HomeMy WebLinkAbout031799 PC Agenda~n~mtp~i~ncewithth~m~dca~w~thDisabi~iiisAct~fy~un~edq~ed~am~an~t~pa~c~p~nth~~ee
oltlceoftheCommunl(yMDepamHntatpl(qeO4-HGO- NollfKation46hounlato~toameetingvdlenabietheCItYfgmake
reaMaide imlngentents to ensure accessibility to that meeting pl CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title IrJ
TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
'March 17, 1999, 6:00 PM
43200 Business Park Drive
Council Chambers
Temecula, CA 92390
Reso Next In Order #99-008
CALL TO ORDER:
FLAG SALUTE:
ROLL CALL:
Chairperson Guerriero
Fahey, Guerriero, Naggar, Soltysiak and Webster
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the commissioners on items
that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes each. If you desire to
speak to the Commissioners about an item not listed on the Agenda, a pink "Request to Speak"
form should be filled out and filed with the Commission Secretary.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state vourname and address.
For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Planning Secretary
before Commission gets to that item. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
1. Approval of Agenda
2. Approval February 11 Minutes of a Joint Workshop of the Temecula Public/Traffic
Safety Commission and the Planning Commission
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Planning Application No. PA98-0517 (Development Plan)
Mr. Alan Young, Encinitas Corporate Center Two LLC
The south side of Rio Nedo, approximately 1,300 feet southwest of
the intersection of Tierra Alta Way and Rio Nedo.
Proposal: The design, construction and operation of a 32,000 square foot office,
warehouse and manufacturing building on two parcels (0.94
acres/parcel) totaling 1.88 acres.
Environmental Action: Exempt per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section
15332
Planner: Patty Anders, Assistant Planner
Recommendation: Approval
%\TI~IEC_FS201\DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING~WIMBERVG\PLANCOMM~AGENDAS~I999~3-17-99,do~
m
Case No: Planning Application No. PA98-0511 (General Plan Amendment
and Zone Change)
Applicant: Curt Miller, Pacific Golf Properties
4220 Von Karman, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Location: A 12.3 acre lot on the northwest comer of Winchester Road and
Nicolas Road, (APN 911-170-078, 911-170-085, 911-170-090).
Proposal: To change the General Plan Land Use designation from Business
Park (BP) to Professional Off, ca (O) and change the Zoning
designation from Business Park (BP) to Professional Office (PO) for
a proposed development of a 244 unit senior's only apartment
complex.
Environmental Action: Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Case Planner: Thomas Thomsley
Recommendation: Recommend Approval
Case No: Planning Application No. PA98-0512 (Development Plan)
Applicant: Curt Miller, Pacific Golf Properties
4220 Von Karrnan, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Location: The northwest comer of Winchester Road and Nicolas Road, (APN
911-170-078, 911-170-085, 911-170-090)
Proposal: A proposal to develop a 244 unit senior's only apartment complex with
two ancl three story buildings on an 8.3 acre site.
Environmental Action: Mitigated Negative Declaration
Case Planner: Thomas Thomsley
Recommendation: Approval
PLANNING MANAGERS REPORT
COMMISSIONER REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting:
April 7, 1999, 6:00 PM, City Council Chambers
43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California
\~TEMEC~FS2~DATA~DEF~\PLANN~NG~W~MBERVG\PLANC~MM\AGF~NDA~999~3-~7`99~d~c
2
ITEM #2
MINUTES OF A JOINT WORKSHOP OF THE
TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
FEBRUARY '11, '1999
CALL TO ORDER
The City of Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission and the Planning Commission convened
in a joint workshop at 6:00 P.M., on Thursday. February 11, 1999, in the City Council Chambers
of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Flag salute by Commissioner Edwards.
ROLL CALL
Public/Traffic Commission:
Planning Commission:
Absent:
Also Present:
Commissioners Connerton. Edwards, Markham,
Telesio*, and Chairman Coe.
Commissioners Guerdero, Naggar, Soltysiak, and
Webster.
None.
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks,
Senior Planner Hogan, and
Minute Clerk Hansen.
* (Commissioner Telesio arrived at 6:09 P.M.)
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Development Service Director Miller, representing the City of Murrieta, addressed the Commissions
regarding the proposed projects associated with the City of Muraleta referenced in Temecula's
Circulation Element Update (per submitted memorandum), relaying that the majority of the items
referenced are not part of Murrieta's one-five year Circulation Implement Plan (CIP.)
In response to Mr. Millers comments, the Commissioners commented, as follows:
· Chairman Coe relayed that due to the current heavily impacted traffic circulation
(created by the County when the freeway was constructed without provision of
adequate off-ramps) the City of Temecula is proactively addressing the issue for
future impact; and queried whether the City of Murrieta will address the traffic,
specifically denoted in the Circulation Update, for provision of adequate traffic flow
for the future.
In response to Commissioner Connerton's comments, Commissioner Markham
confirmed that the City of Muraleta was involved in the recent traffic meetings due
to its concern regarding traffic impact at mall-opening, noting that the City of
Murrieta was specifically represented by Mr. Mole, or Mr. Miller.
Commissioner Connerton queried whether the pertinent information discussed at
the numerous traffic meetings went back to the City Council of Murrieta.
Commissioner Markham queried the timing of the response, echoed by
Commissioner Connerton, in light of the active involvement the City of Murdeta had
regarding this particular Circulation Update; and advised that the primary issue of
concern is the Date Street Interchange, involving the Split Diamond at Cherry
Street, the connection across the Creek, and the connection of the Interchange
tying into State Highway 79; and queded whether the City of Murrieta had identified
alternate routes, other than those referenced in the Capital Improvement Program,
specifically denoted as Project No. 31.
Commissioner Soltysiak relayed for informational purposes, the condition of heavy
impact at the Winchester Road on-ramp; noted that numerous projects referenced
in the Update refer to the Winchester Road Interchange; relayed that Murrieta's
growth in development, specifically with regard to Industrial construction along
Cherry Street impacts the Winchester Road on-ramp; and queried how the Industrial
projects associated with the City of Murrieta will affect the traffic impact if the City
does not address the issue.
Mr. Miller relayed that it is the desire of the City of Murrieta to work with the City of Temecula to
address traffic impact; clarified that the items referenced in the Circulation Update associated with
Murrieta have been identified as areas for improvement, advising, however, that the
aforementioned areas have not been placed in the one-five year plan of the CIP for Murdeta due
to the lack of funding; in response to Commissioner Markham's comments, relayed that if the City
of Temecula would provide funding through mitigating measures, that the City of Murrieta would
be agreeable to such a proposal; in response to Murrieta's involvement in the traffic discussions,
relayed that there wasn't cladty as to the timing of the projects; with regard to the aforementioned
Project No. 31 (regarding Cherry Street), relayed that although there is a potential for the project
to be developer driven, at this point in time the project is viewed as long-term for Muraleta; for
Commissioner Naggar, clarified that the memorandum (of record) submitted was authored by
himself per Murrieta's City Managers direction; for Commissioner Webster, relayed that the
General Plan Update for Murrieta is proposed to be brought to the City Council of Mun'ieta on
March 30, 1999; noted that the Circulation Element Update is currently being processed, proposed
to be in draft-form in June or July, clarifying that few of the projects referenced in Temecula's one-
five year plan will be included in Murrieta's one-five year plan due to the pdodty projects currently
being implemented in Muraleta, encompassing its one-five year plan; and assured the
Commissioners that he would forward their comments to the City of Mumeta.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
t, ApProval of Minutes - January 20, 1999
MOTION: Commissioner Telesio moved to approve the minutes. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Connerton and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
2. Circulation Element Update
Senior Planner Hogan relayed that a brief introduction of the actual proposed circulation map will
be presented by Mr. Bob Davis, specifying the deletions, revisions, and the new components
reflective of the central, southern, and northern portions of the City; relayed that the comments of
the Commissions will be brought to the City Council at a future point in time; and advised that the
comments of Mr. Miller, representing the City of Murrieta, will be forwarded to both City Councils
for further discussion.
Mr. Bob Davis presented the revised version of the Capital Improvement Program for the one-five
year plan, and beyond ten years; relayed that the previous comments of the Commissions have
been incorporated into the revision; and invited the Commissioners to address any questions or
concerns.
Commissioner Markham noted, for Commissioner Connerton, that Via Eduardo is located in the
Pechanga Valley.
For Commissioner Connerton, Mr. Davis clarified that one project may be denoted on the priority
list twice due to the provision of the studies required for the project represented as the first listed
entity, relaying that the following listed entity would be the actual improvement.
A. Presentation of Level of Service (LOS) Determinations
By way of overheads, Mr. Davis presented detailed clarification as to Level of Service (LOS)
determinations; and noted that LOS measures density of traffic and the accessibility of lane
changing.
B. Presentation of the Proposed Revisions to the General Plan Circulation Element
By way of maps, Mr. Davis provided extensive clad~cation of the revisions to the Circulation Plan;
and reviewed the deleted, revised and new components of the revision.
1. Deletions, Revisions and New Components (central portion of the City)
· Deletions
the extension of the Western BYPass continuing into Murrieta, currently
proposed to terminate at Cherry Street
· the Date Street InterchanGe
· Revisions
since the Western Bypass will not be a continuous mute into Muraleta, this
project will be downam ded to a Pdncipal Collector. updatina Cherry Street
to a Secondary
regarding to-alignment of Diaz Road at the Rancho California Road
Connection, eliminate one of the sianalized intersections
upqm de Rancho Califomia Road to a six-lane facility (between Mom ga and
Ynez Roads)
· uPGmde a small portion of Ynez Road (south of Rancho California Road)
up.qm de from Secondary, to Maior a small portion of the Western Bvoass
(as it approaches the freeway)
· New Components
connection from the Westem Bypass over to Cherry Street, widening to four
lanes; relayed two options regarding the Cherry Street improvement (as it
continues east), as follows: a) tie into the Date Street Extension to State
Highway 79, redesignating Date Street as State Route 79, diverting traffic
from the Winchester Road Corridor, and b) leave Date Street as it exists,
bdng Cherry Street across south to the top of the ridge (north of the Santa
Gertrudis Creek) and tie into Margarita Road, advising that the first option
provides for even and extensive reduction in traffic from the Winchester
Road
Corridor
an additional Principal Collector two-lane crossing at the creek (at Via
Montezuma)
· IntemhanGe at SantiaGo Road
For Chairman Coe, Mr. Davis confirmed that if them is no consideration for the utilization of the
Split Diamond Intemhange now, the use may not be possible at a Mum point in time due to the
continued development in the area, noting that it is one of the few opportunities with the potential
of provision for diverting traffic from Winchester Road in the area of discussion.
For Commissioner Markham, Mr. Davis relayed that Date Street is on the County's Circulation
Element, classified as Major; and noted that currently them are no proposed overcrossings in
Murrieta between Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Date Street.
2. Deletions and Revisions (nodhem portion of the City)
· Deletions
· the elimination of the Borel Road Connection to Anza Road
regarding the Johnson Ranch Project area, Anza Road terminates and the
connection is eliminated
· the extension of Nicolas Road to Calle Contento has been eliminated
· Revisions
· Borel Road downqraded from Major to Principal Collector
· Leon Road downaraded to Principal Collector
Nicolas Road downaraded in staaes, first to a Major, then to Principal
Collector (as it approachers Butter~eld Stage Road)
For Commissioner Connerton, Mr. Davis relayed that Butte~eld Stage Road is still proposed to
continue from Washington Street, noting that a portion (between Mumeta Hot Springs and Nicolas
Roads) will be six lanes; and, for Commissioner Webster, noted that although the connection of
North General Keamy Road (from Nicolas Road to Margarita Road) would divert 10-11,000 cars
a day from Winchester Road, this connection has been deleted.
With regard to the deletion of the aforementioned North General Kearny Road Connection, the
Commissioners comments were, as follows:
Commissioner Webster recommended that the City Council reconsider the
connection.
Commissioner Naggar queried what action the Commissioners could make to bdng
this issue forward for consideration due to the substantial traffic alleviation the
connection provides, reiterating Mr. Davis' comments that the lack of this connection
would have a detdmental impact on alternate streets in the area.
Commissioner Edwards advised that this particular connection appeared to be the
most effective diversion of traffic.
Commission Recommendation: It was the consensus of the Commissions that staff add the
North General Keamy Road Connection back into the Circulation Element as a Secondary road.
3. Deletions, Revisions and New Components (southem Portion of the City)
· Deletions
· Extension of Butterfield Staoe Road to Pala Road
Revisions
uDclrade Loma Linda Road to a Principal Collector
downtirade De Portola Road (between Jedediah Smith and Margarita
Roads)
and De Portola
downGrade Jedediah Smith Road (between Margadta
Roads)
New Components
a new cmssina at Temecula Creek proposed (east of Pala Road), the exact
location yet to be determined
Senior Planner Hogan relayed, for Commissioner Edwards, that the Pala Road Bddge
encompassed four lanes.
W~th regard to the extension of Butterfield Stage Road being eliminated due to the existing
development, Mr. Davis relayed, for Commissioner Connerton, the impact of this revision.
Commissioner Markham further specified the existing development in the aforementioned area of
discussion. Senior Planner Hogan further clarified the rationale for the revision of the extension.
Commissioner Connerton recommended downgrading the aforementioned alignment, but adding
it back into the Circulation Update. In response to Mr, Connerton's comments, Mr. Davis advised
that the extension could be added back into the Circulation Update, downgrading it to a Principal
Collector.
Commission Recommendation: It was the consensus of the Commissions that the Butterfield
Stage Road Extension be added back into the Circulation Plan as a Principal Collector, based on
the topography.
For Commissioner Telesio, Mr. Davis clarified the rationale for the downgrading of De Portola
Road; and relayed the proposals northwest of the Jedidiah Smith Road area.
For Commissioner Markham, Senior Planner Hogan relayed that although there are
intergovernmental issues that need to be addressed, a connection in the Via Eduardo area is being
considered for a future point in time.
Senior Planner Hogan thanked the Commissioners for their efforts associated with the Circulation
Update, relaying that their comments will be forwarded into the final Update to be brought to the
City Council in May or June.
Senior Traffic Engineer Moghadam introduced Mr. Hughes, the City's Senior Engineer of the
Capital Improvement Program, relaying that he will be Acting Director of Public Works when
Director of Public Works Kicak retires from the City.
Mr. Hughes addressed the Commissions, providing an overview of his role with the Temecula; and
noted his pleasure to be working with the City.
The Commissioners welcomed Mr. Hughes; and Commissioner Edwards commended Mr. Hughes
for his diligent efforts associated with the Old Town Construction Project, regarding his interaction
with the merchants.
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:25 P.M. Chairman Coe formally adjoumed this joint workshop to the next regular Publicrl'reffic
Safety Commission meeting Thursday, March 11, 1999, at 6:00 P.M., and the next regular
Planning Commission meeting Wednesday, February 17, t999, at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council
Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula.
Chairman Charles Coe
Planning Manager Debbie Ubnoske
ITEM #3
RECOMMENDATION:
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Date: March 17, 1999
Planning Application No.: PA98-0517 (Development Plan)
Prepared By: Patty Anders, Assistant Planner
The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff
recommends the Banning Commission:
1. ADOPT Resolution No. 9~.__ appmving Planning Application
No. PA98-0517 based upon the Analysis and Findings
contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval;
2. ADOPT a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No.
PA98-0517 per the California Environmental Quality Act
Guidelines Section 15332.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
EXISTING LAND USE:
Alan Young, Encinitas Corporate Center Two LLC
Ken Keane, Architect
The design, construction and operation of a two-story, 32,000 square
foot office, warehouse and manufacturing building on two parcels
(0.94 acres/parcel) totaling 1.88 acres.
The south side of Rio Nedo, approximately 1300 feet southwest of the
intersection of Tierra Alta Way and Rio Nedo.
LI (Light Industrial)
North: LI (Light Industrial)
South: LI (Light Industrial)
East: LI (Light Industrial)
West: LI (Light Industrial)
N/A
BP (Business Park)
Vacant
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA'~DEPTS~LANNING~STAFFRPT%517PA98PCStaffRpt.doc
1
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North: Vacant Lot
South: Vacant Lot
East: Vacant Lot
West: Existing Light Industrial Building
BACKGROUND
A formal application submittal was received on December 23, 1998. A Development Review
Committee (DRC) meeting was held on January 21, 1999, with staff providing written comments on
January 26, 1999. The project was deemed complete on March 1, 1999.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project consists of the design, construction and operation of a two-story, 32,000 square foot
office, warehouse and manufacturing building with associated parking and landscaping on two
parcels totaling 1.88 acres (0.94 acres/parcel). The site is located in an industrial park area with
similar light industrial, manufacturing, warehouse and office uses.
ANALYSIS
Site DesiGn and Landscaping
The subject property is located on a lot that has been previously graded. The site has one point of
ingress/egress off of Rio Nedo. The project provides circulation around the entire building, with
parking located on the north, east and west sides of the structure. The project is located on two
parcels; therefore, the project will be conditioned to require a parcel merger application be recorded
prior to the issuance of the building permit.
Landscaping is being provided along the north, south, east and west property lines. There are also
landscape planters adjacent to the north and east building elevations. The project is providing
21.4% landscaping which complies with the 20% landscaping requirement of the Light Industrial
zone. There are approximately five trees that will be removed with the installation of the sidewalk.
Staff is conditioning the project to relocate the existing trees on site (No. 25c).
Architecture
The building is proposed as a concrete, tilt-up, painted two-story structure that is very similar to the
existing structures in the area. The main entry is articulated with windows which are encased by a
painted band, special concrete treatment, and is set-off with two large, projected walls with a
horizontal painted ban. The proposed colors are earth tones of light greys and a light teal accent
color. There is extensive use of windows and a second story deck on the north elevation. The
structure also has varying roof heights which help to break up the building mass. There is a metal
canopy on the south elevation which provides covering for the loading zone. The proposed
architecture is very compatible with existing structures in the area in terms of overall design, colors,
materials and bulk and mass.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
A Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA98-0517 was made per the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15332. Section 15332 applies to in-fill
development projects that are less than five (5) acres that are substantially surrounded by urban
uses; a project that is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable
general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning; a site that has no value as habitat for
endangered, rare or threatened species; and a site that can be adequately served by all required
\\TEMEC_FS20f~DATA~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRpT~517pA98pCStaffRpt.doc
2
utilities and public services. The subject site is a previously graded tot, is in an area that does not
serve as a mitigation corddor or have habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. Therefore,
the proposed project is eligible for a CEAQ exemption pursuant to Section 15332 of the CEQA
Guidelines.
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY
The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation of BP (Business
Park), the existing zoning of LI (Light Industdal) and the City-Wide Design Guidelines. The proposed
use is a permitted use within Light Industrial zoning classification. As proposed, the project complies
with the General Plan Land Use designation. existing zoning and the corresponding development
standards.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The project consists of the design, construction and operation of a two-story, 32,000 square foot
office, warehouse and manufacturing building with associated parking and landscaping on two
parcels totaling 1.88 acres (0.94 acres/parcel), As proposed, the project is consistent with the
General Plan and Development Code, and is compatible with the existing development in terms of
architectural design, colors and materials.
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 proposed use
is a permitted use in the Light Industrial zoning classification.
The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety and general welfare. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan
for Temecula, the Development Code and with all applicable requirements of State law
and other ordinances of the City.
The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site,
and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The site is
surrounded by development and is an infill site. Furthermore, grading has already
occurred at the site, The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse
effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code, A
Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA98-0517 was made per the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15332. Section 15332 applies to in-fill
development projects that are less than five (5) acres that are substantially surrounded by
urban uses; a project that is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all
applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning; a site that has no value
as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; and a site that can be adequately
served by all required utilities and public services. The subject site is a previously graded
lot, is in an area that does not serve as a mitigation corridor or have habitat for endangered,
rare or threatened species. Therefore, the proposed project is eligible for a CEAQ exemption
pursuant to Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines.
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~DEPTS~PLANNINGLSTAFFRPTV517PA98PCStaffRpt.doc
3
Attachments:
PC Resolution No. 99-__- Blue Page 5
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 8
Exhibits - Blue Page 19
A. Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C. General Plan Maps
D. Site Plan
E, Elevations
F. Floor Plans
R:~STAFFRPT~517PAg8PCStaffRpt.doc
4
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
R:~STAFFRP'F~517PA98PCStaffRpt.doc
5
ATTACHMENT NO. I
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-
0517 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION
AND OPERATION OF A TWO-STORY, 32,000 SQUARE FOOT
OFFICE, WAREHOUSE AND MANUFACTURING BUILDING ON
TWO PARCELS TOTALING 1.88 ACRES. LOCATED ON THE
SOUTH SIDE OF RIO NEDO, APPROXIMATELY 1300 FEET
SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF TIERRA ALTA WAY
AND RIO NEDO AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS.
909-290-043 AND 909-290-044.
WHEREAS, Alan Young, filed Planning Application No. PA98-0517, in accordance with the
City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA98-0517 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. PA98-0517, on
March 17, 1999, 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 hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. PA98-0517;
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. Findin,qs. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No.
PA98-0517 (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 proposed use is a
permitted use in the Light Industrial zoning classification.
B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public
health, safety and general welfare. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for
Temecula, the Development Code and with all applicable requirements of State law and other
ordinances of the City.
C. The design of the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial
environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
There is no fish wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish
wildlife or habitat off-site. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse
effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code.
R:\STAFFRPTL517PA98PCStaffRpt,dOc
6
Furthermore, the site is a previously graded site. The project will not individually or cumulatively
have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game
Code. A Notice of E_xemption for Planning Application No. PA98-0517 was made per the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15332. Section 15332 applies to
in-fill development projects that are bess than five (5) acres that are substantially surrounded by
urban uses; a project that is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all
applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning; a site that has no value as habitat
for endangered, ram or threatened species; and a site that can be adequately served by all required
utilities and public services. The subject site is a previously graded lot, is in an area that does not
serve as a mitigation corridor or have habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. Therefore,
the proposed project is eligible for a CEAQ exemption pursuant to Section 15332 of the CEQA
Guidelines.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. A Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No.
PA98-0517 was made perthe California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15332. This
exemption allows
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula City Council hereby conditionally approves
Planning Application No. PA98-0517 (Development Plan) for the design, construction and operation
of a two-story, 32,000 square foot office, warehouse and manufacturing building on two parcels (0.94
acres/parcel) totaling 1.88 acres. Located on the south side of Rio Nedo, approximately 1300 feet
southwest of the intersection of Tierra Alta Way and Rio Nedo, and known as Assessors Parcel Nos.
909-290-043 and 909-290-044 subject to the project specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A,
attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of March, 1999.
Ron Guerriero, 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 17th day of March,
1999 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~DEPTS~PLANNING%STAFFRPT~517PA98PCStaffRpt.doc
7
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA'~DEPTS~LANNING~STAFFRPT~17PA98PCStaffRpt.doc
8
EXHIBIT a
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA98 -0517 (Development Plan)
Project Description: The design, construction and operation of a two-story. 32,000 square
foot office, warehouse and manufacturing building on two parcels totaling 1.88 acres (0.94
acres/parcel).
Development Impact Fee Category: Industrial
Assessor's Parcel No. 909-290-043 and 909-290-044
Approval Date: March 17, 1999
Expiration Date: March 17, 2001
PLANNINGDIVISION
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
a cashier's 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 Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and
California Code of Regulations Section 15062. 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 appmved 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 right to take any and all action the City
deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense.
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.
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~517PA98PCStaffRpt.doc
9
The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "D"
(Site Plan), contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning
Division.
Landscaping shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "E" (Landscape
Plan). Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the
reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager. If it is determined that the
landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Manager shall have the authority
to require the property owner to bdng 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. All existing trees
shall be relocated behind the proposed sidewalk.
Building elevations shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "F" (Building
Elevations), contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning
Division, All mechanical and roof equipment shall be screened from public view by
architectural features integrated into the design of the structure.
The colors and materials for this project shall substantially conform to the following list of
approved colors and materials and with Exhibit "G" (Color and Matedal Board), contained on
file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. Any deviation from
the approved colors and materials shall require approval of the Planning Manager.
Matedal Color
Concrete Walls (Pdmary Color)
Concrete Walls (Secondary Color)
Accent Tdm Color
Glazing
Lt. Grey-Artist Canvas (8681VV)
Dr. Grey - Stratford Brown (8704D)
Bay Bddge (8575D)
Greylite
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
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.
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.
The applicant shall revise Exhibits "D, E, F, G", (Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations,
Color and Material Board) to reflect the final conditions of approval that will be provided by
the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and submit five (5) full
size copies and two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color pdnts of approved Exhibit "G"
(Color and Materials Board) and of the colored version of approved Exhibit "F", the colored
architectural elevations to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for
their files. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be readable on
the photographic prints.
10.
The applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
for permanent filing two (2) 8" X 1 O" glossy photographic color prints of approved Exhibit "G"
(Color and Materials Board) and of the colored version of approved Exhibit "F", the colored
architectural elevations. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be
readable on the photographic prints.
\\TEMEC_FS201 ',DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFR PT~I 7PA98PCStaffRpt.doc
10
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
11. The parcel merger shall be recorded.
12. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
13.
Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department - Planning Division for approval. These plans shall
conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "E", or as amended by these conditions. The
location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans
shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. 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:
a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal).
b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
d. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan).
Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits
14.
An Administrative Development Plan application for signage shall be required for any signage
not included on Exhibits "D" and "F", or as amended by these conditions.
A separate building permit shall be required for all signage identified on the appreved
Exhibits "D" and "F", or as amended by these conditions.
15
All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the
appreved construction plans and shall 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 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 plan, 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 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 interior end of the parking space at a minimum height
if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at
a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk.
A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-street parking
facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, cleady and conspicuously stating the following:
\\TEMEC_FS201~)ATA~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~517PA98PCStaffRpt.doc
11
"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
vehide~ 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.
18.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with pdor to occupancy or any use allowed
by this permit.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
19.
Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any
Govemment 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
20.
A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the Department
of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained
road right-of-way.
21.
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.
22.
All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation 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.
23.
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
Department of Public Works:
Improve Rio Nedo (Principal Collector Highway Standards - 78' R/W) to include
installation of sidewalk and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer).
24.
Unless otherwise approved the following minimum cdteria shall be observed in the design
of the street improvement plans:
a. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207.
Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in
accordance with Ordinance No. 461.
Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400
and 401. All existing trees shall be relocated behind proposed sidewalk.
All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed
through curb outlets per City Standard No. 301,302 or 303.
\\TEMEC_FS201'{)ATA'~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~517pA98pCStaffRpt.doc
12
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall
be provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required where adequate
right-of-way does not exist for installation of the facilities. All utilities shall be
designe~ and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility previder.
25.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be
provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and
constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable TV,
and/or secudty systems shall be pre-wired in the residence.
26
The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit
shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements.
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
27.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
a. Planning Department
b. Department of Public Works
c. Riverside County Health Department
d. General Telephone
e. Southern California Edison Company
f. Southern California Gas Company
28.
A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City of
Temecula standards and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any grading. The plan shall incorporate adequate erosion control
measures to protect the site and adjoining properties from damage due to erosion.
29.
A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and submitted to the
Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all
soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered
structures and preliminary pavement sections.
30.
A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the
Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identify storm
water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of the site.
It shall identify all existing or proposed off-site or on-site, public or private, drainage facilities
intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable
of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study
shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or
upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided
as part of development of this project. The basis for analysis and design shall be a storm
with a recurrence interval of one hundred years.
31.
The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and
erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to
approval by the Department of Public Works.
\\TEMEC_FS201 ~DATA~DEPTS',PLANNING~STAFFRPT~517PA98PCStaffRpt.doc
13
32.
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 cashiers 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.
33.
The Developer shall obtain letters of approval or easements for any off-site work performed
on adjoining properties. The letters or easements shall be in a format as directed by the
Department of Public Works.
34.
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
has been shown to be exempt.
35.
The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental
Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits
36.
A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and
approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and
elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and
site conditions.
37.
Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, the
approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards and
accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial
conformance with the approved rough grading plan.
38.
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.
39.
The Developer shall record a written offer to participate in, and wave all rights to object to
the formation of an Assessment District, a Community Facilities District, or a Bddge and
Major Thoroughfare Fee District for the construction of the proposed "Western bypass
Corridor*' or "Medians 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 Certificates of Occupancy
40.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
a. Rancho Califomia Water District.
b. Eastern Municipal Water District.
c. Department of Public Works.
41,
All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public
agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works.
\\TEMEC_FS201~DATA~DEpTS~.DLANNING~STAFFRpT~517pA98pCStaffRpt,doc
42.
All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City
standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
43.
The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken due
to the construction operations of this project shall be repaired or removed and replaced to
the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
BUILDING AND SAFETYDEPARTMENT
44.
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to
the Planning Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees.
45.
Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining
property or public dghts-of-way. All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown
on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check
approval and shall comply with the requirements of City Ordinance No. 655 regarding light
pollution.
46.
Comply with applicable provisions of the 1994 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and
Mechanical Codes; 1993 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24
Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code.
47.
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.
48.
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.
49.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
50. The Occupancy classification of the proposed buildings shall be B/S-I/F-1.
51. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
52.
All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
all details on plans. (Califomia Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
53. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building.
54. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
55. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
56.
Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire
alarm systems.
57.
Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1994
edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code, Appendix C.
58. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system.
\\TEMEC_FS201~)ATA~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~517PA98PCStaffRpt.dOC
15
59. Provide appropdate stamp of a registered professional with odginal signature on plans
submitted for plan review.
60.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic
and mechanical plan for plan review.
61.
62.
Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer
engineer are required for plan review submittal.
Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
63.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
64.
Trash encJosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls require separate approvals
and permits,
FIRE DEPARTMENT
The following are the Fire Department Conditions of Approval for this project. All questions regarding
the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau.
65.
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.
66.
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. a water system capable of delivering 1500 GPM at
20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a
total fire flow of 2350 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)
67.
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 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent
to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart and shall be located no more
than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to an
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).
68.
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)
69.
If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection prior
to any building construction. (UFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2)
\\TEMEC_FS201~:)ATA\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~17PA98PCStaffRpt.doc
16
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have
appmved temporaW Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads are
installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for
70,000 Ibs GVVV. (UFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
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 fadiity or any portion
of an extedor wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather
surface 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 vedical 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 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 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 prior 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 shall
be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor 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_FS201 ~DATA\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~517PA98PCStaffRpt.d~<:
17
80.
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 eme~'gency access by firefighting personnel. (UFC 902.4)
81.
Pdor 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 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. (UFC Article 81)
82.
Pdor to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developer/applicant
shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the
storage of combustible liquids, fiammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both
the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau.(UFC 7901.3 and 8001,3)
OTHERAGENCIES
83.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated January 13, 1999, a copy of which
is attached.
84.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California
Water Districts transmittal dated January 11, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in cenforrnance
with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be
subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant Name
\\TEMEC_FS201~)ATA~DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRpT~517pA98pCStaffRpt. Cloc
18
County of Riverside
HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY
TO:
FROM:
RE:
~t~v~coe~ He, aJ,;C/~ Sl~ei,,t_i3~t 7111
DATE: JamUZ/L~ |], 1999
The 'l~epax,~mem.~ a~, ~r,u, ULaranem.,~a~ ff~ ~ ,'LP..U./.tJet.~ ~ PL~t rbu~ h/o, PA98-0517 emd
~ m:~ objeP~',,U~n~,. ~ 6e~,~ ~ u)aIe,'c xe~u,~.e.A r, cuj be a. vnjj. abL~ .~ ,tJaj~
I~IOR TO ANY PLAN CHI~CIC .SU~ITTAL ~o~, ~ ~e.~ ~ ~olJ, omb~ b ~e
~equ~te~:
,the e. pp~ ae~:ex ~ A~ ~.
~e ~a~ a~ R~ Feed F~ ~.
~e ~ Food F~ P~ ~ ~
t Unde/tg~oetf~ .6,CxT. n~e ~,~ml~6, Oa~Z~uuzce fl617.4.
~' f~z_n..tu~uA (~x,A,~z Geme.,'uz.to,,c Sexu.~.e. e6, O,,UJ,/,ma~e_e
3. gdn. A:~ Rf~u.r.,~,,~R 8~ur_J~ (f, de,~:e CoT, Iec.~.onlLF~A),
3V3 EeG8SS6 OE:SI 6E6T/£T/IO
JZ seed -- ,£06~SS6# mo~ ,, md8~:£ 666~ '£[ X~enuep xepssups~
Janua~ 11,1999
Ms. Patty Anders, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AVAILA-q!LITY
LOTS NO. 43 AND NO. 44 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 23182
APN 909-290-043 AND APN 909-290-044
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0517
Dear Ms. Andors:
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 this office.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brannon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
99~SB:mc012\F012-T1~CF
c: Laurie Williams, Engineering Services Supervisor
JAN I ;~ i999 ~,/
'~ ./
Itancho California Water District
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
EXHIBITS
\\TEMEC_FS201~)ATA'~E)EPTS'~PLANNING~TAFFRPT',517PA98PCStaffRpt,doc
19
CITY OF TEMECULA
MURRI ETA ~ ~
.% .
TEMECULA ~,:"'~
C
CASE NO. 98-00517
EXHIBIT - A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - March 17, 1999
=
VICINITY MAP
R:\STAFFRPT~517PA98PCStaffRpt.dOC
CITY OF TEMECULA
EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - LI (Light Industrial)
~P
RH
P
~ RP
EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - BP (Business Park)
CASE NO. 98-0517
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - March 17, 1999
R:\STAFFRPT~517PA98PCStaffRpt.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. 98-0517
EXHIBIT- D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - March 17, 1999
SITE PLAN
R:\STaFfRPT~517Pa98PCStaffRpt.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. 98-0517
EXHIBIT- E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - March t7, 1999
ELEVATIONS
R:\STAFFRPT~517PA98PCStaftRpt.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. 98-0517
EXHIBIT - F
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - March 17, 1999
FLOOR PLAN
R:\STAFFRPT~517PA98PCStaffRpt.doc
ITEM #4
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
March 17, 1999
Planning Application No. PA98-0511
(General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment)
Planning Application No. PA98-O512
(Development Plan)
Prepared By: Thomas K. Thornsley, Project Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends the Planning
Commission:
ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending approval of
Planning Application No. PA98-0511 (General Plan
Amendment and Zoning Amendment) based upon the
Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report;
ADOPT the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Planning
Application Numbers PA98-0511 (General Plan Amendment
and Zoning Amendment) and PA98-0512 (Development
Plan);
ADOPT the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning
Application Number PA98-0512 (Development Plan);
ADOPT Resolution No. 99- approving Planning Application
No. PA98-0512 (Development Plan); based upon the Analysis
and Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
Curt Miller, Pacific Gulf Properties, Inc.
PROPOSAL:
Planning Application No. PA98-0511 is a request to amend the
General Plan Land Use and Zoning Map designations, of two
parcels totaling 12.3 acres, from Business Park (BP) to
Professional Office (O), along with Planning Application No.
PA98-0512, a Development Plan proposal to build a 244 unit
senior housing complex with two and three story apartment
buildings on 8.3 acres.
LOCATION:
Located on the northwest corner of Nicolas Road and
Winchester Road (Assessors Parcel Numbers 911-170-078,
911-170 085 and 911-170-090)
R:\STAFFRPT~511-512pa98 pc,doc
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: BP (Business Park)
EXISTING ZONING:
BP (Business Park)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
M (Medium Density Residential)
PI (Public Institution)
N/C (Neighborhood Commercial) SP (Rodpaugh
Estates Specific Plan)
M (Medium Density Residential) and PI (Public
Institution)
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North: Residential
South: Chaparral High School
East: Vacant
West: Residential and Chaparral High School
PROJECT STATISTICS
Total Area Gross:
Total Area Net:
Total Building Area
Building Footprint:
Landscape Area:
Paved Area:
Hardscape:
361,548 square feet
355,580 square feet
217,900 square feet
90,400 square feet
126,770 square feet
100,810 square feet
37,600 square feet
(8.3 acre)
(8.1 acre)
60.30%
25.42%
35.66%
28.35%
10.57%
Parking Required:
Senior Housing (% covered spaces per unit)
+1 uncovered space per 5 units for guest parkincl
Total
122 spaces
49 spaces
171 spaces
Parking Provided:
Covered 122 spaces
Uncovered 153 spaces
Total 283 spaces
Building Height:
30 feet for two story building
42 feet for three story buildings
BACKGROUND
A pre-application meeting was held in October 1998 and the project was considered a viable
proposal if the General Plan and Zoning were amended to permit this use. The application was
formally submitted to the Planning Department on December 24, 1998. A Development Review
Committee meeting was held on January 21, 1999. The project was deemed complete on February
24, 1999.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Planning Application No. PA98-0511, is a request for a General Plan Amendment and a Zoning
Amendment to change the Land Use and the Zoning designations of 12.3 acres of property from
Business Park (BP) to Professional Office (PO). Planning Application No. PA98-0512 (Development
Plan) is a request for the construction of a 244 unit senior housing complex, consisting of two and
R:\STAFFRFI'\511-512pa98 pc.doe
2
three story apartment buildings on 8.3 acres. The remaining four acres are not being proposed for
development at this time. Currently the property line crosses the project site but a Lot Line
Adjustment is being processed to move the lot line between this site and the remaining four acres.
ANALYSIS
General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment
Under Planning Application No. PA98-0511 the applicant had sought a location within the city where
they could provide senior housing that was convenient to community businesses and services. The
applicant found there is a limited amount of available property within the city that permits their type
of development. Their selected site meets their need but is designated Business Park (BP) under
the General Plan Land Use Map and the Zoning Map, which does not permit senior housing. Under
Professional Office (PO), senior housing and congregate care housing are permitted uses.
Therefore, changing the land use and zoning designations to PO insures that the site can be used
as senior housing and cannot be converted to general use (multi-family) apartments in the future.
Development Plan
Planning Application No. PA98-0511 proposes to build 244 dwelling units for senior (55 years of age
and older) housing on 8.3 acres. There will be four building on site with one building designed as
a two story structure and the other three being three stories. The facility will have a mix of one and
two bedroom units with a kitchen, dining area, living room, and one or two baths. This facility is
designed for active seniors and will provide amenities like any apartment complex. The applicant
does not propose to offer any assisted living services in this complex.
Site Desiqn and Circulation
The project will have two access points on Nicolas Road, In the future there may be a shared
access onto Winchester Road when the remainder of the site is developed. Caltrans has consented
to this future access on the condition that it be right-in and right-out only. A perimeter drive aisle
provides onsite circulation that loops around the entire complex. All parking is provide along this
drive aisle.
Four buildings make up this complex (reference Exhibit D). The main building, is a two story building
and is located on the corner of Nicolas and Winchester Roads and is the largest with an east and
west wing. Each wing is rectangularity shaped with an internal courtyard. Building two is located
to the west of building one and is an "L" shaped three story structure. To the north, buildings three
and four are placed at angles away for the center of building one providing an internal space
between the three buildings. tn this area are a pool, spa, patio, and garden areas. Access to all of
the apartments will be from inside the structure with outside access at the ends or the middle of the
building. No units are designed to have direct outside entries.
Courtyards, patios, and walkways will connect the buildings. The walkways meander between the
buildings through gardens and landscaped areas. Building two is located adjacent to a putting
green. Between buildings two and three and three and four are decorative patio areas that function
as entry points into the complex and provide access for emergency services.
Parking Analysis
The City's Development Code requires % covered spaces per unit (244 / % = 122) and one
uncovered space per five units for guest parking (244 / 5 = 49). As designed the applicant is
proposing 122 covered stalls, 8 handicapped and 153 additional stalls for a total of 283 parking
stalls. The site provides 112 more parking stalls than required. The applicant indicates that they
R:\STAFFRFT\511-512pa98 pc.doe
3
need one space for each unit in the complex and that reduces the number of extra spaces down to
thirty-nine.
Architecture & Colors
The design of the apartments takes elements of the "Craftsman" style with clean lines, exposed
beams, low sloping roofiines with gables, and neutral tones. The fascias of the buildings will be
finished with a wood float stucco finish in light shades of gray, beige, and tan. To add relief, the
exterior walls will have multiple planes giving the building fascia depth. The windows will be
recessed and the second and third floors will appear to step back from the lower floors. Each unit
will have either a patio or a balcony with stucco walls on the ground floor patios and wrought iron on
the upper floor balconies.
Building one is the main building with its entry facing the driveway from Nicolas Road. A fountain
will be the focal point into the building. Stacked sandstone veneer will enhance this entrance and
the other entry points around the buildings.
Roof colors will be a mix of light and dark grays and grayish-tan concrete tiles. The exposed wood
fascia and outlooker beams will be finished with light olive green for accent coloring. As designed,
the building will be very distinctive and appealing,
The carports proposed are post and beam design with a metal trimmed roof that will have a finished
color to match the building stucco color. Staff felt that the carports should incorporate some
additional features such as the outlookers and utilize accent colors used on the main building. The
applicant has requested to maintain the simple unaccented look of the carport so that they are less
noticeable. Some of the carports are located along Winchester and Nicolas Roads were they will
be visible. Staff has added a condition of approval to assure that the styling of the carports be more
articulated to be consistent with the main building.
Landscapincl
Thirty-five percent (35.66%) of the site has been landscaped. This exceeds the twenty-five percent
minimum landscaping requirement in the PO (Professional Office) zone. The bulk of the landscaping
is provided along the two street frontages (Winchester Road and Nicholas Road) and around the
perimeter of the buildings. A twenty-five foot landscape buffer has been provided between the
streets and the buildings. The dominant trees being used are Carrotwood (Cupaniopsis
Anacordioides), California Sycamore (Pantanus Racemosa), African Sumac (Rhus Lancea), and
Bottle Tree (Brachychiton Populneus). Additional landscaping is provided between the buildings
including landscaped paths and gardens and two landscaped courtyards in building one.
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. In addition,
because the site has been previously disturbed, it contains no biological resources. As a result staff
is recommending that a De Minimus Impact Finding be made.
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATION
The cuprent General Plan land use designation and the zoning classification are Business Park (BP).
Planning Application PA98-0511 (General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment) is proposing
R:\STAFFRPTX511-512pa98 pc .doc
4
to amend the General Plan Land Use map, forthe requested 12.3 acres, to Professional Office (PO)
and the Zoning Map to Professional Office (O).
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The development of the requested senior housing complex (PA98-0512) requires a change to the
General Plan Land Use and Zoning designations. By changing the designations (PA98-0511) from
Business Park to Professional Office many of the same uses will be permitted including senior
housing. This project provides a specialized housing need in the community that is not being met
elsewhere. Converting this site to residential is a use consistent with the varied mix of surrounding
uses. Additionally, this site is in proximity to a wide variety of community sen/ices that will be
convenient to future residents.
Therefore, the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment (PA98-0511) will change
the land use and zoning to compatible designations without impacting the community. And the
Development Plan (PA98--0512) for senior housing is a use that can be considered compatible and
consistent with the surrounding area of Nicolas Road and Winchester Road. The proposed project
will therefore be consistent with the City's General Plan and Development Code. Staff, therefore,
recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of PA98-0512 (General Plan
Amendment and Zoning Amendment) to the City Council and approve PA98-0512 (Development
Plan) for a senior housing project.
FINDINGS - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of this General Plan Amendments, makes the
following findings:
This amendment is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community+
Planning Application No. PA98-0511 (General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment)
as proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The change
in land use is in conformance with all applicable requirements of State law and other
Ordinances of the City. The land use change remains 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.
This amendment is compatible with existing and surrounding uses. The project is compatible
with existing and surrounding uses. There is undeveloped commercial property and existing
residential in the immediate area similar and/or compatible to the proposed use.
This amendment will not have an adverse effect on the community and is consistent with the
goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The proposed amendment will not have an
adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies
of the adopted General Plan.
FINDINGS -ZONING AMENDMENT
The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of this Change of Zone, makes the following
findings:
The change is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Planning
Application No. PA98-0511 (General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment) as proposed
is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The change in land use
is in conformance with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the
City.
R:\STAFFRPT\5 11-5 12pa9 8 pc .doc
The change is consistent with the approved revisions to the General Plan Land Use Map.
The General Plan Land Use Designation has been changed to Professional Office and the
requested Zoning Amendment will change the zoning to Professional Office which is
consistent with the amended General Plan Land Use Map.
The change will not have an adverse effect on the community and is consistent with the
goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The proposed amendment will not have an
adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies
of the adopted General Plan.
FINDINGS - DEVELOPMENT PLAN
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. Furlher, 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:
PC Resolution No. 99- - (PA98-0511) - Blue Page 7
Exhibit A - (Draft Resolution No. 99- ) - Blue Page 11
Exhibit B - (Draft Ordinance No. 99- ) - Blue Page 15
PC Resolution No. 99- - (PA98-0512) - Blue Page 19
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 22
initial Study - Blue Page 34
Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 52
Exhibits - Blue Page 58
A. Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C. General Plan
D. Site Plan
E. Elevation
F. Landscape Plan
G. Floor Plans
H. Rendering
R:\$TAFFRPTX511-512pa98 pc .doc
6
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
R:XSTAFFRFT\511-5 I2pa98 pc .doc
7
ATTACHMENTNO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
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 FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS
LOTS 166 AND 181 OF THE TEMECULA LAND AND WATER
COMPANY; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 911-
170-078, 911-170-085 AND 911-170-090 (PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA98-0511)" 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 CITY FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS LOTS 166 AND
181 OF THE TEMECULA LAND AND WATER COMPANY; ALSO
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 911-170-078, 911-170-085
AND 911-170-090. (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0511)"
WHEREAS, Curt Miller, of Pacific Gulf Properties, Inc., initiated Planning Application No.
PA98-0511, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA98-0511 was processed including, but not limited
to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, Temecuta Library,
Pujol Street Community Center, and the Temecuia Valley Chamber of Commerce; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA98-05't 1 on
March 17, 1999, 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 opposition to this
matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission recommended approval of Planning Application No. PA98-0511;
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. Findinqs.
A. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of this General Plan
Amendments, make the following findings:
1. This amendment is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
Planning Application No. PA98-0511 (General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment)
R:\STAFFRFT~511-512pa98 pc .doc
8
as proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The change in land
use is in conformance with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City.
The land use change remains 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.
2. This amendment is compatible with existing and surrounding uses. The project is
compatible with existing and surrounding uses. There is undeveloped commercial property and
existing residential in the immediate area similar and/or compatible to the proposed use.
3. This amendment will not have an adverse effect on the community and is consistent
with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The proposed amendment will not have
an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the
adopted General Plan.
B. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of this Change of Zone, makes
the following findings:
1. The change is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
Planning Application No. PA98-0511 (General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment) as
proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The change in land
use is in conformance with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City.
2. The change is consistent with the approved revisions to the General Plan Land Use
Map. The General Plan Land Use Designation has been changed to Professional Office and the
requested Zoning Amendment will change the zoning to Professional Office which is consistent with
the amended General Plan Land Use Map.
3. The change will not have an adverse effect on the community and is consistent with
the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The proposed amendment will not have an
adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the
adopted General Plan.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Environmental Study was prepared for this
project to determine if the proposed changes would result in any environmental impacts beyond
those impacts identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City General Plan. The
Initial Study indicated that overall, the proposed General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
would have not result in impacts beyond those originally anticipated for the City General Plan. Two
areas, circulation, and air quality impacts, are expected to see small reductions in the anticipated
environmental impacts because there are fewer trips generated by senior housing than that
potentially generated by professional offices. As a result, the Planning Commission determines that
the potential impacts of these changes were adequately addressed by the Final Environmental
Impact Report for the City General Plan and that no further environmental analysis is required.
Section 4. The City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of
Planning Application No. PA98o0511 (General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment) and
recommends that the City Council do the following:
A. Approve a Resolution entitled "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of
Temecula Amendin9 the General Plan Land Use Map for Property known as Lots 166 And 181 of
The Temecula Land and Water Company, also known as Assessor's Parcel No. 911-170-078, 911-
170-085 and 911-170-090 (Planning Application No. PA98-0511)" substantially in the form that is
attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A; and,
R:\STAFFRFT~511-512pa98 pc.doe
9
B. Adopt an Ordinance entitled "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of
Temecula Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Temecula City for Property known as Lots 166
and 181 of the Temecula Land and Water Company, also known as Assessor's Parcel No. 911-170-
078, 911-170-085 and 911-170-090 (Planning Application No. PA98-0511 )" substantially in the form
that is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 17th day of March 1999.
Ron Guerriero, 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 17~h day of March,
1999 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:\STAFFRFT%511-512p~98 pc .doc
10
EXHIBIT A
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 99-
R:\STAFFRPTX511-512pa98 pc .doc
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP
FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS LOTS 166 AND 181 OF THE
TEMECULA LAND AND WATER COMPANY; ALSO KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 911-170-078, 911-170-085 AND 911-
170-090 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0511 )
WHEREAS, Curt Miller, of Pacific Gulf Properties, Inc., initiated Planning Application No.
PA98-0511, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA98-0511 was processed including, but not limited
to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance was posted at City Hall, Temecula Library,
Pujol Street Community Center, and the Temecuta Valley Chamber of Commerce; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA98-0511 on
March 17, 1999, 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 opposition to this
matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission recommended approval of Planning Application No. PA98-0511;
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to Planning Application
No. PA98-0511 on , at which time interested persons had opportunity to,
and did testify either in support or opposition to Planning Application No. PA98-0511;
WHEREAS, the City Council received a copy of the Commission proceedings and Staff
Report regarding Planning Application No. PA98-0511;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL 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
rarefence.
Section 2. Findings The City Council, in approving Planning Application No. PA98-0511
(General Plan Amendment) hereby makes the following findings:
A. This amendment is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
Planning Application No. PA98-0511 (General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment) as
proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The change in land
use is in conformance with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City.
The land use change remains 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.
R :\STAFFR~F\511-512pa98 pc. doc
B. This amendment is compatible with existing and surrounding uses. The project is
compatible with existing and surrounding uses. There is undeveloped commercial properly and
existing residential in the immediate area similar and/or compatible use.
C. This amendment will not have an adverse effect on the community and is consistent
with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The proposed amendment will not have
an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the
adopted General Plan.
Section 3. Amendment To The General Plan Land Use Map The City Council hereby
amends the General Plan Land Use Map on the following parcels in the manner specified below:
A. For the parcels identified as APN 911-170-078, 911-170-085 and 911-170-090:
change the Land Use Designation from Business Park (BP)to Professional Office (O); and,
Section 4. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Environmental Study was prepared for this
project to determine if the proposed changes would result in any environmental impacts beyond
those impacts identified in the Final Environmental Impact Repod for the City General Plan. The
Initial Study indicated that overall, the proposed General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
would have not result in impacts beyond those originally anticipated for the City General Plan. Two
areas, circulation, and air quality impacts, are expected to see small reductions in the anticipated
environmental impacts because there are fewer trips generated by senior housing than that
potentially generated by professional offices As a result, the Planning Commission determines that
the potential impacts of these changes were adequately addressed by the Final Environmental
Impact Repod for the City General Plan and that no further environmental analysis is required.
Section 5. 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 6. The City Clerk shall cedify the adoption of this Resolution.
R:\STAFFRFT\511-512pa98 pc .doc
13
Section 7. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this __ day of , 1999.
ATTEST:
Steven J. Ford, 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
, 1999 by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
R:\STAFFRFF\511-512pa98 pc .doc
EXHIBIT B
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 99-
R:\STAFFRPT~511-512pa98 pc .doe
EXHIBIT B
ORDINANCE NO. 99-~
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA CITY FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS LOTS 166 AND
181 OF THE TEMECULA LAND AND WATER COMPANY; ALSO
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 911-170-O78, 911-170-085
AND 911-170-090 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0511)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Public hearings have been held before the Planning Commission and City
Council of the City of Temecula, State of California, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning law of the
State of Califomia, and the City Code of the City of Temecula. The changes to the land use district
as shown on the attached exhibit are hereby approved and ratified as part of the Official Land Use
map for the City of Temecula as adopted by the City and as many be amended hereafter from time
to time by the City Council of the City of Temecula. The City of Temecula Official Zoning Map is
amended by placing in affect the zones as described in Planning Application PA98-0511 and listed
below:
A. For the parcels identified as APN 911-170-078, 911-170-085 and 911-170-090:
change the Zoning Designation from Business Park (BP) to Professional Office (PO); and,
Section 2. Notice of Adoption. Within 10 days after the adoption hereof, the City Clerk of
the City of Temecula shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be posted in at
least three public places in the City.
Section 3. Findinqs The City Council, in approving Planning Application No. PA98-0511
(Zoning Amendment) hereby makes the following findings:
A. The change is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
Planning Application No. PA98-0511 (General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment) as
proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The change in land
use is in conformance with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City.
B. The change is consistent with the approved revisions to the General Plan Land Use
Map. The General Plan Land Use Designation has been changed to Professional Office and the
requested Zoning Amendment will change the zoning to Professional Office which is consistent with
the amended General Plan Land Use Map.
C. The change will not have an adverse effect on the community and is consistent with
the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The proposed amendment will not have an
adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the
adopted General Plan.
Section 4. Taking Effect. This ordinance shall take effect 30 days after the date of its
adoption.
R:\STAFFRPT\511-512pa98 pc ,cloc
Section 5. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Environmental Study was prepared for
this project to determine if the proposed changes would result in any environmental impacts beyond
those impacts identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City General Plan. The
Initial Study indicated that overall, the proposed General Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
would have not result in impacts beyond those originally anticipated for the City General Plan. Two
areas, circulation, and air quality impacts, are expected to see small reductions in the anticipated
environmental impacts because there are fewer trips generated by senior housing than that
potentially generated by professional offices. As a result, the Planning Commission determines that
the potential impacts of these changes were adequately addressed by the Final Environmental
Impact Report for the City General Plan and that no further environmental analysis is required.
Section 6. 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 :\STAFFRFT\511-512pa98 pc. doc
Section 7. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this __ day of , 1999.
ATTEST:
Steven J. Ford, Mayor
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. __ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the __ day of ,1999, and that thereafter, said Ordinance
was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the
__ day of , 1999 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, CMC
City Clerk
R:\STAFFRPT\511-512pa98 pc.doe
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
R :\STAFFRPT\511-512pa98 pc .doc
ATTACHMENTNO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-
0512 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) A PROPOSAL TO BUILD A 244 UNIT
SENIOR HOUSING COMPLEX WITH TWO AND THREE STORY
APARTMENT BUILDINGS ON 8.3 ACRES; LOCATED ON THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF NICOLAS ROAD AND WINCHESTER
ROAD, KNOWN AS LOTS 166 AND 181 OF THE TEMECULA LAND
AND WATER COMPANY; ALSO KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NO. 911-170-078, 911-170-085 AND 911-170-090.
WHEREAS, Cud Miller, of Pacific Gulf Properties, Inc., filed Planning Application No. PA98-
0512, in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA98-0512 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. PA98-0512, on
March 17, 1999, 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 hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. PA98-0512;
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
FefeFeRce.
Section 2. Findinqs, The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No,
PA98-0512 (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 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 considered
to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and in the Conditions
of Approval added to the project.
R: \STAFFRPT~ 11-512pa98 pc. doc
20
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 Mitigated 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. PA98-0512 (Development Plan) a proposal to build a 244 unit
senior housing complex with two and three story apartment buildings on 8.3 acres, located at the
northeast corner of Nicolas Road and Winchester Road, and known as Assessors Parcel No. 911-
170-078, 911-170-085 and 911-170-090, and subject to the project specific conditions set forth in
Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of March, 1999.
Ron Guerriero, 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 17th day of March,
1999 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:\STAFFRFT\511-512pa98 pc .doc
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
R:\STAFFRFFXS11-512pa9g pc.doe
22
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA98-0512 (Development Plan)
Project Description:
A proposal to build a 244 unit senior housing complex with
two and three story apartment buildings on 8.3 acres.
Located on the northwest corner of Nicolas Road and
Winchester Road (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 911-170-
078, 911-170-085 and 911-170-090)
Development Impact Fee Category: Multi-Family
Assessors Parcel No.:
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
911-170-078, 911-170-085 and 911-170-090
March 17, 1999
March 17, 2001
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 Califomia 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
indemnity, 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 notity 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 right to take any and all action the City
deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense.
The approval of this application shall not be effective until such time that the General Plan
and Zoning for the proposed site permits the development of senior housing.
R:\STAFFRFr\511-512pa98 pc .doc
23
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otheRvise, 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. 98-0512, or as amended by these conditions.
The development of the building shall conform substantially to Exhibit E (Elevations),
approved with Planning Application No. 98-0512, or as amended by these conditions.
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.
Material Color
Exterior Plaster in wood float sand finish La Habra Plaster Co. #x9511 (grey)
La Habra Plaster Co. #x3713 (beige)
La Habra Plaster Co. #x80220 (tan)
Wood Fascia and exposed wood trim Olympic Satin "Outside White"
Accent Color on handrails, gutters & downspouts Frazee 4904D (light olive green)
Tile Roof Pioneer Concrete Roof Tiles WS-503 (dark grey)
Pioneer Concrete Roof Tiles WS-516 (medium grey)
Pioneer Concrete Roof Tiles WS-472 (tan/grey)
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
10.
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.
11.
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.
12.
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.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
13. Lot Line Adjustment PA98-0477 shall be recorded.
R :\STAFFRFr~ l 1-5 12pa98 pc .doc
24
14.
All mechanical and roof-mounted equipment shall be hidden by building elements that were
designed for that purpose as an integral pan of the building.
15.
The carports shall be redesigned to include architectural elements and color enhancements
similar to the main structures.
16. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
17.
The perimeter landscaping shall provide shrubs, berms and/or walls to screen the parking
areas.
18,
Three (3) copies of detailed Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted
to the Planning Department for review 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 identify the total
square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be accompanied by the
following items:
a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal).
b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
c. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
d. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan).
Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits
19.
The development of a bus stop as requested by the Riverside Transit Authority shall be done
so at no expense to the City. The developer shall be responsible for obtaining all required
encroachment permits.
20.
Separate building permit applications for the installation of signage shall be submitted in
conformance with City Ordinances, Design Guidelines, and Development Code.
21.
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 properly constructed and in good working order.
22.
Perfon'nance 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 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 released.
23.
Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently affixed
re~ectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the
International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches
in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height
if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at
a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk.
A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-street parking
facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, deady and conspicuously stating the following:
R :\STAFFRPT\511-512pa98 pc .doc
25
"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."
tn 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
24.
Comply with applicable provisions of the 1994 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and
Mechanical Codes; 1993 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24
Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code.
25.
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.
26.
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.
27.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
28. The Occupancy classification of the proposed buildings shall be R-1.
29. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
30.
All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
31. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building.
32. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
33. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
34.
Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire
alarm systems.
35.
Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1994
edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code, Appendix C.
36. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system.
37.
Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans
submitted for plan review.
38.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic
and mechanical plan for plan review.
R:\STAFFRPT\511-512pa98 pc .doc
26
39. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer
engineer are required for plan review submittal.
40. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
41.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector pdor to the start of the
building construction.
42.
Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls require separate approvals
and permits
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
43.
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 properly 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
44.
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.
45
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.
46
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the California Department of Transportation
prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State Right-of-
Way.
47.
All improvement plans, 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
48.
A copy of the grading, improvement plans, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic
calculations shall be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District for approval prior to the issuance of any permit.
49.
A permit from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is required
for work within their Right-of-Way.
50.
A permit from Army Corps of Engineers is required for any work within the Santa Gertrudis
Channel.
51.
A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a ragisterad 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 pdvate property.
52. 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.
R: \STAFFR PT\511-512pa98 pc. doc
27
53.
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.
54.
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.
55.
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.
56.
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
Army Corps of Engineers
Planning Department
57.
Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and
the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
58.
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.
59.
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 cashiers 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.
60.
The site is in an area identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map as Flood Zone A. 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.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
61.
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:
a. Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C, and 1.00% minimum over
A.C. paving,
R:\STAFFRFFL511-512pa98 pc .doc
28
b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A.
Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in
accordance with Ordinance 461.
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 centerline 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.
62.
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 Winchester Road (Urban Arterial Highway Standards - 134' R/W) to
include installation of sidewalk, street lights and utilities (including but not limited
tO WateF and SeweF.
63.
The Developer shall construct the following public improvements in conformance with
applicable Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public
Works.
Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: sidewalks, drive
approaches and street lights
Storm drain facilities
C,
Sewer and domestic water systems
64.
Bus bays will be designed at all existing and proposed bus stops as directed by Riverside
Transit Agency and approved by the Department of Public Works.
65.
All access rights, easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be submitted to and
approved by the Director of the Department of Public Works for dedication to the City where
sidewalks meander through private property.
66.
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.
67, The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the adjacent property.
68.
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.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
69.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
a. Rancho California Water District
R:\STAFFRPT\511-512pag~ pc .doc
29
b. Eastern Municipal Water District
Department of Public Works
70. Comer property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805.
71.
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.
72
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 following are the Fire Department Conditions of Approval forthis project. All questions regarding
the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau,
73,
Final fire and life safety conditions wilt 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.
74.
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, a water system capable of delivering 2000 GPM at
20 PSi residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 400 GPM for a
total fire flow of 2400 GPM with a 4 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)
75
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) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent
to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 450 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 an
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).
76
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).
77.
If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection prior
to any building construction. (UFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2)
78.
Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have
appreved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads are
installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for
70,000 Ibs GVW. (UFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2).
79. 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 podion
R:\STAFFRFr\511-512pa98 pc .doc
30
of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather
surface designed for 70,000 Ibs. GVVV with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. ( UFC sec
902 and Ord 95-15).
80,
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).
81.
Pnor to building construction, dead end mad 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).
82
Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all-
weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (UFC 902.2.1).
83.
Pdor to issuance of building pen'nits, 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).
84.
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).
85
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).
86.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a directo~ display monument
sign shall be required for apartment, condominium, townhouse or mobile home parks. Each
complex shall have an illuminated diagrammatic layout of the complex which indicates the
name of the complex, all streets, building identification, unit numbers, and fire hydrant
locations within the complex. Location of the sign and design specifications shall be
submitted to and be approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior to installation.
87.
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 spdnkler 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).
88.
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 shall
be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (UFC Article 10).
89. 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).
R :\$TAFFRFT~511-512pa98 pc .doc
90.
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)
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
The TCSD has reviewed the aforementioned development plan and conditions the project as follows:
General Conditions:
91.
Prior to installation of aderial street lighting, the developer shall file an application with the
TCSD and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of said street lighting into
the respective TCSD maintenance program.
92.
During construction, the developer shall provide temporary measures acceptable to the
Department of Public Works for the protection of the Santa Gertrudis Recreational Trail from
any silt, drainage, or other construction debds.
93.
All parkway landscaping and slope areas adjacent to the development shall be maintained
by the property owner.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits:
94.
The developer shall satisfy the City's parkland dedication requirement through the payment
of in-lieu fees equivalent to 1.43 acres of parkland, based upon the City's then current land
evaluation. Said requirement includes a 50% credit for private recreational opportunities
provided on-site and shall be pro-rated at a per dwelling unit cost prior to the issuance of
each building permit requested.
Prior to Certificate of Occupancy:
95.
The developer shall provide permanent measures acceptable to the Department of Public
Works for the protection of the Santa Gertrudis Recreational Trail from silt and drainage.
OTHER AGENCIES
96
Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control
District's transmittal February 18, 1999, a copy of which is attached. The fee is made
payable to the Riverside County Flood Control Water District by either a cashiers check or
money order, pdor to the issuance of a grading permit (unless deferred to a later date by the
District), based upon the prevailing area drainage plan fee.
97.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health's transmittat January 7, 1999, a copy of which is
attached.
98.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California
Water Districts transmittal January 11, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
99.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in Eastern Information
Centers transmittal January 11, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
100. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in Riverside Transit Agency
transmittal January 12, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
R:XSTAFFRFT\511-512pa98 pc ,doc
32
101.
102.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in CALTRANS transmittal
February 3, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in CALTRANS transmittal
February 17, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above
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 Community Development Department approval.
Applicant's Signature
Date
Name printed
R :\STAFFRPT~511-512pa98 pc. doc
33
DAV'D P. ZAPPE
General Manager-Chief Engineer
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
February 18, 1999
1995 MARKET STREET
KIVERSIDE, CA 92501
909/955-1200
909/788-9965 FAX
Mr. Thomas Thornsley
City o f Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula. CA 92590
Dear Mr. Thornsley:
Re: PA 98-0512
The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in
incorporated Cities. The District also does not plan check City land use cases, or provide State
Division of Real Estate letters or other flood hazard reports for such cases. District
comments/recommendations for such cases are normally limited to items of specific interest to the
District including District Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood control and drainage
i~cilities 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 xvith respect to flood hazard, public health and safety, or any other such issue.
PA 98-0512 is a proposal for a development of a 244 unit senior apartment complex with two and
three story buildings on an 8.13 acre lot located on the northeast corner of Winchester Road and
Nicholas Road.
,
This project is adjacent to Santa Gertrudis Channel. The applicant should ensure that the grading of
the site would not create a levee condition in relationship to the charmel. If a levee condition is
created it would jeopardize the District's CLOMR-#91-09-48R for Santa Gertrudis Channel.
Any work that involves the District's right of way, easements or facilities. will require an
encroachment permit from the District.
The City should condition the applicant to provide all studies, calculations, plans or other information
needed to meet FEMA requirements. This project is located within the limits of the District's
Murrieta Cree'k/Santa Gertrudis Creek Area Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been
adopted. Applicable fees should be paid to the Flood Control District, at the time of issuance of
building andgradingpermits. t--,,; ~-~, ~ ~ 77
Mr. Thomas Thomsley
Re: PA 98-0512
-2-
February lS, 1999
Questions regarding this matter may be directed to me at 909/955-1214.
Very truly yours,
STUART E. MCKIBBIN
Senior Civil Engineer
SM:mcv
PC\55938
TO:
FROM:
RE:
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
CITY OF TEMECULA PLAN~'4ING DEPARTMENT
PLOT PLAN NO. PA98-0512
DATE: January 7, 1999
Health Specialist III
1. The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the Plot Plan PA98-0512 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)
Three 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
Calilbmia Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific reference, please contact Food
Facili~: Plan examiners at (909) 694-5022.
A clearance letter from the Hazardous Services Materials Management Branch (009) 604-5055
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 Collection/LEA).
Cll:dr
1909) 955-8980
NOTE: Any current additional requirements not covered. can be applicable at time of Building
Plan review for final Department of Environmental Health clearance.
cc: Doug H~ompson '
3y
.Jeffrey L. Minkler
John F. Hennlgar
Phl]lip L. Forbes
Kenneth C. Deal>
PerO R, Louck
January 11, 1999
Thomas Thornsley, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AVAILABILITY
PORTION OF LOT NO.
MAP BOOK 8, PAGE 359, SAN DIEGO
APN 911-170-085 AND APN 911-170-078
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0512
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.
I~ yOU h=,,,= =n,, r- ............. Engineering S,=n,in
........ J questions, nl~c~ ,"nn+~,"'~' an
· Representative at this office.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
~<--,-c .~2~'
Steve Brannon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
99~SB:mc01 IXF012-T6/FCF
c: Laurie Willlares, Engineering Services Supervisor
CALIFORNIA
IIISTORICAL
RESOURCES
INFORMATION
~YSTEM
Eastern Information Canter
Department of Anthropology
Universit,/of California
Riverside, CA 92521-O418
Phone (909) 787-5745
Fax (909) 787-5409
January 11, 1999
Thomas ThornsIcy
City of Temecula
Planning Department
P. O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Case No.:
Applicant:
PA98-0512
Curt Miller, Pacific Gulf Properties
Dear Mr, Thomsley:
Please find enclosed our comments for one project transmittal as requested by the Planning
Department. If you have any questions, please contact the Eastern Information Center at
(909) 787-5745.
PA98-0512 ....................................... Jan. 19, 1999
Sincerely,
Enclosure(s)
Martha Smith
Information Officer
!' jAN 12 1999 '
CALIFORNIA
141STORICAL
RESOURCES
INFORMATION
SYSTEM
MONO
RFqEP,~IDE
Eastern Information Center
Department of Anthropology'
University of California
Riverside, CA 92521-0418
Phone (909) 787-5745
Fax(909) 787-5409
CULTURAl, RESOURCE REVIEW
DATE: 7r~,,~' -'~/icjq~
RE: Case Transminal Reference Designation:
Records at the Eastern Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System have
been reviewed to determine if this project would adversely affect prehistoric or historic cultural resources:
The proposed project area has not been surveyed for cultural resources and contains or is adjacent to known cultural
resource(s), A Phase I study is recommended.
Based upon existing data the proposed project area has the potential for containing cultural resources. A Phase I study
is recommended.
A Phase I cultural resource study (MF #
) identified one or more cultural resources.
The project area contains, or has the possibility of containing, cultural resources. However, due to the nature of the
project or prior data recovery studies, an adverse effect on cultural resources is not anticipated. Further study is not
recommended.
._L//~A Phase l cultural resource study (MF # ~e);-~ ) identified no cultural resources. Further study is not recommended.
__ There is a iow probability of cultural resources. Further study is not recommended.
_L///lf. during construction, cultural resources are encountered, work should be halted or diverted in the immediate area whL!e
a qualified archaeologist evaluates the finds and makes recommendations.
Due to the archaeological sensitivity of the area, earthmoving during construction should be monitored by a professional
archaeologist.
The submission of a cultural resource management report is recommended following guidelines for Archaeological
Resource Management Reports prepared by the California Office of Historic Preservation, Preservation Planning Bulletin
4(a), December 1989
Phase I
Phase II
Phase Ill
Phase IV
Records search and field survey
Testing [Evaluate resource significance; propose mitigation measures for "significant" sites.]
Mitigation [Data recovery by excavation, preservation in place, or a combination of the two.]
Monitor earthmoving activities
COMMENTS:
If you have any questions, please contact us.
Eastern Information Center
January I2,1999
Riverside Transit Agency
1825 Thrrd Street
~O 8ox 59968
R,versic~e, CA 92577
Phone (909) 684 0850
Fax (909) 684 1007
Mr. Thomas Thomsley
City of Temecula
Temecula Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula. CA 92590
Dear Mr. ThornsIcy:
RE: PA98-05],,F
RTA presently provides transit service on Winchester Road via RTA Route 23A. We currently do
not have a bus stop serving the area in the proposed senior apartment development site, hoxvever,
based on the size of this development and our own plans for future growth, we are requesting that
a bus turnout be incorporated into the general design. Ideal site for the bus turnout would be on
Winchester Road farside the future access driveway adjacent to the proposed Building Four.
If possible. we would also like to request that pedestrian openings be provided near the turnout
locations specified above. Paved, lighted and handicapped accessible pedestrian accessway
consistent with ADA standards should be provided between the stop and the project site. I can
indicate the exact location for the turnout as the project progresses.
Thank you for the opportunity. to review this project. Please keep us updated on the status of this
request and should you require additional information, please call me at (909)684-0850.
Sincerely,
4teLente4'~'~T''''
Transit Planner
jsc,~DEV#248
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT 8, 4S4 W. 4th STREET, ~h FLOOR
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92401-1400
February 3, 1999
08-Riv-79-R3.98
Mr. Thomas Thornsiey
Assistant Planner
43200 Business Park Drive
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Dear Mr. Thornsley:
Planning Application No. PA98-0512
Thank you for forwarding the preliminary site and grading
plans :c ibis office. We have completed our review of the
documents and have the following comments:
The preliminary grading plan submitted to this office
dep!ct a median on Winchester Road (State Route 79), but does
no1 indicate whether that median is raised or no:. Section A-A
ioesn': indicate any median.
Af:er reviewing the Hemorandum of Understanding (MOU}
~e:ween the State of California, Depar:ment of Transportation
.Cai:rans) and the City of Temecula which was finalized on
i.lsvem3er 13, 1995, the proposed access driveway on the future
late Faci!i:y parcel will only be allowed if the median on
Winches:or Road is In fact a raised median. In addi:ion, 1/8
mile spacLng is required for limited access driveways and shall
Se right-in, right-out only.
This project may require an encroachment permit if there
is any work, including work pertaining to: access,
grading, or drainage; within, abutting or impacting the
State highway right of way. The Department of
Transportation would be a responsible agency and may
require certain measures be provlded as a condition of
permii issuance.
If an encroachment permit is required, it can be
obtained from the District 8 Permits Office
oeg nn g of wor . Their address and p one n U" '
listed below:
Mr. Thomas
February 3,
Page 2
Thornsley
1999
Office of Permits
California Department of Transportation
464 West Fourth Street, 6th Floor, MS619
San Bernardino, CA 92401-1400
(909) 383-4526
if you have any questions, please contact Jim Be!ty az
(909) 383-4473 or FAX (909) 383-5936.
Sincerely,
LINDA GRIMES, Chief
Office of Forecasting/
Development Review
~' Hideo Sugita, RCTC
CC: Naidu Athuluru, Encroachment Permits, Riv Co., D8
· TATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT 8, 464 W. 4th STREET, 6th FLOOR
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92401-1400
Gray Davis, Governor
e
Hr. Thomas Thornsley
Assis:ant Planner
43200 Business Park Drive
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Dear Mr. Thornsley:
February 17, 1999
08-Riv-79-R3.98
Planning Application No. PA98-05!2
This letter is in response to our conversation on Tuesday,
February 16, 1999. I received your letter from the Riverside
Transit Agency (RTA) via FAX requesting a bus turnout on the
above-mentioned project.
A bus turnout will be allowed only if it meets Ca!tran's
approval. Please submit previously requested plans in a letter
2azed February 3, 1999 from :his office which includes lhe bus
lurnoul design. All previously requested items in Zhat letter
szzll apply.
Far szght distance safe:y ii zs recommended thal PROPOSED
Fi~P,-SiDE BUS TURNOUT ~SJACENT TO BUILDING NUMBER 4, begin ins
'approach taper' a minimum distance cf 50' {feet} to the west
from uhe proposed access driveway on the proposed future Care
Facii!ly property. This is very near the property line between
:he Care ~acility and the Senior Apartment Complex.
This projeci will require an encroachment permit if
there is any work, including work pertaining to: access,
grading, or drainage; within, abutting or impacting the
S:ate highway Right of Way. The Department of
TransportaIion would be a responsible agency and may
require certain measures be provided as a condition of
permit issuance.
If an encroachment permit is
obtained from the District 8
beginning of work.
listed below:
required, it can be
Permits Office prior to
Their address and phone n~kbcr ar~
FEB 1
I
Mr. Thomas Thornsley
February 17, 1999
Page 2
Office of Permizs
California DeparEment of TransporZation
464 West Fourth Street, 6th Floor, MS619
San Bernardino, CA 92401-1400
(909) 383-4526
If you have any questions, please contact Jim Be!ty ai
/909~ 383-4473 or FAX (909) 383-5936.
cc:
Sincerely,
LINDA GRIMES, Chief
Office of Forecasting/
Development Review
Hideo Sugita, RCTC
Naidu Athuluru, Encroachment Permits, Riv Co., D8
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
R :\$TAFFRlYFX511-512pa98 pc. doc
34
Project Title
Lead Agency Name and Address
Contact Person and Phone Number
Project Location
Project Sponsors Name and Address
General Plan Designation (Current)
Zoning (Current)
Description of Project PA98-0511 (General
Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment)
Description of Project PA98-0512
(Development Plan)
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. PA98-0511 (General Plan Amendment
and Zone Change) and Planning Application PA98-0512
(Development Plan)
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Thomas Thornsley
(909) 694-6400
Located on the northwest comer of Nicolas Road and
Winchester Road (Assessors Parcel Numbers 911-170-078,
911-170-085 and 911-170-090)
Curt Miller, Pacific Golf Properties
4220 Von Karman, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Business Park (BP)
Business Park (BP)
A request to change the General Plan Land Use designations
and Zoning Map designation of two parcels totaling 12.3 acres
from Business Park (BP) to Professional Office (O).
A proposal to develop a 244 unit senior housing complex with
two and three story apartment buildings on an 8.3 acre site. This
is a permitted use in the Professional Office zone and is a less
intensive use. Although the density for the apartments is at 30
units per acre the actual population will be less intensive than
regular apartments because each units will house only one or
two people.
The project is separated from single family homes to the north
and west by the San Gertrudis Creek (channeled), Chaparral
High School to the south, and vacant commercial land in the
Roripaugh Estates Specific Plan to the east.
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 :\STAFFRFY\511-512pa98 pc .doc
35
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 Planning
Population and Housing X
X Geologic Problems
X Water
Air Quality X
Transportation/Circulation
Biological Resources
Energy and Mineral Resources
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 earlier 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
February 25, 1999
Date:
Thomas K. Thornsley
For: The City of Temecula
R:\STAFFRFT\511-512pa98 pc .doc
36
1.a,
1.b.
!1.c.
1.d
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
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 minority
community)?
X
X
X
Comments:
1.a.,c.
The General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment (GPNZA) are a proposal, that upon approval, will
modify the City's General Plan Land Use Designation and Zoning Designation from Business Park to
Professional Office. The impact of GPNZA is expected to be less than significant because Professional
Office is compatible with Business Park and are equally intensive uses. Professional Office is also
compatible the other adjacent commercial designations in the vicinity and allows for senior housing. The
Development Plan for senior apartments is also compatible with the residential uses in the surrounding area
and this location will allow the residents convenient access to community amenities. As a consequence the
impact associated with this Development Plan is expected to be less than significant.
1.b
It is not anticipated that the GPNZA will conflict with applicable environmental plans or polices adopted by
agencies with jurisdiction over the project. The environmental impact of the proposed GPNZA and the
proposed Development Plan are expected to be less than significant because Professional Office is
comparable with Business Park and they are equally intensive uses. Although, impacts 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. All agencies with jurisdiction over these projects
are being given the opportunity to comment on them. It is anticipated that they will make the appropriate
comments as to how the GPNZA and development plan relate to their specific environmental plans or
polices. The Development Plan 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 Development Plan. No significant effects are anticipated as a result of
this project.
1.e
The GPNZA will not have an effect, and the development plan will not disrupt or divide the physical
arrangement of an established community (including low-income or minority community). It will provide for
a specific housing need in the community. As a consequence no significant effects are anticipated as a
result of this project.
R:\STAFFRFFX511-512pa98 pc .doc
37
tmp~
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would be proposal:
2.a.
2,b.
Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population
projections? (Source 1, Page 2-23)
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)
X
X
X
Comments:
2.a. The GPAJZA will not cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections. The development plan
will ultimately result in the construction of senior apartments, which will have a limited effect on population
because each apartment will house only one or two persons. Since the Development Plan is partially
intended to serve the needs of the existing residents, the proposed development will not be a significant
contributor to population growth that wilt cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections.
No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
2.b. The GPNZA and the development plan will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly.
The Development Plan will cause some people to relocate to Temecula, but will more likely accommodate
the needs of existing residents. Therefore, the Development Plan will not induce substantial growth in the
area, and no significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project.
2.c. The GPNZA will not effect exiting housing. The development plan proposes senior housing which will expand
the existing housing and will likely provide more affordable housing. No significant effects are anticipated
as a result of this project.
R:\STAFFRPT\511-512pa98 pc .doc
38
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving?
3.a.
3.b.
3.c.
3.d,
3.e.
3.f.
3,g.
3.h.
3.i.
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
Comments:
3.b,f.,
The GPNZA will not have an effect but the proposed Development Plan may expose people less than
significant impacts involving seismic ground shaking and to erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading or fill. However, the project site is located in Southern California, an
area that is seismically active, and any potential impacts are 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, erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill and
expansive soils. After mitigation measures are performed, less than significant impacts are anticipated as
a result of this project.
3.c., g.
The GPNZA and the development plan site is located within an area delineated as a liquefaction/
subsidence hazard zone. Potentially significant impacts associated with the development of this site will be
mitigated through building construction, which is consistent with Uniform Building Code standards. In
addition, 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 prior
to the issuance of grading permits. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report will be
utilized in the development of this site, which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from
liquefaction. After mitigation measures are performed, no significant effects are anticipated as a result of
this project.
3.d.
The GPA/ZA and the development plan 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 impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
3.e.
The GPNZA and the development plan 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 impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
3.h. This site should not be subject to expansive soils. Soils test in the general area have not indicated that the
conditions or mineral elements exist that create and/or cause there to be problems with expansive soils.
Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R :\STAFFRFT\51 l -512pa98 pc .doc
39
3.i.
The GPNZA and the development plan 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 impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
4. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
4.a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and mount of surface runoff?
4.b. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding? (Source 1, Figure 7-3, Page 7-10;
Figure 7-4, Page 7-12 and Source 5)
4.c. Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)?
4.d. Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body?
4.e. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements?
4.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?
4.g. Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
4.h. Impacts to groundwater quality?
4.i. Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater.
Otherwise available for public water supplies? (Source
I 2, Page 263)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Comments:
This land GPNZA will not have an effect, however, the proposed Development Plan for this site wilt result
in changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns and the rate and amount of surface runoff. While
absorption rates and surface runoff will change, potential impacts will ultimately be mitigated through site
design. Drainage conveyances will be required at the time that a development proposal is proposed to
safely and adequately handle runoff that is created. The impact as a result of this project will be less than
significant.
4.b.
This GPNZA will not expose people to water related hazards. However, the site is located in Zone A of the
Temecula Creek floodplain (areas within the 100-year floodplain) as identified by Flood Insurance Rate Map
Panel No. 060742-0005-B (November 20, 1996). As a consequence the proposed Development Plan will
be required to comply with Riverside County Flood Control measures to mitigate the development for
potential flooding hazards. This site is also located within a dam inundation area as identified in the City of
Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report. Impacts can be mitigated by utilizing existing
emergency response systems and by assuring that these systems continue to maintain adequate service
provision as the City develops. Impacts associated with this project with respect to the threat of flooding can
be mitigated to levels that will be less than significant.
4.c. The GPNZA does not effect discharge into surface waters. The Development Plan for this site 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 a development proposal on this site, the developer will be required to
comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from
R:\STAFFRPT\511-512pa98 pc.doe
40
4.d.,e.
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 as a result of the development of this site.
This GPNZA will not effect the amounts of surface water in any water bodies nor changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water movements. The ultimate development of the site; however, may 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. Consequently any impact as a result of the change
in land use designations is considered less than significant.
The GPAJZA will not have any effects on ground water. The ultimate development of the site should have
a less than significant impact with respect to the change in the quantity and quality of ground waters.
No Impact
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
5.a
5.b.
5.c.
5.d.
Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation(Source 3, Page
6-11, Table 6-2)
Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
Alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause
any change in climate?
Create objectionable odors?
X
X
X
X
Comments:
5.a
The proposed GPAJZA will not violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air
quality violation. The proposed Development Plan will not violate nor contribute to existing or projected air
quality violations. As a consequence no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
5.b.d
The GPNZA will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. Them is a sensitive receptor, Chaparral High
School, in proximity to the Development Plan site. The development of this site may create dust and
objectionable odor during the grading and construction phase of the project. These impacts will be of shod
duration and are not considered significant over the long term. No other odors are anticipated once the
project is built and occupied.
5.c
Neither the proposed GPNZA nor the proposed Development Plan will alter air movement, moisture or
temperature, or cause any change in climate. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\STAFFRPT\511-512pa98 pc .doc
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
Would the proposal result in:
6.a.
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?
X
X
X
6.d
6.e.
6.f.
6.g
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 turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Rail. waterborne or air traffic impacts?
X
X
X
X
Comments:
6.a,
The changes in land use for the GPAJZA are of a similar nature and will not have an impact. The
development of the site will add new traffic to the area. However, the EIR has already addressed the
anticipated traffic volumes generated by the development of this proper~y under Business Park. Based on
the tdp generation data of the General Plans Circulation Element the proposed senior housing Development
Plan has neady half the daily trip rate of the current land use designation of Business Park. Therefore, this
project will create less traffic congestion that previous anticipated in the Circulation Element and the EIR for
the General Plan. It is anticipated that this project will contribute 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 Nicolas Road. 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 and development
impact fees paid, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
6.b.
The GPA/ZA and the Development Plan will not result in hazards to safety from design features. The
Development Plan 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 GPAJZA and the Development Plan will not result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby
uses. The Development Plan is senior housing (apartments) in an area with a vadety of uses which includes
residential. This project is designed to current City standards and has adequate emergency access. No
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The GPAJZA and the Development Plan will not result in hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists.
Hazards or barders to bicyclists have not been included as part of the project. No impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
6.g.
The GPNZA and the Development Plan 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.
R:\STAFFRPT\511-512pa98 pc .doc
42
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES:
Would the proposal result in impacts to:
7.8.
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals
and birds)? (Source 1, Pg 5-15, Figure 5-3 & Source 4)
X
m7.b.
7.c.
7.d.
7.e.
Locally designated species (e.g.heritage trees)? (Source 1
Pg 5-15, Figure 5-3)
Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest,
coastal habitat, etc.)?
Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, ripadan and vernal pool)?
Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
X
X
Comments:
7.a.
The project site for the GPNZA and the and senior housing Development Plan does not lie 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 site is with in the urbanized area of the city and has been
continuously disc for weed abatement and has little vegetation left to provide a potential habitat. As a
result, no impacts are anticipated at this time.
7.b-e. The GPA/ZA has no effect on these biological resources and the Development Plan site is currently
disturbed and undeveloped. There are no locally designated communities, wetland habitat areas, or wildlife
corridors on or around the site. As a result, no impacts are anticipated with the proposed development of
this site.
R :\STAFFRFY\51 I -512pa98 pc .doc
43
ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
8.c.
Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
Use non-renewal resources in a wasteful and inefficient
manner?
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?
X
×
X
Comments:
Neither the GPAJZA nor the Development Plan will impact and/or conflict with adopted energy conservation
plans. The Development Plan 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 GPAJZA will not effect non-renewable resources and the Development Plan 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 resoumes. Due to the scale of the proposed development, these
impacts are not seen as significant,
8.c.
The GPNZA does not effect mineral resources and the Development Plan 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.
R:\STAFFRPT~511-512pa98 pc.doe
44
Im~a
lm~ct
No Impact
9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
9.a.
9.b.
9.c.
9.d.
9.e.
A risk 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 ~ammable brush,
grass, OF trees?
X
X
X
X
X
Comments;
The GPAJZA and the development plan will not result in an 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. Development must receive clearance from the Department of Environmental Health prior to any
plan check submittal and must also receive clearance from the Fire Department prior to the issuance of a
building permit. This applies to storage and use of hazardous materials. No impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
9.b.
The GPA/ZA and the development plan 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 development plan proposes to take access from maintained streets and will therefore not impede any
emergency response or emergency evacuation plans. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9.c.
The GPNZA and the development plan will not result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard. The Development Plan 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 impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9.d
The GPA/ZA and the development plan will not expose people to existing sources of potential health
hazards. No health hazards are known to be within proximity of the project. No impacts are anticipated as
a result of this project.
9.e.
GPNZA and the development plan will not result in an increase to fire hazard in an area with flammable
brush, grass, or trees. The project site 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 impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
R :%STAFFRFT\511-512pa98 pC .d~
45
10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
lO.a.
lO.b.
Increase in existing noise levels? (Source 1, page 8-9)
Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (Source 1,
Figure 8-5)
X
X
Comments:
10.a.
The GPAJZA will not have an effect on noise and Development Plan will result in a less than significant
increase to existing noise levels. The site is currently vacant and development of the land logically wiB 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 Development Plan 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 GPNZA will not expose people to severe noise levels. However, the project site is adjacent to State
Highway 79, Winchester Road, which is designated as an access restricted six-lane urban artedal roadway.
Ambient noise levels 100 feet from centedine are 70.2 to 75.2 CNEL for Highway 79. This Development
Plan for residential use will require an acoustical survey to determine if noise mitigation is necessary. Site
design and building methods can mitigate the ambient noise to acceptable levels. The development of this
project may expose people to severe noise levels dudng the development/construction phase (short-term).
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.
R:\STAFFRFI'X511-512pa98 pc .doc
46
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. Fire protection? X
11 .b Police protection? X
!11.c, Schools? X
I 11 .d Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X
I 11 .e. Other governmental services*~ i X
~ - .
Comments:
11 .a.b. GPAJZA and the development plan will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new
or altered fire or police protection. The Development Plan 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 GPAJZA and the development plan should have no impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered
school facilities. The Development Plan will not cause significant numbers of people requiring schools 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 GPNZA and the development plan 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 GPNZA and the development plan 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.
R:\STAFFRPT\511-512pa98 pc .doc
47
12, UTILITES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS: Would the proposal
result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial
alterations to the foliowinD utilities:
12.a. Power or natural gas?
12.b. Communications systems?
12.c. Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities?
X
X
X
12.d.
12.e.
12.f.
i 12.g.
Sewer or septic tanks? (Source 2, Pgs. 39-40)
Storm water drainage?
Solid waste disposal?
Local or regional water supplies?
X
X
X
X
Comments:
12,a
The GPNZA and the development plan 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.
12.b.
The GPNZA and the development plan 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.
12.c.
The GPNZA and the development plan 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.
12d
The GPNZA and the development plan will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial
alterations to sanitary sewer systems or septic tanks. While the Development Plan 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.
12.e.
The proposal will result in a less than significant need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations
to storm water drainage. The Development Plan 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 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 Source Reduction and Recycling Programs that are implemented by the City. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project,
12.g.
The GPNZA and the development plan 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.
R :\STAFFRPT\511-512pa98 pc .doc
48
13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
13.a.
13.b.
13.c.
Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic affect?
Create light or glare?
X
X
X
Comments:
13.a
The GPNZA and the development plan will not affect a scenic vista or scenic highway. The project is not
located in an 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 GPAJZA and the development plan will not have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect. The
Development Plan consists of multiple apartment building in an area of mixed uses and aesthetic styling.
These buildings are consistent with the City's Design Guidelines and provide greater architectural relief that
the neighboring high school. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
13.c.
The GPNZA and the development plan will have a less than a significant impact from light and glare. The
Development Plan 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 Development
Plan 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.
R:\STAFFRPT\511 512pa98 pc.doe
49
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
14.a. Disturb paleontological resources? (Soume 2, Fig. 15,
Pg. 70)
14.b. Disturb archaeological resources? (Source 2, Fig. 14,
Pg. 67)
14.c, Affect historical resources?
14.d. Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
14.e. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
X
X
X
X
X
Comments:
14.c.
The GPNZA and the development plan 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 GPNZA and the development plan will not have the potential to cause a physical change that would
affect unique ethnic cultural values. Reference response 14.c. No impacts are anticipated as a result of
this project.
14.e.
The GPNZA and the development plan 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.
Signi~c~m
lmptct
No lmpac~
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
15.a.
15.b
Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks or other recreational facilities?
Affect existing recreational opportunities?
X
X
Comments:
15.a.,b. The GPA/ZA and the development plan is a residential facility that 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 an
increase in demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities. The Development
Plan is providing some amenities forthe tenants and will therefore be conditioned to pay an adjusted rate
of the park mitigation fees. The same is true for the quality or quantity of existing recreational resources
for opportunities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\STAFFRPTX511-512pa98 pc .doc
50
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
16.a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or 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?
16.b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-
term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental
goals?
16.c. Does the project have impacts that area individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? CCumutatively
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?
Comments:
16.a-d No impacts are anticipated as a result of this GPA/ZA and the Development Plan.
X
X
X
X
EARLIER ANALYSES. None
SOURCES
2.
3.
4.
City of Temecula General Plan.
City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report.
South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Habitat Map (compiled by the Riverside
County Transporlation and Land Management Agency ['FLMA] GIS Division - dated June 4, 1998)
Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel No. 060742-0005-B (November 20, 1996)
R :\STAFFR PTL511-512pa98 pc .doc
51
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
R:XSTAFFRPTX311-5 12pa98 pc .doe
52
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Planning Application No. PA98-O511 and PA98-0512
(General Plan Amendment and Development Plan for Senior Housing)
Geologic Problems
General impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Processes:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from
excavation, grading or fill.
Planting of slopes and undeveloped portions consistent with
Ordinance No. 457.
Submit erosion control plans for approval by the Department of
Public Works.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Department of Public Works.
General Impact:
Mitigation Measures:
Specific Processes:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from
excavation, grading or fill.
Planting of on-site landscaping that is consistent with the
Development Code.
Submit landscape plans that include planting of slopes and
undeveloped portions of the site to the Planning Department for
approval.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Planning Department.
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Exposure of people or property to 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.
R:\STAFFRPTX5 11-512pa98 pc .doc
53
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Pady:
Exposure of people or property to 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 propedies, 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.
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,
Department of Public Works and building and Safety.
R :\STAFFRFTX511-512pa98 pc, doc
54
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Transpor'l:ation/Circulation
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 tdps or traffic congestion.
Payment of Development Impact Fees, which contribute to road
improvements and traffic signal installations.
Pay fees as computed by the Building Department.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Department of Public Works,
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.
Department of Public Works.
R:%STAFFRFF\5 11-5 12pa98 pc .dec
55
Bioloqical 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
Public Services
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
An incremental 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 Fees.
Pay current mitigation fees with the Riverside County Fire
Department.
Prior to the issuance of building permit.
Building & Safety Department
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
An incremental 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.
R:\STAFFRFF\511-512pa98 pc .doc
56
General impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
Aesthetics
General Impact:
Mitigation Measure:
Specific Process:
Mitigation Milestone:
Responsible Monitoring Party:
An incremental effect upon and a need for maintenance of public
facilities, including roads.
Payment of Development Impact Fee for mad improvements, traffic
impacts, and public facilities.
Pay fees computed by the Department of Public Works.
Prior to the issuance of building permits.
Department of Public Works.
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.
R :\STAFFRFFX511-512pa98 pc. doc
57
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
R:\STAFFRPT\511-512pa98 pc .doc
58
CITY OF TEMECULA
\
% ,
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-05~1 (General Plan Ament~ment and Zoning Amendment) and
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0512 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT A VICINITY MAP
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - March 17, 1999
R:\STAFFRPT~II-512pa98 pc.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
EXHIB(T B
DESIGNATION - BP (BUSINESS PARK)
ZONING MAP
;. ~ LM /xt5
LM
t'qC
4C
8P s? :-~'-"'
'-J
·
LM
EXHIBIT C GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - BP (BUSINESS PARK)
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0511 (General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - March 17, 1999
,r~: STAFFRPT',5 ~ Z -512pa98 pc ,doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0512 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - March 17, 1999
SITE PLAN
R:\STAFFRPT\5I 1-512pa98 pc.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0512 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - March 17, 1999
DETAIL ELEVATIONS
P, STAFFPdPT Si I ~i2pa98 pc.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
Pacific Gulj Propertie~ ~',':';!
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0512 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - March 17, 1999
R/,STAFFRPT\5 1 t -512pa98 pc.doe
BUILDING ONE ELEVATIONS
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0512 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - March 17, 1999
BUILDING TVVO ELEVATIONS
R:\STAFFRFT\5iI-512pa98 pc.doe
CITY OF TEMECULA
North Elevation
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0512 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - March 17, 1999
BUILDING THREE ELEVATIONS
R:ISTAFFRPT\511-512pa98 pc.doe
CITY OF TEMECULA
North Elevatiot~
West Elevation
East Elevation
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0512 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - March 17, 1999
BUILDING FOUR ELEVATIONS
R: STAFFRPT/,511-512pa98 pc.doc
CITY OFTEMECULA
WINCHESTER ROAD
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0512 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT F
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - March 17, 1999
LANDSCAPE PLAN
R:I, STAFFRPT',511-512pa98 pc.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0512 (Development Plan)
EXHIBIT G
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - March 17, 1999
FLOOR PLANS
R 'STAFFRPT\5 Z 1-512pa98 pc.doc