Extension of Time for Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1 Re-affirm the previously adopted Negative Declaration Craig D. Ruiz Approve R:~WIMBERVG\PLANCOMM~AGENDAS~11-1*93 10128t93 vgw 1 Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Environmental Action: Planner: Recommendation: Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Second Extension of Time Trans Pacific Funding Corporation Northwest corner of Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway Second one (1) year extension of time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372 N/A Matthew Fagan Approve Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Environmental Action: Planner: Recommendation: Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Environmental Action: Planner: Recommendation: Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Second Extension of Time Trans Pacific Funding Corporation Northwest corner of Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway Second one (1) year extension of time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373 N/A Matthew Fagan Approve PA93-0175, First Extension of Time Markham & Associates Northeast corner of Ynez and Santiago Roads First Extension of Time for Tentative Tract Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1 Re-affirm the previously adopted Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1 Matthew Fagan Approve PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 8. Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Environmental Action: Planner: Recommendation: PA93-0179 - Second Unit Permit Raymond and Odette Derobert 31550 Calle Girasol - on corner of Calle Girasol, north of the intersection of Calle Girasol and Riverton Lane Construct a new 2,195 square foot dwelling unit. New unit will become the primary unit and the existing 1,536 square foot structure will become the secondary unit. Categorical Exemption Matthew Fagan Approve R:\WIMBERVG\PLANCOMM\AGENDAS\11-1-93 10/28/93 vgw 2 9. Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Environmental Action: Planner: Recommendation: PA 93-0145 (Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2) PA 93-0144 (Tentative Tract Map No. 27827) Leo Roripaugh Northwest corner of Nicolas and Winchester Roads A Request for Approval of Amendment No. 2 to Specific Plan No. 164 in order to Change the Zoning for Planning Areas 7 (22.5 Acres) and 8 (10.1 Acres) from Very High Density Residential (20 Dwelling Units Per Acre) to High Density Residential (12 Dwelling Units Per Acre), to add a three (3) acre park and adjust the boundaries between Planning Areas 7, 8 and 9; and Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 27827, a 162 single family lot subdivision plus a three (3) acre lot for a public park within Planning Area No. 7. Negative Declaration Saied Naaseh Recommend Approve Next meeting: December 6, 1993, 6:00 p.m., Vail Elementary School, 29915 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula, California. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION OTHER BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT R:~WIMBERVG%PLANCOMM\AGENDAS\11-1-93 10/28/93 vgw 3 ITEM #2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION HELD OCTOBER 4, 1993 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Planning Commission was called to order on Monday, October 4, 1993, 6:00 P.M., at Vail Elementary School, 29915 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula, California. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Steven Ford. PRESENT: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Hoagland, Ford ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None Also present were Senior Planner Dabble Ubnoske, Assistant City Attorney Mary Jo Shelton, and Recording Secretary Gall Zigler. PUBLIC COMMENT None COMMISSION BUSINESS 1. Aooroval of Aaenda It was moved by Commissioner Chiniaeff, seconded by Commissioner Hoagland to approve the agenda. The motion was carried as follows: AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Hoagland, Ford NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ADDrOVal Of Minutes - September 20, 1993 It was moved by Commissioner Chiniaeff, seconded by Commissioner Hoagland to approve the minutes of September 20, 1993. The motion was carried as follows: AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Hoagland, Ford NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None PCMIN10/04193 -1- October 10, 1993 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 4. 1993 NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 3. Director's Hearino Report No report Ray Casey provided an update on Case No. 93-0027, Temecula United Methodist Church. Mr. Casey advised staff has approached Rancho California Water District regarding joint access and they appear to be more receptive to the idea. Staff has re- reviewed the acceleration and sight distance requirements for the driveway and a possible joint use driveway through the RCWD site. Staff has requested topographic maps to review the design constraints regarding joint access through the RCWD site. Staff will update the Planning Commission again upon receipt of this additional information. Taylor Woodrow Homes Limited - Presentation Adrianne Foley, representative of Taylor Woodrow Homes, provided the Commission with an overview of the Crown Hill Project new design guidelines, in comparison to the previous design guidelines. John Mickler, representing Hunsaker & Associates for Taylor Woodrow Homes, provided a detailed overview of Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map 23143 and 26941. John Wayland, 33342 Pauba Road, Temecula, presented the Commission with a letter of support for the proposed revised map. Chairman Ford asked how the design addresses the flood plain area to the east on the map. Mr. Mickler said there is a water feature designed into the golf course to carry the flow from a 10 year storm and the overflow would flood the golf course. Chairman Ford expressed concern regarding the liability to the City with golf carts crossing public streets to utilize the course. Adrianne Foley said he would be willing to address these concerns with staff. Commissioner Hoagland stated he supports this plan as opposed to the previous plan. Commissioner Blair stated she also supports this plan, however, she asked the applicant to try and conform to the natural land formations and not to deviate from the proposed plan. PCMIN10/O4193 -2- October 10, 1993 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 4, 1993 The overall consensus of the Commission was to support the proposed revised map based on the environmental analysis and staff report. Chairman Ford suggested the applicant develop a production schedule. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 5. PianninQ Application No. 93-0158, Amendment No. I Proposed expansion to the existing TVUSD facility in two (2) phases. Phase 1 consists of the construction of a 15,300 square foot warehouse, the conversion of an existing bus facility to 3,840 square feet of additional warehouse space, and the removal of ten (10) trailers and the drivers lounge. Phase 2 proposes a 15,300 warehouse expansion and a 13,824 square foot expansion to the District Office. Matthew Fagan presented the staff report. He noted the following changes to the Conditions of Approval; Public Works No. 31 and No. 32, amend by adding the language "if applicable" to the end of these conditions. Condition No. 18, modify to read "The applicant shall provide the Director of Planning a landscape maintenance agreement to insure the maintenance of the planrings for a period of one year. Said landscape maintenance agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. Commissioner Hoagiand questioned Condition No. 14, which requires all roof mounted equipment to be properly screened from the surrounding residences. Planner Fagan advised that the only roof-mounted equipment are exhaust fans. Chairman Ford opened the public hearing at 7:10 P.M. Lettie Boggs, representing the Temecula Valley Unified School District, advised the Commission the intent is to store materials used in the daily operation of the school and not maintenance or garage type materials. Ms. Boggs concurred with the Conditions of Approval, however, asked the hours of operation to read 7:00 A.M. She said that although there would not be anyone employed at the facility at 7:00 A.M., some delivery trucks will arrive prior to the 8:00 A.M. start time. Commissioner Hoagland questioned how long the Conditions of Approval are effective. He said he is concerned there may be directives in the future, mandating delivery trucks operate during off hours. Commissioner Hoagland asked what would be the school district's recourse. Senior Planner Debbie Ubnoske suggested language be added providing flexibility with Planning Director approval. Betty Kimbro, 31231 Corte Alhambra, Temecula, stated she was in support of the school district's proposal. PCMIN10/04193 -3- October 10, 1993 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 4, 1993 Joe Sequin, 41640 Avenida de la Reina, Temecula, advised the Commission the homeowners approved the proposal based on the 8:00 A.M. start time. Mr. Sequin also stressed that the facility is to be used for light warehousing. He said he feels the roof equipment should be painted to blend into the surrounding neighborhood. Lettie Boggs responded that the materials that will be stored at the facility are general administrative materials. She said the intent of the warehouse is to take products in and move them out in the same boxes they arrived in. Commissioner Fahey said she feels adding in language to make the start time more flexable might create additional concerns and suggested that since the applicant has agreed with the Conditions of Approval, there should be no modification to the start time. Senior Planner Debbie Ubnoske advised that this item will not go on to the City Council: the Planning Commission has final approval. It was moved by Commissioner Blair, seconded by Commissioner Fahey to close the public hearing at 7:35 P.M. and Adopt the Negative Declaration for Planning Application 93-0158, Amendment No. 1, Adopt Resolution No. 93-23 approving Planning Application 93-0158 subject to the Conditions of Approval, amending Conditions No. 31,32 and 18, as recommended by staff. The motion was carried as follows: AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Fahey, Hoagland, Ford NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT None PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION None OTHER BUSINESS None PCMIN10/04193 -4- O~tober 10, !lg3 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 4, 1993 ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Fahey, seconded by Commissioner Chiniaeff to adjourn at 7:45 P.M. The motion was unanimously carried. The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Planning Commission will be held on Monday, November 1,1993, 6:00 P.M., at Vail Elementary School, 29915 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula, California. Chairman Steven Ford Secretary PCMIN10/04193 -5- O~lober 10, 1993 ITEM #3 TO: Planning Commission DATE: November 1, 1993 SUBJECT: Director's H~g Cases U~te One Minor Public Use Permit was heard and approved at a Planning Direetor's Hearing during October, 1993. Attachment: 1. Planning Director's Hearing - Action Agenda - Blue Page 2 R:x, THORNHG~DIRECTOR.MTG\II-I-93.DH 10/19/e~ klb ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PLANNING DIRECTOR'S I:I~ARING - ACTION AGENDA R:XTHORNHG~DIRECTOR.MT(P, II-I-93.DH 10/19193 klb ACTION AGENDA TEMECULA DIRECTOR'S ITE, MIlNG REGULAR MY.I~TING October 14, 1993 1:30 PM TENIECULA CITY H_AT J. MAIN CONFERENCE ROOM 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 91390 CAT.t, TO ORDER: Debbie Ubnoske, Senior Planner PUBLIC COh!MENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address to the Senior Planner on items that a~ not listed on the Ageads. Speakers are limited to thl'ee (3) minutes each. If you desir~ to speak to the Senior Planner about an item not Hsted on the Agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and fried with the Senior Planner. When you am called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address, For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be fried with the Senior Planner before that item is heard. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers. Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Environmental Action: Planner: ACTION: Planning Application No. 93-0171, Minor Public Use Permit Temecula Valley Church of Religious Science 42145 Lyndie Lane, Building B, Suites 110, 112 and t14. A church facility that will include approximately 1,180 squaxe feet of assembly area, 475 square feet of classroom area, with the remainder of the suite committed to storage, lounge, meeting, reception, nursery and office area in an existing building. Class 1 Categorical Exemption pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Matthew Fagan APPROVED ADJOLINMENT R:XWIMBERVGXDIRECTOR~AGENDA$',lO-14.-93.AGN 10/14193 Idb ITEM #4 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION November 1, 1993 Planning Application No,: PA93-0163 Prepared By: Craig D. Ruiz, Assistant Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends the Planning Commission: RE-AFFIRM the previously adopted Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1; and ADOPT Resolution No. 93- approving PA93-0163, First Extension of Time for Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1, based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report; and APPROVE PA93-0163, Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1, First Extension of Time subject to the Attached Conditions of Approval. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Michael J. Lanni PROPOSAL: A request for a one year time extension for Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1, a subdivision of 5 acres into 8 residential lots and I street lot. LOCATION: East side of Ynez Road, approximately 300 feet south of Calle Halcon. EXISTING ZONING: R-A-20,000 (Residential Agriculture, 20,000 square foot minimum lot size). SURROUNDING ZONING: North: South: East: West: R-1-14,000 (Single Family Residential, 14,000 square foot minimum lot size) R-A-2~ (Rural Agriculture, 2~ acre rain. lot size) R-A-2~ (Rural Agriculture, 2~ acre rain. lot size) S-P (Specific Plan No. 180) PROPOSED ZONING: N/A R:\S\STAFFRPT~193PA93.PC 10127/93 klb FUTURE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Very Low Residential (.2-.4 du/ac) EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Residential South: Vacant East: Residential West: Residential BACKGROUND Planning Application No. PA93-0163 was formally submitted to the Planning Department on July 30, 1993. Planning Application No. PA93-0163 was deemed complete by staff on September 22, 1993. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project is the first one year extension of time for Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1, a subdivision of 5 acres into 8 residential lots and I street lot. ANALYSIS The project is unchanged from that which was originally approved by the Temecula Planning Commission. The only new conditions of approval which have been added to the project relate to new City and federal regulations for erosion control and National Pollutant Discharge Emissions System (NPDES), and to update Community Services Department standard conditions of approval. EXISTING ZONING AND FUTURE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION The project is consistent with the existing zoning of R-A-20,O00. The project's future General Plan Land Use Designation is Very Low Residential (.2-.4 du/ac). The project is within the proposed "Chaparral Overlay District" of the Draft General Plan. The draft overlay guidelines contain provisions for residential lots in the district to increase the land use designation from .2-.4 dwelling units per acre to 2 dwelling units per acre. The City Council, in their meeting of September 21, 1993, discussed this specific project and determined it to be consistent with the General Plan and the Chaparral Overlay District. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION A Negative Declaration was performed for the original approval of this project. The project is unchanged from that which was originally approved and therefore, no further environmental review is required. Staff recommends that the Commission re-certify the previously adopted negative declaration that was performed for the original approval of this project. R:\S~STAFFRPT~163PA93,PC 10/27/93 kJb 2 SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS The project as proposed meets all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460 and Ordinance No. 348. The project is consistent with the City's Draft General Plan Land Use Designation of Very Low Residential and the Chaparral Overlay District. All environmental impacts have been reduced to insignificant levels by the mitigation measures contained in the conditions of approval. FINDINGS The findings for the original approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1 are found to remain valid except as amended herein. 2. No new information of substantial importance to the project has become available. There is a reasonable probability that Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1, First Extension of Time will be consistent with the City's Draft General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State law. The Draft General Plan Land Use Designation for the site is Very Low Residential. The proposed development is consistent with the Draft General Plan and the current zoning of 20,000. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the plan due to the fact that the proposed use is consistent with the existing zoning and existing residential development in the surrounding area. No subsequent changes are proposed in the project which would require revisions to the previously certified Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental impacts not considered in the previously approval of this project. The proposed use or action complies with State planning and zoning laws. The proposed use complies with City of Temecula Ordinance No. 460 and Ordinance No, 348. 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, due to the fact that the proposed subdivision complies with the standards of Ordinance No. 460. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the area, due to the fact that the proposed use is compatible with the proposed land use designation of Very Low Residential. Said findings are supported by maps, exhibits and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. R:\S\STAFFRPT~163PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb 3 Attachments: 2. 3. 4. PC Resolution 93- - Blue Page 5 Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 10 Previous Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 14 Exhibits - Blue Page 15 A. Vicinity Map B. Zoning Map C. Site Plan R:~S\STAFFRPT~163PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 4 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- R:\S\STAFFRP"~'I63PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb 5 A'ITACI-IM~NT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION AlPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA93-0163, FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME FOR TENTATIVE PARCEl, MAP NO. 24172, Ah!F_,NDI~.NT NO. 1, A SUBDIVISION OF 5 ACRES INTO 8 RESIDENTIAL PARCELS AND 1 STI~P.~T LOT IN TIRE. R- A-20,000 ZONE, LOCATED ON ~ EAST SIDE OF YN~.7. ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 300 FEET SOUTH OF CALLE HALCON, ALSO KNOW AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 945-060-002. WF~REAS, Michael J. Lanni fried Planning Application No. 93-0163, First Extension of Time for Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1, in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WFrF,,REAS, said application were processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WIW, REAS, the Planning Commission considered said application on November 1, 1993; NOW, TFIEREFORE, T1TI?. PLANNING COMMISSION OF TIRE. CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findines. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following fmdings: 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: general plan. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the 2. The planning agency fmds, 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. R:\S\STAFFRPTV63PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb 6 b. Them is fittie or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted genenl plan ff 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 mended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest potion 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 prepaxalion of its General Plan. C. The Planning Commission, in recommending approving of said applications makes the following findings, to wit: 1. The fmdings for the original approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1 are found to remain valid except as mended herein. No new information of substantial importance to the project has become available. 3. There is a reasonable probability that Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1, First Extension of Time will be consistent with the City's Draft General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State law. The Draft General Plan Land Use Designation for the site is Very Low Residential. The proposed development is consistent with the Draft General Plan and the current zoning of R-A-20,000. 4. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future General Plan, ff the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the plan due to the fact that the proposed use is consistent with the existing zoning and existing residential development in the surrounding area. 5. No subsequent changes are proposed in the project which would require revisions W the previously certified Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental impacts not considered in the previously approval of this project. 6. The proposed use or action complies with State planning and zoning laws. The proposed use complies with City of Temecula Ordinance No. 460 and Ordinance No. 348. 7. 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, due to the fact that the proposed subdivision complies with the standards of Ordinance No. 460. R:\S~STAFFRPT~163PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb 7 8. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding propony, because it does not repr6sent a significant change to the planned land use of the area, due to the fact that the proposed use is compatible proposed land use designation of Very Low Residential. 9. Said fmdings are supported by maps, exhibits and environmental documents associated with these applications and heroin incorporated by reference. F. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, the Tract Map proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Section 2. Environmental Compliance. A Negative Declaration was prepared for the original approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1. The project is unchanged from that which was originally approved and will not have a significant impact on the environment due to the fact that mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project design. Section 3. Conditions. The City of Temecuh Planning Commission hereby approves Planning Application PA93-0163, First Extension of Time for Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1, a request to subdivide a 5 acre parcel inW 8 single family lots and 1 street lot located on the east side of Ynez Road, approximately 300 feet south of Calle Halcon, subject to the following conditions: A. Attachment No. 2, attached hereto. R:\S\STAFFRPT~163PA93.pC 10/27/93 klb 8 Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of November, 1993. STEVEN F. FORD CHAIRMAN I m~nl?,gy 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 1st day of November, 1993 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: GARY THORNHILL SECRETARY R:\S\STAFFRPT~163PA93,PC 10/27/93 klb 9 ATI'ACHMENT NO. 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:\S\STAFFRP'~163PA93.PC 10/27193 klb 10 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PA93-0163, Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1, First Extension of Time. Project Description: First one-year extension of time for Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1, a subdivision of 5 acres into 8 residential parcels and one street lot in the R-A-20,000 zone. Assessor's Parcel No.: 945-060-002. Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT General Requirements PA93-0163, Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1, First Extension of Time shall comply with all Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1, (copies of which are attached) unless superseded by these Conditions of Approval. The project shall comply with all the requirements of Ordinance 460, unless modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in accordance with State Planning Law and City Ordinance No. 460, upon written request, if made 30 days prior to the expiration date. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, an erosion control plan in accordance with City Standards shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. The following statement shall be added to Condition number 25 of the original conditions of approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1: Height of landscaping shall be limited to 2 feet in the corner property cut offs to provide for adequate sight visibility. R:\S\STAFFRPT~163PA93,PC 10/27/93 klb 11 Condition number 28 shall be revised as follows of the original conditions of approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1: The Developer shall construct or post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the construction of the following public/private improvements within 18 months in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. Street improvements, which may include, but are not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, traffic signals and other traffic control devices as appropriate. B. Storm drain facilities. C. Landscaping (slopes and parkways). D. Erosion control and slope protection. E. Sewer and domestic water systems. F. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. COMMUNITY SERVICES Delete Original Condition No. 15 of the original conditions of approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, Amendment No. 1 and replace with: Prior to recordation of the final map the applicant or his assignee shall pay the fair market value of .10 acres of park land to comply with City Ordinance No. 460.93 (Quimby). The amount to be paid shall be determined by Community Services (TCSD) staff within thirty days prior to the recordation of said map. 9. Delete Original Condition No. 27: (please note that for assessment administration purposes, the City does not utilize Landscape and Lighting Districts as did the CSA 143. The Temecula Community services District is structured so that all parcels within the City boundary lines are automatically within the "district".) 10. All proposed slopes and open space intended for dedication to the City for maintenance purposes shall be identified and offered for dedication on the final map. 11. Prior to recordation of the final map, landscape construction drawings for project areas identified as TCSD maintenance areas shall be reviewed and approved by TCSD staff, In addition, the subdivider shall post security and an agreement shall be executed guaranteeing the construction of all proposed TCSD landscape maintenance areas. R:\S\STAFFRPT~183PA93 .PC 10/27/93 klb 12 12. Construction of proposed TCSD landscape maintenance areas shall commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the developer and City Maintenance Superintendent. Failure to comply with the TCSD review process may preclude acceptance of these areas into the TCSD maintenance program. OTHER AGENCIES 13. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health transmittal dated July 13, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 14. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water District transmittal dated September 8, 1993 a copy of which is attached. 15. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside County Flood Control District transmittal dated September 20, 1993 a copy of which is attached. 16. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Eastern Municipal Water District transmittal dated August 16, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R :\S~STAFFRPT\163PA93 ,PC 10/27/93 Idb 13 COUNTY OF PdV'ERSIDE a HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH July, 13, 1993 CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT 43174 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE TEMECULA, CA 92590 A'I'I N: Craig D. Ruiz: .RE: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 24172, IST EXTENSION OF TIME: BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOT 1 OF TRACT 8211 AS SHOPIN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK $9, PAGES 96 THROUGH 98 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. (8 LOTS) Dear Gentlemen: The Department of Environmental Health has revi~ved Tentative Tract Map No. 24172, 1st E,,ctension of Time and has no objections. S~¢ the following for requirements. 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 ~ter system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 fe~t, along with the original dra%~ing to the City of Temecula.. The prints shMI show the internal pipe diameter, location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and joint specifications, and the size of the main at the junction of the new system to the exi~ing sD"tem. The plans shall comply in all respects with Div. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety. Cede, California Administrative Code, Title 11, Chapter 16, 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 cemfy that the design of the ~tter system in Tract Map l~ 2/4-172 is in accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Eastern Mumcipal'Water District and that the water services, storage, and distribution system will be adequate to provide water service to such Tract Map". This certification does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply ~t~r to such Tract Map at any specific quamities, flows or pressures for fire protection or any other purpose. This certification shall be signed by a responsible official of the ~,'ater company. The plans rest be submitted to the City of Temecula:s Office to review at least two weeks prior to the request for the recordation of the final maD. This subdivision has a statement from Rancho California Water District agreeing to serve domestic ~ter to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand providing satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It will be necessa~ for financial arrangements to bc made prior to the recordation of the final map. This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Wamr District and shall be connected to the sewers of the District. The se~r s~tem shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the District, the City ofTemeeula a~xi the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the se~r system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the originM drawing, to the Ci~,., of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint specifications and the size of the s~rs at the junction of the new system to the existing system. A single plat indicating location of sewer lines and waterlines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer John M. Fanning, Director 4065 County Circle Drive · Riverside, CA 92503 · Phone (909) 358-5316 · FAX (909) 358-5017 (Mailing Address - P.O. Box 7600 * Riverside, CA 92513-7600) r~..,t.,,,~,,d~,.,, ~ City of Temecula planning Dept. Page 2 Arm: Craig D. Ruiz August 11, 1993 be a portion of the sewage plans and pmffies. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and the sewer district with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the sewer system in Tract Map No. 24172 is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that the waste disposal system is ad~cluate at this time to treat the anticipated ~tstes from the proposed Tract Map". The plans must be submitted to th~ City of Temecula' s Office m review at least two weeks prior to the request for the recordarion of the final map. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be completely finalized prior to recordation of the final map. Sincerely, ~m MaC~~ Health Specialist IV SM:dr (909) 275-8980 ncho Water RECEIVED September 8, 1993 Mr. Craig D. Ruiz City of Temecula Planning Depax tment 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590-3606 SEP 13 1993 And ............ Water Availability Tract Map No. 24172 First Extension of Time (PA-93-0163) Dear Mr. Ruiz: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Senga Doherty. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E. Development Engipeering Manager SB:SD:mglO/F186 cc: Senga Doherty, Engineering Technician RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT FAX NO, C~4714-~46 SEP 2 lEE-3 hs'a ............ Plan check city land use case~, Or provide State Divisio~q of Reai Estate letters or oth~ flood hazard reports fOr such ca.~es. District (~v~ent~Jreo2mme~datio(,.s for ~uch cases are noteely limited to items of specific interest to the District including Dist~CT Master Di'alnage Ran radiities, other regional flood control and drainage facilities which could be oonsidered a logical component Or estef~on of · master pan system, end District Area Drainage Ran fees (development mitigation fees). In eddilion, infch"mation Of m general nature is provided. The District has not reviewed the proposed project in detail and the folinwing checked comments do not in any way co~.stjtute Or imply District approval Or endorsement of the proposed project with respeC~ 1o ftocxl hazard, ptf~ic heaith aml safety Or a~/other mjch Lssue: F~This project wcxjId not de impacted by District Master Drainage Ran facilities nor are other facilities of regi(x~l interest proposed. 'IT his projed involves District Master Ran facilities. The District will ancept ownership of ~jch radiities on written request of the City. Fadlities must be construded to District standards, and District Plan check and ir~on will be required for District anceptance. Ran check, inspection and administrative fees will he required, I This project proposes charmers, storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter, Or other facilities that could be onnsidered regionai in nature Lm:l/Or a Iogicai extension of the adopted Master Drainage Ran. The District would (xwsider ownership of such fadfities on wTitlen request of the City. Facilities must be consmJcted to District standards, and District plan ~ and of a parcel map or subdivision prior to recoffiation of the finai map. Fees to be paid sherid be m tie rate in affect m the time of racerclarion, or if deferred, at the tim of issuance of the actual permit. GFNFRAI INFORMATION This project may require · NatiortaJ Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Wmer Resources Corttrol Board. Clearance for grading, raCerclarion, Or other ~nai apptovai, ~no(jId not be given until the City has determined mm the project has bee~ granted parrnit or is shown to be exempt. If this pro~ect invofves a Fedorai Emergency Managemere Agency (FEMA) mapped flood plain, then the Cjty should require The applicant to prowde ail studies, caicula~ons, plans and cthar infOaTtstion required to meet FEMA requirements, and should further require that the applicanl obtain a Conditional Letlor of Map Revision (CLOMR) phor to fading, recordation or other final apptovsi of the project, and 8 Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) leer TO occupancy. If a natural watercourse Or mapped flood plain is impacted by this project the City should require the applicant TO obtain a Section 1601/1603 Agreement tree the California Depanrnent of Ash and Game end · Clam1 Water ACl Sectjan 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or writlee correspondence from these agerides indicating the project is exempt from ~ese requirements. A aean Water Ac~ Se~io~q 404 Water Quality Ceflitication may be required from the Iocai Caiifomia Regional Water QuaJity Control Board ptiOr to k.suance of the Corps 404 permit. Very mJly yours, c Eastern Municipal ater E)astrict August 16, 1993 RECEIVED AUG 18 1993 Craig D. Ruiz, Case Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 SUBJECT: TM 24172 Amended No. 1 - 1st Extension of Time (PA 93-0163) Dear Mr. Ruiz:: We have reviewed the materials transmitted by your office which describe the subject project. Our comments are outlined below: General It is our understanding the subject project is a proposed 8 lot residential subdivision located along the east side of Ynez Rd. between approximately Calle Haleon and Preece Lane, in Temecula. The subject project is located within the District's sanitary sewer service area. However, it must be understood the available capabilities of the District's systems are continually changing due to the occurrence of development within the District and programs of systems improvement. As such, the provision of service will be based on the detailed plan of service requirements, the timing of the subject project, the status of the District's penit to operate, and the service agreement between the District and the developer of the subject project. The developer must arrange for the preparation of a detailed plan of service. The detailed plan of service will indicate the location(s) and size(s) of system improvements to be made by the developer (or others), and which are considered necessary in order to provide adequate levels of service. To arrange for the preparation of a plan of service, the developer should submit information describing the subject project to the District's Customer Service Department, (909) 925-7676, extension 409, as follows: 1. Written request for a "plan of service". Mail To: Post Office Box 8300 · SanJacinto, California 92581-8300 · Telephone (909) 925-7676 · Fax (909) 929-0257 Main Office: 2045 S. San Jacinto Avenue, San Jacinto · Customer Service/Engineering Annex: 440 F_. Oakland Avenue, Hemer, CA Craig D. Ruiz TM24172 August 16, 1993 Page 2 Minimum $400.00 deposit (larger deposits may be required for extensive development projects or projects located in "difficult to serve" geographic areas). Plans/maps describing the exact location and nature of the subject project. Especially helpful materials include grading plans and phasing plans. Sanitary Sewer The subject project is considered tributary to the District's Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility. CrVRWRF). The nearest existing TVRWRF system sanitary sewer facilities to the subject project are as follows: 8-inch diameter sewer aligned along Ynez Rd. between Calle Halcon and Preece Lane, fronting the subject project. Should you have any questions regarding these comments, please feel free to contact this office at (909) 925-7676, extension 468. Very truly yours, EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT ~avid G. Crosley ~ Senior Engineer Customer Service Department DGC/clz AB 93-911 (',,,p-ntwk-TM 24172.clz) ATTACHMENT NO. 3 PREVIOUS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:\S\STAFFRPT~163PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb 14 ATTACHMENT |1 CITY OF TEMECULA ....... Tentative Tract Map No: 24172 Project Description: Assessor's Parcel No.: Subdivide 5 Acres into eight residential oarcels. 945-060-002 Planning DePartment The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule B, 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 August 5, 1993. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. 4. · 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. b. Be contOur-graded to blend w th existing natural contours c. Be a part of the downhill lot when within or between individual lots. :" '~: ;:~ 24172 -/~'; :-:: 5. 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, shell be submitted to the City · Planning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of _grading .... 6. The applicant Shall comply with the environmental health recommendations ;: outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated May 20, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 7. The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the County Fire Department's letter dated June 6, 1991, a copy of which is attached. All proposed construction shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy, as outlined in the Southwest Area Plan. 9. Lots created by this subdivision shall coml~l~'with the following: Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the development standards of the R-A (Residential Agricultural) 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. 10. 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. 11. Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: a. 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. .: .... ::~ ....~ . b, All building plans for all new structures shall incorporate, all required '" ; y the Coan~;Fire 12. c. 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 ' d .....-Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitte~l' within the · ' subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with Planning Department approval. Prior to the issuance of a 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. 13. 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.!t_s 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. 24172, 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. 14. 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. The subdivider shall provide for the dedication of park land and/or in-lieu fees to the satisfaction of the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) Board of Directors PRIOR TO RECORDATION of final map, as authorized by City of Temecula Ordinance No. 460.93. ' The park land dedication' requirement shall be a predetermined amount based on the use and r~Qmb~r ~f~uni~ proposed. If the p~rk lan~l requirement cannot be met, the applicant shall be required to the fair market value 'of the required park and acreage (PlUs 20% for offsite improvements). A:TM24172: ~ ~' :~ -~-. :~-..~..::=-:.. 16 agencies: ~, ;.:::_~,:::::;j:~.i::.::. :~:' :_-:'~' '.'..:-:':::'~:. ' :' ':'""" .... :: · Planning Depa~ment ~,-~ ......... Temecula Valley SchoOl District - - - Fire District : ' : : Engineering Depa~ment 16.Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit written verification to the Building and Safety Department that all pertinent Conditions '.' of Approval and applicable regulations have been met for the following County Health Department . Water District Temecula Community Services District Flood Control District Eastern Municipal Water District. 17. 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 ($1,2~5.00), 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). 18. Prior to final map recordation, the following Conditions shall be satisfied: The following note shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet: "County Geologic Report No. 603 was prepared for this property by Leighton and Associates on August 23, 1988 and March 12, 1990 and is on file at the Planning Department. The specific items of interest are potentially active faults, seismic design of structures, and uncompacted trench backfill." b, The final grading report for this site shall be submitted to the Planning ......... Department Engineering Geologist for review and approval prior to ' ' ' ssuance of further perm ts., Th s report sha address the status of the ' '~ ~' ! !i:"'::' .::~:~:. !': ~:~:~'potent a y act Ve fau ts en~0unt~red dur ng grad ng and:~t~engtheni~ .... foundations on Lots 1,2, and 3, in addition to the standard requirements ; ~,,. -: - ~-~,. for a final grading report~ The recommendations made in the Addendure Geotechnical Fault Investigation Repor~ dated March 12, 1990 for mitigation of seismic/geologic hazards shall be adhered to in the design and construction of this project. The following note shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet: "This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All prol~osed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations. Encjineerin(~ Deoartment 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 shoW'~ all existing easements, traveied ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further consideration. PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 19. As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Rancho California Water. District; Eastern Municipal Water District; Riverside County Flood Control district; City of Temecula Fire Bureau; Planning Department; Engineering Department; Riverside County Health Department; CATV Franchise; and Parks and Recreation Department. 20. All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the City Engineer. A:TM24172 18 21. Ynez Road shall be improved with 32 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, (32'/44'). ~22 :~ Street "A" shall be improved with40 ~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 (40'/60'). - 23. A cul-de-sac shall be constructed at the terminus of Street "A" per Riverside· County Standard No. 800A. 24. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Ynez Road and so noted on the final map with the exception of public street intersections as approved by the City Engineer. 25. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No, 805· 26. Easements, when required for roadway slol~e~, landscape easements, drainage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall' be submitted and recorded as directed by the City Engineer. 27. A Notice of Intention to form and/or join the Landscape and Lighting District shall be filed with the City Council. The engineering costs involved in District information shall be borne by the developer. 28. The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements in conformance with applicable City standards. Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, and other traffic control devices as appropriate. b. Drainage facilities. ' c. Landscaping (street and parks),: ..... ~ ~ ....... ~ ....... .. ~ .!...=: ..~.._ -' ' - .:; :~ - d. Sewer and domestic water systems· ": ' ' e. Undergrounding of existing' and proposed utility distribution lines. s .: ~..:.:;'~.'~:~:~2..: ;:~'~ :~- ~}: -.: '., ;~:. ~- ;., '7--: -. ,::. ~; ~ ~"t.x: ;:,,: ;.: ::-. :,:~, ,:~;,;,~...::~: .'.:..:. _;': :,'-:~t'_ .:.:· ::::::::::::::::::::::: :'X:':':: ,'~'-- ":' :'; :::- ' - ' ' '..:L:t?" ~: '3":.'.::':;'-'..:-::':-.:. ~: :;. -' ::"~::;:::~.~...-..:. -: ::.~.: ..-:.:., :. :~:: :::.:: 29. 31. The street design and improvement concept of this project shall be coordinated with adjoining developments. - Street lights shall be provided at the intersection of Ynez Road and Street "A" in accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the City Engineer. ' : ': ........ Prior to :~ecordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Engineering Department a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation towards traffic signal impacts. Should the developer choose to .defer the time of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a written agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a building permit. 32. Street names shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineering Department. 33. The minimum centerline radii shall be 300_feet or as approved by the C. ity Engineer, 34, All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the City Engineer. 35. Improvement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and alignment as approved by the City Engineer. 36. A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent. 37. 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). 38. All driveways shall be located a minimum of two (2) feet from the property line, 39. - The subdivider shall submit two prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, and aS may be additionally provided for in these Conditions of Approval. 'The plan shall be drawn on 24" x 36"'mylar by a Registered Civil 40, A geological repo~ shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and .... . subm ~ed for rev ew and approval ..by the CounW:Ceologist and :the ~"'~:.~;~'.:'' Engine~ prio~'~o '~eCO~datiOn of ~He ~al 'ma~;'~:~:~-~:~'~:?':~:~; ?~/~;':~:~: ~:~ :';~L: 41. The subdivider shall submit two copies of a soils report to the Engineering Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. : 43. A drainageStudy shall be submitted to and appr0Ved by the City Engineer. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. The subdivider shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the City Engineer permits the use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Article XI of Ordinance No, 460 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the subdivider shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Engineering Department. A drainage channel and/or flood protection wall will be required to protect the structures by diverting sheet runoff to streets, or to a storm drain. 45. 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. 46. 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: 47. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office. 48. 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. 49. All lot drainage shall be to the street by side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot. 50. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to this ........ ;; ~property, no new charge needs to be paid. : - :. :, ~ :.. . · ~ A:TM24172 -~. - :-; ~-21 - · - - - :' '- , PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT: 51. 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. 52. 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. 53. 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 there0fTthe 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: 54. 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. 55. Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. ..:~;,. 56. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be apl~lie'~ 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. - Transoortation Engineering - - · v: PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 57. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for Ynez Road and shall be included in the street improvement plans. ATTACHMENT NO. 4 EXHIBITS R:%S\STAFFRPT\163PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb 15 CITY OF TEMECULA L._I CASE NO.: PA93-0163 EXHIBIT: A VICINITY MAP P.C. DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~163PA93.PC 10127/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA ~,~L~X R-2 'P fi8o) % CASE NO.: PA93-0163 EXHIBIT: B P.C. DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1993 ZONING MAP R:\S\STAFFRPT~163PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA I I / CASE NO.: PA93-0163 EXHIBIT: C SITE PLAN P.C. DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~163PA93.PC 10127193 klb ITEM #5 MI~ORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commissioners Matthew Fagan, Assistant Planner~/' November 1, 1993 Agenda Reports for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1, Second Extension of Time and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Amendment No. 1, Second Extension of Time The body for the for the above referenced Agenda Reports are essentially the same. The items that primarily differ are: project descriptions, project statistics and resolutions. R:~FAGANlVlMVI[~MO\23372-3.M~I 10/28/93 mf STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION November 1, 1993 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1, Second Extension of Time RECOMMENDATION: Prepared By: The Planning Commission: Matthew Fagan Department Staff recommends the Planning ADOPT Resolution No. 93- , approving the Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1 based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Margarita Village Retirement Community, Inc. c/o Kemper Real Estate Development Company REPRESENTATIVE: Mick Ratican, Rick Engineering PROPOSAL: A second one year extension of time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1 - a residential subdivision of 469 dwelling units on 46.9 acres. Planning Area No. 40 is Very High Density Residential (25 d.u./acre target density). Planning Area No. 41 is Medium High Density Residential (7.7 d.u./acre target density). LOCATION: Northwest corner of Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway EXISTING ZONING: Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village SURROUNDING ZONING: North: South: East: West: Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village R-1 (One Family Dwellings), R-R (Rural-Residential), R-5 (Open Area Combining Zone-Residential Developments) Specific Ran No. 199 - Margarita Village PROPOSED ZONING: Not Requested R:%S\STAFFRPT~23372,PC 10/28/93 klb 1 FUTURE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Planning Area No. 40: Very High Density Residential (13- 20 d.u./acre) Planning Area No. 41: Medium High Density Residential (7-12 d.u./acre) EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: South: East: West: Vacant Vacant Rancho California Water District Tank Site, Park, and Single Family Residences Vacant PROJECT STATISTICS Total Area Number of Lots Project Density Planning Area No. 40 Planning Area No. 41 46.90 acres 66.00 10.66 d.u./scre 25.00 d.u./acre 6.20 d.u./acre BACKGROUND Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23372, Amendment No. I was originally approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on November 8, 1988. The first Extension of Time was filed with the Planning Department on October 12, 1990. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the first Extension of Time on November 4, 1991 and the City Council approved the first Extension of Time on April 28, 1993. A second Extension of Time was formally submitted to the Planning Department on October 8, 1991. A Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was held on November 5, 1992. Staff contacted Kemper Real Estate Development Company (the present title holder of the property) in July, 1993, and was informed that they would ultimately be in receivership of the property within the next few months. Staff explained the status of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372 to Kernper and also expressed the necessity of taking action on the extension, because the map would expire on November 8, 1993. Although they did not currently hold title on the property at that time, they expressed that they did not want to see the map expire. Staff received notification from Kernper on October 26, 1993, stating that they had title for the land in the name of Margarita Village Retirement Community, Inc. Staff scheduled the item for the November 1,1993 Planning Commission meeting in order to avoid the expiration of the map. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The current project is a request for a second one year extension of time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1 (VTTM 23372). Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372 is a portion of the Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199. The Tentative Map encompasses Planning Areas 40 and 41. According to the Specific Plan, Planning Area No. 40 is a proposal for a 237 unit congregate care and/or apartment facility on 9.6 acres. The R:\S\STAFFRPT\23372.PC 10/28/93 klb 2 overall density of that project would be approximately 25 dwelling units per acre at buildout. Planning Area 41 is a 66 lot, 232 unit condominium development on 37.3 acres. The overall density of Planning Area 41 is approximately 6.2 dwelling units per acre. Both Planning Areas are Retirement Community Housing. ANALYSIS LeQal Issues Reaardina V~ I M 23372 The City Council approved the first Extension of Time for this project contingent upon an agreement being entered into by the applicant (Reference Attachment No. 5). This agreement . contained timelines and responsibilities for removing all the sediments from the open channel and the box culvert north of Rancho California Road between Margarita Road and Humber Drive. The applicant is in the process of removing the sediments from the channel and from the box culvert. A condition of approval has been added to the project that assures that the applicant continues to remove the sediments from the channel and from the box culvert. Senate Bill 428 Senate Bill No. 428 went into effect on September 14, 1993. This Bill added Section 66542.11 to the Government Code and contains the following language: "The expiration date of any tentative subdivision map or a parcel map for which a tentative map has been approved that has not expired on the date that the act that adds this section becomes effective shall be extended by 24 months." The City Attorney has determined that the above referenced Senate Bill applies to VTFM 23372. The second extension was scheduled to expire on November 8, 1992. The approval of the current extension, along with the provisions contained in Senate Bill No. 428 extends the life of the map until November 8, 1994. New Conditions of Approval New conditions of approval have been added to this project to ensure the public health, safety and welfare. The major ones pertain to requiring a biological assessment of the Gnatcatcher; two conditions of approval (that are in effect immediately upon approval of the second extension of time) for the immediate removal of the sediments from the channel and from the box culvert for the Long Valley Wash; two conditions of approval added to insure completion of improvements to Margarita Road between La Serena Way and Rancho California Road; and a condition of approval that recreational trails and Class II bicycle lanes along Margarita Road and Meadows Parkway be designed and constructed to intercept with the City's Park and Recreational Master Plan. Density for Plannine Area No. 40 The draft General Plan land use designation for Planning Area No. 40 is High Density Residential (13-20 d.u./acre). The project proposes target densities of 25 d.u./acre. The City Attorney has determined that these densities are consistent with the overall density of the Specific Plan, the Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Development Agreement No. 5. R:~S\STAFFRPT~23372.PC 10/28/93 klb 3 EXISTING ZONING AND FUTURE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION Existing zoning for the site is Specific Plan (S.P. 199 - Margarita Village). The Specific Plan land use designation for the site is Very High Density Residential - 25 d.u./acre target density for Planning Area No. 40 and Medium High Density Residential - 7.7 d.u./acre target density for Planning Area No. 41. The draft General Plan land use designation for the site is High Density Residential (13-20 d.u./acre) for Planning Area No. 40 and Medium Density Residential (7-12 d.u./acre) for Planning Area No. 41. The project as proposed is consistent with Specific Plan No. 199 (Margarits Village), Ordinance No. 348, and the draft General Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 202 was previously adopted by Riverside County for Specific Plan No. 199. Staff has determined that said EIR still applies to this subdivision because no subsequent, unmitigable changes are proposed in the project which would require revisions to the previous Certified Environmental Impact Report. The project does not include new significant, unmitigable environmental impacts that were not considered in the previously Certified Environmental Impact Report on the project. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS The current project is a request for a second one year extension of time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1 (V'I'FM 23372), which is located in the Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199. The Tentative Map encompasses Planning Areas 40 and 41. According to the Specific Plan, Planning Area No. 40 is a proposal for a 237 unit congregate care and/or apartment facility on 9.6 acres. The overall density of that project would be approximately 25 dwelling units per acre at buildout. Planning Area 41 is a 66 lot, 232 unit condominium development on 37.3 acres. The overall density of Planning Area 41 is approximately 6.2 dwelling units per acre. Both Planning Areas are Retirement Community Housing. Several new conditions of approval have been added to this project to ensure the public health, safety and welfare, The major ones pertain to requiring a biological assessment of the Gnatcatcher; two conditions of approval (that are in effect immediately upon approval of the second extension of time) for the immediate removal of the sediments from the channel and from the box culvert for the Long Valley Wash; two conditions of approval added to insure completion of improvements to Margarita Road between La Serena Way and Rancho California Road; and a condition of approval that recreational trails and Class II bicycle lanes along Margarita Road and Meadows Parkway be designed and constructed to intercept with the City's Park and Recreational Master Plan, The project as proposed is consistent with Specific Plan No. 199 (Margarita Village), Ordinance No. 348, and the draft General Plan. The approval of the current extension, along with the provisions contained in Senate Bill No. 428 extends the life of the map until November 8, 1994. R:\S\STAFFRPT~23372,PC 10/28/93 klb 4 FINDINGS The findings for the original approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1 are found to remain valid except as amended herein. No subsequent changes are proposed in the project which would require revisions to the previously Certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 202. The proiect does not include new significant, unmitigable environmental impacts that were not considered in the previously Certified Environmental Impact Report on the project. 3. No new information of substantial importance to the project has become available. There is a reasonable probability that Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1, Second Extension of Time 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 draft General Plan land use designation for Planning Area No. 40 is High Density Residential (13-20 d.u./acre). The project proposes target densities of 25 d.u./acre. These densities are consistent with the overall density of the Specific Plan, the Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Development Agreement No. 5. The draft General Plan land use designation for Planning Area No. 41 is Medium Density Residential (7-12 d.u./acre) and the Specific Plan designation is Medium High Density Residential (7.7 d.u./acre target density) . The proposed use or action complies with State Planning and Zoning Laws. The proposed use complies with the Subdivision Map Act, and City of Temecula Ordinances No. 460 and 348. 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, due to the fact that the proposed residential development complies with the standards of Ordinances No. 460 and 348. m The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or welfare, due to the fact that the Conditions of Approval include mitigation measures. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses.. The harmony in scale, bulk, height, intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with adjoining properties, because low-medium density residential uses exist to the east and are buffered by a golf course to the north and west of the site. The draft General Plan Land Use designations are medium density residential for the parcels which are immediately adjacent to the north and west of the site. 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 use is compatible with the surrounding land uses. 10. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic, because access will be off of Meadows Parkway which will be a publicly maintained street. R:\S~STAFFRPT~23372.PC 10/28/93 klb 5 11. 12. The design of the project and the type of improvements are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the property within the proposed project. Said findings are supported by maps and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. R:%S\STAFFRPT%23372.PC 10/28/93 klb 6 Attachments: Resolution No. 93- - Blue Page 8 Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 13 Conditions of Approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1, First Extension of Time- Blue Page 20 Conditions of Approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1 - Blue Page 21 Agreement: Stipulation and Order No. 91-14308-H11 - Blue Page 22 Exhibits - Blue Page 23 A. Vicinity Map B. Future General Plan Designation C. Zoning Designation D. Tentative Map R:%S%STAFFRP'r%23372.PC 10/28193 Idb 7 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- R:\S\STAFFRPT~23372.PC 10128193 klb 8 ATrACI-B~NT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF ~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A SECOND ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23372, AMF-NDMENT NO. 1, A PROPOSAL FOR 469 DWELLING UNITS ON 46.9 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF RANCHO CAL!'FORNIA ROAD AND M'F,,ADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCF, L NO. 953-060-007 W~F~REAS, Kemper Real Estate Development Company in the name of Margarita Village Retirement Community, Inc. fried an Extension of Time application for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Extension of Time application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Extension of Time on November 1, 1993; WIW. REAS, at said hearing, the Commission considered all facts relating to the Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1; NOW, TFIE~REFORE, ~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF TF/F~ CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. Section 2. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: 1. The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general plan. 2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: R:\S\STAFFRPT~23372.PC 10/28/93 klb 9 a. Them is a reasonable probability that the hnd 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 ff 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. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as mended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incoxporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The Planning Commission in approving the proposed Extension of Time, makes the following fmdings, to wit: 1. The Findings for the original approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1 are found to remain valid except as mended herein. 2. No subsequent changes are proposed in the project which would require revisions to the previously Certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 202. The project does not include new significant, unmitigable environmental impacts that were not considered in the previously Certified Environmental Impact Report on the project. No new information of substantial importance to the project has become available. 4. There is a reasonable probability that Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1, Second Extension of Time 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 draft General Plan land use designation for Planning Area No. 40 is High Density Residential (13-20 d.u./acre). The project proposes target densities of 25 d.u./acre. These densities are consistent with the overall density of the Specific Plan, the Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Development Agreement No. 5. The draft General Plan land use designation for Planning Area No. 41 is Medium Density Residential (7-12 d.u./acre) and the Specific Plan designation is Medium High Density Residential (7.7 d.u./acre target density). 5. The proposed use or action complies with State Planning and Zoning Laws. The proposed use complies with the Subdivision Map Act, and City of Temecula Ordinances No. 460 and 348. R:%S\STAFFRPT~23372.PC 10/28/93 klb 10 6. 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, due to the fact that the proposed residential development complies with the standards of Ordinances No. 460 and 348. 7. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or weftare, due to the fact that the Conditions of Approval include mitigation measures. 8. The proj ea is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony in scale, bulk, height, intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with adjoining properties, because low-medium density residential uses exist to the east and are buffered by a gnff course to the north and west of the site. The draft General Plan Land Use designations are medium density residential for the parcels which are immediately adjacent to the north and west of the site. 9. 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 use is compatible with the surrounding land uses. 10. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated fight-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic, because access wffi be off of Meadows Parkway which will be a publicly maintained street. 11. The design of the project and the type of improvements are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the property within the proposed project. 12. Said findings are supported by maps and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. D. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, the Tentative Tract Map is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 202 was previously adopted by Riverside County for Specific Plan No. 199. Staff has determined that said EIR still applies to this subdivision because no subsequent, unmitigable changes are proposed in the project which would require revisions to the previous Certified Environmental Impact Report. The project does not include new significant, unmitigable environmental impacts that were not considered in the previously Certified Environmental Impact Report on the project. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves the Second One Year Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1, a proposal for 469 dwelling units on 46.9 acres located at the northwest corner of Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway and known as Assessor' s Parcel No. 953-060-007 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. R:\S\STAFFRPT~23372.PC 10/28/93 klb 11 Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of November, 1993. STEVEN F. FORD CHAIP, MAN I [P~.RF. Ry CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Tem~cula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 1st day of November, 1993 by the following vote of the Commission: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: GARY THORNHHL SECRETARY R:\S\STAFFRPT\23372.PC 10/2B/93 ~b I 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23372, AMENDMENT NO. 1, SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME R:\S\STAFFRPT%23372,PC I0/211/93 kib 1 :~ CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1, Second Extension of Time Project Description: SecondoneyearextensionofTimeforVestingTentativeMapNo. 23372, Amendment No. I - a residential subdivision of 469 dwelling units on 46.90 acres. Assessor's Parcel No.: Approval Date: Expiration Date: 953-060-007 PLANNING DEPARTMENT General Requirements The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless modified 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. The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, it agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1, Second Extension of Time, 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 applicant shall comply with all Conditions of Approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1, first Extension of Time, and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, Amendment No. 1, unless superseded by these Conditions of Approval. If subdivision phasing is proposed, a ohasina olan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village, m The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be subject to DevelOpment Aoreement No. 5. R:\S\STAFFRPT\23372.PC 10/28/93 klb 14 The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures identified within EIR No. 202. A Mitioation Monitorino Prooram shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director prior to recordation of the Final Map or issuance of Grading Permits which ever occurs first. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 9. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director. 10. A biological assessment of the Gnatcatcher shall be required. Necessary mitigation measures acceptable to the United States Department of Fish and Wildlife and/or California Department of Fish and Game shall be implemented. 11. The applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report, compliance with the Conceptual Landscape Plans for this stage of the development. 12. The applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 13. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director: A. A copy of the Final Map. B. A copy of the Rough Grading Plans. C. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes: (1} This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations, Ordinance No. 655. (2) Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 202 was prepared for this project and is on file at the City of Temecula Planning Department. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 14. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director: A. Construction landscaoe plans consistent with the City standards and the approved conceptual landscape plans including automatic irrigation for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from the view of the public from streets and adjacent property for: R:~S\STAFFRPT~23372.PC 10/28/93 klb 16 (1) Front yards and slopes within individual lots prior to issuance of building permits for any lot(s). (2) Private common areas prior to issuance of the twentieth (20th) building permit. B. Wall and fence plans consistent with the Conceptual Landscape Plans. C. Precise grading plans consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements. D. The Model Home Complex Plot Plan (if applicable) which includes the following: (1) Site Plan with off-street parking. (2) Construction Landscape Plans. (3) Fencing Plans. (4) Building Elevations. (5) Floor Plans. (6) Materials and Colors Board. 15. 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 Director approval. 16. The applicant shall demonstrate by a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits 17. Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots shall be completed for inspection. 18. Private common area landscaping shall be completed for insDection prior to issuance of the twentieth (20th) occupancy permit. 19. The applicant shall sign an agreement and/or Dost a bond with the City to insure the maintenance of all landscaping within private common areas for a period of one year. 20. The applicant shall demonstrate by a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. R:\S\STAFFRPT~23372.PC 10/28/93 klb 16 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 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. General Requirements 21. The Developer shall remove all the sediments from the open channel and the box culvert north of Rancho California Road between Margarita Road and Humber Drive to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works, and pursuant to the terms and conditions of the stipulated judgment in Case No. 91-14308-H 11. 22. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. Within Thirty (30) Days of Approval of The Second Extension of Time 23. The Developer shall enter into a Reimbursement Agreement with the City providing that, prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the Developer shall reimburse the City, the City's cost for completion of the improvements to Margarita Road, between La Serena Way and Rancho California Road, should the City choose to construct said improvements. 24. An erosion control plan shall be prepared in accordance with City Standards, by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. Prior to Recordation of Final Map 25. The Developer shall construct or post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the construction of the erosion control and slope protection improvements and all required offsite improvements, as specified in the Conditions of Approval as approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on November 8, 1988, and as modified by the Planning Commission on November 4, 1991, for the First Extension of Time, within 18 months, in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 26. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the Developer shall complete the improvements to Margarita Road, between La Serena Way and Rancho California Road, should the City choose not to construct said improvements. R:%S\STAFFRPT~23372.pC 10/28/93 klb 17 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT General Requirements 27. Exterior slopes contiguous to public streets that are adjacent to residential development shall be offered for dedication to the Community Services Department (TCSD) for maintenance purposes following compliance to existing City Standards and completion of the application process. All other slopes and open space shall be maintained by an established Home Owners' Association. 28. Recreational Trails and Class II Bicycle Lanes along Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway shall be designed and constructed to intercept with the City's Park and Recreation Master Plan. 29. All proposed slopes intended for dedication to the TCSD shall be identified on the final map as a proposed TCSD maintenance area. 30. Construction of proposed TCSD landscape maintenance areas shall commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the developer and the City Maintenance Superintendent, Failure to comply with the TCSD review and inspection process may preclude acceptance of these areas into the TCSD maintenance program. 31. The developer, or the developer's successors or assignees, shall maintain all landscaped areas until such time as those maintenance responsibilities are accepted by the TCSD. Prior to Recordation of Final Map(s) 32. The applicant or his assignee shall pay the fair market value of 6.96 acres of park land to comply with City Ordinance No. 469.93 (Quimby), The amount to be paid shall be determined by TCSD staff within thirty (30) days prior to recordation of said map. 33. The subdivider shall post security and enter into an agreement to improve all proposed TCSD maintenance areas in conformance with the City of Temecula Landscape Development Plan Guidelines and Specifications. 34. Landscape construction drawings identified as TCSD maintenance areas shall be reviewed and approved by TCSD staff prior, R:\S\STAFFRPT\23372.PC 10/28/93 klb 16 OTHER AGENCIES 35. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittal dated October 18, 1993, a copy of which is attached, 36. The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the County of Riverside Fire Department's letter dated October 18, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 37. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Eastern Municipal Water District transmittal dated October 14, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R:\S\STAFFRPT~23372,pC 10/211193 klb 19 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE · HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH October 18, 1993 CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT 43174 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE TEMECULA, CA 92592 AI IN: Matthew Fagan: RECEIVED COT 2; 1993 Ans'd .......... RE: 2RACT MAP NO. 23372: BEING PARCELS 1,2,3,4 AND 5 OF PARCEL MAP 21884 AS SHOWN ON A MAP THEREOF FILED IN BOOK 144. PAGES 24 THROUGH 33 OF PARCEL MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID RIFERSIDE COUNTY I'OGtziFIER WITH A PORTION OF THE RANCHO TEMECULA GRANTED BY THE GOFERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO LUIS FIGNE,~' BY PATENT DATED JANUARY 18, 1860 AND RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. (68 LOTS) Dear Gemlemen: The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed Tract Map No. 23372 and recommends: A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approvcd by the water company and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the water system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a miramum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet, along with the original drawing to the City. of Temecula's Office. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and joint specifications, and the size of the main at the junction 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 11, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of Califomia, 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 Tract Map No. 23372 is m 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 Tract Map". This certification does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to such Tract Map at any specific quantities, flows or pressures for fire protection or any other purpose. This certificauon shall be signed by a responsible official of the water company. The plans must be submitted to the City of Temecula's Office to review at least two weeks prior to the re.~uest for the recordation of the final map. Tl~xs 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 recordation of the final map. John M. Fanning, Director 4065 County Circle Drive * Riverside, CA 92503 * Phone (909) 358-5316 · FAX (909) 358-5017 (Mailing Address - P.O. Box 7600., Riverside, CA 92513-7600) City of Temeeula Planning Dept. Page Two Attn: Matthe%v Fagan August 18, 1993 This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be connected to the servers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the District, the City of Temeeula's Office and the Health Deparanent. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the ori~nal drawing, to the City of Temecula' s Office. The prints shall show the rotereal pipe diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint specifications and the size of the sewers at the junction of the new system to the existing system. A single plat indieatin~ location of sewer lines and waterlines shall be a portion of the selvage plans and profiles. The plans shall be signed by a registered engmcer and the sewer district with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the sewer system in Tract Map No. 23372 is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans tithe Eastern Municipal Water District and that the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated ~vas~es from the proposed Tract Map". The plans must be submitted to the CiW of Temecula~s Office to review at least two weeks prior to the request for the recordation of the final may. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be completely fmalized prior to recordation of the final map. SM:dr (909) 275-8980 ~ C'~n~: RIVERSIDE C O UNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 210 WF, ST SAN JACINTO AVENUE · PERRIS. CALIFORNIA 92570 · (909) 657-3183 October 18, 1993 TO: Pla/lning Department ATTEN: Matthew Fagan RE: Tract 23372 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 City of Temecula Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection standards: The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 2500 GPM and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant shall be 1500 GPM for 2 hour duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. Approved super fire hydrants (6"x4xa-2 1/2") 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 hydrant. Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water 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 the 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 materials being placed on the job site. The required fire flow may be adjusted at a later point in the permit process to reflect changes in design, construction type, area separation or built-in fire protection measures. r'l RIVERSIDE OFFICE 3760 12lh St~'~t, Rive~ide. CA 92501 (909] 2754777 · FAX (909] 369-7451 FIRE PREVENTION DIVISION PLANNING SECTION [:2] INDIO OFFICE 79-733 Cuumry Club Drive, Suite F, lndio, CA 92~01 (619) 863-8886 * FAX (619) 863-7072 THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS MUST BE MET PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY. Install a complete fire sprinkler system in all buildings. The post indicator valve and fire department connection shall be located to the front of the building, within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from the building(s). A statement that the building will be automatically fire sprinkled must be included on the title page of the building plans. In lieu of fire sprinkler requirements, building(s) must be area separated into square foot compartments approved by the fire department, as per the Uniform Building Code Section 505(f). Install a supervised waterflow monitoring fire alarm system, Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation. Install portable 2A10BC. Contact placement. fire extinguishers with a minimum rating of a certified extinguisher company for proper Blue 'dot reflectors shall be mounted in private streets and driveways to indicate location of fire hydrants. They shall be mounted in the middle Of the street directly in line with fire hydrant. All buildings shall be constructed with fire retardant roofing material as described in Section 3203 of the UniformBuilding Code. Any wood shingles or shakes shall be a Class "B" rating and shall be approved by the fire Department prior to installation. Street address shall be posted, in a visible location, minimum 4 inches in height, on the street side of the building with a contrasting background. Prior to recordation of the final map , the developer shall deposit, with the City of Temecula, the sum of $400.00 per lot/unit, as mitigation for fire protection impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time od payment, he/she may enter into a written agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of the. first building permit. Applicant/developer shall be responsible to provide or show there exists conditions set forth by the Fire Department. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed in the Building and Safety Office. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Department Planning and engineering section. RAYMOND H. REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner Laura Cabral Fire Safety Specialist / !".. · astern j / unicipal I/ ater District October 14, 1993 RECEIVED 0 C T 18 Matthew Fagan, Case Planner City of Temecula Manning Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 SUBJECT: Vesting Tentative TM No. 23372, 2nd Extension of Time Mr. Fagan: We have reviewed our file containing materials which describe the subject project. Our comments are outlined below: General It is our understanding the subject project is a proposed 469 residential dwelling unit subdivision of 46.90 acres, located east of Margarita Road, between Rancho California Road and La Serena Way, in the Maxgarita Village Project. The subject project is located within the District' s sanitary sewer service area. However, it must be understood the available capabilities of the District's systems are continually changing due to '..he occu~nce of development within the District and programs of systems improvement. As such, the provision of service will be based on the detailed plan of service requirements, the timing of the subject project, the status of the District's permit to operate, and the service agreement between the District and the developer of the subject project. The developer must arrange for the preparation of a detailed plan of service. The detailed plan of service will indicate the location(s) and size(s) of system improvements to be made by the developer (or others), and which are considered necessary in order to provide adequate levels of service. To arrange for the preparation of a plan of service, the developer should submit information describing the subject project to the District's Customer Service Department, (909) 925-7676, extension 409, as follows: 1. Written request for a "plan of service". Mail To: Post Office Box 8300 · San Jacinto, California 92581-8300 · Telephone (909) 925-7676 · Fax (909) 929-0257 .Main Office: 2045 S. San Jacinto Avenue, San Jacinto · Customer Service/Engineering Annex: 440 E. Oakland Avenue, Hernet, CA Matthew Fagan TTM 23372 October 14, 1993 Page 2 Minimum $400.00 deposit (larger deposits may be required for extensive development projects or projects located in 'difficult to serve" geographic areas). Plans/maps describing the exact location and nature of the subject project. Especially helpful materials include grading plans and phasing plans. Sanitary Sewer The subject project is considered tributary to the District's Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility. The subject project appears to sewer in two (2) different directions by gravity-flow (ie. Southwesterly towards South General Kearney Road and Rancho California Road, and northerly towards La Serena Way). Other Issues The representative of the subject project must contact the District's Customer Service Department to arrange for plan check and field inspection of proposed District facilities and onsite plumbing. Should you have any questions regarding these comments, please feel free to contact this office at (909) 925-7676, extension 468. Very truly yours, Customer Service Department DGC:cz AB 93-I124 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23372, AMENDMENT NO. 1, 1ST EXTENSION OF TIME R:\S\STAFFRPT~23372.PC 10/28/93 klb 20 ATTACHlv~NT NO. 3 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372 First Extension of Time City Council Approval Date: April 28, 1992 Expiration Date: November 8, 1991 PLANNING DEPAET1VIENT 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 rgqu'n~t 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. "The covenants, conditions and restrictions for the development shall require that each permanent resident in each dwelling unit shall be 55 yean of age or over, including any apartments in Planning Area 40 of the Specific Plan. The reference at pg. 144 of the Specific Plan that the apartments axe not subject to any age restriction is incorrect, and the Descriptive Summary at pg. 143 of the Specifxc plan that the "planning area shall contain solely retirement community housing" is controlling." DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS The following axe the Depaxtment of Public Works Conditions of Approval for tkis 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 m be resubmitted for further review. S\STAFFRF~23371 The Developer shall comply with all Conditions of Approval as previously imposed or mended and with the Conditions noted below. PRIOR TO P, ECORDATION OF TI{E FINAL MAP: Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requiremenu of said section. Delete condition no. 24 of Riverside County Road Commissioner letter dated September 30, 1988 and rgplace it with the following: Prior to recordalien of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department of Public Works a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation towards ~affic 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 bidding permit. An erosion control and slope protection plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The installation shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and site conditions shall be maintained to protect adjacem properties from damage due to ranoff and erosion. Developer shall post a performance bond for erosion control and slope protection in an amount approved by the Department of Public Works. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area Drainage Plan fee rote 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. As deemed necessary by the deparanent 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 Departmere; and CATV Franchise. Community Services District S\STAFFRFI~23372 2 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 any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtahed from the City Engineer's Offxce, in addition to any other permits required. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUll .DING Pl~121T: Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public fae'tlities imposed upon the property of project, including that for tsaffic and public facility mitigation as requ'tmd 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 winch developer requests its budding permits for the project or any phase thereof, the developer shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of winch has been provided to developer. Concurrently, with executing thi.~ Agreement, developer Shall pOSt security to secur~ payment of the Public Fee'filly 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 mount 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; 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 CF.~TIFiCATES OF OCCUPANCY: 10. 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. 11. All street improvements striping, marking and signing shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 12. Prior to March 25, 1992, the Buie Corporation shall make arrangements to remove all the sediment from the open channel and box culvert north of Rancho California Road between Margarita Road and Humbet Road to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. TRANSPORTATION ENGIN~.k'rRING PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACI:IM~NT P]~dl'l'S: 12. Delete Condition No. 36 of Riverside County Road Commi.~sioner letter dated September 30, 1988. 13. Traffic striping, marking and meet name signing plans Shntl be designed as directed by the Department of Public Works. 14. 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. TEMECULA CO~ SERVICES DISTRICT: 15. Prior to recordation of the fmai map the applicant or his assignee shall pay the fair market value of 5.49 acres of required pa~cl~nd to comply with City Ord!n~ce No. 460.93 (Quimby). The mount to be paid shall be determined by TCSD staff within thirty (30) days prior to recordation of said map. (Amended at City Counc~ on April 28, 1992) 16. Exterior slopes bordering an arterial street may bc dedicated shah be offered for dedication to the TCSD for maintenance following compliance to TCSD standards and completion of the application process. (Amended at City Council on April 28, 1992). ATTACHMENT NO. 4 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23372, AMENDMENT NO. 1, R:\S\STAFFRPT%23372.PC 10/28193 klb RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTHENT SUBDIVISION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VE~rING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23372 ANE)IDE/) NO. I STAMOARD CONDITIONS ... tvid.r .hall hold ha..l.s, th. County of Riverside, its agents, oy from any claim, action, or proceeding against the County of Riverside or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the County of Riverside, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Vesting Tentative Tract 23372 Amended No. 1, which action is brought about within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The County of Riverside will promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the County of Riverside and will coo erate fully in the defense. If the County fails to promptly notify the suEdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, tndenntfy, or hold harmless the County of Riverside. 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. e 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. 4. The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor subject to all the requirements of the State of California Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance 460. The subdivider shall submit one copy of a soils report to the Riverside County Surveyor's Office and two copies to the Department of Building and Safety. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. If any grading is proposed, th~ subdivider shall submit one.print of comprehensive grading plan to the Department of Building and Safety. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, as amended by Ordinance 457 and as maybe additionally provided for in these conditions of approval. Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract No. 23372/~ended No. ] Page 2 7. R gfadtng pemtt shall be obtained from the Department of Butldtng and f $a ety prtor to commencement of any gradtng outstde of county maintained road fight of Nay, 8. Any delinquent property taxes shall be patd prior to fecordatton of the ffnal map, 2e · The subdtvfder shall comply with the street Improvement recumendattons outltned tn the R(verstde County Road Department's letter dated 9-22-88 a copy of whtch ~s attached, Legal access as requt~ed by Ordinance 460 shall be provtded from the tract map boundar~ to a County maintained road, All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall '~onttnue tn force unttl the overotng body accepts or abandons such offers, All dedications sha~l be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Road Commissioner. Street names shall be subject to approval of the Road Comtss~oner, Easements, when requtred for roadway slopes, drainage facilities, uttlttles, etc., shall be shown on the final map tf they are located wtth~n the land division boundary. All offers of dedication a conveyances shall be submitted and recorded as directed by the CountJ Surveyor. Mater and sewerage dtsposal facilities shal] be installed tn accordance with the provisions set forth tn the RIverside County Health Department's letter dated 9-7-88 a copy of whtch ts attached. The subdlv(der shall comply with the flood control reconmendattons outlfned by the Riverside County Flood Control Otstrtct's letter dated 7-22-88 a copy of uhtch Is'attached. Zf the land dhtston 11es wtthln an adopted flood control dratnage area pursuant tO Section %0.25 of Ordinance 460, apprcprfate fees' for the construction of area dratnage facilities shall be collected by the Road Con~ntsstoner. ; The subdhtder shall comply with the ftre ~improvement recommendations outltned tn the County Fire Harshal's letter dated 8-Z7-88 a copy of which ts attached. Subdivision phastngo Including any proposed common open space area fmprovement phastng, tf appllcable, shall be subject to Planntng Oepartment approval. Any proposed phastng shall provide for adequate vehicular access to all lots tn each phase, and shall substantially confom to the tntent and purpose of the subdivision approval. Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract No. 23372 Amended No. ] Page 3 17. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following: Corner lots end through lots, if any, shall be provided with additional area pursuant to Section 3.8B of Ordinance 460 and so as not to contain less net area than the least amount of net area in non-corner and through lots. Lots created by thts subdivision shall be in conformsrice with the development standards of the Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No. 1 zone. ~nen lots are crossed by major publtc uttlity easements, each lot shall have a net usable area of not less than 3,600 square feet, exclusive of the uttltty easement. d. 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 appruved by the Director of Building and Safety. e. Trash bins, loadtrig areas and incidental storage areas shall be located awa and vtsually screened from surrounding areas wtth the use of block w~ls and landscaping. Prior to RECORDATION Of the final map the following conditions shall be satisfied: Prior to the recordatton of the ftnal map the applicant shall submit wrttten clearances to the RIverside County Road and Survey Oepartment that all pertinent requirements outlined in the attached approval letters from the following agencies have been mot. County Fire Department County Flood Control County Parks Department Eastern Yunictpal Hater Dtst. County Health Department County Planning Department Rancho Water District Prior to the recordatton of the ~tnal mp, General Plan Amendment 150, Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No. 1, Development Agreement No. 5, and Change of Zone No. 5107 shall be approved by the Board of Supervisors and shall be effective. Lots created by this land division shall be in conformance with the development standards of the zone ultimately applied to the property. 19. All existing structures on the subject property shall be removed prior to recordatton of the final map. Condlttons of Approval Tentative Tract No. 23372 Amended No. 1 Page 4 20. The Common open space area shall be shown as a numbered lot on the final rap and shall be reneged by a master property owners association. 21. Prior to recordatton of the final subdivision map, the subdivider shall submit the follovrlng documents to the Planning Department for review, which documents shall be subject to the approval of that department and the Office of the County Counsel: t) A declaration of covenants, condlttons and restrictions; and 2) A sample document conveyed tttle to the purchaser of an individual lot or unit which provides that the declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions is Incorporated therein by reference. The declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions submitted for 'reytew shall (a) provtde for a minimum term of 60years, (b) provide o for the establtsbment of a property owners' associatt n comprised of the owners of each Individual lot or unit, (c) provide for ownership of the common and (d) contain to following provisions verbatim: "Nothwithstandtng any provision in this Declaration to the contrary, the following provision shall apply: The property owners' association established herein shall manage . continuously maintain the 'common area', more particularly described on Exhibtt 'III-17' of the spectfic plan attached hereto, and shall not sell or transfer the 'common area', or any part thereof, absent the prior wrttten consent of the Planning Dtrector of the County of RIverside or the County's successor-in-interest. The property owner's association shall have the right to assess the owners of each individual lot or unit for the reasonable cost of maintaining the 'coanon area' and shall have the right to 1ten the property of any such owner who defaults in the pa~nnent of a maintenance assessment. An assessment lien, once created, shall be prior to a13 other liens recorded subsequent to the notice of assessment or other document creating the assessment 1ten. This Declaration shall not be terminated, 'substantially' amended or ropetry deannexed therefrom absent the prior written consent of the ~lanntng Director of the County of Riverside or the County's successor-in-interest. A proposed amendment shall be considered 'substantial" if it affects the extent, usage or maintenance of the *common area'. In the event of any conflict between thts Declaration and the Articles of Incorporation, the Bylaws or the property owners' association Rules and Regulations, tf any, this Declaration shall control." Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract No. 23372 Amended No. 1 Page 5 Once approved, the declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions shall be recorded at the same time that the final map is recorded. Prior to recordatton of the final map, clearance shall be obtained from Netropolitan Water District relative to the protection of applicable easements affecting the subject property. be completed. The developer shall comply with the requirements as shown in Specific Plan No. maintained by H0A or other public entity: 10-5-88) Lot line adjusl~ents shall also following parkway landsca ing 199 Amendment No. I unVess {Amended by Planning Commission 1) Prior to recordatton of the final map the developer shall file an . application with the County for the formation of or annexation to, a - parkway maintenance district for Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23372 Amended No, I in accordance with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, unless the project is within an existing parkway maintenance. 2} Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall secure approval of proposed landscaping and irrigation plans from the County Road and Planning Department. All landscaping and irrigation plans and specifications shall be prepared in a reproducible format suitable for permanent filing with the County Road Department. 3) The developer shall post a landscape performance bond which shall be released concurrentl with the release of subdivision performance bonds, quaranteeing ~e of all landscaping which will be vlability installed prior to the assumption of the maintenance responsibility by the district. 4) The developer, the developer's successors-in-interest or assignees, shall be responsible for all parkwa landscaping maintenance until such time as maintenance is taken overly the district. 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 appreved by the Planning Director. Street lights shall be provided within the subdivision in accordance with the standards of Ordinance 461 and the following: 1} Concurrently with the filing of subdivision improvement plans with the Road Deparbnent, the developer shall secure approval of the proposed street light layout first from the Road Department's traffic engineer and then from the appropriate utility purveyor. Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract No. 23372 Amended No. 1 Page 6 z) Following approval of the street lighting layout by the Road Department's traffic engineer, the developer shall also ftle an appltcatto~ with LAFCO for the formation o a treet lighting ~t tS district, or annexation to an extsttng 11ghttng d sir ct, unless the stte ts ulthtn an exlsttng 11ghttng district. 3) Prtor to recordatton of the ftnal map, the developer shall secure 1 condtttona approval of the street 11ghting application from LAFCO, unless the slte ts within an extsttng 11ghtlng district. 4) All street 11ghts and other outdoor 11ghtlng shall be show~ on electrical plans submltted to the De artment of Butlding and Safety for plan check approval and sha~l comply with the requirements of Riverside County Ordinance No. 655 and the RIverside County · ' Comprehensive General Plan. Prior to the tssunace of GRADING PERMITS: the developer shall provlde mitigation for removal of the Stephens Kangaroo Rat habitat as follows: Memorandum of Understanding between the developer and the Coltforinta Department of Fish and Game, or Compliance with an adopted County program for the mitigation removal of Stephens Kangaroo Rat habitat Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERI~ITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: Prior to the tssuance of gradtng pemtts, detailed'common open space area parking landscaplng and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval for the phase of development tn process. The plans shall be certified by a landscape architect, and shall t following. prov de for the 1) 2) Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be Installed on all landscaped areas requiring irrigation. Landscape screening Where required shall be destgned to be opaque up to a minimum height of six (6) feet at maturity. 3) All uttllty servtce areas and enclosures shall be screened from vie~ with landscapln and decorative barriers or baffle treatments, as approved by ~he Utilities shall be Director. Planning placed underground. Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract No. 23372 knended No. 1 Page 7 4} Parkways and landscaped building setbacks shall be landscaped to Frovide visual screening or a transition Into the prtma~j use area of the site. Landscape elements shall tnclude earth bermtng, ground cover, shrubs and specimen trees tn conjunction v~th meandering sidewalks, benches and other pedestrian amentries where apprepriate as ipproved by the Planntng Deparl~ent and Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No, 1, 5) Landscaping plans shall Incorporate the use of specimen accent trees at key visual focal points ~thtn the project, 6) 7) 8) g) 10. 28. 91 ~here streets trees cannot be planted wtthtn right-of-way of Interior streets and pro'ect parkways due to Insufficient road right-of-way, they shall be p~anted outside of the road right-of-way. Landscaping plans shallIncorporate native and drought tolerant plants - where appropriate. All existing specimen trees and significant rock outcroppings on the d subject property shall be shown on the project's gra tng 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. Parking layouts shall comply with Ordinance 348, Section 18.12. All existing native s ectmen trees on the subject property shall be preserved wherever feasiCle. Where they be preserved they shall be cannot relocated or replaced with specimen trees as approved by the Planning Director. Replacement trees shall be noted on approved landscapingplans. 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: 1) Techniques which Ntll be utiltz~d to prevent erosion and sedtmentation 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 h throug March. 3) Preliminary pad and roadway elevations. Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract No. 23372 Amended No. 1 Page 8 4) Areas of temporan/gradtng outside of a particular phase. Grading plans shall conform to Board adopted Htllstde Development Standards: A1 cut and/or ftll slopes, or Individual combinations thefor, which exceed ten feet tn verttcal hetght shall be modified by an appropriate combination of a spectal terracing (benchtng) plan, tncrease fifteen percent grade. All cut slopes located adjacent to ungraded natural terrain and exceeding ten (10) f t in vertical heights shall be contour-graded incorporating ee the following grading techniques: 1) The angle of the graded slope shall be gradually adjusted to the angle of the natural terrain, Angular forms shall be discouraged, The graded form shall reflect the natural rounded terrain. 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. Where cut or fill slopes exceed 300 feet in horizontal length, th horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved in a continuous, undulating fashion. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a qualified paleontologist shall be retained by the developer for consultation and connent 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 tamporarily divert, redtrect or halt grading activity to allow recove~ of fossils. Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERHITS the following conditions sha.ll be satisfied: a. Xn accordance with the written request of the developer to the County of Riverside, a copy of which is on file, and in furtherance of the agreement between the developer and the County of Riverside, no building ermtts shall be issued by the County of Riverside for any parcels wVthin the subject tract until the developer, or the developer's successors-in-interest provided evidence of compliance with the terms of said Development Agreement No. 5 for the financing of public facilities. Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract No. 23372 Amended No. 1 Page 9 34. b. ifith the submittal of butldtng plans to the Department of Bufldtng and Safety the developer wt]1 demonstrata compliance wtth the acoustical ., dy p, .red ,or Te.tative Tr.c, 233, Ame.ded .o. established app~prta~ gatton masures to reduce a~tent tnterlor notse levels ~ 45 Ldn and exterSor notse levels bel~ 65 Ldn. Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted ~Hthtn the subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with Planning Department approval, Butldtng separation between all buildings Including fireplaces shall not be less than ten (10) feet unless approved by Department of Building and Safety and Fire Department per Spectftc Plan No. 199 Amendment No. 1. (Amended by Planntng Commission 10-S-88) e.: All street stde yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 10 feet. f. All front yards shall be provided with landscaping and automatic Irrigation. Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMZTS the following conditions shall be sattsfted: Prior to the final building Inspection approval, by the Butlding and Safety Department, walls shall be constructed along Kaiser Parkway and Rancho California Road, La Serena Way, Kaiser Park Way per the Design ~nual. The requtred wall shall be subject to the approval of the d 1 Director of the Depa, b,ent of Butldtng and Safety an the P anntrig Director and may be phased with the project. (Amended by Planning Commission 10-5-88) b. Mall and/or fence locations shall conform to attached Figure 1II-17 of Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No. 1. c. M1 landscaping and Irrigation shall be Installed tn accordance wtth approved plans prior to the issuance of occupanc permits. Zf seasonal conditions do not permit planting, interim ~andscaptng erosion and control measures shall be utilized as approved by the Planning Director and the Director of Buildtrig and Safety. cL All parking, landscaping and Irrigation shall be Installed ~n accordance wtth approved plans and shall be vertfted by a Plannlng Departnent field Inspection, Cond]ttons of Approval Tentative Tract No. 23372 Mended No. 1 Page l0 Street. trees shall be planted throughout the subdivision tn accordance wtth the standards of. Ordinance 460 and Spectftc Plan No, 199 Amendment No, I Development of Vesttng Tentative Tract No, 23372 Mended No, I shall comply wtth a11 provisions of Spectftc Plan No, 199 Amendment No, I and Development Agreement No, 5, KG:mcb:mp LeRoy D. Sinoat OFFICE OF ROAD COXMIS$1ONER & COUNTY SURVEYOR Riverside County Planning Coff;tsslon 4080 Lemon Stret Riverside, CA 92501 September ZZ~ Z988 Re:.Tract Rap 23372 - Amend #Z - Road Correction Schedule A - Tem SP Ladies end Gentlemen: Vtth respect to the conditions of approval for the referenced tentative land division mp, the Road Department recommends that the landdivider provide the following street improvement plans and/or road-dedications in accordance with Ordinance 460 ind Riverside County Road improvement Standards (Ordinance 461). Zt is understood that the tentative mp correctly shows acceptable centerline profiles, a11 existing easements, traveled Nays, and drainage courses with appropriate O's, and that their mission or unacceptebilttyma~ require the map to be resubmitted for further consideration. These Ordinances and the following conditions are essential parts and a requirement occurring in 0HE Is as binding as though occurring in a11. They are Intended to be comphmentary and to describe the conditions for 'a cmplete design of the Improvement. All questions regarding the true meaning of the conditions $hall be referred to the Road Comtsstoner's Office. The landdivider shall protect downsitem properties from damages caused b~ alteration of the drainage patterns, I.e., concentra- tlon of diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities including enlarging existing facllttles or b~ securing a drainage easement or b~ beth. All drainage easements shall be shown on the final map and noted as follows: "Drainage Easement - no building, obstructions, or encroach~ents b~ land fills are allowed". The protection shall be as approved by the Road Department. The landdivider shall accept and properly dispose of all offsite drainage flowing onto or through the site. Zn the event the Road Commissioner permits the use of streets for drainage Fur oses, the provisions of Article XZ of Ordinance No. 460 wtl~ apply. Should the quantities exceed the street c&pacity or the use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the subdivider shall proYide adequate drainage facilities as approved by the Road Deparl~ent. Page Z j 3. !~3or drainage !s ¶nvolved on this la~ddhlslon and its resolution shalT be as approved b~ the Road Department. 4. Streets "BBB" and "KICK" shall be improved tn accordance ufth Nadirled County Standard No. 103, Section A. (44'/44')o Street "CCC" thru "OOO" shall be Improved within the dedicated ~!ght of W tn accordance with I~dified County Standard RO. 105. Section A. {36'/36') raiser Fark,ay shall be Improved within the dedicated Hght of In accordance with County Standard No. lot, (38'/50'). 11e landdivider shall provid~ utility clearance from Rancho Calif. Ilatar District prior to the recordatlon of the final map. The maximum centerline gradient shall'not exceed The min(mumcenterllne radii shall be as approve Department. Prior to the ftltng of the final mp with the County Recorder's Office, the developer shall provide evidence of continuous maintenance of eli proposed private streets within the development as approved by the Road Co~mlssioner. Sidewalks within the development shall be as approved by the Road Commissioner. -- The minimum qot frontages along the cul-de-sacs and knuckh$ shall be 35 feet unless otherxfse specified tn the particular zoning classification. All driveways shall conform to the applicable RIverside County Standards and shall be shown on the street Improvenent plans. A minimum of four feet of full height curb shall be c~nstructed between drhewa~so ~hen 5lockwalls are required to be constructed on top of slope, e debris retention wall shall be constructed at the street right of I way line to prevent s 1ring of side,elks as approved by the Road Commissioner. The edntmum garage setback shall be 30 feet measured from the face of curb. Should the developer p~ovide evidence of roll up doors on the building plans, a roductJon of 4' may be allowed but In no Case shall the garage be closer than 20 feet from beck of sidewalk or curb in the ·beence of sidewalk. A secondary access roads to the nearest paved road maintained by the County shall be constructed within the public right of ~ay tn 1 accordance ~lth County Standard No. 106, Sect on B, {32'/6D') ·t a grade and alignment is app~.ved by the Road Comissloner. ~!or to the recordatton of the final map~ the develope~ shall depostt ~tth the Riverside County Road Department, · cash sum of $150.00 per lot as mitigation for traffic signal impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time of payment, he may enter into · mitten agreement w|th the COUnl~y deferring said payment to the time of Issuance of · bJtlding permit.. Zmp~ovement 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 RIverside County Road Comissioner. Completion of road improvements does not Imply acceptance for maintenance by County. 39. Electrical and communications trenches shall be provided in accordance with O~dinance 462, Standard 8Z7. Asphalttc e~ulston (fog seal) shall be applied not less than fourteen days following placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon pep square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall confom to Sections 37, 39 and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. Standard cul-de-sacs and knuckles and offset cul-de-sacs $hali be constructed throghout the landdivision. Corner cutbacks in conformance ~th County Standard No. 805 shall be sho~ on the final map and offered for dedication at the inter- section of Kaiser Parkway and Street "KKK". 23. Lot access shall be restricted on Katser Parkway and so noted on the final map. 24. -Landdivisions creating cut or fill slopes adjacent to the streets shall provide erosion control, sight distance control and slope easements as approved b~ the Road Department. 25° All centerline intersections shall be at The street design and Improvement concept of This project shall be coordinatod with TR 2337Z and TR 23373. Street lighting shell be required In accordance with Ordinance 460 end 461 throughout the subdivision, The County ~ervice A~e~ (CSA) Administrator determines whether this proposil qualifies under In existing assessment district or not. if note the land owner shall file an application with LAFC0 for annexation Into or creation of · "LI htlng Assessment District" In accordance with 6overnment~l Code ~ctlon 56000.' GH:lh u ' on Engineer. bd~CAt~Ot 8-17-88 4080i~mon,~,q,,i~ IlL th,nk~ CA 92501 (714) 787J~06 FLA~ING DEFArZh~.~.L TRACT 23372 - A.sSX~I3) !i, ROAD With respect to the conditions of approval for the ·boys referenced lend division, the Tire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accord·ace with ~tverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection standards: FIR~ PROTECTION · he vatsr mains shall be capable of providing s potential fire flow of 2500 GPH and an actmaX fire flow available fro= any one hydrant shall be 1500 GTH for 2 ho~re duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. Approved super fire hydrants, (6'xd'x2Jx2|) shall be located at each street intersection and spaced not mort than 330 feet apart in any direction with no portion of any lot frontage more than Z63 feet fro= a hydrant. Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the vat~r system plans to the Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to fire hydrant types,-lo;atipn and spacing, and, the system shall meet the firs flow requirements. Plans shallbe stgned/approved by · registered civ~ engineer and the local water company with the following certifiesfinn: mI certify that the design of the vster system~ in accordance with r. he requirements prescribed by the giverside County Firs Thm required water system, including firs hydrants, shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot, All buildings shall be constructed with fire retardant zoofins sattrial as described in Section 3203 of the Uniform Building Coda. Any wood shingles or shakes shall have · Class abe rating sad shall be spproved by the Tire Department prior to Installation. NITICATION ?riot to the recordsfinn of the final map, the developer shall deposit rich the liverside County Fire Department, a cash sun of $400.00 per lot/unit as mitigation for fire protection ~mpscts. Should the developer choose to defer the rime of payment, he/she may enter into · written agreement vir~ the County deferring said payment to the t~ne of issuance of · building permit. Sub3ecc: ~racC 23372 J.LI queettons regarding the seenhi of condit~ons 8ha~ be referred to the TAre Depar~nent Tla~4~ and E~inetr4~S staff. PaBe 2 F, IVEP, SIDE COU}~r'Y PLANNING DEPT. ~ ~P,~t'~"r Ke, p 23372..a~ended N~, ] DATE: September 7, 1988 Environmental Health Services ~nvlror~ental ikalth Services has reviewed Tract lop 23372, Aaended No. 1 dated July 19, 1988. Our current co---ents will rem=ia as stated in our letter dated June 20, 1988, COUNTy OF RIVERSIDE DEPARTMENTof HEALTH 4080 Lemon Street Riverside, CA 92502 lath= Xsthy Oilford JUN Zl 1988 RIVEHsIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT RE; ~11ACTIi~P 23372: That certain land situtsted in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of Californi,, being Parcels 1,2,3,4 and 5 of Parcel H,p 21884 &s shown on a map thereof filed in Book 144, Pages 24 through 33 of Parcel Maps in the orric, of the County Recorder of said Riverside County together with a portion of theRehobo Temecula grznLwd by the Governmen~ of ~he United StaLes of America to Luis Vignes by ptLenL ds~ed Jtnusry 18, 1860 and recorded in the Office Ssn Diego CoyLy, (68 Lo~s) Gentlemen: The Department of Public Health has reviewed Tentative Map No. 23372 ,rid reco~endl that: A water system shill be installed according to plans and specification 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 thin.one inch equals 200 feet, along with the original drawing to the County Surveyor. The priers shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and joint specifications, and the size of the main at the junction of the new system to the existing system. The plans shall comply in all respects with Div. S, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety Code, California Administrative Code, Title 22. Chapter 16. and General Order No. lO3 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, when applicable. Riverside County Planning Dept. Page Tvo Attn: Kathy Gifford 3tn'xe 20, 1988 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 Tract Nap 23372 is accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Ranthe California Water District and that the vator service,storage.and distribution system will be adequate to provide water service'to such tract. ~his certification does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water tn such tract 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. This Department has a statement from the Rancho California ~ater District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and ever~ lot in the subdivision on demand providing. satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It will be necessary for the financial arrangements to be made prior to the recordation of the final map. This Department has a statement from the Eastern Municipal ~ater District agreeing to allow the subdivision sewage system to be connected to the sewers of the District. The sever system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the District, the Count~ Surveyor and the Health Department. Permanent prints of.the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the original drawing, to the County Surveyor. The prints shall show the internal pipe d~tmeter, location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint specifications and the size of the sewers at the junction of the new system to the existing system. ~ single plat indicating location of ~sever lines and water lines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The plexus shall be signed by a registered engineer and the se~er district with the following certification: 'I certify that the design of the sewer system in Tract Hap 23372 is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Nunicipal ~ater District and that the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anttcipated~astes from the proposed tract.' ' Riverside County Planning Dept, P*ge Three li'lN: K, thy 6ifrerd ,,1T. tne 20, 1988 It will be necessary for financial arr&ngemenLs prier to the recerdation of the final map. Sincerely, SM:tac to be made RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT Rtverstde County Planning Department CountyAdministrative Center Riverside, Cal~fernta Attention: Regional Team No. Area: Temec. l~ 1Alley RE: ,4me,,,d-.-f ,Ale . I Ve have revtewed thts case and have the following coments: Except for nutsonce nature local runoff which may traverse portions of the property the project ts considered free from ordinary storm flood hazard. However, a storm of unusual magnitude could cause some damage. New construc- Uon should comply with all applicable ordinances, The topography of the area consists of well defined ridges and natural water- courses which traverse the property. There $s adequate area outside of the mature1 watercourses for building sttes. The nature1 watercourses should be kept free of bufidtngs and obstructions in order to maintain the natural drainage patterns of the area and to prevent flood damage to new buildings. A note should be placed on an environmental constraint sheet stattng, °All new buildings shall be floodproofed by elevating the finished floors a minimum of ]8 tnches above adjacent ground surface. Erosion protection shall be provided for mobfie home supports." This project ts tn the dralnage plan fees shall be paid 1n accordance wtth the applicable r~lesArea and regulations. __ The proposed zontng ts consistent with extsttng flood hazards. Some flood control facilities or floodproofing may be required to fully develop to the tmpl~ed density. The Distrtct's report dated :7'une~J,,l~J~ ts st111 current for this project. The Dtstrlct does not obJeCt to the proposed mlnor change. The attached coments apply, Very truly Yours, CO: KENNETH L. EDI4ARDS HN H. KASHUBA entor Civil Engineer : J,ty I e& RiL r-::l) COUrlC,u FLArlFlirlG DEPA CiTErlC DATE: ~lune 1o 1988 TD: Assessor lutldtng and Safety Surveyor - Dave Duda Road Department IMalth -*Ralph Luchs ** Fire Protection Flood Control District Fish & Game LAFCO, S Paisley II.So Postal Service - Ruth E. Davidson _ :: ,d 16 1~88 h RIVERSidE COUNTy PLANNING DEPARTMENT Shertfrs Department Airports Department UCR, Ltfe Science .Dept., 14.14. Nayhew GRDFIT *' Eastern Munlclpal ~rater Dlst. Rancho California i~ater Dtst. Elsfnore Union School Dtst. Temecula Union School Dtst. Sierra Clubs San Gorgonto Chapter CALTRNi$18 'VESTING TRACT 23372 - (Sp P1}' - E.A. 32547 - Nargartta VtTlage Development - . Robert Betn, I~tlltam Frost & Assoc. - Rancho california Area - First Supervisortel District - N. of Rancho California Road, i~. of Kaiser - R-R Zone 44 Acres - {:Concurrent Cases TR 23371 & 23373) - RELATED CASE SP 199 Hargartta Village - Nod - A.P. 923-210-02 Please review the case described above, along wtth the attached case map. A Land Division Comtttee meeting has been tentatively scheduled for June 20, 1988. If tt c~ears tt will then go to public hearing. Tour c=ents and recommendations are requested prior to June 5, 1988 in order thatwe ma ~nclude thm in the staff report for this particular case. Should you have an~ questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact Kathy Gtfford at 787-635~ Planner The Elstnore Unton Htgh School Dtstrtct facilities are overcrowded and our educational programs seriously impacted by increasing student population caused by new residential, connerctal and industrial construction. _ Therefore, pursuant to Callforota Government Code Section 53080 of AB 2926 and S8 327, this district levies a fee against all new development projects ~ithin tts boundaries. DATE= SIG~LekTURI': 4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 (714) 7876181 46-209 OASIS STREET, F, M 3C INDIO, CALIFORNIA 922C (619) 342-82; PLArlnik,G DEP = filERC OATE: June 1, 1988 Assessor Building and Safety rmrve~or - Dave Duda · oad Department !lealib - Ralph baths FIre Protection Flood Control District '- FIsh & Game tAFCO, S Patsle~ IJoSo Postal Service - Ruth E. Davidson 3~3UN13 1988 ' RIVERSIDE COUNTY pLANNING DEPARTMENT Shertff's Departaent Parks partmerit - George B, Agriculture Co~atsstoner t Airports Department UCR, LIfe Science .OAFS., I~.W. Payhew GROFIT ' ' : Eastern Nunlclpal ~tater Oist. Rancho California Mater Dlst. Elsfnore Union School Dfst. Temecula Union School Dtst. Sierra Club, San Gorgonto Chapter CALTRANS #8 VESTING TRACT ~337Z - (Sp P1) - E.A. 32547 - Nargartta Village Development - t Robert Bein, Will am Frost & Assoc. - Rancho california Area - First Supervtsortal District - R. of Rancho California Road, W. of Kaiser - R-R Zone 44 Acres - (Concurrent Cases TR 23371 & 23373) - RELATED CASE SP 199 Nargartta Vtllage- Hod - A.P. 923-210-02 Please review the case described above, along with the attached case map. A Land Division Conntttee meeting has been tentatively scheduhd for June 20, 1988. If it clears it will then go to public hearing. Tour co~nents and recommendations are requested prior to June 5, 1988 in order that we m~ include the~ in the Staff report for this particular case. Should you have any questions regarding this tte~, please do not hesitate to contact Kathy Gifford at 787-6356 ~Ira~;r nrlnt n~.~ ~n~ title 4080 LEMON STREET. 9TM FLOOR RIVERSIDE. ~LIFORNIA 92~1 p14) 787~181 EASTElaN iNFORMATION CENTER Archaeological Research Unit Unhersfily of California Rinrsidt CA 92521 46-209 OASIS STREET. ROOM 3( INDIO, CALIFORNIA 922' (619) 342-82' ATTACHMENT NO. 5 AGREEMENT: STIPULATION AND ORDER NO. 91-14308-H11 R:\S\STAFFRPT~23372,PC 10/28/93 klb 22 1 2 3 4, '5 6 '7 10 11 . 12 14 20 21 2~ 24 ~5 26 27 28 ~ OF T~C~D,,,; and SUl~ 640 (213) xc~eys UNITED STATZS BAN/(R~TCY CO~TRT SOUTHERN DZ~/CT OF C/LIYOR~IA I~ re ~AR~ARITA VITX.~GE DEVELOPMENT COI~3RATION, CASZ NO. 91-14308-Hll STIPULATION FOR CO~PRON/SE OF CLAIMS AGA/~ST CPa~PTER ~EA~, T, he cmun=y o~ ~lversi~e approved Ten=anive Map Noe. 23371--A and 23371-B =or Margari=n Village Development Company k'~ERY. A~, on or about March, 1929, MTDC signed an for ~ustun cun~ol and ~n~u~ lmpruv~ ~cr Tra~ ~, on or a~u= Au~, 19S9, ~C ~ecu=ed an m~n fur ~o~lon ~n~l and ~nds~pe Improvemen=s 23371-B; W~EREAS, eai~ TTac=s; pursuan~ =o both of "~_he~e Agreemen=s, Y~VDC grade~ bo=h of =.hese Agreemen=B required =ha~ MVDC S ~ ~e sati~fa~n af ~a Building OffiCial, any de~e~ive ~or~ 4 or ~r ~ne er ~efe~ve ~iall 5 ~, ~ ~e~iVe ~o~ o= eil~ =~m said ~a~ 6 23371--A and ~ ~s ~ de~si~ d~S~em ~ ~s ~lv~ T ~~ Pal~ Village ud ~ ~e ~ng Valley Hash a~jacu= 10 Palo~r 11 e, ~ a c~ndi=ion oZ appruv~ fur ~e ~1 ~p f~r - ~ raa'l proxy c~mpria~g Palemar Village, lo~=~ a~ Ma~ariU 1~ ~d ~cho ~lifomia ~ads, ~e b~in~s usocia~on far said sal~ ~rope~y, aa 4~=d ~ ~e le~ from ~v~ai~e Flood c~ntr~l and ~a~ Dis~i~ ~ ~ BI~, Willi~ 18 e, ~e Villagu Homeo~s Associa=i~n !9 responsibility p~sU~ ~ ~ac N~. 20735 ~D main~n 20 Valley Wash a pa~ of said 21 ~, on Dec~ ~,' 198~, ~e Ci~ of T~e~la ~ ~cu~ra~, succeeding to ~e righas ~d d~i~ ~ of Riverside, includ~g ~e per=umance ~nds ref~encad hl~w~ 24 ~, Se~ion 6.14.002(b) Qf ~e T~e~la ~unicipal C~e 26 uf vhl~, In ~y m~-made s=a~e, whaler as a resul= cf 27 cp~a=~o~, ~vauion, fill or o~ al=~a~, inkfares wi~ -2- 1 4 10 11 14 15 17 18 20 ~4 ad~oin£nc~ ~r o=-her l:rcper=ies w2~ic~ ~oes or My ~esul~ ~n or to neig~r~g ~s~sd ~ =o remove ~e sil= de~si=ed ~ ~g valley ~ash, ~ ~ r~uved said sil= a= a ~s= of appr~xima=el~ ~, ~ ~n~a~e~ for S~il Te~, Inc., ~u prap~ a l~=ed ~oei~n-e~dy =~r ~ng Valley ~, said s~ ~di~=es ~a~ as of Sep~ 2S, ~90, Ea ~s con~ibu=ed 78% Qf ~e soil deposited in ~n; Valley Wae~, which was subee~tly r~oved by ~; ~, apprux~t~y 3,600 y~ds Qf additional e~lt been depusi=ed in ~e ~1v~ ~d~ea~ Palomar village and ~ng Valley ~ash s~ce ~e previuue cl~nup, whi~ silt ~s d~ived ahQs= en=irely Zrum ~ac~ 23371--A and B; ~, City asser=s a claim agains= ~C ~d Be~ord p~suan~ ~ ~e Ci=y Grading, Nuisance ~ S~visiQn Ordinances, ~d ~he ~a~ Map condi=iQns~ =o cumpei a cl~up ~n~ Valley Wash and ~e culve~ ~der ~alom~ Village; ~, ~C s~ci=ically d~ies sac a~ ev~ one a~ve Reci~le, bu= agees =o ~is Seipula=ion in o~ =~ l=a peace and to ob=ain an ~icable resolu=ion tu ~e Recl~ls con=ained hereinabove; NOW, ~~. ZT ZS H~Y A~ n~u ~E P~ FO~E: 2 clays o~ C~ur'=~pproval ~Z T.~ls Order, IP~Z~een Thousand ~l~ars ~ ($~SrO0O) t~ Set?.le a~ Cla4-,L o: VHA, M~/DC and the Clt7 as ~ 4 sil~ in ~he culver~ underneath Polomar Village, and =o ~aciltVaCe ~ Zu=ure maintanan~ Qf ~he c~lve~c and L~ng Valley Waeh. 6 2. MVDC shall, be~inning n~ la~er than July 1, lSS2, and 7 c~mple=ed nQ later then ~ July 31~ 1Sea, repair and regade T_he 8 L~r~ Valley Wash between Xu~n R~ad and lt,m~er ~rive, along 9 ltancho CaliZc3rnia R~ad, J.n Trac~: No. 2~735 ~:~ planned elevaT. i&ns 10 by Robert Bein, Willieins FrQS= and Associates, dated Dec--~er 11, 11 1985, ~O =he ~olloving spe~lfica~ione: 12 A. Scope of work is te ~nclude T. he following: 13 C1) Clearing and disposal ~f all trees, brush ana l& =rash- 1~ (2) EXcavation a~d export of material t~ res=or~ 16 channel V~ planned alevav~ons. 17 (3} Fine .re~rading or flowlines an~ slopes =~ 18 planned elevations ~d lines met by a 19 registered C~li=ornia civil engineer, 20 mutually acceptable ~ =he par=ieQ, e= ~VDC's 21 expense. 2= (4) If w~r~ is no~ completed by July 15, lee2, ~Z ~a3C or i~s con=ra:Eors shall use ~a~ar 2~ trucks to irri~a~e =he adjacent grass and 2~ trees. 26 (5) All sprinkler~ end irrigation equipmen~ shall TR.M~'J3paTp &'0Vt'~ 2 S 10 11 12 13 14 18 lS 19 upon umpleti~n. - (6) Underground flov pipe =hall be cleaned, repaired ar~fi put in=o good vorking ~rd~ upon comple~n. [?) ~ ~Ja~n= l~d~pin~ shall ~ replaced or repaired. (8) Hotly ~ at l~s= one ve~ ~for~ w~rk ~gins. ~C or its con=a~or shall ~ respons~le for · lo~C~g a d~p sire of i~ ~oi~. ~c or l~ ccn~a~cr s~ll hold ~ ~-~less o= an~ problems ~in~ fr~ d~p sloe. EC, i~elf, ~ ~cuqh i~ con~a~or s~ll provide all ~i~, ~t~ial, and l~r necess~ =o ~f~ said work a= i=s cos=, ~d ,all ind~i=y and held ~, Cl=y and Beard hapless from all claim f~ liabili~ based upon, cr damages ~ising Zrcm, ~crk perfo~ed h~eund~ ~r brea~ of any portion o= ~is Ageement by ~C, i=s cun~a~ors, agen~ or ~ploye~. I= vill ~ ~C's or l~ con=a~or's responsibilit~ ~ con=a~ Und~rground S~i~ Alert ~d all o~ c~ncem~d ag~cies =or ~e l~=i~ns of all ~is=ing u=ili=ies ~i~in ~e des~ib~ york ar~. ~C and i=s con~a~ur shall be eolely -5- 2 5 6 9 lO r~ 19 2o 2~ 24 ~6 2~ 28 sideva3~, lnndscaping, e~., a~ and be'.vee~ ~e ~ site ~d' d~ s~. l~ s~ll also include all . p~ ~ v~r~ at ~ sQle cost. ~C ot ~V ~a~Qr-s~l ~ame ~, C~t~ and ae~ord as ~o~l ~ cn i~ liabili~ ~ce ~li~ ~d pruvide a ~ni=i~te ~= hs~- ~ cr i~ co~a~nr rill suppW pro~= of appro~ia~e w~,s ccmpensa=ien Cuns~icn vat~ ~d cohesion va~ me~er. will ~ ~ovided by ~C or i~ con~ac=cr as is meted. ~C, or l~ succ~sors and assigns, ~all ~n=~ue ~ M~i~ ~ne Valley ~ash ~ ~e above s~cificaUicns ~ ~e mnn~ provid~ a~, i~ sole ~s=, up ~o and un=il ~e Cl=~ of T~e~la r~leases Fai~ful P~Zumnca Bond ~usicn C~n=~l and ~dscape ~prov~ for Tra~ 23a71-1, ~ond No. 7900~276~7, ~ Fai~Zul P~umnce Bond for ~usion c~n=21 and Improv~en~s Zor Tra~ 23371-B, ~ond 790~5=9484. ~, nc~i~g herein ma~ M consL~ed as a waiver by ~e Ci=~ or i~ right, an~, =~ requir~ ~e s~e=~ o[ said ~nds ~ ~rfum any cbliga=icn o= ~DC ~der T2li/Ixu.tu,P.%'~ M --6-- 1 2 4 6 7 9 10 11 13 15 16 lS 19 20 Z1 ~2 26 or ~,be AgTaammnts they sac~m~' ~e city s~ll ~ ~l~e o~ said ~ ~ less ~ s~y (~O) ~ys prier ~ ~s ~ms e~ said ~s. ~1 p~i~ a~ee ~a~ ~ior to ~e release or s&id Bonds, ~ng V~lley Wash ~ust ~ cleaned ~nd r~ad~ to ~s a~va specificatio~ and work~g order as yell as ~e adJac~t spriglet ~e~s. ~, If h ~e opinion u= ~e City ~e ~v~ ~es~ Pal~ Village, a= ~e of ~e ~ o= ~is Agent=, ~e ~nds will ~ r~se~, ~ ~C, i~ asslOs ;r s~ll clean'said Palo--s~ bux culv~ as Yell. ~m~, any d~a~e done t~ any co~e~e ~pruvu~s ~ ins~lls, shall M ~ ~y submi~ an hvQice up =~ ~e ~oun= of $5,D00 for bui~g ~d comple=in~ confers arainage impruvemen~ ~end~g frum ~on tD ~r in ~e ~ng Valley Wa~ up ~=il 1, 1992. Upun s~missi;n ~f sai~ ~v~iues ~ ~ in a t~ely =ashjan, ~i~ i~v~ices ~all ~ by ~C up to ~e ~;un= ~f $S,000 ~ not less ~an 10 1 2 5 6 8 9 lO ° 12 13 16 18 19 20 21 2~ 26 28 ~ ~ces= do h~ rel~Se ~d dis~ar~e ~C, i~ offi~x, a~, ~ployees and succasscr~ ~W~, fr~ any ~d all =tgn~, cla~, d~, a~ damages o~ ~y ~nd, ~o~ or ~a~ 22371 in ~n~ Valley Wa~ ~d ~, culv~t In cnuid~ation oZ ~e promises con~ned h~etn, ~ ~d t~ o~s, ag~, ust~s and ~ ~tmrsm~ do her~ teluse and ~s~s Ct~, ~d Bedford, ~d ~ c~ic~s, agen~ ~loyeu and ~c~ssso=s-~-int~u~ ~=om ~y and all ri~h~,.~la4~, ds~, ~d daugns ~d, ~o~ or ~o~, asked ~r ~ss~ rssul~ ~rom or related ~o ~e silt ~aviously depostUsd, pres~.ly existing, ~ ~ht~ ~y depcsi=ed Z~2m ~C or o~ ups~eam ~develo~ hnd in ~ng Valley Wa2h and ~e ~lv~ ~ea~ Palo~r Village. In consideration of ~e pro~ses confined h~, Ci=y, and l~ owners, a~, assigns and successors in inures= de h~eby release and dis~ar~'e ~e ~, and BedZurd, and 1 4 5 6 '7 8 9 lO 11 12 14 15 16 17 1B 19 20 21 22 24 25 26 27 intere~ from any and all right, cla(-~, d~nda, and damages of any kind, known or unknown, asserted or usaseethed, resul=ing ~rom or rula~=d ~ T_he sil= ~rsviously deposited, Wesen=ly other upstream undeveloped land in Long Valley Wash and the oulver= beneath Palemar Village, through the date of ]release of T. he bonds described at SecT_ion I.H. In considera~ion of T_he promises con=ai~ed herein, Bedford, and its owners, a~en=s, assigns a~d successors in in=steer do hereby release and discharge =he ClOy and VHA, and =heir officers, agents, employees and successors-in-interes= from any a~d all rig~=s, claims, demands, and damages of any kind, known or unknown, asserted or unasssned. resul=in~ from o= related ~o the sil~ previously deposi=sd, presently exis~in~, ur ~r~ich may be deposited from MVDC or ether upstream undeveloped land in Long Valley Wash and the culvert beneath Palemar Village. In consideration of the promises ~n~ained herein, MVDC, and i=s owners, ages=s, assigns and successors in in~eres~ do hereby release and dischar~e Bedford, the Ciny and VHA, and ~heir officers. ages==. empl'oyees and successors-in- Tm~mlrrn!,.s'n, ~ -9-- 2 4 5 6 8 ll 12 :).6 17 18 19 20 21 22 24 2~ 27 · and damages of an~ kind, known or unknovn, asseTCad ~r unaaser=ea, resulting from ~r related to the Silt previously deposited, presently o~.~e~ upstream undeveloped land in Long Valley Wash and the culvert beneath Palomar Village. 4. The parries here~ ~alders=and and age= that all of their rights under Secnion 1542 ~f The Civil Cc~e af Califcr~a ~r any s~--~lar law of any state ~r territory or the United S=a=ae, ere hereby ex~mreealy ~aive~. Said Section reeds as fallows: "SaCion 1542. General Release-Claims Extinguished. A general release does not ex=en~ to claims which the ~redi=or know or suspeo~ to exis= in his favor ~ime o~ exerting ~e release, vhi~ by h~, mus~ have ~rially a=fe~ his 5. I~ is ~d~m=uod and speed =ha= ~is S~ipulation repressnEe ae==l~n= of' ~isp~ed cla~ and is cQns~ed as representing an abimsion ~y ~ =0 ~is Stipulation. The p~ies, however, in=end buy ~eir peace and =o forever provide a =ull ~d complete rmlease.ana ~is~ar~e.=rom any and all li~lli=y ~ie~g out ~e =anea~iQns, mat=~s.and ev~ more pa~i~larly i~fie~ hereina~ve. -10- 2 agree T/m~ in executing ~his Stipulation, ~hey do ~o with full knowledge of any rights ~hich =hey have or may have wi~h 4 ~ ~he other, and ~mt they have received independent legal advice =tom their respective ~ttorneys with respect to this 6 Stipulat_ion, and with respect ~ the heroinabove referenced 9 this Stipulation, they may ~iscove~ differenn or adaiti~nal 1O concsrl~ing the s~bjec= ma~=er of =his Stipulation or their 11 undarB~auu~ing of those fac~s. The parches hereCo, therefors, 12 expressly assume the risk uS such fa~cs being so different and 13 agree that this Stipulation, shall in all respects, be effective 14 and not subject to restlesion, cancellation or termination by 15 reason of any such add/tional or different 16 7. Should any percy bring an action against the ether for 17 =he purpose uf enforcing t_he terms of this Stipulation, or 18 damages arising from its breach, then in such event, the 19 prevailing percy shall be entitled ~ its reasonable attorneys 20 fees and costin in addition to any other award entered ~by the 21 Cour=. 22 8. This Stipulation shall inure to the benefit of T, he 23 parties and to their respective successors, representatives and 24 assigns, and shall be binding upon each of the foregoingi ~5 9. This Stipulation shall, in all respects, be ~8 interpreted, enforced and governed by and under the le~s ~f the 27 State of California. This Agreement connains T, he entire 28 -11- su~mc~ ~t~,e~ herao~ and supersedes a~d replaces ~ego~a~O~, proposed a~e~ ~ a~e~ts, ~r oral. T~s Stipula~on ~y ~ ai~ in count~. 10. Thie. ~ip~a~icn ~all ~ e~Je~ =o 6 a~roval ~cause it ar~a~ ~e righ~ 'and/or obliga=i~ns 7 ~C. TAis S=ip~a=icn shall no= ~ h~ding on ~y ~ies h~eto ~l~s and ~=il ~u~ a~roval is S=ipula~i~n ~c~ e~fe~ive as =o ~C. ~C shall 10 eu~ ap~uval wi~ ~o (a) b~ess da~s of ~C 11 co~el ' s ~e~ivin~ ~t==en no=ifi~=i~n of ~is S=ipula~ion 12 ~e~ution by ~, Bedlord and EC. No~wi~s=and~g any 13 =or~g t~ ~e cun~, ~e ~orc~= and ~e~re=a=ion 14 ~is S=ipula=i~n s~ll nu~ ~ subj~ ~ ~e B~pt~ ~, ~cspt t~ ~t e~ant euch ~forc~t in~e~re~ion a=fe~s ~e righ=s or obliga~ions ~f 17 ~is S=ip~ani~n. 18 IN ~S WH~OF, each ~= ~e undosigned have 1S ~is Stip~atiun on ~e date ~d ye~ indiared ~low. 20 ~e below n~ed persons warran~ ~an ~e7 ~e duly 2! sl~ ~is ag~en= on ~half of ~eir principal and ~e au~uriz~d ~o bind ~eir principal ~ ~is S=ip~la=ion. 25 26 2~ 2 -- ~ 4 5 7 8 9 - 14- 26 1992 Dat, e,~: ..,~'~.;, ~992 Da~ed: ~ , Z992 By: BUIX-P~NC~O CALIFORNIA, LTD., & Call=~rnia limi=ad partnership By: · a cali=ornia corporation, Ceneral P~r~ner By: By: NEVADA-RA~C~ CALZI~31LNIJ~, LTD. a Call$arnl& limi~aa parv~arship By: FEVADA CAPITAL, LTd. & General Par-,ne: Byz -3,.3 2 4- 5 6 7 8 lO ll -12 15 16 17' 19 20 22 2~ 25 26 27 'mt;~3..E, ll=:IJ~JJkt~ & BO,t. ENBEN ScoT'r, F. F~eld, CiZy A~corney CITY OY TEM~uu,A Dated: Vi~or Vilaplana, Zsq. A=V~-neye By: . Da~ed: Dennis Klimme~, Esq. A==orney for BTa3FOED DEV~-O~w~n~T COMPANY TDI,I/1]O'/33F,ITP ~l~21 -14 ~ , 1992 1992 1992 ATTACHMENT NO. 6 EXHIBITS R:\S\STAFFRPT~23372.PC 10/28/93 klb 2~ CITY OF TEMECULA lu S~n Oaegu CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: '~ C. DATE: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23372, AMENDMENT NO. 1, 2ND EXTENSION OF TIME A VICINITY MAP NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\23372,PC 10/25/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: c, C. DATE: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23372, AMENDMENT NO. 1, 2ND EXTENSION OF TIME D SITE PLAN NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~23372,PC 10/25/93 klb L, CITY OF TEMECULA EXHIBIT B - FUTURE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: VERY HIGH/MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL EXHIBIT C - ZONING DESIGNATION: SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 199 - MARGARITA VILLAGE CA_SE NO.: P.,,,, DATE: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23372, AMENDMENT NO. 1,2ND EXTENSION OF TIME NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\23372.PC 10/25/93 klb ITEM #6 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION November 1, 1993 LOCATION: EXISTING ZONING: SURROUNDING ZONING: Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Amendment No. 1, Second Extension of Time Prepared By: Matthew Fagan RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends the Planning Commission: ADOPT Resolution No. 93- , approving the Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Amendment No. I based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Margarita Village Retirement Community, Inc. c/o Kernper Real Estate Development Company REPRESENTATIVE: Mick Ratican, Rick, Engineering PROPOSAL: A second one year extension of time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Amendment No. I - a residential condominium subdivision of 348 dwelling units on 23.5 acres and 7.5 acres commercial. Planning Area No. 38: Very High Density Residential 14o8 d.u./acre. Planning Area No. 39: Commercial 7.5 acres. Northwest corner of Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village PROPOSED ZONING: FUTURE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: EXISTING LAND USE: North: South: East: West: Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village R-1 (One Family Dwellings) Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village Not Requested Planning Area No. 38: High Density Residential (13-20 d.u./acre) Planning Area No. 39: Neighborhood Commercial VBcBnt R:\S\STAFFRPT~23373.PC 10/28/93 mf SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Vacant South: Vacant East: Single Family Residences West: Vacant PROJECT STATISTICS °- Total Area: 31.0 gross acres Number of Lots: 8 Residential Density: 14.8 d.u./acre BACKGROUND Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23373, Amendment No. I was originally approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on November 8, 1988. The first Extension of Time was filed with the Planning Department on October 12, 1990. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the first Extension of Time on November 4, 1991 and the City Council approved the first Extension of Time on April 28, 1993. A second Extension of Time was formally submitted to the Planning Department on October 8, 1991. A Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was held on November 5, 1992. Staff contacted Kemper Real Estate Development Company (the present title holder of the property) in July, 1993, and was informed that they would ultimately be in receivership of the property within the next few months. Staff explained the status of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373 to Kemper and also expressed the necessity of taking action on the extension, because the map would expire on November 8, 1993. Although they did not currently hold title on the property at that time, they expressed that they did not want to see the map expire. Staff received notification from Kemper on October 26, 1993, stating that they had title for the land in the name of Margarita Village Retirement Community, Inc. Staff scheduled the item for the November 1,1993 Planning Commission meeting in order to avoid the expiration of the map. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The current project is a request for a second, one year extension of time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No, 23373, Amendment No. 1 (VTTM 23373). Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Amendment No. I is a portion of the Margarita Village Specific Plan No, 199. The Tentative Map encompasses Planning Areas 38 and 39. Planning Area No. 38 proposes a 348 unit retirement residential condominium project on approximately 23,5 acres. The overall density of that project would be approximately 14.8 dwelling units per acre at buildout, Planning Area 39 is a I lot commercial site consisting of approximately 7,5 acres. ANALYSIS Leaal Issues Reaardina V'FI'M 23373 The City Council approved the first Extension of Time for this project contingent upon an agreement being entered into by the applicant (Reference Attachment No. 5). This agreement R:\S\STAFFRPT%23373.PC 10/28/93 mf 2 contained timelines and responsibilities for removing all the sediments from the open channel and the box culvert north of Rancho California Road between Margarita Road and Humber Drive. The applicant is in the process of removing the sediments from the channel and from the box culvert. A condition of approval has been added to the project that assures that the applicant continues to remove the sediments from the channel and from the box culvert. Senate Bill 428 Senate Bill No. 428 went into effect on September 14, 1993. This Bill added Section 66542.11 to the Government Code and contains the following language: "The expiration date of any tentative subdivision map or a parcel map for which a tentative map has been approved that has not expired on the date that the act that adds this section becomes effective shall be extended by 24 months." The City Attorney has determined that the above referenced Senate Bill applies to VT~M 23373. The second extension was scheduled to expire on November 8, 1992. The approval of the current extension, along with the provisions contained in Senate Bill No. 428 extends the life of the map until November 8, 1994. New Conditions of APProval New conditions of approval have been added to this project to ensure the public health, safety and welfare. The major ones pertain to requiring a biological assessment of the Gnatcatcher; two conditions of approval (that are in effect immediately upon approval of the second extension of time) for the immediate removal of the sediments from the channel and from the box culvert for the Long Valley Wash; two conditions of approval added to insure completion of improvements to Margarita Road between La Serena Way and Rancho California Road; and a condition of approval that recreational trails and Class II bicycle lanes along Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway be designed and constructed to intercept with the City's Park and Recreational Master Plan. EXISTING ZONING AND FUTURE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION Existing zoning for the site is Specific Plan (S.P. 199 - Margarita Village). The Specific Plan land use designation for Planning Area No. 38 - Retirement Community is very high density residential (Density range 14-20 d.u./acre). The land use designation for Planning Area No. 39 is commercial development The draft General Plan land use designation for Planning Area No. 38 is High Density Residential (13-20 d.u./acre) and Neighborhood Commercial for Planning Area No, 39. The project as proposed is consistent with Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village, Ordinance No. 348, and the draft General Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 202 was previously adopted by Riverside County for Specific Plan No. 199. Staff has determined that said EIR still applies to this subdivision because no subsequent, unmitigable changes are proposed in the project which would require revisions to the previous Certified Environmental Impact Report. The project does not include new significant, unmitigable environmental impacts that were not considered in the previously Certified Environmental Impact Report on the project. R:\S\STAFFRPT~23373.PC 10/28/93 mf 3 SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS The current project is a request for a second one year extension of time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Amendment No. I (V I I iVl 23373), which is located in the Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199. The Tentative Map encompasses Planning Areas 38 and 39. Planning Area No. 38 proposes a 348 unit residential condominium project on approximately 23.5 acres. The overall density of that project would be approximately 14.8 dwelling units per acre at buildout. Planning Area 39 is a 1 lot commercial site consisting of approximately 7.5 acres. Several new conditions of approval have been added to this project to ensure the public health, safety and welfare. The major ones pertain to requiring a biological assessment of the Gnatcatcher; two conditions of approval (that are in effect immediately upon approval of the second extension of time) for the immediate removal of the sediments from the channel and from the box culvert for the Long Valley Wash; two conditions of approval added to insure completion of improvements to Margarita Road between La Serena Way and Rancho California Road; and a condition of approval that recreational trails and Class II bicycle lanes along Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway be designed and constructed to intercept with the City's Park and Recreational Master Plan. The project as proposed is consistent with Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village, Ordinance No. 348, and the draft General Plan. The approval of the current extension, along with the provisions contained in Senate Bill No. 428 extended the life of the map until November 8, 1994. FINDINGS The findings for the original approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Amendment No. 1 are found to remain valid except as amended herein. No subsequent changes are proposed in the project which would require revisions to the previously Certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 202. The project does not include new significant, unmitigable environmental impacts that were not considered in the previously Certified Environmental Impact Report on the project. 3. No new information of substantial importance to the project has become available. There is a reasonable probability that Tentative Parcel Map No. 23373, Amendment No. 1, Second Extension of Time 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 Specific Plan land use designation for Planning Area No. 38 - Retirement Community is very high density residential (Density range 14-20 d.u./acre). The land use designation for Planning Area No. 39 is commercial development The draft General Plan land use designation for Planning Area No. 38 is High Density Residential (13-20 d.u./acre) and Neighborhood Commercial for Planning Area No. 39. The project as proposed is consistent with Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village and the draft General Plan. R:\S\STAFFRPT~23373.PC 10/28/93 mf 4 10. 11. 12. The proposed use or action complies with State Planning and Zoning Laws. The proposed use complies with the Subdivision Map Act, and City of Temecula Ordinances No. 460 and 348. 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, due to the fact that the proposed residential development complies with the standards of Ordinances No. 460 and 348. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or welfare, due to the fact that the Conditions of Approval include mitigation measures. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony in scale, bulk, height, intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with adjoining properties. Medium density residential uses are proposed to the west and are buffered by a golf course. Medium high residential uses are proposed to the north of the site and are buffered by a road. Existing low-medium density residential development is located across Rancho California Road. The commercial portion of the site is adjacent to Meadows Parkway (identified in the draft General Plan as a 4-lane major road) and Rancho California Road (identified in the draft General Plan as a 4-lane arterial). 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 use is compatible with the surrounding land uses. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic, because access will be off of Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway, which are publicly maintained street. The design of the project and the type of improvements are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the property within the proposed project. Said findings are supported by maps and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. R:\S\STAFFRPT~23373.PC 10/28193 mf 5 Attachments: Resolution No. 93- - Blue Page 7 Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 12 Conditions of Approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Amendment No. 1, First Extension of Time- Blue Page 19 Conditions of Approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Amendment No. 1 - Blue Page 20 Agreement: Stipulation and Order No. 91-14308-H11 - Blue Page 21 Exhibits - Blue Page 22 A. Vicinity Map B. Future General Plan Designation C. Zoning Designation D. Tentative Map R:\S\STAFFRPT~23373.PC 10/28193 mf 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- R:\S\STAFFRPT%23373,PC 10128193 mf 7 ATiACHIVEENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF ~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A SECOND ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23373, AMENDMENT NO. 1, A PROPOSAL FOR A RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION OF 348 DWELLING UNITS ON 23.5 ACRF~ AND 7.5 ACRES CO1VIlV~RCIAL LOCATED AT TFW~ NORTHWEST CORNER OF RANCHO CAL~ORNIA ROAD AND MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 953-060-009. WI~.REAS, Kemper Real Estate Development Company in the name of Margarita Village Retirement Community, Inc. fried an Extension of Time application for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Amendment No. I in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WIIEREAS, said Extension of Time application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WttF~REAS, the Planning Commission considered said Extension of Time on November 1, 1993; W!tEREAS, at said hearing, the Commission considered all facts relating to the Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Amendment No. 1; NOW, TffEREFORE, ~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. Section 2. Findines. 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. R:\S\STAFFRP'T~23373.PC 10128/93 mf 8 2. The planning agency fmds, 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 complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as mended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest pertion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The Planning Commission in approving the proposed Extension of Time, makes the following findings, to wit: 1. The fmdings for the original approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Amendment No. 1 are found to remain valid except as amended herein. 2. No subsequent changes are proposed in the project which would require revisions to the previously Certified Environmental Impact Report (lh;IR) No. 202. The project does not include new significant, unmitigable environmental impacts that were not considered in the previously Certified Environmental Impact Report on the project. 3. No new information of substantial importance to the project has become available. 4. There is a reasonable probability that Tentative Parcel Map No. 23373, Amendment No. 1, Second Extension of Time 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 Specific Plan land use designation for Planning Area No. 38 - Retirement Community is very high density residential (Density range 14-20 d.u./aere). The land use designation for Planning Area No. 39 is commemial development The draft General Plan land use designation for Planning Area No. 38 is High Density Residential (13-20 d.u./acre) and Neighborhood Commercial for Planning Area No. 39. The project as proposed is consistent with Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Viibee and the draft General Plan. R:\S\STAFFRPT~23373,PC 10/28/93 mf 9 5. The proposed use or action complies with State Planning and Zoning Laws. The proposed use complies with the Subdivision Map Act, and City of Temecula Ordinances No. 460 and 348. 6. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lot configuration, circulation pattems, access, and intensity of use, due to the fact that the proposed residential development complies with the standards of Ordinances No. 460 and 348. 7. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or weftare, due to the fact that the Conditions of Approval include mitigation measures. 8. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony in scale, bulk, height, intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with adjoining properties. Medium density residential uses axe proposed to the west and are buffered by a goff course. Medium high residential uses are proposed to the north of the site and are buffered by a road. Existing low-medium density residential development is located across Rancho California Road. The commercial portion of the site is adjacent to Meadows Parkway (identified in the draft General Plan as a 4-lane major road) and Rancho California Road (identified in the draft General Plan as a 4-lane arterial). 9. 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 use is compatible with the surrounding land uses. 10. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated fight-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic, because access will be off of Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway, which are publicly maintained street. 11. The design of the project and the type of improvements axe such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the property within the proposed project. 12. Said findings are supported by maps and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. D. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, the Tentative Tract Map is compatible with the health, safety and weftare of the community. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. Environmental Impact Report (h':IR) No. 202 was previously adopted by Riverside County for Specific Plan No. 199. Staff has determined that said EIR still applies to this subdivision because no subsequent, unmitigable changes are proposed in the project which would require revisions to the previous Certified Environmental Impact Report. The project does not include new significant, unmitigable environmental impacts that were not considered in the previously Certified Environmental Impact Report on the project. R:\S\STAFFRPT%23373.PC 10128/93 mf 10 Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves the Second One Year Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Amendment No. 1, a proposal for a residential condominium subdivision of 348 dwelling units on 23.5 acres and 7.5 acres commercial located at the northwest comer of Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 953-060-009 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of November, 1993. STEVEN F. FORD CHAIRMAN I IIF, REBY CERT~Y that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecuh at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 1st day of November, 1993 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: GARY THORNHILL SECRETLY R:\S\STAFFRPT~23373,PC 10/28/93 mf 11 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23373, AMENDMENT NO. 1, SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME R:\S\STAFFRPT%23373,PC 10/28/93 mf 12 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Amendment No. 1, Second Extension of Time Project Description: SecondoneyearextensionofTimeforVestingTentativeMapNo. 23373, Amendment No. I - a Residential condominium subdivision of 348 dwelling units on 23.5 acres and 7.5 acres commercial. Assessor's Parcel No.: Approval Date: Expiration Date: 953-060-009 PLANNING DEPARTMENT General Requirements The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless modified 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. The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, it agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Amendment No. 1, Second Extension of Time, 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 applicant shall comply with all Conditions of Approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Amendment No. 1, First Extension of Time, and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, Amendment No. 1, unless superseded by these Conditions of Approval. If Subdivision phasing is proposed, a Dhasine plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 199 - Margarita Village. m The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be subject to Development Aareement No. 5. R:\S\STAFFRPT~23373,PC 10/28/93 rnf 13 7. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures identified within EIR No. 202. 8. A Mitioation MonitorinQ Proaram shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director prior to recordation of the Final Map or issuance of Grading Permits which ever occurs first. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 9. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director. 10. A biological assessment of the Gnatcatcher shall be required. Necessary mitigation measures acceptable to the United States Department of Fish and Wildlife and/or California Department of Fish and Game shall be implemented. 11. The applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report, compliance with the Conceptual Landscape Plans for this stage of the development. 12. The applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 13. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director: A. A copy of the Final Map. B. A copy of the Rough Grading Plans. C. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes: (1) This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations, Ordinance No. 655. (2) Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 202 was prepared for this project and is on file at the City of Temecula Planning Department. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 14. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director: A. Construction landscape plans consistent with the City standards and the approved Conceptual Landscape Plans including automatic irrigation for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from the view of the public from streets and adjacent property for: R:~,S\STAFFRPT%23373.PC 10/28/93 mf 14 ( 1 ) Front yards and slopes within individual lots prior to issuance of building permits for any lot{s). (2) Private common areas prior to issuance of the twentieth (20th) building permit. B, Wall and fence plans consistent with the Conceptual Landscape Plans. C. Precise grading plans consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements, D. The Model Home Complex Plot Plan (if applicable) which includes the following: (1) Site Plan with off-street parking, (2) Construction Landscape Plans. (3) Fencing Plans. (4) Building Elevations. (5) Floor Plans. (6) Materials and Colors Board. 15. 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 Director approval. 16. The applicant shall demonstrate by a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits 17. Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots shall be completed for inspection, 18. Private common area landscaping shall be completed for inspection prior to issuance of the twentieth (20th) occupancy permit. 19, The applicant shall sign an agreement and/or post a bond with the City to insure the maintenance of all landscaping within private common areas for a period of one year. 20. The applicant shall demonstrate by a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. R:\S\STAFFRPT~23373.PC 10/28/93 mf 15 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 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. General Requirements 21o The Developer shall remove all the sediments from the open channel and the box culvert north of Rancho California Road between Margarita Road and Humber Drive to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works, and pursuant to the terms and conditions of the stipulated judgment in Case No. 91-14308-H11. 22. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. Within Thirty (30) Days of Approval of The Second Extension of Time 23. The Developer shall enter into a Reimbursement Agreement with the City providing that, prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the Developer shall reimburse the City, the City's cost for completion of the improvements to Margarita Road, between La Serena Way and Rancho California Road, should the City choose to construct said improvements. 24. An erosion control plan shall be prepared in accordance with City Standards, by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. Prior to Recordation of Final Map 25. The Developer shall construct or post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the construction of the erosion control and slope protection improvements and all required offsite improvements, as specified in the Conditions of Approval as approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on November 8, 1988, and as modified by the Planning Commission on November 4, 1991, for the first Extension of Time, within 18 months, in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 26. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the Developer shall complete the improvements to Margarita Road, between La Serena Way and Rancho California Road, should the City choose not to construct said improvements. R:\S\STAFFRPT~23373.PC 10/28/93 mf 16 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT General Requirements 27. Exterior slopes contiguous to public streets that are adjacent to residential development shall be offered for dedication to the Community Services Department (TCSD) for maintenance purposes following compliance to existing City Standards and completion of the application process. All other slopes and open space shall be maintained by an established Home Owners' Association. 28. Recreational Trails and Class II Bicycle Lanes along Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway shall be designed and constructed to intercept with the City's Park and Recreation Master Plan. 29. All proposed slopes intended for dedication to the TCSD shall be identified on the final map as a proposed TCSD maintenance area. 30. Construction of proposed TCSD landscape maintenance areas shall commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the developer and the City Maintenance Superintendent. Failure to comply with the TCSD review and inspection process may preclude acceptance of these areas into the TCSD maintenance program. 31. The developer, or the developer's successors or assignees, shall maintain all landscaped areas until such time as those maintenance responsibilities are accepted by the TCSD. Prior to Recordation of Final Map(s) 32. The applicant or his assignee shall pay the fair market value of 4.73 acres of park land to comply with City Ordinance No. 469.93 (Quimby). The amount to be paid shall be determined by TCSD staff within thirty (30) days prior to recordation of said map. 33. The subdivider shall post security and enter into an agreement to improve all proposed TCSD maintenance areas in conformance with the City of Temecula Landscape Development Plan Guidelines and Specifications. 34. Landscape construction drawings identified as TCSD maintenance areas shall be reviewed and approved by TCSD staff. R:\S\STAFFRPT~23373.PC 10/28193 rnf 17 OTHER AGENCIES 35. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittal dated October 18, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 36. The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the County of Riverside Fire Department's letter dated October 18, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 37. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Eastern Municipal Water District transmittal dated October 22, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R:\S%STAFFRPT%23373.PC 10128193 mf 18 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE · HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH October 18, 1993 CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT 43174 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE TEMECULA, CA 92592 ATIN: Matth~xv Fagan: RECEIVED 0 C T 2 I 1993 Ans'd ........... liE: TRACT MAP NO. 23373: BEING PARCELS 1,2,3,4 AND S OF PARCEL MAP 21884 AS SHOWN ON A MAP THEREOF FILED IN BOOK 144. PAGES 24 THROUGH 33 OF PARCEL MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID RIVERSIDE COUNTY TOGETHER WITH A PORTION OF THE RANCHO TEMECULA GRANTED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO LUIS VIGNES BY PATENT DATED JANUARY 18, 1860 AND RECORDED IN THE OI't'1CE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. (68 LOTS) Dear Gentlemen: The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed Tract Map No. 23373 and recommends: A water system shall be inshailed according to plans and specifications as approved by the water company and the Health Depamncnt. 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 ~vith the original drawing to the City, of Tcmecula's Office. The prints shall show the internal pipe dinmeter, location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and joint specifications, and the size of the m~fm at the junction of the new system to the existing system. The plans shall comply in all respects with Div. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the Califorma Health and Safety Code, Calffomaa Administrative Code, Title 11, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Comnussion 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 Tract Map No. 23373 is in accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the water services, storage, and distribution system xvill be adequate to provide water service to such Tract Map". This certification does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to such Tract 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. The nlans must be submitted to the City of Temecula's Office to review at least two weeks prior to the recluest for the recordation of the final map. 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 am completed with the subdivider. It will be neeessary for financial arrangements to be made prior to the mcordation of the final map. John M. Fanning, Director 4065 County Circle Drive * Riverside, CA 92503 · Phone (909) 358-5316 · FAX (909) 356-5017 (Mailing Address - P.O, Box 7600 · Riverside, CA 92513-7600) City. of Temecula Planning Dept. Page Two Atm: Matthew Fagan August 18, 1993 This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the District, the City ofTemeeula's OtSee and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the ori~na l drawing, to the City of Temeeula's O~ee. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint spee'tficatinns 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 wate~ines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and the sewer district with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the sewer system in Tmet Map No. 23373 is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed Tract Map". The vlans must be submitted to the City of Temecola' s Office to review at least two weeks prior to the request for the recordation of the final may. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be completely fmalized prior to recordation of the final map. ~'ce~emal Health Specialist IV SM:dr (909) 275-8980 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE · PERRI$, CALIFORNIA 92570 · (909) 657-3183 TO: Planning Dept ATTEN: Matthew Fagan RE: October 18, 1993 Tract 23373 - 2nd Extension of Time. 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 City of Temecula Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection standards: The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 2500 GPM and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant shall be 1500 GPM for 2 hour duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. Approved super fire hydrants (6"x4x2-2 1/2") 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 hydrant. Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water 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 the 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 materials being placed on the job site. The required fire flow may be adjusted at a later point in the permit process to reflect changes in design, construction type, area separation or built-in fire protection measures. ~ RIVERSIDE OFFICE 3760 12th Street. Riverside, CA 92501 (909) 275..-~777 * FAX (909) 369-7451 FIRE PREVENTION DIVISION PLANNING SECTION [~ INDIO OFFICE 79-733 Country Club Dnve, Suite F, lndio, CA 92201 (619) 863-8886 · FAX (619) 863-7072 THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS MUST BE MET PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY. Install a complete fire sprinkler system in all buildings. The post indicator valve and fire department connection shall be located to the front of the building, within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from the building(s). A statement that the building will be automatically fire sprinkled must be included on the title page of the building plans. In lieu of fire sprinkler requirements, building(s) must be area separated into square foot compartments approved by the fire department, as per the Uniform Building Code Section 505(f). Install a supervised waterflow monitoring fire alarm system. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation. Install portable fire extinguishers with a minimum rating of 2AiOBC. Contact a certified extinguisher company for proper placement. DisPlay Boards: Display boards required for apartments, commercial complexes, condominiums , RV parks and mobile home parks will be as follows. Each complex shall have an illuminated diagrammatic representation of the actual layout which shows the n~me of the complex, all streets, building designators, unit numbers, and fire hydrant locations within the complex. These directories shall be a minimum4'x4' in dimension and located next to the roadway access. Blue dot reflectors shall be mounted in private streets and driveways to indicate location of fire hydrants. They shall be mounted in the middle of the street directly in line with Eire hydrant. Prior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane painting and or signs. All buildings shall be constructed with fire retardant roofing material as described in Section 3203 of the UniformBuilding Code. Any wood shingles or shakes shall be a Class "B" rating and shall be approved by the fire Department prior to installation. Street address shall be posted, in a visible location, minimum 6 inches in height, on the street side of the building with a contrasting background. All gated access shall be equipped with Knox Lock. The applicant shall contact the Fire Department for specifications and knox applications. Prior to recordation of the final map , the developer shall deposit, with the City of Temecula, the sum of $400.00 per lot/unit, as mitigation for fire protection impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the ~ime od payment, he/she may enter into a written agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of the first building permit. Applicant/developer shall be responsible to provide or show there exists conditions set forth by the Fire Department. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed in the Building and Safety Office. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Department Planning and engineering section. RAYMOND H. REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner by~OJC~~ Laura Cabral Fire Safety Specialist SENT 8Y:E e W D -22-93; 9:50AN; ?14929, 14 9096948477;# 2 L.t.m .N[u.icir,.l Vvr. Di.trict Rgla'~ ~L Caz Oc~c-ober 22, 3.993 ~,~cwb~ Matthew Fagan, Case Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 BUB3'BC~: 'VTTM 23373 - :end urt:ansiea of Time Dear .Mr, Fagan: We have reviewed the materials transmitted by your office w~ch describe the subject project. O~r comments ere outlined below: It is our understanding the subject project is a proposed condominiu~ and casserole1 property development located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Meadows Perkway and Ranthe Celifol-nia Road. The subjec~ project is located within the District'e sanitary Sewer service area. However, it must be Rnderstood ~he available capabilities o2 the District 's systems are continually changing due to the occurrence of development within the District and progr_~ of systems improve~e~t. As SUch, the provision of seZ~rice will be based on the detailed plan Of service requirements, the timing of the subject project, ~he ;~atua of the District"s permit to operate, and the service agreedPent between the DisTrict and the devel0~ejr of ~he subject project. The developer must arrange for the preparation of a detailed plan of s~rvice. The detailed plan of serVice Will indicate the location(e) and siZe(s) of system improvements ~o be made by the developer {or others), and which are considered necessary in order to Drovide adequate levels of service. To arrange for the preparation of a plan of service, the developer should eu~mi= information describing the subJ eGt project to the District ~ e Customer Service Depa~-L~ent, (909) 92~-7676, extension 409, as follows: Written request for a "plan of service". Minimum $400. 00 deposi~ (larger deposits amy be required Mza To: P~Of~oz8~00 · SenJu:into, Calj/ornja PZ.581-8]O0 · T~ (909) 92.5-7676 · hx(90~)929-0~57 Msin Ofnc= 2045 & 8an l..a--,, Aven~ Sen J-q-.- · ~ ~xvie/~-_~-~s ~,--- 440 K O-~--a A,-,~-. ~ C~ ' S::NT BY:E II W D -22-93 | 9:51AM; '/14929,. I~ 909694.84.'/'/;~ 3 Matthew Fagan VTTM 23373 Oc=Ober 20, 1993 Page 2 for ex~censive development projects or projects located in wdifficult to sOrven geographic areas). 3. Plans/maps describing the exact location and nature of the eubjec~c project. Especially helpful laaterials include grading plane and phasing plans. The subject prOJect is considered tributary to the District*s TemecUla Valley Re~iOnal Water Reclamation Facili=y (TVRWRF). The nearest existing ~KWRF system sanitary sewer facilities to the subject prOJect are as follows: Gravity-flow sewer aligned along Ranthe California Road Meadows Parlay. gthar Islgss The project representative must contact the District,e customer Sez~Yice Departanent to make arrangements for plan check and ~lald inspection of proposed District facilities and/or onsite plulabing. Should you have any~uestiuns regarding these comments, please feel free to contact this office at (909) 925-7676, ex~enslon 468. Very truly yours, DGC/cz ATTACHMENT NO. 3 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23373, AMENDMENT NO. 1, FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME R:\S\STAFFRPT%23373.pC 10/28/93 mf I 9 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 CITY OF TEM~CULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373 Fint Extension of Time City Council Approval Date: April 28, 1992 Expiration Dam: November 8, 1991 PLANNING DEPARTMk'NT Unless previously paid, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant Shnll comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ol'rllnance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be supeneded by the provisions of a I-Iabitat Conservation Plan prior to 'the 'payment of the fee required by Ordirmnce No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County orr[inance or resolution. No building permits slall 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-hundrexl dollars ($100) per lot/unit shall be deposited with the City as mitigation for public library development. "The covenants, conditions and restrictions for the development shall requi~ that each penanent resident in each dwelling unit shall be 55 years of age or over, including any apartments in Plavnlng Area 40 of the Specific Plan. The reference at pg. 144 of the Specific Plan that the apartments are not subject to any age resLriction is incorrect, and the Descriptive Summary at pg. 143 of the Specific Plan that the "planning area shall conmln solely retirement community housing" is controlllng." -- DEPART1V[ENT 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 appropmte staff person of the D~a~'unent 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. The Developer shall comply with all Conditions of Approval as previously imposed or mended and with the Conditions noted below. PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 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. Delete condition no. 15 of Riverside County Road Commissioner letter dated September 22, 1988 and replace it with the following: 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. An erosion control and slope protection plRn shall be submittal to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The installation shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and site conditions shall be maintained to protect adjacent properties from damage due to runoff and erosion. Developer shall post a performance bond for erosion control and slope protection in an mount approved by the Depa.tment of Public Works. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area Drainage Plan fee ram 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. As deemed necessary by the depa.tment of Public Works, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Rancho California Water District; F-a~tern Municipal Water District; Riverside County Flood Control District; City of Temecuh Fi~ Bureau; Plavning Department; Depa~'tment of Public Works; Riverside County Health Department; and S~AFFI~r~/$ 2 CATV Fnuchise. 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. Prior to any work being performed in public fight-of-way, fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Bngineer's Office, in addition to any other permits required. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUr~-BING PF.,RMIT: 10. Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed upon the property of project, inchding that for Waffic and public facility mitigation as required for the project. The fee W be paid shall be in the mount 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 developor 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 pwvided to developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer shall post security to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The mount of the security shall be $2.00 per square foot, not W exceed $10,000. Developer understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated {assuming benefit W the project in the mount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any fight to protest the provisions from thk Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or_t_h_e process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or tnffic impact fee for this project; vrovided that developer is not waiving its fight to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the mount thereof. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY: 11. 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, 12. All street improvements striping, marking and signing shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 13. Prior to March 25, 1992, the Buie Corporation shall make arrangements to remove all the sediment fwm the open channel and box culvert north of Rancho California Road between Maxgarita Road and Humbet Road to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. SXSTAFFRPT~3~ 3 TRANSPORTATION ENGINY, RnlNG PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROA~ PERMITS: 14. Traffic striping, marking and street name signing plnn~ Shall be designed as directed by the Department of Public Works. 15. A construction area tnffic control plnn Shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and appmved by the City Engineer for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circuhtion as required by the City Engineer. TElVIECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT: 16. Prior to recorda~on of the final map the applicant or his assignee shah pay the fair market value of 4.07 acres of required parkland to comply with City Ordinance No. 460.93 (Quimby). The mount to be paid Shall be demrmined by TCSD staff within thirty (30) days prior to recordation of said map. 17. Exterior slopes bordering an arterial street may bc dedicated shall be offered for dedication to the TCSD for maintenance following compliance to TCSD standards and completion of the application process. (Amended at City Council on April 28, 1992) vgw ATI'ACHMENT NO. 3 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23373, AMENDMENT NO. 1, FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME R:\S\STAFFRPT%23373,PC 10/28/93 mf 19 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23373, AMENDMENT NO. 1, R:\~\STAFFRPT~23373.PC 10/28/93 mf 20 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPAR'R4ENT SUBDIVISION CONDITIONS OF A~PROVAL VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23373 AJ~IDED NO. I STANDARD CONDITIONS Riverside, 1is agents, o y from any claim, action, or proceeding against the County of Riverside or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the County of Riverside, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Vesting Tentative Tract 23373 Amended No. 1, whtch action is brought about within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The County of Riverside will promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the County of en eC u e a 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 County of Riverside. 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 Hap Act and Ordinance 460. 5. The subdivider shall submit one copy of a soils report to the Riverside County Surveyor's Office and two copies to the Department of Building and Safety. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. 6. If any ~radtng is proposed, t~; subdivider shall submit one print of comprehensive grading plan to the Department of Building and Safety. The plan shall comply with the Untfom Building Code, Chapter 70, as amended by Ordinance 457 and as maybe additionally provided for in these conditions of approval. Conditions of Approval Tentathe Tract No. 23373 Amended No. 1 Page 2 7. A gradtn permlt shall be obtatned from the Department of Bulldtng and Safety pr?or to cb,,,encement of any gradtng outstde of county maintained road right of~ay. Any delinquent property taxes shall be patd prior to recordatton of the final map. The subdivider shall comply wtth the street (mprovement reconmendattons outltned In the RIverside County Road Department's letter dated 9-22-88 a Copy OfNhtCh ts attached. Legal access as requtred by 0rdtnance 460 shall be provtded from the tract map boundary to a County maintained road. All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the pubqtc and shall continue $n force unttl the overntng body accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shaY1 be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Road Commissioner. Street names shall be subject to approval of the Road Comtsstoner. Easements, ~hen requtred for roadway slopes, drainage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map tf they are located w~th~n the land d~vtston boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted and recorded as d~rected by the County Surveyor. Mater and sewerage disposal facilities shall be Installed tn accordance wtth the provisions set forth tn the RIverside County Health Department's letter dated 7-25-88 a copy of whtch ts attached. The subdivider shall comply wtth the flood control recommendations outltned by the RIverside County Flood Control O~strtct's letter dated 7-22-88 a copy of~hlch ts attached. If the land dtvtston 11as wlth~n an adopted flood control dratnage area pursuant to Section lO.2S of Ordinance 460, appro rtate fees for the construction of area dratnage facilities shall be collected by the Road Commissioner. The subdivider shall comply wtth the fire Improvement recommendations outlined tn the County Ftre Harshal's letter dated 8-17-88 a copy of whtch ts attached. Subdivision phastng, Including any proposed Common open space area Improvement phastng, tf applicable, shall be subject to Planntng Department approval. Any proposed phastng shall provtde for adequate vehicular access to all lots tn each phase, and shall substanttaqly conform to the tntent and purpose of the subdivision approval. Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract No. 23373 Amended No. 1 Page 3 17. Lots created by thts subdivision shall comply with the following: Corner lots and through lots, tf any, shall be .provided with additional area pursuant to Section 3,8B of Ordinance 460 and so as not to contain less net area than the least amount of net area in non-corner and through lots. b. Lots created by this subdhtston shall be in conformonce with the development standards of the Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No. 1 zone, When lots are crossed by major public uttltty easements, each lot shall have a net usable area of not less than 3,600 square feet, exclusive of the utiltty easement. 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. Trash bins, loading areas and incidental storage areas shall be located a land visually screened from surrounding areas with the use of block ~ s and landscaping. Prior to RECORDATION of the final map the following conditions shall be satisfied: Prior to the recordatton 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 Rood Control County Parks Department Eastern Municipal Water Dtst. County Health Department County Planning Department Rancho Water District Prior to the recordatton of the final map, General Plan Amendment 150, Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No. 1, Development Agreement No. 5, and Change of Zone No. 5107 shall be approved by the Board of Supervisors and shall be effective. Lots created by this land division shall be in conformance with the development standards of the zone ultimately applied to the property. All existing structures on the subject property shall be removed prior to recordatton of the final map. Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract No. 23373 Amended No. Z Page 4 The Conm~on open apace area shall be shown as a numbered lot on the final map and shall be managed by a master property owners association, Prior to recordatton of the final subdivision map, the subdivider shall submit the following documents to the Planning Department for review, which documents shall be sub3ect to the approval of that department and the Office of the County Counsel: 1) A declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions; and 2) A sample document conveyed tttle to the purchaser of an Individual lot or unit which provtdes that the declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions ts Incorporated therein by reference, The declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions submitted for review shall (a) provide for a minimum term of 60 years, (b) provide fo~ the establishment of a property owners' association comprised of the owners of each individual lot or unit, (c) provide for ownership of the common and (d).contain to following provisions verbatim: "Nothwtthstanding any provision in this Declaration to the contrary, the following provision shall apply: The property owners' association established herein shall manage and continuously maintain the 'common area', more particularly described on Exhibit 'III-17' of the specific plan attached her, to, and shall not aell or transfer the '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 owner's association shall have the rtght to assess the owners of each tndlvtdual lot or untt for the reasonable cost of maintalntng the 'co,~non area' and shall have the right to lien the property of any such owner who defaults in the payment 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 1ten. This Declaration shall not be t;rmtnated, 'substantially' amended or ropetry deannexed therefrom absent the prior written consent of the ~lanntng Director of the County of Riverside or the County's successor-in-interest. A proposed amendment shall be considered 'substantial' tf tt affects the extent. usage or maintenance of the 'common area'. Zn the event of any conflict between this Declaration and the Articles of Incorporation. the Bylaws or the property owners' association Rules and Regulations, if any. this Declaration shall contrel." Conditions of Rpproval Tentative Tract No. 23373 Amended No. ] Page 5 Once approved, the declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions shall be recorded et the same time that the final map is recorded. : 22. Prior to recordatton of the final map, clearance shall be obtained from HetropoHtan Water District relative to the protection of appllcabh easements affecting the subject property. Lot line adjustments shall also be completed. The developer shall comply with the requirements as shown in Specific Plan No. maintained by H0A or other publtc entity: 10-5-88) following parkway landscaping 199 Amendment No. I unless (Amended by Planntng Commission 1) Prior to recordatton of the final map the developer shall file an application with the County for the formation of or annexation to, a · parkway mafntenance district for Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23373 Amended No. 1 in accordance with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, unless the pro3ect is within an existing parkway maintenance. 2) 3) Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall secure approval of proposed landscaping and irrigation plans from the County Road and Planning Department. All landscaping and irrigation plans and specifications shall be prepared tn a reproducible format suitable for permanent filing with the County Road Department. The developer shall post a landscape performance bond wMch sha~l be ua · vtabiltty of all landscaping which will be installed prior to the assumption of the maintenance responsibility by the district. 4) The deveqoper, the developer's successors-in-interest or assignees, shall be responsible for a11 parkwa landscaptn maintenance until such t as maintenance is taken over ~y the dist;lct. t me The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all slopes, landscaped areas and irrigation systems until such time as those o erattons are the responsibilities'of other parties as approved by the P~ar Director. ;ntng Street lights shall be provtded wtthtn the subdivision in accordance w~th the standards of 0rdfnance 461 and the following: 1) Concurrently wtth the liltrig of subdivision improvement plans with the Road Department, the developer shall secure approval of the proposed street light layout first from the Road Department's traffic engineer and then from the appropriate uttlity purveyor. Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract No. 23373Amended No. 1 Page 6 2) Following approval of the street 11ghttng layout by the Road Department's trafftc engineer, the developer shall also file an application with LAFCO for the formation of a s feet ltghting district, or annexation to an extsttng lighttng district, unless the stte is withtn an extsttng 11ghttng district. 3) Prior to recordatton of the final map, the developer shall secure conditional approval of the street ltghting application from LAFCO, unless the site is within an existtng ltghttng district, 4) All street lights and other outdoor ltghting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Buildtng 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 the issuance of GRADING PERHITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, detailed common open space area parking 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 vtew with landscaping and decorative barriers or baffle treatments, as approved by the Planning Director, Utilities shall be placed underground, 4) Parkways and landscaped butldtng setbacks shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or a transition into the primary use area of the site, Landscape elements shall tnclude earth bermtng, round cover, shrubs and specimen trees in conjunction with mean)ering sidewalks, benches and other pedestrian amentries where appropriate as approved by the Planntng Department and Specific Plan No, 199 Amendment No, 1, 5) Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent trees at key vtsual focal points within the project. Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract No. 23373 Amended No. Z Page 7 7. ge 6) Where streets trees cannot be planted withtn right-of°way of interior streets and pro~ect parkways due to Insufficient road right-of-way, they shall be planted outside of the road right-of-way. 7) Landscaping plans shall Incorporate native and drought tolerant plants where appropriate. 8) All existtrig spectmen trees and significant rock outcroppings on the sub ect property shall be shown on the pro~.ect's grading plans and sha~l note those to be removed, reiDcared and/or retained. g) All trees shall be minimum doubh staked. Weaker and/or slow growing trees shall be steel staked. 10.. Parking layouts shall comply with Ordinance 348, Section 1B.12. All existing native specimen trees on the sub3ect property shall be preserved wherever feasible. Where they cannot be preserved they shall be reiDcared or replaced with specimen trees as approved by the Planning Director. Replacement trees 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 a proval. The plan shall be used as a guideline for subsequent detat~ed grading plans for phases of development and individual shall include the following: 1) Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and sedtmentatton during and after the grading process. 2) 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. Grading plans shall conform to Board adopted Hillside Development i Standards: A1 cut and/or fill slopes, or tnd vtdual combinations therof, which exceed ten feet in vertical height shall be modified by an a propriate combination of a special terracing (benchin) plan, increase sVope ratio (i.e., 3:1), retaining walls, and/or slope pVanttng combined with irrigation. All driveways shall not exceed a fifteen percent grade. Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract No. 23373 Amended No. 1 Page 8 32, Al1 cut slopes located adjacent to un faded natural terratn and exceeding ten (10) feet tn verttcal hetghts shal~ be Incorporating contour-graded the following gradtrig techniques: 1) The angh of the graded slope shall be gradually adjusted to the angle of the natural terrain. 2) Angular forms shall be discouraged. The graded fom shall reflect the natural rounded terrain. 3) The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded w~th curves with radtt designed in proportion to the total height of the slopes where drainage and stability pemtt such rounding. 4) Where cut or f111 slopes exceed 300 feet in horizontal length, the horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved in a continuous, undulattn9 fashion. Prior to the tssuance of grading pennlts, a qualified paleontologlst shall be retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the proposed grading with respect to potential peleontologtcal 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, redtrect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of fossils. Prior to the issuance of BUILDZNG PERHZTS the following conditions shall be satisfied: In accordance wtth the wrttten request of the developer to the County of RIverside, a copy of whtch ts on ftle, and tn furtherance of the agreement between the developer and the County of Riverside, no building pemtts shall be tssued by the County of Riverside for any parcels wtthtn the subject tract unttl the developers or the developer's successors-In-interest provtded evtdence of compliance with the terms of satd Development Agreement No. 5 for the financing of publtc facilities. Mtth the submittal of butldtng plans to the Department of Butlding and Safety the developer will demonstrate compliance with the acoustical study prepared for Vesting Tentative Tract 23371 Amended No. I which established mitigation measures to reduce ambient interior noise levelsaPSr~rtate t Ldn and exterior noise levels below65 Ldn. 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. Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract No. 23373 Amended No. 1 Page 9 3e Butldtng separation between all buildings Including fireplaces shall not be less than ten (10) feet unless approved by the Department of Butldtng and Safet~A~ ~re Department per Spectftc Plan No. 199 Amendment No. d by Planning Commission 10-5-88) e. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 10 feet. f. All front yards shall be provided with landscaping and automatic ~rr~gatton. Prtor to the tssuance of OCCUPANCY PERHITS the followin9 conditions shall be satisfied: a. Prior to the final butldtng inspection approval, by the Buildtng and ra Rancho California Road, r ac r ~ay per the Destgn Hanual. The required wall shall be subject to the approval of the Director of the Department of Building and Safety and the Planning d by Planning Director and my be phased with the project. (Amen ed Commission 10-5-88) b. Null and/or fence locations shall conram to attached Figure III-17 of Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No. 1. c. All landscaping and Irrigation shall be installed in accordance with approved plans prtor to the issuance of occupancy permits. ~f seasonal conditions do not penntt planting, triterim landscaping and erosion control measures shall be uttllzed as approved by the Planning Dtrector and the Director of Building and Safety. All parking, landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance w~th approved plans and shall be verified by a Planning Department field inspection. s.--Com;rete-sSdewalks-shall-be-eenstrueted-{hreugheut-the-subd4v4s4an--4, aeeerdanee--w+th--the-standards-of-Brd~nance-461-and-Spec~fic-Ptan-No: ~9g-AmendmeR~-Ne,-t~ {Deleted by Planning Commission 10-5-88) f. Street trees shall be planted throughout the subdivision in accordance with the standards of Ordinance 460 and Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No. I Development of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23373 Amended No. I shall comply with all provisions of Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No. 1 and Development Agreement No. 5. teRoy D, Smear ' OFFICE OF ROAD CONNI$$1ONER E, COUNTY $URVEYOR September 22, 1988 RtversMe County Plenntng Commission 4080 Lemon Street . Riverside, CA gZS0Z Re: Tract Hap 23373 - Amend IZ - Road Correction Schedule A - Team SP Hap tZ Ladles and Gentlemen: iith respect to the conditions of approval for the referenced tentative land division map, the Road Department recommends that the landdivider provide the following street improvement plans and/or road dedications in accordance with Ordinance 460 end RIverside County Road Zmprovement Standards (Ordinance 461). It Is' understood that the tentative map correctly shows acceptable centerline profiles, all existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses with appropriate O's, end that their omission or unacceptabtltt~V my require the map to be resubmltted for further consideration. These Ordlnance~ end the following conditions ere essential parts end e requirement occurring in ONE ts as binding as though occurring in 411. They ere Intended to be complementary and to describe the conditions for a complete design of the improvement. All questto' regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Commtssioner's Office. The qanddlvtder shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns, i.e., concentra- tion of diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities Including enlarging existing facilities or by securing e drainage easement or by both. All drainage easements shall be shown on the final map end noted as follows: "Drainage Easement - no building, obstructions, or encroachnents by land fills ere allowed'. The protection shall be as approved by the Road Department. The landdivider shall accept and properl~ dispose of ell offsite drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the Road Commissioner permits the use of streets for drainage. purposes, the provisions of Article X% of Ordinance No. 460 will apply. Should the quahtttles exceed the street capacity or the use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the subdivider shall provide adequate drainage facilities as approved bl the Road Department. Tract )lap 23373 - Amend Ix - Road Correction Hap #1 ,~eptanber 22, 1988 Page RaJor drainage Is tnvolved on l~fs landdivision and its resolution shall be as approved by the Road Department. All interior streets shell be improved in accordance with County Standard lio. 105, Section A or greater as approved by the Road Comissioner (modified no The landdivider shall provtde utlltty clearance from Rancho CalJf. Mater District prior to the recordsCion of l~e ftnal map. The maximum centerline gradient shall not exceed The minimum centerline radii shall be as approved by the Road Department, Rancho Ca'llfornia Road shall be !m roved with concrete curb and gutter located 43 feet from centerSthe and match up asphalt concrete paving; reconstruction; or resurfaclng of existing paytag as determined by the Road Commissioner within a 55 foot half width dedicated right of way in accordance with County Standard No. ZOO, 9, Kaiser Parkway shall be improved with concrete curb and gutter located 38 feet from centerline and match up asphalt concrete paving; reconstruction; or resurfactng of existing paving as determined by the Road Commissioner within a 50 foot half width dedicated right of way in accordance wish County Standard No. 101, ZO, Prior to the filing of the final map with the County Recorder's Office, the developer shall-.provlde evidence of continuous mintchance of all proposed private streets within the development as approved b~* the Road Commissioner, All drlveways shall conform to the applicable Riverside County Standards and shall be sho~ on the street Improvement plans. When Mockvmqls are required to be constructed on top of slope, a debris retention wall shall be constructed at the street right of way line to prevent Siltin9 of sidewalks as approved by the Road Commissioner. Concrete sidewalks shell be' constructed on Rancho Colifornta Road .and Kaiser Parkway in accordance with Country Standard No, 400 led 40~ (curb sidewalk), September 23, 1988 . Page 3 in ·ccess road to the nearest paved road mtntatned by the County shall be constructed within the public rt ht Of way tn accordance with County Standard Ro. 106, Sectton B, 132'/60') at a grade and alignment as upproved by the Road Camuissioner. ~rlor to the recorderion of the final map, the developer $hall depostt with the Riverside County bad Department, a cash sum of S140.0Q per untt for parcels 1-7 Is mitigation for traffic signal lapacts. Should the developer choose to defer the ttme of payment, he my enter Into · written agreement with the County deferring said payment to the time of issuance of · bolldtng permit. Parcel 8 is not subject to signal mitigation ·t this time. Zt is postponed until the time of development. Xmprovement plans shall be based upon e centerline profile extendin9 · minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and a14gnment as approved by the Riverside County Road Comissioner. Completion of road improvements does not imply acceptance for maintenance by County. 17. Electric·] end communications trenches shall be provided in · ccordance with Ordinance 461, Standard 817. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than fourteen days following placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at e rate of 0.05 gallon per.square yard. Asphalt e~ulston shall conform to Sections 37. 39 and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. 19. Corner cutbacks in confonnance with County Standard No. 805 shall be $ho~n on the final map and offered for dedication. 20. Lot access shall be restricted on Rancho California Road and Kaiser Parkway and so noted on the final map with the exception of one opening on Roncho California Road approximately 400' westerly of intersection with Katser Parkway. 21. Landdivisions creating cut or fill slopes adjacent to the streets shall provide erosion control, sight distance control end slope easements s· approved by the Road Department. 22. All entrance gate facilities shall be located a minimum distance of 60' from gate to flow' line.-- 23. A~l centerline intersections shall be at 24. The street deslg~ and improvement concept of this project sha~l he coordinate~ with TR 23371 end TR 23372. lfect !~aD 23373 - Amend ~1 - Road Correction Nap #1 September 22, 19~8 ,Pegs 4 Street lighting shell be required Jn accordance with Ordinance 450 end 461 throughout the subdivision. The County Service Area (CSA) Admlnistretor determines whether this proposal qualifies under en extstlng Issessment district or ,ot. if nots the lend owner shall file en application with LAFCO for annexation Into or creation of · ell hung Assessment Districts In accordance with Governmental Code ~ctton 56000. 26. Prior to recordatton of the fine1 map, the landdhider' shall record CC & R's providing Ingress end egress for parcel 1 thru 7 Ind shall n be subject to review and approval by Riverside Cou ty Counsel. GH:lh Ve truly yours, .. ' ughes IraI'm, CA faOl P~w~CAgZS0i llACr 23373 - AHENDI~ fl, 10AD CORKEC~XO~ fX Mlthzeepect to the conditions of approval for the ·boys referenced land division, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures bt provided in accordance with giverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection mtandard$: rlJ~ 'PROTEC'~ION The water mains she11 be capable of providing · potential fire flov of 2500 GPH and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant shall be 1500 GPH for 2 hour· duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, Approved super fire hydrants, (6"x~'x2|x2J) shall be located at each street intersection and spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction vith no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from · hydrant. Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the vetmr system plans to the Fire Department for review. Plans ·hall co~orm to fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and, the system shall meet the fire flow requirements, Plans shall be aigned/approved by · registered civil engineer and the local Mater company with the lollsvim2 certification: aX certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Departmentsm The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being ~laced on an individual Xot. All buildings shall be constructed with fire retardant roofing material as described in Section 3203 of the Uniform Building Coda. Any wood thingIts or shakes shall have · Class wgw rating and shall be approved by the Firs Department prior to installation. Tract 23373 Yale 2 ~ITIC&TION Prior to the recordalien of the final map, the developer ·hall deposit with the Riverside Count~ Fire Department, a cash sum of 0400.00 per lot/unit ·s mitigation for fire protection impacts. Should the developer choose to deter the tile st payment, he/she may enter into s written agreement with the County daferrin2 said peyutnt to the time of 4-suauce of · bulld~nB pemit. questions regarding the meanin2 of conditions shall be referred to the Flan~ni and F-uSineerin2 staff. Chief Fire Department Ylauner By George S. Tat·me Flannin2 Officer County of Riverside TROM: RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTHENTDAT~: JuTv 25. 1988 Tract Nap 2)]73. Amended No. I The Envlronmentll Health Services has reviewed Tract Nap 23373, Amended Nap No. I dated July Ig, !g88. Our current coff,nents will remeln as previously stated in our letter dated June 13e 1988. SM:bo RIVEF, SiDE COUNTY PLANr,.;:r.;r, DEPA~T.uE~..iT ~NNLP'r!4 ~ IL"~N*~ tell mAI~KIL~ warm RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT · ~.y :22, 1988 Vesting Tra~t 23373 Amended No. I Follcwir~J are the ~istrict's recam~ndati~s: ~his tract is located within ~e limits of the Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Are Drainage Plan f~r ~hich drairmge f~es have been adopted the Board. Drainage i%es shall be paid as set f~rth under the provi- sions of the '~lles and ~n.fi. atio~8 ~ Admirdstraticn of Are Drainage Plans", amended February 16, 1988: Drxi.r,,,ge fees shall be laid to the laoad C.,,,,d. ssicner as part of the fi]4r~c3 Zu, recur~ of the su~divisim final ~ ~r l~rc~l cr if the r__-eorfiing of a final pereel mp is ~aived, ~rainage f~es shall be paid as a ca~iticm of the ~iver ~rior t~ recc=ding a certificate of c--,,vl~ce evidencing the ~miver of the free.1 At the ~Ufcn of the la~ aivide[, u~n filing a required fidavit requesting defermerit of the payment of f~es, the dranage fees stay be ~edd ix) t~e Building Direc~Dr at the time Of issuance of a ~aaing l~rmit ~r building Izrmit f~r each aF~e~ ~/, divisl~ final mp or Farce/rrap~ provided hcm~ever, this c~t~cm to defer the fees ma~ uot be exercised fur any parcel Where grading . year l~eriod, or tzrmits fur eit~e: activity have be~ issued that Feroel which re~4- K"tJ.ve. / · -2- ,3*u3.y 2,2, 19e~ O~fsite dratrage ~actltttes ~g~ld be located witht~ l~bltcly dedicat- drainage eseae~ts d~ained -'. ~, the a~£ec~ dcc~ents should be re~ed and a ~y su~zaitted to the Dis~rtc~ l:r,i. or to recordatic~ o~ the ~ Drainage facilities ~cletttng ~ certifies shc~ld be designeft t~ convey the tr~bataz7 100 year st..= fiods. Mditi~l energency es- The lrc~P_r~'s street and lot grading should be desi~ed in a n~nner that per~et~ates the exist~g ratural ~raju~age lintterns ~ith resTc~ t~ tr/txatary drainage are. o~.let points arid cx~let ----xiitic~s. otJw_~wise, a dr~nage eas~ne~t should ~e obtained fza~ the affected l~l:,erty owners fr= the re/ease of ~ce~trated cr diver*~a storm fiods. A coFf of the rec~r~e~ drainage easement should be su~nit~sd to the r~strict fur review prior f~ the re~=datic~ of the final map. T~,~;.;ary erosion control neas~res sh~ld be i~le~-~ im~d/a~-ly f~llckrlng zo~h grading t~ Fever del~sittm of debris c~to do.rP str~-~ l~c~_~=Les cr drainage facilities. DevelcFamt of this lzvF_rCy should be _c~o_~trate~ with ~t of adj~t ~es ~ ~e ~t ~~s ~~ ~ ~o~s ~e ~ div~ ~ ~e ~r~ ~. ~s my r~.4~e ~ ~.~ of ~,~ ~e ~c~i~es ~ offst~ ~~ ~ ~ ]~iv~rsi~e C~z~y Planning De/ar~menC 1~.. Vestrig ~ 23373 Jm~xied~. I ~ues~iam amcerning ~his totter my be referred to ~ (~tsng of this office at 714/787-2333. Vezy truly COUNTY OF t IVERSIDE ' DEPARTMENTof HEALTH x,ss RIVe,~SIDEC0UNTYPLXNNING DEPT. 4080 Lemon Street Riverside, CA 92502 Attn: Kathy 6itford RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1~; TRACT!(AP 23313: That certain land situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, being Parcels 1, 2,3,4 and $ of Parcel Hap 21884 as shown on a map thereof filed in ~ook 144, Pages 24 through 33 of Parcel Hips in the Office Of the County Recorder of said Riverside County together with a portion of the Rancho Temecula grinted by the Government of the Onited Stltes of ~merica to Luis Vignes by patent dated 3anulry *q, 1860 and recorded in the Office of the County Recorder o San Diego County, California 18 Lots) Gentlemen: The Department of Public Health has reviewed Tentative Hap No. 23373 and recommends that: X water system shall be installed according to plans and specification 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 i minimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet, along with the DriginIl driving tD the County Surveyor. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of valves lmd fire hydrants; pipe joint specifications, and the size of the main at the junction of the new system to the existing system. The pains shall comply in all respects with Div. 2, Part l, Chapter I of the California Health and Sirsty Code, California Administrative Code, Title 22, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public 0tillties Commission of the State of C&lifornia, when applicable. Riverside County Pl,nning Dept. P,ge Two ALan: K,thy Gifford The pJs, ns shall be signed by · registered engineer and water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in Tract Map 23373 is accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the water service,storage and distribution system viII be adequate to provide water service to such tract. This certification does not constitute a gustantes that it will supply water to such tract 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. This Department has a statement from the Rancho California Water District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and every lot ~n the subdivision on demand providing satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It viII be necessary for the financial arrangements to he made prior to the recordaries of the final map, This Department has a statement from the Eastern Municipal, Water District agreeing to alloy the subdivision sewage system to be connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the District, the County Surveyor and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the original drawing, to the County Surveyor. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint 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 district with the following certification: 'I certify that the design of the sewer system in Tract Map 23373 is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that the waste disposal system is adequate at ~iverside County Plaru~ing Dept, Pa~eThree ATTN: Kathy Gifford June 13o 1988 this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the pruposed tract.' It will be necessary for financial arrangements ta be made prior to the recordation of the final map. S~:tac RiVE:BiDE COUntY PLArlTlirlG DEPA:iCiTIErlC EATE: ,June 1, 1988 10: Assessor Building and Safety Surveyor - Deve Duda Road Department _ IRalib -lalphLuchs Fire Protection Flood Control District Fish i Game LAFCO, S Paisley . , U.S. Postal Servtce- Ruth [. Davidson RIVERSIDE COUNTy PLANNING DEPARTMENT Sheriff's Department Airports Department UCR, Life Science Dept., W.W. Payhew GROFZT .... £astern Nuntctpal Water Dtst. Ranthe California kter Oist. Elithere Union School Dlst. - Temecula Unton School D!st. Sierra Club, San Gorgonto Chapter CALTRN~S e8 VESTING TRACT 23373 - (Sp P1) - E.A. 32548 - Par arita Village Development Co. - Robert BeVn, Milltam Assoc. - Frost & Rancho California Area - First Supervisortel District - N. of Ranthe California Road, M. of Kaiser Parkway - R-R Zone - 28 Acres 348 Condomtntum unit. - (RELATED CASE TR 23371 & 23372) Iqod - A.P. 923-210-023 Please review the case described above, along with the attached case map, A Land Division Con~ittee meeting has been tentatively scheduled for June 20, 1988, if it clears it will then 9o to public hearing. Tour comments and recommendations are requested prior to June 5, 1988 in order that we ma include ~hem tn the staff report for this particular case. Should you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact Kathy Gtfford at 787-6356 Planner The Elithere Union High School District facilities are overcrowded and our educational programs seriously impacted by increasing student population caused by new residential, commercial and industrial construction. Therefore, pursuant to California Government Code Section 53080 of AB 2926 and SB 327, this district hvles a-fee against all new development projects within its boundaries, DATE: S1GttATURE I~EASE print name end ttt~e Joseph Enserro, Assistant Superintendent 4080 LEMON STREET, 9~ FLOOR RIVERSIDE, GALIFCHRNIA 92501 (714) 787-6181 46*209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304 INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201 (619) 342-8277 ~s,T[: 3uae I, 1968 tO: ~S~SOr lu(lding and Safety Surveyor - Dave Duda load kpartx~nt lieulib - Ralph Luchs Fire Protection Flood ramtro] DIstrict Fish · ~ · LAFC0o S Patslgy · tI.S, Postal Service - Ruth E. Davidson JUN 1 1888 RIVERSIDE COUNTy PLANNING DEPARTMENT S~er¶ff's DeparUnent gr cu um ntn s net Airports Department UCR, Life Science Dept., W,W. Kayhew · Ds~m H~tctpal Water Dtat. into ~lafomta ~r D~st, Bs$no~ ~on Sch~ Dlst. T~la Union $ch~1 Dtst. Sterra Club, San ~nto ~ap~r ~T~ 18 pVESTZNG TRACT 23373 - (Sp Pl) - E.A. e;t 111m Frost i Assoc. - Rancho California Area - First Supervtsortal District - R. of Rancho . California Road, g. of Kaiser Parkway - R-R Zone - 28 Acres 348 Condomtnium units - (RELATEO CASE TR 23371 & 2337Z) Nod - A.P, 923-210-023 9lease revled the case described above, along with the attached case map. A Land iviston Comtttee meeting has been tentathely scheduled for June ZO, 1988. If it clears, it rill then go to public hearing. Tour conyhenri and recon~endattons are requested prior to June S, 1988 in order that wb ..ay include thm in the staff report for this particular case. Should ,you have any questions regarding this lte~, please do not hesitate to contact Kathy Gifford at 787-6356 Planner EASTERN INFORMATION CENTER Archaeological Research Unit Univer$iity of California Riversidt CA 92521 PLF_A~ i~tnt name and tttle 080 LEMON STREET. 9'' FLOOR RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 (714) 787~181 46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304 INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92~201 (619) 342, iVE ; ;DE COUrlCV PLAnflinG DEP ClTIErlC DATE: Oune 1, 1988 113: Assessor Building and Safet~ Surveyor - Dave Duda .... Road Department Nealth- Ralph Luchs Fire Protection *' Flood Control District Fish & Game LAFCO, S Patsle, y U.S. Postal Service - Ruth E. Davidson JUN 13 RIVERSI DE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Shertff*s Department Airports Departn~nt UCR. Life Science Dept., I.I. Hayhew EROFZT .... Eastern Hun¶ctpal Hater Dist. Rancho'Callfornla ~ater Dtst. Elslnore Unton School Olst. Terecula Union School Olst. Sierra Club, San Gorgonio Chapter CAL,TRNLS #8 VESTING TRACT 23373 - (Sp P1) - E.A. 32548 - ~argarita Vtllage Development Co - Robert Rein, Milltam Frost & AsiDe. - Rancho California Area - First Supervtsorial District - N. of Rancho California Road, M. of Kaiser Parkway - R-R Zone - 28 Acres 348 Condomintum untt -(RELATEO CASE TR 23371 & 23372) Hod - A.P. 923-210-023 Please review the case described above, along with the attached case map. A Land Division Committee meeting has been tentatively scheduled for June 20, 1988. if it dears it will then go to public hearing. Tour comments end reconunendations are requested prior to June 5, 1988 in order that Nt re include th~ in the staff report for this particular case. Should you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact Kathy Gifford at 787-6356 Planner DATE: SIGNATURE PLEJ~E print name and tttle 41080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 (714) 787-6181 46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304 INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201 (619) 342-8277 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 AGREEMENT: STIPULATION AND ORDER NO. 91-14308-H11 R:\S\STAFFRPT~23373.PC 10/28/93 ~rff 21 1 2 & 7 10 11 . 12 14 le 17 18 19 20 22 2~ 2~ A=~meys =or CZTY OF TEKEC~LA UNITED STATES BANKREYPTCY COURT SOUTN~N ]3TSe2~J, CT OF C~LIYORNZA In re N~RGAR/TAVILLAGE DEVELOPMENT COFJ~DRATION, Debtor. CASE NO. 91-14308-Hll STIPULATION FOR COMPROMISE OF CLAIMS AGAINST CHAPTER 11 ESTATE Hap Noe. 2=371-A and 23371-B =or Mariariga Village Company ~, on or a~u= Har~, 19S9, ~C si~n~ an A;eement =or ~uslun COn=Q1 and ~n~s~ lmpruv~ f~r Tra~ ~, Qn Qr a~u= Au~, 1989, ~C uecu~ed an m~ for ~oeion Con=ol and ~nds~pe Improv~en~s WHEREAS, said Trot=i; WHEREAS, pursuan= to bo~h of These Agreemen~s~ MVDC graded bo=h o~ ~hese Agreemen=s =equired =hat MVDC 2 during ~s satn~enancs ptriod '~ restore, repa~ ~nd rep~a~, 23371-A end B ~s ~ de~t~ ~l~e~ ~ ~s ~lve~ ~d~U~ ~l~mr Village ~d ~ ~m ~ng Valley Wash 8 tD ~a~ No. 20735; 11 ~, ~ ~ condtti~ oZ apeoval f~r ~e ~cel - ~ real pr2~y comprts~e Palour Village, lou=g a= 13 ~d ~cho ~lt=omta ~a~, ~e b~inus usocia=ion fur said 15 said property, as do~mu~ ~ ~e le~ from ~v~lde 16 Flood ConSul and Wa=~ Dis~i~ to ~ Bain, Willin 1~ ~d ~sociatea, da=ed ~y 1~, 18 ~, ~e Villagu Homeo~s Assotis=ion (m~) 19 respcnsibili=y p~su~t ~ ~a~ No. 2G735 to main~in ~e 20 Valley Wash a pan of said ~a~;.' 21 ~, on Dec--~ 1',' 1989, ~e Ct=y of T~e~la 22 ~cc~cra~, succeeding ~0 ~e rights ~d du~iu o= ~e ~ of RIverside, includ~g ~e per=onance ~nds rsf~enced ~low; 24 ~, SeXton 6.14 . 0~2 (b) of ~e T~e~la ~unictpal C~e 25 desi~a=ee as a nuisance "land, ~e =~pogra~y or ~nft~a=ton 26 uf whi~. in ~y m~-made s=a=e, whe~er as a resul~ of 27 opcaC~ou, exuva=icn, fill or o~' aln~a=ion, in~=eras wi~ 28 2 adJcinin~ Dr or~er preper~Les ~nich does 3 erOSion, s~sidance cr surface va~ 4 ~de aS ~ ~ ~j~l~s ~ ~li~ healS, ~fs~ a~ Yellare ~ or to neiq~uring 6 ~, ~n Qr ~ N~m~, 1990, ~e City cf T~e~la 7 dirs~ad ~ =~ remove ~e silt de~si=ed ~ ~ng Valley Wash, 8 ~d ~ r~oved said ell= at a 9 ~, ~ cen~a~ed for Sell Te~, Inc., to prepare a 10 li~tsd ~eeion. m~dy ~o: ~ng V~lley Wash; 11 ~, said stay ~di~=es ~a~ ~ ~ Ms ccn~ibu~ed 781 of ~e 20il deposited in ~nG Valley I3 wash, ~ich vas ~se~ently ~cved by 14 ~, appr~m~ely 3,600 y~s of additional sil~ 15 been deposited in ~e ~lv~ ~de~ea~ Palemar Village and in 16 ~ng Valley Wash s~ce 17 d~ived a~os= entirely Zrom ~ac~ 23371--A and B; 18 ~, city asses a claim against ~C ~d Be~ord !9 p~suan= ~ ~e City Grading, Nuisance a~ S~ivisien 20 Ordinances, and the ~a~ Map Cendi~iens, 21 ~ng Valley Wash and ~e cul~e~ ~d~ Palemar Village; ~ ~, ~C s~ciZically 25 a~ve Reci~ls, but ageas =o ~is S~i~ula=i~n In ~rder ~ buy ~ its peace and to ob~in an ~cable resolution to ~e Recl~ls ~$ con=aimed heroinabove; 26 NOW, ~~, IT IS H~BY AG~ B~ ~E P~ AS 27 FO~W~: 2 aays ~ C~ur= a~pr~val ~Z ~ ~d~, Pift~n ~nd ($15,000) to sable ~y cla~-* of ~, ~C ~d ~e Cl~ S ~u~e ma~n~ of ~ ~v~ ~d ~ng Valley Wash. 8 2. mC ~11, ~~ ~ la~ ~ july 1, 19~1, and ~ ~ple=md no la=~ ~ ~ July ~1, 19el, repair and r~ade B ~ Valley Wa~ ~twe~ Y~n ~ad ~d H,,~ ~ive, alon~ 9 ~o ~1~ ~ad, ~ ~a~ N~. 20735 =D plyned elevenths 10 ~ ~ Be~, Willi~ ~os= ~ ~sociat~ da~d ~ce~r 11, ~1 1985, to ~e =0110w~g 12 A. ~cope of work is to inulude ~e =oilowing: ~ (1) Cl~rin9 ~d ~spmeal of all ~eee, ~eh and 18 ~el ~ pla~ed elevator. 1T (3) F~e ~e~rading of flowl~ ~d slO~ 18 pl~ elevations ~d l~es set ~ a 19 r~i~t~ed ~lifo~la civil e~ine~, 20 munually ac~p~le to ~e pZiee, at =I e~nee. ~ (4) If work is no~ completed by Jul~ 15, =3 ~C or i~ con~a~rs ~all use wa~ ~ ~c~ tu ~i~ate ~e adjac~= ~ass and ~ ~e~. 26 (5) All sprinklers and irri~ation e~ipment shall 1 2 & 10 ll 16 1T 18 20 2~ upon c~mpletlon. (6) Undaz~lround =low pipe T~hall be cleaned, repair~i and put into good vor~ing order upun c~ple~ion. ~1 ~a~ l~d~pin~ shall ~ replaced ~r repa~ed. ~gins. lo~ting a d~p site ~f iV ~oi~. ~C or con~a~r s~l hold ~ hapless O= any problems ~ing fr~ d~p ei~s. ~C, i~elf, cr ~ou~ i~ ccn~a~cr s~ll ~ovide all ~i~t, M~ial, and nec~s~ uo ~fo~ said work a= i~ cos=, and ~all ind~i~y and hold ~, Ci=y and ~df~d h~less =rum all clai~ for liabili~ ~s~ upon, cr da~ges ~ising =r~m, ~crk perfoxed h~eund~ or brea~ of any potion o= ~is Ageemen~ ~C, i~ ccn~a~ors, agen~ or employees. It wall ~ ~C's o~ i~ con=a~ur's responsibility ~ con=a~ Underground Aler= and all c~ cnncerned ag~cies fur l~=ions ~f all ~is=in~ uUili=ies wi~in des~ib~ ~crk ar~. ~c and i~s con=a~ur shall be solely -5- 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 25 26 27 28 sidewalk, lands~aping, e~:., at and between ~.he job site and d~ si~. It sMll also include all ~ffic ~ol ~ m~ee= wash~g nec~s~ . p~ l~ work at i~ mole cost. ~DC or i~ ~=a~-m~ll name ~, city and ~drord as ~o~1 ~e~ on i~ liabili=~ ~ce ~li~ ~d p~vide a cenifi~e hs~e. ~ or l~ ccn=a~er will suppW ~= of appreciate w~e's compensa=ien Cons~i2n vat~ ~d co~ion ~at~ meter is n~ed. con=~ ~ ~in~in ~ng Valley ~ash no ~e ~ve s~uifica=lons in ~e ~ providd a~, i~ sole ~et, up to and until ~e C~t~ of T~e~la rmleaees Fai~ful P~f~nue Bond ~usion Con=~l and ~dscape ~prov~ents for Tra~ 23~1-1, Bond No. 7900~27607, ~ Painful P~cmnce Bond for ~usiun Con=ol and Improv~en~s for Tra~ 13371-B, Bond 790Q529484. ~r~, no~ing herein ma~ M curtsied as a waiver by ~e Ci=~ of i~ right, an~, =o requir~ ~e s~e=~ of said ~nds ~ ~rfo~ an~ obliga~ion o~ ~DC und~ ~is 1 4 6 7 9 11 12 14 15 16 1T 19 20 21 22 2~ 28 ~s. ~1 p;iu 8~ee ~a~ ~ior ~ ~e raZeaRe a~ r~ ~ ~a ab~e spect~tca~io~ and ~, wor~ing crd~ as wall as ~e adJa=~ spriglet ~et~e. ~, if in ~e opinion u= ~e ~gime~ a si~ift~= areas= of lilt r-~x~ in ~e c~lv~ ~a~ Pal~ Village, a~ ~e of ~e =~ oZ ~is ~e~=, ~e ~nds will ~ r~eased, ~d ~C, t~ assl~s ~ mucusson e~ll clean'said Palo~ ~x ~lv~ as well. ~m~, any d~ee done =o any con~e~e ~nage ~prov~s ~ ins~lls, shall ~ ~ My submit an ~nvoice up ~o ~e uoun~ o= $5,000 for butldin~ ~d comple=ing drainage ~provemen~ ~and~g =Tom Y~on to H-~r in ~e ~ng Valley WaS up ~=11 1, 1992. ~pon s~mission of said inveices ~ ~ in a t~mly ~ashi~n, uid invoices shall M paid by ~C up to ~e Doun= of ~,000 .~ not lees ~an 10 day2. 1 & ll 20 22 2~ 3. A. ~m:~, Zr~ any ~d all :iVh~, d~, a~ damages o~ ~y kind, ~o~ ~M, ass~ ~ ~asse~ed, resul~n~ pres~Uly ~is~g or vhi~ may ~ depas~tmd ~a~ 2237~ in ~ng ~alley Wa~ ~d ~ ~ma~ Pal~ Vllhge. In cunsid~ation uf ~e premises confined h~ein, ~ ~d i~ o~s, a~, asai~s and su~a~ h ~erest do her~ relies ~d dis~e Ci~, ~d Bedford, ~d ~e~ offices, ~loye~ and ~ccesmors-~-in=~= =rum ~y and all righ~ ,. ~la~, den~, ~d da~g~ of ~nd, ~o~ or ~o~, ass~ed or usse~ resultin~% =r~ or related to ~e silt praviMly deposited, pres~=.ly uistin~, or ~hi~ deposited zrom ~c or 2~c ups~sam ~develo~ land in ~ng Valley wash and ~e ~lv~ ~ea~ Palmr Village. In consideration of the promises ccn~ed h~e~, city, and i~ owners, ag~, assigns and successors in intcest do hceby release and dis~arge ~e ~, and Bedford, and 1 4 lO 1I 12 14 17 18 20 21 Anterest from any and all rigbox, claims, demanda, and dxmaees af any kind, knawn or unknown, asser=ed or un_-~er~nd, resultin~ Zrom or ~ ~e all= ~svio~ly de~si=ed, Weeetly ~ ups=~ ~develop~ land in ~ne Valley Wash ~d ~e culv~ ~ea~ P~I~ Village, ~ou~h ~e da~ of release of ~e bo~s des~Md a= Se~on In cubidea=ion cf ~e ~smises con~ined h~e~, Bed=ord, and i~ o~s, agents, assigns successors h ~es= do h~e~ telflee and dis~e ~e Clay aM ~, and ~e~ ~ffic~, ~gents, ~loyees and succ~so~-in-~t from any ~d all rignaB, cla~, deMn~, a~ u~ssened, reaul=in9 from cr rela~ t~ ~e ailt previously deposi=ed, pr~=ly ~is=ing, may be deposited from ~C or c~ ups~m ~developed land in ~ng Valley ~ash and ~e culve~ ~nea~ Palo~r Village. In ccnsideranion of ~e promises con=abed h~e~ ~DC, and l~ o~ers, agents, assi~s and successors in in=~r~ do h~Gy release and discharge Bedford, ~he CiUM and ~, and ~fflc~s, ~gen~, employees and succeesors-~- and damages of any kind, k~o~n or unknown, asserted ~r unasserted, resulting from ~ rehted ~o ~e silt ~evio~l~ deposited, ~s~ntly · c~ ~s~e~ ~develcped land in ~ng valley 7 Wash ~d ~e ~1~ ~ea~ Pmlo~r Village. 8 4. The panics here~o ~der~d and ages ~a= all of 9 ~e~ ri~hU ~der Solon 1542 of ~e Civil C~e of ~liZ~r~a 10 or ~ s~l~ law of ~y s~=e ~ t~i~ or ~e United 1! S~s, arm h~ ~sly ~aived. Said $e~ion reads as 12 f~llo~s = 13 ~Se~iun 1542. Ge~e~l Releas~Claims 14 E~i~ished. A gen~al release does no~ 15 e~end to cla~s whi~ ~e ~edi=or d~ no~ 16 ho~ or su~e~ ~ exist in his ~av~r a= ~e 17 =i~e of exerting ~e release, whi~ if ho~ 18 by him, must have ~rially affe~ his 19 settl~en= wi~ the d~=e:." 20 5. It is undostood and ageed =ha~ ~is S=ipulatiun 21 represenns set=lent of' disputed claims and Is no~ ~o ~ ~ c~ns~ed as representing an a~issi~n of liablll~ en ~alf of ~ any Nny ~ ~is stipulation. The p~ies, however, in=end to ~ buy ~eir peace and =o forever provide a full ~d c~mplete ~ release and dis~arge.Zrom any and all liability ~ie~g our ef 26 ~e ~ansactions, matins. and even~ m~re pa~i~larly i~en~fied 27 hereina~ve. I 6. T~e ~l-=ies here=o ex~ressl~ wa~ ~=, represent, 3 ~o~l~e uf any righ~ ~hi~ ~e~ have ~= ~y have wi~ ~ ~e o~, ~ ~t ~e~ ~ve re~i~d ~e~d~t legal 5 ~vice tr~ ~e~ r~ve a==o~eys ~i~ ree~ to ~is 8 S~pula~on, ~d ~i~ respect ~ ~e h~eina~ve referenced dispute. 9 ~is S~ipula~Qn, ~e~ ey discov~ ~=feren= or a~itio~l 11 ~d~Bt~ding cf ~ose =a~. The p~iee h~e=u, ~erefQre, 12 e;reemly asses ~e risk c~ su~ fa~ ~ so dfff~t and 13 a;ee ~a= ~ie S~ipula=ion, sMll ~ all res~c~, ~ e=fe~ive 14 ~ no= s~Je~ to rescission, ~n~llanion or ~emna=icn by 1~ reason of any suC ad~=io~l or d~f~en= fa~. 18 7. Should ~y panF br~; an a~ion aga~= ~e o~ 1~ ~e p~o~a c= en=orcin~ ~e =~s cf ~is stipulation, or f~ 1S d~ges arising from its ~each, ~ in su~ even~, 19 prevailing party snell ~ entitled ~ its reasonable a=tc~eys 20 fees and costs in addition =c ~y u~er awed en~ 21 C~. 22 8. ~is Stipulation shell ~e ~o ~e ~nefl~ of ~e ~ p~ies and to ~eir respective successors, reprisal=ires and ~ assigns, and shall ~ bind~ upon ea~ of ~e 25 9. T~is S=ip~a=ion sh~ll, in all r~pe~s, ~ 26 ~a~re~ed, ~forced and goveme~ by and ~er ~e la~s of ~e 2~ S~=e of ~lilcrnia. This A~eemen= cormsins ~e enSUe 28 -11- 2 su~jec~ ma==er hexe~f and supersedes and replaces ell prior nego=ia=lons, propQssd agreements or agreemen=s, whether ~rri=~sn 4 or oral. This S=ipula~ion may be si~ned in coun=~. ~0. This. S=ipula=ion ~hall be subJec= =o la~kxup~cy C~ 6 approval bemuse i~ arla~=s the righTJ 'and/or oblige=ions MVDC. This S~ipula=ion shall n~= be hindin~ on any o= l~ar=iee here~ unless and ~=il su~ a~roval is pro~sd ~d 9 S=ipula=ion ~c~ e~fe~ive as ~ ~C. ~C shall apply f~r 10 su~ approval wi~ ~o (2) ~ess days cr ~C 11 co~el's reviving ~l==en no=ifi~=ion cf ~is S=ipula=icn's 12 ~e~=ion by ~, Bedford and ~C. Nc~wi~=and~g any 13 f2r~c~g t~ ~e ccn~, ~e ~crc~= and ~te~rena=ion uf 14 ~is 2tipulani2n s~ll no= ~ subJe~ =c ~e J~isdic=icn ~f 15 B~pt~ C~, ~cept to ~e enen~ such ~forc~t 18 inte~re~=ion affe~J ~e ri~h~ or Obligatiu~ ~f ~C ~dc ~is Stipula=ion. IN WI~S WH~OF, each or ~e und~si~ned have ~ecuT 19 ~is S~lp~a=ion On ~e dare ~d ye~ indiared ~low. h~ of ~e below n~ed persons warran~ ~a~ ~ey ~e duly au~oriz~ 21 sign ~is age~en= on ~half ~f ~eir principal and au~urized =u bind ~sir principal ~ ~is S=ipula=i~n. 2~ 26 6 9 - 10 11 19 PATaICIA NAYOR DaTad: .. , 1992 Byt Title: Dated: ~/.Z.:I__, 1992 :D C.,C~2k~'Y, & Call=nrnia JoiT. t venture BUIE-RANC~O CALIFOP~IK, LTD., · Calt=ornta limi=ad per=narship By: THE BU~E CORPORATION, General P~rtner Dated: , 1992 By: DaT. sd: , 1992 By: HEVADA-KAa4C~C~ CALIPORNI~, LTD. california limicad parV. nsr~h~.p NEVADA CAPITAL, 'LTD. a California uQrporaCion, General Par=net Dared: ., 1992 -1,3 - 1 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 ' 12 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 24 26 APPROVE/) AS TO Scott F. l"':k. eld, Ci=y At"corney Dated: Da~ed: Vi~n=r Vilaplana, Esq. · ~'BTwu & G'BI"HNELL Howell, Esq. DZNNZS rr.lNl~X By: . Da~ed: Dennis KlizmeX, Esq. A==2rney for BEDFOED DEVELOpv~wT C~ANY -14 - , 1992 , 1992 , 1992 1992 ATTACHMENT N0.6 EXHIBITS R:\S\STAFFRPT%23373.PC 10/28/93 mf 22 CITY OF TEMECULA "lg CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: ~.C. DATE: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23373, AMENDMENT NO. 1, 2ND EXTENSION OF TIME A VICINITY MAP NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~23373.PC 10/26/93 mf CITY OF TEMECULA EXHIBIT B - FUTURE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL EXHIBIT C - ZONING DESIGNATION: SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 199 - MARGARITA VILLAGE r'tkSE NO.: I-'.C. DATE: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23373, AMENDMENT NO. 1, 2ND EXTENSION OF TIME NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\23373,PC 10/26/93 mf CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: '~,C, DATE: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23373, AMENDMENT NO. 1, 2ND EXTENSION OF TIME o SITE PLAN NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:%,~\S,T~,FFBPT\23373.PC 10/26/93 mf ITEM #7 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION November 1, 1993 Planning Application No. 93-0175 First One Year Extension of Time for Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1 Prepared By: Matthew Fagan RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: RE-AFFIRM the previously adopted Negative Declaration for Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1; and ADOPT Resolution No. 93- , approving PA93-0175, Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1; First Extension of Time subject to the findings and attached Conditions of Approval. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: James Meyler REPRESENTATIVE: Markham & Associates PROPOSAL: One year extension of time for Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1 - A four (4) parcel residential subdivision of 3.86 gross acres LOCATION: Northwest of the intersection of Ynez and Santiago Roads EXISTING ZONING: R-A FUTURE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential (.5- 2 d.u./acre) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: R-A 2 Y2 (Residential Agricultural, 2 ¼ acre minimum parcel size) South: R-A 2 ~ (Residential Agricultural 2 ~,~, acre minimum parcel size) East: R-A 2 ~ (Residential Agricultural 2 ~, acre minimum parcel size) West: Specific Plan No. 180 - Rancho Highlands PROPOSED ZONING: Not Requested R:\S\STAFFRPT\175PA93.PC 10/28/93 mf EXISTING LAND USE: ResidentialNacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Single Family Residential South: Vacant East: Single Family Residential West: Single Family Residential PROJECT STATISTICS - Total Area: Number of Parcels: Parcel Acreage: Parcel 1 Parcel 2 Parcel 3 Parcel 4 3.86 gross acres 4 1.00 acre net .51 acre net .62 acre net .50 acre net BACKGROUND Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. I was originally approved by the Planning Commission on August 19, 1991. The Planning Commission also recommended approval of Change of Zone No. 14 (redesignation of the site from R-A-2~ to R-A) concurrent with the Tentative Map. A request for a one year extension of time was filed with the Planning Department on September 7, 1993. A Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was held on October 7, 1993. Subsequent to the DRC meeting, the application was deemed complete and a Planning Commission hearing date was established. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Planning Application No. 93-0175 is a request for a one year time extension for Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1 - a residential subdivision of 3.86+/- acres into 4 parcets. ANALYSIS No new significant issues have developed since this project was originally approved by the Planning Commission on August 19, 1991. The draft General Plan has been evolving since this project was originally approved and the project as proposed is consistent with the Draft General Plan. National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements have been mandated since this project was originally approved and have been included as a condition of approval for erosion control on the site. EXISTING ZONING AND FUTURE GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY The project site is zoned R-A (Residential Agricultural - .5 Acre Minimum Parcel Size). The Draft General Plan Land Use Designation for the site is Low Density Residential (.5- 2 dwelling units per acre). The project's proposed density is ,92 dwelling units per acre which is within the range established in the draft General Plan, The project as proposed is consistent with the City's future General Plan. R:\S\STAFFRPT\175PA93.PC 10/28/93 mf 2 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION A Negative Declaration was adopted for Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1 pursuant to the CEQA guidelines. No subsequent changes are proposed in the project which would require re-visions to the previously adopted Negative Declaration. Significant environmental impacts not considered in the previously adopted Negative Declaration on the project have not developed since the project was originally approved. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS The proposed project was originally approved by the Planning Commission on August 19, 1991. The project as proposed is consistent with the City's future General Plan. No subsequent changes are proposed in the project which would require revisions to the previously adopted Negative Declaration. FINDINGS The findings for the original approval for Tentative Parcel Map No. 26848, Amendment No. 1 are found to remain valid except as amended herein. No subsequent changes are proposed in the project which would require revisions to the previously adopted Negative Declaration. Significant environmental impacts not considered in the previously adopted Negative Declaration on the project have not developed since the project was originally approved. 3. No new information of substantial importance to the project has become available. There is a reasonable probability that Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1, First Extension of Time 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 Draft General Plan recommended land use designation for the site is Low Density Residential (.5 - 2 dwelling units per acre). The project proposes a density of approximately .92 dwelling unit per acre. The proposed use or action complies with State Planning and Zoning Laws. The proposed use complies with the Subdivision Map Act, and City of Temecula Ordinances No. 460 and 348. 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, due to the fact that the proposed residential development complies with the standards of Ordinances No. 460 and 348. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or welfare, due to the fact that the Conditions of Approval include mitigation measures. R:\S\STAFFRPT\175PA93.PC 10/28/93 mf 3 The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony in scale, bulk, height, intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with adjoining properties, because very low density residential uses exist to the north, south, east and west of the site. The draft General Plan Land Use designations are medium density residential for the parcels which are immediately adjacent to the north and west of the site. 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 use is compatible with the surrounding land uses. 10. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic, because access will be off of Santiago and Ynez Roads, which are publicly maintained streets. 11. The design of the project and the type of improvements are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the property within the proposed project. 12. Said findings are supported by maps and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. Attachments: 2. 3. 4. PC Resolution No. 93- - Blue Page 5 Conditions of Approval for PA93-0157, Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1, First Extension of Time - Blue Page 10 Conditions of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1 - Blue Page 14 Exhibits - Blue Page 15 A. Vicinity Map B. Draft General Plan Land Use Map C. Zoning Map D. Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1 R:\S\STAFFRPT\lTSPA93.PC 10/28/93 mf 4 AT'I'ACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- R:\S\STAFFRPT\175PA93,PC 10/28/93 mf 5 ATFAC~ NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93-- A RESOLUTION OF ~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF ~ Crrf OF TEMECULA APPROVING A FIRST ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR PA~3-0175, TENTATIVE pARCI~,I, MAP NO. 26845, AMEND~ NO. 1, A FOUR PARCF. I. RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 3.86 ACRES LOCATED AT TI~. NORTHWEST CORNER OF YNEZ AND SANTIAGO ROADS AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCP, I, NO. 945-0~0-007 WF[EREAS, James Meyler fried an Extension of Time application for Tentative Pared Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WI~.REAS, said Extension of Time application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WtW~REAS, the Planning Commission considered said Extension of Time on November 1, 1993; WHEREAS, at said hearing, the Commission considered all facts relating to the Second Extension of Time for Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TI~E CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are tree and correct. Section 2. 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 tb. Lrty (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: general plan. 1. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the 2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the foliowing: R:\S\STAFFRPT\175PA93.PC 10/28/93 mf 6 a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. c. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as mended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (bereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The Planning Commission in approving the proposed Extension of Time, makes the foliowing f'mdings, to wit: 1. The findings for the original approval for Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1 are found to remain valid except as amended herein. 2. No subsequent changes are proposed in the project which would require revisions to the previously adopted Negative Declaration. Significant environmental impacts not considered in the previously adopted Negative Declaration on the project have not developed since the project was originally approved. No new information of substantial importance to the project has become available. 4. There is a reasonable probability that Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. I, First Extension of Time 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 Draft General Plan recommended land use designation for the site is Low Density Residential (.5 - 2 dwelling units per acre). The project proposes a density of approximately .92 dwelling unit per acre. 5. The proposed use or action complies with State Planning and Zoning Laws. The proposed use complies with the Subdivision Map Act, and City of Temecula Ordinances No. 460 and 348. 6. 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, due to the fact that the proposed residential development complies with the standards of Ordinances No. 460 and 348. R:\S\STAFFRPT~175PA93.PC 10/28/93 mf 7 7. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or weftare, due to the fact that the Conditions of Approval include mitigation measures. 8. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony in scale, bulk, height, intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with adjoining properties, because very low density residential uses exist to the north, south, east and west of the site. The draft General Plan Land Use designations are medium density residential for the parcels which are immediately adjacent to the north and west of the site. 9. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does not rapresent a significant change to the present or planned land use of the area,. due to the fact that the proposed use is compatible with the surrounding land uses. 10. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated fight-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic, because access will be off of Santiago and Ynez Roads, which are publicly maintained streets. 11. The design of the project and the type of improvements are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the property within the proposed project. 12. Said findings are supported by maps and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. D. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, the Tentative Parcel Map is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. A Negative Declaration was adopted for Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1 pursuant to the CEQA guidelines. No subsequent changes are proposed in the project which would require re-visions to the previously adopted Negative Declaration. Significant environmental impacts not considered in the previously adopted Negative Declaration on the project have not developed since the project was originally approved. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves the First One Year Extension of Time for Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1, a four parcel residential subdivision of 3.86 acres located at the northwest comer of Ynez and Santiago Roads and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 945-060-007 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. Fl:~S\STAFFRPT~175PA93.PC 10/28/93 rnf 8 Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of November, 1993. STEVEN F. FORD CHAIRMAN I I~.lll~.Ry 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 1st day of November, 1993 by the following vote of the Commission: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: GARY THORNI-rn SECRETARY R:\S\STAFFRPTVi75PA93.PC 10/28/93 mf 9 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:\S\STAFFFIPT\175PA93.PC 10128/93 mf 10 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. 93-0175 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845. Amendment No. 1, First Extension of Time) Project Description: One year extension of time for Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. I - A four (4) parcel residential subdivision of 3.86 gross acres Assessor's Parcel No.: Approval Date: Expiration Date: 945-060-007 PLANNING DEPARTMENT General Requirements Planning Application No. 93-0175 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1, First Extension of Time) shall comply with all Conditions of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1, unless superseded by these Conditions of Approval. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request, if made 30 days prior to the expiration date. The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, it agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Planning Application No. 93-0175 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 26845, Amendment No. 1, First Extension of Time), which action is brought within the time pgriod 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. Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director. R:\S\STAFFRPT~175PA93.PC 10/28/93 rnf 11 Prior to the Recordation of the Final Map 5. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director: A. A copy of the Final Map. B. A copy of the Rough Grading Plans. C. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following note: (1) This project is within a Subsidence Zone. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 6. 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 Director approval. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 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. General Requirements 7. Condition No. 31 shall be revised as follows: In the event that Santiago Road is not constructed by an Assessment District prior to the Final Map Recordation, the Developer shall design and bond for the street improvements per the "Rural Street Standards" as dictated by the draft Circulation Element of the proposed General Plan with A.C. Dike along both sides of paving. In addition a transition lane shall also be provided as directed by the Department of Public Works. The improvements shall be constructed prior to issuance of the occupancy permit. The owner shall also waive all rights to oppose formation of an Assessment District to construct the ultimate improvements to Santiago Road. Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permit The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. 9. An erosion control plan in accordance with City Standards shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. R:\S\STAFFRPT~175PA93 .PC 10/28/93 mf I 2 10. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. Prior to the Recordation of the Final Map 11. The Developer shall construct or post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the construction of the erosion control and slope protection improvements and all required offsite improvements within 18 months, as specified in the Conditions of Approval as epproved in the Planning Commission Hearing of August 19, 1991, in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT General Requirements 12. The developer, his assignee, or successors shall replace that portion of the existing Class II bicycle lane within Ynez Road that may be destroyed or damaged during the construction of the curb and gutter or other road improvements for this project. The bicycle lane shall be completed in concurrence with the street improvements. 13. All parkways, open space and landscaping shall be maintained by the property owner or an established Home Owner's Association (HOA), Prior to the Issuance of Building Permit 14. Upon the request of a building permit for construction of residential structures on one or more of the parcels within four years following approval of a tentative map, parcel map, or planned development, real estate development, stock cooperative, community apartment project and condominium for which a tentative map or parcel map is filed, a pre-determined Quimby Act Fee in the amount equal to the fair market value of required acreage shall be paid by the owner of each such parcel(s) as a condition to the issuance of such permit as authorized by City Ordinance No, 460.93. OTHER AGENCIES 15. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittel dated October 4, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 16. The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the County of Riverside Fire Department's letter dated October 21, 1993, a copy of which is attached, 17. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Eastern Municipal Water District transmittel dated October 8, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 18. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho California Water District transmittel dated October 14, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R:\S\STAFFRPT\175PA93.PC 10/28/93 mf 13 TO: FROM: RE: County of Riverside DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL I-I~ALTH DATE: October4, 199. CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNIlqG DEPT. A : tthew Fagan ~ental Health Specialist IV TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 26845, 1ST EXTENSION OF TIME, AMENDED NO. 1 Depamnent of Environmental Health has reviewed the Extension of Time and has no objections.. SM:dr (909) 275-8980 R E C E I V E 13 0 C T 8 8 1993 /ns'd .......-....-. , .~._ .,., RIVERSIDE COUNTY -~, "~ '; FIRE DEPARTMENT c-~ .T M HARRIS 210 WEST SAN JAGINTO AVENUE · PER.R/S, CALIFORNIA 92570 · (909) 657-3183 ~ CHI]EF October 21, 1993 TO: Planning Department ATTEN: Matthew Fagan RE: PA93-0175 First Extension of Time Tentative Tract 26845 The Fire Department has reviewed the above referenced case, original conditions of approval shall remain the same. the Any questions regarding the meaning of this letter shall be referred to the Fire Department Planning and Engineering section. RAYMOND H. REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner By~ ~~ Laura Cabral Fire Safety Specialist [2] RIVERSIDE OFFICE 3760 12th Street, Riverside, CA 92501 (909) 275-4777 ,, FAX (9C9) 369-7451 FIRE PREVENTION DIVISION PLANNING SECTION [2] IND]O OFFICE 79-733 Country Club Drive, Suite F, Indio, CA 92201 (619) 863-8886 ', FAX (619) 863-7072 Easte?n Municipa[ er Distric October 8, 1993 City of Temecula Planning Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 SUBJECT: Tentative Parcel Map 26845 (planning Application No. 93-0175) To Whom It May Concern: We have reviewed the materials transmitted by your office describing a one year extension of lime for the subject parcel proposed to be residential development. As shown on th, transmittal's accompanying map, the subject parcel is located at the northeasterly cornel of the intersection of Ynez and Santiago Roads in the City of Temecula. The nearest existing sanitary sewer facilities to the subject parcel are the following: 8-inch diameter gravity-flow sewer pipeline in Santiago Road, approximately 200 feet east of the intersection of Santiago and Ynez Roads. 8-inch diameter gravity-flow sewer pipeline in Quiet Meadow Road at the intersection of Quiet Meadow and Ynez Roads. It must be understood, the available capacilies of the Disu-ict's sanitary sewer system is continually changing due to the occurrence of development within the District and programs of systems improvement. As such, the provision of sanitary sewer service will be based on the approval of a detailed plan of sanitary sewer service, the timing of the subject parcel development, the status of the District's permit to operate, and the service agreement between the District and the developer. The developer must arrange for the preparation of a sanitary sewer plan of service. The sanitary sewer plan of service will indicate the location(s) and size(s) of system improvements to be made by the developer (or others), and which are conside. red necessary in order to provide adequate levels of sanitary sewer service. To arrange fo' the preparation of a sanitary sewer plan of service, the developer should submt. informalion describing the subject project to the District's Customer Service Department, blail To: Post Office Box 8300 - San Jacinto, California 92581-8300 · Telephone (909) 925-7676 · Fax (909) 929-0257 Main Office: 2045 S. San Jarjnto Avenue, San Jacinto o Customer Service/Engineering Annex: 440 E. Oakland Avenue, Hemet, CA (909) 925-7676, extension 409, as follows: Written request for a "sanitary sewer plan of service". Minimum $400.00 deposit (larger deposits may be required for extensive development projects or projects located in "difficult to serve" geographic areas). Plans/maps describing the exact location and natore of the subject project. Especially helpful materials include grading plans and phasing plans. The District encourages the beneficial use of reclaimed water for landscape irrigation and other uses in accordance with Title 22 of the California Administrative Code and Eastern Municipal Water District Ordinance No. 68. The design of irrigation systems for subject project landscaped areas must consider the District's water budget criteria and landscape irrigation guidelines. Water budget and landscape irrigation guidelines may be obtained from the District's Customer Service DepaA hnent The developer must submit information which describes the subject project's irrigation water/potential reclaimed water demand to the District's Customer Service Depa~a,.ent for review. At the time of the District's review, a District determination will be made regarding requirements for reclaimed water use and/or reclaimed water system improvements. Should you have any questions regarding these comments, please feel free to contact this office at (909) 925-7676, extension 467. Very truly yours, EASTERN MUNIC11~AL WATER DISTRICT Warren ~L Back Associate Engineer Customer Service Depatu.ent wan/ aB 93-1089 ancho Wa r October 14, 1993 RECEIVED OCT 181Sg3 Mr. Matthew Fagan City of Temecula Planning Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590-3606 SUBJECT: Water Availability Parcel Map 26845 Dear Mr. Fagan: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCVqD and the property owner. Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Senga Doherty. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E. Development Engineering Manager SB:SD:eb11/F186 cc: Senga Doherty, Engineering Technician ./ ATTACHMENT NO. 3 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 26845, AMENDMENT NO. 1 R:\S\STAFFRPT~175PA93,PC 10/27193 mf 14 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ..... :: ' -:~ ~., Santiaoo and Ynez Roads, . , -;. · .; -,: ',.~.,.. , ~ ::-~ ~- Assessor's parcel No.:. i'; ~".- -: 945-060-007 .-;',~;~'~.:--- -' -. :.: - . Project Description: --. ~,.~-':;4 lot residential ' 'L subdivision on 3.68 - '!'~ - ' -.- ' ' . :!:-- : ~: acres, located at the · .. northeast corner of Plannine Deoartment The tentative subdivision shall comply with the. State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule G, unless modified by the conditions listed below, A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon wri~en 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. 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. . -,. , 7. 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. 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. 8 ....~ 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. 9. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated July 10, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 10. The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the County Fire Department's letter dated July 16, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 11. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Eastern Municipal Water District transmittal dated August 6, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 12. All proposed construction shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy, as outlined in the Southwest Area Plan. 13. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho Municipal Water Distrlct transmittal dated July 30, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 14. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following: Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the development standards of the R-A zone. b.. 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 · :15. ;;-The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all ~l'0pes,' ~i:;_'::~ "" ' landscaped areas and irrigation systems until such time as those operations are" - '- the responsibilities of other parties as approved by the Planning Director. ' 16. Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) :.': shall be prepared in conjU'nction with the final map to delineate identified - .:.. ~;,.: ' envif0nmental 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. - ....... ' .... ' .... · 17. 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 shall conform with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory Lighting Ordinance 655. 18. 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. 19. Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: No building permits shall be issued by the City for any residential lot/unit within the project boundary until the developer's successor's-in-interest provides evidence of compliance with public facility financing measures. A cash sum of one-hundred dollars ( $100) per lot/unit shall be deposited with the City as mitigation for public library development. 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. c. 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. '.- d, 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. .... ~ ,, .~, ~ : : · .: .-. ....... , ., - .... . e, Building separation between all buildings including fireplaces shall not be "'" ~' . less than ten (10) feet.- · :: '- ~--- --. , . f. ' :All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of ten (10) feet. 20; 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 fo~h 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. 21. 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. 26845, 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, 22. 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. _ 23. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. 24. Within forty-eight (48) hours of the approval of the. project, the applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of .One Thousand, Two Hundred, Seventy;Five Dollars :($1,275.00),- which includes-the One-,~:- Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars ($1 ;250.00) fee,' in compliance with 'AB -. 3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711,4(d)(2) plus the Twenty- -_ .- '-:: :--~- Five 'Dollar(S25.00).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)." '--'.-- .-' ;:". ,:-~:"'. '- ',!~ T:;;:';;,-,'~;:-%' ;:: -,:-- . '.. . 25. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit a geology report in accordance with Riverside County Ordinance 90-079 to the Riverside County Engineering Geologist for the subject Tentative Parcel Map. The County: Geologist must transmit comments to the City of Temecula Engineering Department and any identified geologic hazards will be recorded on the Environmental Constraints Sheet. 26. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with all comments and conditions set forth by the Riverside County Engineering Geologist. 27. The subdivider shall submit to the Planning Director an agreement with the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) which demonstrates to the satisfaction of the TCSD Board of Directors, and the City that upon the request of BUILDING PERMIT for construction of RESIDENTIAL structures on one or more of the parcels WITHIN FOUR YEARS following approval of a tentative map, parcel map, or planned development, real estate development, stock cooperative community apartment project and condominium for which a tentative map or parcel map is filed, a predetermined Quimby Act fee in the amount equal to the fair market value of required acreage (Plus 20% for offsite improvements) shall be paid by the owner of each such parcel(s) as a condition to the issuance of such permit as authorized by City of Temecula Ordinance No. 460.93. -. Eneineerine DePartment The following are the Engineering Department Conditions of Approval for this project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Engineering Department '~ - -.- ~ .... · ' It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further consideration. . - - .' PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: ..... - , _ 28. ~' As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: .... ' San Diego Regional Water Quality Control; - "' Eastern Municipal Water District; . . : . City of Temecula Fire Bureau; -::- - . Planning Department; - -Engineering Department; Riverside County Health Department; - . CATV Franchise; and - Parks and Recreation Department. 29, All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the City Engineer. 30. Ynez Road shall be designed and improved with 32 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'). 31. Santiago Road shall be designed and improved with 43 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. 100 (110'/86'). 32. Street "A" shall be designed and improved, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 106, Section A (50'/32'), and shall terminate in a cul-de-sac turn around per County Standard No. 800. 33. A transition taper, 495 feet in length, shall be provided from the end of the proposed improvements to existing improvements on Ynez Road. 34. A transition taper, 105 feet in length, shall be provided from the end of proposed improvements to existing improvements on Santiago Road. 35. 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 · -' Cit~/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.,:::-:~. 36.: Vehicular access shall be restricted. on Ynez Road and so noted on the final map ..... - 37; ~:"Corner prope~y line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. ' ~; 805.'-' ~-':~:: Z~: .;;?~::~..~'~.';~:'~ ~:'~ '~:-;-~ : ~':~;;:--~;~-: '=:.' :' T;'~.::;' "~'~ -:' ::~' ::: ';," 38. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated or noticed on the_final map.~= ..:.,:-. ...... ;~ <.: ..... : 39. 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 relocation, and other traffic control devices as appropriate. b. Storm drain facilities. c. Landscaping (street and parks). d. Sewer and domestic water systems. e. Undergrounding of existing and proposed utility distribution lines. 40. The street design and improvement concept of this project shall be coordinated with adjoining developments. 41. Street lights shall be provided along streets at the intersections adjoining the subject site in accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the City Engineer. 42. Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Engineering Department a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation- towards traffic signal impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time . of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a written agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a building permit. 43. Street names shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineering Department .......... 44. All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the City Engineer. 45. Improvement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and alignment as approved by the City Engineer. 46. A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent. 47. 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). 48. All driveways shall be located a minimum of two (2) feet from the property line. 49. The subdivider shall submit two (2) prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, and as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 24" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil Engineer. 50, A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. 51, The subdivider shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report to the Engineering Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site: 52. Drainage calculations shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. 53. 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." 54. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 55. The subdivider shall protect downstream properties ~?rom'dar~ages 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. 56. 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 .... ~:.i,". :' - - · :~ :., ,: ~ .' - ..... :..;~ ;. :, '. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: : - 57. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office. .58. 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. 59, All lot drainage shall be to the street by side yard drainage swales independe, nt of any other lot, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 60, 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 fe.e or mitigation charge has already credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 61. The grading plan shall designate a location and design for subsurface sewage systems, and shall be submitted to Riverside County Health Department for approval. PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT: 62. A precise grading plan shall be submit'ted 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. 63. 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 bein substantial conformance with the approved rough ..... grading plan. - ..... . ................ ; .......... ; ... 64, . 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 underthe 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. 65. 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. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY: 66. Existing city ro3ds rcquiring construction shall rcmain opcn to traffic at all timcs with adcquatc dctours during construction. (Deleted at Planning Commission August 19, 1991) 67. 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 Enaineerinq PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP: 68. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for Ynez Road and Santiago Road and shall be included in the Street improvement plans. 69. Plans for a traffic signal pole relocation shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for the intersection of Ynez Road and Santiago Road and shall be included in the street improvement plans with the second plan check submittal, ATTACHMENT NO, 4 EXHIBITS R:\S\STAFFRPT~175PA93 ,PC 10~27~93 mf 15 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: A °.C. DATE: PA93-0175, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 26845, AMENDMENT NO. 1, 1 ST EXTENSION OF TIME VICINITY MAP NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\175PA93.PC 10/11/93 mf CITY OF TEMECULA EXHIBIT: B DRAFT GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP · DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL · EXHIBIT: C CASE NO.: ZONING DESIGNATION: R-A (RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL) PA93-0175, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 26845, AMENDMENT NO. 1, FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME ~ C. DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\175PA93.PC 10/11/93 mf CITY OF TEMECULA /# CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: D '~.C. DATE: PA93-0175, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 26845, AMENDMENT NO. 1, 1 ST EXTENSION OF TIME TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~175PA93,PC 10/14/93 mf ITEM #8 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION November 1, 1993 Planning Application No. 93-0179, Amendment No. 1 - Second Unit Permit Prepared By: Matthew Fagan RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends the Planning Commission: ADOPT Resolution No. 93 approving PA93-0179, Amendment No. I based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Raymond and Odette Derobert and Michelle Hapoit REPRESENTATIVE: Paul Toomey PROPOSAL: To construct a new 2,195 square foot dwelling unit; whereby, the new unit will become the primary unit and the existing 1,536 square foot structure will become the secondary unit. LOCATION: 31550 Calle Girasol - on corner of Calle Girasol, north of the intersection of Calle Girasol and Riverton Lane EXISTING ZONING: R-A 2 ~/2 (Residential Agricultural, 2 V2 acre minimum parcel size) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: R-R 2Y= (Rural Residential, 2~ acre minimum parcel size) South: R-A 2 ~ (Residential Agricultural, 2 ~ acre minimum parcel size) and R-T (Mobilehome Subdivisions and Mobilehome Parks) East: R-A 2 Y2 (Residential Agricultural, 2 '~ acre minimum parcel size) West: R-R 2~ (Rural Residential, 2Y= acre minimum parcel size) and R-T (Mobilehome Subdivisions and Mobilehome Parks) PROPOSED ZONING: Not requested FUTURE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Very Low Density Residential (.2-.4 dwelling units/acre) R:\S\STAFFRPT\179PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 1 EXISTING LAND USE: Single-Family Residence SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: South: East: West: Single-Family Residence Single-Family Residence Single-Family Residence Single-Family Residence PROJECT STATISTICS Total Area Building Height Project Density Earthwork Amount 5.23 acres (227,820 square feet) 1 story 2.61 du/acre 780 cubic yards cut/570 cubic yards fill BACKGROUND Planning Application No. PA93-0179 was formally submitted to the Planning Department on September 21,1993. A Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was held on October 7, 1993. Planning Application No, PA93-0179 was deemed complete on October 19, 1993. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project is a proposal to construct a new 2,195 square foot dwelling unit on a parcel that contains an existing dwelling unit. The new unit will be a manufactured home and will become the primary unit. The existing 1,536 square foot structure is also a manufactured home and it will become the secondary unit. ANALYSIS Ordinance ReQuirements and Fees Pursuant to Section 18.28.a.c.( 1 O) of Ordinance No. 348, any second unit placed more than 150 feet from a public right-of-way shall be required to provide all-weather access for emergency vehicles. According to the Department of Public Works, all-weather access for this particular project consists of a 28 foot wide asphaltic concrete paved road. This would mean that the project proponent would have to supply approximately 500 feet of 28 foot wide asphaltic concrete paved road to provide all-weather access per Ordinance No. 348. The applicant has expressed that this would be a hardship for them in this particular instance - that the requirement to pave the all-weather access would make their second unit permit request too costly. In addition to access to the site, the Fire Department has access requirements on-site. They require the same type of paving material as the Department of Public Works, The applicant claims that this too will make their project cost prohibitive. Plannine Commission Direction to Staff Reeardine ReQuirements for Second Units Staff is supportive of the concept of second units; however, the requirement for all weather access will prove to be cost prohibitive for people wanting to construct them. Staff requests that the Planning Commission provide direction on this matter relative to enforcing this R:\S\STAFFRPT~179PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 2 requirement under Ordinance No. 348, or whether an Ordinance Amendment for this requirement would be appropriate. Consistency With State Law Due to the economic hardship that the applicant would incur as a result of strict adherence to Section 18.28.a.c.(10) of Ordinance No. 348 (paving the road and driveway improvements), Staff requested clarification from the City Attorney to determine whether the requirements under Ordinance No. 348 were consistent with State Law. The City Attorney determined that the City of Temecula Second Unit Ordinance was in fact consistent with State Law. Pursuant to Section 65852.2 of the California Government Code, any local agency may, by ordinance, provide for the creation of second units in single-family and multi- family residential zones. The provisions contained in this section of the Code allow Cities to impose standards that "...include, but are not limited to". This gives cities the opportunity to impose standards more stringent than those contained in this Section of the Code. Riverside County did in fact adopt more stringent standards that the City subsequently adopted. Site Desion/Architecture/Area Coml~atibilitv The new residence will be located in front of the existing structure (it has been placed above a natural drainage course, and both dwellings will have to cross the drainage course for access). The structure will consist of manufactured units and is approximately 2,195 square feet with a two car garage. The new structure will have wood siding (light brown) with wood trim (light tan). The roof will be composition shingle. The new residence will be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in terms of materials, colors and scale. EXISTING ZONING AND FUTURE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION Existing zoning for the site is R-A 2 '/'= (Residential Agricultural, 2 V2 acre minimum parcel size). Second units are permitted in al residential zones provided that a second unit permit is granted pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.28.a. of Ordinance No. 348. The draft General Plan land use designation for the site is Very Low Density Residential (,2 - .4 dwelling units/acre). The project as proposed is consistent with Ordinance No. 348, and the draft General Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment since the project is a Class 3 Categorical Exemption pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Class 3 includes the construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures. The number of structures described in Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines are the maximum allowable on any legal parcel or to be associated with a project within a two year period. Examples per the Guidelines include single-family residences not in conjunction with the building of two or more such units, SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS Planning Application No. 93-0179, Amendment No. 1 is a proposal to construct a new 2,195 square foot dwelling unit on a parcel that contains an existing dwelling unit. The new unit will become the primary unit, and the existing 1,536 square foot structure will become the R:\S\STAFFRPT~179PA93.PC 10/28/93 kll~ 3 secondary unit. The new residence will be located in front of the existing structure. The new residence will be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in terms of materials, colors and scale. Pursuant to Section 18.28.a.c.(10) of Ordinance No. 348, any second unit placed more than 150 feet from a public right-of-way shall be required to provide all-weather access for emergency vehicles. In addition to access to the site, the Fire Department has requirements for all-weather access on*site. All-weather access for this particular project consists of a 28 foot wide asphaltic concrete paved road. The applicant has expressed that this would be a hardship for them in this particular instance - that the requirement to pave the all-weather access would make their second unit permit request too costly. Staff is requesting that the Planning Commission provide direction on this matter relative to enforcing this requirement under Ordinance No. 348, or whether an Ordinance Amendment for this requirement would be appropriate. FINDINGS There is reasonable probability that Planning Application No. 93-0179 - Second Unit Permit proposed will be consistent with the General Plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. The proposed project is consistent with Ordinance No. 348. The project meets the criteria prescribed under Section 18.28.a. (Second Unit Permit) of Ordinance No. 348. 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 project meets the criteria prescribed under Section 18.28.a. (Second Unit Permit) of Ordinance No. 348. 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. The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment since the project is a Class 3 Categorical Exemption pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. R:\S\STAFFRPT~I79PA93,PC 10/28/93 klb 4 Attachments: PC Resolution - Blue Page 6 Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 10 Exhibits - Blue Page 18 A. Vicinity Map B. Future General Plan Land Use Designation C. Zoning Map D. Site Plan E. Elevations F. Floor Plans R:\S\STAFFRPT~179PA93.PC 10/28193 kib 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 93-__ R:\S\STAFFRPT~179PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF ~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-0179, AMlq~'DMENT NO. 1 TO CONSTRUCT A SECOND UNIT ON A PARCEL CONTAINING ~.23 ACRES LOCATED AT 315S0 CALLE GIRASOL AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 914-480-006 WtlRREAS, Raymond and Odette Derobert and Michelie Hapoit fried Planning Application No. 93-0179 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHRREAS, said Planning Application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Planning Application on November 1, 1993, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or in opposition; WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons deserving to be heard, said Commission considered all facts relating to Planning Application No. 93-0179, Amendment No. 1; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEIVIECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. Section 2. 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, ff 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: R:\S\STAFFRPT~179PA93.PC 10/28/93 Idb 7 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 ff 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. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecuh as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The Planning Commission, in approving of the proposed Planning Application, makes the following fmdings, to wit: 1. There is reasonable probability that Planning Application No. 93-0179 - Second Unit Permit proposed wffi 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. The proposed project is consistent with Ordinance No. 348. The project meets the criteria prescribed under Section 18.28.a. (Second Unit Permit) of Ordinance No. 348. 4. 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 project meets the criteria prescribed under Section 18.28.a. (Second Unit Permit) of Ordinance No. 348. 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. 5. The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment since the project is a Class 3 Categorical Exemption pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. R:\S\STAFFRPT~179PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb ~ A. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, the Planning Application proposed conforms to the logical development of its proposed site, and is compatible with the present and future development of the surrounding property. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment since the project is a Class 3 Categorical Exemption pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves Planning Application No. 93-0179, Amendment No. 1 to construct a second dwelling unit located at 31550 Calle Girasol and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 914-480-006 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of November, 1993. STEVEN F. FORD CHAIRIVlAN I HF. REBY 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 1st day of November, 1993 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: GARY THORNRILL SECRETARY R:\S\STAFFRPT\179PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 9 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-0179, AMENDMENT NO. I - SECOND UNIT PERMIT R:\S\STAFFRPT~179PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 10 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. 93-0179, Amendment No. 1 - Second Unit Permit Project Description: A request to construct a new 2,195 square foot dwelling unit on a parcel which already comains an existing 1,536 square foot structure. The new unit will become the primary unit and the existing structure will become the secondary unit. The project is located in the Rural Residential (R-R 2 1/2) zone. The project site is located at 31550 Calle Girasol. Assessor's Parcel No.: 914480-006 Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT General Requirements The use hereby permitted by this Planning application is to construct a new 2,195 square foot dwelling unit on a parcel which already contains an existing 1,536 square foot structure. The new unit will become the primary unit and the existing structure will become the secondary unit. 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 attach, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Planning Application No. 93-0179, Amendment No. 1 - Second Unit Permit. 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. The second unit shall be used for family members or rental purposes only and may not be sold as a separate unit unless the lot is subdivided pursuant to all applicable laws and local ordinances. The second unit shall be used as a dwelling unit only, and no businesses or home occupations of any kind may be conducted from or in the second unit. 5. This approval shall be valid for five (5) years. 6. The project shall be consistent with Section 18.28.a of Ordinance No. 348. The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as shown on the site plan marked Exhibit A, or as amended by these conditions. R:\S\STAFFRPT~179PA93, PC 10/28/93 klb 11 8o Building elevations shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on Exhibit B. Wood Siding: Earthenware (Frazee 5203 M) Wood Trim: Candlewax (Frazee 4500 W) Roof: Composition Shingle Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Seventy-Eight Dollars (878.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 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 voided by reason of failure of condition. Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits 10. The applicant shall comply with Ordinance No. 663 by paying the fee required by that ordinance which is based on (the gross acreage of the parcels proposed for development). Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fees required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required under the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 11. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT 12. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1991 edition of the Uniform Building, Plumbing and Mechanical; 1990 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code Title 24 Energy and Handicapped Regulations and the Temecula Code. 13. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 14. The applicant shall provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans submitted for plan review. 15. The applicant shall provide electrical plan including load calcs and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. R:\S\STAFt:RPT\179PA93 .PC 10/28/93 klb 12 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 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 correctly shows on the tentative site plan all existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their - omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision, General Requirements 16. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise (including all onsite flat work and improvements) grading shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained road right- of-way. 17, An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. 18. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 19, The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. 20, The Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board Planning Department Department of Public Works Riverside County Health Department Community Services District General Telephone Southern California Edison Company Southern California Gas Company 21. A Grading Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, City Standards, and as required in these Conditions of Approval. 22. A Soils Report prepared by a registered Soils Engineer shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall R:\S\STAFFRPT\I ?9PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 13 23. address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weedfree condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the Department of Public Works. 24. 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 Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District prior to issuance of any permit. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has been already credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 25. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for offsite work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. 26. 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 drainage easement shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review prior to recordation. The location of the recorded easement shall be delineated on the precise grading plan. 27. The Developer shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the Department of Public Works permits the use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Section XI of Ordinance No. 460 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the Developer shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Department of Public Works. 28. The Developer 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. 29. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. Prior to the Issuance of Encroachment Permits 30. All necessary grading permit requirements shall have been accomplished to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 31. Street plans prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works shall be required for the public street. The plans and profiles shall show the location of exiting utility facilities within the right-of-way as directed by the Department of Public Works. R:\S\STAFFRPT~179PA93,PC 10/28/93 klb 14 32. The Developer shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public and private improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. A. Street improvements B. Storm drain facilities C. Sewer and domestic water systems 33. All required fees shall be paid. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit 34. The Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Riverside County Fire Department Planning Department Department of Public Works 35. All necessary construction or encroachment permits have been submitted/accomplished to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 36. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the Department of Public Works 37. All building pads 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, 38. The Developer shall deposit with the Engineering Department a cash sum as established per acre/unit as mitigation for traffic signal impact. 39. The 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 the Developer requests its building permit 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 the Developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, the 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 ~ 10,000. The 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, the 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 R:\S\STAFFRPT~179PA93.PC I0/28/93 klb 15 mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; orovided that the Developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. Prior to Issuance of Certification of Occupancy 40. The Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Rancho California Water District Eastern Municipal Water District General Telephone Southern California Edison Southern California Gas Planning Department Department of Public Works 41. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards, including but not limited to curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees, street lights on all interior public streets, signing, striping, traffic signal interconnect, and traffic signals. 42. Adequate right-of-way shall be dedicated along Jeffery Heights Road and Aussie Avenue to provide for a 60 foot full width right-of-way including a cul-de-sac at their termini and required corner property line cut off in accordance with City Standards. Article XVIII of Ordinance No. 348, Section 18.28a., Item c (10), specifies that "any second unit placed more than 150 feet from a public right-of-way shall be required to provide all-weather access for emergency vehicles". An aIFweather access consists of a minimum 28 foot wide aspbaltic concrete paved road, per City Standards. Therefore, an all weather access road meeting these requirements shall be provided along Aussie Avenue from Calle Girasol to the proposed driveway to the site. The driveway and the access to the site shall be designed and constructed relative to the ultimate design of Aussie Avenue including a turn around per City standards at the terminus. In order to provide for a paved section along Aussie Avenue, the improvements shall accommodate the natural drainage course crossing the road. All necessary permits shall be obtained from appropriate agencies; i.e, the Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps. of Engineers, and Regional Water Quality Control Board. 43. 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. R:\S\STAFFRPT~179PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 16 OTHER AGENCIES 44. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water District transmittal dated October 14, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 45. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside County Health Department transmittal dated October 1, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 46. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside County Fire Department transmittal dated October 25, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R:\S\STAFFRPT~179PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 17 Wmr John F. Hennigar Phillip L Forhes October 14, 1993 RECEIveD OCT 18 IZE3 Mr. Matthew Fagan City of Temecula Planning Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590-3606 SUBJECT: Water Availability APN 914-480-006, PA93-0179 Second Unit Permit Dear Mr. Fagan: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. Water availability. would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Senga Doherty. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E. Development Engineering Manager SB:SD:eUOB/F186 cc: Senga Doherty, Engineering Technician TO: FROM liE: County of Riverside DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH CITY OF TEMECLrLA PLANNING DEPT. ~-~T~T~~ Health Specialist IV SECOND UNIT PERMIT NO. PA93-0179 DATE: October 1, 1993 RECEIVED Anti .............. The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the Second Unit Permit No. PA93-0179 and will mqulxe the following items PRIOR TO BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL: Adequate/satisfactory detailed soils percolation testing in accordance with the procedures outlined in the Riverside County Waste Disposal Booklet enlitled "Waste Disposal for Individual Homes, Commercial and Industrial. 2. A "will-serve" letter for potable water from the appropriate agency providing water service. 3. Three detailed dram to scale (1 "=20') of the proposed subsurface sewage disposal system and floor plan/phtmbing schedule to ensure septic tank sizing. SM:d~ (909) 275-8980 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT HARRIS 210 WEST SAN JAG]INTO AVI~ffJE · PERR/So CALIFORNIA 92~70 · (~9) 657-3183 October 25, 1993 T0: Planning Department ATTEN: Matthew Fagan RE: PA93-0179 With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced second unit permit, The Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with the City of Temecula Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection standards: The water mains shall be a minimum of 6" diameter and shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 500 GPM for 2 hour duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure The required fire flow shall be available from a standard fire hydrant (6"x4"x2 1/2") within 500 feet of the property. The applicant/developer shall be responsible to submit written certification from the water company noting location of the existing fire hydrant and the existing water system is capable of delivering 500 GPM fire flow for a 2 hour duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. If a water system currently does not exist, the applicant/developer shall be responsible to provide written certification that financial arrangements have been made to provide them. The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on the job site. Driveways over 150 feet in length shall have a turn around at the second unit, capable of accommodating fire apparatus. Any second unit placed more than 150 feet from any public right-of- way shall be required to provide an all-weather access for emergency vehicles. Access shall not have an up or down grade of more than 15%. Access will not be less than 12 feet in width and will have a vertical clearance of 13'6". Access will be free of sharp confined turns. Access will be designed to withstand the weight of any type of emergency vehicle. Access will have a turning radius of 45 feet capable of accommodating fire apparatus. ~RE PREVENTION DIVISION ~ RIVERSIDE OFFICE PLANNING SECTION ~ INDIO O~ICE 37~ 12th St~et, Rivenire. CA 92501 79-733 Count~ Club Drive, Suite F, lndio, CA 92201 (909) 2754777 · FAX (9~9) 3~-7451 (619) 863-8886 * FAX (619) 863-7~2 All buildings shall be constructed with fire retardant roofing material as described in Section 3203 of the UniformBuilding Code. Any wood shingles or shakes shall be a Class "B" rating and shall be approved by the fire Department prior to installation. Street address shall be posted, in a visible location, minimum 4 inches in height, on the street side of the building with a contrasting background. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the deposit, with the City of Temecula, the sum of mitigation for fire protection impacts. developer shall $400.00 per unit All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Department Planning and engineering section. RAYMOND H. REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner Laura Cabral Fire Safety Specialist ATTACHMENT NO. 3 EXHIBITS R:\S\STAFFRPT\179PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 18 CITY OF TEMECULA PROJECT SITE CASE NO.: PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-0179, AMENDMENT NO. 1 EXHIBIT: A VICINITY MAP P.C. DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\179PA93,PC 10/19/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA - ~ SITE EXHIBIT B - FUTURE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL EXHIBIT C - ZONING DESIGNATION: R-A 2'/a (RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL, 2~ ACRE MINIMUM) \SE NO.: PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-0179, AMENDMENT NO. 1 DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPTX179PA93.PC 10/19/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-0179, AMENDMENT NO. 1 EXHIBIT: D SITE PLAN P.C. DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\~79PA93.PC 10/19/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-0179, AMENDMENT NO. 1 EXHIBIT: E ELEVATIONS P.C. DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\179PA93,PC 10/19/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-0179, AMENDMENT NO. 1 EXHIBIT: F FLOOR PLAN P.C. DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~179PA93.pC 10/19/93 klb ITEM #9 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION November 1, 1993 Case No.: Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 {PA93-0145) Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) Prepared By: Saied Naaseh RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: RECOMMEND ADOPTION of Resolution No. 93- recommending Approval for: Planning Application Nos. 93-0144 and 93-0145 (Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2, and Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. RECOMMEND ADOPTION of Negative Declaration for PA93-0144 and PA93-0145. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Leo Roripaugh REPRESENTATIVE: Sanford Edward, MPD Don Lohr, Lohr + Associates PROPOSAL: A Request for Approval of Amendment No. 2 to Specific Plan No. 164 in order to Change the Zoning for Planning Areas 7 (22.5 Acres) and 8 (10.1 Acres) from Very High Density Residential (20 Dwelling Units Per Acre) to High Density Residential (12 Dwelling Units Per Acre), to add a three (3) acre park and adjust the boundaries between Planning Areas 7, 8 and 9; and Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 27827, a 162 single family lot subdivision plus a three (3) acre lot for a public park within Planning Area No. 7. LOCATION: Located on the north west corner of Nicolas Road and North General Kearny Road EXISTING ZONING: Planning Area 7: Very High Density Residential: (14.9 Dwelling Units Per Acre) Planning Area 8: Office R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb I SURROUNDING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: South: East: West: Santa Gertrudis Creek Specific Plan No. 164, Medium High Density Residential (5.1 Dwelling Units Per Acre) R-2 (Multiple Family Dwellings) R-R (Rural Residential) Planning Area 7 and 8: High Density Residential (12 Dwelling Units Per Acre) VBcBnt North: Vacant South: Single Family Residential East: Vacant West: Vacant R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 kib 2 PROJECT STATISTICS Project Site Area (acres) Density (dwelling units per acre) Maximum Number of Dwelling Units Number of Dwelling units Proposed Park Site Area (acres) Private Open Space Area (square feet) Minimum Lot Size (square feet) Minimum Lot Width (feet) Minimum Lot Depth (feet) Minimum Front Setback (feet) Minimum Rear Setback (feet) Minimum Side Setback (feet) PLANNING AREA 7 22.5 12 243 162 3.0 N/A 3,400 40 85 10 5 5 **'10 Maximum Building Height (feet) 35 Floor Area (square feet) Plan 1 1,012 Plan 2 1,125 Plan 3 1,160 Plan 4 1,340 Plan 5 1,460 PLANNING AREA 8 10.1 12 '121 *202 **0.75 First Story 150 Upper Stories 100 7,200 N/A N/A One Story 20 Two Story and Up 25 One Story 20 Two Story and UP 25 One Story 15 Two Story 20 Three Story 25 50 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A A transfer of density from Planning Area 7 increases the density of Planning area 8 from 12 to 20 dwelling units per acre and increases the number of dwelling units from 121 to 202. * * The 0.75 acre area will be private common area. * * * For zero lot line developments. Fh\S\STAFFRP'~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 3 BACKGROUND Specific Plan 164 was approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors in 1985 and was subsequently amended by the County in 1988. The applicant met with staff on several occasions regarding the tentative map prior to submittal of the project. The appiicant's goal was to propose a project that would be compatible with the surrounding uses and at the same time would provide an opportunity for the applicant to develop the site immediately after approval. During these meetings, it was - determined that a Specific Plan Amendment would be required to accomplish the applicant's goal. This project was submitted on July 9, 1993 and was scheduled for a Development Review Committee Meeting (DRC) on August 5, 1993. The issues identified at the DRC meeting included: Density transfers between Planning Area 7 and 8 Requirement of a median for Nicolas Road Width of the parkway on Nicolas Road Providing access from Planning Area 7 to Winchester Road through Planning Areas 8 and 9 Traffic concerns at the intersection of Nicolas Road and Winchester Road with emphasis on left turn movements Noise impacts on the project from the traffic on Nicolas Road Maintenance of alleys, walls and side yard landscaping Proximity of the site to the French Valley Airport Influence area Lot sizes and the ultimate product type that will be built on the site Location, design and .timing of the park PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project consists of a Specific Plan Amendment and a Tentative Tract Map. SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164, AMENDMENT NO. 2 The Specific Plan Amendment changes the zoning of Planning Areas 7 and 8 from Very High Density Residential (14.9 dwelling units per acre) and Office to High Density Residential (12 dwetling units per acre). This amendment also allows for a transfer of density between Planning Areas 7 and 8 and allows a total of 364 dwelling units within these Planning Areas. It also adds a three (3) acre park to Planning Area 7, adjusts the boundaries between Planning Areas 7, 8 and 9, and allows using street cross sections of 46 and 50 feet as opposed to the conventional 60 foot right-of-way. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 27827 The tentative map subdivides a 22.5 acre parcel into 162 single family lots and a three (3) acre park on the east side of the site (refer to Exhibits D and E). The access to the park is provided from General Kearny Road and two access points are provided from Nicolas Road to the tract. The streets within the tract are narrower than the standard sixty (60) foot right- of-way street section with forty six (46) and fifty (50) foot right-of-ways. Additional R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klh 4 circulation is provided by alleys (twenty feet wide). The minimum lot size for the tract is 3,400 square feet which has been established by the Specific Plan amendment. Accompanying the map are elevations, floor plans, colors and materials, typical plotrings, typical front yard landscape plans and conceptual landscape plans for the park and Nicolas Road. ANALYSIS - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 27827 The following includes discussion of the issues regarding the map: Develooment Agreement Development Agreement No. 37 was approved by the County in 1988. This project has been conditioned to comply with this Development Agreement or any restatements or amendments thereto. The applicant has been negotiating with the City to enter into a new Development Agreement which may reduce the current impact fees. The Development Agreement will be brought back to the Planning Commission under a separate Staff Report, Home Owners Association The project will have Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's); however, it will not have a Home Owners Association (HOA). Initially, staff requested an HOA to maintain the common areas such as the alleys, side yard landscaping for the corner lots and the wall along Nicolas Road. However, the applicant does not wish to form an HOA for this project, since the future homeowners will be burdened by the HOA dues as the project is entry level housing. Therefore, he is proposing to eliminate all common areas by dedicating the alleys to the City. Individual home owners will maintain the side yard landscaping and the wall on Nicolas Road. In order for the Public Works Department to maintain the alleys, they will be constructed with concrete to reduce the maintenance costs, parking and speed limits will be restricted and automatic garage door openers will be required. Moreover, in order for the individual home owners to maintain the side yard landscaping, the applicant has been required to connect the side yard irrigation to the front yard irrigation to reduce the chances of the homeowner turning off the irrigation for the side yard (refer to Exhibit F). The wall on Nicolas Road has been moved from the edge of the right-of-way to inside the individual lots; therefore, the individual homeowners will be responsible for maintaining the portion of the wall within their property. The CC&R's include a provision that the same color be used when the homeowners are painting their walls. R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/I~3 klb 5 Nicolas Road Imorovements Assessment District 161 is scheduled to start construction of full improvements of Nicolas Road in 1994 which will include improving it from Winchester Road to Joseph Road. This improvement will not include a median as proposed on the Draft General Plan Circulation Element. This project has been conditioned to pay its fair share to construct this landscaped median consistent with City standards, The City will also install a interim traffic signal in 1994 at the intersection of Nicolas Road and Winchester Roads. Currently the improvement plans for this signal are being prepared. A copy of the Traffic Study Summery has been included as Attachment No. 4. Noise linDacts A Noise Analysis was performed for the map which has identified impacts on the project. According to this study, mitigation measures included in the conditions of approval will reduce the impacts to insignificant levels. These conditions require six foot six inch (6' 6") high decorative block walls or a combination of berming and block walls measured from the pad elevation. These walls will be constructed on the rear property lines for lots 1 through 22, 103, 104 and 162, and on the side property lines for lots 1, 22, 103 and 162. Additionally, the applicant will submit a Noise Analysis prior to issuance of building permits to determine the mitigation measures necessary to limit the interior noise levels to 45 CNEL. This study will need to be performed with the benefit of the architectural drawings and the precise grading plans. Walls and Fences In addition to above walls required by the Noise Analysis, a decorative block wall is also required along the western property line (lots 103 through 121 ) and the side yards for corner lots. The applicant has the option of providing wrought iron, decorative block wall or a combination of the two to take advantage of views along the northern property line (lots 121 through 154) and lots 155 through 162 and the side yard for lot 154. These lots are either adjacent to Santa Gertrudis Creek or the park. All other interior fencing may be wood fencing. Product Type The map was submitted without the benefit of the elevations, floor plans and typical plottings and front yard landscaping. After reviewing this map with proposed minimum lot sizes of 3,400 square feet and alleys, staff requested the applicant to submit the above information to demonstrate that the product type proposed meets the quality of development desired by the City. Moreover, it was necessary to see how these houses will fit the proposed lots and how the applicant was proposing to take advantage of the alleys. The applicant is proposing five (5) models that range from 1012 to 1460 square feet in size. These units include three (3) to four (4) bedrooms and two car garages (refer to Exhibits J, K, L, M and N). The architecture is mediterranean with stucco exterior and tile roofs (refer to Exhibits I, J1, J2, J3, K1, K2, K3, L1, L2, L3, M1, M2, M3, M4, N1, N2 and N3). The entry to the garages is possible with three (3) different variations: conventional front entry, R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93,PC 10/28/93 klb 6 shared side entry and alley rear entry (refer to Exhibit G), The project has been conditioned to restrict parking on all driveways, since the front entry driveways are only ten (10) feet long, the side entry driveway needs to be kept free of parked cars since parked cars will block the entry to the garages and in case of rear entry garages, parking in front of the garages will encroach into the alleys. Improvement of Santa Gertrudis Creek The construction of Santa Gertrudis Creek is the responsibility of Assessment District 161. According to the Assessment District this construction will commence in 1994. Final releases will not be issued for this project until the construction of the creek is complete as determined by the Riverside County Flood Control. Nicolas Road Parkway Width The proposed map only allows for a six (6) foot wide landscaped parkway between the sidewalk and the property line (refer to Exhibit H1 and H2). However, across the street from the project site the width of the parkway is approximately ten (10) feet wide. Staff requested the applicant to match this width; however, the applicant has maintained a position that the six (6) foot parkway is sufficient to provide a pleasing streetscape and a larger parkway will further reduce the lot sizes (refer to Attachment 5). Park The proposed three (3) acre park will be improved by the applicant as a turn key operation prior to issuance of the final release of the thirty fourth (34th) dwelling unit or within eighteen (18) months of the recordation of the first phase of the Final Map, whichever comes first. SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164, AMENDMENT NO. 2 The following includes a discussion of the issues regarding the Specific Plan Amendment: Boundary ChanQes The Specific Plan Amendment will change the boundaries of Planning Areas 7, 8 and 9 which will result in changes in the areas of these Planning Areas. The following represents these changes: PLANNING AREA 7 PLANNING AREA 8 PLANNING AREA 9 Approved 18.16 4.83 26.69 Proposed 23.60 10.1 20.18 Note: The above totals are not equal due to Santa Gertrudis Creek and street right-of-way areas, R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 7 Density Transfer As a part of the Specific Plan Amendment, a zone change and a density transfer is proposed for Planning Areas 7 and 8. The current Specific Plan Zone Designation of Very High Density allows for the construction of 271 multi family units and a 4.83 acre commercial office parcel. The zone change for Planning area 7 and 8 converts the zoning from Very High Density Residential (maximum 14.9 Dwelling units per acre} and Office, respectively, to High Density Residential (maximum of 12 Dwelling Units Per Acre). The density transfer allows the construction of 364 dwelling units within Planning Areas 7 and 8. This density transfer is consistent with the General Plan density for Medium Density Residential (maximum of 12 dwelling units per acre) which could result in 390 dwelling units. The proposed tract map includes 162 single family lots. With benefit of the density transfer, Planning Area 8 could be developed with 202 multi-family dwellings at a density of 20 dwelling units per acre. Since this density is higher than the usual 14-15 dwelling units per acre approved by the City for multi family projects, a few provisions have been included in the Zoning Ordinance of Planning Area 8 which requires development of a 0.75 acre recreational area which may include basketball, volleyball, barbecue, picnic areas, tot lots and open lawn areas. Moreover, private open space areas such as patios and balconies are required for each dwelling unit at a rate of 150 square feet for first story units and 100 square feet for upper story units. Bufferino The Planninc~ Areas Since the zoning for Panning Area 8 has been changed from Office to High Density Residential and Planning Area 9 to the west of Planning Area 8 has been approved for retail shopping center, there is a necessity to provide a buffer between these two Planning Areas. Staff and the applicant have agreed to a twenty five (25) foot landscaped buffer. It should be noted that a buffer has not been proposed between Planning Areas 7 and 8, since the Zoning Ordinance for Planning Area 8 requires a twenty (20) foot setback for two story buildings and the rear yard setbacks for the single family dwellings proposed on lot 103 through 121 is a minimum of sixteen (16) feet. Therefore, a minimum of 36 feet will separate the buildings within these two Planning Areas. FUTURE GENERAL PLAN, ZONING, AND SWAP CONSISTENCY Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 This project will likely be consistent with the future General Plan since the Draft General Plan currently designates the site as Medium Density Residential. This project is consistent with the Southwest Area Plan (SWAP) which designates the site as Specific Plan No. 164. This project is consistent with the intent of Specific Plan No. 164 Amendment No. 1. Tentative Tract MaD No. 27827 This project will likely be consistent with the future General Plan since the Draft General Plan currently designates the site as Medium Density Residential. This project is consistent with the Southwest Area Plan (SWAP) which designates the site as Specific Plan No. 164. This project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2's High Density zone since it meets all the requirements for this zone. R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10128/93 kJb 8 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION A Initial Study was prepared for Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 and Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 and it revealed no significant impacts that have not been mitigated to an insignificant level. Therefore, Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS The Specific Plan Amendment and the Tentative Tract Map decrease the number of multi family units from 271 to 202, allow the development of 162 single family dwelling units, and add a fully improved three (3) acre public park. Moreover, the multi family portion of the project includes a 0.75 common open space which was not required in the previously zoned 271 unit project. The environmental impacts of the project have been reduced to insignificant levels with the mitigation measures included in the Conditions of Approval. FINDINGS Soecific Plan No. 164. Amendment No. 2 There is a reasonable probability that Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 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 subject request is consistent with the SWAP Designation of Specific Plan and is in substantial conformance with Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 1. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future General Plan if Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact that approval of such an amendment will ensure orderly development of the area and the significant environmental impacts have been mitigated. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses of single family residential since it is separated by Nicolas Road and the Santa Gertrudis Creek and impacts have been reduced to a level of insignificance. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the area, due to the fact that the proposed land use is consistent with the Draft General Plan Land Use Element and the overall density is being reduced. The project will have a positive impact on the surrounding land uses since it is introducing an additional new park to the area. R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 Idb 9 Tentative Tract MaD No. 27827 There is a reasonable probability that Tentative Tract Map 27827 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 ordinances and development standards. Furthermore, the proposed density of the project is consistent with the future General Plan Land Use Designation of Medium Density Residential. 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, since the surrounding land uses are single family dwellings. The proposed use or action as conditioned 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 Planning Commission has considered the effect of its action upon the housing needs of the region and has balanced these needs against the public service needs of the residents and available fiscal and environmental resources (Gov. Cod Section 66412,3) and finds that the project density is consistent with SWAP and the future General Plan. Additionally, it will provide more diversity in the housing type available to the residents of the City of Temecula. m The proposed project will not result in discharge of waste into the existing sewer system that is in violation of the requirements as set out in Section 13,000 et seq. of the California Water Code since the project has been conditioned to comply with Eastern Municipal Water District's requirements. The project has acceptable access by means of dedicated right-of-way and as conditioned. The project is consistent with the intent of the original project approved by the County of Riverside. The project is consistent with the provisions of Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2. Said Findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental documents associated with this application 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. R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/29/93 klb 10 Attachments: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. PC Resolution - Blue Page 12 Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 17 Initial Study - Blue Page 34 Traffic Study Summary - Blue Page 49 Applicant's Correspondence on Parkway Landscaping Width - Blue Page 50 Exhibits - Blue Page 51 R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 11 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 12 ATFACHIVIENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF ~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF TFIF~ CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 92-0145 (SPECHqC PLAN NO. 164, AMEND1VIENT NO. 2) AND PLANNING APPLICATION NO.93-0144 (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 27827) TO APPROVE AMENDMF-NT NO. 2 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164 IN ORDER TO CHANGE ~ ZONING FOR PLANNING AREAS 7 (22.5 ACRES) AND 8 (10.1 ACRES) PROM VERY HIGH DENSITY RF~IDENTIAL (20 DWELI.ING UNITS PER ACRE) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (11 DWF..LLING UNITS PER ACRE), TO ADD A THREE (3) ACRE PARK AND ADJUST TWE BOUNDARW-S BETWEEN PLANNING AREAS 7, 8 AND 9; AND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 27827, A 162 SINGLE FAIV!II.Y LOT SUBDIVISION PLUS A THREE (3) ACRE LOT FOR A PUBLIC PARK WITHIN PLANNING AREA NO. 7. Wtw~REAS, Leo Roripaugh fried Planning Application No. 92-0145 (Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 and Planning Application No. 93-0144 (Tentative Tract Map No. 27827) in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WItEREAS, said applications were processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WI-IEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said applications on November 1, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHF~REAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said applications; NOW, Tt~-REFORE, THE PLANNING COMMI,qSION OF TI"~, 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: R:\S\STAFFFIPT~144PA93,pC '10/28/93 klb 1. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the p~paration of the general plan. 2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of budding 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 ff the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. c. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of said applications makes the following findings, to wit: Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 1. There is a reasonable probability that Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 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 subject request is consistent with the SWAP Designation of Specific Plan and is in substantial conformance with Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 1. 2. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future General Plan ff Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact that approval of such an amendment will ensure orderly development of the area and the significant environmental impacts have been mitigated. 3. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses of single family residential since it is separated by Nicolas Road and the Santa Gertrudis Creek and impacts have been reduced to a level of insignificance. R:\S\STAFFRP'I~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 14 4. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does not represent a significant change to the p|anrled land use of the area, due to the fact that the proposed hnd use is consistent with the Draft General Plan I~nd Use Element and the overall density is being reduced. 5. The project will have a positive impact on the surrounding land uses since it is introducing an additional new park to the area. · Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 1. There is a reasonable probability that Tentative Tract Map 27827 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 ordinances and development standards. Furthermore, the proposed density of the project is consistent with the future General Plan Land Use Designation of Medium Density Residential. 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, since the surrounding land uses are single family dwellings. 3. The proposed use or action as conditioned 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 Planning Commission has considered the effect of its action upon the housing needs of the region and has balanced these needs against the public service needs of the residents and available fiscal and environmental resources (Gov. Cod Section 66412.3) and finds that the project density is consistent with SWAP and the future General Plan. Additionally, it will provide more diversity in the housing type available to the residents of the City of Temecula. 5. The proposed project will not result in discharge of waste into the existing sewer system that is in violation of the requirements as set out in Section 13,000 et seq. of the California Water Code since the project has been conditioned to comply with Eastern Municipal Water District's requirements. as conditioned. The project has acceptable access by means of dedicated right-of-way and 7. The project is consistent with the intent of the original project approved by the County of Riverside. 8. The project is consistent with the provisions of Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2. R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 9. Said Findings ar~ supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental documents associated with this application 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. D. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, said projects are compatible with the health, safety and weftare of the community. Section 2. Environmental Compliance. A Initial Study was prepared for Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 and Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 and it revealed no significant impacts that have not been mitigated to an insignificant level. Therefore, Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration. Section 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Planning Application No. 93-0145 (Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 and Planning Application No. 93-0144 (Tentative Tract Map No. 27827) located on the northwest comer of Nicolas Road and North General Keamy Road subject to the following conditions: A. Attachment No. 2, attached hereto. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOFrED this 1st day of November, 1993. STEVEN F. FORD CHAIRMAN STATE OF CALrFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEIVIECULA) 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 1st day of November 1993 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: GARY THORNI-nl SECRETARY R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 Idb 17 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. 93-0144, (Tentative Tract Map No. 27827) Project Description: A request to subdivide a 22,5 acre parcel into 162 single family dwelling lots and a three (3) acre open space lot for a public park |Roripaugh Cottages) Assessor's Parcel No.: Approval Date: Expiration Date: 911-150-035 and 911-150-038 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand Three Hundred Twenty-Eight Dollars ($1,328.00), which includes the One Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars (~1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB 3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(2) plus the Seventy-Eight Dollars (978.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 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). General Requirements The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless modified 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. The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, it agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Tentative Tract Map No. 27827, 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. If subdivision phasing i~ proposed, a phasing plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director. R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93.pC 10/28/93 klb 18 5. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2. 6. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Development Agreement No. 37 or any restatements or amendments thereto. 7. All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check approval and shall comply with the requirements of Riverside County Ordinance No. 655. 8. A Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director prior to recordation of the Final Map or issuance of Grading Permits which ever occurs first. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 9. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director. The plans shall include a note for dust control indicating: A. All active areas shall be watered at least twice a day. B. Non-toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied to all unpaved roads in grading and construction areas according to the manufacturer's specifications. C. Wheel washers shall be installed where vehicles exit unpaved areas into paved roads. D. All dirt hauling trucks shall be covered or they shall maintain at least two (2) feet of freeboard. 10. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinar. ce 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. 11. The applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 12. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director: A. A copy of the Final Map B. A copy of the Rough Grading Plans C. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes: R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93,PC 10/28/93 klb 19 (a) (b) A copy (a) This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations, Ordinance No. 655. This project is within a 1 O0 year flood hazard zone. of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. The CC&R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, exterior of all buildings and all landscaped and open areas including parkways. No basketball courts shall be allowed in the alleys. No parking shall be allowed on the shared access driveways. All units shall have operating garage door openers at all times. E. The project shall be consistent with the requirements of the French Valley Airport when the plan is adopted. F. The applicant shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 13. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director: A. Construction landscape plans consistent with the following: (a) City Standards, (b) The approved Typical Conceptual Landscape Plans. (c) Automatic irrigation for all landscaped areas. (d) Complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from the view of the public from streets and adjacent property. (e) Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots prior to issuance of the first building permits within each of the phases of the Einal Map, (f) Change the California Sycamore in the Nicolas Road Conceptual Plans to London Plane Tree. B. Wall and fence plans consistent with the following: (a) All walls and fences shall be a minimum of six (6) feet measured from the highest grade or as otherwise specified below, R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93,PC 10/21i/93 klb 20 14. 15. (b) A six foot six inch (6' 6") high decorative block wall or a combination decorative block wall and berming (measured from the finished pad elevation) shall be constructed on the rear property lines for lots 1 through 22, 103, 104 and 162, and on the side property lines for lots 1, 22, 103 and 162. These walls shall have a surface density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or cracks (Refer to Preliminary Noise Analysis prepared by Mestre Greve Associates, August 11, 1993). (c) Decorative block shall be required for the side yards for corner lots and along the western property line (lots 103 through 121 ). (d) Wrought iron, decorative block or wrought iron combination shall be required to take advantage of views for rear yards along the northerly property line (lots 121 through 154) and lots 155 through 162 and the side yard for lot 154. (e) Wood fencing shall be used for all side and rear yard fencing when not restricted by 2, 3 and 4 above. (f) The wall along Nicolas Road shall be constructed entirely, including the footings, within the individual lots and not within the public right-of- way. Precise grading plans including all structural setback measurements consistent with the approved rough grading plans and the approved plotrings. Elevations, floor plans and colors and materials consistent with the approved plans. E. The Model Home Complex Plot Plan (if applicable) which includes the following: (a) Site Plan with off-street parking (b) Construction Landscape Plans (c) Fencing Plans (d) Building Elevations A Noise Analysis shall be submitted for review and approval for the interior spaces within the project. The maximum interior noise level shall be 45 CNEL. 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 Director approval. The applicant shall demonstrate by a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. R:\S%STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC I0/28/93 Idb 21 Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits 16. If deemed necessary by the Planning Director, the applicant shall provide additional landscaping to effectively screen various components of the project. 17. Front yard and slope landscaping and all fencing within individual lots shall be completed for insoection. 18. All the Conditions of Approval shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Directors of Planning, Public Works, Community Services and Building and Safety. 19. Zero clearance garage doors with automatic garage door openers shall be provided for all units. 20. The wall and the associated landscaping along Nicolas Road shall be installed prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit within each of the phases of the Final Map that front Nicolas Road. 21. The monument signs for the project shall be maintained by the applicant and shall be removed, if within right-of-way, prior to issuance of the last final release of the project. 22. The applicant shall demonstrate by a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program have been satisfied for this stage of the development. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 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. General Requirements 23. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the Tentative Tract Map all existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. 24. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise (including all on-site flat work and improvements) grading shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained road right- of-way. 25. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93.PC 10128/93 klb 22 26. 27. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. 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 28. A copy of the grading and improvement plans, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations shall be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for approval prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of any permit. A permit from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is required for work within their Right-of-Way. 29. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, City Standards, and as additionally required in these Conditions of Approval. 30. All lot drainage shall be directed to the driveway and/or the alley by side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot. 31. 32. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property, The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed with the Regional Water Quality Control Board or the project is shown to be exempt from that agency. 33. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Regional Water Quality Control Board, S,an Diego Region; Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District; Planning Department; Department of Public Works; Riverside County Health Department; Community Services District (TCSD); General Telephone; Southern California Edison Company; and Southern California Gas Company. 34. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Soils Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 23 35. An Erosion Control Plan in accordance with City Standards, shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 36° The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. 37. 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 Department of Public Works. 38. 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 Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District prior to issuance of any permit. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 39. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or easements for any off- site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works at no cost to any agency. 40. The Developer shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the Department of Public Works permits the use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Section XI of Ordinance No. 460 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the Developer shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Department of Public Works. 41. The Developer 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. 42. A Flood Plain Development Permit and Drainage Study shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The drainage study shall include, but not be limited to, the following criteria: Drainage and flood protection facilities which will protect all structures by diverting site runoff to streets or approved storm drain facilities as directed by the Department of Public Works. Adequate provision shall be made for the acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. Cm The impact to the site from any flood zone as shown on the FEMA flood hazard map and any necessary mitigation to protect the site. D. Identify and mitigate impacts of grading to any adjacent floodway. R:\S\STAFFFIPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 24 The location of existing and post development lO0-year floodplain and floodway shall be shown on the improvement plan, 43. The site is in an area identified on the Flood Hazard Maps as Flood Zone "A" and is subject to flooding of undetermined depths. Prior to the approval of any plans, this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 91-12 of the City of Temecula, and with the rules and regulations of FEMA for development within Flood Zone "A", which may include obtaining a letter of map revision from FEMA. 44. The following storm drain facilities shall be provided along with the facilities as shown on the Tentative Map. The requirement for the underground facilities is to mitigate the surface runoff onto Nicolas Road, the potential maintenance of the nuisance runoff created by this development, and negate the provision of additional drainage facilities downstream since Assessment District 161 did not accommodate this development's proposed runoff in sizing the downstream drainage facilities. Catch basins shall be installed at the intersection of "G" Street and Nicholas Road to eliminate the cross gutter. The site shall be designed to minimize the contributory onsite runoff to Nicolas Road at "A" Street by providing additional catch basins and storm drain pipes or by redesigning the grades near the intersection of Nicolas Road and "A" Street. Prior to the Issuance of Encroachment Permits 45. All conditions of the grading permit and encroachment permit shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. 46. Improvement plans, including but not limited to, streets, parkway trees, street lights, driveways, drive aisles, parking lot lighting, drainage facilities and paving shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer on 24" x 36" mylar sheets and approved by the Department of Public Works. Final plans (and profiles on streets) shall show the location of existing utility facilities and easements as directed by the Department of Public Works. 47. The following criteria shall be observed in the design of the improvement ~lans to be submitted to the Department of Public Works: Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207,207A, and 208. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with Ordinance No. 461 and shall be shown on the improvement plans as directed by the Department of Public Works. R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 kJb 25 D. 5 foot wide concrete sidewalks shall be constructed per City Standard Nos. 400 and 401 specifications. E. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. F. Minimum centerline radii shall be in accordance with City Standard No. 113 or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. G. All reverse curves shall include a 100-foot minimum tangent section or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. H. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. I. All units shall be provided with zero clearance garage doors. J. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. K, All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed through under-sidewalk drains. 48. All driveways shall be located a minimum of 2 foot from the side property line unless otherwise provided for with a joint use easement for ingress/egress. 49, In order for the City to agree to accept and maintain the proposed alleys, they shall be subject to the following conditions: · The alleys shall be concrete paved. · No utilities shall be installed within the alleys. · Parking shall not be permitted along the alleys and they shall be signed accordingly. · Lights shall be installed on each garage and/or every house, · The Developer shall file an application with TCSD for inclusion of the alleys within Service Level 'R' to provide for the maintenance of the alleys. 50. 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 prorider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. 51. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground, R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 kJb 26 52. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and reviewed by the Department of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. 53. The stop bar at the southbound Warbler Circle approach shall be positioned five (5) feet from Nicolas Road curb line. 54. All required fees shall be paid. Prior to Recordation of Final Map 55. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. 56. The Developer shall construct or post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the construction of the following public/private improvements within 18 months in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. Street improvements, which may include, but are not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, traffic signals and other traffic control devices as appropriate. B. Storm drain facilities. C. Landscaping (slopes and parkways). D. Erosion control and slope protection. E. Sewer and domestic water systems. F. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. 57. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board; Rancho California Water District; Eastern Municipal Water District; Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District; City of Temecula Fire Bureau; Planning Department; Department of Public Works; Riverside County Health Department; Cable TV Franchise; Community Services District; General Telephone; Southern California Edison Company; Southern California Gas Company; Department of Fish and Game; and Army Corps of Engineers. R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 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. The draft Circulation Element of the proposed General Plan calls for an 18 foot wide raised landscaped median along Nicolas Road per City Standard No. 100. Consequently, should Assessment District (AD) 161 not construct the median, the Developer shall be required to construct the median along the property frontage or pay the fair share cost of the improvements in lieu of construction of the improvements to provide for the raised landscaped median per City Standard No. 100. In the event that the Developer constructs the median, it shall accommodate a left turn pocket into Roripaugh Road. The median shall be continuous at "A" Street to restrict access to right turn in/out movement if the it is to remain at its currently designed location. The median shall also be designed to accommodate a 150 foot left turn pocket into Warbler Circle and "G" Entry Street and "D" Street and Nicolas Road should the Developer choose to relocate the access to that location, If the median is not constructed, the Developer shall accommodate the above by striping accordingly. Sufficient right-of-way along "G" Entry Street shall be dedicated for public use to provide for a 60 foot full width right-of-way and shall be improved with concrete curb and gutter located 18 feet on both sides of the centerline and 36 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or post bonds for the street improvements, as determined by the Department of Public Works. Sufficient right-of-way along "A" , "B", "C", and the remainder of "G" Street shall be dedicated for public use to provide for a 50 foot full width right-of-way including the standard knuckle, and shall be improved with concrete curb and gutter located 18 feet on both sides of the centerline and 36 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or post bonds for the street improvements, as determined by the Department of Public Works. Sufficient right-of-way along "D" , "E" , and "F" Streets shall be dedicated for public use to provide for a 46 foot full width right-of-way and shall be improved with concrete curb and gutter located 16 feet on both sides of the centerline and 32 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or post bonds for the street improvements, as determined by the Department of Public Works. Sufficient right-of-way along the Alleys shall be dedicated for public use to provide for a 20 foot full width right-of-way and the entire width shall be improved with concrete pavement, or post bonds for the alley improvements, as determined by the Department of Public Works. The Developer shall file an application with TCSD for inclusion of the alleys within Service Level 'R' to provide for the maintenance of the alleys. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805, R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 28 66. 67, 68. 69, 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submittal of the final map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site 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. The volume of traffic projected at the project access intersections would not be high enough to meet peak hour signal warrants. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Nicolas Road and so noted on the Final Map as approved by the Department of Public Works. A Signing and Striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for Nicholas Road and shall be included in the street improvement plans. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact the Department of Public Works for the design requirements. Bus bays and shelters shall be provided at locations as determined by Riverside Transit Agency and the Department of Public Works. The joint use driveway easements shall be shown on the Final Map. No building permits for units with joint use shall be issued until the Final Map has been recorded. 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 for review and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities located outside of road right-of*way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating "drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions." 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 following information shall be on the ECS: A. The delineation of the area within the 100-year floodplain. B. Special Study Zones. R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 29 75. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 76. 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. 77, The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements. 78, 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 submitted to the following Engineering 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 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 private areas. 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. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 79. A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 30 80. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. 81. The Developer shall pay the Public Facilities and Services Mitigation Fee as per the amended Development Agreement as reviewed and approved by the City. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 82. All improvements shall be completed and in place per the approved plans, including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, drainage facilities, parkway trees and street lights on all interior public streets. 83. All signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan. 84. The traffic signal at Nicolas Road and Winchester Road shall be installed and operational per the special provisions and the approved traffic signal plan. 85. The Developer shall provide "stop" controls at the intersection of local streets with arterial streets as directed by the Department of Public Works. 86. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersection and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance as directed by the Department of Public Works. 87. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied only as directed by the Department of Public Works 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. 88. In the event that the required improvements on Nicolas Road along the property frontage of this development are not completed by AD 161, the Developer shall construct the required half width improvements per City Standard No. 100 or as otherwise determined by the Department of Public Works. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT General Requirements: 89. A Class II Bicycle Lane on Nicolas Road shall be designed and constructed in conformity with the City's Park and Recreation Master Plan and in concurrence with the completion of the street improvements. 90. Construction of the public park site, perimeter landscaping and medians shall commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the developer and the City Maintenance Superintendent, Failure to comply with the TCSD review and inspection process may preclude acceptance of these areas into the TCSD maintenance program. R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93,PC 10/28/93 klb 31 91, The developer, or the developer's successors or assignees, shall maintain the park site, parkway landscaping and medians until such time as thoseresponsibilities are accepted by the TCSD. 92. All parks shall be improved and dedicated to the City free and clear of any liens, assessment fees, or easements that would preclude the City from utilizing the property for public park purposes. A policy of title insurance and soils assessment report shall also be provided with the dedication of the property. 93. All perimeter walls, interior slopes and open space shall be maintained by the individual property owners. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map: 94. Prior to recordation of the first phase, the developer or his assignee shall enter into an agreement and post security to improve lot number 163, a three (3) acre site, as a public park facility, pursuant to City Ordinance No. 460.93 (Quimby). Lot No 163 shall be identified as a public park site and offered for dedication to the City on the final map. 95. Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall post security and enter into an agreement to improve the parkway landscaping and landscaped medians within Nicolas Road right-of-way in conformance with the City of Temecula Landscape Development Plan Guidelines and Specifications, All proposed slopes, landscaping and medians intended for dedication to the TCSD shall be identified on the final map as a proposed TCSD maintenance area. 96. Landscape construction drawings, consistent with the approved conceptual landscape plans, for the public park site, parkway landscaping, and medians shall be reviewed and approved by TCSD staff prior to recordation of the final map. Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy: 97. Actual development and dedication of the park to the City shall be completed prior to issuance of the 34th certificate of occupancy, or within eighteen months of recordation of the first phase of the final map, whichever comes first. 98. Prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy, the developer or his assignee shall submit, in a format as directed by TCSD staff, the most current list of Assessor's Parcel Numbers assigned to the final project. OTHER AGENCIES 99. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittal dated July 27, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 32 100. The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated September 20, 1993, 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 No. 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits. 101. The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the County of Riverside Fire Department's letter dated August 3, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 102. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Eastern Municipal Water District transmittal dated July 29, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 103. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho California Water District transmittal dated October 14, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R:\S%STAFFRPT%144PA93.PC 10/29/93 klb 33 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE · HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEAI,TH July, 27, 1993 RECEIVED CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT 43174 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE TEMECULA, CA 92590 ATTN: Saied Naaseh: AUG 0 1993 Ans'd... RE: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 27827: BEING A SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF LOTS 182 AND 183 OF THE TEMECULA LAND AND WATER COMPANY, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 8, PAGE 359 OF MAPS, SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECORDS, TOGETHER WITH THOSE PORTIONS OF HAMILTON AVENUE, BANANA STREET, AND APRICOT STREET, TOGETHER WITH A PORTION OF THE RANCHO TEMECULA AS SHOWN PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 1, PAGE 37 OF PATENTS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, ALL BEING IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. (163 LOTS) Dear Gentlemen: The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 and recommends: A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as a proved by the water cornpan and the Health Department. Permanent prints of ~et plans of the water system ~s~all be submitted in triplicate, with a minifaum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet, along with the original drawing to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the rotereal pipe diameter, locatmn of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and 'oint specifications, and the size of the main at the junction of the new system to h~e existing system. The lans shall compl in all res ects with Div. 5, Part 1, Cha ter 7 of the California Fre~alth and Safety ~ode, Cae'~orma Administrative Code, ~tle 11, Chapter 16, 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 Tract Map No. 27827 is in accordance with the water system expansmn plans of the Rancho Cahfomia Water District and that the water services, storage, and distribution system will be adequate to provide water service to such Tract Map". This c~rti~cation does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to such Tract Map at an specific quantities, flows or pressures for fire roteorion or any other purpose. 7H~s certification shall be si ed by ares onsib{~ official of the water company. The plans must be submitte~nt~ the City oFTemecula's Office to review at least two weeks prior to the request for the recordation of the final map. providing satisfactory financial arrangements are com leted with the subdivider. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be ma~g prior to the recordarion of John M. Fanning, Director 4065 County Circle Drive · Riverside, CA 92503 · Phone (909) 358-5316 · FAX (909) 358-5017 (Mailing Address - P.O. Box 7600 · Riverside, CA 92513-7600) p.,.,.~ City of Temecula Planning Dept. Page 2 Arm: Saied Naaseh July 27, 1993 the final map. This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed according to lans and s ecifications as approved by the District, the Ci of system shall be submitted in tri licate, along with ~eo~riginal ~wing, to the City of Temecula. The prints shall ~ow the internal p. ipe diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint s eci~cations and the size of the sewers at the junction of the new system to ~t~ existin system. A sin e plat indica~n location of sewer lines and waterlines shall ~e a portion of ~ee sewage plans an~profiles. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and the sewer district with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the sewer system in Tract Map No. 27827 is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that the waste disposal s stem is adequate at this time to treat the antici ated wastes from the pro osed ~arcet Map". The plans must be submitted to ~e City of Temecula's OFt~c~e to review at least two weeks prior to the re~luest for the recordation of the final map. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be completely finalized prior to recordation of the final map. Sincerely(, Sam Martinez, Environmental Health Specialist IV SM:dr (909) 275-8980 KENNETH L B)WARDS RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT I ~d;es and Gentlemen: Re: 'f~"~ CI'A aS- t45) 1he District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in ino~porsted cities. The District also does not plan check city land use cases, or provide State Division of Read Estate letters or oh'at flood hazard reports for such cases, Dis~'iof c~nments/recommer~stjons for such cases me normally limited to hems of specific interest to the District including District Master DrNnage Ran facilities, other regional ~o~x:l Corltrd arid drainage facilities which could be considered a logical com;xx~nt or extension of a master plan system, and District Area Drainage Ran fees (developmere mitigation fees). In addition, information of a gerard natu~ is Ixovided. The DisTrict has not reviewed the proposed project in detail and the following checked comments do not in any way corL. stitute or irnply Distdct 8;~xoval or endorsement of the praposed project with respe~ to flood hazard, ptd34ic health and safety or any ofher such issue; E"'l This project would not be impeded by Distdct MasTer Drainage Ran radiities nor we other facilities of regional intm'est proposed. ~is project involves District MasTer Ran facilities. The District will ascept owflership of such facilities on written request of The City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and DisTricT plan check and inspectio~ will be required for District anceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required. ownership of such facilities on writlen request of the C~it,~~. Fadlities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan c~k' and inspection Will be required for District acceptance. Ran Check, inspection and eqministrmive fees Will be required. l';~his ptojed is located v/thin the limits of the District's~!,Vl~la.~k (dwk'takGlL'lki~h~J9,' ;:~' Area Drainage Ran for which drainage fees have been adopted; applicable fees sh3uld be paid to the Ro~dCJ~trol District or City prior to final approval of the project, or in the case of a parcel map or subdivision prior to recordation of the final map. Fees to be paid should be st ~e rate in effect at the time of recordstion, or if deferred, st the time of issuance of the actual permif, GENERAl INFORMATION This project may require a Nstionai Pdlutant Discharge Bimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Wstor Resources Control Board. Clearance for grading, re<~'dstion, or other final approval, should not be given Until the City has betermmed that the project has be~n granted a permit or is shown to be exempt. If this prqect invofves a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mapped flood plain, then the City should require h applicant to provtbe all studies, calculations, plans and other information required to meet FEMA requirm, and ~hould further require that the applicant obtmn a Conditional Ledor of Map Revision (CLOMR) prior to grading, reo3ffiation or other final approval of the project, and a Letlor of Map Revision (LOMR) prior to occupancy. If a naturaJ waterceurso or mapped flood plain is impacled by this project the City should require the applicant to obtain a Section 1601/1603 Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Game and a Clean Water Act S~clion 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Enginegrs, or wrmen corresm from these agerides indicating the project is exempt from these requirements. A C~ean Water Act Sectloft 404 Water Quality Certification may be required from the local California Regional Water Quality Corerrd Board prior to issuance of the Corps 404 permit. Very truly yours, DUSTYWIIIIAMS Senior Civil Engineer pat.: C-~JMI'tARRIS RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 210 WEST SAN 3ACRq'rO AVENUE * PER. R/S, CALIFORNIA 92570 * (909) 657-3183 TO: ATTEN: RE: Temecula Planning Department Saied Naaseh PA93-0144 Tentative Tract 27827 August 3, 1993 With resoect to the conditions of aOproval for the above refer- enced land ~ivislon. the Fire Department recommends 'the following · fire 0refection measures be provided in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection standards: t. ,'-Z, ci'~edule A fire protection. An a0oreved standard fire hy- c~r"aL-i_~-. (.:~'~x4"x,:] l.,'2" i located one a't ,:eacK stree~ in'~.ersection vrc-,nf a~.:= mcr'e than 165 feet from a h,/drant. Mil3imum fire 'f: low sha.]l :,,:~ iCx:x:> GPM for 2 ;-~ours duration at 20 PSI. '_':. >_ion: dot reflector=_ _::'l-,ali be mounted in or'.~vate streets and dT."lve~a',"_: to indicate ]ocatlOFi O": fire hydrants. They shall be ,-no~r",t_=c~ :n the middle of the street cJirectl,/ in line wlth ripe 4. Thb rrec]uir-ed water s/stem, including fire hydrants, shall be zns~allec'. and ~ccepted d~/ tire approoria[e ~ater agency prior to ~n'. c:or, bustible building materiz. 1 be:l. ng Olaced on an individual ', ~3 t. ~ RIVERSIDE OFFICE 3760 12lh Sireel. Riverside. CA 92501 (909) 275-4777 ,, FAX i909) 369-7451 FIRE PREVENTION DIVISION PLANNING SECTION ~1 INDIO OFFICE 79-733 Country Club Drive, Suite F, Indio, CA 92201 (6t9) 863-8886 · FAX (619) R63-7072 5. Prior to the recordation of 'the f~nal mao, 'the develsoer sP, all demos~t, with the City of Temecula, a cash ~um of Set tot/unit, as mitigation for fire protection impacts. Should the ~evelo0er choose to defer the time of payment, he/she may enter into a written agreement with the County deferring said maymerit to the time of issuance of 'the first bull ruing permit. All muestions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be re- ferred to the Rlanning and Engineering S~e. ff. RAYMO,~4D H. REGIS Chief Fire Deoartment FIlanner L. aL~ra Cabra l , Fire Sa~etv Soec.'~alist. Eftstern ] unicipat Water District luly 29, 1993 RECEIVED Saied Naaseh, Case Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Ans'd ............ SUBJECT: Tract 27827 (PA 93-0144) Dear Mr. Naaseh:: We have reviewed the materials transmitted by your office which describe the subject project. Our comments are outlined below: General It is our understanding the subject project is a proposal to subdivide 22.5 acres located between Nicolas Rd. and the Santa Genrudis Creek at the northwest comer of the intersection of Nicolas and North General Kearney Rds., into 163 single family residential lots with alleys and a 3.0 acre park site. The subject project is located within the District's sanitary sewer service area. However, it must be understood the available service capabilities of the District' s systems are continually changing due to the occurrence of development within the District and programs of systems improvement. As such, the provision of service will be based on the detailed plan of service requirements, the timing of the subject project, the status of the District's permit to operate, and the service agreement between the District and the developer of the subject project. The developer must arrange for the preparation of a detailed plan of service. The detailed plan of service will indicate the location(s) and size(s) of system improvements to be made by the developer (or others), and which are considered necessary in order to provide adequate levels of service. To arrange for the preparation of a plan of service, the developer should submit information describing the subject project to the District's Customer Service Department, (909) 925-7676, extension 409, as follows: Mail To: Post Office Box 8300 · SanJacinto, California 92581-8300 · Telephone (909) 925-7676 · Fax (909) 929-0257 Main Office: 2045 S. San Jacinto Avenue, San Jacinto · Customer Service/Engineering Annex: 440 E. Oakland Avenue, Hemet, CA Saied Naasch City of Tcmecula Tract 27827 July 29, 1993 Page 2 Written request for a "plan of service". Minimum $400.00 deposit (larger deposits may be required for extensive development projects or projects located in "difficult to serve" geographic areas). Plans/maps describing the exact location and nature of the subject project. Especially helpful materials include grading plans and phasing plans. Sanltarv Sewer The subject project is considered tributary to the District's Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility (TVRxNRF). The nearest existing TVRWRF system sanitary sewer facilities to the subject project are as follows: 15-inch diameter gravity-flow sewer aligned along Nicolas Rd. between Roripaugh and North General Kearney Rds. Other Issues The District requires that onsite sewers be located within the proposed public roadways and not alleyways. Should you have any questions regarding these comments, please feel free to contact this office at (909) 925-7676, extension 468. Very truly yours, EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT ~avid G. Crosley "'~ 7 Senior Engineer-Customer Service Department DGC/clz AB 93-835 (wp-mwk-TR27827 .clz) ~Thursday October l&, 1993 2:101:m -- From :71~,6949175' -- Page 2~ ~ BY:~ ;10-14-93; 13:02; ~ WA~ ~77;~ 2/3 Octo~rl4,1~3 Mr. Saied ~ City of Tcmccula Plmmning Deparuncm 43174 Business Park Ddv~ Tem~nda, CA 92590-3606 $IUIIECT: Trod No. 27827 Dear IVk, N-'~h: Pleam~ be advised llult lime nbove=fder~,~t property is Io~t~d within time bouts!rifles of the R~ncho California Wnh-~ Districl (RCll~/Distti~). W~ ~,'icc, t!~:cfom, world be available upon complctiOu of financial a,:~n,_,uncnts (including the construetiara of all in-tract and off ,-sile facilities) between RCWD and the Foparty owner. The existing RCWD water storage and di~bulion systcm may not bc adeq,~W m provide domestic waler and fuc protection servlccs to the Fopevty ~clbrenced above WiBhln Assessment Distri~ N., 161 (AD-161). TI~ following informellen is intended 1o cxplnin the District' s position in providing water scTvln~ to this The future or w-,nter service within A1)-161 is dcpenck-nt upon the Ixoperty owners and the Counly of Rivereside approving topplemental ~n-'mcing of wntcf facilities to service the properties within RCWD boundarlcs. The District lm~ _rcee__ivud several requests from developeta in this ann for RCWD to review the ct.-i~u[ water service situation to dct~i. ine if the existing system can slipport additional development prior to the conslruction of ~ddi~on31 water supply facilities. Ba.scd upon an additional hydraulic nnnlysis performed by TransPacific Engineering Corporalion and actual field fire flow tests, Ihe existing syatcm c~n support an .~l_di~onal maximum daily flow of 400 gptm This flow cquatc~ Io eithcr 380 re,dual hou.~ing units ot 115 acrc~ of ~onimen:Pal dcvclopmenl or a cornbie~on of both. There ate some limhafions to the ~ that the ex~ng sysiem c~n sa've~ r~.,~denfial d~vclopment ]s I ]mhed to areas under ~ JS0-foot eleva~on and ~mmerc~ai dcvclopment ~.~ Hmh~i to propedie~ the Winchc~er Rm~! corridor at elevations under 1.125 feet. Under thcs~ conditions, the Dislrict can meet the m~idcntial da~]y demands including a fire flow of ! ,000 ~ym and the commen:~al daily demands including a mnyimum fir~ flow of 2,500 gpm. RCWD will rcqui~ that nil residential mctt~ ialerals bc 1 '~ im'~es in diameter nnd thnt al[I rcsidcnc~ insh[l a pret~rc teg,,lator for fvturc conveaiou to ~ 1380 Prc~urc Zone. .J iThursday October 1~,, 199:5 2:lOFm -- From #71/,6949175~ -- Page 3~ ~3N'r ~Y:T!~EULA ;10-14-9B; IB:OB; ~ WA~- S0~77;~ B/3 Cily of Temecula Plsnning Department October 14, 1993 Page Two '% The District will acoept mctef applications on a ~nt-comdfi.,st-scrved basis. Applicants must meet the flow and elevation conditions ss~d above. Meter application fees must be paid in full at th~ entrant talc at the time of application. If ft~s should increas~ prior to inst~dl~ion of the waler meters, the .' dovetoper will have 90 days to have ~c metins installed or they will be liablc to pay the increase in application fees. For those ptopeRies thai request service 'after the available enpacity i.~ d~dicaaxi or if ihcy do not mccl the elevation conditions slated above, the cott~'uclion of the implementing fncilifies identified for AD- 161 will be required prior to installation of the meteted service, Thos~ implemcnfing facilifics nre listed below: I. A 54-inch water main, parslid to Winchester Road, fxom l-IS to Margarita Road; A 1380 Pressre= Zone pump slation near the intersection of Margariln Road and Winchester Road; A water mMn in Margnrita Road that is 30 incht~ in diannctcr from the pump station to Rustic Glen Drive, 30 inches to Dat~ slreet, and 30 inches along Dale Strut Io Winchester Road; A 24-inch watcrline I'mm thc inters~-tion of Margarila Road and Winchester Road to North General Kearny Road; 5. A connection to the 1380 Pressure Zon~ at North General Kearny Road and Nicolas Road. As .elated above, it may be necessary livr the developer to upgradc the cxi.~nE waler system to provide sufficient pressure for domestic and fire protection purposes. It may also be ncce.,,-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-~7 for ~ developer tu install off-site facilities to ntcct the derasnds of this property. However, this does not constitute a gu~antee that RCWD will .supply water tu .said parcel at any slx:cific quantity, flow, or pressure ~cbr fire protection or for any other purposc. Waler availabilily wuuld be contingent upon tht: property owner sibming an Agency Agreement which re;signs water m:magement tighLs, if any, to RCWD. you should have any questions, please contact us. Sincerely, RANClIO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E. Development Engineering Managcr ~:S~ -'eb101FZG7 cc: S~nga Dohcrty, Engineering Technician ATTACHMENT NO. 3 INITIAL STUDY R:\S\STAFFRPT~1~,-4PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 34 City of Temecula Planning Department Initial Environmental Study I. BACKGROUND INFORMA~ON 1. Name of Project: 2. Case Numbers: 3. Location of Project: 4. Description of Project: 5. Date of Environmental Assessment: 6. Name of Proponent: 7. Address and Phone Number of Proponem: II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Roripaugh Estates Planning Application No. PA93-0144 and PA93-0145 Located on the North-west comer of Nicolas Road and North General Kearny Road A Request for Approval of Amendment No. 2 to Specific Plan No. 164 to Change the Zoning for Planning Areas 7 ( 22.5 Acres) and 8 ( 10.1 Acres) from Very High Density Residential (20 Dwelling Units Per Acre) to High Density Residential (12 Dwelling Units Per Acre), and Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 27827, a 163 lot subdivision within Planning Area No. 7. September 22, 1993 Roripaugh Ranch Inc. P.O. Box 2 Temecula, CA 92590 (Explanations to all the answers are provided in Section III) 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction, or over covering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? f. Changes in siltation, deposition or erosion? Yes Maybe No __ __ ,X X X __ __ .X X X R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 35 g. The modification of any wash, channel, creek, river or lake? h. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, liquefaction, Found failure, or similar hazards? i. Any development within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone? Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, temperature, or moisture or any change in climate, whether locally or regionally? Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff?. c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions, withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? h. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? Yes Maybe N~o X X x R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 36 Yes Maybe N__o 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? __ __ X._X_ b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species of plants? __ __ ~ c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegetation, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? _ X d. Reduction in the acreage of any agricultural crop? __ __ X__ 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (animals includes all land animals, birds, reptiles, fish, amphibians, shellfish, benthie organism, and/or insects)? _ __ __X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species of animals? __ __ X c. The introduction of new wildlife species into an area? __ __ X d. A barrier to the migration or movement of animals? __ __ X e. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? __ __ X 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? X _ b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? .... X c. Exposure of people to severe vibrations? __ __ X 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce or result in light or glare? _ X 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in: a. Alteration of the present land use of an area? X __ b. Alteration to the future planned land use of an area as described in a community or general plan? __ __ X R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 kJb ~7 Yes Maybe N..~o 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. An increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X __ __ b. The depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? X __ __ 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal result in: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of any hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset conditions (hazardous substances includes, but is not limited to, pesticides, chemicals, oil or radiation)? __ __ X b. The use, storage, transport or disposal of any hazardous or toxic materials (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? __ __ X c. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? __ __ X 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? _ X 12. Homing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? _ __ X 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? X b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? _ __ X c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems, including public transportation? __ __ X d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? __ __ X e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? __ __ X f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X __ 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? __ __ X R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 38 b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services: Y~ 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial mounts of fuel or energy? __ b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or 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 any of the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? __ b. Communications systems? __ c. Water systems? __ d. Sanitary sewer systems or septic tanks? _ e. Storm water drainage systems? __ f. Solid waste disposal systems? __ g. Will the proposal result in a disjointed or inefficient pattern of utility delivery system improvements for any of the above? __ 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? __ b. The exposure of people to potential health hazards, including the exposure of sensitive receptors (such as hospitals and schools) to toxic pollutant emissions? __ 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in: a. The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? __ b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? __ Maybe N__q X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R:%S\STAFFRPTV44PA93.pC 10/28/93 klb 39 19. 20. c. Detrimental visual impacts on the surrounding area? Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impa~t upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational resources or opportunities? Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. The alteration or destruction of any paleontologic, prehistoric, archaeological or historic site? b. Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? c. Any potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d. Restrictions to existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? Yes Maybe N__o X X X X R:\S\STAFFRPT\I44PA93.PC 10/28/9a klb 40 IH. DISCUSSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS l~rth 1 .a.d. No. The project will not result in unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures, destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features since the site has already been graded and no unique features exist on site. No impacts are anticipated. 1.b. Yes. The project will cause disruptions, displacements, compaction, or overcovering of soil, however, the impacts are considered insignificant since the site has already been graded and additional grading will be for foundation, street improvements and drainage. 1 .c.g. No. The project will not result in change in topography or Found surface relief features, or modification of any wash, channel, ereok, river or lake since the project site has already been graded. The Santa Gemdis Creek will be developed by Assessment District 161 prior to development of this site. The project will have no significant impacts. 1 .e.f. Yes. The project will result in an increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site and changes in siltation, deposition or erosion. These impacts are mainly short term as a result of construction. The City will require the use of appropriate best management practices to reduce and mitigate onsite erosion and offsite deposition. Long-term erosion and deposition from the project site is expected to decrease as a result of the project because of the required paving and landscaping when the site is ultimately developed. No significant impacts are anticipated. 1.h.i. No. The project will not result in exposure of people or property to geelogic hazards such as earthquakes, and development near an Alqnist-Priolo Special Study Zone, since the General Plan EIR does not identify the site in being in any of these areas. However, the site is within a liquefaction zone as identified in the General Plan EIR. The Geotechnlcal Investigation prepared by Geocon, Inc., Revised August 1993, identifies the site as having a low potential for liquefaction since the ground water is approximately 47 feet below the existing ground level and the density of the alluvium left in place is generally dense and increases with depth. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated, if the recommendations included in the Geotechnical report for grading operation are implemented. Yes. The construction of the site will ultimately result in the local deterioration of air quality. It will ultimately result in some short-term construction related increases in air emissions and particulate matter when the site is developed; however, these impacts are not considered significant, since dust control measure mitigation measures such as watering the active areas at least twice daily, applying non-toxic soil stabilizers to all unpaved roads in grading and construction areas according to the manufacturer's specifications, installing wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved roads and covering all dirt hauling trucks or maintain at least two (2) feet of freeboard. In addition, upon development of the site, some long-term air pollutant emissions from increased automobile usage could occur; however, this impact is not anticipated to be significant since the number of dwelling units proposed in the project (162) does not exceed the 166 unit threshold set by AQMD. R:\S\STAFFRPTH44PA93.PC 10/28193 kJb 41 2.b.c. No. The project will not cream objectionable odors or cause alteration of air movement, temperature or moisture or any change in climate, whether locally or regionally because of the nature and location of the project. No significant impacts are anticipated. Waler 3.a.c.d. e.f.g.h. i. No. The project will not cause changes in currents or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or flesh waters, alterations to the course or flow of flood waters, change in the amount of surface water in any waterbody, discharge into surface waters or in any alterations of surface water quality, alteration of the direction or rate of flow of Found waters, change in the quantity of ground waters, reduction in the mount of water otherwise available for public water supplies, or exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding because of location and size of this project. The site has already bean graded and is adjacent to Santa Gertrudis Creek which will be developed by Assessment District 161. No significant impacts are anticipated. 3.b. Yes. This project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage panems, or the rate and mount of surface runoff since impervious surfaces will be created when it is ultimately developed. This impact is not anticipated to be significant since the storm water is directed to improved drainage facilities. Plant Life 4.a.b.d. No. This project will not change the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plant, reduce the numbers of any unique, rare, threatened or endangered species of plants or reduce the acreage of any agricultural crop since the site has already bean graded. No significant impacts are anticipated. Maybe. This project may introduce new species of plants; however, when the project is ultimately developed, as new landscaping will be introduced as a part of the new development. No significant impacts are anticipated. Animal Life No. The project will not cause a change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals, since the site has previously been completely graded and no discernible animal communities or species reside on the site. No significant impacts are anticipated. 5.b.c. d.c. No. The project will not cause a reduction in numbers of any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species of animals, introduction of new wildlife species into the area, a barrier to the migration or movement of animals or deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat since the site is already graded and is located in an urban area. Applicable Stephens' Kangaroo rat fees will be paid, since the project is within the fee area. No significant impacts are anticipated. R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 42 Noise Yes. The project will increase the existing noise levels. However, when the site is ultimately developed, short term increases will be associated with the grading and construction of the site which will be mitigated through restrictions in the hours of construction activities. Long term project impacts will be associated with the increased traffic on site and on Nicolas Road. The Noise study prepared for this project (Mestre Greve Associates, August 11, 1993) identifies significant exterior noise impacts (over 65 CNEL) that can be mitigated to insignificant levels (under 65 CNEL) by construction of a six foot six inches (6'6") high wall along the Nicholas Road, side yard of lots 22 and 1, and rear yards of lots 103, 104 and 162. Furthermore, the interior noise levels were analyzed and determined to be significant ( 45 CNEL and above). The second floor building surfaces in the project will be exposed to a maximum of 72 CNEL, and will therefore require at least 27 dB noise reduction in order to meet the interior noise level standard~ Detailed engineering calculations are needed for building attenuation requirements greater than 20 dB. Specific mitigation measures will be determined after the precise grading plans and the construction plans are prepared. The noise levels need to be reduced to 45 CNEL in order to reduce the impacts to insignificant levels. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the approval of this project due to the mitigation measures outlined in the Noise Study prepared by Mestre Greve Associates. 6.b.c. No. The project will not expose people to severe noise or vibrations because of the residential nature of the project. No significant impacts are anticipated. Li~,ht and Glare Maybe. The project may cause an increase in light and glare. However, since the project will be conditioned to comply with the requirements of Ordinance 655, California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory no significant impacts are anticipated. Land Use Yes. The project will cause an alteration of the present land use of the area since when the site is ultimately developed it will change it from vacant to residemial which is consistent with the General Plan designation of Medium Density Residemial. This change is not anticipated to have a significant impact since the area is mostly developed with residential uses and the future use of this site will be consistent with the zoning and General Plan land use designation of the area. 8.b. No. The proposed project will not cause alteration to the future planned land use of this area, when ultimately developed, as described in the draft General Plan which designates the site as Medium Density Residential. Since this project is consistent with the draft General Plan, no significant impacts are anticipated. Natural Resources 9.a.b. Yes. The project will result in an increase in the rate of use of any natural resources and depletion of any nonrenewable natural resources when the site is ultimately developed, since it will use aggregate materials for construction and petroleum for construction and use. However, since these materials are commercially available, no significant impacts are anticipated. R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 4,~ Risk of Upset lO.a.b. No. The project will not result in a risk of explosion and/or, the release of hazardous substances, when the site is ultimately developed, since hazardous substances will not be stored on site. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated. No. The project will not result in any interference with an emergency response plan when the site is ultimately developed, since proper circulation has been provided on site and adequate access has been provided to publicly maintained streets. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from this project. Pouulation 11. Maybe. This project is a residential development and due to its residential nature there may be alterations to the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of this area. However, no significant impacts are anticipated due to the small size of the project. Honsin~ 12. No. The project will not affect existing housing and create a demand for new housing when the site is ultimately developed because of the residential natore of the project with no potential for new employment. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated. Transportation/Circulation 13.a.f. Yes. The project will generate approximately peak 1609 daily trips, increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians when the site is ultimately developed. However, the number of trips generated are not significant since the project abuts Nicholas Road and Winchester Road which will be developed by the Assessment District 161. Furthermore, the number of access points is restricted for efficient flow of traffic. All projects increase traffic hazards; however, this project and previous projects have been conditioned to reduce these hazards to an insignificant level (i.e. restricted access, traffic lights). Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated. 13.b.c.d. No. The project will not create additional demand on parking, cause a substantial impact on existing transportation systems, alterations to present paRems of circulation or movement of people and/or goods and alteration to waterborne, rail or air traffic because of the residential nature and location of the site. No significant impacts are anticipated. Public Services 14.a.b.c. d.e.f. No. The project will not have a substantial impact on fire protection, police protection, schools, parks and other governmental services since these services are already available for the project area. No significant impacts are anticipated. R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 44 Enen!v 15.a.b. No. The project will not result in substantial use of fuel or energy when the site is ultimately developed. It will not result in substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy because of the small scale of the project and the commercial availability of these resources. No significant impacts are anticipated. Utilities 16.a.b.c. d.e.f.g. No. The project will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to any of the following: power or natural gas, communication systems, water systems, sanitary sewer systems, storm water drainage systems, solid waste disposal systems and will not result in a disjointed or inefficient pattern of utility delivery system improvements for any of the above because of the project location and its proximity to the utilities and the availability of these utilities. No significant impacts are anticipated. Human Health 17.a. No. The project will not create potential health hazards when the site is ultimately developed because of the residential nature of the project. No significant impacts are anticipated. 17.b. No. The project will not expose people to potential health hazards, including the exposure of sensitive receptors such as hospitals and schools to toxic pollutant emissions because of the nature and location of the project which is not in close proximity to these sensitive recepters. No significant impacts are anticipated. Aesthetics 18.a.b.c. No. The project will not result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view, or in a detrimental visual impact on the surrounding area, when the site is ultimately developed, because of the nature and location of the project and the fact that the elevations of the buildings will be consistent with the existing buildings in the area. No significant impacts are anticipated. Recreation 19. Yes. The project will result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational resources or opportunities since the project is proposing a public park. This impact is considered positive and no significant impacts are anticipated. R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 45 Cultural Resources 20.a.b.c. d. No. The project will not result in alteration or destruction of any paleontologic, prehistoric, archeological or historic site, adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object, any potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values, or restrictions to existing religions or sacred uses within the potential impact area since the project site has already been graded. No significant impacts are anticipated. R:\S\STAFFRPT~14-4PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 46 IV. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Does the project have the potential to either: degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish, wildlife or bird species, cause a fish, wildlife or bird population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant, bird or animal species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Yes Maybe N__q _ _ x__ Does the project have the potential to achieve short term, to the disadvantage of long term, environmenta] 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 cumulatively 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 substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X V. DEPARTMENT OF HSH AND GA1VIE "DE MINIMUS" IMPACT FINDINGS Does the project have the potential to cause any adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively, on fish and wildlife resources? Wildlife is defined as "all wild animals, birds, plants, fish, amphibians, and related ecological communities, including the habitat upon which the wildlife depends on for it's continued viability" (Section 711.2, Fish and Game Code). Yes X No R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93,PC 10/28/93 klb 47 ENVIRONMENTAL DETI;R_MINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I fred that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because the Mitigation Measures described on the attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval that have been added to the project will mitigate any potentially significant impacts to a level of insignificance, and 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. Prepared by: Signature Saied Naaseh. Associate Planner September 22. 1993 Name and Title Date R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb 48 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 TRAFFIC STUDY SUMMARY R:\S\STAFFRPT\I4-4.PA93,PC 10/28/93 klb 49 tl 1 ! 1 ! I I Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Associates I. INTRODUCTIONANDSUNIMARY A, Purpose of Report and Study Objectives The primary purpose of the City's focused traf-6c analysis is to respond to the following questions: · What is the percentage of impact to intersections within the study area by the proposed project? · If signals are required, what is the project's fair share contribution? Based on a more detailed discussion of traffic issues related to the Roripaugh Residential Property site, the following specific study objectives were identified: 1) A review of existing roadway and traffic conditions in the vicinity of the site; 2) Identification of the probable traffic generation associated with the current residential land use density (currently proposed density is lower than that the density currently approved for the Roripaugh Residential Property site; 3) A review of anticipated site-related traffic impacts (increases) at key nearby intersections based on existing background traffic volumes; 4) A review of the proposed site access street intersections on Nieolas Road; 5) A review of the site layout in terms of general on-site cixculation; and 6) A review of cumulative development lxaffic conditions without and with the project. B. Executive Summary This section presents an overview of the focused traffic analysis findings, conclusions, and recommendations for mitigating anticipated traffic impacts related to the Koripaugh Residential project. Roripaugh Residential Property I City of Temecula Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Associates Site Location and Studv Area - The site is located on the north side of Nicolas Road, generally between Ro~paugh Road and North General Keamy Road (see Figure 1). Access to a~d from the site would be served by Nicolas Road. Nieolns Road is currently a two-lane roadway between W'mehester Road and Roripaugh Road, Between Roripaugh Road and General Kearny Road, Nicolas Road has been improved to its ultimate half fight-of way cross- section on the south side (eastbound). The north side (westbound direction) portion of this segment only provides for one travel lane. The improvement of the north side of this segment would be accomplished as part of the Assessment District 161 (A.D. 161) Nicholas Road improvements. Winchester Road is currently widened to its designated six-lane Urban Arterial classification from 1-15 to Margarita Road. Northeast of Margarita Road, W'mchester Road provides only two travel lanes. Develonment Description - The project development proposal consists of I62 single-family residential dwelling units and a three-acre neighborhood park located on an approximately 22 acres. Principle Findines - Key findings of the focused traffic analysis are as follows: Existin~ peak-hour traffic volurr~es at the intersection of Winchester Road/Nicolas Road warrant sig~s!iTation of the intersection. The Nicolas Road widening/Santa Gemdis Creek Flood Control project is being landed by A.D.161 and should be underway within the next three months. This project would improve Nicolas Road to its ultimate Arterial cross-section from Winchester Road to Just east of General Kernroy Road. The cm-rently proposed project reflects a reduction in the already approved residential density for the site. This reduction in density would result in an approximate 38 to 40 percent reduction in the potential project trip generation. Projected 1994 traffic conditions with the project would provide peak-hour service levels of "C" or better at the unsignalized Nicolas Road intersections formed by Koripaugh Road, West Project Access, and Warbler Circle. Projected Cumulative Development scenario traffxc conditions with and without the project would be identical except for those movements specifically'related direct project access, Traffic movements projected to operated at service level "E" or worse under this scenario either do not involve project traffic movements or affect an insignificant number of project vehicles. Assuming si_.~alization of the Winchester Road/Nicolas Road intersection peak-hour Roripaugh Residential Property CiW of Temecula 1 t l I | Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Associates service levels would be "B" or be~ter for the 1994 With Project scenario and "D" or better for the Cumulative Development With Project scenario. · The volume of traffic projected at the project access intersections would not be high enough to meet peak hour signal warrants. Proposed access spacing along Nicolas Road would be less than the ideal spacing, but is not anticipated to significantly impact traffic operation on Nicolas Road. The geometry of Nicolas Road at Warbler Circle is anticipated to cause sight distance ~oblems unless additional ~ight obs~n~.l~o- ~etback requirements are imvosed. Proposed on-site circulation provisions are determined to be adequate for the project. Recommendations - WSA has developed the following recommendations based on the findings of the focused traffic analysis: Accept the proposed lower residential density to minimize project traffic generation. Provide approximately 150 feet of vehicle storage for eastbound left turn movements into the project site at the West Project Access. Provide approximately 100 feet of vehicle storage for eastbound left turn movements into the project site at the Warbler Circle access. P, oripnugh Residential Propen7 City of Temecula Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Associates Fn. AREA COND~IONS This section defines the study area, describes existing land use, addresses the transportation network and current traffic conditions. A. Study Area Defined Given the location of the site and the likely distribution 'of project traffic to and from the east and west on Nicholas Road, a study area was initially defined (through discussions with Public Works Department staff) to include the Nicholas Road corridor segment from Winchester Road to North General Kearny Road. Key tmffxc issues associated with the Roripaugh Residential Developmen~ are focused on the immediate access intersections formed by the proposed project access drives and the existing intersections along Nicholas Road within the study area, B. Study Area Land Use Land use within the study area is primarily residential. Existing residential development is comprised of Roripaugh Estates and Meadowview to the south and some partially developed residential subdivisions to the northeast along North General Keamy Road. Anticipated area development is provided in both grapkic and tabular form in Appendix B. The majority of the already approved development is residential in nature. However a number of the larger approved specific plan projects include non-residential uses, In the immediate vicinity Of the site, approved non-residential uses include the Roripaugh Village Commercial Center and the Rancho Temecula Towne Centre. C. Site Access The existing roadway system serving the project area is depicted in Figure 1. Access 'to and from the site would be provided by Nicholas Road. Winchester Road Ls currently a two lane roadway north of Margarita Road. The planned widening of Winchester Road to six lanes has been designed, and construction will commence once A.D. 161 has sold the next series of bonds. If the new bond series is sold within the next six months the planned widening could be completed in approximately two years. Nicholas Road has been widened from two lanes to three lanes between Roripaugh Road and North General Kearny Road; the eastbound Roripaugh Residential Propen3, 6 City of Temecula Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Associates direction now has two lanes. Between Roripaugh Road and Winchester Road there are two travel lanes on Nicholas Road. The widening of Nicholas Road to four lanes, within the study area, will be initiated by A.D. 161 in July of 1993 this year (as part of a Smata Oertrudis Creek flood control project) and would be completed by the first quarter of 1994. The future circulation system is currently defined by the Draft General Plan Circulation Element Map. A copy of the Draft Circulation Element Map is provided in Appendix C. The Draft General Ran Circulation Element identifies Nicholas Road as a four-lane .4.rterial. Other 'key area roadways identified in the Draft Circulation Element include: Winchester Road (six- lane Urban Arterial nortlaeast of Ynez Road); Margarita Road (four-lane Arterial); and Muraleta Hot Springs Road (six-lane Urban ,~a'terial in the vicimty of Winchester Roa~). D. Traffic Volumes and Conditions Morning and evening peak hour tra_ffzc counts are depicted in Figure 2. The counts at Roripaugh Road/Nicholas Road, Warbler CircleJNicholas Road, and North General Kearny RoacifNicholas Road were taken on May 20, 21, & 22, 1993 respe~vely. The U-affic counts at Winchester RoadfNicholas Road were provided by the City of Temecula Public Works Department and were conducted on February 2, 1993. The traffic counts are presented in Appendix D. The existing traffic controls within the study area are limited to stop signs, and are depicted in Figure I. The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) unsignalized analysis was used to evaluate the intersections of Winchester Road/Nicholas Road, Roripaugh Road/Nicholas Road, and Warbler Circle/Nicholas Road. The intersection of North General Kearny/Nicholas Road was not analyzed because project impacts at the intersection approaches do not exceed the 5 pement project impact threshold, (see Section IV A. Site Traffm). The results of the HCM analyses of existing conditions are prosemeal in Table 1. All movements at the intersections of Roripaugh Road/Nicholas Road and Warbler Circle/Nicholas Road were found to be operating at level of service (LOS) B or better. Two movements, both left-turning movements, at Winchester Road/Nicholas Road operate at a level of service worse than LOS C. The HCM A signal is programmed to be installed at the Winchester Road/Nicholas Road anal ed further to the time that Winchester Road is widened, however the intersection was determine whether a signal is warranted based on existing conditions. ysis was accomplished through the use of the planning level Peak Hour Volume Warrant wor'ksheet in the California Deoartment of Tr~nsoormtion Traffic Manual. The analysis found that a signal is warranted today based on existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes. The graph used Roripaugh Residential Property 7 City of Temecula i ] i 1 ! ! Table 1 Levels of Service For Critical Unsignalized Intersections Existing Traffic Conditions Scenario Roripaugh Residential Development Intersection Movement AM Peak Hour Street Street Nicholas Rd. & SB Left Winchester Rd. 86 A WB Left 120 E WB Right 172 A Nicholas Rd, & WE Left 4 A Roripaugh Rd. NB Left 31 A NB Right 14 A Nicholas Rd. & EB Left Warbler Circle WS Left NB Left NB Through NB Right SB Left SB Through SB Right 3 A 12 A 0 -- 7 A 2 A 0 --- 1 A PM Peak Hour Vehicles Approx. Affected LOS 125 D 81 F 89 A 18 A 21 B 14 A 0 -- 6 A 7 A 0 -- 4 A 1 A 0 -- 1 A 1 ! I 1 I ! ! Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Associates in the analysis is presented in Appendix E. Planned Signal Locations The only new signal which is curren~y pl3nncd at any of the major intersections in the immediate study area will be located at the intersection of Nicholas Road and W'mchester Road. The new signal is included in the City's Five Year Capital knprovement Program. It "should be noted that aporiion of the sj~o~l funding has already been transferred from Riverside County Signal Modification Fees to the City of Temecula, Roripnugh Residential Properil/ City of Temeculs I I ! ! Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Associates V. FOCUSED TRAFFIC ANALYSIS The focused traffic analyses performed for Koripaugh Residential Development concenWates on responding to the key traffic issues raised by City staff. Responding to these issues required the foBowing analysis to be performed: A review of anticipated site-related traffic impacts (increases) at key nearby intersections based on projected 1994 and Cumulative Development scenario backSIound trn~c volumes; · A review of the proposed site access s~eet intersections on Nicolns Road; · A review of the site layout in terms of general on-site circulation; and A review of cumulative development traffic conditions without and with the project The following sections present a discussion of the issues, their analysis and the analysis findings, A. Off-Site Traffic Impacts for 1994 Traffic Projections HCM UnsigDalized Intersection analyses were performed at the intersections with approaches experiencing traffic increases of five percent or more in existing traffic due to the project. The results of the HCM unsignalized intersection analysis are summarized In Table 5. The analysis results indicate that all movements at the intersections of Rofipaugh Road/Nicholas Road, West Project AccessdNicholas Road, and Warbler Circle/Nicholas Road would operate at Level of Service (LOS) C or better during the peak-hour periods both "without" and "with" the project Two movements, the southbound and westbound left-turn movements at Winchester Road/ Nicholas Road are, however, expected to operate at Levels of Service E and F, respectively during peak traffic periods. As mentioned earlier, signal warrant analysis performed for existing traffic conditions found that a signal is currently necessary at this intersection. When signali?~tion is assumed at the Winchester Road/Nicolas Road intersection along with only minor intersection improvements (the provision of a sopcrate fight-turn lane at the northbound approach), the intersection would operate at service level 'B" or better during peak traffic periods. The HCM worksheets for the 1994 scenario analysis are provided in Appendix F. Roripaugh R~iden~al Property City of Temecula Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Associates B. Off-Site Traffic Impacts for Cumulative Development Traffic Projections Table 6 presents the results of a general deU:rmination of project u~affxc impacts at area intersections based on the Cumulative Development scenario background traffic forecasts, The results of this comparison indicat~ that the project-relamd increment of traffic increase would become much less significant in the Curnulative Development scenario than was evaluated based on existing traffic volumes. HCM Unsig-na|ized Intersection analyses were performed on the Nicolas Road intersectiota at Roripaugh Road, West Project Access, and Warbler Circle. The Winchester Road/Nicolas Road intersection was not included in this analysis since it was already determined that a signal would be required at a much earlier date. Results of the HCM UnsignaliTed Intersection analysis are summarized in Table 7. Since the proposed project would not add any new traffic to the critical turning movements at the intersection of Roripaugh Road/Nicholas Road, the "without" an "with" project Levels of Service for the critical turrd~g movements would be identical. The northbound left-tram movement, which is projected to operate at LOS F (with or without the project) is associated with traffic generated by the existing Roripaugh Estates residential development. Traffic movements at the project access intersections at West Proiect Access/Nicholas Road and Warbler Circle/Nicholas Road should operate at LOS C or better except for the southbound left-turning movement at both intersection locations and th~ northbound left-turn movement at Warbler Circle, which would operate at LOS ~ rtnHng the _everang peak-hour. While this is generally considered an unacceptable level of service, it must be considered that only one project vehicle would be affected at each location daring the peak hour. A relatively small number (seven) vehicles at the northbound Warbler Circle approach would also experience delays while attempting to turn left. Note that other than the project related turn movements, Level of Service would be the same "with" or "without" the project. The HCM Uasi~,.alized Intersection analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix G. Cumulative development evening peak hour traffic conditions at the Winchester RoadfNicolas Road intersection were analyzed using HCM Signalized Intersection Operational methodology. Results of this analysis indicate that the intersection would operate at service level "D." C. Signal Warrant ABalysis Plarmmg level sig'aal warr&nt analyses were performed for the following intersections for the cumulative scenario: Roripaugh Road/Nicholas Road, West Project Access/Nicholas Road, and Warbler Circle/Nicholas Road. The results of the analysis indicate that the Cumulative Development plus project traffic conditions would not satisfy the signal warrant during the evening peak-hour at any of the intersections. As discussed earlier, a similar analysis was Roripaugh Residential Property 13 Cit~ of Temecula 31 :! i :i ]I l 1 Table 6 Determination of Project Impact at Area Intersections Cumulative Traffic Conditions Scenario Roripaugh Residential Development Intersection Winchester Rd ~ Nicholas Rd Roripaugh Rd @ Nicholas Rd West Project Access @ Nicholas Rd Warbler Circle @ Nicholas Rd N. General Kearny @ Nicholas Rd Approach Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Westbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound PM Peak Hour Cumulative nPcrr;jme:tnJ Background Volume I 723 53 2801 59 2489 39 1166 104 804 56 86 0 1072 104 804 26 0 34 1072 44 803 4 11 0 0 24 1057 1 669 2 141 0 374 2 Percent Added 7.3% 2.1% 1.6% 8,9% 7.0% 0.0% 9.7% 3.1% 4.1% 0.5% 0.0% 0.1% 0.3% 0.0% 0.5% | l ] ! 1 I ] 1 1 ] Table 7 Levels of Service For Critical Unsignalized Intersections Cumulative Traffic Conditions Scenario Roripaugh Residential Development Intersection Nicholas Rd. & Roripaugh Rd. Nicholas Rci. & West Project Access Nicholas Rd. & Warbler Circle Without Project Movement PM Peak Hour Major Vehicles Street Affected WB Left EB Left EB Left WB Left Minor Street 8 NB Left 65 NB Right 21 NA SB Left NA SB Right NA NA 6 NB Left 7 Through NA NB Right 4 SB Left NA Through NA SB Right NA With Project PM Peak Hour LOS C 8 C F 65 F A 21 A NA 61 } B NA 1 ~ E NA 33 I B NA 43 { B C 6 ( C S 7 I S NA 0 ( --- A 4 I A NA 1 ~ E NA 0 ~ -- NA 23 ~ B Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Associates performed for existing traffic conditions at the intersection of Winchester Road/Nicholas Road, and it was found that the peak-hour si~naI warrant was satisfied at that location. Planning level signal warrant worksheets are provided in Appendix G. D. Other Site Access Traffic Issues 1 1 1 This section discusses two additional site access issues wkich have been raised by City Staff. intersection SVacinlz Alon2 Nieolas Road- Some concern has been expressed by City staff regarding the spacing of access poin~ along Nicolas Road whlch would result from the proposed site access plan. Principal access points along Arterial classification roadways are ideally recommended at one quarter-mile (1,320-foot) spacing. Existing intersection spacing along Nicolas Koad is generally 1,200 feet or greater for the more si~rnificant residential collector street intersections such as Koripaugh Road, General Kearny Koad, and Calle Medusa. Existing intersection spacing for minor residential collectors such as Via Valencia, and Warbler Circle range from 630 feet to 950 feet. The proposed Koripau~h Residential Project access plan would utilize the existing Warbler Circle ~ntersection location and would introduce one new minor residential collector intersection (West Project Access) between Koripaugh Road The desire for greater access spacing (e.g. degree of access control) is directly related to several factors: The ultimate traffic volume expected to served by the facility. and the relative proximity of this volume to the roadway's capacity (volume to capacity ratio); 1 t The volume of traffic expected to be served by the int~secting street; Desired speed limit on the major street; The anticipated interruption of traffic flows on the major s~eet resulting from traffic control devices ultimately needed at the intersection or from conflicting traffic movements introduced by the presence of the intersecting minor street. ] 1 1 ] In the case of Nicolas Road, the volume to capacity. ratio at build-out of the City's General Plan is projected to be in the 0.5 m 0.6 range which represents Level of Service A. Traffic volumes projected to be introduced by the project at the proposed project access intersection locations are quite low and do not warrant signalization at either intersection. The volume of project ~raffic projected to be involved in conflicting traffic movements is also very low. Roripaugh Residential ProperO' 14 City of Temecula 1 t I I ! 1 ! Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Associates Based on the projected service level for the most significant of these movements, (as determined in the Unsi~'nalized Intersection analysis), the potential for measurable disruption to traffic flows on Nicolas Road is highly unlikely, even during peak traffic periods. The proposed 350-foot spacing baween Koripaugh Road and the West Project Access was checked for adequacy in providing back-to-back left-turn storage for westbound left turns from Nicolas Road into Roripaugh Road and eastbound left-turns into the West Project Access. The highest back-w-back left turn volumes arc projected to occur during the evening peak-hour when approximately 20 westbound left turn vehicles (into Roripaugh Road) would be combined with approximately 61 eastbound left-turn vehicles into the West Project Access, Even with the provision of very conservative storage bay lengths of 100 feet (for westbound left turns) and 150 feet (for e.~stbound left turns), no overlap of the left-turn bay tapers would be necessary. It should be noted that the 22-foot wide center median width would allow for a considerable amount of left-turn bay taper overlap. Although we did not find a compelling need to modify the location of the West Project Access, i.t should be noted that a more uniform intersection ~pacin~ could be achieved alon~ Nicol~ l~oad by ~.~hi~ng the West Project access ~o the e~.~ Ip~Vroximately 235 feet to align with the second on-site north-south s~eet from the western project boundar7. Sight Distance At Warbler Circle Access Intersection- Given the location of the southbound project access approach to Nicolas Road at Warbler Circle, (on the h~side of the Nicolas Road Curve) outbound motorists may have limited visibility to the east and west, A closer review of this situation indicated that sight distance within the Nicolas Road right-of-way would be approximately 325 feet to and from the east and approxixnately 400 feet to and from the west. Tl-fis assumes that the stop bar at the southbound Warbler Circle (project access) approach is located 10 feet behind the Nicholas Road curb-line. The recommended stopping sight distance for approaching ~:affxc on the major through street is 360 feet for a posted speed limit of 45 miles per hour and 430 feet for a posted speed limit of 50 miles per hour. Sight distance from the west would be adequate for a speed limit of 45 miles per hour but sub-standard for a posted speed limit of 50 miles per hour. Sight distance from the east would only be adequate for posted speed of 40 miles per hour. Sight distance requirements for a posted speed of 50 miles per hour could be met if the stop bar at the southbound Warbler Circle approach is positioned five feet from the Nicholas Road curb-line. Yhis minor striping adjustment would provide for the recommended 430-foot stopping sight- distance. Roripaugh Residential Propert~ 15 Ci~ of Temecula Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Associates E. Analysis of Proposed Site Plan WSA has reviewed the proposed on-she circulation system depicted on the project site plan. Given the low volumes of traffic projected for the site, we do not anticipate any on-site circulation problems associated with proposed configuration of on-site local residential streets. The proposed 36-foot curb-to-curb cross-section would provide adequate width at the outbound approaches to Nicolas Road to serve the projected site waffle. The approximate 80-foot storage .provision for outbound project traffic should be adequate for peak period egress needs. F. Off-Site Parking For Project Park Site WSA has e.~imated the number of vehicles which could park off-site along the north side of Nicholas Road and the west side of General Keamy Road. Based on standard parallel parking dimension requirements, it is estimated that curb-space along the north side of Nicholas Road would accommodate approximately 16 parking vehicles and curb-space along General Kearny Road (immediately adjacent to the park site) would accon'Lrnode 4 parked vehicles. A total of approximately 20 vehicles could be accommodated along the street curbs which are imr~ediatley adjacent to the park. It should be noted that these estimates take into account sight distance requirements in the vicelily of the Warbler Circle project access road. Roripaugh Residential Property ] 6 City of Temecula Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Associates VL FINDINGS AND RECOM2VIENDATIONS l I 1 | | ! A. Summary of Findings Key fiDdi,gs of the focused traffic analysis are as follows: · Existing peak-hour traffic volumes at the intersection of Winchester Road/Nicolas Road warrant signalization of the intersection. The Nicolas Road widening/Santa Gemdis Creek Flood Control project is being funded by A.D.161 and should be underway within the next three months. This project would improve Nicolas Road to its ultimate Arterial cross-section from Winchester Road to just east of General Kearny Kgad. The currently proposed project reflects a reduction in the already approved residential density for the site. This reduction in density would result in an approximate 38 to 40 percent reduction in the potential project nip generation. Projected 1994 traffic conditions with the project would peak-hour service levels of "C" or better at the tinsignalized Nicolas Road intersections formed by Roripaugh Road, West Project Access, and Warbler Circle. Projected Cumulative Development scenario traffic conditions with and without the project would be identical except for those movements specifically related direct project access. Traffic movements projected to operated at service level "E" or worse under this scenario- either do not involve project ~affc movements or affect an insi~ifi. cant number of project vehicles. Assuming signalization of the Winchester Road/Nicol~s Road intersection peak-hour service levels would be "B" or better for the 1994 With Project scenario and "D" or better for the Cumulative Development With Project scenario. The volume of traffic projected at the project access intersections would not be hi~a enough to meet peak hour signal warrants. Roripaugh Residential Property 17 city of Temecula I I ] 1 t ] I Focused Traffic Study Wilbur Smith Associates Proposed access spacing along Nicolas Road would be less than the ideal spacing, but is not anticipated to significantly impact traffic operation on Nicolas Road. · The geometry of Nicolas Road at Warbler Circle is anticipated to cause sight distance problems unless additional sight obstnaction setback requirements are imposed. · Proposed on-site circulation provisions are determined to be adequate for the project B. Recommendations WSA has developed the following recommend.fions based on the findings of the focused Oaf:tic analysis: · Maintain the proposed lower residential density to minimize project traffic generation · Provide appro~r~mately 150 feet of vehicle storage for eastbound left turn movements into the project site at the. West Project Access. Provide approximately 100 feet of vehicle storage for eastbound left turn movements into the project site at the Warbler Circle access. Roripaugh Residential Property City. of Temeeula ATTACHMENT NO. 5 APPLICANT'S CORRESPONDENCE ON PARKWAY LANDSCAPING WIDTH R:',S',STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/28/93 klb S0 September 16, 1993 Mr. Saied Naaseh City of Temecula Planning Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 city OF P&D Environmental Services A Division of P&D Technologies 1100 Town & Country Roa¢ Suite 300 Orange, CA 92668 PO Box 5367 Orange, CA 92613-5367 FAX 7141953-6989 714/835-44~,7 An Employee-Owned Company Re: Nicolas Road Parkway (North Side) PA 93-0144 (Tentative Tract Map 27827) and PA 93-0145 (S.P. Amendment No. 2), Roripaugh Dear Mr. Naaseh: As you requested during our telephone conversation today, I am writing this letter to document the design considerations which influenced proposals for the Nicolas Road parkway adjacent to the referenced project. I am aware that the parkway width on the south side of Nicolas Road is approximately 10' wide; however, given the design considerations described below, I am confident that we will create an attractive landscape image within the 6' parkway proposed for the north side of Nicolas Road. Basically, the following issues influenced our design recommendations: The existing houses adjacent to the south side of Nicolas Road are situated at elevations significantly higher than that of Nicolas Road. We estimate that these elevation differences range from 5'-10'. In contrast, the proposed pad elevations adjacent to Nicolas Road within the Roripaugh Cottages development will be situated at approximately the same elevation as that of Nicolas Road. The proposed houses for the Roripaugh Cottages development are significantly smaller than those located on the south side of Nicolas Road, including both massing and square footage. In fact, several of the housing types are single story units rather than the two story units prevalent to the south. Because of the various design configurations of proposed housing types, the houses proposed to back up to the north side of Nicolas Road will be located a distance of 15'-20' away from the Nicolas Road R.O.W. As a result, the homes in the Roripaugh Cottages project will not make as significant a visual impact as the homes located to the south side of Nicolas Road. In light of the smaller housing size, the variation in distance from Nicolas Road, and the lower pad elevations, the landscape concepts proposed for the north side of Nicolas Road will create an attractive streetscape image which will provide an adequate balance to the existing south side parkway. As a result, when combined with a strong vegetative buffer, the existing 6' parkway will be more than adequate to create a consistent landscape character along Nicolas Road. If you have additional questions regarding the streetscape proposals described in this letter or on the submitted planting plans, please do not hesitate to contact me at your earliest convenience. I look forward to working together with you and the City of Temecula to implement a low maintenance, drought tolerant parkway design for the Roripaugh Cottages development. Sincerely, R. Patrick Callihan, RLA, ASLA Senior Landscape Architect CC: Mr. Steve Doyle Mr. Sanford Edward Mr. Don Lohr ATTACHMENT NO. 6 EXHIBITS R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93.PC 10128193 CITY OF TEMECULA 'qORIPRU6'if RDRO CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: '~.C. DATE: Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 (PA93-0145), Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) A VICINITY MAP November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA \ SITE CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 (PA93-0145), Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) B ZONING MAP November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA SITE CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: ".C. DATE: Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2 (PA93-0145}, Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) c FUTURE GENERAL PLAN November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.pC 10/27/93 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) D TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 27827 November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93,PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) E November 1, 1993 PARK R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/27/93 kJb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) F TYPICAL FRONT YARD LANDSCAPING November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) G TYPICAL PLOTTINGS November 1, 1993 R:~S\STAFFRPT\144PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA I I "'I,, ,, ,, Warbler Circle CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) HCONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPING FOR NICOLAS RD November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/27193 klb CITY OF TEMECULA N,C~al Road CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) H2CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPING FOR NICOLAS RD November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) I November 1, 1993 RENDERING R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) j PLAN I - FLOOR PLAN November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA LCrT f~;NT CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) J1 PLAN 1A - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.pC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA I~NT CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) J2 PLAN 1 B - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93,pC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA b~rr flC~NT CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) J3 PLAN 1 C - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) K PLAN 2 - FLOOR PLAN November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93,PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) EXHIBIT: K1 PLAN 2A - ELEVATION P.C. DATE: November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAf:FRPT\144PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA _r.El]m / m~m CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) K2 PLAN 2B - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFI~PT\144pA93,pC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) K3 PLAN 2C - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) L PLAN 3 - FLOOR PLAN November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) L1 PLAN 3A - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/27/93 CITY OF TEMECULA I Zf "' ................m ..Jui LF, rT -- r=! CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) L2 PLAN 3B - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA Lr_rT m F'iq~ ~DBRBlY CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) L3 PLAN 3C - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93.PC 10127/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) M PLAN 4 - FLOOR PLAN November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93.PC 10127/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) EXHIBIT: M1 PLAN 4A - ELEVATION P.C. DATE: November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) M2 PLAN 4B - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:~S\STAFFRPT~144PA93,PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144| M3 PLAN 4C - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93.PC 10/27/93 kib CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) EXHIBIT: M4 PLAN 4D - ELEVATION P.C. DATE: November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~144PA93,PC 10/28/93 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) N PLAN 5 - FLOOR PLAN November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93.PC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA F I CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) N1 PLAN 5A - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\144PA93,pC 10/27/93 klb CITY OF TEMECULA r/~rtT CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144| N2 PLAN 5B - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:\S~STAFFRPT~144PA93.pC 10/27/93 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: EXHIBIT: P.C. DATE: Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 (PA93-0144) N3 PLAN 5C - ELEVATION November 1, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT~144pA93.pC 10/27/93