HomeMy WebLinkAbout110498 PC Agenda in compliance with the Americans with DlsabiliUes Act, If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please
contant the office of the Communi~/Devalopment Department at (909) a94-64~0. Notiflcalion 48 hours prior to a meeting wltl enable the
City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeUng [28 CFR 35,102.35.104 ADA Title jr]
CALL TO ORDER:
FLAG SALUTE:
ROLL CALL:
TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
November 4, '1998, 6:00 PM
43200 Business Park Drive
Council Chambers
Tereecula, CA 92390
Chairman Slaven
Guerdere, Naggar, Slaven, Soltysiak and Webster
Reso Next In Order #98-038
PUBLICCOMMENTS
A total of 15 rain utes is provided so merebern of the public can address the sommissionem on items that are not listed on
the Agenda. Speakera are limited to three (3) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Commissionera about an item
not listed on the Agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the Commission Secretan/.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state yourname and address.
For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" fom~ must be filed with the Planning Secretan/before Commission gets
to that item. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakera.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
1. Approval of Agenda
2. Request to Revise Made Callender's Landscape Plan
3. Director's Hearing Update
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
4. Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Planner.
Recommendation:
Planning Application No. PA95-0079 (Tentative Parcel Map
No. 28257)
William and Michael Peruchetti
South side of Pauba Road, west of Showalter Road, east
of La Primavera Street, north of Esterc Street
To subdivide 2.85 acres into four (4) residential parcels
Carele K. Donahoe, AICP
Recommend Continuance to December2, 1998
5. Case No.:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Environmental Action:
Case Planner:
Recommendation:
Planning Application No. PA98-0318 (General Plan Amendment and Zone
Change)
James and Mary Corona
Located nodheast of the intersection of Highway 79 South and Butterfield Stage Road
(Assessors Parcel Numbers 952-150-001 and 003}
A request to change the General Plan Land Use and Zoning designations of two
parcels from Highway/Tourist Commercial (HTC), Medium Density Residential (M),
and Low Medium Density Residential (LM) to Community Commercial (CC).
Mitigated Negative Declaration
John DeGange
Recommend Approval
R:%W1MBERVG\PLANCOMMLAGENDAS~-6-96 10/28/98 vgw
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Environmental Action:
Case Planner.
Recommendation:
Planning Application No. PA98-0302 (Development Plan)
Mesquita & Assoc., Femando Mesquita
43040 Rancho Way at the Southwest Comer of Rancho Way & Diaz Road. (921-040-
018)
To construct a 13,112 Square Foot industrial (tilt-up concrete) building on a .86 acre
lot.
Negative Declaration.
Thomas Thomsley
Approval
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Environmental Action:
Case Planner:
Recommendation:
Planning Application No. PA98-0354 (Development Plan)
Dekkon Development Inc, James E. Hundley
North side of Winchester Road, immediately south of the intersection of Calle
Empleado and Winchester Road (APN 909-310-019)
To construct a 15,950 Square Foot industrial (tilt-up sencrete) building on a one acre
Negative Declaration.
Thomas Thomsley
Approval
PLANNING MANAGERS REPORT
COMMISSIONER REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting:
November 18, 1998, 6:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park
Drive, Ternecula, California
2
ITEM #2
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FRO M:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission
Patty Anders, Assistant Planner ~. ~c-
October 28, 1998
PA 97-0398 (Development Plan) for Marie Callendet's
Attached is the proposed revised landscape plans for the Marie Callender's restaurant which was
approved by the Planning Commission on February 2, 1998. The applicant is requesting
permission to remove 13 trees, reduce the size of some shrubs from five (5) gallon to one (1)
gallon, and replace the ground cover hydroseed with sod along Rancho California Road and Ynez
Road (see attached plans).
The approved landscape plan provided 34% of landscaped area. The applicant's landscape
architect has stated that the proposed changes would not reduce the total landscaped percentage,
only the spacing and sizes would change. The project is located within the Rancho Highlands
Specific Plan which does not have a minimum landscape percentage requirement. Staff feels the
changes in the approved landscape plan are extensive and therefore requests direction from the
Commission on this matter.
R:\PLANNING~IEMO~398pag'/PC-MEM.aoc 10r28~98 pa
ITEM #3
CITY OF TEMECULA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission
Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager
October 28, 1998
Director's Hearing Case Update
Planning Director's Agenda items for September, 1998.
Date Case No.
September 10, PA98-
1998 0328
September 17, PA98-
1998 0316
September 17, PA98-
1998 0351
Proposal
To construct and operate an
ull~anned substation,
consisting of a 65 ~ tall
monopole with top mounted
antennas camouflaged as a
simulated palm tree
The construction of single
family homes with four floor
plans and three elevations per
floor plan on 95 lots within
TM 24182
To install a wireless PCS
facility consisting of four
antennas to be mounted on an
existing 80 foot high ballfield
light
Applicant Action
Cox Approved
Communications
Continental Homes Approved
Cox Continued to
Communications October 1, 1998
Attachments:
1. Action Agend3s - Blue Page 2
R:\DIRHEAR\MEMO\I998\7-15-98.MEM 10/28/98 klb
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
ACTION AGENDAS
R:\DIRHEAR\MEMO',1998\7-1~i-~8.MEM lOfa/98klb 2
ACTION AGENDA
TEMECULA DIRECTOR'S HEARING
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 10, 1998 1:30 PM
TEMECULA CITY HALL MAIN CONFERENCE ROOM
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92390
CALL TO ORDER: Dave Hogan, Senior Planner
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address to the Senior Planner
on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes each.
If you desire to speak to the Senior Planner about an item not listed on the Agenda, a pink
"Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the Senior Planner.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state vour name and address.
For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Senior Planner
before that item is heard. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers.
PUBLIC HEARING
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Environmental Action:
Case Planner:
Case Engineer:
Recommendation:
Planning Application No. PA98-0328 (Minor Conditional
Use Permit)
Cox Communications PCS, L.P.
26201 Ynez Road, the Magnecomp Building, in front of
Gold's Gym
To construct and operate an untoarmed substation, consisting
of a 65-foot tall monopole with top-mounted antennas
camouflaged as a simulated palm tree (monopalm), and
associated ground mounted BTS equipment within a concrete
block, 185 square foot, 7-foot high enclosure.
Categorical Exemption, Class lb, Section 15301
Carole K. Donahoe, AICP
Gen-y Alegria
APPROVAL
ACION:
APPROVED
ADJOURNMENT
ACTION AGENDA
TEMECULA DIRECTOR'S HEARING
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 17, 1998 1:30 PM
TEMECULA CITY HALL MAIN CONFERENCE ROOM
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92390
CALL TO ORDER: Dave Hogan, Senior Planner
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address to the Senior Planner
on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes each.
If you desire to speak to the Senior Planner about an item not listed on the Agenda, a pink
"Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the Senior Planner.
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 Senior Planner
before that item is heard. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers.
PUBLIC HEARING
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Environmental
Action:
Case Planner:
Recommendation:
ACTION:
Planning Application No. PA98-0316 (Development Plan for
Product Review)
Continental Homes, 12230 E1 Camino Real, Ste 3000, San Diego,
DA 92130
North side of State Hwy 79 S., east of Meadow Pkwy., and south of
De Portola Rd.
The construction of single family homes with four floor plans and
three elevations per floor plan on 95 lots within Tract Map No. 24182
This project is exempt from further evaluation under CEQA due to the
previous certification of an Environmental Impact Report (EER) for
this site.
Thomas ThornsIcy
Approval
APPROVED
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Planning Application No. PA98-0351 (Minor Conditional Use
Permit)
Cox Communications PCS, L.P.
Paloma del Sol Park, 32099 De Portola Road
To install a wireless PCS facility consisting of four antennas to be
mounted onto an existing 80 foot high ballfield light standard, eight
Environmental
Action:
Case Planner:
Recommendation:
ACTION:
antennas to be mounted onto an 80 foot high monopole similar in
appearance to the existing ballfield light standards, six ground-
mounted BTS equipment cabinets and one GPS antenna mounted
onto the primary power cabinet.
Categorical Exemption, Class Ib, Section 15301
Carole K. Donahoe, AICP
Approval
CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 1, 1998
ADJOURNMENT
ITEM #4
CITY OF TEMECULA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DMSION
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning CommissiOn
Debbie Ubnos!~e, Planning Manager
November 4, 1998
Planning Application No. PA95-0079 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 28257) -
William and Michael Perucherti Applicant
Prepared by: Carole Donahoe, Project Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Depm'hnent Staff recommends that the Planning
Commission:
Continue this item to the December 2, 1998 Planning Commission
hearing.
ANALYSIS
This project was continued to the November 4, 1998 Commission meeting to allow the applicant
time to address several outstanding items. The applicant has expressed that they need additional
time to address these items and request that the project be continued to the December 2, 1998
Planning Commission hearing. Staff concurs with the applicant's request.
R:~STAFFRPTX79pa95 pc continuance.doc
ITEM #5
RECOMMENDATION:
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
November 4, 1998
Planning Application No.'s PA98-0318 and PA98-0449
(General Plan Amendment and Zone Change)
Prepared By: John De Gange, Project Planner
The Planning Department Staff recommends
Commission:
1.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
the Planning
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Planning Application
No.'s PA98-0318 and PA98-0449;
ADOPT Resolution No. 98- recommending approval of
Planning Application No.'s PA98-0318 and PA98-0449 based
upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff
Report; and
APPROVE Planning Application No.'s PA98-0318 and PA98-
0449.
APPLICANT:
PROPOSALS:
LOCATION:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
James and Mary Corona
To amend the General Plan Land Use Map and the Zoning Map for
the site from Highway/Tourist Commercial (HT), Medium Density
Residential (M) and Low Medium Density Residential (LM) to
Community Commercial, in accordance with Exhibit A (for the
General Plan Land Use Map) and Exhibit B (for the Zoning Map);
Northeast of the intersection of Highway 79 South and Butterfield
Stage Road (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 952-150- 001 and 952-
150-003)
North:
South:
East:
West:
Medium and Low-Medium Density Residential
Neighborhood Commerdal
Riverside County - Residential (2-4 du/ac)
Paloma del Sol Specific Plan - Residential
EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98.PC.doc
1
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North: Vacant
South: Vacant
East: Vacant
West: Vacant and agricultural uses
PROJECT STATISTICS
Parcels:
Total Area:
952-150-001 (9.56 acres) and 952-150-003 (9.61 acres)
19.17 acres
BACKGROUND
On July 23, 1998 an application requesting a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change from
Medium and Low Medium Density Residential to Highway/Tourist Commercial for Assessor Parcel
Number 952-150-001 was received. After meeting with the applicant and their representative, staff
was informed that their ultimate goal is to process a specific plan on the parcel in question and the
adjacent parcel (Parcel Number 952-150-003). The applicant's goal in this application is to obtain
General Plan and zoning designations that will be consistent with the land uses they will ultimately
propose in their specific plan. The applicant has revised their application to include the other parcel
they intend to place within the specific plan area and modified the proposed designation from
Highway/Tourist Commercial to Community Commercial.
ANALYSIS
The proposal would change the General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map designations from
Medium Density and Low Medium Density Residential and Highway/Tourist Commercial to
Community Commercial to facilitate the future development of a specific plan on the site. Staff
feels that the change from Highway/Tourist Commercial to Community Commercial is appropriate
because both districts are compatible with each other and Community Commercial is considered
a less intensive use in comparison with Highway/Tourist Commerdal, The Community Commercial
designation is also compatible with the commercial and light industrial properties on two of the
other three corners at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Butterfield Stage Road.
Staff also feels that changing the residential parcel north of the property directly at the comer to
Community Commercial is also appropriate. This is because the two parcels, when combined,
would create a more viable commercial site. The basis for this opinion is that both parcels are
shallow in depth, (approximately 350 feet), although wide along the portion of the lot that faces
Highway 79(S) (approximately 1200 feet). Given the importance of the intersection of Highway 79
South and Butterfield Stage Road, a parcel only 350 feet deep would realistically not be capable
of supporting any kind of substantial commercial development, particularly of the scale of
Highway/Tourist Commercial. If approved, this proposal will create a 19-acre commercially zoned
parcel, which is approximately 1200 feet wide and 700 feet deep. A commercial site of this size
is more able to support a viable commercial project and would help avoid isolated fragmented
development.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
An initial environmental study was performed for this project which determined that the proposal
could potentially affect geology, water, transportation/circulation, aesthetic, and cultural resources.
The study was prepared for a non-detailed general plan amendment and zone change because
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98.PC.doc
2
no detailed development proposals have been submitted to the City. Section 15146 of the CEQA
Guidelines states that the specificity and detail of environmental analysis should be similar to the
detail and specificity of the project. Since the project is a general plan amendmentJzone change,
only a general plan level of evaluation is possible. However, in an effort to provide as much
information as possible, some additional evaluation has been provided. Any mitigation measures
identified in this document will be implemented when detailed development proposals are available.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
Staff has evaluated this proposal and has determined that the requested amendment to the
General Plan land use and zoning designations are appropdate and will allow the property owners
to reasonably and appropriately develop this site in a manner compatible with the surrounding area.
FINDINGS
Planning Application No.'s PA98-0318 and PA98-0449 (General Plan Amendment and
Change of Zone) as proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
The project is compatible with existing and surrounding uses. A portion of the site is already
zoned for commercial uses and is already being partially used for commercial purposes.
The proposed project will not have an adverse effect on the community because it remains
consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan,
Attachments:
PC Resolution No. 98- - Blue Page 4
Exhibit A - Resolution No. 98- - Blue Page 7
Exhibit B - Ordinance No. 98-__ - Blue Page 10
Initial Study - Blue Page 14
Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 30
Exhibits - Blue Page 36
A. Vicinity Map
B. General Plan Map
C. Zoning Map
D. Proposed Project Zoning
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98.PC.doc
3
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 98-
R:\STAFFRP~318PA98.PC.doc
4
ATI'ACHMENT NO. I
PC RESOLUTION NO. 98-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP NORTHEAST OF THE
INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 79 (SOUTH) AND BUTI'ERFIELD
STAGE ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS.
952-150-001 AND 952-150-003 (PLANNING APPLICATION PA98o
0318)" AND ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA, NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF
HIGHWAY 79 (SOUTH) AND BUTtERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 952-150-001 AND 952-
150-003 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO.'s PA98-0318 and PA98-
0449)"
WHEREAS, Section 65800 of the Government Code provides for the adoption and
administration of zoning laws, ordinances, rules and regulations by cities to implement such general
plans as may be in effect in any such city; and
WHEREAS, Sections 65860 of the Government Code requires that a zoning ordinance
shall be consistent with the adopted general plan of the city; and
WHEREAS, that this Ordinance complies with all the applicable requirements of State law
and local ordinances; and,
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, Temecula Library,
Pujol Street Community Center, and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce; and,
WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on November 4, 1998, at which time interested
persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES HEREBY RECOMMEND THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE A RESOLUTION ENTITLED
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 79
(SOUTH) AND BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS.
952-150-001 AND 952-150-003 (PLANNING APPLICATION PA98-0318)" AND ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, NORTHEAST OF
THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 79 (SOUTH) AND BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 952-150-001 AND 952-150-003 (PLANNING
APPLICATION NO.'s PA98-0318 AND PA98-0449)" SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE FORMS THAT
ARE ATI'ACHED TO THIS RESOLUTION AS EXHIBITS A AND B, RESPECTIVELY.
R:\STAFFRPT~318PA98.PC .doc
5
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 4th day of November 1998.
Marcia Slaven, Chairperson
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 4th day of November,
1998 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R :\STAFFRPT\318PA98 .PC .doc
6
EXHIBIT A
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 98-__
R:\STAFFRPT~318PA98.PC.dOC
7
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO. 98-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP
NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 79 (SOUTH)
AND BUTrERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 952-150-001 AND 952-150-003
(PLANNING APPLICATION NO.'S PA98-0318 PA98-0449)
WHEREAS, Section 65300 of the Government Code requires that cities adopt a
comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the jurisdiction as well as
any adjacent areas which, in the judgement of the city, bears a relationship to its planning; and
WHEREAS, On November 9, 1993, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted the
General Plan.
WHEREAS, Sections 65350 of the Government Code permits a city to amend the general
plan; and
WHEREAS, there is a need to amend the General Plan Land Use Map to accurately reflect
private property; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on November 4,
1998, and recommended that the City Council approve the attached amendments to the General
Plan Land Use Map; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on
to consider the proposed General Plan Amendment; and
__,1998
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AND DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAl PLAN LAND USE MAP The City Council
hereby amends the General Plan Land Use Designations on the following parcels as specified
below:
A. For the parcel identified as APN 952-150-001: change the Land Use Designation
from Medium Density (M) Residential and Low Medium Density (LM) Residential to Community
Commercial (CC).
B. For the parcel identified as APN 952-150-003, change the Land Use Designation
from Highway/Tourist Commercial (HT) to Community Commercial (CC).
Section 2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City Council, based upon the information
contained in the Initial Environmental Study, finds that the proposal could potentially affect geology,
water, transportation/circulation, aesthetic, and cultural resources, The study was prepared for a
non-detailed general plan amendment and zone change because no detailed development
proposals have been submitted to the City. Section 15146 of the CEQA Guidelines states that the
R:\STAFFRPT~318PA98.PC.doc
8
speci~city and detail of environmental analysis should be similar to the detail and speci~city of the
project. Since the project is a general plan amendmentJzone change, only a general plan level of
evaluation is possible. However, in an effort to provide as much information as possible, some
additional evaluation has been provided. Any mitigation measures identified in this document will
be implemented when detailed development proposals are available.
Section 3. SEVERABILITY The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this
Resolution are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any
sentence, paragraph, or section of this Resolution to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining parts of this Resolution.
Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this __th day of
,1998.
ATTEST:
Ron Roberts, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC
CityClerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council
of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of
,1998 by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
CityClerk
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98.PC.dOC
9
EXHIBIT B
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 98-
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98,PC.doc
10
EXHIBIT B
ORDINANCE NO. 98-__
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA, NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF
HIGI-IVVAY 79 (SOUTH) AND BU'I'rERFIELD STAGE ROAD AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 952-150-00t AND 952-
150-003 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO.'S PA98-0318 AND PA98-
0449)
WHEREAS, Section 65800 of the Govemment Code provides for the adoption and
administration of zoning laws, ordinances, rules and regulations by cities to implement such general
plans as may be in effect in any such city; and
WHEREAS, Sections 65860 of the Government Code requires that a zoning ordinance
shall be consistent with the adopted general plan of the city; and
WHEREAS, there is a need to amend the Zoning Map to accurately reflect pdvate property
and to be consistent with the adopted General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public headng on November 4,
1998, and recommended that the City Council approve the attached amendments to the City
Zoning Map; and
WHEREAS, that this Ordinance complies with all the applicable requirements of State law
and local ordinances; and,
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, Temecula Library,
Pujol Street Community Center, and the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on
to consider the proposed amendments to the City Zoning Map.
__;1998
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY ZONING MAP The City Council hereby amends
the Zoning Map for the City of Temecula for as specified below:
A. For the parcel identified as APN 952-150-001: change the Zoning Designation from
Medium Density Residential (M) and Low Medium Density Residential (LM) to Community
Commercial (CC) as shown on Exhibit A.
B. For the parcel identified as APN 952-150-003, change the Zoning Designation from
Highway/Tourist Commercial (HT) to Community Commercial (CC) as shown on Exhibit A.
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98.PC.doc
Section 2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City Council, based upon the information
contained in the Initial Environmental Study, finds that the proposal could potentially affect geology,
water, transportation/circulation, aesthetic, and cultural resources. The study was prepared for a
non-detailed general plan amendment and zone change because no detailed development
proposals have been submitted to the City. Section 15146 of the CEQA Guidelines states that the
specificity and detail of environmental analysis should be similar to the detail and specificity of the
project. Since the project is a general plan amendmentJzone change, only a general plan level of
evaluation is possible. However, in an effort to provide as much information as possible, some
additional evaluation has been provided. Any mitigation measures identified in this document will
be implemented when detailed development proposals are available.
Section 3. SEVERABILITY The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this
Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any
sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
Section 4. NOTICE OF ADOPTION The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this
Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law.
Section 5. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage.
The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall publish a
summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall be posted in
the office of the City Clerk at least five days prior to the adoption of this Ordinance. Within 15 days
from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance, together
with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against the Ordinance, and post the same
in the office of the City Clerk.
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98.PC.dOC
12
Section 6. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this __ day of ,1998.
ATTEST:
Ron Roberrs, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council
of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of
,1998 by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
CityClerk
R:\STAFFRPT~318PA98.PC.doc
13
A'i'I'ACHMENT NO. 2
INITIAL STUDY
R:\STAFFRPT%318PA98.PC,dOC
Project Title
Lead Agency Name and Address
Contact Person and Phone Number
Project Location
Project Sponsor's Name and Address
General Plan Designation (Current)
Zoning (Current)
Description of Project
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
Other public agencies whose approval
is required
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Environmental Checklist
Planning Application No. PA98-0318 (General Plan
Amendment and Zone Change)
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
John De Gange
(909) 694-6400
Located on northeast of the intersection of Highway 79 (S)
and Butterfield Stage Road (Assessor's Parcel Numbers
952-150- 001 and 003)
James and Mary Corona, 33320 Highway 79 South,
Temecula, CA 92592
Highway/Tourist Commercial (HT), Medium Density
Residential (M) and Low Medium Density Residential (LM)
Highway/Tourist Commercial (HT), Medium Density
Residential (M) and Low Medium Density Residential (LM)
A request to change the General Plan Land Use
designations of two parcels from Highway Proudst
Commercial (HTC), Medium Density Residential (M), and
Low Medium Density Residential (LM) to Community
Commercial (CC)
The project is surrounded by the Paloma del Sol/Paseo
Del Sol Specific Plan to the west, the Vail Ranch and
Redhawk Specific Plans to the South, the unincerporated
Wine Country to the east, and the Crown Hills are to the
north.
Riverside County Fire Department, Riverside County
Health Department, Temecula Police Department, Eastern
Municipal Water District, Rancho California Water District,
Southern California Gas Company, Southern California
Edison Company, General Telephone Company, and
Riverside Transit Agency
R:\STAFFRPT~318PA98.PC.dOC
15
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
X
X
Land Use Plannin9
Population and Housing
Geologic Problems
Water
Air Quality
Transportation/Circulation
Biological Resources
Energy and Mineral Resources
X
X
Hazards
Noise
Public Services
Utilities and Service Systems
Aesthetics
Cultural Resources
Recreation
Mandatory Findings of Significance
None
Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
X
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant 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 an
attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least
one effect 1 ) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as
described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must
analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have
been analyzed adequately in an eadier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been
avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that
are imposed upon the proposed project.
Signature
Date: October 16, 1998
John De Gange
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98.PC.doc
16
For: The City of Temecula
Issues and Supporing Information Sources
Potenfially
Signfficant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Inconx)mted
Less 'l~an
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
1.a.
1.c.
1.d.
1.e.
Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source 1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17)
Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project?
Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts
to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land
uses)? (Source 1, Figure 5-4, Page 5-17)
Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including low-income or minodty
community)?
X
X
X
Comments
1.a., c.
t.d
1,e.
The project is a general plan amendment and zone change from existing Highway/Tourist,
Medium Density Residential and Low Medium Density Residential to Community Commercial.
The environmental impact of the proposed general plan amendment and proposed zone
change is expected to be less than significant because Community Commercial is compatible
with Highway/Tourist Commercial and is a less intensive use. Community Commercial is also
compatible the other adjacent commercial designations in the vicinity. The widening of the
commercial designation to include the residential parcel to the north is logical in that it creates a
more viable commercial site by increasing the site from 9,5 acres to 19 acres. This will assist
in averting isolated fragmented development. As a consequence the environmental impact
associated with this project is expected to be less than significant.
This site as well as adjacent properties to the north and south are located in areas identified as
Farmland of Local Importance. Currently isolated farming does occur in and around the site;
however, these areas are not within areas under Williamson Act contract. The City of
Temecula General Plan has anticipated that this property will ultimately be developed with uses
other than agriculture and would consequently no longer be utilized for agricultural production.
As a consequence any environmental impacts associated with this project is expected to be
less than significant.
The project will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community
(including low-income or minodty community), There is no established residential community
(including low-income or minodty community) at this site. Furthermore, the site is a vacant,
and the reduction in the amount of residentially zoned property being proposed in this project
will be minor. As a consequence no significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would be proposal:
Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population Projects? (Source 1, Page 2-23)
R:\STAFFRPT~318PA98.PC.dOC
X
2.b.
2.c.
Comments
2.a,
2.b.
2.c.
3.a.
3.b.
3.c.
3.d.
3.e.
3.f.
3.g.
3.h.
3.i.
Issues and Supporting Information Sources
Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g, through project in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)?
Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? (Source 1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17)
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Signfficant Mitigation Signfficant
impact Incorporated Impact
No
Impact
X
X
The project will not cumulativeiy exceed official regional or local population projections. The
project will ultimately result in the construction of community commercial facilities Since the
project is intended to ultimately serve the needs of the existing residents, the proposed
development will not be a significant contributor to population growth which will cumulatively
exceed official regional or local population projections. No significant effects are anticipated as
a result of this project.
The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The project
will not likely cause people to relocate to or within Temecula, but will the uses which will
ultimately be constructed on the site will serve the needs of existing residents. Therefore, the
project will not induce substantial growth in the area, and no significant effects are anticipated
as a result of this project.
The project will not displace any type of housing. The project site is vacant with proposed
zoning, which is commercial, and as a consequence no housing will be displaced. No
significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving?
Fault rupture? (Source 1, Figure 7-1, Page 7-6 )
Seismic ground shaking?
Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (Source 1,
Figure 7-2, Page 7-8)
Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard?
Landslides or mudflows? (Source 1, Figure 7-2, Page 7-
8)
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions form excavation, grading or fill?
Subsidence of the land? (Source 1, Figure 7-2, Page 7-
8)
Expansive soils?
Unique geologic or physical features?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98.PC.doc
18
Comments
3.a.,b.,c.,e.,f
.,g.,h
4. WATER,
4.a.
4.b.
4.c,
4.d.
4.e.
4.f.
4.g.
4.h.
4.i.
Issues and Supporting Informalton Sources
Potentially
Significant
PotenUaliy Unless Less Than
Signfficant Mitigation Signfficant No
Impact Inco~por'~led Impsct Impsct
The ultimate development of the site may have a significant impact on people involving
seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure (including liquifaction), erosion, changes in
topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill and expansive soils.
The site is located in Southern Califomia, an area that is seismically active. The City's
General Plan identifies two active faults in the vicinity, the Wildomar Fault and the Wolf Valley
Fault.
Potential impacts will be mitigated by compliance with State of California AIquist-Priolo Special
Studies Zone development criteria and construction in accordance with the Uniform Building
Code standards. A soils report shall be required as part of the development and shall
contained recommendations for the compaction of the soil which will serve to mitigate any
potentially significant impacts from seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure (including
liquefaction), erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation,
grading or fill and expansive soils. Erosion control techniques will be included as a condition
of approval for development projects at the site. Potential unstable soil conditions from
excavation, grading or fill will be mitigated through the use of landscaping and proper
compaction of the soils. After mitigation measures are performed, no impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project..
Would the proposal result in:
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate
and mount of surface runoff?
Exposure of people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding? (Source 1, Figure 7-3, Page 7-10 and
Figure 7-4, Page 7-12)
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature. dissolved oxygen
or turbidity)?
Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body?
Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements?
Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through
direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of
an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial
loss of groundwater recharge capability?
Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
Impacts to groundwater quality?
Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater.
Otherwise available for public water supplies?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98.PC,dOC
19
Issues and Supporting Information Sources
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigatiml Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
Comments
4.b.
4.c.
4.d. ,e.
4.f.-h.
4.i.
Development of the site may result in changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns and the
rate and amount of surface runoff should development occur as a result of the land use
designation and zone change. However, because of the restrictive easements, fault line, water
course and flood plain, development is anticipated to be limited. The impact as a result of the
change in land use designations is considered to be less than significant.
This project falls within Zone × of the Temecula Creek floodplain (areas within the 500-year
floodplain) as identified by Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel No. 060742-0005-B (November
20, 1996). If a property is located in Zone X no mitigation is required and as consequence a
less than significant impact is expected.
The project may have a potentially significant effect on discharges into surface waters and
alteration of surface water quality. Pdor to issuance of a grading permit for the project, the
developer will be required to 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 has been filed or the project is
shown to be exempt. By complying with the NPDES requirements, any potential impacts can
be mitigated to a level less than significant. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of
this project.
The proposed change in land use designations will have a less than significant impact in
changes to the amount of surface water in any water body or impact currents, or impact the
course or direction of water movements. Because of the restrictive easements, fault line,
water course and flood plain, development is anticipated to be limited. The impact as a result
of the change in land use designations is considered less than significant.
The proposed change in land use designations will have a less than significant change in the
quantity and quality of ground waters. Because ofthe restrictive easements, fault line, water
course and flood plain, development is anticipated to be limited. The impact as a result of the
change in land use designations is considered less than significant.
The proposed change in land use designations will have a less than significant impact in the
reduction in the amount of ground water otherwise available for public water supplies. Because
of the restrictive easements, fault line, water course and flood plain, development is anticipated
to be limited. The impact as a result of the change in land use designations is considered less
than significant.
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
5.b.
5.c.
5.d.
Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? (Source 1,
Page 2-29)
Expose sensitive recaptors to pollutants?
Alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause
any change in climate?
Create objectionable odors?
X
X
X
X
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98.PC.doc
20
Issues and Supporting Information Sources
Potentially
Signfficant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mifigafion Significant No
Impact Inccxpomted Impact Impact
Comments
5.a
5.b. ,d.
5.c.
The proposed change in land use designation will not violate any air quality standard or
contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation. Because of the restrictive
easements, fault line, water course and flood plain, development is anticipated to be limited
and well below target floor area ratios of any commercial zone. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. There are no sensitive receptors
in proximity to the project. According to the City's Development Code, standards with regards
to the generation of particulate matter, smoke, dust, did, ash, odors, toxics and other noxious
matter apply equally to all commercial zones.
The proposed change in land use designation will not alter air movement, moisture or
temperature, or cause any change in climate. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result
of this project.
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
Would the proposal result in:
6.a.
6.c.
6,d.
6,e.
6.f,
6.g.
Comments:
Increase vehicle tdps or traffic congestion?
Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections or incompatible
Uses)?
Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby
Uses?
Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus tumouts, bicycle racks)?
Rail, waterhome or air traffic impads?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
6.a.
The proposal is located in an area where current conditions are such that the read system
experiences occasional traffic congestion at peak times. To address these conditions the City
of Temecula, CALTRANS and the County of Riverside have several regional circulation
improvement projects proposed. In some cases these projects are currently under
construction. Area traffic congestion is expected to significantly improve when these scheduled
improvements have been completed. This proposal would shift the General Plan and Zoning
designations from one commercial designation to another and a portion of the site from
residential to commercial. It is anticipated; however, that because of the limited nature of future
development, most sites are significantly constrained with utility easements and environmental
site limitations, that a less than significant impact upon traffic is anticipated. The project will
have a less than significant impact upon increased vehicle tdps or traffic congestion.
R:\STAFFRPT%318PA98.PC,doC
21
6.d.
7.a.
Potentially
significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Slgnfficant Mffigation Signffissnt No
Impact Incorporate~l Impact impact
Future development will be conditioned to provide sufficient parking capacity in accordance
with the City's Development Code. With proper mitigation measures, future development is
anticipated to cause a less than significant impacts as a result of this project.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES:
Would the proposal result in impacts to:
7.b.
7.c.
7.d.
7.e.
Comments:
7.a.,b.
7.c.d.,e.
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals
and birds)? (Source 4)
Locally designated species (e.g.heritage trees)?
(Source 4)
Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest,
coastal habitat, etc.)?
Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)?
Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
X
X
X
The project site for the proposed change in land use lies within in an area designated by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as potential habitat for the Federally listed endangered species
the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly. This proposal does not actually represent a development
proposal. However, any future development of the site, as with any development projects
which fall within this boundary, will be required to conduct a biological survey to determine if the
vegetational association best suited for the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly is present and if the
organism is an actual inhabitant of the property. A Mitigation measure, requiring the applicant
of a development proposal on this property to conduct a biological survey of the property pdor
to the approval of any development proposal, has been included. A biological survey of the
property shall include appropriate mitigation measures for the development of this property.
With proper mitigation measures, future development is anticipated to cause a less than
significant impacts as a result of this project.
The project site is currently disturbed and largely undeveloped. There are no locally
designated communities, wetland habitat areas, or wildlife corridors on or around the site.
Future development proposals for this site will receive appropriately detailed environmental
review. As a result, no impacts are anticipated at this time.
8.a.
8.b.
8.c.
ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
Use non-renewal resources in a wasteful and inefficient
manne~
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of future value to the region and
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98 .PC.doc
22
X
X
X
issues and Suppoffing Information Sources
the residents of the State?
PotentiaJiy
Significant
Potentially Unless ~ Than
Significant Mffiigatio~ Significant No
Impact Incoq~orated Iml~act Impact
Commen~;
8.b.
8.c.
The project will not impact and/or conflict with adopted energy conservation plans. The project
will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable laws pertaining to energy conservation
during the plan check stage. No permits will be issued unless the project is found to be
consistent with these applicable laws. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
The project will result in a less than significant impact for the use of non-renewable resources
in a wasteful and inefficient manner. While there will be an increase in the rate of use of any
natural resource and in the depletion of nonrenewable resource(s) (construction materials,
fuels for the daily operation, asphalt, lumber) and the subsequent depletion of these non-
renewable natural resources. Due to the scale of the proposed development, these impacts
are not seen as significant.
The project will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of
future value to the region and the residents of the State. No known mineral resource that
would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State are located at this project
site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal Involve:
9.8.
9.b.
9.c.
9.d.
9.e.
A dsk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil,
pesticides, chemical or radiation)?
Possible interference with an emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard?
Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards?
Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees?
X
X
X
X
X
Comments:
9.3.
The project will not result in a significant impact due to dsk of explosion, or the release of any
hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset conditions since none are proposed
in the request. While some retail uses may have the potential to sell hazardous substances,
they are regulated by both the Fire Department and the Department of Environmental Health.
Future development must receive clearance from the Department of Environmental Health pdor
to any plan check submittal. Future development must receive clearance from the Fire
Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. This applies to storage and use of
hazardous materials. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98.PC,doc
23
9.b.
9.c.
9.d.
9.e.
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Issues and Suppoffing Information Souross Significant Mltigati(xt Significant No
Impact Incoll)orated Impact Impact
The project will not interfere with an emergency response plan or an emergency evaluation
plan. The subject site is not located in an area, which could impact an emergency response
plan, The project will take access from maintained streets and will therefore not impede any
emergency response or emergency evacuation plans, No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
The project will not result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard. The
project will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable health laws during the plan check
stage. No permits will be issued unless the project is found to be consistent with these
applicable laws. Reference response 9.a. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of
this project.
The project will not expose people to existing sources of potential health hazards. No health
hazards are known to be within proximity of the project. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
The project will not result in an increase to fire hazard in an area with flammable brush, grass,
or trees. The project is in an area of existing uses and proposed commercial uses. The project
is not located within or proximate to a fire hazard area. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
10.a.
10.b.
Increase in existing noise levels? (Source 1, page 8-
9)
Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
X
X
Comments:
lO.a.
10.b.
The proposal will result in a less than significant increase to existing noise levels. The site is
vacant and development of the land logically will result in increases to noise levels during
construction phases as well as increases to noise in the area over the long run. However, the
project site is adjacent to State Highway 79 South and Butterfield Stage Road which are both
designated as access restricted six-lane urban arterial roadways. Ambient noise levels 100
feet from centerline are 70.2 to 75.2 CNEL for Highway 79 South and range within 65 CNEL for
Butterfield Stage Road. According to the City's General Plan, it is appropdate to place
insensitive land uses such as commercial adjacent to noise generators such as highways.
Long-term noise generated by this project would be similar to existing and proposed uses in the
area. Noise impacts are anticipated to be less than significant as a result of this project in
either the short or long*term.
The project may expose people to severe noise levels dudng the development/construction
phase (short run). Construction machinery is capable of producing noise in the range of 100+
DBA at 100 feet which is considered very annoying and can cause headng damage from
steady 8-hour exposure. This source of noise will be of short duration and therefore will not be
considered significant. There will be no long-term exposure of people to noise. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98.PC.dOc
24
Issues and Supporting Infom~alion Sources
Potenltally
Slgnfficant
Impact
Potenf~ally
Significant
Unless
Miligatio~s
Less '11~n
Signfficant
impact
No
Impact
11. PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result In a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
11.a.
11.b.
11.c.
11.d.
11.e.
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
Other governmental services?
X
X
X
X
X
Comments:
11.a.,b.
11.c.
11.d.
11.e.
The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered
fire or police protection. The project will incrementally increase the need for fire and police
protection; however, it will contribute its fair share to the cost of maintenance of service
provision from these entities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered
school facilities. The project will not cause significant numbere of people to relocate within or to
the City of Temecula and therefore will not result in a need for new or altered school facilities.
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will have a less than significant impact for the maintenance of public facilities,
including roads. Funding for maintenance of roads is dedved from the Gasoline Tax, which is
distributed to the City of Temecula from the State of California. Impacts to current and future
needs for maintenance of roads as a result of development of the site will be incremental,
however, they will not be considered significant. The Gasoline Tax is sufficient to cover any of
the proposed expenses.
The project will not have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental
services. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS: Would the proposal
result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
12.a.
12.b.
12.c.
12.d.
12.e.
12.f.
12.g.
Power or natural gas?
Communications systems?
Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities?
Sewer or septic fanks?
Storm water drainage?
Solid waste disposal?
Local or regional water supplies?
Commen~:
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
R:\STAFFRPT~318PA98.PC.dOC
25
12.a.
12.b.
12,c.
12.d.
12.e.
12.f.
12.g.
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Signfficant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incoq~orated Impact impact
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to
power or natural gas. These systems are currently being delivered in proximity to the site, No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to
communication systems (reference response No. 12.a. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
The project will not result in the need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to
local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to
sanitary sewer systems or septic tanks. While the project will have an incremental impact upon
existing systems, the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's General Plan
states: "both EMWD and RCWD have indicated an ability to supply as much water as is
required in their services areas (p. 39)." The FEIR further states: "implementation of the
proposed General Plan would not significantly impact wastewater services (p. 40)/' It is
anticipated that the proposal to change the designation from Office to Commercial, and the
limited nature of future development under this designation, would not significantly increase the
demand for systems or supplies. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
Future development may require additional storm water drainage facilities onsite. However,
because this project is a change in General Plan and Zoning designations from one commercial
category to another, no specific development proposals are being proposed at this time. Any
specific development proposal would receive an appropriately detailed environmental review.
No significant impacts are anticipated at this time.
The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to solid waste
disposal systems. Any potential impacts from solid waste created by this development can be
mitigated through participation in any Source Reduction and Recycling Programs which are
implemented by the City. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to
local or regional water supplies. Reference response 12.d. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
13.a.
13.b.
13.c.
Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
Create light or glare?
Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic affect?
X
X
X
Comments:
13.a.
The City does not have any designated scenic highways. However, future developments on
the site will be reviewed to ensure that project design provides appropdate aesthetic benefits in
accordance with the City's Development Code and Design Guidelines. No significant impacts
are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98.PC,doc
26
13.b.
13.c.
Potenlially
Significant
Potentially Unless Le~s Than
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Significant MiUgaffi3n Signfficant No
Impact incorporated impact Impact
The project will not have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect. The project, as proposed, is
intended to encourage neighborhood commercial uses and appearance along Pala Road, and
would locate more intense service commercial uses on the intedor portion of the site. It is
anticipated that this layout will require a more neighborhood character in terms of building scale
and design and in terms of landscaping adjacent to Pala Road to make future development
more compatible with the surrounding area, As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated.
The project will have a potentially significant impact from fight and glare. The project will
produce and result in fight/glare, as all development of this nature results in new light sources.
All light and glare has the potential to impact the Mount Palomar Observatory. Future
development will be conditioned to be consistent with Ordinance No. 655 (Ordinance
Regulating Light Pollution). With mitigation measures no significant impacts are anticipated as
a result of this project.
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
14.a.
14.b.
14.c.
14.d.
14.e.
Disturb paleontological resources? (Source 2, Figure
55 )
Disturb archaeological resources? (Source 1, Page
281 )
Affect historical resources? ( )
Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( )
Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? ( )
X
X
X
X
X
Commen~:
14.b.
14.c.
14.d.
14.e.
The General Plan identifies a sensitive archaeological area at the intersection of State Highway
79 South and Butterfield Stage Road, which may extend to the subject site. Due to the
potential for deposits in the area, future development of the proposed site will be required to
conduct a Phase I archeological investigation on site prior to the approval any development
project. The potential for future significant impacts will be determined and fully mitigated when
future development proposals are considered.
There are no known historical resources on site, which the project would impact. As a
consequence no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not have the potential to cause a physical change affecting unique ethnic
cultural values. Reference response 14.b,c. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result
of this project.
The project will not restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area.
As a consequence no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
15.a, Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks or other recreational facilities?
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98.PC.dOC
27
X
15.b.
Issues and Supporting Informalton Sources
Affect existing recreational opportunities?
Potentially
Significant
Potenljally Unless Less Than
Signfficant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incoq~orated Impact Impact
I I x
Comments:
15.a.,b.
The project will have a less than significant impact or increase in demand for neighborhood or
regional parks or other recreational facilities. The project will not cause significant numbers of
people to relocate within or to the City of Temecula. The same is true for the quality or quantity
of existing recreational resources or opportunities, No significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
16,a.
16.b.
16.c.
16,d.
Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
Does the project have the potential to achieve short-
term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental
goals?
Does the project have impacts that area individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects).
Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X
X
X
X
Comme~:
EARLIER ANALYSES. None
R:\STAFFRPT~318PA98. PC .doc
28
SOURCES
2.
3.
4.
City of Temecula General Plan.
City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report.
South Coast Air Quality Management Distdct CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Habitat Map (compiled by
the Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency ICrLMA] GIS
Division - dated June 4, 1998)
R:\STAFFRPT~318PA98.PC.dOC
29
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
R:\STAFFRPT~318PA98.PC.dOC
30
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Planning Application No. PA98-0318 (General Plan Amendment and Zone Change)
Geologic Problems
General impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Exposure of people or property to fault rupture, seismic ground shaking,
seismic ground failure, landslides or mudflows, expansive soils or
earthquake hazards.
Ensure that soil compaction is to City standards.
A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted
to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check.
Building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits and building permits.
Department of Public Works and Building & Safety Department.
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure;
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Exposure of people or property to fault rupture, seismic ground shaking,
seismic ground failure, landslides or mudflows, expansive soils or
earthquake hazards.
Utilize construction techniques that are consistent with the Uniform
Building Code.
Submit construction plans to the Building & Safety Department for
approval.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building & Safety Department
Water
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure;
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
The project will result in changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns
and the rate and amount of surface runoff.
Methods of controlling runoff, from site so that it will not negatively impact
adjacent properties, including drainage conveyances, have been
incorporated into site design and will be included on the grading plans.
Submit grading and drainage plan to the Department of Public Works for
approval.
Prior to the issuance of grading permit.
Department of Public Works.
R:\STAFFRPT~318PA98.PC,doc
31
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Transportation/Circulation
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality
(e.g, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity).
An erosion control plan shall be prepared in accordance with City
requirements and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
shall be prepared in accordance with the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) requirements.
The applicant shall submit a SWPPP to the San Diego Regional Water
Quality Control Board (SDRWQCB) for their review and approval.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Department of Public Works and SDRWQCB (for SWPPP).
Increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for road improvements and traffic
impacts.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by,
and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building and Safety Department.
Increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for traffic signal mitigation.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by,
and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permit.
Building and Safety Department.
Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site.
Provide on-site parking spaces to accommodate the use.
Install on-site parking spaces.
Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits.
Department of Public Works, Planning Department and Building & Safety
Department.
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98.PC.doc
32
Biological Resources
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but
not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds).
Pay Mitigation Fee for impacts to Stephens Kangaroo Rat.
Pay $500.00 per acre of disturbed area of Stephens Kangaroo Rat
habitat,
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Department of Public Works and Planning Department
General impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but
not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds).
Requirement of biologic survey at the time of the submittal of a
development proposal for the site.
At the time of the submittal of a development proposal on the project site
the applicant shall submit a biological survey at the appropriate time of
the year to determine if the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly or any other
endangered or threatened species are present on site. This biological
survey shall propose appropriate mitigation for development of the site.
Upon submittal of a development proposal.
Planning Department
Energy and Minerel Resources
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Affect upon energy conservation plans.
Compliance with all applicable laws pertaining to energy conservation.
Submit energy calculations and pertinent data for review.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Building and Safety Department.
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98,PC.dOC
33
Public Services
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Pady:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
A substantial effect upon and a need for new/altered governmental
services regarding fire protection. The project will incrementally increase
the need for fire protection; however, it will contribute its fair share to the
maintenance of service provision.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for Fire Mitigation.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by,
and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permit.
Building & Safety Department.
A substantial effect upon and a need for new/altered schools.
Payment of School Fees.
Pay current mitigation fees with the Temecula Valley Unified School
District.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building & Safety Department and Temecula Valley Unified School
District.
A substantial effect upon and a need for maintenance of public facilities,
including roads.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for read improvements, traffic
impacts, and public facilities.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by,
and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of building permits,
Building and Safety Department.
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98.PC.dOC
34
AESTHETICS
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
The creation of new light sources will result in increased light and glare
that could affect the Palomar Observatory.
Use lighting techniques that are consistent with Ordinance No. 655.
Submit lighting plan to the Building and Safety Department for approval.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Building & Safety Department.
Have a demonstreble negative aesthetic effect.
Ensure architectural and design compatibility with existing structures.
Submit architectural plans that conform with the existing development in
terms of design, style, materials and colors.
Prior to scheduling for public hearing.
Planning Department.
R:\STAFFBPT\318PA98.PC.doc
35
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
EXHIBITS
R:\STAFFRPT\318PA98.PC,dOC
36
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NUMBER: PA98-0318 and PA98-0449
EXHIBIT- A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - NOVEMBER 4, 1998
VICINITY MAP
CITY OF TEMECULA
~ ~.~ ~ ~. ~... " , '. ,!~:... .
EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC)
~_ T/,~-_--~-~
O
EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC)
CASE NUMBER: PA98-0318 and PA98-0449
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - NOVEMBER 4, 1998
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NUMBER: PA98-0318 and PA98-0449
EXHIBIT - D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - NOVEMBER 4, 1998
PROPOSED PROJECTZONING
ITEM #6
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
November 4, 1998
Planning Application No. PA98-0302 (Development Plan)
Prepared By: Thomas K. Thornsley, Project Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends the Planning
Commission:
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Planning Application
No. PA98-0302;
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
ADOPT the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning
Application No. PA98-0302;
ADOPT Resolution No. 98- approving Planning
Application No. PA98-0302 based upon the Analysis and
Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval.
Mesquita & Assoc., Femando Mesquita
The design and constnJction of a 13,112 square foot industrial
(tilt-up concrete) building on a .86 acre lot.
On the southwest comer of Rancho Way and Diaz Road (APN
921-040-018).
BP (Business Park)
LI (Light Industrial)
North:
South:
East:
West:
LI (Light Industrial)
LI (Light Industrial)
OS (Open Spaca)
LI (Light Industrial)
Not requested
Vacant
R:\STAFFRFI~02pa98.doc
1
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North: Vacant
South: Industrial Building
East: Diaz Road and Murrieta Creek
West: Industrial Building
PROJECT STATISTICS
Total Area:
Building Footprint/Area
Landscape Area:
Paved Area:
.86 acres (37,574 square feet)
13,112 square feet 34.9%
11,330 square feet 30.1%
13, 132 square feet 35.0%
Parking Required:
Varies according to uses ratios.
Office (2,500 square feet/300)
Manufacturing (3,399 square feet/400)
Warehousing (7.213 square feet/1000)
Total
8 spaces
8 spaces
7 spaces
23 spaces
Parking Provided:
23 spaces (21 standard spaces, 2 handicapped spaces)
Building Height: 24 feet
BACKGROUND
The application was formally submitted to the Planning Department on July 13, 1998. A
Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was held on August 13, 1998. The project was
deemed complete on October 15, 1998. This project was initially submitted as a larger building
with severel conflicts to the City's design standards and requirements. To create an attractive yet
functional building, in compliance with the Code at a prominent Iocetion, required extensive design
changes and a reduction in square footage. The outcome of those changes has produced a project
that includes architectural elements and a site layout that will enhance the area.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project is a speculative building designed for mixed uses that the applicant has anticipated to
include offices, warehousing, and manufacturing on a .86 acre site. The building will be twenty-four
(24) feet high and 13,112 square feet in area. This project provides 23 parking spaces to
accommodate the mixed-use ratios set by the applicant.
ANALYSIS
Site Design and Circulation
The project is located on the southwest corner of Rancho Way and Diaz Road with access being
taken from Rancho Way. The lot is almost square with the front (northem elevation) facing Rancho
Way and the parking lot placed between the building and the street. Access to the loading area
will be along the west property line to the rear of the site. Loading facilities are on the southwest
inverted corner of the building, which is 160 feet back form Rancho Way. This is an adequate
distance back and behind the building to be out of view from the public way. An employee patio
area will be located in the northeast comer of the property near the front entrance to the building.
Architecture & Colors
The building is designed for warehouse and/or industrial use with office space. Fronting Rancho
Way are two office entry points to the building, both finished with bronze glass. Covering the
entries will be a trellis supported by an extended concrete panel and concrete columns. Along Diaz
Road, the building is stepped back breaking up the potential wall mass. The exterior of the building
is tilt-up concrete with a sandblasted finish and vertical and horizontal scores lines with an accent
color band (maroon) around the top (reference Attachment 4.F.)
Landscaping
Twenty-nine percent (29%) of the site has been landscaped which exceeds the twenty percent
minimum landscaping requirement in the LI (Light Industrial) zone. A large portion of the
landscaping is between the Diaz Road and the building and along Rancho Way, This landscaping
will be effective in screening the property. Adjacent to the entire front of the building will be
landscaping to soften the hard vertical and horizontal surfaces creating more interesting entries to
the offices. Along the streets are London Plane trees and a mix of Fern Pine and Purple Leaf Plum
trees throughout the parking lot. This selection of plants is similar to those used on other properties
in the general area.
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATION
Existing zoning for the site is LI (Light Industrial). Office/warehouse/manufacturing uses are
permitted with the approval of a development plan pursuant to Chapter 17.05 of the Development
Code. The General Plan Land Use designation for the site is BP (Business Park). The project, as
proposed, is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
An Initial Study has been prepared for this project. The Initial Study determined that although the
proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not
considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and in the
Conditions of Approval for the project. Any potentially significant impacts will be mitigated to less
than significant.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
This area has an extensive vadety of styles and there are other industrial use buildings surrounding
this location. The proposed design and use should be compatible and consistent with other
businesses along this portion of Rancho Way and Diaz Road. The proposed project is consistent
with the City's General Plan, Development Code and Design Guidelines.
FINDINGS
The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all
applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The project is
consistent with all City Ordinances, including; the City's Development Code, Ordinance No.
655 (Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance), and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping
provisions.
The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety and welfare. The project as proposed complies with all City Ordinances and meets
the standards adopted by the City of Temecula designed for the protection of the public
health, safety and welfare.
An Initial Study was prepared for the project and it has determined that, although the
proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not
considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and
in the Conditions of Approval added to the project.
The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats, including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds. The project site
has been previously disturbed and graded, and street improvements have already been
installed on site. There are no native species of plants, no unique, rare, threatened or
endangered species of plants, no native vegetation on or adjacent to the site. Further,
there is no indication that any wildlife species exist, or that the site serves as a migration
corridor. A DeMinimus impact finding can be made for this project.
Attachments:
1.
2.
3.
4.
PC Resolution - Blue Page 5
Exhibit A. Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 8
Initial Study - Blue Page 19
Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 32
Exhibits - Blue Page 37
A. Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C. General Plan
D. Site Plan
E. Elevation
F. Landscape Plan
G. Floor Plans
R:\STAFFRPT\302pa98.doc
4
ATTACHMENT NO. t
PC RESOLUTION NO. 98-__
R:\STAFFRPTX302pa98.doc
5
ATI'ACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 98-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA98-0302 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) FOR THE DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A 13,112 SQUARE FOOT INDUSTRIAL
(TILT-UP CONCRETE) BUILDING ON A .86 ACRE LOT;
LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF RANCHO WAY
AND DIAZ ROAD, KNOWN AS PARCEL I OF PM 13487 AND
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-040-018.
WHEREAS, Fernando Mesquita of Mesquita & Associates filed Planning Application No.
PA98-0302, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA98-0302 was processed including, but not limited
to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA98-0302, on
November 4, 1998, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City
staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition
to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. PA98-0302;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by
reference.
Section 2. FjDdjDg~ The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No.
PA98-0302 (Development Plan) hereby makes the following findings as required by Section
17.05.010. F of the Temecula Municipal Code:
A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with
all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The project is consistent
with all City Ordinances including: the City's Development Code, Ordinance No. 655 (Mt. Palomar
Lighting Ordinance), and the City's Water Ericlent Landscaping provisions.
B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public
health, safety and weftare. The project as proposed complies with all City Ordinances and meets
the standards adopted by the City of Temecula designed for the protection of the public health,
safety and welfare,
C. An Initial Study was prepared for the project and it has determined that although the
proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not
considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and in the
Conditions of Approval added to the project.
D. The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species
or their habitats, including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds. The project site
has been previously disturbed and graded, and streetscape installed on site. There are no native
species of plants, no unique, rare, threatened or endangered species of plants, no native
vegetation on or adjacent to the site. Further, there is no indication that any wildlife species exist,
or that the site serves as a migration corridor. A DeMinimus impact finding can be made for this
project.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Study was prepared for this project and
indicates that although the proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the
Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration with a
DeMinimus impact finding, therefore, is hereby adopted.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby
conditionally approves Planning Application No. PA98-0302 (Development Plan) for the design and
construction of a 13, 112 SQUARE FOOT industrial (tilt-up concrete) building on a .86 acre lot,
located on the southwest corner of Rancho Way and Diaz Road, and known as Assessors Parcel
No. 921-040-018, and subject to the project specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached
hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of November, 1998.
Marcia Slaven, Chairperson
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 4th day of November,
1998 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:XSTAPFRPT~302pa98,do~
7
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
R:\STAFFRPT\302pa98.doc
8
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA98-0302 (Development Plan)
Project Description: The design and construction of a 13,112 SQUARE FOOT
industrial (tilt-up concrete) building on a .86 acre lot located on
the southwest corner of Rancho Way and Diaz Road.
Assessor's Parcel No.:
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
921-040-018
November 4, 1998
November 4, 2000
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
a cashiers check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of
Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file
the Notice of Determination with a DeMinimus Finding for the Mitigated or Negative
Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code
of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour pedod the applicant has
not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division the check as
required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of
condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)].
General Requirements
The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to
indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own
selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or
instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees,
consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions,
awards, judgements, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek
monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the
approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal
board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning
the Planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner
of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further
cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its dght to take any and all
action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such
defense.
R:\STAFFRPT~302p~L08.dOC
9
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall
become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction
contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter diligently
pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this
approval.
The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved Mitigation
Monitoring Program.
The development of the premises shall conform substantially to Exhibit D (Site Plan),
approved with Planning Application No. 98-0302, or as amended by these conditions.
Building elevations shall conform substantially to the approved to Exhibit E (Elevation
Plans), or as amended by these conditions. All mechanical and roof equipment shall be
screened from public view by architectural features integrated into the design of the
structures.
+
Landscaping shall conform substantially with the approved Conceptual Landscape Plan,
Exhibit F, or as amended by these conditions. Landscaping installed for the project shall
be continuously maintained to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager and the
Development Code. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the
Planning Manager shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring the
landscaping into conformanca with the approved landscape plan. The continued
maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any
successors in interest.
The colors and materials used for this industrial building shall conform substantially to the
approved color and material board, or as amended by these conditions.
Material
Concrete walls
Accent Trim
Office front and windows
Man doors & Overhead doors
Color
Sandblasted Finish
Frazee AC115N Tomatillo
Libby Owens Ford, Bronze Vision Glass
Frazee 8784D, Blackthorn
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
The applicant shall submit to the Planning Department for permanent filing two (2) 8" X 10"
glossy photographic color prints each of the Color and Materials Board and the colored
architectural Elevations. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall
be readable on the photographic prints.
10.
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal
Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by
providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid.
R:\STAFFRPT',302pa98.doc
11.
The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided
by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and retum one
signed set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
12. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecuta Fee Schedule.
13.
Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the
Planning Department for approval. The location, number, genus, species, and container
size of the plants shall be shown. These plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient
Ordinance and conforTn substantially to the approved Exhibit "F" Conceptual Landscape
Plan or as amended by these conditions. The cover page shall identify the total square
footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be accompanied by the
following items:
Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal).
One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
Total cost estimate of piantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved
plan).
Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits
14.
Separate building permit applications for the installation of signage shall be submitted in
conformance with City Ordinances, Design Guidelines, and Development Code.
15.
All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed and be in a condition
acceptable to the Planning Manager. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds,
disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be propedy constructed and in good working
order.
16.
Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to
guarantee the maintenance of the plantings, in accordance with the approved construction
landscape and irrigation plans, shall be filed with the Community Development Department
- Planning Division for one year from final certfficate of occupancy. After that year, if the
landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the
Planning Manager, the bond shall be released.
17.
Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently
affixed reflectodzed sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying
the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square
inches in area and shall be centered at the intedor end of the parking spaca at a minimum
height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or
centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking spaca finished grade, ground,
or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-
R:\STAFFILoT~302pa98.doc
street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously
stating the following:
"Unauthodzed vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not
displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for
persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense.
Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 909 696-3000."
In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a
surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least 3
square feet in size.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
18.
Comply with applicable provisions of the 1994 edition of the California Building, Plumbing
and Mechanical Codes; 1993 National Electdcal Code; California Administrative Code, Title
24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code.
19.
Submit at time of plan review, a complete extedor site lighting plans showing compliance
with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other
outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building
and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly
upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way.
20.
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted
to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School
Mitigation Fees.
21.
Obtain all building plan and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
22. The Occupancy classification of the proposed buildings shall be B/S-I/F-1.
23. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
24.
All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
all details on plans. {California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
25. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building,
26. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
27. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
28.
Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of extedor lighting, fire
alarm systems.
R:\STAFFRPT\302pa98.dcc
12
29. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1994
edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code, Appendix C.
30. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system.
31. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with odginal signature on plans
submitted for plan review.
32. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic
and mechanical plan for plan review.
33. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer
engineer are required for plan review submittal.
34. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
35. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector pdor to the start of the
building construction.
36. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls require separate
approvals and permits.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any
Government Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site plan all
existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and
drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review
and revision.
General Requirements
37. A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site fiat work and
improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way.
38. 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.
39. All grading plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing
improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of
Temecula mylars.
R:\STAFFRPT~302pa98.dOC
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46,
47.
48.
A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and
appreved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary
erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private
property.
The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading
and erosion control improvements in cenformance with applicable City Standards and
subject to approval by the Department of Public Works.
A Soil Report shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and submitted to the
Director of the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report
shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the
construction of engineered structures and pavement sections.
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.
As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer
shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
Planning Department
Department of Public Works
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.
The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site
work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier's check
or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan
fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this
property, no new charge needs to be paid,
The site is in an area identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map as Flood Zone AE. This
project shall comply with Chapter 15, Section 15.12 of the City Municipal Code which may
include obtaining a Letter of Map Revision from FEMA. A Flood Plain Development Permit
shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
R:\STAFFRPTX302pa98.dcc
14
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
49.
Improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of
Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works.
The following design cdteda shall be observed:
Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1,00% minimum over A.C,
paving.
b. Driveway shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A.
Streetlights shall be installed along Diaz Road adjoining the site in accordance with
City of Temecula Standard No. 800.
Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages
in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400 and 401.
All street and driveway centedine intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
Landscaping shall be limited in the comer cut-off area of all intersections and
adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility.
50.
The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula
General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by
the Director of the Department of Public Works:
Improve Diaz Road (Major Highway Standards - 100' R/W) to include installation
of sidewalk.
Improve Rancho Way (Principal Collector Highway Standards - 78' R/W) to
include installation of sidewalk, drainage facility, and utilities (including but not
limited to water and sewer).
c. Access ramp at the intersection of Diaz Road and Rancho Way.
The Developer shall design and construct or provide a cash deposit for half width
raised landscape median on Diaz Road (Major Highway Standards - 100' PJW)
along property frontage. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the
Department of Public Works.
51.
The building pad shall be ceffified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with
the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer
shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions,
52.
The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as
required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code
and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06.
R:\ST~302pa98.doc
15
53.
The Developer shall record a wdtten offer to participate in, and waive all rights to object to
the formation of an Assessment District, a Community Facilities District, or a Bridge and
Major Thoroughfare Fee District for the construction of the proposed Western Bypass
Corridor in accordance with the General Plan. The form of the offer shall be subject to the
approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
54.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District
Eastern Municipal Water District
Department of Public Works
55.
All public improvements, shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and
City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works,
56.
The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall
be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department
of Public Works.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
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:
57.
Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by
the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the Uniform
Building Code (UBC), Uniform Fire Code (UFC), and related codes which are in force at the
time of building plan submittal.
58.
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commercial buildings per UFC Appendix Ill.A, Table A-Ill-A-1. The
developer shall provide for this project, awater system capable of delivering 1500 GPM at
20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 1850 GPM for
a total fire flow of 3350 GPM with a 3 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted
during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic
fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as
given above has taken into account all information as provided. (UFC 903.2, Appendix
Ill.A)
59,
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per UFC
Appendix Ill. B, Table A-Ill-B-1. A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants (6"
x 4" x 2-2 "outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access reads andadjacent public
streets. Hydrants shall be spacad at 400 feet apart and shall be located no more than 225
feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access read(s) frontage to a hydrant.
The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The
R:\STAFFRPTX302pa98.doc
16
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (UFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-
B)
As required by the Uniform Fire Code, when any portion of the building(s) is in excess of
150 feet from a water supply on a public street, on site fire hydrants are required. For this
project on site fire hydrants are required. (UFC 903.2)
Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire
Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any
portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all
weather suffaca designed for 70,000 Ibs. GVVV with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet.
( UFC sec 902 and Ord 95-15)
Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than
twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13)
feet six (6) inches. (UFC 902.2.2.1 and Ord. 95-15)
Pdor to building construction, dead end roadways and streets in excess of one hundred and
fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of
accommodating fire apparatus. (UFC 902.2,2.4)
Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water
system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to installation. Plans shall be:
signed by a registered civil engineer, contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature
block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards.
After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to
the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire
hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any
combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (UFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2
and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1 )
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers"
shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations, (UFC 901.4.3)
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, all commercial buildings
shall display street numbers in a prominent location on the street side of the building. The
numerals shall be minimum twelve (12) inches in height for buildings and six (6) inches for
suite identification on a contrasting background. In strip centers, businesses shall post the
suite address on the rear door(s). (UFC 901.4.4 and Ord 95-15)
Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and
type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system.
Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to
installation. (UFC Article 10, UBC Chapter 9 and Ord 95-15)
Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for
monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm
system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans
R:\STAFluRFr~302pa98.doc
17
shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to installation. (UFC
Article 10)
69.
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be
provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be
located to the right side of the main entrance door. The Knox-Box shall be supervised by
the alarm system. (UFC 902.4)
70.
All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates
obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry
system for emergency access by firefighting personnel. (UFC 902.4)
71.
Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible
stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: an
automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage
arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department
access doors and Fire department access roads. Buildings housing high-piled combustible
stock shall comply with the provisions Uniform Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable
National Fire Protection Association standards. (UFC Article 81)
OTHER AGENCIES
72.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated August 10, 1998, a copy of which
is attached.
73.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California
Water District's transmittal dated August 6, 1998, a copy of which is attached.
74.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside County
Flood Control and Water Conservation District's transmittal dated October 8, 1998, a copy
of which is attached.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, I understand, and I accept all the above
mentioned Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in
conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the
project shall be subject to Planning Department approval.
Applicanrs Signature
Date
Name printed
R:\STA[:i=RPTk10'2pa98.dOC
18
TO:
FROM:
(
COUNTY OF RIVERSI FL
DF_.2ARTMEN~ OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
: Thomas rnsle~
PLOI PLAN NO. PA98-C302
H1
DATE: August 10, 1998
The DeparU,~ent of Environmental Health has reviewed the Plot Plan No.PA98~0302 and has no
objections. Sanitary sewer and water services may be available in this arm.
PRIOR TO ANY PLAN CItECI{ SUBMITTAL for health clearance, the following items arc
required:
a) "Will-serve" letters from the appropriate waler and sewedng agencies.
b)
Three complete sets of plans for each food establishment will be submitted, including a fixture
schedule, a finish schedule, an~ a plumbtag schedule in order to ensure compliance with the
California Uniform Retail Fooll Facilities Law. For specific reference, please contact Food
Facility Plan examiners at (909) 594-5022.
c)
A clearance letter from the H,Tardous Services Materials Management Branch (909) 694-5055
will be required indicating that ~e project has been cleared for:
· Underground storage tanks, Ordinance #617.4.
· Hazardous Waste G-cncramr Services, Ordinance #615.3.
· Hazardous Waste Disclosm-¢ (in accorchmc¢ ~vith Ordinance #651.2).
· Waste reduction managere-.t.
3. Waste Rcgulation Branch (Waste CJDIlcctionFLEA).
CH:ch.
[909) 9554980
NOTE:
Any current additional requirements not covered, can be applicable at time of Building
Plan rc.~iew for final l~partment of Environmental Hellth clearance.
cc: Doug Thompson
sta~d3b.cloc
HiW~N ib'.TN~TWNO;qTANq
John F. Hennigar
Phillip L. Forbes
C. Michael Cowett
Best Best & Krieger LLP
August 6, 1998
Thomas Thornsley, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AVAILABILITY
I nT ~ln ~ OF PARCEL MAP ~,n 13487
APN 921-040-018
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0302
Dear Mr. Thornsley:
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.
If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for
fees and requirements.
Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing
an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to
RCWD.
If you have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services
Representative at tl-fis office.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brannon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
98/SB:mc166/F012-T6/FCF
AUG (i '7 1998
c: Laurie Williams, Engineering Services Supervisor
DAVID P. ZAPPE
General Manager-Chief Engineer
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
1995 MARKEl' STREE.r
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
909/955-1200
909/788-9965 FAX
54145.1
October 8, t998
City of Temecula
Planning Department
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Attention: Thomas Thomsley
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re: PA 98-0302
The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in
incorporated Cities. The district also does not plan check City land use cases, or provide State
Division of Real Estate letters or other flood hazard reports for such cases. District
comments/recommendations for such cases are normally limited to items as specific interest to the
District including District Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood control and drainage
facilities which could be considered a logical component or extension of a master plan system, and
District Area Drainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition, information of a general
nature is provided. The District has not reviewed the proposed project in detail and the following
comments do not in any way constitute or imply District approval or endorsement of the proposed
project with respect to flood hazard, public health and safety, or any other such issues.
PA 98-0302 is a proposal to construct a 15,000 square foot concrete tilt-up building for business uses
at the southwest comer of Rancho Way and Diaz Road.
Almost the entire site is within the 100-year Zone AE flood plain limits for Murrieta Creek as
delineated on Panel No. 060742-005B of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps issued in conjunction with
the National Flood Insurance Program, administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA). The water surface elevation for the FEMA flow rote of 30,900 cfs is 1011.00 at the
upstream edge of the property. A District flood study has determined the base flood elevation for the
master plan flow rate of 38,300 to be 1013.84 at the upstream edge of the property. The high-water
mark during the flood of January 1993 was 1012.96. All the elevations are based on 1929 NGVD.
Property within the flood plain should be conditioned to construct the required improvements to
Murrieta Creek Channel or participate in a financing mechanism such as an assessment district to
ensure necessary improvements are constructed. If the City chooses to allow development to
proceed, it should condition the applicant to provide all studies, calculations, plans or other
information needed to meet FEMA requirements. In this case, the new building should be
floodproofed by constructing the finished floor a minimum of 12 inches above the District's base
flood elevation for 38,300 cfs.
OCT 13 1998
City of Temecula '2-
Re: PA 98-0302
October 8, 1998
This project is located within the limits of the District's Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area
Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been adopted; applicable fees should be paid by cashier's
check or money order to the Flood Control District prior to the issuance of building or grading
permits. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of issuance of the actual permit.
Questions concerning this matter may be referred to me at 909/955-1214.
Very truly yours,
STUART E. MCKIBBIN
Senior Civil Engineer
SKM:sO
ATTACHMENT NO, 2
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
R:\STAFFRPT~302pa98.dOC
19
CITY OF TEMECULA
Environmental Checklist
Project Title:
Lead Agency:
Contact Person:
Project Location:
Project Sponsor:
General Plan Designation:
Zoning:
Project Descdption:
Surrounding Land Uses
and Setting:
Other public agencies
Whose approval is required:
Planning Application No. PA98-0302 (Development Plan)
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Ddve, Temecula, CA 92590
Thomas K. Thornsley, Project Planner (909) 694-6400
On the southwest comer of Rancho Way and Diaz Road. (APN 921-
040-018)
Mesquita & Assoc., Fernando Mesquita
6595 Riverdale St., San Diego, CA 92120
BP (Business Park)
LI (Light Industrial)
The design and construction of a 13,112 square foot industrial (tilt-up
concrete) building on a .86 acre parcel.
The project is located in an area that has been previously graded.
Some of the surrounding properties are developed. This property
takes access to Rancho Way and all utilities are available. The
prepedy to the south and west is developed. The properties to the
east and north are vacant.
Riverside County Fire Department, Riverside County Health
Department, Temecula Police Department, Eastem Municipal Water
Distdct, Rancho California Water District, Southern California Gas
Company, Southem California Edison Company, and General
Telephone Company.
R:~STAFF~21~98.dOC
2O
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be
at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant
following pages.
[ ] Land Use and Planning [ ]
[ ] Population and Housing [ ]
[X] Geologic Problems [ ]
[X] Water [ ]
[ ] Air Quality [ ]
[ ] Transportation/Circulation [ ]
[ ] Biological Resources [ ]
[ ] Energy and Mineral Resources [ ]
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
potentially affected by this project, involving
Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the
Hazards
Noise
Public Services
Utilities and Service Systems
Aesthetics
Cultural Resources
Recreation
Mandatory Findings of Significance
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
however, there should not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures
described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
Thomas K, Thornsley
Project Planner
Date
R:\STAFFRPT\302pa98.doc
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Po~ntially
Significant Less
Polennally Unless Than
Si~ificam Mi~gahon Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a. Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source 1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17)
b. Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project?
c. Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
(Source 1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17)
d. Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to
soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)?
(Source 1, Figure 5-4, Page 5-17)
e. Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established
community (including low-income or minority community)?
[ ] [] [] Ix]
[ ] [] [] Ix]
[ ] [ ] [ ] [x]
[ ] [ ] [ ] Ix]
[ ] [ ] [ ] [x]
1 .b. The project will not conflict with applicable environmental plans or polices adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over
the project. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan Land Use Designation of BP (Business Park) and
the zoning designation of LI (Light Industrial). Impacts from all General Plan Land Use Designations were analyzed
in the Environmental Impact Report for (EIR) the General Plan. Agencies with judsdiction within the City commented
on the scope of the analysis contained in the EIR and how the land uses would impact their particular agency.
Mitigation measures approved with the EIR will be applied to this project. Further, all agencies with jurisdiction over
the project are also being given the opportunity to comment on the project and it is anticipated that they will make the
appropriate comments as to how the project relates to their specific environmental plans or polices. The project site
has been previously graded and sen/ices have been extended into the area. There will be limited, if any environmental
effects on environmental plans or polices adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project, No effects are
anticipated as a result of this project.
1 .e. The project will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including low-income or
minority community). The project is an industrial building that has been designed to accommodate handle
manufacturing and warehousing uses, and is surrounded by some currently developed similar uses. There is no
established residential community (including low-income or minority community) at this site. No effects are anticipated
as a result of this project.
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would be proposal:
a, Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population
projects?
b. Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through project in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)?
c. Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing?
[] [] [] ~
[] [] [] ~
[] f) [1 ~
2.a, The project will not cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections. The project is speculative
industrial building for manufacturing and warehousing and is consistent with the City's General Plan Land Use
Designation of LI (Light Industrial). Since the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, and does not exceed
the floor area ratio for Light Industrial, it will not be a significant contributor to population growth that will cumulatively
exceed official regional or local population projections. No effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
2.b. The project wilt not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The project is censistent with the
General Plan Land Use Designation of Light Industrial. The project will cause people to relocate to or within Temecula;
however, due to its limited scale, it will not induce substantial growth in the area. No effects are anticipated as a result
of this project,
R:\STAFFRFT\302pa98.doc
22
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Po~n~ally
Significant Less
Pommially Unless TItan
Significant MitjgaBon Significant No
Impact Imorpora~d Impact lmpac~
2.c. The project will not displace housing, especially affordable housing. The project site is vacant; therefore no housing
will be displaced. No effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result
in or expose people to potential impacts involving?
a. Fault rupture? (Source 1, Figure 7-1, Pg. 7-6)
b. Seismic ground shaking? (Source 1, Figure 7-1, Pg. 7-6)
c. Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
(Source 1, Figure 7-2, Pg. 7-8)
d. Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard?
e. Landslides or mudflows?
f. Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions
from excavation, grading or fill?
g. Subsidence of the land? (Source 1, Figure 7-2, Pg. 7-8)
h. Expansive soils?
i. Unique geologic or physicel features?
[] [] Ix] []
[] [] [~ []
[] ~ [] []
[] [] [] [~
[1 [1 [] ~
[1 [] [~ []
[] [~ [] []
[] [~ [] []
[] [] [] ~]
g,h. The project may have a significant impact on people involving seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure
(including liquefaction and subsidence of the land) and expansive soils, and will have a less than significant to erosion,
changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill. The project is located in Southern
California, an area that is seismically active. Any potentially significant impacts will be mitigated through building
construction that is consistent with Uniform Building Code standards. Further, preliminary soil reports have been
submitted and reviewed as part of the application submittal and recommendations contained in this report will be used
to determine appropriate conditions of approval. The soils reports will also contain recommendations for the
compaction of the soil which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from seismic ground shaking,
seismic ground failure (including liquefaction and subsidence of the land), erosion, changes in topography or unstable
soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill and expansive soils. After mitigation measures are performed, no
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
3.d. The project will not expose people to a seiche, tsunami or volcanic hazard. The project is not located in an area where
any of these hazards could occur. No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
3.e. The project will not expose people to landslides or mudflows. The Final Environmental Impact for the City of Temecula
General Plan has not identified any known landslides or mudslides located on the site or proximate to the site. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
3.f. Increased wind and water erosion of soils both on and off-site may occur during the construction phase of the project
and the project may result in changes in siltation, deposition or erosion. Erosion control techniques will be included
as a condition of approval for the project. In the long-run, hardscape and landscaping will serve as permanent erosion
control for the project. Modification to topography and ground surface relief features will not be considered significant
since modifications will be consistent with the surrounding development. Potential unstable soil conditions from
excavation, grading or fill will be mitigated through the use of landscaping and proper compaction of the soils as
recommended in the soils report. After mitigation measures are performed, no impacts are anticipated as a result of
this project.
3.i. The project will not impact unique geologic or physical features. No unique geologic features or physical features exist
on the site. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project,
R:\STAFFRPT~302pa98.doc
23
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Significant l~ss
Pot~nm~y Unless Than
Signifi~nt Mitigation Si~cant No
~ [ncorpomed Impact Impact
4. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?.
b. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding? (Source 1, Figure 7-3, Pg. 7-10, and
Figure 7-4, Pg. 7-12)
c. Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface
water quality (e.g. temperature. dissolved oxygen or
turbidity)?
d. Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body?
e. Changes in currents, or the course or direction ofwater
movements?
f. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through
direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial
loss of groundwater recharge capability?
g. Altered direction or rate of ~ow of groundwater?
h. Impacts to groundwater quality?
i. Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies?
(Source 2, Pg. 263)
[] [] ~ []
[] ~] [] []
[] [] [~ []
[] [] [~ []
[] [] ~] []
[] [] ~ []
[] [] [~ []
[] [] [~ []
[] [] [] [~
4.a.
The project will result in less than significant changes to absorption rates, drainage petterns and the rate and amount
of surface runoff. Previously permeable ground will be rendered impervious by construction of buildings,
accompanying bardscape and driveways. While absorption rates and surface runoff will change, potential impacts
shall be mitigated through site design, Drainage conveyances will be required for the project to safely and adequately
handle runoff that is created. After mitigation measures are performed, no significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
4.b.
This project could result in potentially signfficant impacts by exposing people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding. A portion of the project site is within the 100 year flood zone of Murrieta Creak. Recommendations
from County Flood Control for flood proofing the building will be included in the Conditions of Approval of this project
to mitigate the potential flood hazard. After mitigation measures are perfon'ned, no significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
The project may have a potentially significant effect on discharges into surface waters and alteration of surface water
quality. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the project, the developer will be required to 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 has been flied or the project
is shown to be exempt. By camplying with the NPDES requirements, any potential impacts can be mitigated to a
level less than signfficant. No signfficant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
4 .d,e. The project will have a less than significant impact in a change in the amount of surface water in any water body or
impact currents, or to the course or direction of water movements. Additional surface runoff will occur because
previously permeable ground will be rendered impervious by construction of buildings, accompanying hardscape and
driveways. Due to the limited scale of the project, the additional amount of drainage into Murdeta Creek will not be
considered significant. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
4 .f-h. The project will have a less than significant change in the quantity and quality of ground waters, either through direct
additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of
groundwater recharge capability. Limited changes will occur in the quantity and quality of ground waters; however,
due to the minor scale of the project, it will not be considered significant. Further, construction on the site will not be
R:\STAFFRPT',302pa98.dOC
24
ISSUES AND SUPFORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Significant Less
Potchilly Unless Than
Significant Mitigation Slgm~cant No
Im~ct Incor~r~d impact Impact
at depths sufficient to have a significant impact on ground waters. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result
of this project.
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
5.b.
5.c.
5,d,
a. Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
(Source 3, Pgs. 6-11, Table 6-2)
b. Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
c. Alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause
any change in climata?
d. Create objectionable odors?
[] [] [] [x]
[] [] [] [~
[] [1 [] [~
[] [] ~ []
The project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. There are no significant pollutants or sensitive receptors
in proximity to the project. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause any change in climate. The limited scale
of the project precludes it from creating any significant impacts on the environment in this area. No impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will create objectionable odors dudng the construction phase of the project. These impacts will be of short
duration and are not considered significant over the long term. No other odors are anticipated as a result of this
project.
6.8.
6.b.
TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
Would the proposal result in:
a. Increase vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
b. Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves
or dangerous intersection or incompatible uses)?
c. Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
d. Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
(Source 4, Table 17.24(a), Pg. 17-24-9)
e. Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
f. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus tumouts, bicycle racks)?
(Source 4, Chapter 17.24, Pg. 12)
g. Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
[] [] R []
[] [] [] [~
[] [] [] R
[] [] [] [x]
[] [] [] [~
[] [] [] [~
[] [1 [1 [~
The project will result in a less than significant increase in vehicle trips; however it will add to traffic congestion. It
is anticipated that this project will contdbuta less than a five percent (5%) increase in existing volumes during the AM
peak hour and PM peak hour time frames to the intersection of Diaz Road and Rancho Way. The applicant will be
required to pay traffic signal mitigation fees and public facility fees as conditions of approval for the project. After
mitigation measures are performed, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not result in hazards to safety from design features. The project is designed to current City standards
and does not propose any hazards to safety from design features. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
ISSUF~ AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potenually
Significant L~s
I~.mlaHy Unless Than
Significant Mitigauon Significant No
~-,p.~n lncorporat~l Impact Impact
The project will not result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses. The project is an industrial
building for manufacturing and warehouse use in an area with other similar uses and planned Business Park/Light
Industrial uses. The project is designed to current City standards and has adequate emergency access. No impacts
are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.e. The project will not result in hazards or barTiers for pedestrians or bicyclists. Hazards or barriers to bicyclists have
not been included as part of the project. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.g. The project will not result in impacts to rail, waterborne or air traffic since none exists currently in the immediate
proximity of the project. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal
result in impacts to:
a. Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals
and birds)? (Source 1, Page 5-15, Figure 5-3)
b. Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)?
(Source 1, Figure 5-3, Page 5-15)
c. Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest,
coastal habitat, etc.)? (Source 1, Figure 5-3)
d. Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)?
(Source 1, Figure 5-3)
e. Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
[] [] []
[] [] []
[] [] []
[] [] []
[] [] [1
The project will not result in an impact to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The project site does not serve as
part of a migration corridor. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal:
a. Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
b. Use non-renewal resources in a wasteful and inefficient
manner?
c. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
that would be of future value to the region and the residents
of the State?
[] [] []
[] [] []
[] [] []
8.a. The project will not impact and/or conflict with adopted energy conservation plans. The project will be reviewed for
compliance with all applicable laws pertaining to energy conservation during the plan check stage. No permits will
be issued unless the project is found to be consistent with these applicable laws. No impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
8.b. The project will result in a less than significant impact for the use of non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner. There will be an increase in the rate of use of natural resource during construction (construction
materials, fuels for the daily operation, asphalt, lumber). The depletion of these nonrenewable resource(s) and the
subsequent depletion of the non-renewable natural resources is minimal. Due to the scale of the proposed
development, these impacts are not seen as less than significant.
8.c. The project will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the
region and the residents of the State. No known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the
residents of the State are located at this project site. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING IN~ORIvlATION SOURCES
9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
9.8.
9.b.
9.c.
Potentially
Significant L~ss
Potentially Unless Than
Si~i~cam Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporeal Impact Impact
9.d.
9.e.
a. A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemical or radiation)?
b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan?
c. The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard?
d. Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health
hazards?
e. Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees?
[] [] ~ []
[] [] [] ~
[] [] ~ []
[] [] [] [~
[] [] [] [~
The project will result in a less than significant impact due to risk of explosion, or the release of any hazardous
substances in the event of an accident or upset conditions since none are proposed in the request. While the future
tenant has not been determined and they may sell or distribute hazardous substances, they will be regulated by both
the Fire Department and the Department of Environmental Health. Both entities have reviewed the project. The
applicant must receive clearance from the Department of Environmental Health prior to any plan check submittal.
The applicant must receive clearance from the Fire Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. This
applies to storage and use of hazardous materials. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not interfere with an emergency response plan or an emergency evaluation plan. The subject site
is not located in an area that could impact an emergency response plan. The project will take access from a
maintained street and will therefore not impede any emergency response or emergency evacuation plans. No
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will result in a less than significant impact in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard.
The project will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable health laws during the plan check stage. No permits
will be issued unless the project is found to be consistent with these applicable laws (Reference response 9.a.) No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not expose people to existing sources of potential health hazards. No health hazards are known to
be within proximity of the project (Reference 9.a. & 9.c.). No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not result in an increase to fire hazard in an area with ~ammable brush, grass, or trees. The project
is a speculative industrial building for manufacturing and industrial uses in an area of similar uses and proposed
Business Park/Light Industrial uses. The project is not located within or proximate to a fire hazard area. No impacts
are anticipated as a result of this project.
10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a. Increase in existing noise levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
[] [] ~ []
[] [] ~ []
10.a. The proposal will result in a less than significant increase to current noise levels. The site is currently vacant and
development of the land logically will result in increases to noise levels during construction phases as well as
increases to noise in the area over the long run. Long-term noise generated by this project would be similar to
existing and proposed uses in the area. No significant noise impacts are anticipated as a result of this project in
either the short or long-term.
10.b. The project may expose people to severe noise levels during the development/construction phase (short run).
Construction machinery is capable of producing noise in the range of 100+ DBA at 100 feet, which is considered very
R:\STAFFRPT\302pa98.doc
27
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potenlially
Significant Less
Potsreally Unless Than
Signific,~nt Milig~fion Si~ificam No
lmp~t In~orpora~ Impact impact
annoying and can cause hearing damage from steady 8-hour exposure. This source of noise will be of short duration
and therefore wil~ not be considered significant. There will be no long-term exposure of people to noise. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
11.
PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
e. Other governmental services?
[] [] [~ []
[] [] ~ []
[] [] [] ~
[] [] ~ []
[] [] [] [x]
11 .a,b.The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered fire or police
protection, The project will incrementally increase the need for fire and police protection; however, it will contribute
its fair share to the maintenance of service provision from these entities. No significant impacts are anticipated as
a result of this project.
11 .c. The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered school facilities. The
project will not cause significant numbers of people to relocate within or to the City of Temecula and therefore will
not result in a need for new or altered school facilities. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
11 .d. The project will have a less than significant impact for the maintenance of public facilities, including roads. Funding
for maintenance of roads is derived from the Gasoline Tax, which is distributed to the City of Temecula from the State
of California. Impacts to current and future needs for maintenance of roads as a result of development of the site
will be incremental, however, they will not be considered significant. The Gasoline Tax is sufficient to cover any of
the proposed expenses. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
11 .e. The project will not have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services. No impacts
are anticipated as a result of this project.
12.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b, Communications systems?
c. Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities?
d. Sewer or septic tanks? (Sourca 2, Pg. 39-40)
e. Storm water drainage?
f, Solid waste disposal?
g. Local or regional water supplies?
[] [] [] ~
[] [] [] ~
[] [] [] [~
(1 [1 [1 [~
[1 [1 ~ [1
[1 [] [] [~
[1 [1 [] [~
12.a. The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to power or natural gas.
These systems are currently being delivered in proximity to the site. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
12.b. The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to communication systems
(reference response No. 12.a.). No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\STAFFRPT~302pa98.doc
28
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Significant Less
Potentially Unless Than
Si~i~eam Mitigauon Si~i~cant No
Impact Incorpora~ Impact Impact
12.c. The project will not result in the need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to local or regional water
treatment or distribution facilities. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
12.d. The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to sanitary sewer systems
or septic tanks. While the project will have an incremental impact upon existing systems, the Final Environmental
Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's General Plan states: "both EMWD and RCWD have indicated an ability to supply
as much water as is required in their services areas (p. 39)." The FEIR further states: "implementation of the
proposed General Plan would not significantly impact wastewater services (p. 40)." Since the project is consistent
with the City's General Plan. There are no septic tanks on site or proximate to the site. No impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
12 .e. The proposal will rasutt in a less than significant need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to storm
water drainage. The project will need to provide some additional on-site drainage systems. The drainage system
will be raquirad as a condition of approval for the project and will tie into the existing system. No significant impacts
are anticipated as a result of this project.
12.f.
The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to solid waste disposal systems,
Any potential impacts from solid waste created by this development can be mitigated through participation in any
Soume Reduction and Recycling Programs that are implemented by the City, No impacts are anticipated as a result
of this project.
12 .g. The project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to local or regional water
supplies. Reference response 12.d. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a. Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
b. Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?
c. Create light or glare?
[] [] [] ~
[] [] [~ []
[] [] [~ []
13.a. The project will not affect a scenic vista or scenic highway. The project is not located in a area where there is a
scenic vista, Further, the City does not have any designated scenic highways. No impacts are anticipated as a result
of this project.
13.b. The project will not have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect. The project is an industrial building in an area
of existing uses and proposed Business Park/Light Industrial uses. The building is consistent with other designs in
the area and proposed landscaping will provide additional aesthetic enhancement, No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
13.c, The project will have a potentially significant impact from light and glare. The project will produce and result in
light/glare, as all development of this nature results in new light sources. All light and glare has the potential to impact
the Mount Palomar ObservatonJ. The project will be conditioned to be consistent with Ordinance No. 655 (Ordinance
Regulating Light Pollution), No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a. Disturb paleontological resources?
(Source 2, Figure 15, pg,70)
b. Disturb archaeological resources?
(Source 2, Figure 14, pg. 67)
c. Affect historical resources?
[] [1 [1 ~
[1 [1 [] [~
[1 [] [] ~
R:',STAFFRP'B302pa98.doC
29
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Si~l~ificant Less
Pot~mlly Unless Tlan
Significa~ Mi~iga~on Significant No
lmpm lnwq~orated lm[na Impact
d. Have the potential to cause a physical change which would
affect unique ethnic cultural values?
e. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential
impact area?
[] [] [] Ix]
[ ] [ ] [ ] [x]
14.c. The project will not have an impact on historical resources. The site has been previously graded and resources would
have been disturbed at that time. No historic resources exist at the site or are proximate to the site. No impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project,
14.d The project will not have the potential to cause a physical change that would affect unique ethnic cultural values.
Reference response 14.a.c. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
14.e. The project will not restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area. No religious or sacred
uses exist at the site or are proximate to the site. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a. Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or
other recreational facilities?
b. Affect existing recreational opportunities?
[] [] ~ []
[] [] [~ []
15.a,b.The project will have a less than significant impact or increase in demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other
recreational facilities. The project will not cause significant numbers of people to relocate within or to the City of
Temecula, However, it will result in an incremental impact or in an increase in demand for neighborhoed or regional
parks or other recreational facilities. The same is true for the quality or quantity of existing recreational resources
or opportunities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlib species, cause a fish or wildlife population
to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal community, reduce the number of restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history
or prehistory?
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals?
Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively cansidereble? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future projects),
Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
[] [] [] [~
[] [] [] [~
[] [] [] ~
R:\STAI~RPT\:~02p~98.doc
:~0
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potemjally
Significant
Po~enually
Sigm~cant
Unless
MRigation
Ineorporat~l
Than
Sigm~cant
impact
No
Impact
17. EARLIER ANALYSES.
None.
SOURCES
1. City of Temecula General Plan
2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report
3. South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook
4. City of Temecula Development Code
R:\STAFFRPT\302pa98.doc
31
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
R:\STAFFP, PT~02pa98.doc
32
Geologic Problem~
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Processes:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
R:\STAFFRPTB02pa98.dOc
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Planning Application No. PA98-0302
(Development Plan)
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from
excavation, grading or fill.
Planting of on-site landscaping that is consistent with the Development
Submit landscape plans that include planting of slope m the Planning
Department for approval.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Planning Department.
Exposure of people or property to fault rupture, seismic ground
shaking, seismic ground failure, expansive soils or earthquake hazards.
Ensure that soil compaction is to City standards.
A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be
submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading
plan check. Building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil
Engineer.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits and building permits.
Department of Public Works and Building & Safety Department.
Exposure of people or property to fault rapture, seismic ground
shaking, seismic ground failure, expansive soils or earthquake hazards.
Utilize construction techniques that are consistent with the Uniform
Building Cede.
Submit construction plans to the Building & Safety Deparunent for
approval.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building & Safety Deparanent
33
Water
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
The project will result in changes to absorption rams, drainage panems
and the rate and amount of surface ranoff.
Methods of controlling runoff, from site so that it will not negatively
impact adjacent properties, including drainage conveyances, have been
incorporated into site design and will be included on the grading plans.
Submit grading and drainage plan to the Deparunent of Public Works
for approval.
Prior to the issuance of grading permit.
Department of Public Works.
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as
flooding.
Comply with the recommendations of County Flood Control for flood
proofing the building by raising the finish floor one foot above the
stated flood level.
The applicant shall modify the grading plan and comply with the
building standards.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit and building permit.
Depamnent of Public Works and building and Safety.
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water
quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or mrbidity).
An erosion control plan shall be prepared in accordance with City
requirements and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
shall be prepared in accordance with the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) requirements.
The applicant shall submit a SWPPP to the San Diego Regional Water
Quality Control Board (SDRWQCB) for their review and approval.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Department of Public Works and SDRWQCB (for SWPPP).
R:~STAFFRPT\302pa98.doc
34
Transportation/Circulation
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion.
Payment of Public Facility Fee for road improvements and traffic
impacts.
Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by,
and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits.
Department of Public Works.
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion.
Payment of Traffic Signal Mitigation Fee.
Pay pro-ram share for traffic impacts (to be determined by the Director
of Public Works.
Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits.
Deparunent of Public Works.
Biological Resources
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but
not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds).
Pay Mitigation Fee for impacts to Stephens Kangaroo Rat.
Pay $500.00 per acre of disturbed area of Stephens Kangaroo Rat
habitat.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Deparunent of Public Works and Planning Depat h.ent
R:\STAFFRPT~02pa98.doc
35
Public Services
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
A substantial effect upon and a need for new/altered governmental
services regarding Fare protection. The project will incrementally
increase the need for fire protection; however, it will contribute its fair
share to the maintenance of service provision.
Payment of Fire Mitigation Fees.
Pay current mitigation fees with the Riverside County Fire Department.
Prior to the issuance of building permit.
Building & Safety DeparUnent
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
A substantial effect upon and a need for new/altered schools. No
significant impacts are anticipamd.
Payment of School Fees.
Pay current mitigation fees with the Temecula Valley Unified School
District.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building & Safety Deparuaent and Temecula Valley Unified School
District.
AESTHETICS
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
The creation of new light sources will result in increased light and glare
that could affect the Palomar Observatory.
Use lighting techniques that are consistent with Ordinance No. 655.
Submit lighting plan to the BuiMing and Safety Depa~uuent for
approval
Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Building & Safety Deparunent.
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
R:\STAFFRF~302pa98.doc
37
CITY OF TEMECULA
o~
ZIP CODE
Eastern 92590
Water
Dist
DMV
e
Tower
Plaza
Rd
'\
Maiblno
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0302 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 4, 1998
VICINITY MAP
R:\STAFFRPT\302pa98.doc
36
CITY OF TEMECULA
EXHIBIT B
DESIGNATION - LI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL)
,,,. ·
/
OS
3C
BP
CC
ZONING MAP
EXHIBIT C
DESIGNATION - BP (BUSINESS PARK)
GENERAL PLAN
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0302 (Development Plan)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 4, 1998
R:\STAFFRFT~302pa98.doe
37
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0302 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 4, 1998
SITE PLAN
R:\STAFFRPT~02pa98 .doc
38
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0302 (Development Plan)
EXI-IIRIT E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 4, 1998
ELEVATIONS
R:\STAFFRPT~02pa98 .doc
39
CITY OF TEMECULA
DIAZ ROAD
Z
fr
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0302 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT F LANDSCAPE PLAN
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 4, 1998
R:~STAFFRFr~302pa98 .do~
40
CITY OF TEMECULA
~UlIE~O ]
PLAN~G APPLICATION NO. PA98-0302 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT G
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 4, 1998
FLOOR PLANS
R:~STAFFRPT~302pa98.doc
41
ITEM #7
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
November 4, 1998
Planning Application No. PA98-0354 {Development Plan)
Prepared By: Thomas K. Thomsley, Project Planner
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends the
Commission:
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
Planning
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Planning Application
No. PA98-0354;
ADOPT the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning
Application No. PA98-0354;
ADOPT Resolution No. 98- approving Planning
Application No. PA98-0354 based upon the Analysis and
Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval.
James E. Hundley, Dekkon Development, Inc.
The design and construction of a 16,840 square foot industrial
(tilt-up concrete) building on a one acre lot.
On the north side of Winchester Road, east of Calla Empleado
and west of Diaz Road (APN 909-310-019)
BP (Business Park)
LI (Light Industrial)
North:
South:
East:
West:
Not requested
Vacant
LI (Light Industrial)
LI (Light Industrial)
LI (Light Industrial)
LI (Light Industrial)
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRF'I~354pe98.dOC
1
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS
Total Area:
Total Building Area:
Building Footprint:
Landscape Area:
Paved Area:
Parking Required:
Parking Provided:
Building Height:
North: Vacant
South: Vacant
East: Vacant
West: Specialty Metals, Inc.
43,883 square feet
16,840 square feet
15,950 square feet
8,777 square feet
19,156 square feet
(1 acre)
38%
36%
20%
44%
Varies according to uses ratios.
Office (890 square feet/300)
Manufacturing (3,750 square feet/400)
Warehousing (12.200 square feet/1000)
Total
3 spaces
9 spaces
12 spaces
25 spaces
38 spaces (27 standard spaces, 11 compact spaces (30%),
2 handicapped accessible spaces)
Vaded 26 - 30 feet
BACKGROUND
This project started with a pre-application review in May of this year. The application was formally
submitted to the Planning Department on August 17, 1998. A Development Review Committee
meeting was held on September 10, 1998. The project was deemed complete on October 15,
1998.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project is a speculative building for mixed uses compatible to warehousing and manufacturing
on one acres site. The building will have and overall height of thirty (30) feet but height variations
down to twenty-six (26) feet will be used to break-up the linear massing of the walls. The footpdnt
of the building will be 15,950 square feet. Total building square footage will be 16,840 square feet
(15,950 square foot first floor and 890 square foot second floor).
ANALYSIS
Site Design and Circulation
The project will take access from Winchester Road. The lot is narrow and deep with the front
(southern elevation) of the building set back 80 feet from Winchester Road. The western side of
the building is on the property line. Vehicular Circulation will be along the eastern side of the
building terminating behind the building. Parking is located along both sides of the ddveway entry
and along the east and north sides (rear) of the property. Loading facilities are on the east and
north sides of the building and are an adequate distance (155 feet) back form Winchester Road to
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNrlNG\STAFFRPT~354p~98 ,dec
2
be out of view from the public way. An employee patio area will be located in the northwest comer
of the property behind the building.
Parking Analysis
The applicant is proposing a need for 25 parking stalls based on their calculation of the likely
building tenant and use ratios of 6% office, 72% warehousing and 22% manufacturing. As a
speculative building the parkin9 ratios may vary depending on the actual tenant. With 13 additional
spaces the building could accommodate a more intensive user with greater floor areas in offace and
manufacturing that currently anticipated.
Architecture & Colors
The building is designed for warehouse and/or industdal use and is designed to maximize internal
floor space. The front of the building, which is visible from Winchester Road and the intersection
of Winchester Road and Calle Empleado, is articulated through the use of concrete and glass on
the clipped corner of the building creating an entry focal point. The remainder of the building is
concrete that has been articulated through color patterns using white, off-white, and grey (reference
Attachment 4.F.) and vertical and horizontal score lines. To break up the height and linear mass
of the building, portions of the extedor walls have been vaded (26 - 30 feet) and in a few locations
recessed. The overall architecture is consistent with other industrial buildings in the area.
Landscaping
Twenty percent (20%) of the site has been landscaped. This is consistent with the twenty percent
minimum landscaping requirement in the LI (Light Industrial) zone. The bulk of the landscaping is
between the street and the building front creating an effective landscape statement. The street
trees are London Planes and the front landscaping is a mixed grouping of Desert Willow, Australian
Willow and Queen Palms. This selection of plants is similar to those used on the property to the
west.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
An Initial Study has been prepared for this project. The Initial Study determined that although the
proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not
considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and in the
Conditions of Approval for the project. Any impacts will be mitigated to levels less than significant.
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATION
The General Plan Land Use designation for the site is BP (Business Park). Existing zoning for the
site is LI (Light Industdal). Office/warehouse uses are permitted with the approval of a
development plan pursuant to Chapter 17.05 of the Development Code. The project as proposed
is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
This is an in-fill site and the project proposal includes architectural elements found on many of the
surrounding buildings and is compatible with surrounding business. The area has an extensive
vadety of land uses and there are other industrial buildings within a block of this location. Therefore,
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~354pa98.doc
3
the proposed design and use is considered to be compatible and consistent with other businesses
along this portion of Winchester Road. The proposed project is consistent with the City's General
Plan, Development Code and Design Guidelines.
FINDINGS
The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all
applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The project is
consistent with all City Ordinances, including; the City's Development Code, Ordinance No.
655 (Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance), and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping
provisions.
The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety and welfare. The project as proposed complies with all City Ordinances and meets
the standards adopted by the City of Temecula designed for the protection of the public
health, safety and welfare.
An Initial Study was prepared for the project and has determined that, although the
proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not
considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and
in the Conditions of Approval added to the project.
The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats, including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds, The project site
has been previously disturbed and graded, and street improvements have already been
installed on site. There are no native species of plants, no unique, rare, threatened or
endangered species of plants, no native vegetation on or adjacent to the site. Further,
there is no indication that any wildlife species exist, or that the site serves as a migration
corridor. A DeMinimus impact finding can be made for this project.
Attachments:
1.
2.
3.
4.
PC Resolution - Blue Page 5
Exhibit A. Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 8
Initial Study - Blue Page 18
Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 31
Exhibits - Blue Page 36
A. Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C. General Plan
D. Site Plan
E. Elevation
F. Landscape Plan
G. Floor Plans
H. Rendedng
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA\DEFTS\PLANNINGXSTAFFRP~354p~98.doc
4
A'I'I'ACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO, 98-
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEFrS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX3~4pa98.doc
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 98-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA98-0354 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) FOR THE DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A 16,840 SQUARE FOOT INDUSTRIAL
(TILT-UP CONCRETE) BUILDING ON A ONE ACRE LOT;
LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WINCHESTER ROAD EAST
OF CALLA EMPLEADO AND WEST OF DIAZ ROAD, KNOWN AS
PARCEL 91 OF PM 21383 AND ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-
310-019.
WHEREAS, James E. Hundley, of Dekkon Development, Inc., filed Planning Application
No. PA98-0354, in accordance with the City of Temecuta General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA98-0354 was processed including, but not limited
to public notice, in the time and manner prascdbed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA98-0354, on
November 4, 1998, at a duly noticed public headng as prascribed by law, at which time the City
staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition
to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. PA98-0354;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are heraby incorporated by
reference.
Section 2. Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No.
PA98-0354 (Development Plan) heraby makes the following findings as required by Section
17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code:
A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with
all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The project is consistent
with all City Ordinances including: the City's Development Code, Ordinance No. 655 (Mt. Palomar
Lighting Ordinance), and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping provisions.
B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public
health, safety and welfare. The project as proposed complies with all City Ordinances and meets
the standards adopted by the City of Temecula designed for the protection of the public health,
safety and welfare.
C. An Initial Study was prepared for the project and it has determined that although the
proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, these effects are not
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA~DEPTS\PLANNING~ST~54pa98.doc
6
considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and in the
Conditions of Approval added to the project.
D. The project will not result in an impact to endangered, threatened or rare species
or their habitats, including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds. The project site
has been previously disturbed and graded, and streetscape installed on site. There are no native
species of plants, no unique, rare, threatened or endangered species of plants, no native
vegetation on or adjacent to the site. Further, there is no indication that any wildlife species exist,
or that the site serves as a migration corridor. A DeMinimus impact finding can be made for this
project.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Study was prepared for this project and
indicates that although the proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the
Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration with a
DeMinimus impact finding, therefore, is hereby adopted.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecuia Planning Commission hereby
conditionally approves Planning Application No. PA98-0354 (Development Plan) for the design and
construction of a 16,840 SQUARE FOOT industrial (tilt-up concrate) building on a one acre lot,
located on the north side of Winchester Road east of Cal Empleado and west of Diaz Road, and
known as Assessor's Parcel No. 909-310-019, and subject to the project specific conditions set
forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of November, 1998.
Marcia Slaven, Chairperson
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 4th day of November,
1998 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
\\TEMEC_FS201XDATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPTX354pa98.dOc
7
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA98-0354 (Development Plan - Industrial building)
Project Description: The design and construction of a 16,840 square foot industrial
(tilt-up concrete) building on a one acre lot located on the north
side of Winchester Road east of Calle Empleado and west of
Diaz Road
Assessor°s Parcel No.:
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
909-310-019
November 4, 1998
November 4, 2000
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
a cashiers check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of
Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file
the Notice of Determination with a DeMinimus Finding for the Mitigated or Negative
Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code
of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant has
not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division the check as
required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of
condition [Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)].
General Requirements
The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to
indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own
selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or
instrumentality thereof, or any of its etected or appointed officials, officers, employees,
consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions,
awards, judgements, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek
monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the
approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal
board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning
the Planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner
of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further
cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its dght to take any and all
action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such
defense.
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA\DEFfS~PLANNINGL~TAFFRFI~54pa98.dOc
,
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall
become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction
contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter diligently
pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this
approval.
The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved Mitigation
Monitoring Program.
The development of the premises shall conform substantially to Exhibit D (Site Plan),
approved with Planning Application No. 98-0354, or as amended by these conditions.
Building elevations shall conform substantially to the approved to Exhibit E (Elevation Plan),
or as amended by these conditions. All mechanical and roof equipment shall be screened
from public view by architectural features integrated into the design of the structures.
Landscaping shall conform substantially with the approved Conceptual Landscape Plan,
Exhibit F, or as amended by these conditions. Landscaping installed for the project shall
be continuously maintained to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager and the
Development Code. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the
Planning Manager shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring the
landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued
maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any
successors in interest.
The colors and materials used for this industrial building shall conform substantially to the
approved color and material board, or as amended by these conditions.
Matedal Color
Concrete walls Frazee 182, Arizona White
Frazee 180, Sonoma
Frazee 351, Stormy Sky
Office front and windows Reflective Vision & Spandrel Glass, Finish #11 (Blue)
Man doors &Overhead doors Frazee 182, Arizona White
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
The applicant shall submit to the Planning Department for permanent filing two (2) 8" X 10"
glossy photographic color prints each of the Color and Materials Board and the colored
architeclural Elevations. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall
be readable on the photographic pdnts.
10.
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal
Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by
providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid.
11.
The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided
by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and return one
signed set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~4p~98,doc
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
12. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
13.
Throe (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the
Planning Department for approval. The location, number, genus, species, and container
size of the plants shall be shown. These plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient
Ordinance and conform substantially to the approved Exhibit "F" Conceptual Landscape
Plan or as amended by these conditions. The cover page shall identity the total square
footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be accompanied by the
following items:
Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal).
One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved
plan).
Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits
14.
Separate building permit applications for the installation of signage shall be submitted in
conformance with City Ordinances, Design Guidelines, and Development Code.
15.
All roquirod landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed and be in a condition
acceptable to the Planning Manager. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds,
disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working
order.
16.
Performance secudties, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to
guarantee the maintenance of the plantings, in accordance with the approved construction
landscape and irrigation plans, shall be filed with the Community Development Department
- Planning Division for one year from final certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the
landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the
Planning Manager, the bond shall be roleased.
17.
Each parking space roserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently
affixed reflectodzed sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying
the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square
inches in aroa and shall be centerod at the intedor end of the parking space at a minimum
height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or
centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground,
or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-
street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, cleady and conspicuously
stating the following:
"Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not
displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for
persons with disabilities may be towed away at owners expense.
Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 909 696-3000."
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRFI'~54!~t98.do~
11
In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a
surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least 3
square feet in size.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
18. Comply with applicable provisions of the 1994 edition of the California Building, Plumbing
and Mechanicel Codes; 1993 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title
24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code.
19. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance
with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other
outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building
and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly
upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way.
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted
to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School
Mitigation Fees.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
The Occupancy classification of the proposed buildings shall be B/S-I/F-1.
Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building.
Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
Provide house electdcel meter provisions for power for the operation of extedor lighting, fire
alarm systems.
Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1994
edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code, Appendix C.
Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system.
Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with odginal signature on plans
submitted for plan review.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic
and mechanical plan for plan review.
20.
22.
23,
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer
engineer are required for plan review submittal.
34. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
35.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
36.
Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls require separate
approvals and permits.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Unless otherwise noted, the Developer at no cost to any Government Agency shall complete all
conditions. 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 will subject the project to further review and may require revision.
General Requirements
37.
A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site flat work and
improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way.
38.
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.
39.
All improvement plans and grading plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent
projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on
standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars.
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
40.
A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and
approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary
erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private
property.
41.
The Developer shall post secudty 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.
42.
The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in
accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and
upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private
drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and
identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect
the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream facilities,
including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required
improvements, shall be provided by the Developer.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA',DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~54pa98 .doc
13
43.
As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer
shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
· Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation Distdct
· Planning Department
· Department of Public Works
44.
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.
45.
Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department
and the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
46.
The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site
work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works.
47.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation Distdct by either cashier's check
or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan
fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this
property, no new charge needs to be paid.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
48.
Improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of
Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public
Works. The following design criteria shall be observed:
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 of Temecula Standard No. 207A.
Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages
in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400 and 401.
All street and ddveway canterline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
Landscaping shall be limited in the comer cut-off area of all intersections and
adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility.
All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed
through under-sidewalk drains.
49.
The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with
the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer
shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
50.
The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as
required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and
all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06.
51.
The Developer shall record a wdtten offer to participate in, and waive all dghts to object to
the formation of an Assessment District, a Community Facilities Distdct, or a Bridge and
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA\DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~354pa98.doc
Major Thoroughfare Fee Distdct for the construction of the proposed Western Bypass
Corridor in accordance with the General Plan. The form of the offer shall be subject to the
approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney,
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
52.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
· Rancho California Water District
· Eastern Municipal Water District
· Department of Public Works
53.
The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall
be repaired or removed and raplaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department
of Public Works.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
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:
54.
Final fire and lifo safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by
the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the Uniform
Building Code (UBC), Uniform Fire Code (UFC), and related codes which are in force at the
time of building plan submittal.
55.
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commercial buildings per UFC Appendix ILIA, Table A-Ill-A-I. The
developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 1500 GPM at
20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 1850 GPM for
a total fire flow of 3350 GPM with a 2 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted
dudng the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic
fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as
given above has taken into account all information as provided. (UFC 903.2, Appendix
Ill.A)
56.
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per UFC
Appendix Ill.B, Table A-Ill-B-1. A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants (6"
x 4" x 2-2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Depertrnent access roads and adjacent public
streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 400 feet apart and shall be located no more than 225
feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant.
The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The
upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (UFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-
B)
57.
As required by the Uniform Fire Code, when any portion of the building(s) is in excess of
150 feet from a water supply on a public street, on site fire hydrants are required. For this
project on site fire hydrants are required. (UFC 903.2)
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRFI~354pa98.dO~
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
Pdor to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire
Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any
portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all
weather surface designed for 70,000 Ibs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet.
( UFC sec 902 and Ord 95-15)
Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than
twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13)
feet six (6) inches. (UFC 902.2.2.1 and Oral 95-15)
Prior to building construction, dead end road ways and streets in excess of one hundred
and fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of
accommodating fire apparatus. (UFC 902.2.2.4)
Pdor to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water
system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to installation. Plans shall be:
signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature
block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards.
After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to
the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire
hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any
combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (UFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2
and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1 )
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers"
shall be installed to identi~ fire hydrant locations. (UFC 901.4.3)
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, all commercial buildings
shall display street numbers in a prominent location on the street side of the building. The
numerals shall be minimum twelve (12) inches in height for buildings and six (6) inches for
suite identification on a contrasting background. In strip centers, businesses shall post the
suite address on the rear door(s). (UFC 901.4.4 and Ord 95-15)
Pdor to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and
type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system.
Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to
installation. (UFC Article 10, UBC Chapter 9 and Ord 95-15)
Pdor to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for
monitodng the spdnkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm
system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans
shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (UFC
Article 10)
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be
provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be
located to the dght side of the main entrance door. The Knox-Box shall be supervised by
the alarm system. (UFC 902.4)
\\TEMEC_FS20]\DATA\DEFrS\PLANNING~TAFFRPTX354pa98.doc
16
67.
All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates
obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry
system for emergency access by firefighting personnel. (UFC 902.4)
68.
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, building final or occupancy, buildings
housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions of Uniform Fire Code
Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. The storage
of high-piled combustible stock may require structural design considerations or
modifications to the building. Fire protection and life safety features may include some or
all of the following: an automatic fire spdnkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity
class and storage arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains,
Fire Department access doors and Fire department access roads. (UFC Article 81 )
69.
Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible
stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: an
automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage
arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department
access doors and Fire department access roads. Buildings housing high-piled combustible
stock shall comply with the provisions Uniform Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable
National Fire Protection Association standards. (UFC Article 81)
OTHER AGENCIES
70.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated September 3, 1998, a copy of
which is attached.
71.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California
Water Distdct's transmittal dated August 28, 1998, a copy of which is attached.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, I understand, and I accept all the above
mentioned Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in
conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the
project shall be subject to Planning Department approval.
Applicant's Signature
Date
Name printed
~ \TEMEC_FS201 \DATA'~DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRFr~54ps98 .doc
17
TO:
FROM:
!
CO UNTY OF RIVERSIDE
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
DATE: September 3. 1998
CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PLOT PLAN NO. PA98-0354
1. The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the Plot Plm3 No. PA98~0354 and has no
objections. Sanitary sewer and water services may be available in this area.
2. PRIOR TO ANY PLAN CHECK SUBMITTAL for health clearance, the following items are
required:
a) "Will-serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies.
b) T1Tree complete sets of plans for each food establishment will be submitted, including a fixture
schedule, a finish schedule, and a plumbing schedule in order to ensure compliance with the
California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific reference, please contact Food
Facility Plan examiners at (909) 694-5022.
c) A clearance letter from the Hazardous Services Materials Management Branch (909) 694-5055
will be required indicating that the project has been cleared for:
· Underground storage tanks, Ordinance #617.4.
· Hazardous Waste Generator Services, Ordinance #615.3.
· Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with Ordinance #651.2).
· Waste reduction management.
3. Waste Regulation Branch (Waste CollectionfLEA).
CH:dr
(909) 955-8980
NOTE: Any current additional requirements not covered, cm~ be applicable at time of Building
Plan review for final Department of Environmental Health clearance.
cc: Doug Thompson
stand3b.doc
John F. Hennigar
Phillip L. Fnrhes
Kenneth C. Dealy
Linda M. Yregoso
C. Michael Cowerr
Best Best & Krieger LLP
August28,1998
Thomas Thornsley, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AND SEWER AVAILABILITY
PARCEL NO. 91 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 21383
APN 909-310-019
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0354
Dear Mr. Thornsley:
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within
the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water and
sewer service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial
arrangements (including alt in-tract facilities) between RCWD and the
property owner.
If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for
fees and requirements.
Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing
an Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to
RCWD.
If you have any questions~ please contact an Engineering Services
Representative at this office.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brannon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
98/SB:mc193/F012-T6/FCF
C: Laurie Willjams, Engineering Services Supervisor
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA\DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~ 54pa98 .doc
18
CITY OF TE1VIECULA
Environmental Checklist
Project Title:
Lead Agency:
Contact Person:
Project Location:
Project Sponsor:
General Plan Designation:
Zoning:
Project Description:
Surrounding Land Uses
and Setting:
Other public agencies
Whose approval is required:
Planning Application No. PA98-0354 (Development Plan)
City of Temecula, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590
Thomas K. ThornsIcy, Project Planner (909) 694-6400
On the north side of Winchester Road east of Cat Empleado and west of
Diaz Road (APN 909-310-019).
Dekkon Development, Inc., James E. Hundley
42346 Rio Nedo, Ste. L, Temecula, CA 92590
BP (Business Park)
LI(Lightlndustrial)
The design and construction of a 16,840 square foot industrial (tilt-up
concrete) building on a one acre parcel.
The project is located in an area that has been previously Faded.
Some of the surrounding properties are developed. This property takes
access to Winchester Road and all utilities are available. The property
to the west is developed. The lots to the east, north and south are vacant.
Riverside County Fire Depa~hnent, Riverside County Health
Department, Temecula Police Department, Eastern Municipal Water
District, Rancho California Water District, Southern California Gas
Company, Southern California Edison Company, and General Telephone
Company.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA~DEFrSXPLANNING\STAFFRPT~54pa98 .dec
19
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
[ ] Land Use and Planning [ ] Hazards
[ ] Population and Housing [ ] Noise
IX] Geologic Problems [ ] Public Services
[X] Water [ ] Utilities and Service Systems
[ ] Air Quality [ ] Aesthetics
[ ] Transportation/Circulation [ ] Cultural Resources
[ ] Biological Resources [ ] Recreation
[ ] Energy and Mineral Resources [ ] Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, however,
there should not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an
attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
Thomas K. ThornsIcy
Project Planner
Date
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATAXDEFFS~,PLANNING\STAFFRPT~354pa98.do~
20
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Sigm~cant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant MiUga~on Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a. Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source 1, Figure 2-1, Page 2-17) [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
b. Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
c. Be incompatible with existing land use m the vicinity?
(Source l, Figure 2-1, Page2-17) [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
d. Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to
soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)?
(Source l, Figure 5-4, Page 5-17) [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
e. Disruptordividethephysicalarrangementofanestablished
community (including low-income or minority community)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
1.b. Thepr~jectwi~n~tc~n~ictwithapphcab~eenvir~nmenta~p~ans~rp~cesad~ptedbyagencieswithjurisdicti~n~ver
the project. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan Land Use Designation of BP (Business Park) and
the zoning designation of LI (Light Industrial). Irapacts from all General Plan Land Use Designations were analyzed
in the Environmental Impact Report for (EIR) the General Plan. Agencies with jurisdiction within the City
commented on the scope of the analysis contained in the EIR and how the land uses would impact their particular
agency, Mitigation measures approved with the EIR will be applied to this project. Further, all agencies with
jurisdiction over the project are also being given the opportunity to comment on the project and it is anticipated that
they will make the appropriate comments as to how the project relates to their specific environmental plans or polices.
The project site has been previously graded and services have been extended into the area. There will be limited, if
any environmental effects on environmental plans or polices adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project.
No effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including low-income
or minority cornmumty). The project is an mduslrial building that has been designed to accommodate handle
manufacturing and warehousing uses, and is surrounded by some currently developed similar uses. There is no
established residential community (including low-income or minority community) at this site. No effects are
anticipated as a result of this project.
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would be proposal:
a. Cnmulatively exceed official regional or local population [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
projects?
b. Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
indirectly (e.g. through project in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)?
c. Displace existing housIng, especially affordable housing? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
2.a. The project will not cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections. The project is an mdustzial
building for manufacturing and warehousing consistent with the City's General Plan Land Use Designation of LI
(Light IndusUial). Since the project is comistent with the City's General Plan, and does not exceed the floor area ratio
for Light Industrial, it will not be a significant conm~>utor to population grovah that will cumulatively exceed official
regional or local population projections. No effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
2.b. The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The project is consistent with
the General Plan Land Use Designation of Light Industrial. The project will cause people to relocate to or within
Temeeula; however, due to its limited scale, it will not induce substantial growth in the area. No effects are
anticipated as a result of this project.
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Sigm~cam No
Impact Incorporated Impact hnpact
2.c. The project will not displace housing, especially affordable housing. The project site is vacant; therefore no housing
will be displaced. No effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result
in or expose people to potential impacts involving?
a. Fault mpture? (Source l, Figme7-1, Pg. 7-6) [ ] [ ] IX] [ ]
b. Seismic ground shaking? (Source 1, Figure 7-1, Pg. 7-6) [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
c. Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
(Source 1, Figure 7-2, Pg. 7-8)
d. Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
e. Landslides or mudflows? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
f. Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
from excavation, Fading or fill?
g. Subsidence of the land? (Source 2, Figure 7, Pg. 68) [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
h. Expansive soils? [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
i. Unique geologic or physical features? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
g,h. The project may have a significant impact on people involving seismic ground shaking, seismic Found failure
(including liquefaction and subsidence of the land) and expansive so~s, and will have a less than significant to erosion,
changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill. The project is located in Southem
California, an area that is seismically active. Any potentially significant impacts will be mitigated through building
construction that is consistent with Uniform Building Code standards. Further, preliminary soil reports have been
submitted and reviewed as pan of the application submittal and recommendations contained in this report will be used
to determine appropriate eonditious of approval. The soils reports will also contain recommendations for the
compaction of the soft which will serve to mitigate any potentially si~tmificant impacts from seismic ground shaking,
seismic ground failure (including liquefaction and subsidence of the land), erosion, changes in topography or unstable
soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill and expansive soils. After mitigation measures are performed, no
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
3.d. The project will not expose people to a seiche, tsunami or volcanic hazaRoad The project is not located in an area
where any of these hazards could occur. No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
3.e. The project will not expose people to landslides or mudflows. The Final Environmental Impact for the City of
Temecula General Plan has not identified any known landslides or mudslides located on the site or proxtmate to the
site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Increased wind and water erosion of soils both on and off-site may occur during the consauction phase of the project
and the project may result in changes in sfltation, deposition or ewsion. Erosion control techniques will be included
as a condition of approval for the project. In the long-m, hardscape and landscaping will serve as permanent erosion
control for the project. Modification to topography and ground surface relief features will not be considered
significant since modifications will be consistent with the surrounding development. Potential unstable soil conditions
from excavation, grading or ~l will be mitigated through the use of landacapmg and proper compaction of the soils
as recommended in the soils report. After mitigation measures are performed, no impacts are anticipated as a result
of this project.
3.i. The project will not impact tmique geologic or physical feat~tres. No unique geologic features or physical features
exist on the site. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEFFS\PLANNING~STAFFRFr\354pa98.dcc
22
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORNIATION SOURCES
pou:mialiy
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact IncoqOorated lmOacl Impact
4. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage panems, or the [ ] [ ] IX] [ ]
rate and amount of surface runoff?
b. Exposure of people or property to water related haTard~ [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
such as flooding? (Source 1, Figure 7-3, Pg. 7-10, and
Figure 7-4, Pg. 7-12)
c. Discharge imo surface waters or other alteration of surface [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or
mrbidity)?
d. Changesintheamountofsuffacewaterinanywater [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
body?
e. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
movements?
f. Changeinthequantityofgroundwaters, either through [ ] [ ] IX] [ ]
direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial
loss of groundwater recharge eapabfiity?
g. Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
h. Impacts to groundwater quality? [ ] [ ] IX] [ ]
i. Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
otherwise available for public water supplies?
(Source 2, Pg. 263)
The project will resuh in less than significant changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns and the rate and amount
of surface runoff. Previously permeable ground will be rendered impervious by construction of buildings,
accompanying hardscape and driveways. While absorption rates and surface nmoff will change, potential impacts
shall be mitigated through site design. Drainage conveyances will be required forthe project m safely and adequately
handle nmoff that is created. A~cer mitigation measures are performed, no significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
The project may have a potentially significant effect on discharges into surface waters and alteration of surface water
quality. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the project, the developer will be required to comply with the
requirements of the National Polintant Discharge Elimination System CNPDES) penrot from the State Water
Resources Contxol Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent has been ~ed or the
project is shown to be exempt. By complying with the NPDES reqmremants, any potential impacts can be mitigated
to a level less than significant. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
4.d,e. The project will have a less than significant impact in a change in the amount of surface water in any water body or
impact currents, or to the course or direction of water movements. Additional surface runoff will occur because
previously permeable ground will be rendered impervious by construction of buildings, accompanying hardscape
and driveways. Due to the limited scale of the project, the additional amount of drainage into Mumeta Creek will
not be considered significant. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
4.f-h. The project will have aless than significant change mthe quantity and quatity ofground waters, either through direct
additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through subsUmtial loss of
groundwater recharge capability. Limited ehanoves will occur in the quantity and quality of ground waters; however,
due to the minor scale of the projec~ it will not be considered significant. Further, conslruction on the site will not
be at depths sufficient to have a significant impact on ground waters. No significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEFrS\PLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX354pa98.doc
23
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Po~ntmlly
Significant
Potenlj~liy Unless Less Than
$ig~ifiea~ Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorpora~d Impact Impact
5. MR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
5.b.
5.c.
5.d.
a. Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
(Source 3, Pgs. 6-1 I, Table 6-2)
b. Expose sensitive receptors to pollntants?
c. Alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause
any change m clnnate?
d. Create objectionable odors?
[ ] [ ] [ ] ix]
[ ] [ ] [ ] ix]
[ ] [ ] [ ] ix]
[ ] [ ] ix] [ ]
The project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. There are no significant pollutants or sensitive receptors
in proximity to the project. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause any change m climate. The limited scale
of the project precludes it from creating any significant impacts on the environment in this area. No impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will create objectionable odors during the construction phase of the project. These impacts will be of
short duration and are not considered significant over the long term. No other odors are anticipated as a result of this
project.
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
Would the proposal result in:
a. Increase vehicle trips or traffic congestion? [ ] [ ] IX] [ ]
b. Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
or dangerous intersection or incompatible uses)?
c. Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
d. Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
(Source 4, Table 17.24(a), Pg. 17-24-9)
e. Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
f. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
(Source 4, Chapter 17.24, Pg. 12)
g. Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
The project will result in a less than significant increase in vehicle nips; however it will add to traffic congestion.
It is anticipated that this project will conUibute less than a five percent (5%) increase in existing volumes during the
AM peak hour and PM peak hour time frames to the intersections of Winchester Road and Calle Empleado and
Winchester Road and Diaz Road. The applicant will be required to pay traffic signal mitigation fees and pubhc
facility fees as conditions of approval for the project. After mitigation measures are performed, no impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
6.b.
The project will not result in baTants to safety from design features. The project is designed to current City standards
and does not propose any hazards to safety from design features. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
The project will not result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses. The project is an industrial
building for manufacturing and warehouse use in an area with existing similar uses and planned Business Park/Light
Industrial uses. The project is designed to current City standards and has adequate emergency access. No impacts
are anticipated as a result of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATAXDEPTS~PLANNINGXSTAFFRPT\354pa98.doc
24
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Si~ific~
Potentially Unless Less Than
Sismfic~m Miu~ation SiSni~c~nt No
Impaa Incorporau~ Impact Impact
6.e.
6.g.
7.
The project will not result m hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists. Hazards or barriers to bicyclists have
not been included as part of the project. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not result in impacts to rail, waterborne or air Irafiic since none exists currently in the mediate
proximity of the project. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal
result in impacts to:
a. Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, ammals
and birds)7 (Source 1, Page 5-15, Figure 5-3) [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
b. Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)7 [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Source 1, Figure 5-3, Page 5-15)
c. Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
coastal habitat, etc.)? (Source 1, Figure 5-3)
d. Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
(Source 1, Figure 5-3)
e. Wildlife dispersal or migration coredors? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
The project will not result in an impact to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The project site does not serve
as part of a migration corndot. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal:
a. Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
b. Use non-renewal resources in a wasteful and inefficient [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
c. Resultinthelossofavailabilityofaknownmineralresottree [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
that would be of future value to the region and the residents
of the State?
The project will not unpact and/or conflict with adopted energy conservation plans. The project will be reviewed for
compliance with all applicable laws pel'~ining to energy conservation during the plan check stage. No permits will
be issued unless the project is found to be consistent with these applicable laws. No impacts are anticipated as a result
of this project.
8.b. The project will result in a less than significant impact for the use of non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient n~anner. There will be an increase in the rate of use of natoral resource during construction (consInaction
materials, f~els for the daily operation, asphalt, lmber). The depletion of these nonrenewable resource{s) and the
subsequent depletion of the non-renewable natural resources is minimal. Due to the scale of the proposed
development, these impacts are not seen as less than significant.
8.c. Thepr~jectwilln~tresultinthe~~ss~favailability~fakn~wnmineralres~urcethatw~uldbe~ffuturevaluet~the
region and the residents of the State. No known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the
residents of the State are located at this project site. No nnpacts ate anticipated as a result of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPTX354pa98.doc
25
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Signi~eam
Potentin.By Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated im~t Impact
9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a. A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
substances (including, but not limited to: off, pesticides,
chemical or radiation)?
b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
or emergency evacuation plan?
c. Thecreationofanyhealthhazardorpotentialhealth [ ] [ ] IX] [ ]
heard?
d. Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
hazards?
e. Increase fire hazard in areas with ~ammable brush, [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
grass, or trees?
The project will resuk in a less than significant impact due to risk of explosion, or the release of any hazardous
substances in the event of an accident or upset conditions since none are proposed in the request. While the future
tenant has not been determined and they may sell or dism'bute hazardous substances, they will be regulated by both
the Fire Depam'nent and the Deparanent of Environmental Health. Both entities have reviewed the project. The
applicant must receive clearance from the Department of Environmental Health prior to any plan check subminal.
The applicant must receive clearance from the Fire Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. This
applies to storage and use of hazardons materials. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9.b.
The project will not interfere with an emergency response plan or an emergency evaluation plan. The subject site
is not located in an area that could impact an emergency response plan. The project will take access from a
maintained street and will therefore not impede any emergency response or emergency evacuation plans. No tmpacts
are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will result in a less than significant impact in the creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazaRoad The project will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable health laws during the plan check stage.
No permits will be issued unless the project is found to be consistent with these applicable laws. Reference response
9.a. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9.d. The project will not expose people to existing sources of potential health hazards. No health haTards are known to
be within proximity of the project (Reference 9.a. & 9.c.). No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The project will not result in an increase to fire hazard in an area with ~ammable brush, grass, or trees. The project
is a speculative industrial building for manufacturing and industrial uses in an area of similar uses and proposed
Business Park/Light Industrial uses. The project is not located within or proxamate to a frre hazard area. No impacts
are anticipated as a result of this project.
10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a. Increase in existing noise levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
[ ] [ ] [x] [ ]
[ ] [ ] Ix] [ ]
10.a. The proposal will result in a less than significant increase to existing noise levels. The site is currently vacant and
development of the land logically will result in increases to noise levels during construction phases as well as
increases to noise in the area over the long run. Long-term noise generated by this project would be similar to
existing and proposed uses in the area. No significant noise xmpacts are anticipated as a result of this project in either
the short or long-term.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRF~354pa98.dCc
26
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Po~mially
Significam
po~nfially Unless Less Than
Si~ni~c.a~ MitigaUon Si~i~cam No
Imp~:t Lncot~orate~ lm~ct Impact
10.b. The project may expose people to severe noise levels during the developmcntjconsn'uction phase (short run).
Construction machinery is capable of producing noise in the range of 100+ DBA at 100 feet, which is considered
very annoying and can cause hearing damage from steady 8-hour exposure. This source of noise will be of short
duration and therefore will not be considered significant. There will be no long-term exposure of people to noise.
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
b. Police protection? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
c. Schools? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
d. Maintenance of public facilities, inchdrag roads? [ ] [ ] [XI [ ]
e. Other governmental services? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
11 .a,b.The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered frre or police
protection. The project will incrementally increase the need for fire and police protection; however, it will contribute
its fair share to the maintenance of service provision from these entities. No significant impacts are anticipated as
a result of this project.
11 .c. The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered school facihties. The
project will not cause significant numbers of people to relocate within or to the City of Temecula and therefore will
not result in a need for new or altered school facilities. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
11.d. The project will have a less than significant impact forthe maintenance of public facilities, including roads. Funding
for maintenance of roads is derived from the Gasoline Tax, which is dislrthuted to the City of Temecula from the
State of California. Impacts to current and future needs for maintenance of roads as a result of development of the
site will be increurental, however, they will not be considered significant. The Gasoline Tax is sufficient to cover
any of the proposed expenses. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
11 .e. The project will not have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services. No impacts
are anticipated as a result of this project.
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
b. Communications systems? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
c. Local or regional water lreannent or dism'bution [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
facilities?
d. Sewer or septic tanks? (Some 2, Pg. 39-40) [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
e. Storm water drainage? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
f. Solid waste disposal? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
g. Local or regional water supplies? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
12.a. Thepr~jectw~~n~tresu~tinaneedf~rnewsystems~rsupp~ies~~rsubstantia~a~terati~nswp~wer~rnatura~gas.
These systems are currently being delivered in proximity to the site. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
\\TEMEC_FS201XDATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRF~354pa98.doc
27
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Pot~naally
Significant
Potentially Unless Le~s Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incot~rat~d Impact Impact
12.b. Thepr~jectwi~~n~tresu~tmaneedf~rn~wsyst~rns~rsupp~es~~rsubstantia~alterati~nst~c~mmum~ati~nsystems
(reference response No. 12.a.). No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
12.c. Thepr~je~twilln~tresu1tintheneedf~rnewsystems~rsupp~ies~~rsubstantia~a~terati~nst~~~~a~~rregi~na~water
treatment or distribution facilities. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project,
12.d. Thepr~je~twi~~n~tresu~tinaneedf~rnewsysterns~rsupp~ies~~rsubstantia~a~terati~nst~sanitarysewersystems
or septic tanks. While the project will have an incremental m'q3act upon existing systems, the Final Environmental
Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's General Plan states: "both E1VIWD and RCWD have indicated an ability to
supply as much water as is required in their services areas (13. 39)." The FEIR further states: "implementation of the
proposed General Plan would not significantly impact wastewater services (p. 40)." Since the project is consistent
with the City's General Plan. There are no septic tanks on site ur proxkmate to the site. No impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
12.e. Thepr~p~sa~willresu~tina~essthartsigni~cantneedf~rnewsystems~rsupphes~~rsubstantia~a~terati~nst~st~rm
water drainage. The project will need to provide some additional on-site drainage systems. The drainage system
will be required as a condition of approval for the project and will tie into the existing system. No siLgni~cant trapacts
are anticipated as a result of this project.
12.f.
The proposal will not result in a need for new systcrns or substantial alterations to solid waste disposal systems.
Any potential impacts from solid waste created by this development can be mitigated through participation in any
Source Reduction and Recycling Programs that are implemented by the City. No impacts are anticipated as a result
of this project.
12.g. Thepr~jectwilln~tresu~tinaneedf~rnewsystems~rsupp~ies~~rsubstantia~a~tarati~nst~~~ca~~rregi~na~water
supplies. Reference response 12.d. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a. Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
b. Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?
c. Create light or glare?
[ ] [ ] [ ] [x]
[ ] [ ] [x] [ ]
[ ] [ ] Ix] [ ]
13.a. The project will not affect a scenic vista or scenic highway. The project is not located in a area where there is a
scenic vista. Further, the City does not have any designated scenic highways. No impacts are anticipated as a result
of this project.
13,b. The project will not have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect. The project is an industrial building in an area
of existing uses and proposed Business Park/Light Industrial uses. The building is consistent with other designs in
the area and proposed landscaping will provide additional aesthetic enhancement. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
13.c. The project will have a potentially significant impact from light and glare. The project will produce and result in
light/glare, as all development of this nature results in new light sources. All light and glare has the potential to
impact the Mount Palomar Observatory. The project will be eonthtioned to be consistent with Ordinance No. 655
(Ordinance Regulating Light Pollution). No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX354p~98 .doc
28
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Po~y Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Intact Incorporated Impact Impact
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a. Disturb paleontological resources? [ ] [ ] [ ] IX]
(Source 2, Figure 15, pg.70)
b. Disturb archaeological resources? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Source 2, Figure 14, pg. 67)
c. Affect historical resources? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
d. Have the potential to cause a physical change which would [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
affect unique ethnic cultural values?
e. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
impact area?
14.c. The project will not have an impact on historical resources. The site has been previously graded and resources would
have bean disturbed at that time. No historic resources exist at the site or ere proximate to the site. No impacts ere
anticipated as a result of this project.
14.d. The project will not have the potential to cause a physical change that would affect unique ethnic cultural values.
Reference response 14.a.c. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
14 .e. The project will not restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact erea. No religious or sacred
uses exist at the site or ere proximate to the site. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a. Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional perks or
other recreational facilities? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
b. Affect existing recreational opportunities? [ ] [ ] IX] [ ]
l 5 .a,b. The project will have a less than significant impact or increase m demand for neighborhood or regional perks or other
recreational facilities. The project will not cause sigul~eant numbers of people to relocate within or to the City of
Temecula. However, it will result in an incremental hupaet or in an increase in demand for neighborhood or regional
parks or other recreational facilities. The same is txue for the quality or quantity of existing recreational resources
or opportunities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population
to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or anlm. al community, reduce the number of restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of Califoima history
or prehistory?
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals?
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS~PLANNING'6'TAFFRPTX3.$4pa98.doc
29
ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Signi~c..ant
Impact
Potenually
Significant
Unless
Mitiga~on
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
c. Does the project have irapacts that are individually [ ]
limited, but cumulatively considerable? CCumula~vely
considerable" means that the meremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future projects).
d. Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
[ ] [ ] [x]
[ ] [ ] [ ] ix]
17. EARLIER ANALYSES.
None.
SOURCES
1. City of Temecula General Plan
2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report
3. South Coast Air Quality Management Distxict CEQA Air Quahty Handbook
4. City of Temecula Development Code
\\TE~viF, C_FS201\DATA\DEFI'S\PLANNINGXSTAFFRPT~3.54pa98 .doc
30
A'R'ACHMENT NO. 3
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS~PLANNINGXSTAFFRPT~54pa98.d~x:
31
Geologic Problems
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Processes:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Planning Application No. PA98-0354
(Development Plan)
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation,
grading or fill.
Planting of nn-site landscaping that is consistent with the Development Code.
Submit landscape plans that include planting of slope to the Planning
Department for approval.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Planning Department.
Exposure of people or property to fault rupture, seismic ground shaking,
seismic ground failure, expansive soils or earthquake hazards.
Ensure that soil compaction is to City standards.
A so~s report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to
the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. Building
pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits and building permits.
Department of Public Works and Building & Safety Department.
Exposure of people or property to fault rupture, seismic ground shaking,
seismic ground failure, expansive soils or earthquake hazards.
Utilize construction techniques that are consistent with the Uniform Building
Cede.
Submit construction plans to the Building & Safety Department for approval.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building & Safety Depathnent
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA\DEPTS ~PLANNING\STAFFRFI~54pa98 .doc
32
Water
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
The project will result in changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns and
the rate and amount of surface runoff.
Methods of controlling runoff, from site so that it will not negatively impact
adjacent properties, including drainage conveyances, have been incorporated
into site design and will be included on the grading plans.
Submit grading and drainage plan m the Department of Public Works for
approval.
Prior to the issuance of grading permit.
Department of Public Works.
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g.
temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity).
An erosion control plan shall be prepared in accordance with City
requirements and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be
prepared in accordance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) requirements.
The applicant shall submit a SWPPP to the San Diego Regional Water Quality
Control Board (SDRWQCB) for their review and approval.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Department of Public Works and SDRWQCB (for SWPPP).
Transportation/Circulation
General Impact: Increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion.
Mitigation Measure: Payment of Public Facility Fee for road improvements and traffic impacts.
Specific Process: Payment of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in
accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Depatiment of Public Works.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRFr~354pa98 .doc
:B
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion.
Payment of Traffic Signal Mitigation Fee.
Pay pro-rata share for traffic impacts (to be determined by the Director of
Public Works.
Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Department of Public Works.
Biological Resources
General Impact:
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not
limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds).
Mitigation Measure: Pay Mitigation Fee for impacts to Stephens Kangaroo Rat.
Specific Process: Pay $500.00 per acre of disturbed area of Stephens Kangaroo Rat habitat.
Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Department of Public Works and Planning Depamnent
Public Services
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
A substantial effect upon and a need for new/altered governmental services
regarding fire protection. The project w~l incrementally increase the need
for fire protection; however, it will contribute its fair share to the
maintenance of service provision.
Payment of Fire Mitigation Fees.
Pay current mitigation fees with the Riverside County Fire Department.
Prior to the issuance of building permit.
Building & Safety Department
General Impact: A substantial effect upon and a need for new/altered schools. No significant
impacts are anticipated.
Payment of School Fees.
Pay current mitigation fees with the Temecula Valley Unified School District.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building & Safety Department and Temecula Valley Unified School District.
\\TEMEC_FS20BDATAXDEFFS~PLANNING~STAFFRPTX354pa98.doC
34
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Puny:
AESTHETICS
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
The creation of new light sources will result in increased light and glare that
could affect the Palomar Observatory.
Use lighting techniques that are consistent with Ordinance No. 655.
Submit lighting plan to the Building and Safety Depai.iient for approval.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Responsible Monitoring Party: Building & Safety Deparunent.
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTSXPLANNING\STAFFRPT~354p~98.dOC
35
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEFrS\PLANNING\STAFR~T\3~4pa98.doc
36
-I
CITY OF TEMECULA
~/incheste
Showgrounds
ZW CODE
Eastern 92590
Water
Dist
Business
California
PLANNING AP?LICATION NO. PA98-0354 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 4, 1998
DMV4
ZI1 ~ CODE
92591
~d
VICINITYMAP
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRFF~354pa98 .dec
37
CITY OF TEMECULA
EXHIBIT B
DESIGNATION - LI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
ZONING MAP
~ BP
BP
BP
EXHIBIT C
DESIGNATION - BP (BUSINESS PARK)
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0354 (Development Plan)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 4, 1998
GENERAL PLAN
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX354pa98.doc
38
CITY OF TEMECULA
SITE PLAN ~, ,'.~'-~' ~
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0354 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 4, 1998
SITE PLAN
\\TEMEC~FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRFF\354pa98.d~
39
CITY OF TEMECULA
-I
:1
IIII
F3
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0354 (Development Plan)
EXHIRIT E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 4, 1998
ELEVATIONS
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\354pa98.doc
40
CITY OF TEMECULA
WINCHESTER ROAD
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0354 (Devdopment Plan)
EXHIBIT F LANDSCAPE PLAN
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 4, 1998
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNINGXSTAFFRpT~354pa98.d~c
41
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0354 (Development Plan)
EXIHBIT G
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 4, 1998
FLOOR PLANS
\\TEMEC_FS201\DATA\DEFTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT\354pa98.dOC
42
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0354 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT H
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - November 4, 1998
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFR.P~354pa98.~Ioc
43
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please
contact the olfice of the Community Development Department at (909) 694-6400. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the
City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II]
CALL TO ORDER:
FLAG SALUTE:
ROLL CALL:
ACTION AGENDA
TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
November 4, 1998, 6:00 PM
43200 Business Park Drive
Council Chambers
Temecula, CA 92390
Chairman Slaven
Guerdere, Naggar, Slaven and Webster
Soltysiak absent, Naggar left ill @ 6:43pm
Reso Nextin Order#98-038
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the commissionere on items that am not listed on
the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Commissioners about an item
no__t 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
ACTION:
APPROVED 4-0, SOLTYSIAK ABSENT
Request to Revise Marie Callender's Landscape Plan
ACTION: APPROVED 4-0, SOLTYSIAK ABSENT
Director's Hearing Update
ACTION: RECEIVE AND FILE
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
4. Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Planner:
Recommendation:
ACTION:
Planning Application No. PA95-0079 (Tentative Parcel Map
No. 28257)
William and Michael Peruchetti
South side of Pauba Road, west of Showalter Road, east
of La Primavera Street, north of Estere Street
To subdivide 2.85 acres into four (4) residential parcels
Carole K. Donahoe, AICP
Recommend Continuance to December 2, 1998
CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 2, 1998 4-0, SOLTYSIAK
1
R:\WIMBERVG/PLANCOMM~AGENDAS\5-6-96 1115198 vgw
701-16
5. Case No.:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Environmental Action:
Case Planner:
Recommendation:
ACTION:
6. Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Environmental Action:
Case Planner:
Recommendation:
ACTION:
7, Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Environmental Action:
Case Planner
Recommendation:
ACTION:
PLANNING MANAGERS REPORT
COMMISSIONER REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting:
Planning Application No. PA98-0318 (General Plan Amendment and Zone
Change)
James and MaW Corona
Located nodheast of the intersection of Highway 79 South and Butterfield Stage Road
(Assessor's Parcel Numbers 952-150-001 and 003)
A request to change the General Plan Land Use and Zoning designations of two
parcels from Highway/Tourist Commercial (HTC), Medium Density Residential (M),
and Low Medium Density Residential (LM) to Community Commercial (CC).
Mitigated Negative Declaration
John DeGange
Recommend Approval
APPROVED 3-0, SOLTYSIAK/NAGGAR ABSENT
Planning Application No. PA98-0302 (Development Plan)
Mesquita & Assoc., Fernando Mesquita
43040 Rancho Way at the Southwest Comer of Rancho Way & Diaz Road. (921-040-
018)
To construct a 13,112 Square Foot industrial (tilt-up concrete) building on a .86 acre
lot.
Negative Declaration.
Thomas Thornsley
Approval
APPROVED 3-0, SOLTYSIAK/NAGGAR ABSENT
Planning Application No. PA98-0354 (Development Plan)
Dekkon Development Inc, James E. Hundley
North side of Winchester Road, immediately south of the intersection of Calle
Empleado and Winchester Road (APN 909-310-019)
To construct a 15,950 Square Foot industrial (tilt-up concrete) building on a one acre
lot.
Negative Declaration.
Thomas Thornsley
Approval
APPROVED 3-0, SOLTYSIAK/NAGGAR ABSENT
November 18, 1998, 6:00 PM, Cit-/Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park
Drive, Temecula, California
2
R:\WIMBERVG\PLANCOMMXAGENDAS\5-6-96 11/5/98 vgw