Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout110399 PC Agendaofi~thoCo~DrsdopewatDepm'mu~et(SC~eO44s~O. Notl~48hourspdorioamM~ngwilienabletheCl~'tomake TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION November3, 1999 (~ 6:00 PM 43200 Business Park Drive Council Chambers Temecula, CA 92590 Resolution Next In Order #99-041 CALL TO ORDER: FLAG SALUTE: ROLL CALL: Chairperson Guerdem Fahey, Guerdem, Mathewson, Naggar, 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. Speakere are limited to three (3) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Commissioners about an item not listed on the Agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the Commission Secretary. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address. For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Planning Secretary before Commission gets to that item. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers. COMMISSION BUSINESS 1. Approval of Agenda 2. Minutes from October 5, 1999 PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS Case No: Planning Application No. PA97-0307 (Tentative Parcel Map 28627) Applicant: Margarita Canyon, LLC 27740 Jefferson Ave., Suite, Temecula, CA 92590 Location: Located adjacent to Interstate 15, southwest of the intersection of Old Town Front Street and Highway 79(S) [the future Westem Bypass Corridor] (Assessors Parcel Number 922-210-047) Proposal: Planning Application No. PA97-0307 is a proposal to subdivide an approximately 37 acre parcel in 10 commerdal lots and one open space lot Environmental Action: City Staff is recommending that an Environmental Impact Repod (EIR) be prepared for this project Case Planner: John De Gange Recommendation: Continue Case No: Applicant: Location: Development Agreement between Pala Rainbow LLC and the City of Temecula (Planning Application PA99-0273) City of Temecula South of State Highway 79 (South) at the intersection with Pala Road in the City of Temecula Proposal: To approve a Development Agreement with Pala Rainbow LLC Environmental Action: Adopt a Negative Declaration Planner:. Dave Hogan, Senior Planner Recommendation: Recommend approval of the Development Agreement to the City Coundl Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) Ollie House Indoor Skateboard Park 43300 Business Park Drive To operate an indoor skateboard park within a 21,346 square foot portion of a building within an existing business park Environmental Action: Exempt per CEQA Section 15301 Planner:. John De Gange Recommendation: 'The Planning Commission Consider the Applicant's Request (Pursuant to Section 17.03 of the Development Code, the Director of Planning has referred this item to the Planning Commission) PLANNING MANAGERS REPORT COMMISSIONER REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: November 17, 1999, 6:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Busineae Park Drive, Temecula, California, 92590 I~:~DEPTS',PLAHblING~WIMBERVG~PLANCOIVlM~G!tNDAS\1999~I 1-3-99.doc 2 ITEM #2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 6, 1999 CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:00 P.M., on Wednesday October 6, 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 Fahey. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Also Present: PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. COMMISSION BUSINESS 1. Al~l~roval of A;:lenda Commissioners Fahey, Mathewson, Naggar, Webster, and Chairman Guerdero. None. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks, Attomey Curiey, Senior Planner Fagan, Associate Planner Donahoe, Project Planner Griffin, and Minute Clerk Hansen. MOTION: Commissioner Fahey moved to approve the agenda. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Mathewson and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 2. APProval of Minutes-September 1, and September 15, 1999 MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to approve the minutes of September 1, 1999, as written. The motion was Seconded by Commissioner Naggar and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Fahey who abstained. MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to approve the minutes of September 15, 1999, as wdtten. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Naggar and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Webster who abstained. PtanComm/minutes~lOO699 3. Director's HeadnO Update For Commissioner Mathewson, Senior Planner Fagan relayed that the architectural design of the new housing developments within the City was ddven by market demands; noted that staff encouraged the developers to be innovative and creative, while adhedng to the existing guidelines in the Specific Plan; and relayed vadous enhanced design elements which would be incorporated into upcoming developments (i.e., porch elements.) B, Commissioner Mathewson recommended that if future projects were to request reduced setbacks and smaller lot sizes that there be additional enhanced development design incorporated into the project in order to justify the reduction in setbacks and lot size. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4. Planninf:l Application No. PA99-0128 (Development Plan) Request to construct a 17,841 square foot industrial building on a 1.02 acre parcel zoned for "Light Industrial" development. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission approve the request. Commissioner Fahey advised that she would be abstaining with regard to this Agenda Item. Via overheads, Project Planner Griffin presented the staff report (of record); noted that when the project was previously presented at the September 1, 1999 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission requested that the applicant add additional enhancements to the design element due to the request for an increase in the Floor Area Ratio (FAR); and relayed the proposed design and landscape modifications, inclusive of the reduction in FAR. Mr, Shane Shaw. representing the applicant, specified the diligent efforts made by the applicant in order to work with staff to develop the proposed project; and for Commissioner Webster, relayed that the applicant would be agreeable to replacing the Palm trees on the landscape plan with an evergreen-type tree. At this time Chairman Guerdero closed the public headng. Commissioner Mathewson relayed concurrence with Commissioner Webster's recommendation to replace the Palm trees with evergreen-type trees. PlanComm/minuteW1OO6)8 MOTION: Commissioner Webster moved to adopt Resolution No. 99-039 approving Planning Application No. PA99-0128 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein, with the attached modification; and to adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0128 pursuant to Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines. RESOLUTION NO. PC 99-039 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0128, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 17, 841 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING ON 1.02 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF RIO NEDO BETWEEN CALLE EMPLEADO AND VIA INDUSTRIA AND KNOWN AS PARCEL 28 OF PARCEL MAP 21328 Modify That the landscape plan be modified, replacing the Palm trees with an evergreen-type tree, per staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Mathewson and voice vote reflected approval with the exception Commissioner Fahey who abstained. 5. Planning AoDlication No. PA99-0284 (Develooment Plan) and Planning APPlication No. PA99-0286 (Vesting Tentative Parcel Mao No. 29431) 1. Request to design, construct and operate a 276,243 square feet of retail commercial uses, including a 131,848 square foot Home Depot Store, a 7,000 square foot automotive supply store, and 137,395 square feet of village shopping space; 2. Request to subdivide 66.828 gross acres into seven (7) lots; 3. Request to Amend Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No. 219 (Paloma del Sol), amending the following: land uses within Planning Area 1, 6, and 8; the realignment and recon~guration of Campanula Way between De Portola Road and Meadows Parkway; the allocation of acreage within Planning Area 1 from 32.3 acres to 35.0 acres; the allocation of acreage within Planning Area 6 from 36.3 to 34.3 acres; the division of Planning Area 6 into Planning Area 6A {22.3 acres, high density residential, 9-12 dwelling units per acre, with a maximum of 268 dwelling units) and Planning Area 6B (12 acres, very high density residential, 13-20 du/ac, with a maximum of 240 dwelling units), resulting in an overall reduction of units from 590 to 508 dwellings; the development of an active, private, gatsd senior community within Planning Area 8 that includes a private recreation area; and an update of Design Guidelines that incorporate the village vignettes and the senior amenities. 4. Request for approval of a Development Agreement between the City and del Sol Investment Co., LLC, a limited liability company. PtlnComm/min4jtWlOoll~l RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission approve the request. Noting that this project had been continued from the September 29, 1999 Planning Commission meeting in order for staff to work with the applicant to develop final Conditions of Approval (COA's) and to address the concoms of the Commission, Associate Planner Donahoe relayed that the supplemental agenda matedal was inclusive of the revised COA's; and provided additional information regarding the following issues: Specified the location of the outdoor seasonal sales area, noting the reduction in square footage which would encompass 7,650 square feet, utilizing approximately 24 parking spaces. Relayed the provision of the additional traffic data (per agenda material), noting the vehicle trip generation comparison between single-family, multifamily, and senior community (with and without an age restriction) developments; advised that the second page of the traffic study packet (denoted as page 20) would be incorporated into the traffic study as a correction, specifying the revised conclusionary remarks; and relayed that the subsequent pages of the traffic material reflected the Service Levels of traffic projected to be at build-out in the year 2010. Noted the provision of the correspondence material from the Corona family (previously presented to the Commission dudng the public headng at the September 29, 1999 Planning Commission meeting by Mr. Stephen Corona), expressing their concern with respect to the flood drainacle issues; presented the response correspondence from Newtand Communities, dated October 6, 1999 (per supplemental agenda material) addressing the issues brought forth the by the Corona family; and advised that Deputy Director of Public Works Parks would provide additional information regarding the flood and drainage issues associated with the area of discussion. Provided additional information from the Alcohol Bevera.Qe and Control (ABC) Board; presented a map denoting the existing licansed off-sale alcohol permitted uses in the vicinity of this particular project; and advised that staff was in the process of plotting the on-sale alcohol permitted uses Citywide, noting that provision of that data would be available in the upcoming weeks. Presented the line-of-siGht studies provided by the applicant, relaying the view of the Home Depot project, and the alternate proposed retail buildings, from Highway 79 South. Relayed the revised Commercial entn/desicln, provided by the applicant, noting that after staff review, the design element would be incorporated into the Design Manual. Per Commission direction, specified the revision of permitted uses (denoted on page 2 of the COA's of the Specific Plan Amendment), noting the addition of the newsstand use, the modification of the recycling facility use which would prohibit outdoor storage, the deletion of the liquor store use, and relayed the revision generated by the applicant's 4 P1anCom~mlnutes/1006911 request which was to delete the public restroom use; and advised that the revisions would be incorporated into the COA's of the Specific Plan Amendment pdor to the presentation to the City Council. In response to Commissioner Mathewson's querying with respect to the landscape design in the parking area, Assodata Planner Donahoe relayed that there was a Condition proposed to modify the Specific Plan Amendment in order to incorporate the requirements necessary to implement the landscape plan that was previously presented by the applicant at the September 29, 1999 Planning Commission meeting. By way of overhead maps, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks provided additional information regarding flood control in the area of discussion; specified the location of the Corona property, and the 20-acre detention basin provided by the Newland Communities and the Paloma del Sol Development; advised that staff was of the opinion that with the existing basin, this proposed project would not have a negative irapad on the surrounding area; noted that the construction of De Portola Road by Assessment Distdct No. 159 was part of the pdor development of the area; advised what while there currently was not a solution to the flooding issues presented by the Corona family, that this issue was unrelated to this particular project; with respect to the Abemathy property (previously discussed at the September 29, 1999 Planning Commission meeting), noted the proposed 60-inch storm drain line project in the Margadta/De Portola Roads area which would begin construction by Newland Communities in approximately a week; for Chairman Guerriero, relayed that while staff had advised Ms. Abemathy to contact the Public Works Department in order to obtain additional information, that there had been no further contact after the September 29, 1999 Planning Commission meeting; for Commissioner Naggar, provided additional information regarding the following: 1) the projected Levels of Services in the area of discussion, and 2) the potential Margadta Road Improvement Project at Highway 79 South which would provide an additional right- turn lane at the southbound approach. At this time Chairman Guerdero reopened the public hearing. Mr. Robed Davis, traffic engineer representing the applicant, for Commissioner Naggar, confirmed that the traffic study included the traffic generated by the proposed development in the Redhawk and Vail Ranch areas; reiterated that the LOS would not be less than Level D for the next 30 years; provided additional information regarding the Margadta Road/Highway 79 intersection; clarified the boundaries that the analysis encompassed; provided additional information regarding the results of the traffic study with and without inclusion of the potential senior community facility; and for Chairman Guerdero, noted the correction to the traffic report (denoted as page 20, in the Section entitled Conclusion, per the supplemental agenda traffic data), clarifying that the LOS levels referenced were the service levels without benefit of mitigation. Mr. Allan Davis, representing the applicant, relayed that the applicant would be agreeable to the revised COA's; and referendng page 2 of the Spedtic Plan Amendment, specifically No. 7, with respect to the modification to the permitted uses in Planning Area 1, 27, and 36, noted that he could not comment on those spedtic revisions since he did not represent the applicant of those specific Planning Areas. I:qanCanvNminutefi~10069g Mr. Barn/Bumell, representing Newland Communities. relayed that the applicant would be agreeable to the above-mentioned revisions for permitted uses within Planning Area 1, 27, and 36. For Commissioner Mathewson, Mr. Kareem All, representing Home Depot, advised that the dates of operation of the seasonal outdoor sales area were scheduled via the City Ordinance standards, noting that the actual Christmas seasonal sales for Home Depot would most likely pegin mid-November, For Chairman Guerriero, Mr. Bumell advised that the Senior Facility Development Plan application within the area of discussion had been submitted to staff; for Commissioner Mathewson, provided additional information regarding the twenty percent density transfer for the residential Planning Area, noting that the transfer would most likely solely occur in Planning Areas 6A, and 6B. Mr. Stephen Corona, 33320 Highway 79, further specified his concam regarding the flooding issues, noting the potential for flooding at the Corona Ranch if there was no additional mitigation required by the development of this particular project. In response to Chairman Guerdero's querying, Attorney Cudey provided additional information regarding the lack of a nexus between this proposed project and the flooding concerns expressed by Mr. Corona per staff comment. At this time Chairman Guerriero closed the public headng. Chairman Guerdero, commended Associate Planner Donahoe for her diligent efforts regarding the information obtained form ABC; relayed his desire to ensure that there would not be a proliferetion of licensed alcoholic establishments in the City of Temecula. For Commissioner Fahey, Attomey Cudey confirmed that any potential project proposed to be permitted for alcohol sales would be presented to the Commission for review; and advised that staff would provide additional information at a future point in time regarding the issue of existing licensed alcohol uses in the City. Due to the additional traffic data provided by Mr. Robert Davis. Commissioner Naggar relayed that he could support the project; and relayed that with respect to the potential provision of an additional right-turn lane at the southbound approach at the Margadta Road/Highway 79 intersection at a future point in time (referenced in the traffic report) that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the aforementioned read improvement project be placed in the subsequent CIP Plan. In response to Commissioner Naggar's recommendation, Commissioner Webster queried whether the City could investigate the issue in conjunction with the current project under design with on Margadta Road, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that he would further investigate the matter, Commissioner Mathewson commended the applicant for the enhanced revised entry monumentation; and relayed his support of the project. F'tanComm/minutes/lO0699 Relaying his support of the project. Chairman Guerriero applauded the developer and staff for their diligent efforts associated with addressing the concerns of the Commission in one week's time. MOTION: Commissioner Fahey moved to approve staffs recommendation. (This motion ultimately died for lack of a second.) Commissioner Naggar relayed a desire to include his previously mentioned recommendation to the City Council in the motion. Commissioner Fahey relayed reluctance to include the recommendation in the motion, advising that staff consider the recommendation for proposal for the subsequent CIP Plan, Commissioner Mathewson, echoed by Commissioner Webster, relayed their support to incorporate Commissioner Naggar's recommendation into the motion. MOTION: Commissioner Naggar moved to recommend that the City Council consider adding the Margadta Road/Highway 79 South Road Improvement Project in the subsequent CIP Plan, which would encompass the addition of a right-turn lane on the southbound approach at the Margadta Road/Highway 79 South intersection; and to approve staffs recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 99-040 recommending that the City Council certify and adopt the Addendure to the Final Environmental Impact Report No. 235 for Specific Plan No. 219, based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report; adopt Resolution No. 99-041 approving Planning Application No. PA99- 0284 (Development Plan) based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; adopt Resolution No. 99-042 approving Planning Application No. PA99-0286 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29431) based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; adopt Resolution No. 99-043 recommending that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0285 (Amendment No. 7 to Specific Plan No, 219) based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; and to adopt Resolution No. 99-044 recommending that the City Council approve Planning Application No. PA99-0283 (Development Agreement entitled "Villages at Paseo del Sol Development Agreement") based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PlanComm/minutes/lOO699 RESOLUTION NO. PC 99-040 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0284, DEVELOPMENT PLAN - THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF 276,243 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL COMMERCIAL USES, INCLUDING A 131,848 SQUARE FOOT HOME DEPOT STORE, A 7, 000 SQUARE FOOT AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY STORE, AND 137,395 SQUARE FEET OF VILLAGE SHOPPING SPACE ON 23.74 ACRES, LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF CAMPANULA WAY, WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 950-020-044 AND 950-870-006 RESOLUTION NO. PC 99-041 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99~0286 -TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29431, SUBDIVIDING 66.828 GROSS ACRES INTO SEVEN (7) LOTS, LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF MONTELEGRO WAY, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 950-020-042, AND -044, AND 950-087- 006 8 PlanComn~mlnutes/1OO699 RESOLUTION NO. PC 99-042 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99- 0285 (AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219), TO CHANGE LAND USES WITHIN PLANNING AREA 1, 6, AND 8; TO REALIGN AND RECONFIGURE CAMPANULA WAY BETWEEN DE PORTOLA ROAD AND MEADOWS PARKVVAY; THE REALLOCATION OF ACREAGE WITHIN PLANNING AREA I AND 6; THE DIVISION OF PLANNING AREA 6 INTO PLANNING AREA 6A (22.3 ACRES, HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 9-12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, WITH A MAXIMUM OF 268 DWELLING UNITS AND PLANNING AREA 6B (12 ACRES, VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 13-20 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, WITH A MAXIMUM OF 240 DWELLING UNITS), RESULTING IN AN OVERALL REDUCTION OF UNITS FROM 590 TO 508 IN THESE AREA; THE PROVISION TO DEVELOP AN ACTIVE, PRIVATE, GATED SENIOR COMMUNITY WITHIN PLANNING AREA 8; AND AN UPDATE OF DESIGN GUIDELINES; ON PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF MONTELEGRO WAY, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY RESOLUTION NO. PC 99-043 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0283 (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT) APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "VILLAGES AT PASEO DEL SOL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT," COVERING 23.74 ACRES LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, SOUTH OF CAMPANULA WAY, EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND WEST OF MEADOWS PARKWAY RESOLUTION NO. PC 99-044 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY AND ADOPT ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 235 FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 219 (PALOMA DEL SOL) Commissioner Mathewson seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. PlanGomfNminutes/lOO6el PLANNING MANAGER'S REPORT Senior Planner Fagan relayed that the Commission had been provided information regarding upcoming teleconferencos, advising the Commissioners to respond to Planning Manager Ubnoske if there was interest in attendance. Senior Planner Fagan queried the Commission with respect to issues they desired to be addressed at the previously requested Workshop. Commissioner Fahey recommended addressing the issues relating to uses licensed to sell alcohol (i.e.. the quantity, the approval criteria.) Chairman Guerdero relayed a desire for an update regarding the Planning Commission's recent tour of the City, which he did not attend. Commissioner Webster recommended that the Commission investigate guidelines for residential developments (i.e., varying lot sizes, variable sethacks) In concurrence with Commissioner Webster, Commissioner Mathewson expressed a desire to investigate the relationship between vadable lot sizes and sethacks to the final product of development. COMMISSIONER REPORTS For Commissioner Webster, Public/Traffic Safety Commissioner Markham provided additional information regarding the relocetion of the crosswalk at Hope Way and Rancho California Road. With respect to Commissioner Mathewson's querying regarding the approving criteria for Large Family Daycare uses, Senior Planner Fagan relayed that he would investigate the matter and obtain specific dates for the Directors Headng Items associated with such uses. Chairman Guerdero queried the purview of the Commission with respect to the selection of the location of school sites, requesting staff to investigate. D= Chairman Guerriero requested that staff address the revised CAL OSHA Standards regarding specified training required for flagmen associated with traffic control dudng construction projects. ADJOURNMENT At 7:13 P.M. Chairman Guerdere formally adjoumed this meeting to Wednesday. October 20, 1999 at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. Ron Guerdero, Chairman Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager 10 ITEM #3 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commi ~ Debbie Ubnosk~,~PIlanning Manager November 3, 1999 Planning Application PA 97-0307 (Tentative Parcel Map 28627) - Margadta Canyon, located adjacent to Interstate 15, southwest of the intersection of Old Town Front Street and Highway 79 (S)/ Western Bypass Prepared By: John De Gange, Project Planner Recommendation: Continuance to December 1, 1999 At the October 20, 1999 Planning Commission Meeting the applicant requested that this item be continued to this meeting. Since that time, staff has met with the applicant and the applicant's representatives to discuss the outstanding traffic issues which prevent staff from recommending approval for the project. At this time, staff is currently analyzing alternatives for the current proposal which could potentially mitigate the concems staff has with the project. As a consequence staff is asking for an additional 30 days to complete this analysis. It is felt that a continuance to the December 1, 1999 meeting would allow staff the necessary time to evaluate these alternatives. For background and an analysis of the project to this point, a copy of the staff report prepared for the October 20th meeting is being included for your review. F:\D~.FrS~LANN1NG%STAFFRIq'~307PAg?I~'I~II~4.doc 1 RECOMMENDATION: 1. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: EXISTING ZONING: SURROUNDING ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: SURROUNDING LAND USES: R:\STAFFRPTX307PA97.PC .d~c APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Margarita Canyon LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Lohr & Associates/Markham and Associates PROPOSAL: To subdivide an approximately 37 acre parcel into 10 commercial lots and one open space lot (TPM 28627). LOCATION: Adjacent to Interstate 15, southwest of the intersection of Old Town Front Street and Highway 79 (S)/ Western Bypass Corddor HTC (Highway/Tourist Commercial)/OS (Open Space) HT (Highway/Tourist Commercial)/OS-C (Conservation) North: South: East: West: Vacant HT (Highway/Tourist Commercial) OS-C (Conservation)/HR (Hillside Residential) Interstate 15 OS-C (Conservation)/HR (Hillside Residential) North: Gas Station/Mini-Mart South: Vacant STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 20, 1999 Planning Application No. PA97-0307 (Tentative Parcel Map 28627) Prepared By: John De Gange, Project Planner The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff recommends the Planning Commission: MAKE a determination based on the Findings contained within the Initial Study prepared for this project that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be prepared in order to address the potentially significant impacts identified within the analysis of this Initial Study; ADOPT Resolution No. 99- denying Planning Application No. PA97-0307 (Tentative Parcel Map 28627), based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the staff report. East: 1-15, Commercial retail center, apartments, single-family residences West: Vacant PROJECT STATISTICS Total Acreage for the Project (Gross) Total Acreage for the Project (Net) Number of Lots Number of Open Space Lots Average Lot Size (gross) Average Lot Size (net) Minimum Lot Size 36.8 acres 12.61 acres 10 I (10.48 acres ) 2.46 acres 1.26 acres 1.04 acres (gross) 0.51 acres (net) BACKGROUND An application for this project was formally submitted on September 8, 1997. A Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was held on October 9, 1997, with written comments being provided shortly after. From the initial DRC meeting, staff has requested that the applicant supply various items and specified studies to evaluate the impacts associated with the project. The applicant has supplied all the items which have been requested since the time the application was submitted; however, it is staffs determination that the traffic study prepared by the applicant's traffic consultant still inadequately addresses the traffic impacts generated by the project and has not proposed adequate mitigation for these impacts. Consequently, the application has not yet been deemed complete. Despite this, the applicant has requested that the project be brought forward to the Planning Commission. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This project is a subdivision of approximately 37 acres into ten commercial lots and one open space lot. The site is located adjacent to Interstate 15 to the east, Murrieta Creek to the west and Ternecula Creek to the south. The applicant is proposing to extend Old Town Front Street from its current intersection with the future Western Bypass Corridor into the project site ultimately terminating in a cul-de-sac. As proposed, all the lots for development will front and take access from the extension of Old Town Front Street. The project proposes ten commercial lots ranging in size from 1.08 to 11.29 gross acres (0.51 to 4,64 net acres). Lots 7,8,9 and 10 all have significant areas which are within the 100-year Floodway (Zone AE) and these areas are being excluded from development. The open space lot which comprises 10.48 acres consists mainly of the Muraleta and Temecula Creek Channels. The applicant is proposing to keep this area as open space in perpetuity with the future possibility that ownership can be transferred over to an appropriate agency or can be used for a mitigation land bank. ANALYSIS Biological Issues The project site is approximately 37 acres of vacant property which includes portions of the Murrieta and Temecula Creek Channels. A biological impact report for the project site was prepared. This report reveals that the ultimate development of the proposed project site will result R:\STAFFRPT\307PAg7.PC,doc 2 in the removal of 30 acres of onsite Non-Native Grassland, the removal of approximately 0.5 acre of the total Riversidian Sage Scrub onsite, and the preservation of the entire six acres of Ripadan Woodland within the boundaries of the project site. It has been determined that impacts to biological resources and the loss of this habitat as a result of this project will not be significant because: 1 ) the 30 acres of non-native grassland which will be removed is not considered a significant resource; 2) the six acres of Ripadan Woodlands will be preserved; 3) and of the one acre of Riversidian Sage Scrub, 0.5 acres will be preserved on site and the other 0.5 acres will be mitigated with the purchase of off-site property. The Riparian Woodlands and jurisdictional wetlands will be preserved with the exception of 0.07 acres of area assodated with a small unnamed drainage channel which bisects the site and flows into Murdeta Creek as identified within a Wetlands Delineation study for the project site conducted by LSA Associates. For this small area, the applicant will be required to mitigate through obtaining a Section 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act and a Section 1601 Streambed Alteration Permit from the California Department of Fish and Game. The project site contains significant biological resources and the proposed project has the potential to impact these biological resources. However, these impacts should not be significant if the mitigation measures described above and appropriate conditions of approval for this project are implemented. TrafficIssues The development of the proposed project is expected to cause a substantial increase to traffic volumes on State Route 79 South/VVestem Bypass between Old Town Front Street and the interstate 15 (I-15) interchange. Although the traffic study and subsequent revisions prepared by Robert Kahn, John Kain and Associates Inc. indicates acceptable interim operating conditions, it is Staffs opinion that the proposed location of the project's access will adversely impact traffic flows in the vicinity of the project, the Interstate 15/State Route 79 interchange and Old Town Front Street. Congestion and unsafe vehicular movements can be expected at intersections within the project's vicinity due to substandard intersection spacing (160 feet) between 1-15 Southbound Ramp and Old Town Front Street, and the traffic volumes generated by the proposed project (7,909 ADT). Another concern is the increase in conflicting movements due to the spacing between the 1-15 Southbound Ramps and the proposed project's access. Because of the short distance between intersections and the projected heavy left-turn movements into the project, t-15 Southbound vehicles wishing to access the site could be forcad into hazardous merging situations. This situation could also cause the traffic to back-up on 1-15 while waiting to get to the left-turn pocket in order to access the site. The antidpated heavy left-turn movement into the site (307 vehicles dudng p.m. peak hour) and lack of adequate storage; could also cause gddlock at the 1-15 Southbound ramp. It should be noted that that a traffic signal at the intersection of Old Town Front Street and 79 South is not needed until Western Bypass Corddor is constructed. However, the access to the site as proposed, will necessitate operation of the traffic signal at the intersection of Old Town Front Street and 79 South which is 160 feet west of the 1-15 Southbound off-ramp. For reference, the spacing between the intersections of Front StreetJJefferson Avenue and 1-15 Southbound ramp is approximately 600 feet on Rancho California Road and 400 feet on Winchester Road. R:\STAFFRPT\307PA97.PC.doc 3 Throughout the processing of this project Staff has maintained that the traffic study and subsequent revisions submitted for the project have not adequately addressed the traffic issues discussed above nor has adequate mitigation measures been proposed. Consequently, the Initial Study prepared for this project recommends the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report due to the significant impacts associated with associated with the project traffic. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION An Initial Study was prepared for this project and distributed on October 1, 1999. Findings within this initial study indicate that the proposed project will significantly increase traffic volumes and coupled with the fact that there is substandard and limited spacing between the intersection of Old Town Front Street (where the project will take access) and the 1-15 southbound ramp signal, congestion and unsafe vehicular movements will result and hazardous merging situations will be created. As a consequence, this project may have a significant effect on the environment and it is recommended that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be required. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS The proposed project is consistent with a majority of the General Plan's policies and is also consistent with the zoning standards regarding the HTC distdct as specified in the Development Code. The project, however, does not comply with the General Plan Circulation Element Policy 1.2 which requires an evaluation of potential traffic impacts associated with new development prior to project approval, and requires adequate mitigation measures prior to, or concurrent with, project development; and Policy 1.4 which requires new development to pursue trip reduction and transportation systems management measures to reduce and limit congestion at intersections and along streets within the City. It is staffs determination that although the traffic study and its subsequent revisions prepared by the applicant's traffic engineer indicate an acceptable intedm operation condition, the project as currently proposed will increase traffic volumes, cause congestion and unsafe vehicular movements, and create hazardous merging situations. For these reasons, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission deny the project as it is presently proposed based on the Findings within the Initial Study that this project could potentially have a significant effect on the environment because the traffic study and its subsequent revisions prepared by the applicant's traffic engineer do not adequately address the traffic issues discussed above and adequate mitigation measures have not been proposed. FINDINGS (For Denial) Planning Application No. PA97-0307 (Tentative Parcel Map 28627) The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the projects is consistent with the General Plan land use designations of Highwayrroudst Commercial and Open Space. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. This project proposes ten commercial and one open space parcels on approximately 37 acres and therefore is consistent with the Highway/Tourist Commercial and Open Space designations. The project as proposed is not consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element Policies 1.2 which requires an evaluation of potential traffic impacts associated with new development pdor to project approval, and requires adequate mitigation measures prior to, or concurrent with, project development; and Policy 1.4 which requires new R:\STAFFRPT\307PA97.PC.dOC 4 development to pursue trip reduction and transportation systems management measures to reduce and limit congestion at intersections and along streets within the City. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements could potentially cause sedous public health problems in that the proposed project will significantly increase traffic volumes, coupled with the fact that there is substandard and limited spacing between the intersection of Old Town Front Street (where the project will take access) and the 1-15 southbound ramp signal. As a consequence, congestion and unsafe vehicular movements will result and hazardous merging situations will be created. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. The project will take access from the extension of Old Town Front Street at the Western Bypass Corridor, and will not obstruct any easements. The map as proposed, conforms to the logicel subdivision of the site,; however, the it is not compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community in that the proposed project will significantly increase traffic volumes and coupled with the fact that there is substandard and limited spacing between the intersection of Old Town Front Street (where the project will take access) and the 1-15 southbound ramp signal. As a consequence, congestion and unsafe vehicular movements will result and hazardous merging situations will be created. The subdivision is, however, compatible with the surrounding areas and the site will be developed pursuant to the General Plan, and the Development Code, both of which regulate commercial parcels and development. The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements could potentially be mitigated by the mitigation measures contained within the biological impact study conducted for this project. As a consequence, the project is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. Damage to any known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site or off-site could be potentially mitigated. Attachments: PC Resolution - Blue Page 6 Initial Study- Blue Page 10 Exhibits - Blue Page 39 A. Vicinity Map B. Zoning Map C. General Plan Map F:\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~307PA97.PC.doc 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- R:\STAFFRl:q'\307PA97.PC.dOC 6 ATI'ACHMENT NO. I PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA97- 0307 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 28627), ADJACENT TO INTERSTATE 15, SOUTI-IVVEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF OLD TOWN FRONT STREET AND HIGHWAY 79 (S)I WESTERN BYPASS CORRIDOR (ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 922- 210-047) WHEREAS, Margadta Canyon LLC filed Planning Application No. PA97-0307 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 28627) in accordance with the City of Temecuia General Plan, Development Code and Riverside County Subdivision Ordinance, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA97-0307 (Tentative Parcel Map 28627) 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. PA97-0307 (Tentative Parcel Map 28627) on October 20, 1999, at a duly noticed public headng 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 considered all facts relating to Planning Application No. PA97-0307; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated Section 2. Ej~ That the Temecula Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No. PA97-0307 (Tentative Parcel Map 28627), hereby makes the following findings as required in Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460. A. The proposed land division and the design or improvement of the projects is consistent with the General Plan land use designations Highway/Tourist Commercial and Open Space. The project as proposed is not consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element Policies 1.2 and 1.4. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. This project proposes 10 commercial and one open space parcels on approximately 37 acres and therefore is consistent with the Highway/Tourist Commercial and Open Space designations. B. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements could potentially cause serious public health problems in that that the proposed project will significantly increase traffic volumes and coupled with the fact that there is substandard and limited spacing between the intersection of Old Town Front Street (where the project will take access) and the I-15 southbound ramp signal, congestion and unsafe vehicular movements will result and hazardous merging situations will be created. R:x, STAFFRPT\307PAgT.pC.doc 7 C. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. The project will take access from the extension of Old Town Front Street at the Western Bypass Corddot, and will not obstruct any easements. D. The map as proposed, conforms to the logical subdivision of the site,; however, the it is not compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community in that the proposed project will significantly increase traffic volumes and coupled with the fact that there is substandard and limited spacing between the intersection of Old Town Front Street (where the project will take access) and the I-15 southbound ramp signal, congestion and unsafe vehicular movements will result and hazardous merging situations will be created. The subdivision is, however, compatible with the surrounding areas and the site will be developed pursuant to the General Plan, the Development Code, all of which regulate commercial parcels and development. Future development of commercial lots potentially will be compatible and sensitive to surrounding development. The proposed subdivision potentially could provide adequate access and circulation for emergency vehicles and may not impact existing circulation or emergency vehicle access. E. The design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements could potentially be mitigated so that it is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. Damage to any known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site or off-site could be potentially mitigated. Section 3. Environmental Compliance An Environmental Initial Study was prepared for this project. Findings within this initial study indicate that the proposed project will significantly increase traffic volumes and coupled with the fact that there is substandard and limited spacing between the intersection of Old Town Front Street (where the project will take access) and the 1-15 southbound ramp signal, congestion and unsafe vehicular movements will result and hazardous merging situations will be created. As a consequence, this project may have a significant effect on the environment and it is recommended that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be required. Section 4. PASSED, DENIED AND ADOPTED this twentieth day of October, 1999. Ron Guerdero, Chairperson R:\STAFFRPTX307PA97.PC.doc 8 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the twentieth day of October, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\STAFFRPT~307PA97.PC.doc 9 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 INITIAL STUDY R:\STAFFRFI'X307pA97.pC.doc 10 CIty of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Project Title Lead Agency Name and Address Contact Person and Phone Number Project Location Project Sponsor's Name and Address General Plan Designation Zoning Description of Project Surrounding Land Uses and Setting Other public agencies whose approval is required Planning Application No. PA97-0307 - Tentative Parcel Map 28627 City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 John De Gange, Project Planner (909) 694-6400 Adjacent to Interstate 15, southwest of the intersection of Old Town Front Street and Highway 79 (S)/ Western Bypass Corridor Margarita Canyon LLC 27740 Jefferson, Suite 200, Temecula, CA 92590 Highway/Tourist Commercial (HTC) Highway/Tourist Commercial (HT) A proposal to subdivide an approximately 37 acre parcel into 10 commercial lots and one open space lots (TPM 28627) The project site is approximately 37 acres of vacant property which includes a portion of the Murrieta and Temecula Creek Channels. The site is adjacent to Interstate 15 to the east, commercial areas to the north across the future Western Bypass Corridor, a vacant open space area across Temecula Creek to the south, and a vacant area zoned Hillside Residential area to the west across Murrieta Creek. 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 Location Map R:XSTAFFRPT\307PA97.PC.d~c 11 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. Aesthetics Agricultural Resources Population and Housing Air Quality Biological Resources Water Cultural Resources Geologic Problems Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population and Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities and Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance Earlier Analyses Determination (To be completed by the lead agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant impact 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 revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED 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 "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact 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, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an eadier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature Date John De Gange. Project Planner Printed name For R:~.STAFFRFI~307PA97,PC.doc 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and histodc building within a state scenic highway? Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the Potentially Sigrdficant Impact Less Than Comments: 1.a. No ImpacL The project site is adjacent to Interstate 15 and the ultimate development of the site will not directly impact any 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. As a consequence no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project or the future development of the site. 1.b. No Impact. There are no designated scenic resources in the vicinity of the project site. The project site includes a portion of the Murrieta Creek Channel, however, the project as proposed will preserve the channel and all future development will not directly impact the channel. There are no scenic resources within the project site within the view of a scenic highway. As a consequence, no significant impact to scenic resources will result from the proposed project or the future development of the site. 1.C. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The project site is approximately 37 acres of vacant propercy which includes a portion of the Murrieta and Temecula Creek Channels. A majodty of the site is composed of disturbed non-native grassland (30 acres). The remaining portion of the site is comprised of Riparian Woodland (six acres) and Riversidian Sage Scrub plant communities (one acre). The portion of the site which consists of drainage channels could potentially have significant visual character given the presence of Riparian Woodland vegetation. The ultimate complete development of all 37 acres of the property would significantly degrade the visual character and quality of the site and surrounding properties. As mitigation, the project proposes to preserve the entire six acres of Riparian Woodland and one haft acre of the one acre portion of the Riversidian Sage Scrub. For the one half acre of Riversidian Sage Scrub that will be developed, the project proponent will be required to purchase one half acre of Riversidian Sage Scrub off-site in compliance with the requirements of the California Department of Fish and Game's Natural Communities Conservation Program (NCCP) [based on the Evaluation Logic Flow Chart contained in Attachment "A" of the Biological Impact Report]. After mitigation, any potential impacts could be mitigated to a level of insignificance. 1.d. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. Though this project only represents a subdivision of the property into commercial lots, the ultimate buildout on the property will have a potentially significant impact from light and glare, The project will produce and result in light/glare, as all development of this nature results in new light sources. All light and glare has the potential to impact the Mount Palomar Observatory. The project will be conditioned to be consistent with Ordinance No. 655 (Ordinance Regulating Light Pollution). After mitigation, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project, R:\STAFFRI~\307PA97.PC .doc 13 2. Agricultural Resources. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the Callfornta Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: Issues and Supporljng Information Sources Convert Pdme Farm land, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? Conflict with the existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland, to non-agricultural use? Less Thee Potentially Significant W'~h Less Than Significsnt Mitigation Significant NO Comments: 2a. ,2c. No Impact. The project site is not currently in agricultural production and in the histodc past has not ever formerly been used for agricultural purposes. In addition this property is not considered pdme or unique of Farmland of statewide importance pursuant the Farmland Mapping and Monitodng Program of the Califomia Resources Agency or the City of Temecula's General Plan. In addition, the project will not involve changes in the existing environment which would result in the conversion of farmland to non- agricultural uses. Therefore, there is no significant impact related to this issue. 2b. No Impact. The project site does not have an agricultural zoning designation by the City of Temecula, and the site is not regulated by a Williamson Act contract. As a consequence there is no impact related to this issue. R:\STAFFILcT\30?pA~'7,pC.doc 14 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: issues and Supporting Information Solaces Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Comments: 3.a. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project represents only a subdivision of vacant property into commercial lots; however, the analysis within this document has evaluated the potential development of the site with commercial uses. The project as proposed will comply with State and national ambient air quality standards. Although the project exceeds the air quality management policies in the current Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) and emissions thresholds established in South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook (April 1993), the City of Temecula's General Plan EIR has addressed development of the site and proposed adequate mitigation for any impacts. The analysis provided in 3b. below, discusses the project's compliance with the AQMP. Therefore, no significant impacts related to conflicts with air quality plans will result from the proposed project 3.b. Less Than Significant ImpacL This project represents only a subdivision of vacant property into commercial lots; however, this analysis has evaluated the potential development of the site with commercial uses. The project proposes to provide for 12.61 net acres of developable land. Pursuant to the City of Temecula's Development Code this site can ultimately be developed with 164,788 square feet of commercial uses based on a target Floor Area Ratio of 0.30. Though this figure exceeds the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook (April 1993) threshold for impacts associated with commercial development, this figure is consistent with target Floor Area Ratio (FAR) anticipated within the City's General Plan. The General Plan established target floor area ratios within various land uses in order to determine the intensity of uses and the impacts upon the environment. The General Plan EIR evaluates the impacts of development at the target'FAR. The analysis conducted for this project assumes that the ultimate development of the site will be at the target FAR for the Highway/Tourist zoning district. It is anticipated that the development of the site will be less than the densities anticipated by the General Plan and analyzed within the General Plan EIR. The General Plan EIR has established mitigation measures for impacts associated with air quality through The General Plan's policies and guidelines. Consequently a less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project. R:\STAFFRPT\307PA97.PC.doc 15 3.c. 3.d. 3.e. Less Than Significant ImpacL As discussed in item b. above, though the project when ultimately developed. will exceed the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook (Apdl 1993) thresholds for impacts associated with commercial development, the City of Temecula's General Plan EIR has addressed the impacts to air quality for a project on this site and established appropdate mitigation measures. Therefore, all potential impacts resulting from cumulative net increases of any criteda pollutants have been addressed within the policies and guidelines of the City of Temecula's EIR and mitigated for. As a consequence a less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project. No Impact. The project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. There are no significant pollutants in proximity to the project nor is it anticipated that the project will generate pollutants. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. No Impact. Though this project only represents a subdivision of the property into commercial lots, the ultimate buildout on the property may create objectionable odors dudng the construction phase of the project. These impacts, however, will be shod in duration and are not considered to be significant. Consequently no impacts would result from this project. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: f, tssues and Supporting Information Sources Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Have a substantial adverse effect on any dpadan habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other means? Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact R:\STAFFRPT\307PA97.PC.dOc Comments: 4.a.,b.,d. Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The project site is approximately 37 acres of vacant property which includes a portion of the Murrieta and Temecula Creek Channels. A majodty of the site is composed of disturbed non-native grassland (30 acres). The remaining portion of the site is comprised of Riparian Woodland (six acres) and Riversidian Sage Scrub plant communities (one acre). A biological impact report for the project site was prepared by Pdncipe and Associates in December of 1997. This study reveals that the ultimate development of the proposed project site will result in the removal of all 30 acres of onsite Non-Native Grassland, the removal of approximately 0.5 acres of the total Riversidian Sage Scrub onsite, and the preservation of the entire six acres of Riparian Woodland within the boundaries of the project site. The study determined that the habitat within the Non-Native Grassland, however is not considered to be a significant biological resource and the loss of this habitat is not considered to be significant. Development of the project site will also result in the removal of 0.5 acres of the one acre total of Riversidian Sage Scrub which is considered a Sensitive Natural Plant Community. The study determined that based on the Evaluation Logic Flow Chart included within the Southem California Coastal Sage Scrub, Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP), Conservation Guidelines (Calif. Dept. of Fish and Game, Nov. 1993), the onsite Riversidian Sage Scrub has a lower potential value for long-term conservation given the fact that it is unoccupied by the Coastal California Gnatcatcher, and given that it is a small isolated patch with no linkage to any other similar habitat. The project site also contains six acres of Riparian Woodlands and jurisdictional wetlands. As proposed; however, the project preserves almost the entire area with exception of 0.07 acres of area associated with a small unnamed drainage channel which bisects the site and flows into Murrieta Creek as identified within a Wetlands Delineation study for the project site was conducted by LSA Associates. For this small area the applicant will be required to mitigate through obtaining a Section 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act and a Section 1601 Streambed alteration Permit from the California Department of Fish and Game. As mitigation for potential impacts created by the proposed project to the 30 acres of Non-Native Grassland and the one acre of Riveraidian Sage Scrub the applicant shall be conditioned to: 1 ) comply with the requirements established in the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Long-term Habitat Conservation Plan, primarily through the payment of a mitigation fee; 2) preserve the 0.5 acre portion of Riversidian Sage Scrub on site and mitigate the loss of the other 0.5 acres with the purchase of off-site habitat at a ratio of 1:1 as deemed appropriate by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Calif. Dept. of Fish and Game in compliance with the interim goals established within the NCCP Program; 3) preserve the entire six acres of Riparian Woodlands habitat; 4) comply with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service protocol and obtain clearance for the Endangered Quino Checkerspot Butterfly by conducting additional field surveys prior to the issuance of grading permits to determine if the host plant for the species are present in which case an adult survey would be required; 5) design future development plans so that surface waters end spills drain away from Murrieta and Temecula Creeks in order to avoid runoff contamination; 6) install utility extensions underground; 7) revegetate all graded and disturbed areas near the channels with native tree and plant species in order to reduce impacts from the project; 7) the applicant shall be required to prepare a Biological Mitigation Plan to insure project compliance to the mitigation measures contained in this document. With the implementation of the above mentioned mitigation measures and associated conditions of approval for this project, the impacts associated with project would be reduced to less than significant. 4.c. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. In October of 1998 a Wetlands Delineation study for the project site was conducted by LSA Associates. The study determined that approximately 5.62 R:\STAFFRPT\307PA97.PC.d~c 17 4.6. acres of the site met the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers criteda for jurisdictional wetlands and 5.93 acres fell within the jurisdiction of the Calif. Department of Fish and Game. Of the acreage delineated as jurisdictional wetlands a 0.07 acre portion of the site is proposed to be filled which will result in the loss of wetlands and ripadan habitat. The lost wetlands area will be from a small unnamed drainage channel which runs through the center of the project and flows into Murrieta Creek. The wetlands areas within Murdeta and Temecula Creeks will be unaffected. The loss of the wetlands/jurisdiction waters will require the project proponent to obtain a 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act and a Section 1601 Streambed alteration permit administered by the California Department of Fish and Game. As mitigation for the lost wetlands the applicant will be required to obtain the necessary permits from the above referenced agencies prior to the issuance of grading permits. After mitigation, this project would have a less than significant impact. No ImpacL The City of Temecula does not have any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, therefore there is no impact associated with this project relative to this issue. Less Than Significant Impact. The project is located within the fee area for the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat (SKR) Long-Term Habitat Conservation Plan. All development within this fee area is required to pay a mitigation fee. This project will be required to pay a mitigation fee for the SKR. In addition, the subject site contains approximately one acre of Riversidian Sage Scrub which places the property within the jurisdiction of the NCCP program. The project will be conditioned to comply with all requirements of the NCCP program or develop their own habitat plan under the provisions of the NCCP. As a consequence a less than significant impact is anticipated. R:\STAFFRPT\307PA97,PC.doc 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Issue~ le~ Supporting Information So~mes Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 1506.5? Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.5? Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Potentially Signiflcam Impact L~ss Than Significant Impact No Comments: 5.9. No ImpacL Based on a previously conducted Phase I cultural resource study it has been determined that there are no known historical resources on site, which the project would impact based on a previous. As a consequence no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 5.b.d. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The General Plan and an earlier Archaeological Investigation conducted by the Archaeological Reseamh Unit at the University of California at Riverside in December of 1988 identifies a sensitive archaeological area along Murrieta Creek which may extend into the subject site. Due to the potential for deposits in the area and at the recommendation of the UCR Eastern Information Center (within correspondence dated October 13, 1997), future development of the proposed site will be required to conduct a Phase II archeological investigation on site prior to the approval any development project. It is anticipated that when future development is proposed on the site and a Phase II archaeological study is conducted that this study would propose mitigation to address any significant impacts that may occur. As a consequence a less than significant impact is anticipated. 5.c. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The General Plan identifies that the area could potentially be within a highly sensitive paleontological area. Due to the potential for deposits in the area, future development of the proposed site will be conditioned to have an on site-monitor during grading operations. The potential for future significant impacts will be determined and fully mitigated when future development proposals are considered. As a consequence, a less than significant impact is anticipated. R:\STAFFRPT\307PA97.PC.dOC 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project? Issues and Supporting Information Sources Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injun/, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on ,/ the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ,/ iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? ,/ iv) Landslides? ,/ b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ,/ c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or ,/ that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1801-B ,/ of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soil incapable of adequately supporting the use of ,/ septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? ~ Than Potentiaaly Significant W~h Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Comments: 6.a.i. No Impact. There are no known or identified earthquake faults as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 6.a.ii, iv,b., and d. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. There may be a potentially significant impact from seismic ground shaking, ground failure, soil erosion, or expansive soils.. Although, there are no known fault hazard zones on the property, the project is located in Southem Califomia, an area that is seismically active. Any potential significant impacts will be mitigated through building construction, which is consistent with the Uniform Building Code standards. Further, the project will be conditioned to provide soil reports pdor to grading and recommendations contained in this report are followed dudng construction. The soil reports will also contain recommendations for the compaction of the soil, which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure, liquefaction, subsidence and expansive soils. After mitigation measures are performed, a less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project. 6.c.,a.iii Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The ultimate development of the site may have a significant impact on people involving liquefaction and subsidence or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill. Potential impacts could be mitigated by compliance with State of California Alquist-Pdolo Special Studies Zone development criteda and construction in accordance with the Uniform Building Code standards. A soils report shall be required as part of the development and shall contained R:\STAFFRPTX307PA97.PC.doc 20 6.e. recommendations for the compaction of the soil which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure (induding liquefaction), erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill and expansive soils. Erosion control techniques will be included as a condition of approval for development projects at the site. Potential unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill will be mitigated through the use of landscaping and proper compaction of the soils. After mitigation measures are performed, a less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project.. No ImpacL Septic sewage disposal systems are not proposed for this project. The ultimate development of the site will be required to hook up to the existing public sewer system. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:~STAFFRPT~30'TPAg'7.pC.dOC 21 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, Would the project: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Crate a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962,5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Expose people or structures to a significant dsk or loss, injury or death involving wildland rires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact ,/' ,/ ,/ Comments: 7.a. No Impact. Though this project only represents a subdivision of the property into commercial lots, the ultimate buildout of the property will involve construction. Construction associated with the development of the property will involve the use of chemical agents, solvents, paints and other hazardous materials that are associated with construction activities. The amount of these chemicals present dudng construction, however, is limited and is not considered a significant hazard. As a consequence, no significant impact is expected form the routine use and disposal of these materials. 7.b. No Impact. The future development of the site will be commercial uses. It is anticipated that the future uses within the project site will not store or house large quantities of hazardous material that would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:\STAFFRPT~307PA97.PC.dCC 22 7.c. 7.d. 7.e.,f. 7.g. 7.h. No Impact. Future development of the project site will be with commercial uses. This site is not within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. The operation of construction equipment and machinery during the development of this site may emit some hazardous emissions and or handle some hazardous material. However, these emissions and material should be of limited quantities over a short durationoftime. Since this project site in not within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school, and will not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste, no impacts are anticipated. No Impact. This project site is not nor is it located near a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 that would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. No Impact. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public or private airstrip. No impact upon airport uses will result from this proposal. No Impact. The project will take access from maintained public streets and will therefore not impede emergency response or evacuation plans. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. No Impact. This project site is adjacent to 1-15 to the east and Murdeta Creek to the west. Though the site is located in the vicinity of large open space areas, it is not located in a high fire area. As a consequence no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:\STAFFP, FI'X307pA97 .PC .dec 23 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site ,/ or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the site ,/ or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or dver, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the ,/ capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ,/ g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? Expose people or structures to a significant dsk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? h. ,/ i. ,/ Lets Than POtentially Significant W'rth Less Than Significant Migation Significant No Impact Incor~ Impact Impact j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ,/ Comments: 8.a. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The subdivision, and subsequent development, will be required to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. By complying with the NPDES requirements, any potential impacts can be mitigated to a level less than significant. With mitigation a less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project. R:~STAFFILoTX30'TpAg'7.pC,dOC 24 8.b.f. 8.c.d. 6.e. 8.g. 8.h.i. 8.j. No Impact. The project will not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. The project will not have an affect on the quantity and quality of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability. Further, construction on the site will not be at depths sufficient to have a significant impact on ground waters or aquifer volume. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattam of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or dver, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation and/or flooding on- or off-site. Some changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns and the rate and amount of surface runoff is expected whenever development occurs on previously permeable ground. Previously permeable ground will be rendered impervious by construction of buildings. accompanying hardscape and driveways. While absorption rates and surface runoff will change, potential impacts shall be mitigated through site design. Drainage conveyances will be required for the project to safely and adequately handle runoff which is created. A less than significant impact is associated with this project. Less Than Significant Impact. Due to the small scale of the proposed subdivision, and ultimately the future commercial development, the project will not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. The project will be conditioned to accommodate the drainage created as a result of the subject site. In addition, the project will be cenditioned so that the drainage will not impact surrounding properties. A less than significant impact is associated with this project. No Impact. This project represents a subdivision of property into commercial parcels. Since no residential property is effected, no impact is associated with this project, Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The project may expose people or property to water related hazards such as flooding. According to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, the project site is in area which is subject to severe flood hazard from Muraleta Creek. Further, the site is located within the limits of the 100-year (Zone AE) floodplain/floodway as delineated on Panel No. 060742 0010B of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps issued in conjunction with the National Flood Insurance Program administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). In its current configuration; however, the project is designed with all pads for future development being elevated above the floodway/floodplain. This project and all future development of the site will be conditioned so that the developer will be required to file a floodplain development permit with the appropriate approvals from the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation Distdct if any portion of the site is to be developed within the floodplain. In addition, future development will be conditioned to pay a mitigation charge to the Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Drainage Plan. In addition, the project is 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. With the incorporation of mitigation measures a less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project. No Impact. The project site will not be subject to inundation by sieche, tsunami, or mudflow as these events are not known to happen in this region. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:',STAFFRPT\307PA97.PC.doC 25 9. Land Use and Planning. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Informalion Sources Physically divide an established community? Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy. or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigation an environmental effect? Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Significant No Comments: 9a.,b. No Impact. The subject site is vacant and is bordered by Murrieta Creek on the west and Interstate 15 on the east. These two features provide an existing physical barrier to the surrounding properties to the east and west. The property to the north is comprised primarily of existing commercial uses. The properties to the west and south are vacant and zoned Open Space. Therefore, the proposed subdivision of this property will not conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance). As a consequence no impact is associated with this project. 9.c. Less Than Significant Impact. The project is located within the fee area for the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat (SKR) Long-Term Habitat Conservation Plan. All development within this fee area is required to pay a mitigation fee. This project will be required to pay a mitigation fee for the SKR. In addition, according to a biological study conducted by Principe and Associates in December of 1997 the subject site contains approximately one acre of Riversidian Sage Scrub which places the property within the jurisdiction of the NCCP program. The project will be conditioned to comply with the NCCP program or develop their own habitat conservation plan under the provisions of the NCCP program. As a consequence a less than significant impact is anticipated. R:~STAFFRI~F\307PA97.PC.dOC 26 10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Issus~ and Supportjng Information ~outces Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Comments: 10.a.b. No Impact. The project will not result in the loss of available, known mineral resources nor in the loss of an available, locally important mineral resource recovery site. The State Geologist has classified the City of Temecula a classification of MRZ-3a, containing areas of sedimentary deposits, which have the potential for supplying sand and gravel for concrete and crushed stone for aggregate. However, these areas are determined as not containing deposits of significant economic value based upon available data in reports prepared in accordance with the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) of 1975. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:\STAFFRPT\307PA97.PC.doc 27 11. NOISE. Would the project result in: Exposure of people to severe noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? For a project within the vicinity of a pdvate airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Potentildly Significant Impact Less Than Significant ~m,~act No Impact Comments: 11.a. Less Than SigniFicant Impact. This project site is designated for commercial development. The site is currently vacant and development of the land logically will result in increases to noise levels during construction phases as well as increases to noise in the area over the long run. However, long-term noise generated by this project would be within the limits of the General Plan standards for commercial development. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 11.b. No Impacts. Development of the project site will be with commercial uses. It is anticipated that the uses conducted on site will not generate activities which would expose persons to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. No impacts are anticipated. 11.c. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will ultimately result in the development of the site with commercial uses which will create noise levels greater than that currently emanating from the vacant land. However, those noises will not be substantial nor constant and are not anticipated to create a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Therefore, only less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 11.d. Less Than SignificantlmpacL The project may result in temporary or pedodic increases in ambient noise levels during construction. Construction machinery is capable of producing noise in the range of 100+ DBA at 100 feet which is considered annoying. However, this source of noise from construction of the project will be of short duration and therefore would not be considered significant. Furthermore, construction activity will comply with City ordinances regulating the hours of activity in residential areas. A less than significant impact would be anticipated. R:\STAFFRPT\307PA97.PC.doc 28 11 .e.f. No Impact. This project is not within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, therefore, people residing in the project area will not be exposed to excessive noise levels generated by an airport. Consequently no impact is anticipated as a result of this project. R:\STAFFRPT\307PA97.PC.doc 29 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Infot~mation Sources Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Potenti~ly Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Incorporated NO Impact Comments: 12.a. No ImpacL The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designation of Highway/Tourist Commercial (HT). The proposed subdivision will eventually result in the development of commemial uses, which will cause some people to relocate to, or within the Temecula area. However, due to its limited scale, it will not induce substantial growth beyond what is projected in the City's General Plan. No significant effects are anticipated as a result of this project. 12.b.c. No Impact. The project will not displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing as the site is vacant property zoned Highway/Tourist Commercial (HT). Therefore, the project will neither displace housing nor people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:\STAFFRPT\307PA97.PC.dOC 13. 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: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associates with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services? b. Fire protection? '/ c. Police protection? '/ d. Schools? e. Parks? '/ f. Other public facilities? '/ Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Comments: 13.a.,b.,c.,e.,f. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered fire, police, recreation or other public facilities. The project will incrementally increase the need for some services. However, the project will contribute its fair share through the City's Development Impact Fees to the maintenance or provision of services from these entities. Due to the project's relative small scale, less than significant impacts are anticipated. 13.d. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered school fadlities. The project will not cause significant numbers of people to relocate within or to the City. The cumulative effect from the project will be mitigated through the payment of applicable School Fees. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. R:\STAFFRPT\307PA97.PC.doC 31 14. RECREATION. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require ,/' the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less Than PotentiaJly Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant NO Comments: 14.a.b. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will have a less than significant impact in the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities. The project will not cause significant numbers of people to relocate within or to the City of Temecula. However, it will result in an incremental impact or in an increase in demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities. The same is true for the quality or quantity of existing recreational resources or opportunities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:\STAFFRPT',307PA97.PC.doc 32 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections? Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Result in a change in air traffic patterns. including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Result in inadequate emergency access? Result in inadequate parking capacity? Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks? .f SiOnificant Impact No Impact Comments: 15.a. Potentially Significant Impact. The development of the project and its proposed access on the south side of Highway 79 South/Western Bypass at Front Street, will cause a substantial increase in traffic and could have potential for significant impact at this intersection and the 1-15 southbound ramps. Due to the substandard and limited spacing between the intersection of Old Town Front Street and 1-15 southbound ramp signal (160 feet) and the high traffic volumes generated by the project (7,909 ADT), congestion and unsafe vehicular movements could be expected at intersections in the vicinity of the project. Although the traffic study prepared by the applicants consultant and its subsequent revisions indicate an acceptable interim operation conditions, staff believes that the site access as proposed, will adversely impact the traffic flow in the vicinity of the project at the I-15 interchange. 15.b. Potentially Significant Impact. This project could potentially cumulatively exceed the level of service standard (LOS "E") established within the County's Congestion Management Plan (CMP). State Highway 79(S), and Interstate 15 are roads which are within the County's CMP. Though the traffic study conducted by the applicant's traffic engineer states otherwise, City staff has determined that this project will be responsible for a significant increase in traffic volumes. This increase in traffic volumes coupled with the close spacing between the intersection at the extension of Old Town Front Street and Western Bypass Corridor with the southbound on and off ramps for 1-15, may lead to congestion and gridlock on State Highway 79(S) and could potentially cause southbound traffic on 1-15 to back up. As a consequence a potentially significant impact may result from this project. 15.c. No Impact. Neither the subdivision of the project site nor the future development of this property will result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that R:\STAFFRPT\307PA97.PC.doc 33 results in substantial safety dsks. This site is not within the French Valley Airport's flight oveday district and therefore will have no impact on the project. 15.d. 15.e. 15.f. 15.g. Potentially Significant ImpacL. The proposed project could substantially increase hazards due the location of the intersection of the extension of Old Town Front Street and the Western Bypass Corridor in terms of its spacing with the southbound on and off ramps for 1-15. After reviewing the traffic study and subsequent revisions prepared by the applicant's traffic engineer, City staff has determined that will generate significant traffic volumes. These increased traffic volumes coupled with the close spacing between the intersection at the extension of Old Town Front Street and Western Bypass Corridor with the southbound on and off ramps for 1-15, may lead to significant traffic congestion. The added congestion combined with close spacing of the Old Town Front Street and I-15 ramps could result in unsafe vehicular. The traffic study submitted for this project does not adequately address this issue, therefore this project could have a potentially significant impact. Less Than Significant Impact. This project is a subdivision of vacant properby into commercial lots and as a consequence it is difficult to determine what the ultimate impacts on emergency access will be at this time. All subsequent development projects on parcels within this project will be evaluated to determine the impacts to emergency access. Future development of the site will be conditioned to meet all applicable standards in place at the time of development. Emergency access to nearby uses will not be affected by this project given that the project is generally surrounded by undevelopable properties. As a consequence the project will have a less than significant impact. No Impact. This project represents a subdivision of vacant land into commercial lots, no specific development is being proposed at this time. Consequently it is not possible to determine specific parking requirements for the site, however, any subsequent development of the proposed parcels will be required to comply with the City's Development Code parking requirements for commercial uses. Therofore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Less Than Significant Impact. The project as proposed does not currently conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. When future development is proposed for the site, individual projects will be reviewed to determine if the provision of alternative transportation opportunities will be appropriate. As a consequence, a less than significant impact is anticipated. R:\STAFFRPT\307PA97.PC.dOc 34 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: Issues and Supporting information Sources Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Comments: 16.a.,b., e. No Impact. The project will not exceed wastewater treatment requirements, require the construction of new treatment fadlities, nor affect the capadty of treatment providers. The project will have an incremental effect upon existing systems. However, the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's General Plan states: "implementation of the proposed General Plan would not significantly impact wastewater services." Since the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Moreover, the project will be conditioned to comply with the Regional Water Quality Control Board standards that will be monitored by the Department of Public Works. No significant impacts are anticipated. 16.c. No ImpacL The project will not result in the need for new storm water drainage facilities. The development of the tract will require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities on site that will connect to the existing system currently in place along Old Town Front Street at the northern end of the site. The design of the existing system is sufficient handle this project and will not require the expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Drainage fees are required by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation Distdct to reimburse the county for the Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan. No significant impacts are anticipated. 16.d. No Impact. The project will not significantly impact existing water supplies nor require expanded water entitlements. The project will have an incremental effect upon existing systems. While the project will have an incremental impact upon existing systems, the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's R:\STAFFRPT\307PA97.PC.doc 35 General Plan states: "both EMWD and RCWD have indicated an ability to supply as much water as is required in their services areas (p. 39)." The FEIR further states: "implementation of the proposed General Plan would not significantly impact wastewater services (p. 40)." Since the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. There are no septic tanks on site or proximate to the site, No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16.f.g. Less Than Significant ImpacL The project will not result in a need for new landfill capacity. Any potential impacts from solid waster created by this development can be mitigated through participation in Source Reduction and Recycling Programs, which are implemented by the City. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:~STAFFRPTX307PA97.PC.doc 36 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. b= C= 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 of restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ('Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects? Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant Impact No Impact Comments: 17.a. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The ultimate development of the site has potential to impact habitat for fish or wildlife species. The project proposes to disturb 0.5 acres of Riversidian Sage Scrub, however, if the project were approved mitigation measures would be included to reduce this to a less than significant impact. In addition, the project proposes to disturb 0.07 acres of wetlands. If approved the project would be conditioned to mitigate this impact by obtaining a Section 404 Permit from the Army Corps of Engineers and a Section 1601 Permit from the Calif. Dept. of Fish and Game. A less than significant impact would result if mitigation measures are incorporated. 17.b. Potentially Significant Impact. The project could have a potentially significant impact with respect to traffic impacts. City staff has determined that the project could potentially generate increased traffic volumes which could cumulatively effect traffic in the vicinity of the project. 17.c. No Impact. This project and the future development of the site will not have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, directly or indirectly. The subdivision is designed and will be developed consistent with the Development Code and General Plan. if approved, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. R:\STAFFRPT'x307PA97.PC,doc 37 18. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets. Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the above check list were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an eadier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 18.a. 18.b. 18.c. No eadier analyses sped~cally related to this project site were used. However, a number of studies were conducted for a previous subdivision (Tentative Parcel Map 23987) which included this property. These studies include: "A Reevaluation of Archaeological Sites Recorded on TPM 23987" prepared by The Archaeological Research Unit at UCR (December 1988); A Biological Assessment conducted by Tierra Madre Consultants (October 1988); A Stephens Kangaroo Rat Study conducted by Friesen Biological Surveys for TPM 19851 (undated); two Geotechnical Investigations conducted by Schaefer Dixon Associates (Apdl 1988 and February 1989).. With the exception of the archeological study, none of these studies were used in this analysis due to their age. Reference was only briefly made to this document. The City's General Plan and Final Environment Impact Report were used as a referenced source in preparing this Initial Study There were no earlier impacts which affected this project. The recommendation of this Initial Environmental Study is that an Environmental Impact Report be prepared. As a consequence no Mitigation Monitoring Program has been prepared. 2. 3. 4. 5. SOURCES City of Temecula General Plan. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report. South Coast Air Quality Management Distdct CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The City of Temecula Development Code. Focused Traffic Analysis for TPM 28627 prepared by RKJK & Associated - May 1999 (with subsequent amendments) Biological Impact Report for TPM 28627 prepared by Principe & Associates - December 1997 Delineation of Wetlands and Jurisdictional Waters for TPM 28627 prepared by LSA Associates - October 1998 A Reevaluation of Archaeological Sites Recorded on TPM 23987 prepared by The Archaeological Research Unit at UCR (December 1988) R:',STAFFRPT~307PA97.PC.doC 38 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 EXHIBITS R:\STAFFRPT\307PA97.PC.dOc 39 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA97-0307 (Tentative Parcel Map 28627) EXHIBIT A PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - OCTOBER 20, 1999 VICINITY MAP F:MDepta~PLANNING',STAFFRIaq"X307pA97.1~C.do~ 38 CITY OF TEMECULA EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP DESIGNATION - HT (HIGI-IVVAY/TOU~ST COMMERCIALy OS~ (CONSERVATION) EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION - HTC (Highway/Tourist Commercial)/OS (Open Space) CASE NO. - PA97-0307 (Tentative Parcel Map 28627) PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - OCTOBER 20, 1999 F:~)epts~PLANNI~G~TAFI~J~r~07pA97.1~C.doc 39 ITEM #4 RECOMMENDATION: STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION November 3, 1999 Development Agreement with Pala Rainbow LLC (Planning Application PA99-0273) Prepared By: David Hogan, Senior Planner The Community Development Department ~ Planning Division Staff recommends the Planning Commission: 1. ADOPT Resolution No. 99- recommending approval of Planning Application No. PA99-0273 based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; 2. ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. PA99-0273; APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: PROPOSAL: LOCATION: EXISTING ZONING: SURROUNDING ZONING: City of Temecula To make a recommendation to the City Council on the proposed modified Development Agreement between the City of Temecula and Pala Rainbow LLC South of State Highway 79 South, north of Temecula Creek along both sides of Pala Road Highway Tourist Commercial (HT) and Professional Office (PO) North: South: East: West: PROPOSED ZONING: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS: EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: South: Very Low Density Residential (VL) Open Space-Conservation (OS-C) Professional Office (PO) Low Medium Density Residential (LM) Not Applicable Highway Tourist Commercial, Office Professional, and Open Space Single Family Residences and vacant Temecula Creek channel F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~273pA99 2PC1 .dec 1 East: Vacant West: Single Family Residences BACKGROUND The proposed Development Agreement will resolve litigation caused by the right-of-way acquisition for the new Pala Road bridge. The Development Agreement would allow the property owner to do the following: Develop the property in a manner that conforms to the requirements of the existing Highway Tourist (HT) and Professional Office (PO) Zones, except for the following: That one of the allowable general merchandise or retail uses could be larger than Development Code would otherwise allow for HT Zone; and, B. That no restaurants could be located in the PO Zone area west of Pala Road; 2. Adjust the required building setbacks in conformance with the existing Development Code; Receive a partial site landscaping credit for open space areas adjacent to the Temecula Creek channel; 4. Pay the applicable Development Impact Fee at a rate that was in effect on January 1, 1999; 5. Receive a partial waiver of some required public improvement plan check fees; and Receive a financial contribution from the City (not to exceed $100,000) toward the construction of extension of Jedediah Smith Road and related area drainage facilities. In exchange, the property owner agrees to allow the immediate construction of the new Pala Road bridge and associated improvements. The original Agreement conveyed no additional land use development rights not previously allowed or authorized under the City's adopted Development Code. After considering the proposed Agreement, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Development Agreement at their September 15, 1999 meeting. However, immediately prior to the October 19, 1999 City Council meeting, the applicant requested that some additional clarifying language be included into the Agreement. Upon hearing the request, the City Council directed that the Agreement be returned to the Planning Commission for their review. The additional language would further clarify which type of uses would be considered as general merchandise/retail in this area and would allow one of these size-limited general merchandise/retail uses to exceed the maximum size stated in the Development Code. The proposed additions to Section 1.15 of the Development Agreement are as follows: "Under this Agreement, the following uses are classified as General merchandise/retail store uses: camera shops, clothing sales, computer sales and service, furniture sales, and hardware stores. In addition, this Agreement also permits one of these general merchandise/retail stores to be as large as 20,000 square feet." Staff believes that these additions are reasonable and that they will not result in a development pattern that is substantially different from other Highway Tourist (HT) Commercial areas. The first reason is that given this site's location, these additions will not hinder the implementation or goals of the General Plan. The Development Code already allows general merchandise/retail uses in the F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~.73PA99 2PC1 .doc 2 HT Zone. The proposed clarification provides a degree of certainty to the property owner, that certain uses will be considered as general merchandise/general retail businesses when future development is proposed. The flexibility in the size will facilitate the development of more than just service stations and fast food restaurants in the Highway Tourist Commercial area. Most of retail uses permitted in the HT Zone do not have similar size restrictions. Given the location of this area, staff believes that the requested modification is very minor, reasonable, and would not adversely impact the City or its adopted General Plan. Therefore, staff recommends that the Commission recommend approval of the Agreement, with the requested clarification, to the City Council. A copy of the modified Development Agreement in included in Exhibit A of Attachment No. 1. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Staff prepared and circulated an Initial Environmental Study for the Development Agreement. The Study indicated that the proposed Development Agreement would have no environmental impacts that had not been previously addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan and Development Code. The minor clarification does not change the nature of the project or the environmental impact discussion contained in the Initial Study. As a result, staff recommends that a Negative Declaration be adopted for this project. Attachments: 2. 3. 4. PC Resolution No. 99- - Blue Page 4 Draft Ordinance No. 99- - Blue Page 8 Draft Development Agreement - Blue Page 12 initial Environmental Study - Blue Page 13 F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'F~.73PA99 2PC1 .doc 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~273PA99 2PC1 .doc 4 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-.._ RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND PALA RAINBOW, LLC FOR PROPERTY LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 79-SOUTH AND PALA ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0273) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, to resolve potential litigation resulting from the City's acquisition of property through eminent domain, the City of Temecula and the property owner, Pala Rainbow, LLC have agreed to enter into a development agreement; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the procedure specified in City Resolution 91-52 and the Development Code, the City of Temecula has initiated said Development Agreement with Pala Rainbow, LLC; Planning Application No. PA99-0273, (hereinafter "Development Agreement"); and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and City Council of said City have each previously conducted public hearings on September 15, 1999 (Planning Commission), and October 19, 1999 (City Council) on this matter; and, WHEREAS, the City Council directed that last minute changes to the Agreement be returned to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a noticed public headng on November 3, 1999, on the issue of recommending approval or denial of the Development Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES FIND AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the Ordinance approving the Development Agreement substantially in the form contained in Attachment "A" and attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, Section 2. That in recommending adoption by the City Council of an Ordinance approving the Development Agreement, the Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: (a) The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula General Plan in that the Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for commercial and office development and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designations of Highway Tourist Commercial and Office Professional; and, (b) The Development Agreement complies with the goals and objectives of the Circulation Element of the General Plan and the traffic impacts of the development over the period of the Development Agreement will be substantially mitigated by the mitigation measures and conditions of approval imposed; and, F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~273PA99 2PC1 .doc 5 (c) The project subject to the Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for the zoning district in which the Property subject to the Development Agreement is located, and that this Development Agreement is consistent with good planning practices by providing for the opportunity to develop the Property consistent with the General Plan; and, (d) The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; and, (e) The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof; and, (f) Notice of the public heating before the Planning Commission was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the Planning Commission public hearing, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days pdor to the hearing to the project applicant and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, and police and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; and, (g) Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission included the date, time, and place of the public hearing, the identity of the hearing body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description and text or diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing, and of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; and, (h) The benefits that will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from this legislation and this Development Agreement are the mutually agreeable resolution of eminent domain issues that could have otherwise resulted in litigation. Section 3. The Secretary of the Planning Commission shall cause this Resolution to be transmitted to the City Council for further proceedings in accordance with State law. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3'" day of November, 1999. Ron Guerriero, Chairperson F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'r~273PA99 2PC1 .doc 6 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 3~ day of November, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 0 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'F~273PA99 2PC1 .doc 7 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 99- F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~.73PA99 2PC1 .doc 8 A'I'rACHMENT NO. 2 ORDINANCE NO. 99- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND PALA RAINBOW, LLC FOR PROPERTY LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 79-SOUTH AND PALA ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0273) WHEREAS, Section 65864 et sea. of the Govemment Code of the State of California and Temecula City Resolution No. 91-52 authorize the execution of agreements establishing and maintaining requrrements applicable to the development of real property; and, WHEREAS, to resolve potential litigation resulting from the City's acquisition of property through eminent domain, the City of Temecula and the property owner, Pala Rainbow, LLC have agreed to enter into a development agreement; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the procedure specified in City Resolution 91-52 and the Development Code, the City of Temecula has initiated said Development Agreement with Pala Rainbow, LLC; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and City Council of said City have each previously conducted public hearings on September 15, 1999 (Planning Commission), and October 19, 1999 (City Council) on this matter; and, WHEREAS, at the October 19, 1999 hearing, the City Council directed that last minute changes to the Agreement be returned to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation; and WHEREAS, notice of the City's intention to consider adoption of this Agreement with Pala Rainbow, LLC has been duly given in the form and manner required by law, and the Planning Commission and City Council of said City have each conducted public hearings on November 3, 1999 (Planning Commission), and November 9, 1999 (City Council) at which time it heard and considered all evidence relevant and material to said subject. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. FINDINGS. The City Council hereby finds and determines, with respect to this Agreement by and between the City of Temecula and Pala Rainbow, LLC, that: A. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula General Plan in that the Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for commercial and office development and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designations of Highway Tourist Commercial and Office Professional; and, B. The Development Agreement complies with the goals and objectives of the Circulation Element of the General Plan and the traffic impacts of the development over the period of the Development Agreement will be substantially mitigated by the mitigation measures and conditions of approval imposed; and, F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~.73PA99 2PC1 ,doc 9 C. The project subject to the Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for the zoning district in which the Property subject to the Development Agreement is located, and that this Development Agreement is consistent with good planning practices by providing for the opportunity to develop the Property consistent with the General Plan; and, D. The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; and, E. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof; and, F. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the Planning Commission public hearing, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing to the project applicant and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, and police and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; and, G. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission included the date, time, and place of the public headng, the identity of the hearing body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description and text or diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing, and of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; and, H. The benefits that will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from this legislation and this Development Agreement are the mutually agreeable resolution of eminent domain issues that could have otherwise resulted in litigation. Section 2. APPROVAL. The Development Agreement, attached hereto at~d incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit "1" is hereby approved. The Mayor is authorized and directed to evidence such approval by executing this Agreement for, and in the name of, the City of Temecula; and the City Clerk is directed to attest thereto; provided, however, that this Agreement shall not be executed by the City until this Ordinance takes effect and the City has received from the applicant two executed originals of said Agreement. Section 3. SEVERABILITY. The City Coundl hereby declares that the provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance. Section 4. NOTICE OF ADOPTION. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law. Section 5. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days prior to the adoption of this Ordinance. Within 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance, together with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against the Ordinance, and post the same in the office of the City Clerk. F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'T'%273PA99 2PC1 .doc 10 Section 6. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ~ day of ,1999. Steven J. Ford, Mayor ATTEST: Susan Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) CITY OF TEMECULA) I, Susan Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, 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 on the day of 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk F:\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRPT~273PA99 2PC1 .doc 11 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~73PA99 2PC1 .doc 12 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TI-HS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the *Agreement') is entered into as of the day of , 1999 ('Agreement Date'), by end between PALA PAINBOW, LLC., (hereinafier "OWNER"), and the CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of California (hereina~er "CITY"), pursuant to the authority of Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code (the "Development Agreement Legislation") and Article XI, Section 2 of the California Constitution. RECITALS This Agreement is predicated upon the following facts: k These Reckals refer to and utilize certain capitalized terms which are defined in this Agreement. The parties intend to refer to those definitions in conjunction with the use thereof in these Recitals. B. The Development Agreement Legislation authorizes CITY to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property in order to, among other matters: ensure high quality development in accordance with comprehensive plans; provide certainty in the approval of development projects so as to avoid the waste of resources and the escalation in the cost of housing and other development to the consumer; provide assurance to the applicants for development projects that they may proceed with their projects in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations and subject to conditions of approval, in order to strengthen the public planning process end encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the private and public economic costs of development; and provide for economic assistance to OWNER, for the entitlements authorizing development related improvements. C. OWNER is the owner of certain real property within the County of Riverside, State of California (the "Property"), as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a pan hereof. OWNER, desires to develop the Property in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, the applicable regulations of the City of Temecula and those regulations of other agencies exercising jurisdiction upon the project. The Scope of Development of the Property as contemplated by this Agreement is described in the Agreement in Section 1.15. D. OWNER, has applied for, and CITY has granted this Agreement in order to create a beneficial project and a physical environment that will conform to and complement the goals of CITY, create a development project sensitive to human needs and values, facilitate efficient traffic circulation, and develop the Property. As pan of the process of granting this entitlement, the City Council of CITY (hereinafier the "City Council") has required the preparation of an environmental review and has issued a Negative Declaration as regards any significant effects arising from the Project and has otherwise carried out all requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act {"CEQA") of 1970, as amended. Project: The following actions were taken with respect to this Agreement and the F:~,DEPTSXPLANNING'~TAFFRPT~.71PAg~ I~v~l~ 1 1. On November 3, 1999, following a duly noticed and conducted public hearing, the City Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve this Agreement; 2. On November 9, 1999, after a duly noticed public heating and pursuant to CEQA, the City Council adopted the Negative Declaration for this Agreement and the Project; 3. On November 9, 1999, after a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council determined that the provisions of this Agreement are consistent with the General Plan of the CITY; 4. On November 9, 1999, after a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council introduced Ordinance No. __ - approving and authorizing the execution of this Agreement and on , the City Council adopted the Ordinance, a copy of which is on file in the Development Services Department at the CITY, and adopted the findings and conditions pertaining thereto, including those relating to the environmental documentation for the Project, F. The CITY has engaged in extensive studies and review of the potential impacts of the Project as well as the various potential benefits to the CITY by the development of the Project and concluded that the Project is in the best interests of the City. G. In consideration of the substantial public improvements and benefits to be provided by OWNER and the Project, and in order to strengthen the public financing and planning process and reduce the economic costs of development, by this Agreement, CITY intends to give OWNER assurance that OWNER can proceed with the development of the Project for the Term of this Agreement pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and in accordance with CITY's General Plan, ordinances, policies, rules and regulations existing as of the Effective Date. In reliance on CITY's covenants in this Agreement concerning the Development of the Property, OWNER has and will in the future incur substantial costs in site preparation and the construction and installation of major infi'astructure and facilities in order to make the Project feasible. H. Pursuant to Section 65867.5 of the Development Agreement Legislation, the City Council has found and determined that: (i) this Agreement and the Existing Project Approvals implement the goals and policies of CITY~s General Plan, provide balanced and diversified land uses and impose appropriate standards and requirements with respect to land development and usage in order to maintain the overall quality of life and the environment within CITY, (ii) this Agreement is in the best interests of and not detrimental to the public health, safety and general weftare of CITY and its residents; Cfii) adopting this Agreement is consistent with CITY's General Plan and constitutes a present exercise of the CITY's police power; and (iv) this Agreement is being entered into pursuant to and in compliance with the requirements of Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Legislation. I. CITY and OWNER agree that it may be beneficial to enter into additional agreements or to modify this Agreement with respect to the implementation of the separate components of the Project when more information concerning the details of each component is available, and that this Agreement should expressly allow for such contemplated additional agreements or modifications to this Agreement. F:'~DEPTS~LANN1N(~STAFFRPT~73pA99 D~v~lo~m~ Agr~imitdo¢ ~2 NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority contained in the Development Agreement Legislation, as k applies to CITY, pursuant to Article XI, Section 2 of the California Constitution, and in consideration of the foregoing recitals of fact, all of which are expressly incorporated into this Agreement, the mutual covenants set forth in this Agreement and for the further consideration described in this Agreement, the parties agree as follows: 1. Definitions. The following words and phrases are used as defined terms throughout this Development Agreement and each defined term shall have the meaning set forth below. 1.1. Authorizing Ordinance. The "Authorizing Ordinance" means Ordinance No. approving this Agreement. 1.2. CITY. The "CITY" means the City of Temecula, a California municipal corporation, duly organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California, and all of its officials, employees, agencies and departments. 1.3. City Council. "City Council* means the duly elected and constituted city council of the CITY. 1.4. Develonment. "Development" means the improvement of the Property for purposes consistent with the Project's land use authorization, including, without limitation: grading, the construction of infrastructure and public facilities related to the Off-site Improvements and On-Site Improvements, the construction of structures and buildings and the installation of landscaping. 1.5. Develonment A~reement Leeislation. The '*Development Agreement Legislation" means Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code as it exists on the Effective Date. 1.6. Development Fees. "Development Fees" means development impact and processing fees imposed on the Development as conditions of development as more particularly set forth in Section 4.2. 1.7. DeveloPment Plan. The "Development Plan" consists of this Agreement, the Existing Regulations, and those Future Development Approvals, if any, contemplated, necessary, and requested by OWNER to implement the land uses authorized by the Project. 1.8. Effective Date. "Effective Date" means the date the Authorizing Ordinance becomes effective. 1.9. Existino Regulations. "Existing Regulations" means those ordinances, rules, regulations, policies, requirements, guidelines, constraints or other actions of the CITY, other than site-specific Project Approvals, which purport to affect, govern or apply to the Property or the implementation of the Development Plans in effect on the Effective Date. Existing Regulations shah also include the text of the zoning district designations ofaay zoning district applicable to the site of the Project in effect on the Effective Date. 1.10. Future Develooment Annrovals, "Future Development Approvals" means those entitiements and approvals contemplated, necessary, and requested by CITY or OWNER to cause the Development to occur upon the Property subsequent to completion of the Project and approved by the City currently upon or after the Effective Date. The parties hereto expressly anticipate Owner will institute mixed uses on the property that may include some combination of Business Park-Light Industrial, Office Professional, Kesidential and Commercial uses. 1.11. Off-site Imnrovements. "Off-site Improvements" means physical infrastructure improvements or facilities which are not and will not be located on the Property. Certain Off-site Improvements may be specifically addressed in this Agreement; all others will be dependent upon the Development and the required Future Development Approvals. 1.12. On-site lmnrovements. "On-site Improvements" means physical infrastructure improvements or facilities that are or will be located on the Property. Certain On-site Improvements may be specifically addressed in this Agreement; all others will be dependent upon the Development and the required Future Development Approvals. 1.13. OWNER. "OWNER" is initially PALA RAINBOW, LLC and all successors in interest, in whole or part, to this entity. 1.14. Planning Commission. "Planning Commission" means the duly appointed and constituted planning commission of CITY. 1.15. Pr0iect. "Project" means the adoption of this Agreement thus securing the scope and intensity of land uses to be developed upon the parcel which is approximately fourteen and three tenths (14.3) acres in area and which is generally located adjacent to State Highway 79 South at Pala Road. The uses permitted and scope of the Development shall be consistent with the development standards set forth in the zoning district in effect on the Effective Date (copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibit "B' and incorporated herein by this reference) subject to the express limitations in this Agreement. Under this Agreement, the following uses are classified as General merchandise/retail store uses: camera shops, clothing sales, computer sales and service, furniture sales, and hardware stores. In addition, this Agreement also permits one of these general merchandise/retail stores to be as large as 20,000 square feet. 1.16 Proiect Annroval. "Project Approval" means the accomplishment of the actions as described in Section 1.15. 2. General Provisions. 2.1. Bindin2 Covenants. The provisions of this Agreement to the extent permitted by law shall constitute covenants which shall run with the Property for the benefit thereof, and the benefits and burdens of this Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties and all successors in interest to the parties hereto. F:XDEIrrSXPLANNING~TAFFRFF~73PA99 Development .2. Property. Interest of OWNER OWNER represents that OWNER has a legal interest in the 2.3. Term. The term (hereina~er called "Term") of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall extend for a period of ten (10) years thereafter terminating at the end of the day preceding the tenth (10th) anniversary of the Effective Date, subject to specific extensions, revisions and termination provisions of this Agreement. 2.4. Termination. This Agreement shall be deemed terminnted and of no further effect upon the occurrence of any of the following events: 2.4. 1. If termination occurs pursuant to any specific provision ofthisAgreement; 2.4.2. Completion of the total build-out of the Development pursuant to the terms of this Agreement and the CITY's issuance of all required occupancy permits and acceptance of all dedications and improvements required to complete Development; or 2.4.3. EnWJ after all appeals have been exhausted of a final judgment or issuance of a final order directed to the CITY as a result of any lawsuit filed against the CITY to set aside, withdraw, or abrogate the approval of the City Counc'd of this Agreement for any part of the Project. The terminalion of this Agreement shall not affect any right or duty arising independently from entitlements issued by CITY or other land use approvals approved prior to, concurrently or subsequent to the approval of this Agreement. 2.5. Transfers and Assienments. 2.5.1. Right to Assign. OWNER shall have the right from time to time and on such number of occasions as it chooses to sell, assign or otherwise transfer all or any portion of its interests in the Property together with all its right, title and interest in this Agreement, or the portion thereof which is subject to transfer (the "Transferred Property") to any person or entity at any time during the Term of this Agreement; provided, however, that any such transfer or assignment must be pursuant to a sale, assignment or other transfer of the interest of OWNER in the Property, or a portion thereof. In the event of any such sale, assignment, or other transfer, (i) OWNER shall notify CITY within twenty (20) days of such event of the name of the transferee, together with the corresponding entitlements being transferred to such transferee and (ii) the agreement between OWNER and such transferee pertaining to such transfer shall provide that either OWNER or the transferee shall be liable for the performance of those obligations of OWNER under this Agreement which relate to the Transferred Property, if any. Each transferee and OWNER shall notify CITY in wrif~ng which entity shall be liable for the performance of each respective obligations. 2.5.2. Rights of Successors and Assilms. Any and all successors and assigns of OWNER shall have all of the same rights, benefits and obligations of OWNER under this Agreement. 2.6. Amendment of Development Aircement. 2.6.1. Initiation of Amendment. Either party may propose an amendment to this Agreement and both parties agree that it may be beneficial to enter into additional agreements or modifications of this Agreement in connection with the implementation of the separate components of the Project. 2.6.2. Procedure. Except as set forth in Section 2.6.4 below, the procedure for proposing and adopting an amendment to this Agreement shall be the same as the procedure required for entering into this Agreement in the first instance. 2.6.3. Consent. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, any amendment to this Agreement shall require the written consent of both parties. No amendment to all or any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless set forth in writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of each of the parties. 2.6.4. Ooeratine Memoranda. The paxties acknowledge that refinements and further development of the Project may demonstrate that changes are appropriate with respect to the details and performance of the parties under this Agreement. The parties desire to retain a certain degree of flexibility with respect to the details of the Development end with respect to those items covered in general terms under this Agreement. If and when the parties mutually find that changes, adjustments, or clarifications are appropriate to further the intended purposes of this Agreement, they may, unless otherwise required by law, effectuate such changes. adjustments, or clarifications without amendment to this Agreement through operating memoranda mutually approved by the parties, which, after execution, shall be attached hereto as addenda and become a part hereof and may be further changed and amended from time to time as necessary, with funher approval by City Manager, on behalf of the CITY and by any corporate officer or other person designated for such purpose in a writing signed by a corporate officer on behalf of OWNER. Unless otherwise required by law or by the Project Approvals, no such changes, adjustments, or clarifications shah require prior notice or hearing. 3. Descriotion of Develooment. 3.1. Develooment and Control of Develooment. 3.1.1. Proieet. While this Agreement is in effect, OWNER shall have the vested right to implement the Development authorized by the Project pursuant to this Agreement and the Project Approvals end CITY shall have the right to control the Development in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement, the Existing Regulations shall control the design and development, Future Development Approvals and all On-Site Improvements and Off-Site Improvements and appurtenances in connection therewith. 3.1.2. Timing of Devdonment. Regardless of any future enactment, by initiative, or otherwise, OWNER shall have the discretion to develop the Future Development in one phase or in multiple phases at such times as OWNER deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment. Specifically, CITY agrees that OWNER shall be entitled to apply for and receive permits, maps, occupancy certificates and other entitlements to develop and use the Property at any time, provided that such application is made in accordance with this A~reement and the Existing Regulations. The panis hereto expressly reject the holding of Pardee Construction Company v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal. 3d 465 (1984) as regards any authority regulating the phasing of the Development. 3.1.3. Entitlements, Permits and AOOrovals - CooDerntion. Procedure without a land use plan. Upon satisfactory completion by OWNER of all required preliminary actions, applications, studies, and payments of appropriate processing fees, if any, CITY shaH, subject to all legal requirements, diligently process, and complete at the earliest reasonable time all required steps, and expeditiously act upon approvals and permits necessary for Future Development Approvals anticipated under this Agreement including, but not limited to, the following: (1) The processing of applications for and issuing of all discretionary approvals requiring the exercise of judgment and deliberation by CITY, including without limitation, the Future Development Approvals; (2) The holding of any required public hearings; (3) The processing of applications for and issuing of all ministerial approvals requiring the determination of conformance with Existing Reguhtions, including, without limitation, site plans, grading plans, improvement plans, building plans and specification, and ministerial issuance of one or more final maps, zoning clearances, grading permits, improvement permits, wall permits, building permits, lot line adjustments, encroachment permits, temporary use permits, certificates of use and occupancy approvals and entitlements and related matters as necessary for the completion of the development of the Property. B. Procedure with land use plan. Notwithstanding the foregoing if OWNER elms, at its own sole cost, to prepare and process a comprehensive land use plan for the subject real property, then the further processing of such further approvals shall be done administratively and as set forth in the land use plan. The land use plan shall be reviewed and approved by the CITY by and through its Planning Commission and, if necessary, its City Council. An example of the nature and scope of the land use plan contemplated for the subject real property is the plan prepared for the regional mall project in the City of Temecula. 3.1.3.1. Further Mitization. In connection with the completion of the Project, OWNER shall be responsible for the satisfaction of any mitigation measures that depend on, act upon, or relate to Future Development Approvals. In connection with the issuance of any Future Development Approvals which are subject to review under CEQA, unless required under CEQA, the CITY shall not impose any environmental land use alternatives or mitigation F:~DEPT~PLANNING~T~73pA99 Develq~n~nt .~e 7 measures in addition to those referenced in the Project Approvals or deemed reasonably necessary in light of the development activity proposal. 3.1.3.2. Other Permits. CITY further a~'ees to reasonably cooperate with OWNER in securing any County, State and Federal permits or authorizations which may be required in connection with development of the Project. This cooperation shall not entail any economic contribution by City. 3.2. Rules, Regulations and Official Policies. Except as otherwise specified in this A~reement and the Project Approvals, the rules, regulations and official policies governing the permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to Development of the Property shah be the Existing P, egulations. In connection with any subsequent approval or action which CITY is permitted or has the fight to make under this Agreement relating to the Project, CITY shall exercise its discretion or take action in a manner which complies and is consistent with this Agreement, the Existing Regulations and such other standards, terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. An overview and non-exhaustive list of Existing Regulations is listed in Exhibit "C". CITY has certified two copies of each of the documents listed on Exhibit "C". CITY has retained one set of the certified documents and has provided OWNER with the second set. 3.3. Reserved Authority. 3.3.1. Uniform Codes. This Agreement shall not prevent CITY ~'om applying new rules, regulations and policies relating to uniform codes adopted by the State of California, as State Codes, such as the Uniform Building Code, National Electrical Code, Uniform Mechanical Code or Uniform Fire Code, as amended, and the application of the aforementioned uniform codes is hereby approved including as the same may be amended by CITY from time to time. 3.3.2. State and Federal Laws and Regulations. In the event that State or Federal laws or regulations prevent or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of this Agreement shall he modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such state or federal laws or regulations; provided, however, that this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CITY shall not adopt or undertake any regulation, program or action, or fail to take any action which is inconsistent or in conflict with this Agreement until CITY makes a finding that such regulation, program action or inaction is required (as opposed to permitted) to comply with such State and Federal laws or regulations after taking into consideration all reasonable alternatives. 3.3.3. Regulation for Health and Safety. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, CITY shall have the right to apply CITY regulations (including amendments to the Existing Regulations) adopted by the CITY afcer the Effective Date, in connection with any Future Development Approvals, or deny, or impose conditions of approval on, any Future Development Approvals in CITY's sole discretion if such application is required to F:~DEPTS~PLANNING~TAFFRPT~273pA99 Developm~t AgrMmmLd~ 8 protect the physical health and safety of existing or future occupants of the Property, or any portion thereof or any lands adjacent thereto. 3.4. Vested Rieht. By entering into this Agreement and relying thereupon, OWNER is obtaining vested rights to proogd with the Development anticipated by the Project in accordance with the te~ms and conditions of this Agreement, and in accordance with, and to the e~tent of, the Projoct Approvals. By entoring into this Agreement and relying thereupon, CITY is securing certain public benefits which enhance the public health, safety and welfare, a partial listing of which benefits is set forth in Section 4.1. CITY therefore agrees to the following: 3.4.1. No Con~ictint Enactments. Except as provided in Section 3.3 of this Agreement, neither the City Council nor any other agency of CITY shall enact a rule, regulation, ordinance or other measure (collectively "law") applicable to the Property which is inconsistent or in conflict with this Agreement. Any law, whether by specific reference to the Development Agreement or otherwise, shall be considered to conflict if it has any of the following effects: (i) Limits or reduces the density or intensity of the Development as regulated by the Existing Regulations or otherwise requires any reduction or increase in the number, size or square footage of lot(s), structures, buildings or other improvements; or (ii) Applies to the Property, but is not uniformly applied by the CITY to all substantially similar development within the CITY. 3.4.2. Consistent Enactments. By way of enumeration and not limitation, the following types of enactments shall be considered consistent with this Agreement and Existing Regulations and not in conflict: (i) Kelocation of structures within the Property pursuant to an application from OWNER; and (ii) Changes in the phasing of the development pursuant to an application from OWNER. (iii) Any enactment authorized by this Agreement. 3.4.3. Initiative Measures. In addition to and not in limitation of the foregoing it is the intent of OWNER and CITY that no moratorium or other limitation (whether relating to the development of all or any part of the Project and whether enacted by initiative or otherwise) affecting parcel or subdivision maps (whether tentative, vesting tentative or final), site development permits, precise plans, site development plans, building permits, occupancy certificates or other entitiements to use approved, issued or granted within CITY, or portions of CITY, shall apply to the Project to the extent such moratorium or other limitation would restrict OWNER's right to develop the Project in such order and at such rate as OWNER deems appropriate. CITY agrees to cooperate with OWNER in all reasonable manners in order to keep this Agreement in full force and affect. In the event of any legal action instituted by a third party or other governmental entity or official challenging the validity of any provision of this Agreement, the parties hereby agree to cooperate in defending such action. In the event of any litigation challenging the effectiveness of this Al~'eement, or any portion hereof; this Agreement shall remain in ~11 force and effect while such litigation, including any appellate review, is pending. 3.4.4. Consistency Between This Aereement and Current Laws. CITY represents that at the F-fFective Date there are no rules, regulations, ordinances, policies or other measures of the CITY in force as of the Agreement Date that would interfere with Development and use of all or any part of the Property according this ASreement. 3.5. Future Amendments to Develooment Plan. The following rules apply to future amendments to the Development Plan: 3.5.1. OWNER's Written Consent. Any Development Plan amendment to which OWNER does not agree in writing shall not apply to the Property or the Project while this Agreement is in effect. 3.5.2. Concurrent Development Aereement Amendment. Any Development Plan amendment requiring amendment of this Agreement shall be processed concurrently with an amendment to this Agreement. 3.5.3. Effect of Amendment. Except as expressly set forth within this Agreement, a Development Plan amendment will not alter, affect, impair or otherwise impact the fights, duties and obligations of the parties under this Agreement. 4. Obligations of the Parties. 4.1. Benefits to CITY. The direct and indirect benefits CITY (including, without limitation the existing and future residents of CITY) will receive pursuant to the implementation of the Agreement include, but are not limited to, the following: 4.1.1. Comnrehensive Planning. Providing a comprehensive planning effort; 4.1.2. Short Term Emolovment Creating substantial employment opportunities through the construction and development phase~ 4.1.3 Lone Term Emnlovment. Creating substantial employment opportunities subsequent to the Development; 4.1.4 lmorovements. The development of the Property, including offsite infrastructure improvements; and 4.1.5 Settlement of Litileation. The adoption of this Agreement shall resuk in the settlement of an eminent domain action between the parties. 4.2. Develonment Fees. Certain presently undefined development impact and processing fees will be imposed on the Future Development Approvals as conditions of approval. Owner shall be responsible for payment of such fees as they may become due. The fees charged by the City of Temecula shall be at the rate effective for such action on lanuary l, 1999. F:~DEPTS~LANNINGxSTAFFRPT~71pA~ Develqm~ A~m~mtdoc l0 4.3. Dedications and Exactions. Future Development Approvals will be reviewed in a manner consistent with the general review procedures of the CITY accorded the particular type of Future Development Approval being sought and necessary conditions imposed in a manner consistent with this Agreement. 4.3.1. Curb Cut Access to Subiect Pronefly. CITY agrees to process, in a reasonable and customary manner, the amendments to that certain Memorandum of Understanding with CalTrans and the County of Riverside (identified as the "Highway 79 South M.O.U.") as regards access to the subject property. CITY shall bear no costs other than those related to its reasonable allocation of personnel necessary to accomplish the amendment. Any and all costs shall be borne by OWNER. The area of the curb cut activity is as defined on Exhibit "D" attached hereto. 4.3.2 Jedediah Smith Road Extension South of Hi2hwav 79. A. Construction Component CITY agrees to contribute an amount equal to one-tldrd of the total costs involved in the extension of the storm drain necessary to permit the extension of Jedediah Smith Road, Notwithstanding any of the contrary in no instance shall CITY' s contribution to the construction component exceed One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00). The costs of which contributions are permissible include engineering costs, permit application costs, environmental studies and project speeitic professional services. CITY shall contribute its proportionate share of the construction monies at any time subsequent to OWNER's commencement of the storm drain construction process, as demonstrated by OWNER's obtaining a CITY building permit. Upon receipt of a detailed invoice from OWNER describing the basis of the funding request and showing the amount sought is one-third (1/3) of the total monies expended, CITY will promptly deliver the portion of the funds for the current stage of construction to OWNEK. Exhibit "E" attached hereto describes the general physical location of the storm drain in relation to Jedediab Smith Road within the public fight-of-way. B. Plan Check and Permit Fee Waiver CITY agrees to waive ks routinely charged fees for plan check and permits for the storm drain construction described in Section 4.3.2A above, C. Further Cooperation CITY will reasonably cooperate in coordinating the storm drain project with the OWNER and County of Riverside to facilitate the efficient development of the f~ility, including, without limitation, the City' s encouragement of the County to contribute its funds to the City, and commitment to administer such funds consistent with the procedures set forth in Section 4.3.2.A. F:~DEFI'S~LANNING~STAFFRFI~TIpA99 ~ A~s~mCdo~ 11 4.3.3 Administrative Discretion - Site Design and Planning. The OWNER and CrFY recognize that certain on-site circumstances may require deviation from the strict application of C1TY's zoning standards. The CITY des'ties to allow for the administrative discretion of certain of the design issues for the facilitation of OWNER's site planning purposes. The CITY hereby authorizes the City Manager, or his or her designee, to act on or to determine that such matter should be acted upon by the CITY Planning Commission, the following issues: A. Reduced Set Back on Highway 79 South and Pala Road The front yard set back may be reduced to zero, or any dimension less than the generally applicable front yard setback amount, in the discretion of the City Manager after consideration of the OWNER's proposals and subject to reasonably accepted planning principles. B. On-site Landscape Area Requirements Incorporating Wetlands Mitigation Area The parties recognize that a portion of land owned by OWNER is currently limited in its development potential because it is reserved as wetlands mitigation !and. The City Manager, or his or her designee, may, in their reasonable discretion, allow all or some portion of the wetland mitigation area (as shown on Exhibit "F') to be calculated as a portion of OWNER's on-site landscaping requirements for the approximately 14.3 acre subject site. 4.4 Limitation on Restaurant Uses. Concurrently with the quit claim referenced in Section 4.5(BX1), OWNER a~rees to impose, to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY, covenants and conditions upon that portion of the Property located west of Pala Road which serve to prohibit drive-in restaurant uses on such portion of the Property. The restricted area is shown on Exhibit "G." The covenants shall insure that no diminution or release of the land use limitation may occur without the prior written consent of CiTy. 4.5 Related Real Prol}ertv Conveyances: Conditions to Develonment Agreement. A, Intent of the Pan'aes The CITY and OWNER agree that the timely completion of the related real estate transactions described hereafter are a material component of the consideration each party has relied upon in its respective decision to enter into this Agreement. OWNER and CITY, individually and coliectively, represent that neither party would have entered into this Agreement but for the promises of the other to transfer the interests in real property described hereunder to the other party. Further, OWNER and CITY, individually and collectively, agree that the failure of any one of the conveyances to be completed in a timely manner will be an event of default under Section 10 of this Agreement. F:XDEPTSXPLANNING~STAFFRPT~273p.A~) D~ Agt~m~ntdoc 12 B. Conveyances to OWNER from CITY 1. Easemere Ouit Claim (Paia Road Vacation) CITY, pursuant to the deeding instrument recorded as 91436-RS 54/89-90 previously was granted a nonspecific easement by OWNER over a portion of the property subject to the jurisdiction of this Agreement. This property is generally described on Exhibit "M-2" hereto. CITY, agrees to, after the Effective Date of this Agreement end concurrently with the conveyance identified in Section 4.5(c)(1) and 4.6 below, deliver to OWNER a quit claim deed describing the interest presently held by CITY and conveying the same to OWNER.. 2. Easement Ouit Claim CITY has previously had dedicated to it, for public purposes, that certain real property described on Exhibit "M-I". The CITY received its interest from the entity identified as "KI/FKLA.' CITY will deliver a quit claim deed to OWNER quit claiming the interest identified on Exhibit "M-l' concurrently with the delivery of the quit claim deed described in Section 4.5(BX1) above. 3. OWNER's Purchase of City of Temecula Real Property CITY presently owns fee title to that certain parcel of real property identified on Exhibit "M-Y' for the portion of real property shown as Area A. OWNER has offered to purchase, and CITY has conditionally agreed to sell, subject to the satisfaction of its customarily required proceedings and conditions, the parcel for the sum of Four Dollars ($4.00) per square foot. The parcel is 28,053 square feet in area, resulting in a sales price of One Hundred Twelve Thousand, Two Hundred and Twelve Dollars ($112,212.00). C. Conveyances to CITY from OWNER 1. Additional Paia Road right-of-way OWNER has agreed to convey, in addition to the real property described in the Action, an additional 12-feet of right.of_way on both sides of Pala Road to provide for the ultimate width of 134 feet as shown on the CITY Circulation Element of the C-enerai Plan, all as shown on Exhibit "M4" hereto. CITY has agreed to pay $4.00 per square foot for the additionai fight-of-way less any consideration provided for in the eminent domain action for penanent use by the CITY (i.e., slope easements.) The parties agree that the value CITY conveyed to OWNER in the Action is as set forth hereunder. The subject property is specifically described on Exhibit "M4", hereon, as Parcels 1 & 2 of that exhibit. Parcel 1 is on the westerly side and has an area of 3,370 SF. The eminent domain action provides for a slope easement over that area (Parcel J) at a cost of $2/sq. ~. The additional consideration for Parcel 1 would be 3,370 SF at $2.00/sq. ~. = $6,740. Parcel 2 is on the easterly side end has an area of 5,744 SF. The eminent domain action provides for a slope easement over 4,299 SF of that area (Parcel lVf) at a cost of $0.75/SF. The additional consideration for Parcel 2 would be 5,744 at $4.00/SF less 4,299 SF at $0.75/SF or $19,751.75. Total consideration for the additional right-of-way is $26,491.75. 2. OWNER has agreed to enter into a License Agreement ('q_,icense") substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "If' for the purpose of insuring CITY access to the wetlands mitigation area described in the Action as Parcel B. The License shall be conveyed at such time as OWNER receives consideration, in the mount of One Dollar ($1.00), from the CITY. 4.6 Termination of Eminent Domain Action. In addition to the other compensation in this Agreement, the entire deposit in the eminent domain action (Kiverside County Superior Court Case No. RIC , referred to in the rest of this section as the "Action") of Two Hundred N'mety-five Thousand Dollars ($295,000.00), plus any interest that accrued on the deposit, shall be immediately released to OWNER. Once OWNER receives such funds, OWNER shall, at C1TY's option, either (a) stipulate to a fmal order of condemnation for the "subject property" defined in the Complaint in Eminent Domain in the Action, or Co) sign and deliver a deed transferring said "subject Property" to CITY, with CITY then dismissing OWNER from the Action. 5. Further Assurances to OWNER Reearding Exercise of Reserved Authority. 5.1. Adontion of General Plan and Grantins of Other Project Aunrovals. In prepaxing and adopting any general plan amendment, zoning district change and in granting the other Project Approvals, CITY reserves its right to and shall consider the health, safety and welfare of the residents of CITY. 5.2. Assurances to OWNER. The parties further acknowledge that the public benefits to be provided by OWNER to CITY pursuant to this Agreement are in consideration for and reliance upon assurances that the Property can be developed in accordance with the Project Approvals and this Agreement. Accordingly, while recognizing that the Development of the Property may be affected by exercise of the authority and rights reserved and excepted as provided in Sections 3.3.1 and 3.3.2. ("Reserved Authority") or this Agreement, OWNER is concerned that normally the judiciary extends to local agencies significant deference in the adoption of land use regulations which might permit CITY in violation of the Reserved Authority, to attempt to apply regulations which are inconsistent with the Project Approvals pursuant to the exercise of the Reserved Authority. Accordingly, OWNER desires assurances that CITY shall not and CITY agrees that it shall not further restrict or limit the development of the Property in violation of this Agreement except in strict accordance with the Reserved Authority. 5.3. Judicial Review. Based on the foregoing, in the event OWNER judicially (including by way of a reference proceeding) challenges the application of a future land use regulation as being in violation of this Agreement and as not being a land use regulation adopted pursuant to the Reserved Authority, OWNER shall bear the burden of proof in establishing that such rule, regulation or policy is inconsistent with the Existing Regulations and the Project Approvals and CITY shall thereafter bear the burden of proof in establishing that such regulation was adopted pursuant to and in accordance with the Reserved Authority and was not applied by CITY in violation of this Agreement. F:~DEPTS~PLANNING~TAFFRPT~71pAg~ [k.v~l~mm~ Ai~m~m[d~ 14 6. Indemnification. Except to the extent of the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties (as defined below), OWNER, and with respect to the portion of the Property transferred to them, the transferee agree: (i) to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the Indemnified Parties from and against each and every claim, action, proceeding cost, fee, legal cost, damage, award or liability of any nature arising from alleged damages caused to third pardes and alleging that CITY is liable therefor as a direct or indirect result of C1TY's approval of this Development Agreement. OWNER's duties under this Section 6(i) are solely subject to and conditioned upon the Indemnified Parties' written request to OWNER to defend and/or indemnify CITY. Without in any way limiting the provisions of this Section 6(i), the pardes hereto agree that this Section 6(i) shall be interpreted in accordance with the provisions of California Civil Code Section 2778 in effect as of the Agreement Date. (ii) during the term of this Agreement, to defend CITY and its agents, officers, contractors, attorney, and employees (the "Indemnified Parties") from and against any claims or proceeding against the Indemnified Parties to set aside, void or annul the approval of this Development Agreement. CITY shall retain settlement authority with respect to any matter provided that prior to settling any such lawsuit or claim, OWNER shall provide CITY with a minimum ten (10) business days written notice of its intent to settle such lawsuit or claim. ff CITY(in its reasonable discretion) does not desire to settle such lawsuit or claim, it may notify OWNER of the same, in which event OWNER may still elect to settle the lawsuit or claim as to itself; but CITY may elect to continue such lawsuit, but at OWNER's cost and expense, so long as the CITY's decision is predicated upon a legitimate and articulated threat to either the exercise of its police powers or a risk of harm to those present within the CITY. 7. Relationshin of Parties. The contractual relationship between CITY and OWNER is such that OWNER is an independent contractor and not the agent or employee of CITY. CITY and OWNER hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them, and agree that nothing contained in this Agreement or in any document executed in connection with the Project shah be construed as making CITY and OWNER joint venturers or parmen. 8. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended or canceled in whole or in part only by mutual consent of the parties in the manner provided for in Government Code Section 65868. No amendment or modification of this Agreement or any provision hereof shall be effective unless set forth in writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of each party hereto. This provision shall not limit CITY's or owner remedies as provided by Section 10. 9. Periodic Review of Comnliance with Aereement. 9.1. Periodic Review. CITY and OWNER shall review this Agreement at least once every 12-month period from the date this Agreement is executed. CITY shall notify OWNER in writing of the date for review at least thirty (30) days prior thereto. Such periodic review shall be conducted in accordance with Government Code Section 65865.1. F:~DEPTSXPLANNINGx3TAFFKFr~T3pA99 D~v~lo~mmt Ag~mmLdo~ 15 9.2. Good-Faith Co mnl ian ce. During each periodic review, OWNER shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement. OWNER agrees to furnish such reasonable evidence of good faith compliance as CITY, in the exercise of its reasonable discretion, may require. If requested by OWNER, CITY agrees to provide to OWNER, a certificate that OWNER or a Development Transferee is in compliance with the terms of this Agreement, provided OWNER reimburses CITY for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by C1TY with respect thereto. 9.3. Failure to Conduct Annual Review. The failure of the CITY to conduct the annual review shall not be an OWNER default. Further, OWNER shall not be entitled to any remedy for CITY failure to conduct this annual review. 9.4. Initiation of Review by City Council. In addition to the annual review, the CITY Council may at any time initiate a review of this Agreement by giving written notice to OWNER. Within thirty (30) days following receipt of such notice, OWNER shall submit evidence to the CITY Council of OWNER's good faith compliance with this Agreement and such review and determination shall proceed in the same manner as provided for the annual review. The City Council shall initiate its review pursuant to this Section 9.4 only if it has probable cause to believe the CITY's general health, safety or welfare is at risk as a result of specific acts or failures to act by OWNER, 9.5 Administration of Aereement. Any decision by CITY staff concerning the interpretation and administration of this Agreement and Development of the Property in accordance herewith may be appealed by OWNER to the City Council, provided that any such appeal shall be filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) days after OWNER receives notice of the staff decision. The City Council shall render, at a noticed public hearing, its decision to affirm, reverse or modify the staff decision within thirty (30) days after the appeal was filed. 9.6. Availability of Documents. If requested by OWNER, CITY agrees to provide to OWNER copies of any documents, reports or other items reviewed, accumulated or prepared by or for CITY in connection with any periodic compliance review by CITY, provided OWNER reimburses CITY for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by CITY with respect thereto. CITY shall respond to OWNER's request on or before ten (10) business days have elapsed from CITY' s receipt of such request. 10. Events of Default: Remedies and Termination. Unless mended or canceled as provided in Section 8, or modified or suspended pursuant to Government Code Section 65869.5 or terminated pursuant to this Section 10, this Agreement is enforceable by either party hereto. 10.1. Defaults by OWNER. If CITY determines on the basis of a preponderance of the evidence that OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, CITY shall, by written notice to OWNER, specify the manner in which OWNER has failed to so comply and state the steps OWNER must take to bring itself into compliance. If, within sixty (60) days after the effective date of notice from CITY specifying the manner in which OWNER has failed to so comply, OWNER does not commence all steps reasonably necessary to bring itself into compliance as required and thereafter diligently pursue such steps to completion, then OWNER shall be deemed to be in default under the terms of this Agreement. CITY may F:XDEPT~XPLANNINO~TAFFRPTx273pA99 Devele~nmt A~re4mmtdoc terminate this Agreement pursuant to Government Code Section 65865.1. OWNER agrees that ks default hereunder is a conclusive representation that it is consenting to the cancellation of this Agreement. In event of default by OWNER. except as provided in Section 10~3, CITYs sole remedy for any breach of this Agreement by OWNER shall be C1TYs right to terminate this Agreement. 10.2. Defaults bv CITY. If OWNER determines on the basis of a preponderance of the evidence that CITY has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, OWNER shall, by written notice to CITY, specify the manner in which CITY has failed to so comply and state the steps CITY must take to bring itself into compliance. If, within sixty (60) days after the effective date of notice from OWNER specifying the manner in which CITY has failed to so comply, CITY does not commence all steps reasonably necessary to bring itself into compliance as required and thereaRer diligently pursue such steps to completion, then CITY shall be deemed to be in default under the terms of this Agreement and OWNER may terminate this A~reement and, in addition, may pursue any other remedy available at law or equity, including specific performance as set forth in Section 10.3. 10.3. Specific Performance Remedy. Due to the size, nature and scope of the Project, it will not be practical or possible to restore the Property to its natural condition once implementation of this Agreement has begun. ARer such implementation, OWNER may be foreclosed from other choices it may have had to utilize the Property and provide for other benefits. OWNER has invested significant time and resources and performed extensive planning and processing of the Project in agreeing to the terms of this Agreement and will be investing even more significant time and resources in implementing the Project in reliance upon the terms of this Agreement, and it is not possible to determine the sum of money which would adequately compensate OWNER for such efforts. For the above reasons, CITY and OWNER agree that damages would not be an adequate remedy if CITY fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement and that OWNER shall have the right to seek and obtain specific performance as a remedy for any breach of this Agreement. CITY and OWNER further acknowledge that, if OWNER fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement, CITY shall have the right to refuse to issue any permits or other approvals which OWNER would otherwise have been entitled to pursuant to this Agreement. Therefore, CITY~s remedy of terminating this Agreement shall be sufficient in most circumstances if OWNER fads to carry out its obligations hereunder. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if CITY issues a permit or other approval pursuant to this Agreement in reliance (explicitly stated in writing) upon a specified condition being satisfied by OWNER in the future, and if OWNER then fails to satisfy such condition, CITY shall be entitled to specific performance for the sole purpose of causing OWNER to satisfy such condition. CITYs right to specific performance shall be limited to those circumstances set forth above, and CITY shall have no right to seek specific performance to cause OWNER to otherwise proceed with the Development of the Project in any manner. 10.4. Institution of Leeal Action. In addition to any other rights or remedies, OWNER or CITY may institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any default, to enforce any covenants or agreements herein, to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation hereof to recover damages for any default, or to obtain any other remedies consistent with the purpose of this Agreement. Such legal action shall be heard by a reference from the Riverside County Superior Court pursuant to the reference procedures of the California Code of Civil Procedure Sections 638, et ~eq. OWNER and CITY shall agree upon a single referee who shall then try all issues, whether of fact F:~DEPTS~LANNING~TAFFRPT~73pA99 Development Agreemint. doe 17 or law, and report a finding and judgment thereon and issue all legal and equitable relief appropriate under the circumstances of the controversy before him. If OWNER and CITY are unable to agree on a referee within tan (10) days of a written request to do so by either party hereto, either party may seek to have one appointed pursuant to the California Code of Civil Procedure Section 640. The cost of such proceeding shall initially be borne equally by the parties. Any referee selected pursuant to this Section 10.4 shall be considered a temporary judge appointed pursuant to Article 6, Section 21 of the California Constitution. 10.S. EStOnOel Certificates. Either party may at any time deliver written notice to the other party requesting an estoppel certificate (the "Estoppel Certificate") stating: 10.5. 1. The Agreement is in full force and effect and is a binding obligation of the parties. 10.5.2. The Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing or, if so amended, identifying the amendments. 10.5.3. No defauk in the performance of the requesting party's obligations under the A~reement exists or, if a default does exist, the nature and amount of any default. A party receiving a request for an Estoppel Certificate shall provide a signed certificate to the requesting party within thirty (30) days after receipt of the request. The City Manager or any person designated by the City Manager may sign Estoppel Certificates on behalf of the CITY. Any officer of OWNER may sign on behalf of OWNER. An Estoppel Certificate may be relied on by assignees and mortgagees. 10.5.4. In the event that one party requests an Estoppel Certificate from the other, the requesting party shall reimburse the other party for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by such party with respect thereto. 11. Waivers and Delays. 11.1. No Waiver. Failure by a party to insist upon the strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreernant by the other party, and failure by a party to exercise its fights upon a default by the other party hereto, shall not constitute a waiver of such party's right to demand strict compliance by such other party in the future. 11.2. Third Parties. Non-performance shall not be excused because of a failure of a third person, except as provided in Section 11.3. 11.3. Force Maieure. OWNER shall not be deemed to be in default where failure or delay in performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement is caused by floods, earthquakes, other Acts of God, fires, wars, riots or similar hostilities, strikes and other labor difficulties beyond OWNER control, government regulations (including, without limitation, local, state and federal environmental and natural resource regulations), voter initiative or referenda, moratoria (including. without limitation, any "development moratorium" as that term is applied in Government Code Section 66452.6) or judicial decisions. F:~DF, Fl'S~LANN~G~TAFFRFF,273pA~ Develqmsmt Agtmm~doc 11.4. Extensions. The Term of this Agreement and the time for performance by OWNER or CITY of any of its obligations hereunder or pursuant to the Project Approvals shall be extended by the period of time that any of the events described in Section 11.3 exist and/or prevent performance of such obligations. In addition, the Term shall be extended for delays arising from the following events for a time equal to the duration of each delay which occurs during the Term: 11.4.1. Litieation. The period of time after the FReerive Date during which litigation related to the Project Approvals or having the actual effect of delaying implementation of the Project is pendin_g, including litigation pending on the Effective Date. This period shall include any time during which appeals may be ~ed or are pending. 11.4.2. Government Aeencies. Any delay resulting from the acts or omissions of the CITY or any other governmental aSency or public utility and beyond the reasonable control of OWNER. 11.5. Notice of Delav. OWNER, shall give notice to CITY of any delay which OWNER believes to have occurred as a result of the occurrence of any of the events described in Section 11.3. For delays of six months or longer, this notice shall be given within a reasonable time after OWNER becomes aware that the delay has lasted six months or more. In no event, however, shall notice of a delay of any length be given later than thirty days after the end of the delay or thirty days before the end of the Term, whichever comes first. 12. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Notices required to be given to CITY shall be addressed as follows: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Post Oilice Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Attn.: Planner Manager With a copy to: Richards, Watson & Gershon Thirty-Eighth Floor 333 South Hope Street Los Angal~s, California 90071-1469 Attn.: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney Notices required to be given to OWNER shall be addressed as follows: Pala Rainbow, LLC 27349 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 102 Temecula, California 92590 Attn.: Michelle D. Schierberi, Managing Member F:~DEPTS~PLANNING~TAFFRPT~273PA99 Develolm~nt A~'m~ntdoc 19 With a copy to: Lorenz Alhadeff Cannon & Rose, LLP 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 203 Temec~t, California 92591-4677 Attn.: Philip D. Oberhansley, Esq. Any notice given as required herein shall be deemed given only if in writing and upon delivery personally or by independent courier service. A party may change its address for notices by giving notice in writing to the other party as required herein and thereafter notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. 13. Attorneys' Fees. If legal action is brought by either party against the other for breach of this Agreement, including actions derivative fxom the performance of this Agreement, or to compel performance under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of its costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, and shall also be enti~ed to recover its contribution for the costs of the referee referred to in Section 10.4 above as an item of damage and/or recoverable costs. 14. Recording. This Agreement and any amendment or cancellation hereto shall be recorded, at no cost to CITY, in the Official Records of Riverside County by the City Clerk within the period required by Section 65868.5 of the Government Code. 15. Effect of A~reement on Title. 15.1. Effect on Title. OWNER and CITY agree that this Agreement shall not cominue as an encumbrance against any portion of the Property as to which this Agreement has terminated. 15.2. Encumbrances and Lenders' Riehts. OWNER and CITY hereby agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit any owner of any interest in the Property, or any portion thereof, at any time or fi'om time to time in any manner, at its or their sole discretion, ~'om encumbering the Property, the improvements thereon, or any portion thereof with any mortgage, deed of trust sale and leaseback arrangement or other security device. CITY acknowledges that any Lender (as hereinafier defined) may require certain interpretations of or modifications to the Agreement or the project and City agrees, upon request, from time to time, to meet with the property owner(s) and/or representatives of such Lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. CITY further agrees that it will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification to the extent such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purpose of this Agreement. A default under this A~reement shall not defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Lender. The mortgagee of a mortgage or beneficiary of a deed of trust or holder of any other security interest in the Property or any portion thereof and their successors and assigns, including without limitation the purchaser at a judicial or non-judicial foreclosure sale or a persun or entity which obtains ti~e by deed-in-lieu of foreclosure ("Lender") shall be entitled to receive a copy of any notice of Default (as defined in Section 10.1 hereof) delivered to OWNER and, as a pre- condition to the institution of legal proceedings or termination proceedings, the CITY shall deliver to all such Lenders written notification of any default by OWNER in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement which is not cured within sixty (60) days (the "Second Default Notice") and shall illlow the Lender(s) an opportunity to cure such defaults as set forth herein. The Second Notice of Default shall specify in detail the alleged default and the suggested means to cure it. After receipt of the Second Default Notice, each such Lender shall have the right, at its sole option, within ninety (90) days to cure such default or, if such default cannot reasonably be cured within that ninety (90) day period, to commence to core such default, in which case no default shall exist and the City ~ take no further action. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if such default shall be a default which can only be remedied by such Lender obtaining possession of the Property, or any portion thereof, and such Lender seeks to obtain possession, such Lender shall have until ninety (90) days after the date obtaining such possession to cure or, if such default cannot reasonably be cured within such period, then to commence to core such default. Further, a Lender shall not be required to core any non-curable default of OWNER, and any such default shall be deemed cured if any lender obtains possession. 16. Severability of Terms. If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreemere shall be determined invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby if the tribunal finds that the invalidity was not a material part of consideration for either party. The covenants contained herein are mutual covenants. The covenants contained herein constitute conditions to the concurrent or subsequent performance by the party benefiteel thereby of the covenants to be performed hereunder by such benefited party. 17. Subseauent Amendment to Authorizine Statute. This A~reement has been entered into in reliance upon the provisions of the Development Agreement Legislation in effea as of the Agreement Date. Accordingiy, subject to Seaion 3.3.2 above, to the extent that subsequent amendments to the Government Code would affect the provisions of this Agreement, such amendments shall not be applicable to this Agreement unless necessary for this Agreement to be enforceable or required by law or unless this Agreement is modified pursuant to the provisions set forth in this Agreement and Government Code Seaion 65868 as in effect on the Agreement Date. 18. Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Terms. 18.1. Interpretation and Governins Law. The language in all parts of this Agreement shall, in all cases, be construed as a whole and in accordance with ks fair meaning. This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The parties understand and agree that this Agreement is not intended to constitute, nor shall be construed to constitute, an impermissible attempt to contract away the legislative and governmental functions of the CITY, and in particular, the CITY's police powers. In this regard, the parties understand and agree that this Agreement shall not be deemed to constitute the surrender or abnegation of the CITYs governmental powers over the Property. 18.2. Section Headines. All section headings and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect any construction or interpretation of this Agreement. 18.3. Gender. The singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes the feminine; "shall" is mandatory, "may" is permissive. F:~DEPTSXPLANN1NO~STAFFRPT~73pkq9 Dt.v~lqm~m A~mm~mt~k~ 21 18.4. No Joint and Several Liability. At any time that there is more than one O~VNER, no breach hereof by an O~VNER shall constitute a breach by any other OWNER. Any remedy, obligation, or liability, including but not limited to the obligations to defend and indemnify CITY, arising by reason of such breach shall be applicable solely to the OWNER that committed the breach. However, CITY shah send a copy of any notice of violation to all OWNERS, including those not in breach. 18.5. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence regarding each provision of this Agreement of which time is an element. 18.6. ReCitalS. All Recitals set forth herein are incorporated in this Agreement as though fully se~ forth herein. 18.7. Entire A~reement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof~ and the Agreement supersedes all previous negotiations, discussion and agreements between the parties, and no parol evidence of any prior or other agreement shall be permitted to contradict or vat~ the terms hereof. 19. Extension of Marts. In accordance with Government Code Section 66452.6(a), any tentative map approved which relates to all or a portion of the Property shall be extended for the greater of (i) the Term of the Agreement or (ii) expiration of the tentative map pursuant to Section 66452.6. 20. Not for Benefit of Third Parties. This Agreement and all provisions hereof are for the exclusive benefit of CITY and OWNER and its Development Transferees and shall not be construed to benefit or be enforceable by any third party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year dated below. Dated: ,1999 "CITY" CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation ATTEST: By: Steven J. Ford, Mayor Susan Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk F:~,DEFI'~PLANNINO'~TA~1~,Fr,273PA99 D~v~lol~m~nt A~do~ 22 APPKOVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Dated: · 1999 "OWNER" PALA RAD,rBOW, LLC By: Its: By: hs: State of California ) )SS County of ) On before me, personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and offidal seal. State of California ) ) SS County of ) Signature of Notary F3DEPTS~LANNING~STAFFRPT~73PA99 Develqm~eug AgreemmLdoc 23 On before me, personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/theft signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and ot~cial seal. Signature of Notary EXIHRIT A PROPERTY OWNED BY PALA RAINBOW, LLC F:~DEPTS~PLANNING~TAFFRFI~2~3pA99 Develo~m~t Agl'e~m~ntdoc W a, 0 EXHIBIT B ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS I~:XDEFI'SXpLANN]NO~&'TAFFRPT~73pA99 D~vll~ 26 CHAPTER 17.08 COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS SECTIONS: 17.08.010 17.08.020 17.08.030 17.08.040 17.08.050 17.08.060 17.08.070 17.08.080 Purpose and intent. Description of commercial/office/industrial districts. Use regulations. Development standards. Special use regulations and standards. Landscape requirements and standards. Commercial/office/industrial performance standards. Environmental standards. 17.08.010 PURPOSE AND INTENT. The following zoning districts are intended to provide regulations for the safe, efficient and creative design of the commercial, office and industrial areas within the city. The zoning districts are intended to be consistent with the land use designatjons that are described in the land use eleme. nt of the Temecula general plan. In certain situations several zoning districts are established to implement the goals and objectives of the general plan. The commercial/office/industrial zoning districts are intended to permit the range of industrial or commercial uses in areas where uses are consistent with the general plan. It is further intended to accomplish the following: Provide for appropriate commercial areas to provide the city with a sound retail and industrial base with employment opportunities for the community. To ensure compatibility of retail commercial and office uses with adjacent land uses and to minimize traffic congestion and overloading of the city's utility systems. To encourage and assure that new COmmercial and industrial development will be planned in a comprehensive manner with high standards of architecture, landscape and site design. (Ord. 95-16 § 2 (part)) 17.08.020 DESCRIPTION OF COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS. The purpose and intent of the zoning districts are described as follows: Neighborhood Commercial (NC). The neighborhood commercial designation includes smaller-scale business activities which generally provide retail or convenience services for the local residents in the surrounding neighborhood. Typical uses include traditional small food markets (floor area less than twenty-five thousand square feet). drug stores, clothing stores, sporting goods, offices, hardware stores, child care and community facilities. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Community Commercial (CC), The community commercial designation includes retail, professional office and service-oriented business activities which serve the entire community. Community commercial areas typically include some neighborhood commercial uses as well as larger retail uses including department stores, theaters, restaurants, professional offices, specialty retail stores and shopping centers. Chapter 17.08-1 Highway/Tourist Commercial (HT). The highway commercial designation is intended to provide for those uses that are located adjacent to major transportation routes or within convenient access from freeway interchanges. Highway commercial development should be located near major arterials, and developed as clusters of commercial development rather than permitted to extend along the major streets. Typical uses may include tourist accommodations and lodging facilities, automobile service stations, restaurants, convenience shopping, and food stores, and gift shops. D= Service Commercial (SC). The service commercial designation is intended to provide for intensive commercial uses and selected light manufacturing uses that typically require extensive floor area. Typical uses include home improvement stores, discount retail stores, furniture stores, auto dealerships and auto service and repair. Warehousing and light manufacturing may be permitted as supporting uses for a business that is consistent with the service commercial designation. Professional Office (PO). The professional office designation includes primarily single-tenant or multi-tenant offices and may include supporting uses. The office developments are intended to include low dse offices situated in a landscaped garden arrangement and may include mid-rise structures at appropriate locations. Typical uses include legal, design, engineering or medical offices, corporate and governmental offices, community facilities. Limited supporting convenience retail and personal service (such as dry cleaners, barbers, shoe repair shop) commercial may be permitted to serve the needs of the on-site employees. A maximum of fifteen percent of the total square footage of the floor area shall be devoted to retail or personal service uses. Business Park District (BP). It is the intent of the business park zoning designation to develop well designed business and employment centers that include attractive and distinctive architectural design, innovative site planning, and substantial landscaping and visual quality. Typical uses may include administrative offices, research and development taboratories, custom made product manufacturing, processing, assembling, packaging, and fabrication of goods, such as jewelry, furniture, art objects, clothing, on-site wholesale of goods produced, and labor intensive manufacturing, assembly, and repair processes which do not involve frequent truck traffic. Retail uses are not permitted in this zoning district except as supporting a principal business park use (limited to fifteen percent (15%) of the square footage of the development). Light Industrial District (LI). It is the intent of the light industrial zoning designation to promote the development of attractive comprehensively planned industrial uses that will help to provide the city with a sound and diverse industrial base. This district allows for a wide vadety of industdal uses including manufacturing. compounding of materials, processing, assembling, packaging, treatment or fabrication of materials, and products which require frequent truck activity or the transfer of heavy or bulky items. Wholesating, storage and warehousing within enclosed building, storage and wholesale to retailers from the premises of finished goods and food products are also allowed. Also included in this zoning distdct are the following uses; warehousing, freight handling, shipping, truck services and terminals, storage and wholesaling from the premises of unreflned raw or semirefined products requiring further processing or manufacturing. Storage of raw or finished materials may occur outside providing there is adequate screening from adjoining lancJ use areas. Standards are provided to protect adjoining uses from excessive noise, odor, smoke toxic materials, and other potentially objectionable impacts. (Ord. 96-19 § 2(EE)(part); Ord. 95-16 § 2 (part); Ord 97-17 § 2(D)) Includes Amenciments as of June 1. 1999 Ctlal~ter 17.08 - 2 17.08.030 USE REGULATIONS. The land uses list in the following Table 17.08.030 shall be permitted in one or more of the commercial zoning districts as indicated in the columns corresponding to each residential district. Where indicated with a letter "P" the use shall be a permitted use. Where indicated with a %" the use is prohibited within the zone, A letter "C' indicates the use shall be conditionally permitted subject to the approval of a conditional use permit, Table 17.08.030 Schedule of Permitted Uses Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts A Adult business-subject to Chapter 5.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code Aerobicsldancelgymnasticsljazzerciselmartial arts studios (less than 5,000 sq. ~.) Aerobicsldancelgymnasticsljazzerciseimartial arts studios (greater than 5,000 sq. ft.) Airports Alcoholism or drug treatment facilities Alcohol and drug treatment (outpatient) Alcoholic beverage sales Ambulance services Animal hospital/shelter 'AntiQue restoration AntiQue sales Apparel and accessory shops Appliance sales and repairs (household and small appliances) Arcades (pinball and video games) Art supply stores Auction houses Auditoriums and conference facilities Automobile dealers (new and used) Automobile sales (brokerage)-showroom only (new and used)-no outdoor display Automobile repair services Automobile rental Automobile painting and body shop Automobile salvage yards/impound yards Automobile service stations with or without an automated car wash Automotive oil change/lube services with no major repairs Automotive parts-sales Automotive service stations selling beer and/or wine- with or without an automated car wash C C P C P P P P P P P F P I P C F P iPt- C C I C C C C I C P C C ~C P P P P C C P P P P P C C P P C P C C C C P C P C C LI C C P F P F c F' C C C C C C C C C C C C C F P C C P P C P C P P P C C F P C P F F P P F F C~ C" C1 C1 C~ C Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 3 Table 17,08.030 Schedule of Permitted Uses Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts Description of Use t NC dec B Bakery goods distribution Bakery retail Bakery wholesale Banks and financial institutions Barber and beauty shops Bed and breakfast Bicycle (sales, rentals, services) Billlard parlor/poolhall Binding of books and similar publications Blood bank Blueprint and duplicating and copy services Bookstores Bowling alley Building material sales (with extedor storage/sales areas greater than 50 percent of total sales area) Building material sales (with exterior storage/sales areas less than 50 percent of total sales area) Butcher shop C Cabinet shop Cabinet shops under 20,000 sq. ft.-no outdoor storage Camera shop (sales/minor repairs) Candy/confectionery sales Car wash, full service Carpet and rug cleaning Catering services Clothing sales Coins. purchase and sales Cold storage facilities Communications and microwave installations2 P P P R C P P P P P P P C C HT ~ P P P P P C P P P ~CI PO P P C I~ P Ir P l' P ~ E1P i L:I P P P P P P P C P P P p 'p P P P P I> P P C C P P P Inductes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17,08 - 4 Table 17.08.030 Schedule of Permitted Uses Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts Description of Use Communications equipment sales Community care facilities Computer sales and service Congregate care housing for the elderly Construction equipment sales, service or rental Contractor's equipment, sales, service or rental Convenience market Costume rentals Crematoriums Cutlery D Data processing equipment and systems Day care centers Delicatessen Discount/department store Distribution facility Drug store/pharmacy Dry cleaners Dry cleaning plant E Emergency shelters Equipment sales and rentals (no outdoor storage) Equipment sales and rentals (outdoor storage) F Feed and grain sales Financial, insurance. real estate offices Fire and police stations Floor covering sales Florist shop Food processing Fortunetelling, spiritualism, or similar activity NC C J C C P P C P P P P C P HT P P P P P P P P C C P SC PO ~P P ~ P P ~ P ~ p P ~ P C P P P P C- C i p P P C C C C P C I> C P Ip P P P P P P P P P- p :> :, P P P P P ~ p 1 P P = p ::' L P P I ncJudes Amendments as of June 1.1999 Cl~apter 17.08 - 5 Table 17.08,030 Schedule of Permitted Uses Commercial/Office/Industrial listricts Description of Use Freight terminals Fuel storage and distribution ' Funeral parlors, mortuary Furniture sales Furniture transfer and storage G Garden supplies and equipment sales and service Gas distribution, meter and control station General merchandise/retail store less than 10,000 sq. ft. Glass and mirrors, retail sales Governmental offices less than 5,000 sq. ft. Grocery store, retail Grocery store, wholesale Guns and firearm sales H Hardware stores Health and exercise clubs (less than 5,000 sq. ft.) Health and exercise clubs (greater than 5,000 sq. ft.) Health food store Health care facility Heliports Hobby supply shop Home and business maintenance service Hospitals Hotels/motels I Ice cream parlor Impound yard Interior decorating service J Junk .or salvage yard Inc~uaes Amenarnent~ as of June 1, 1999 P C C P P C P P P P P C P P P P C C li HT P P SC P P P P p > P PO EP L - P C C P P C C C P P P C C P C P P C P P P C C p ~ = p P C C C C C P C C I3 ~ p C p } p ) Chapter 17.08 - 6 K Kennel L Laboratories. film, medical, research or testing centers Laundromat Laundry service (commercial) Libraries, museums and galleries (private) Liqui~ed petroleum, sales and distribution Liquor stores Lithographic service Locksmith M Machine shop Machinery storage yard . Mail order businesses Manufacturing of products similar to. but not limited , to, the following: Table 17.08.030 Schedule of Permitted Uses Commercial/Office/industrial Districts I I Ci C P P P P P P C C d c P P P p- c c P P c P F F C C C P ~.-F P P P P C P P Custom-made product, processing, assembling, packaging. and fabrication of goods within enclosed building (no outside storage), such as jewelry, furniture, art objects, clothing, labor intensive manufacturing, assembling, and repair processes which do not involve frequent truck traffic. F Compounding of materials, processing, assembling, packaging, treatment or fabrication of materials and products which require frequent truck activity or the transfer of heavy or bulky items. Wholesaling, storage, and warehousing within enclosed building, freight handling. shipping, truck services and terminals, storage and wholesaling from the premises of unrefined, raw or semirefined products requiring further processing or manufacturing, and outside storage. P Uses under 20,000 sq. ft. with no outside storage Massage P P P P P P P Inclu,~es Amendments as of June 1. 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 7 Table 17,08.030 Schedule of Permitted Uses CommerciaUOfficellndustrial Districts Description of Use NC CC Medical equipment sales/rental P P Membership clubs, organizations, lodges C C Mini-storage or Mini-warehouse facilities' C Mobilehome sales and service Motion picture studio Motorcycle sales and service Movie theaters C Musical and recording studio C N Nightclubs/taverns/bars/dance club/teen club C Nurseries (retail) C Nursing homes/convalescent homes C C O Office equipment/supplies, sales/services C F Offices, administrative or corporate headquarters with C greater than 50,000 sq. ft. Offices, professional services with less than 50,000 P P sq. ft., including, but not limited to, business law, medical, dental, veterinarian, chiropractic, architectural, engineering, real estate, insurance P Paint and wallpaper stores p Parcel cielivery services p p Parking lots and parking structures Pawnshop Personal service shops P Pest control services C Pet grooming/pet shop p p Photographic studio p Plumbing supply yard (enclosed or unenclosed) .- - Postal distribution ~ - I Postal services p Inciuoes Amenclrnents as of June 1, 1999 HT P C C C C C C P c C P P P P P C P P P P P C P P P P IM PO BP P ~ c C C U P P P ChaOter 17.08 I:h' P P P4 P P P P P P P P P C P P Table 17,08.030 Schedule of Permitted Uses Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts Description of Use Pdnting and publishing (newspapers. periodicals, books, etc.) Private utility facilities (Regulated by the Public Utilities Commission) Q Reserved R Radio and broadcasting studios. offices Radio/television transmitter Recreational vehicle parks Recreational vehicle sales Recreational vehicle, trailer, and boat storage within an enclosed building Recreational vehicle, trailer and boat storage-exterior yard Recycling collection facilities Recycling processing facilities Religious institution, without a daycare or private school Religious institution, with a private school ;~.li,, ,, ,s instit f nn with a daycare Residential (one dwelling unit on the same parcel as a commercial or industrial use for use of the proprietor of the business) Residential, multiple-family housing Restaurant, drive-in/fast food Restaurants and other eating establishments Restaurants with lounge or live entertainment Retail support use (15 percent of total development square footage in BP and LI) Rooming and boarding houses S Scale, public Schools, business and professional Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 NC CC P P C C C C C C C C HT SC P P P. P P C E C C C C C C C C C C C CiC C C C C C C C C ~ P P P C C C' C C P P po .plL:l C i = P P i ~ P P P P C P C P C C C C C C C C C C C Chapter 17,08 - 9 Table 17.08.030 Schedule of Permitted Uses Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts Description of Use N~ C~C Schools, private (kindergarten through Grade 12) q: P Scientific research and development offices and laboratories Senior citizen housing (see also congregate care) P P Solid waste disposal facility Sports and recreational facilities C C Swap Meet, entirely inside a ~ermanent building3 Swap Meet. Outdoor Swimming pool supplies/equipment sales T Tailor shop Taxi or limousine service Tile sales Tobacco shop Tool and die casting Transfer, moving and storage Transportation terminals and stations Truck sales/rentals/service TV/VCR repair U Upholstery shop V Vending machine sales and service W Warehousing/distribution Watch repair Wedding chapels Welding shop Welding supply and service (enclosed) Y Reserved P P P P P C P HT lSC P IC P C C C P P P P P F -! C P P P F ~ p P P P J C I P F PO P C P C P I- EP C P C C C C P C Ci C P P P P C P P P P P I nciucJes Amenciments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 10 Table 17,08.030 Schedule of Permitted Uses Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts Description of Use Z Reserved ~ 1. The CUP will be subject to Section 17.08.050(G). 2. Subject to standards outlined in appendix. 3. See Chapter 5,22 of the Temecula Municipal Code. 4. I NC I C~ HT S; PO By See Section 17.080.050(R), special use regulations and standards for self-storage or m~ni- warehouse facilities. (Ord. 96-19 §§ 2(EE)(part) and 4; Ord. 95-16 § 2 (part);Ord. 97-03 § 2;Ord. 97-06 § 2; Ord 97- 17§(5)) 17.08,040 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. LI The development standards listed below are the minimum standards for development with the respective zoning districts. It is intended that these standards will be met in addition to the commercial/office/industrial performance standards of Section 17.08.070. Considerations for approval of development plans and for awarding floor area ratio bonuses will be based upon both the development standards and the degree of conformance with the performance standards. In the event of a conflict between the development standarcis and the performance standards, the director of planning shall determine which requirement best implements the intent of the develol~ment code. Separate development standards have been established for developments on a single lot and for those commercial shopping centers or industrial planned developments which include multiple structures on ore or more lots. Inc~ucies Amenarnent~ as of June 1. 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 11 The following Table 17.08.040A provides the ~ievelopment standards for the commercial/office and industrial districts for developments within planned shopping centers or industrtal/13usiness parks. Table 17.08,040A Development Standards - Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts For Developments within Planned Sho ,,ping Centers or Industrial/Busines$~ Parks Commercial Development Standerda NC CC tIT SC PO BP L I Minimum gross area of site 5 a~res 10 acres 10 acres 10 a,'res 5 acres ~ 10 acres ~ 10 a,'res Target floor area ratio 0~25 0.,~ 0 0.30 0.30 0.50 0.40 i 0.40 Maximum floor area ratio 0.~I0 1 "I 1.0 1.5 1.0 15 1 with intensity bonus as per Section 17.08.050 Front yard adjacent to a street: Arterial street 2~ ft. 20 It. 25 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft. 20 ft. 20 Collector 20 ft. 15 it. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. Local 151ft. 10ft. 15ft. 15ft. 10ft. 10ft. 10ft. Yard adjacent to 24 ft. 25 it. 30 residentially zoned property. ~ Interior side yard {] 0j 0 C 0 C O Rear yard l~ft. 10~. 10ft. 10ft. 10ft. 10ft. 10 Accessory structure- 5ift. 5 ~. 5 ft. 5 1. 5 ft. 5 't. 5 side/rear setback Minimum building separation: Onestory: I ft. 10ft. 10ft. 15ft. 15ft. 15ft. 15=t. Two stories: 1 ~ ft. 15 '~. 15 Three stories or more 20 rt 20 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft. 25 Maximum height 35 ft. 50 ft. 75 ft. 50 ft. 75 ft. 50 ft. 40 ~t. Maximum percent of lot 21% 30% 30% 30 Yo 50% 40% 40% coverage Minimum required 25% 20% 20% 20~/o 25% 25% 20% landscape0 open space Fence, wall or hedge 6 It. 6 ~t. Not 6 -t. 6 ft. screening outdoor storage- allowed minimum height Fence, wall or hedge 6lft. 8 It. 8 ft. 12 ft. Not 12 ft. 12 ~t. screening outdoor storage- i allowed maximum height Inclu(tes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 · 12 The following Table 17.08,040B provides the development standards for the Commercial/Office and Industrial Districts for a development on a separate lot. Table 17.08.040B Development Standards - Commercial/Office/Industrial Districts Commercial/Development Standards Minimum net lot area (sq. ft,) Target floor area ratio Maximum floor area ratio with intensity bonus as per Section 17.08,050 30,000 sq. ift. 0,25 0.40 For · Development on a Separate Lot L NC CC HT S PO BP 30,000 20,000 40,000 40,000 40,eoo sq. ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. 0.,;0 0.30 0.30 0.50 0.40 1 .D 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.5 Minimum width at required 50 ft. 50 ft. front setPack area Minimum depth 100;ft, 10(: ft. t Minimum frontage on a street 30 ft, 30 ft, Yard area adjacent to a street: Arterial street 25 h. 15 ft. Collector 25 ~t. 10 ft Local 15 ft. 10 ft. Interior side yard 01 C Rear yard 15ft. 10ft. Accessory structure-side/rear 5 ~. 5 -t, setback Yard areas adjacent to 25 ft. 25 ft. I residential~y zoned property. Maximum height 35 ~t. ' 50 ft. Maximum percent of lot 25+/0 30 coverage Minimum required landscaped 25+/0 20~/o open space Fence, wall or hedge- 6 It. 6 1. maximum height Accessory structure- 12 ft. 12 ft. maximum height Fence, wall or hedge 6 I. screening outdoor storage- minimum height Fence, wall or hedge 6 ft. 8 ~t. screening outdoor storage- maximum height ' L 40,C00 sq. fi. 0.z0 1.) 80ft. 10C ft. 80ft. 10C ft. 100ft. 100ft. 1;00Lft'. 120ft. 12(: ft. 120ft. 50 ft. 60 ft. 80 ft. 80 't, 25 ft. ~ ~: 20 ft. ,20 ft. 20 ~. 25 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 't. 15ft. 15h, 10ft. 10ft. 10 ~. 0 0 0 0 0 10ft. 101. 10ft. 10ft. 101. 5ft. 5f. 5ft. 5~. 5f, 30 ft. 30 l' 25 ft. 30 ft. 40 75 ft. 50 1, 75 ft. 50 ft. 50 ~t. 30% 30% 50% 40% 40% 20% 20% 25% 25% 20~ 6ft. 6ft. 6ft. 61. 6ft. 12ft. 12f:. 12ft. 12ft. 12'I. 6ft Not 6ft. 6R. allowed 8 ft. 12 f. Not 12 ft. allowed 12=t. (Ord. 96-19 § 2(EE) (part) and (FF) and 3(B) and (C); Ord. 95-16 § 2 (part); Ord. 98-14 § 3) Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 13 17.08.050 SPECIAL USE REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS. Commercial/Office/industrial Incentives. increase in the Floor Area Ratio. As a part of the process of the review and approval of a development plan or conditional use permit, the planning commission and dty council may consider an increase in the maximum allowal}le intensity as indicated on Table 17.08.040A. The amount of the increased intensity shall not exceed the maximum of the density range or floor area ratios stated in the general plan for the specific land use designation. In addition, the city engineer must determine if the project at the increased intensity does not create unmitigable impacts upon the traffic circulation in the area or overburden the utilities serving the area. The city council shall consider the following factors in determining if an increase in the intensity is justified: The project includes use(s) which provide outstanding and exceptional benefits to the city with respect to the employment, fiscal, social and economic needs of the community. Examples include: the provision of affordable housing with proximity to convenient shopping and employment, accessibility to mass transit facilities, and creative mixtures of land uses, housing types, and densities. The project provides exceptional architectural and landscape design amenities which reflect an attractive image and character for the city. Examples include b~Jt extraordinary architectural design, landscaped entry features (maybe within the public right-of-way,) public trail systems, or public plazas, and recreational features in excess of what is required by this development code. The project provides enhanced public facilities which are needed by the city. Beyond those required mitigations. Examples of such facilities include: the provision of community meeting centers, enhanced transportation improvements, off-site traffic signalization, police or fire stations, public recreation facilities and common parking areas or structures to serve the community. Entertainment Establishments Providing Dancing, Music and Similar Activities. Noise levels shall not ex~.~.ed the standards set forth in the noise element of the general plan or the environmental performance standards of this development code (Section 17.08.070). Dancing, music, and similar entertainment uses shall be limited to between the hours of six p.m. and two a.m. The city may apply additional requirements or limitations depending on the location, surrounding uses and other considerations. Arcades. In consideration of a request for an arcade, the following cdteria will be considered and application material requested. The planning commission shall consider, but not be limited to, the need for adult supervision, hours of operation, proximity to schools and other community uses, compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood and businesses, noise attenuation, bicycle facilities, and interior waiting areas. IncJudes Amenclments aS Of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 14 2. The applicant shall submit with his application, three sets of typed gummed labels, listing the name and address of all businesses within a shopping center and all landowners within a three-hundre{:i*foot radius of the shopping center or arcade. 3. Each application shall contain a description of the types of machines, a floor plan, and hours of operation. Car Washes. A conditional use permit shall be required for all full-service or self-service car washes within the commercial districts. Car washes shall comply with the following critena: 1. Such business shall be located at least two hundred feet from any residential district. 2. Wash bays and vacuum areas shall be screened from public view. 3. Regular monitoring of the facility by an attendant shall be provided during business hours tO control noise, litter, and other nuisances. 4. Hours Of operation shall be limited to seven a.m. to ten p.m., unless otherwise specifically established as a condition of approval. Automatic shut-off of water a~)d electrical systems, except for secudty and fire protection, shall be provided during non-business hours. Permanent Indoor Swap Meet Facilities. 1. Indoor swap meets shall be established only in buildings containing five thousand square feet or more of gross floor area. 2. City business licenses and state seller permits shall be obtained by every tenant operating a stall space. 3. No more than one business license shall be granted per one hundred fifty square feet of building floor area. 4. The minimum average square footage of a partitioned cubicle or stall space (booth) shall be one hundred fifty square feet. The minimum size for an individual stall shall be one hundred square feet, and no more than twenty-five stall spaces shall be permitted to contain one hundred square feet. 5. No adult business, as defined in the Temecula Municipal Code shall be permitted. 6. No loudspeakers or sound equipment which can be heard from exterior or semipublic areas shall be used on the premises. 7. Each stall space shall be partitioned with partition walls at a heigh. t of not less than five feet, six inches. Scissor-type gating shall not be used to separate vendors or vending areas. 8. All floor areas of indoor tenant spaces, shall be covered with a high-grade tile or carpeting. Includes Amen0ments as of June 1. 1999 Chapter 17.08 · 15 9. Aisles shall have a minimum width of seven feet. 10. Security personnel shall be provided during hours of operation. F. Used Motor Vehicle Sales. The minimum lot width of any site supporting a used motor vehicle sales business shall be one hundred feet. 2. The minimum lot area shall be ten thousand sc~uare feet, Buffer walls and landscaping shall be as provided as required for the zoning district in which the use is located. A building containing not less than two hundred square feet shall be maintained on the lot supporting the business. The building shall be a permanent structure; portable buildings or mobilehomes are not permitted. G. Alcoholic Beverage Sales. All businesses or establishments offering the sale of alcoholic beverages, except for the incidental sale of beer and wine at a restaurant, shall require the appropriate license from the state of California and the city and be subject to a conditional use permit. Any automotive service station which proposes to sell beer and wine concurrently with motor vehicle fuel shall require a conditional use permit which permit shall be subject to the provisions of Business and Professions Code Section 23790 et seq. and shall require that: a. The' decision be based on written findings. A denial of an application for a CUP be subject to appeal to the city council in accordance with Section 17.03.090 of this code. The same procedure for noticing, and conducting the CUP hearing that is utilized by the city for all other CUPs be used and provide for all parties to be present and to present evidence. The decision and findings be based on substantial evidence in view of the whole record to justify the ultimate decision. The above businesses shall not be located within five hundred feet of any religious institution, school or public park. The license application shall be reviewed by the city's police services prior to city approval. Trash Collection Areas. Trash collection areas shall be located within a screened enclosure. The enclosure should not be visible from a public street or from any adjacent residential area. Trash collection shall include separate facilities for the recycling of paper, bottles, plastic and aluminum. Additional design requirements are provided in the performance standards of this chapter. Inc. Judes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 16 Outside Storage and Service Areas, Outside storage should be confined to the rear of the principal structure(s), rear two- thirds of the lot, whichever is more rastdctive, All storage areas shall be located on appropriate paving and be screened from public view from any adjoining properties and from the public fights-of-way by appropriately designed wails, fencing and landscaping. Storage on Vacant Lots. When permitted by the zoning district regulations or by a development permit outside storage on a vacant lot shall be screened from public view from any adjoining properties and from the public right-of-way by appropriately designed, walls, fencing and landscaping. Lighting. All lighting fixtures, including spotlights, electrical reflectors and other means of illumination for signs, structures, landscaping, parking, loading, unloading and similar areas, shall be focused, directed and arranged to prevent glare or direct illuminmion on streets or adjoining property. Mechanical Equipment. Mechanical equipment used in the manufacturing process may be required to be enclosed in a building and roof-mounted accessory equipment may ,,be required to be soreened from view, Retail Sales. Retail sales and services that are incidental to permitted use are subject to the following conditions: The operations are contained within the main structure which houses the primary use, The retail sale area occupies no more than fifteen percent of the total building square footage. 3. No retail sales or display of merchandise shall occur outside the structures. Ddve-Thru Facilities. Commercial uses including restaurants, financial institutions or other business providing drive-thru facilities shall be subject to the following requirements. 1. All drive-thru facilities shall require a conditional use permit. Pedestrian walkways should not intersect the ddve-thru aisles. If pedestrian walkways do cross the drive aisles, they shall be clearly marked with paving or striping. Ddve-thru aisle shall have a minimum width of eleven feet on the straight sections and twelve feet on curved portions. For fast food restaurants the drive-thru aisles shall have a sufficient stacking area behind the menu board to accommodate six cars. The speakers shall be located so as to protect adjoining residential areas from excessive noise. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 17 Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Temporary Office Modules. 1. A master plan for development of permanent buildings shall be submitted in conjunction with such request. 2. The design of the office modules shall have a permanence, as mu~h as practicable. This shall include such things as screening temporary foundations, screening utility equipment, and using overhangs, walkways and stepped roofs to mitigate the temporary appearance. 3. The approval of temporary office modules shall require necessary street improvements, grading, drainage facilities and landscaping. Outdoor Sales of Merchandise. All businesses shall be conducted complete within an enclosed building. The following outdoor sales and commercial activities may be permitted to operate outdoors, within their respective districts and subject to any required reviews and permits: 1. Automobile, boat, trailer, camper, and motorcycle sales and rentals (subject to a conditional use permit); .. 2. Building material, supplies and equipment rental and sales (subject to a conditional use permit); 3. Fruit and vegetable stands (required temporary use permit); 4. Horticultural nurseries (subject to a conditional use permit); 5. Gasoline pumps, oil racks and accessory items when located on pump islands; 6. Outdoor display of merchandise as accessory to current on-site business (subsection Q of this section); 7. Outdoor recreation uses; 8. Parking lot and sidewalk sales (subject to temporary use permit and regulations set forth in this chapter); and 9. Other activities and uses similar to those above as determined by the director of planning. Outdoor Display of Merchandise Accessory to Current On-Site Business. Any outdoor display must be done in conjunction with the business being conducted within the building and shall comply with the following regulations: 1. The items being displayed shall be of the same type that are lawfully displayed and sold inside the building on the premises. 2. The aggregate display area shall not exceed twenty-five percent of the linear frontage of the store front or ten linear feet, whichever is greater. 3. Items shall not project more than four feet from the store front. Chapter 17.08-18 No item, or any portion thereof, shall be displayed on public proper'W; provided, however, items may be displayed within the public fight-of-way if an encroachment permit has first been procured from the city. Items shall be displayed only during the hours that the business conducted inside the 'building on the premises is open for business, No item shall be displayed in a manner that: causes a safety hazard; obstructs the entrance to any building; interferes with, or impedes the flow of pedestrian or vehicle traffic; is unsightly or creams any other condition that is detrimental to the appearance of the premises or any surrounding property; or in any other manner is detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or causes a public nuisance. Flag Poles. A maximum height of seventy five feet. Self-Storage or Mini-Warehouse Facilities. 1. Development Standards The following standards shall be applied to all new self-storage or mini-wareho,u. se facilities: The design of the facility shall be compatible with the surrounding area in terms of design, bulk and mass, materials and colors. Building exteriors shall not be corrugated metal or similar surface, but shall be of finished quality. Metal containers are prohibited. In commercial zoning districts the rear and side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 10 feet. In industrial zoning districts no rear or side yard setbacks are required. The director of planning may increase the setbacks to a maximum of 25 feet when adjacent to an existing residential development project. The front yard setback shall maintain the setback for the underlying zoning classification. c. The maximum lot coverage shall be 65 percent. The development site shall provide a minimum of 10% landscaped open space for a project within commercial districts. In industrial districts, the total landscaping shall be equal to the required setback areas, No interior landscaping is required, but the setback areas shall be landscaped. e. A manager's residential unit may be provided, but is not required. Required parking spaces may not be rented as, or used for, vehicular storage. However, additional parking area may be provided for vehicles, boats, buses, trailers, etc., provided that the storage area is adequately screened from public view with enhanced landscaping, decorative walls, fences, or other methods as deemed appropriate by the director. IncluPes Amenclments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 19 2. Performance and Use Regulations Any business activity, other than rental of storage units, including the on-site sale of merchand~.e or garage sales, and transfer/storage businesses which utilize vehicles as part of the business is prohibited. No servicing or repair of motor vehicles, boats, trailers, lawn mowers, or any similar equipment is permitted. Storage units shall not be used for the storage of ~ammable liquids, highly combustible or explosive materials. or hazardous chemicals. Truck or vehicle rental is prohibited without obtaining all necessary approvals subject to the Development Code Schedule of Permitted Uses. Automobile, Motorcycle and Truck Dealership Landscape Standards. Landscape Standards. The following standards shall be applied to all new automobile, motorcycle and truck dealerships or substantial alterations to existing automobile, motorcycle and truck dealerships. Display areas: a minimum five foot (5') wide landscape island shall be required at the end of all display area lanes adjacent to the main entnj drive lane. A one-foot strip, made of concrete or other materials acceptable to the Community Development Director, shall be located next to the curb immediately adjacent to the end display parking space. Said landscape islands shall have a mixture of trees, shrubs and groundcover shall have automatic irrigation. Street frontages. All portjons of the property which have street frontage shall meet one of the following criteria: A minimum of twelve feet (12') of landscaping shall be provided, measureri frnm the rear of the sidewalk to the display area length and shall be surrounded by low growing shrubs, groundcover and turf; or A minimum of twenty feet (20') of landscaping shall be provided, measured from the rear of the sidewalk to the display area, with display area allowed to encroach into eight feet (8') of the landscape area. a) Display areas shall be paved with concrete, a maximum of twenty (20) feet in length and shall be surrounded by low growing shrubs, groundcover and turf. b) The number of display areas allowed shall be calculated in the following manner: 3 display spaces per 100 linear feet of street frontage. Fractional spaces (.5 and over) shall be rounded up. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 20 17,08.060 A. c) No display area shall be located immediately adjacent to another display area. Landscaping sl"iafi be provided between display areas, Development adjacent to existing and proposed residential uses. All portions of the property which abut an existing or proposed residential use shall have a minimum ten foot (10') wide landscape buffer. All other portions of the property which do not abut a street or existing or proposed residential uses shall have a minimum five foot (5') wide landscape buffer. All customer parking on the site shall be clearly identified, either through special paint (i.e. curb painting) or signage and shall be subject to the landscape requirements contained in Section 17.24.050H of the Development Code. Service bays shall not be visible from a public street and shall be adequately screened from adjacent residential uses. inventory and vehicle-in-repair storage areas on the site shall be clearly identified and will not need to be internally landscaped. If they are located on the perimeter or adjacent to residential development or sensitive areas they shall be screened in the manner discussed above..(Ord. 96-19 §§ 2(GG)~(II); Ord. 95-16 § 2 (part); Ord 97-17 § 3(C), § 10; Ord. 98-17 § 2) LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS. Plant Materials. Landscape design and construction shall emphasize drought-tolerant materials when possible. Street trees shall be planted at a minimum of one tree per thirty linear feet of street frontage. Trees shall be a minimum fifteen-gallon size at the time of planting. Shrubs shall be a minimum of five gallons at the time of planting. All landscape materials shall be subject to approval by the city for appropriateness and consistency with the water efficient landscape ordinance. includes AmenOments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17,08 - 21 Irrigation Requirements. All landscaped areas shall include an automation irngation system approved by the city that provides adequate coverage and irrigation. Efficient water conservation systems such as drip irrigation systems should be used. Property owners are responsible for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous planted areas within the public nght-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free of weeds and debds and maintained in a healthy, growing condition. and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing or trimming. Landscape Design Standards. Setback areas that are not used for vehicular and pedestrian access shall be landscaped. In addition, all interior courts open space areas and boundary areas that are not covered with buildings, pavement, or other impervious surface shall be landscaped. Areas proposed for development in another phase occurring not within six months of the completion of the previous phase shall be temporarily seeded and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control° Landscape designs shall consider such factors as the function of the landscape elements, consistency with the building and its architectural design, compatibility to the area, special design features, herruing, use of hardscape or nonorganic materials. drought-tolerant plant materials for water conservation, and utilize planting (i.e., combination of shrubs, trees and climbing vines) to break up large building masses and perimeter walls and fencing. The use or combination of berming, landscape materials, low level walls and structures, shall be used to screen parking areas, loading areas, trash enclosures, and utilities from public view. lope banks five feet or greater in vertical height with slopes between 5:1 and 2:1 shall, at a minimum, be irrigated and landscaped with an appropnate groundcover for erosion control. Slope banks five feet or greater in vertical height with slopes greater than or equal to 3:1 shall. at a minimum, be irrigated and landscaped with appropriate groundcover for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: One fifteen-gallon or larger tree per each six hundred square feet of slope area; ii. One gallon or larger shrub for each one hundred square feet of slope area; and iii. Appropriate groundcover. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 * 22 Slope banks in excess of ten feet in vertical height with slopes greater or equal to 2:1 shall also provide one five-gallon or larger tree per each one thousand sduare feet of slope area in addition to the requirements of suPsection (C)(5)(a) of this section. All trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary the slope plane. Slope planting required by this section sinall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. Where trees are planted in pedestrian areas, a protective tree grate shall be provided. Trees and shrubs should be planted and maintained so that they do not interfere with utilities, light standards, sight lines for traffic safety, encroach on adjacent property, or obstruct to the solar access rights of adjoining property owners. (Ord. 96-19 §§ 2 (J J) and 3(D); Ord. 95-16 § 2 (part)) 17.08.070 COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to provide for uniform performance standards and criteria for the design of commercial buildings within the city in accordance with the recognition that the quality and compatibility of building design directly impacts the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the community. Moreover, quality and compatible building design promotes and preserves the stability of the city through orderly growth and enhancement of a quality business environment. These purposes are further achieved through the following: The enhancement of the physical character of the community and quality of life through sound planning and coordinated development. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 23 2. The balancing of aesthetic design qualities with functional development. The preservation and enhancement of the physical character, integrity and quality of commercial/office/industrial areas. The enhancement and protection of property values and the adherence to the goals and policies of the general plan. The stimulation of improvements and maintenance of surrounding properties, thereby preventing and reversing the effects of urban blight. General Performance Standards. Developments in the commercial/office/industrial distncts should be designed to provide variety and visual interest while still creating a unified overall image. Performance standards to achieve this image include, but are not limited to the following: Use creative entry treatments with such features as canopies, awnings, cornices or atdums. Use a vadety of complementary colors and avoid the use of just one color and d~.rk colors. 3, Use various window shapes and sizes. 4. Vary the building shapes by using curved or angled walls. Separate buildings or accessory structures should be designed as an integral part of the primary building by using complementary materials, common architectural elements, and special landscape design techniques, Use a consistent design theme throughout the project. Employ complementary or consistent details, shapes, materials and colors, In addition, consistent signage should be provided with complementary colors. lettering, placement and materials. The bulk of the building should be divided to reduce the apparent scale and provide visual interest. Box-like designs should be avoided. This can be accomplished through the following: Use variations in the building footprints and facades. Such variations should be proportional to the overall bulk of the buildings with variations being greater for large buildings. Use a variety of shapes and forms including architectural projections such as roof overhangs, box windows, stainNays, balconies, and cantilevers that create shadows on the buildings. Use contrasting vertical and horizontal elements that help to break the visual mass of the facade into smaller areas, d. Divide the bulk of the roof into smaller areas to reduce the apparent scale of the building and provide visual interest. The roof can be designed with varying heights and slopes to contrast with a flat roof. includes Arnen~ments as of June 1. 1999 Creamier 17.08 - 24 Where the character or scale is identifiable, new development should be designed to maintain that character and to be compatible with that scale. In areas where the charaCter is not identifiable, new development should be aesigned to be complementary or consistent with desirable charactenstics of the surrounding area in a way that contributes to the establishment of a positive character and scale for the area through the use of similar or complementary materials, colors, or building forms and design details. Development should be designed to minimize detrimental impacts on surrounding properties, including, but not limited to, visual. noise, air quality and other environmental impacts. Strategies for minimizing the impacts include protecting residential areas adjacent to commercial development through screening of circulation areas, loading areas and trash collection points or other areas that could potentially be disruptive to the residential character of the adjacent area. Commercial Development Performance Standards. 1. Circulation. Limit egress and ingress to commercial areas to common entrance points. Orient most of the vehicular access from side streets rather than directly from major arterial. Separate vehicular and pedestdan circulation systems should be provided if possible. Pedestrian linkages between uses in the commercial areas should be provided. In shopping centers, provide separate pedestrian walkways from parking areas to the major commercial tenants. Whenever possible, parking lots should be designed to separate vehicular circulation routes from parking aisles. 2. Architectural Design. Large buildings should be designed in such a manner to avoid excessive mass and bulk. This can be accomplished by dividing the building form, varying the height of the roof structure and by creating offsets in the exterior walls. The lower floors of commercial structures should not have blank walls. Windows, trellises, wall articulation, and entrances can provide relief along expansive wall surfaces. Upper portions of multistory commercial structures can be stepped-back to reduce the bulk and mass of the buildings and to preserve pedestrian scale. 3. Site Planning and Design. Pedestrian amenities in commercial developments should be provided to enhance the opportunities for pedestrian circulation and social activities. Strategies to achieve this high degree of pedestrian orientation and activity include, but are not limited to, the following: IncJucles Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 25 D+ Orient the design of the buildings to the scale of pedestrian. First floor uses should be palmadly retail commercial, restaurants, or public use areas. Windows and door entrances should be located on the ground floor to encourage pedestrian activity. Large expanses of uninterrupted wall surfaces should not be permitted. ii. Provide covered or enclosed walkways between the buildings on the site. ill Provide pedestrian plazas and sidewalks of sufficient width adjacent to buildings along with amenities such as special lighting, interesting paving materials, landscaping benches and other street furniture. Whenever possible, new structures should be clustered. This creates plazas or pedestrian malls instead of rows of commercial or "S!rip commercial." Separate structures can be linked with arcades, trellis or clearly defined walkway. Minimize conflicts between pedestrian and vehicular traffic as much as possible by odenting pedestrian circulation areas parallel with the ~ow,.of traffic through the parking areas. Loading facilities shall not be located in front of structures without screening. These facilities are most appropriately located at the rear of the structures where screening can be minimal or not needed. Open spaca areas should be concentrated or clustered into larger more meaningful spaces at areas of significant activity, rather than dispersed into small areas of low impact or on the periphery of the site. Compatibility. When a commercial structure is located adjacent to a residential neighborhood additional setbacks from the residentially zoned area shall be required. Multistory buildings may be stepped back to preserve the scale of the adjacent low dse structures. Industrial Development Performance Standards. 1, Circulation. The circulation plan for an industrial development should clearly differentiate circulation plans for employees, visitors, truck traffic, loading areas and pedestrian circulation. Facilities should be provided, when appropriate, for access to bus routes, bus stops. c. Bicycle parking areas should be provided for employees. Walkways and paths should be provided opportunities for v~alking or jogging for employees. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 26 2. Architectural Design. Long unarticulated walls should be avoided. Wall planes should not extend in a continuous direction for greater than fifty feet without an offset. b. Outstanding building and roof forms, and distinctive windows patterns. c. Blank well elevations should be avoided on street frontages. d, Highly reflective surfaces are discouraged especially at the ground level. Wall materials should be selected that are resilient to damage from machinery. If rolling shutter doors are required, the doors should be mounted on the inside of the building to create an uncluttered appearance from the exterior. Site Planning and Design. Placement of structures which creates opportunities for plazas, courts. or gardens, lunch areas for employees with amenities such as outdoor seating and garden areas. Design features which contribute to the design character of a project may include: ceremonial entrance ddves, enhanced visitor parking areas, highlighted visitor entrance areas, decorative pedestrian plazas and walkways, focal landscape treatments, site sculptures. employee recreational facilities (exercise courses, jogging paths). In order to provide security, lighting should be provided at a minimum illumination of one footcandle across parking areas and two footcandles at entrances. Lighting fixtures should be shielded to confine the spread of light to adjoining Properties. The desi~tn of the lighting fixtures should be compatible with the architecture of the building. Loading areas should generally not be located in the front of the building where it is difficult to adequately screen the loading areas from public view. These areas are most appropriately located in the rear or side of the property so that the loading docks and doors are not directly in the public view. When walls or fences are necessary in the frontage of the property to conceal storage and mechanical equipment areas, walls should be architecturally treated on both sides and should be designed to complement and blend with the architectural design of the building. Long expanses of fencing or walls should be avoided unless offsets are provided, height variations, and combinations of materials are used to avoid monotony. Landscaping along the fences and at specific pockets should be provided. Includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Cl~apter 17.08 - 27 ii. Screening for outdoor storage should be a minimum, of eight feet and a maximum of twelve feet high depending on the height of the material being screened. Exterior storage should be in the portions of the site least visible from public view. iii. Chain link fencing with wood or metal slatting between the links is acceptable for areas that are not visible from the street. iv. When screening is required, a combination of screening techniques may be used, including solid masonry walls, landscaped Perins and landscaping. Mechanical or other utility equipment shall be screened whether it is located on the roof, side of building or on the ground. The method of screening shall be architecturally integrated in terms of materials, color and form. Roof top equipment should be integrated into the design of the building. Compatibility. Where industrial uses are adjacent to nonindustrial uses, appropriate buffering techniques such as increased setbacks, screening, herins and landscaping must be provided to mitigate any negative effects of indust.rial operations. (Ord. 96-19 § 2(KK); Oral. 95-16 § 2 (part)) 17.08.080 ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS. Development projects and buildings should be designed to minimize detrimental impacts on surrounding properties, including, but not limited to, visual, noise, air quality and other environmental impacts. Strategies for minimizing the impacts include protecting residential areas adjacent to industrial development through screening of circulation areas, loading areas and trash collection points or other areas that could potentially be disruptive to the residential character of the adjacent area. Noise. Any existing or proposed uses which generate sounds that are or may be considered a nuisance or hazard to any adjacent property due to the intermittence,.beat, frequency, or shrillness of the sounds, shall have the source of the noise muffled or otherwise controlled so that the noise is subdued to acceptable levels. Construction work is exempt from this requirement during the period a valid building permit is in force. Particulate Matter. Any existing or proposed use shall not discharge excessive particulate matter into the atmosphere for a period that exceeds three minutes in any one hour. The following standards establish maximum acceptable levels: Smoke. The density reading designated as Number 1 on the United States Bureau of Mines Ringelmann Chart is the maximum acceptable level. Dust, Dirt and Ash. Any level which can or may cause damage to the health of any individual, animal, or plant or physical soiling or discoloration of the surfaces of any structure or material which is located outside the property lines of the lot or parcel from which the particulate matter is emanating. includes Amendments as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17.08 - 28 Odors, Toxics and Noxious Matter. Any existing or proposed use which produces odors, toxic gases or noxious matter in such quantities as can or may be readily detectable at any point outside the property lines of the premises and when such emissions are or may become a public nuisance or hazard, the use shall be modified to prevent such releases. Vibration. Any existing or proposed use which generates vibrations that can or may be considered a nuisance or hazard on any adjacent property shall be cushioned or isolated to prevent generation of such vibrations. Glare, Any existing or proposed use that constitutes or may be considered a nuisance or hazard on any adjacent property due to emitlance of excessive light or glare from mechanical or chemical processes or from reflective materials used or stored on the site shall be shielded or otherwise modified to prevent such emissions. Heat, Radiation and Electromagnetic Disturbances. Any existing or proposed use that can or may generate excessive heat, electrical disturbances or radioactive emissions that can or may be considered hazardous or a nuisance shall be shielded, contained or otherwise modified to prevent such generations, disturbances or emissions. (Ord. 95-16 § 2 (part)) Includes AmenclrnenLs as of June 1, 1999 Chapter 17,08 - 29 EXltlBIT C NON-EXHaUSTIVE LIST OF EXISTING REGULATIONS F:x, DEPTS~PLANNING'STAFFRPT,273PA99 Devel~m~,t 27 EXItIBIT C NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF EXISTING REGULATIONS 2. 3. 4. 4. 5. 6, 7, 8. General Plan The Development Code (Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code) The Subdivision Ordinance (Title 16 of the Temecula Municipal Code) Citywide Design Guidelines Habitat Conservation Ordinance Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance Uniform Building Code, as locally adopted Uniform Fire Code, as locally adopted Standard Drawings for Public Works Construction F:~DEPTS~LANNING~TAFFR.PT~273pAg9 Develo[m~e~ EXHIBIT D CURB CUT ACTIVITY F:~DEPTS~PLANNINO~TAFFRPT~3PA99 Developm~ Agreementd~ 29 O tEL. EXHIBIT E JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD STORM DRAIN F:~DEPTS~PLANNING~TAFFRPTa73pA99 Devele~ Agteemtnt,doc 30 6/, ~'~X~IH. O O Floodw~y EXI:IIR1T F WETLAND MITIGATION AREA F:~DEPTS~PLANNINGxSTAFFRPT~73pP~9 Deve|e!:,meut ,~doc 31 / / i 'i iJ L EXHIRIT G RESTAURANT PROHIBITION AREA F;~DEPTS~PLANNING~TAFFRPT~273pA99 D~v~|qmm~ A~m~Ldo~ 32 EXHI~IT H WETLAND ACCESS LICENSE Recording requested by and when recofo~:t, mail to: c~ aerk City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 ExemlX from Recording Fee Govt Code Sec. 27383 ~ of Temecuta By: A.P.N. 950-110-022 DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX IS NONE. Revenue and Taxation Code ~ 11922 LICENSE AGREEMENT The CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and, Pals Rainbow, LLC hereinafier referred to as "Grantor" hereby agree as follows: I. The right is hereby granted to City or City's designee, contractor or subcontractor to enter upon and use the real property of Grantor in the City of Temectda, State of California, described as follows: Being portions of the Temecula Rancho, in the Count7 of Riverside, State of Califronia, which Ran~ho was patented to Luis Vignes by patent recorded in Book 1, Page 37 of Patents, in the office of the Count7 Recorder of San Diego CountT, Califronia, also being a portion of Parcel 43 as described in deed =o Kacor RealtT, Inc. recorded September 29, 1977, as Instrument No. 192314 on file in the office of the County Recorder of said Riverside Coun=y. For all purposes necessary and convenient to facilitate and accomplish the construction and maintenance of the wetland creation area described further as Parcel "B" of Order of Possession, Case No. 315426, Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside filed July 24, 1998. A three- (3) day written notice shall be given to Grantor prior to using the rights herein granted. The term of this agreement shall be five- (5) years ~om the date of said notice; or acceptance of the wetland creation area by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and California Department of Fish and Game. whichever is less. It is agreed that the City shall enter upon Grantors property where appropriate. or designated by the Grantor. for the purpose of getting construction and maintenance equipment, and a temporary water service to and fi'om the wetland creation area. City agrees to use reasonable care on Grantor's property. in the process of performing such activities. lof3 2. The right to emer upon and use Grantors property includes the right to remove and dispose of real and personal property located thereon. Grantor reserves the right to remove salvageable real and personal property on or before the expiration of the three- (3) day notice. 3. At the termination of the period of tree of Grantors property by City, but before its relinquisliment to Grantor, debris generated by City's use will be removed and the surface will be graded and l~ft in a neat condition. Each party hereby indenmifies and saves the other parties harmless fi'om any and all liability, damage, expense, c~nc~s of action, suits, claims, Hem, or judgements arising from injury to person or prolm'ty and occurring on its own parcel unless caused by the act or neglect of any other patty hereto and any liens arising from construction or maintenance. 5. Grantor h~reby warrants that he/she is the owner of said property described above and that be./sl~ has the fight to grant City permission to enter upon and use the properly. This agreement is the result of negotiations between the parties hereto. This agreement is intended by the parties as a final expression of their understanding with respect to the matters herein and is a complete and exclusive statement of the terms and conditions thereof. .. 7. This agreement shall not be changed, modified, or amended except upon the written consent of the parties hereto. 8. This agreement supersedes any and all other prior agreements or understanding, oral or written, in connection therewith except for that certain agroement entitled. 9. Grantor, his assigns and successors in interest, shall be bound by all the terms and cenditinm contained in this agreement and all the parties thereto shall be jointly and s~verally liable thereunder. I 0. The rights and obligations as described herein shall create mutual benefits and servitude upon the parcels running with the land. This agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit oftha parties hereto, their respective heirs, representatives, tenants, successors and/or assiSm~. and shall bind ev~, person having any fee, leasehold, or other interest in a parcel, to the extent that covenant provisions apply to the parcel. IN WITNESS THEREOF, these presents have executed this instrument this day of ,19 Signature Signature Print Name Print Name 2of3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA} SS. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE} On , before me the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of California, personally appeared personally k~own to me (or prm.'ed to me on the basis of satisfnct~ evidence) to be me p~m(s) w'nose name(s) is/a~e ~_,~.,~ibed to the wi~in inslr~nent and actmowledged to me mat h~sh~hey executed the same in his/her/their authorized capeciW(ies), and that by hiNher/their signanne(s) cn the inslnnnent ~m per~cn(s), or the 6~tlty upa~ behalf of which pasm(s) ~_~, ex_-~__ff,'~ the insmentor, WTTNESS my hand ~nd of~ciel seal. Signature 3of3 EXHIBIT M-I EASEMENT QUIT CALIM Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 400 Temecula, CA 92591 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description Pala Road Vacation Revised August 18, 1999 March 24, 1999 JN 15-100053- M1 Page 1 of I That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Pala Road as described in Strip 1 and Cupeno Lane as described in Strip 3 of an easement deed recorded May 16, 1990 as Instrument No. 180581 of Official Records in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County: bounded on the North by the southerly line of State Highway 79 as shown on Tract No. 20319 filed in Book 181, Pages 54 through 58 of Maps in said Office of the Riverside County Recorde..r; bounded on the West by a curve having a radius of 933.00 feet and being concentric with and 12.00 feet easterly from a curve in the easterly line of Pala Road as described in Parcel "A" of an Order of Possession filed July 24, 1998 as Case No. 315426 in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside; and bounded on the South by the following described line: COMMENCING at GPS Station PINYON 1 as shown on a map filed in Book 102, Pages 50 through 65 of Records of Surveys in said Of:rice of the Riverside County Recorder, said Station having coordinates of N 2166428.3493 and E 6498294.9778 based on the California State Plane Coordinate System, Nad 83, Epoch 1995.5; thence South 76°30'20.89" West 210,105.87 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence North 80°49'34" West 92.79 feet; thence South 78°06'16" West 70.41 feet to a point on a curve in the westerly line of said Pala Road (110.00 feet wide) as described in said Strip 1: said c.rve being concave easterly and having a radius of 1055.00 feet. RESERVING therefrom an easement for slope purposes over that portion included within Parcel "M" of said Order of Possession ~ed July 24, 1998. CONTAINING: 0.966 Acres, ,more or less. EXHIBIT .... ttached and by this reference made a pan hereof. R nd L. Mathe, P.L.S. 6185 My license expires 3/31/02. 100 0 100 200 500 GRAPHIC SCALE iN FEET S72'58'0146"E 225%398.5576 LAKE 6201355.2919 MATHEWS 649e ]10562.00 (GRID) //,,,C/L STATE HIGHSNAY pER TRACT NO. 20319 / 55'r~~~~55' i I 55' \ 79 POC P~NYON 1 2166428.3493 7<:9 4 v DATA TABLE 1 N66'26'34"W -- 31,45' 2 05'08'06" 1055.00' 94,55' 3 S78'06'16"W -- 70.41' 4 NB0'49'34"W -- 92,79' 5 2r50'56" 945.00' 360.36' 6 N09'04'46"W -- 12,15' 7 N79'01'41"E -- 2.75' 8 03'54'44" 1571,00' 107,27' 9 N09'04'46"W -- I2,18' 10 07'49'27" 1055.00' !44,07' !I N24'07'25"E -- 33,09' 12 N70'10'lg"E -- 20,84' 13 03'44'23" 933.00' 60,90' 14 N70*10'lg"E -- 10,48' LXHIkil I "~" PALA ROAD VACAT ~ ON REVISED 8/18/99 I MAY 24, 1999 \ \ \ PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF: RAYMOND L. MATHE, L.S. 6185 EXPIRES 3-31-02 PALA ROAD PER STRIP I, INST. NO. 180581,0.R. (5-16-90) <~CUPENO LANE PER STRIP 3,INST. NO. 180581,0.R. (5-16-90) SHEET I OF 1 SHEET 15100053-M1 E / ± EXHIBIT M-:2 EASEMENT QUIT CLAIM (PALA ROAD VACATION) F:~DEPTS~PLANN1NG~TAFFRPT~273PA99 Develclmma Agrmm~doc Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 400 Temecula, CA 92591 Revised August 18, 1999 May 24, 1999 JN 15-100053- M2 Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Descrintion Pala Road/Cuneno Lane Vacation That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula. County of Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Pala Road and Cupeno Lane: bounded on the North by the southerly line of State Highway 79 as shown on Tract No. 20319 filed in Book 181, Pages 54 through 58 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County;, bounded on the West by the easterly line of said Tract No. 20319; bounded on the South by the nonheriy line of Cupeno Lane (60.00 feet wide) as depicted on Exhibit "B" for Parcel "D" of an Order of Possession filed July 24, 1998 as Case No. 315426 in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside; hounded on the Northeast by a line parallel with and 12.00 feet southwesterly from a line shown as "North 54°19'31" West 99.02 feet" in Parcel "J" of said Order of Possession; and hounded on the general easterly side by the following described line: BEGINNING at the intersection of said parallel line with a curve in the easterly line of Pala Road concave easterly and having a radius of 220.92 feet as shown on a map ~ed in Book 54, Pages 89 and 90 of Records of Surveys in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder, a radial line of said curve from said point bears South 6 l°32'52"East; thence along said curve southerly 211.36 feet through a central angle of 54°48'59'' to the northerly line of Cupeno Lane (60.00 feet wide ) as described in Strip 3 of a document recorded May 16, 1990 as Instrument No. 180581 of Official Records in said Office of Riverside County Recorder; Thence along said northerly line North 70°10'19" East 78.33 feet; thence South 16°31'19" West 14.59 feet to said northerly line of Cupeno Lane (60.00 feet wide) as depicted on Exhibit "B" of Parcel "D" of said Order of Possession and THE POINT OF TERMINATION of the described line. Legal Description Pain Road/Cupeno Lane Vacation Revised August 18, 1999 May 24, 1999 JN 15-100053-M2 Page 2 of 2 RESERVING therefrom an easement for slope purposes over that portion included within Cupeno Lane (60.00 feet wide) as described in said Strip 3 of a document recorded May 16, 1990 as Instrument No. 180581 of Official Records. ALSO, RESERVING therefrom an easement for slope purposes over that portion included within said Parcel "J" of said Order of Possession filed July 24, 1998. CONTAINING: 1.570 Gross Acres EXHIBIT "B' attached and by this reference made a part hereof. Ron~~LMathe, P.L.S. 6185 My license expires 3/31/02. 130 130 200 3C0 _:SALE ZN FEET / C/L ~ N10"I4'O~"E ~ ~ S03'17'13"W / 'a) " ,,r~, / STATE HIGHWAY ~E~ TRACT NO, 203'9 "N54" 19'31 "W ',- 799.02"' PER r- PCL, "j" CAt-~ 79 (~PALA ROAD PER PCL. 4 (7-12-73) [NST NO. 91A36,0.R. (7-12-73) <~)PALA ROAD PER RS 54/89-90 Q:)PORTION OF STRIP iNST. NO. 180581,0.R. (5-16-90) fO~x/. 7 1 06'56'52" 157100' 190.50' 2 S54'17'24"E -- 92.12' 5 54"48'59" 220.92' 211.38' 4 NTO"lO'lg"E -- 78,33* 5 S16'31'19"W -- 14,59' 6 11'09'12" 270.00' 52,56' 7 S74'54'46"W -- 169,45' 8 62'48'46" 30500' 334.37' 9 NOB'43'36"E -- 36.71' TOTAL PARCEL='570 ~CRES PREPARED DER THE SUPER ON OF: ~MATHE, L.S. 6185 EXPIRES 3-51-02 EXHIBIT "B" PALA RQAD/CUPENO LANE VACATION REVISED 8/18/99 MAY 24, 1999 SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEET E:ALE: 1"=100' 15100053-M2 EXHIBIT M-3 OWNER'S PURCHASE OF CITY OF TEMECULA REAL PROPERTY F:~DEPTS~PLANNING~TAFFRPT~73pA99 Devele~m~t Agr~mntdo~ 36 Robert Bein. William Frost & Associates 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 400 Temecula. CA 92591 Revised September 14. 1999 May 24, 1999 JN 15-100053- M3 Page 1 of 1 EXHIBIT "A" Leeal Descrintion Pala Road Quitclaim That certain parcel of land situated in the City. of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California. being those portions of Pala Road: bounded on the North by the southerly line of State Highway 79 as shown on Tract No. 20319 filed in Book 181, Pages 54 through 58 of Maps in the Office of the County. Recorder of said Riverside County.; bounded on the West by the easterly line of said Tract No. 20319: bounded on the South by the northerly line of Cupeno Lane (60.00 feet wide) as depicted on Exhibit "B" for Parcel "D" of an Order. of Possession filed July 24, 1998 as Case No. 315426 in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside; bounded on the Northeast by a line parallel with and 12.00 feet southwesterly from a line shown as "North 54°19'31" West 99.02 feet" in Parcel "J' of said Order of Possession; and bounded on the East by a curve in the easterly line of Pala Road, concave easterly and having a radius of 220.92 feet as shown on a map filed in Book 54, Pages 89 and 90 of Records of Surveys in said Office of the Riverside Coun.ty Recorder. RESERVING therefrom an easement for slope purposes over that portion included within Cupeno Lane (60.00 feet wide) as described in Strip 3 of a document recorded May 16, 1990 as Instrument No. 180581 in said Office of Riverside County Recorder. ALSO, RESERVING therefrom an easement for slope purposes over that portion included within said Parcel "J" of said Order of Possession filed July 24, 1998. CONTAINING: 1.549 Gross Acres 0.644 Acres in Area "A' per Exhibit "B" 0.905 Acres in Area "B" per Exhibit "B" EXHIBIT "B" attached and by this reference made a part hereof. Ra~mm~nd L. Mathe, P.L.S. 6185 My license expires 3/31/02. O / ~ NlO'14'OS"E ~"c~T" 0 'CO 200 GRAPHIC SCALE iN FEET STATE HIGHWAY 79 PER TRACT NO, ~ :9'31"W 99.02' PER PCL."j" OF SUPERIOR COURT CASE NO. 315426. [~]INDICATES PORTfON OF ROAD EASEMENT PER STRIP 3 OF INST. NO. 1805810.R. DATA TABLE N54'17'24"W -- 92.12' 57"45'22" 220.92' 222.69' N74'54'48"E -- 153.74' 52'48'46" 305.00' 534.37' NOB'43'36"E -- 36.71' 06°56'52'' 1571,00' 190,50' TOTAL PARCEL=I. 549 ACRES AREA <Z) =0644 ACRES AREA <~> =0.905 ACRES EXHIBIT "B" PALA ROAD QU I T CLA I M REVISED 9/14/99 I MAY 24, ~999 PREPARED UN R THE HE. L.S. 6T85 EXPIRES 5-31-02 SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEET SCALE: 1"=100' 15100053-M3 EXHIBIT M-4 ADDITIONAL PALA ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY F:~DEPTS~LANNING~STAFFRPT~3pA99 Develcpme~ Agr~eme~L~oc Robert Bein. William Frost & Associates 27555 Ynez Road. Suite 400 Temecula. CA 92591 August 18, 1999 J.N. 15-100053-M4 Page 1 of 3 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description Pala Road Right of Way Those certain parcels of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, being those portions of the Temecula Rancho patented to Lais Vignes by patent recorded in Book l, Page 37 of Patents in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, California, described as follows: Parcel 1 BEGINNING at the most northwesterly corner of Parcel "B" as described in an Order of Possession filed July 24, 1998 as Case No. 315426 in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside: thence along the southwesterly line of said Parcel "B", the westerly line of Parcel "A" of said Case No. 315426 and the northwesterly line of Parcel "F" of said Case No. 315426 through the following courses: South 54°17'24" East 99.02 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve concave easterly and having a radius of 1055.00 feel a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 72°43'51" East; thence along said curve southerly 160.85 feet through a central angle of 08°44'09"; thence non-tangent from said curve South 17°35'51" West 19.13 feet to the northerly line of Cupeno Lane (60.00 feet wide) as described in Strip 3 of a document recorded May 16, 1990 as Instrument No. 180581 of Official Records in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County; thence leaving said northwesterly line of Parcel "F", along said northerly line of Cupeno Lane South 70°10'19" West 11.91 feet; thence North 16°31'19'' East 19.28 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve concentric with said curve in the westerly line of said Parcel "A" and having a radius of 1067.00 feel a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 63°59'32" East: Legal Description Pala Road Right of Way August 18, 1999 JN 15-100053-M4 Page 2 of 3 thence along said curve northerly 157.02 feet through a central angle of 08o25'54" to a line parallel with and 12.00 feet southwesterly from said southwesterly line of Parcel "B"; thence non-tangent from said curve, along said parallel line North 54017'24" West 113.61 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve in the southerly line of State Highway 79 as shown on Tract No. 20319 filed in Book 181, Pages 54 through 58 of Maps in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder, a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 03°17'13" East; thence along said curve and southerly line easterly 22.13 feet through a central angle of 00°48'26" to the POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 3370 square feet. more or less. Parcel 2 BEGINNING at the most northeasterly corner of Parcel "C" as described in an Order of Possession filed July 24, 1998 as Case No. 315426 in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside; thence along the southeasterly line of said Parcel "C"and the easterly line of Parcel "A" of said Case No. 315426 through the following courses: South 34026'46" West 71.98 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve concave easterly and having a radius of 945.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 71°01'17" East: thence along said curve southerly 438.79 feet through a central angle of 26°36'15" to a point on a non-tangent curve in the easterly line of Pala Rd. ( 110.00 feet wide) as described in Strip 1 of a document recorded May 16. 1990 as Instrument No. 180581 of Official Records in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder, a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 56~21'27'' East; thence leaving said easterly line of Parcel "A", along said curve and easterly line of Pala Road as described in Strip 1 northerly 58.75 feet through a central angle of 03°11'27" to a point on a non-tangent curve concentric with said curve in the easterly line of Parcel "A' and having a radius of 933.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 47055'37" East; thence along a line parallel and/or concentric with and 12.00 feet easterly from said easterly line of Parcel "A" and southeasterly line of Parcel "C" through the following courses: along said curve northerly 370.04 feet through a central angle of 22°43'28"; Legal Description Pala Road Right of Way August 18. 1999 JN 15-100053-M4 Page 3 of 3 thence non-tangent from said curve North 34026'46" East 76.29 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve in the southerly line of State Highway 79 as shown on Tract No. 20319 filed in Book 181, Pages 54 through 58 of Maps in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder, a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 06040'45" West; thence leaving said parallel line, along said curve and southerly line westerly 15.86 feet through a central angle of 00°34'43" to the POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 5744 square feet, more or less. SUBJECT TO all covenants. rights. ri~ts-of-way and easements of record. EXHIBIT "B" attached and by this reference made a part hereof. Jl~jtfilond~.Mathe, PLS 6185 My License Expires 03/31/02 100 0 'O0 200 300 ~ ~INYON 1 2166428.3493 ! 649 GRAPHIC SCALE iN FEET S72'58'0146"E 310562.00 (GRID) ~ 2257398.5576 LAKE 6201355.2919 MATHEWS /C/L POD '/PLC. 2 \ STATE HIGHWAY 79 PER TRACT NO. 20319 ~,- PARCEU 3370 DATA TABLE .... 1 S54'17'24"E -- 99.02' 2 08°44'09'' 1055.00' 160.85' 5 S17'35'51"W -- 19.13' 4 S70'10'19"W -- 11,91' 5 N16'31'19"E -- 19.28' 6 08'25'44" 1067.00' 157.02' 7 N54'17'24"W -- 11~.61' 6 00'48'26" 1571.00' 22.1~' 9 S~4'26'46"W -- 71.98' 10 26'36'I5" 945.00' 438.79' 11 0~'11'27" 1055.00' 58.75' 12 22'4~'28" 953.00' ~70.04' !~ N$4'26'46"E -- 76.29' 14 00'~4'4~" 1571.00' 15.86' EXHIBIT "B"' PALA ROAD R I GHT OF WAY AUGUST 16, 1999 PREPARED U THE SUPERVIS 0 F: ~:HE. L.S. 6185 EXPIRES 3-31-02 SCALE: 1"=100' PALA ROAD PER STRIP 1. INST. NO. 180581.0.R. (5-16-90) CUPENO LANE PER STRIP 3, INST. NO, 180581,0.R. (5-16-90) SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEET E ATTACHMENT NO. 4 INITIAL STUDY F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'F~73PA99 2PC1 .doc 13 City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Project Title Lead Agency Name and Address Contact Person and Phone Number Project Location Project Sponsor's Name and Address Development Agreement between Pala Rainbow LLC and the City of Temecula (PA99-0273) City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 David Hogan, Senior Planner (909) 694-6400 Southeast comer of State Route 79-South and Pala Road in the City of Temecula Pala Rainbow LLC and the City of Temecula General Plan Designation Highway Tourist Commercial and Open Space Zoning Description of Project Surrounding Land Uses and Setting Other public agencies whose approval is required Highway Tourist Commercial (HT) and Open Space-Conservation (OSC) Approval of a Development Agreement between Pala Rainbow LLC and the City of Temecula to allow the property owner to do the following: 1. Develop the property in conformance with the requirements of the existing Highway Toudst Commercial zone; 2. Adjust the required building setbacks in conformance with the existing Development Code; 3. Receive a partial site landscaping credit for open space areas adjacent to the Temecula Creek channel; 4. Pay the applicable Development Impact Fee at a rate that was in effect on January 1, 1999; 5. Receive a partial waiver of some required public improvement plan check fees; and 6. Get a financial contribution from the City (not to exceed $100,000) toward the construction of extension of Jedediah Smith Road and related area drainage facilities. In exchange, the property owner agrees to allow the immediate construction of the new Pala Road bddge and associated improvements. The Agreement conveys no additional land use development dghts not previously allowed or authorized under the City's adopted Development Code (zoning ordinance). North: Vacant land and single family residences on 2 '~ acre lots. East: Vacant land. South: Channel/open space areas associated with Temecula Creek West: Vacant land. None. R:%CEQA%2.73PA99 IES.docR:%CEQA~73PA99 IES,doc 1 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 Geologic Problems Water Air Quality 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 (To be completed by the lead agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: 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 revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED 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 "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact 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 eadier analysis as desc. dbed on a~ached 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 cou!d na';e a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been anaiyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standaros, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that eadier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Pdnted name R:~CEQA~273PA99 IES.dO;R:%CEQA%273PA99 IES.doc 2 1. Land Use and Planning. Would the project: Leas Thin · a. Physically divide an established community? b. Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan. specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigation an environmental effect'? Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either diractiy (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ,/ necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project? : : :: ::::~: :: :. ~::: : ::~::~: :::~ ;; ~ ::~:;: :i~i ::iSignificard::~: ~ ::!::::~ :i~i.~ b~ Su~ I~Oa;;;:::::;:;::;:: ::~!:!i:ii!:;::::i:~;;~:;: :~:~;~ Implos::::: !~:Incc~o~dedi:~;~; :::¢~'~'~ ::':'::~: a. ~pose p~ple or s~ures to poten~al subs~n~al adveme effe~s, including ~e dsk of loss, inju~, or dea~ I involving: i) Rup~re of a ~o~ ea~quake fault, as delineated on the most re~nt Alquist-Pdolo Ea~quake Fault Zoning Map issued by ~e S~ta Geologist for the area or based on other subs~n~al evidence of a kno~ faul~ Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publi~tion 42. ii) S~ong seismic ground shaking? iii)Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefa~ion? iv) Landslides? b. Result in subs~ntial soil erosion or ~e loss of topsoil? c. Be Io~ted on a geologic unit or soil ~at is uns~ble, or ~at would bemme unstable as a result of the proje~, and po~n~ally result in on- or offisite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefa~ion or ~llapse? R:\CEQA~.73PA99 IES.docR:%CEQA~273PA99 IES.doc 3 Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1801-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial dsks to life or property? Have soil incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tenks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUAUTY. Would the project: ,---- ..d Su~orb.~ sdomm~ So. ca. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a iowedng of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or dver, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltetion on- or off-site? Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or dyer, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Place h'}us;ng within a 100-year flood hazard area as mappsd on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? Expose people or structures to a signfficant dsk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Pokm,~hr Incomemid R:~CEQA~273PA99 IES.docR:%CEQA~273PAg9 IES.do~ 4 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which fie project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative firesholds for ozone precursors? Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? 6. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: ~ .,~ s.p~,,.~ t.~...tm so.~.. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to fie existing traffic load and capacity of fie street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either fie number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections? Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by fie county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location fiat results in substantial safety risks? Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equiDment)? Result in inadequate emergency access? Result in inadequate parking capacity? Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks? 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or fireugh habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in R:%CEQA~73PA99 IES.docR:~CEGA~273PA99 IES.doc 5 local or regional pins, polides, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Have a substantial adverse effect on any dpadan habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the Califomia Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? Have a substantial adverse effect of federelly protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vemal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other means? Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or offer approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 8. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: · Result in the loss of availability of a known minerel resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? s~nmc~ 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: ia. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Crate a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? poleelily Impe~ ,f R:%CEQA~/'3pA99 IES.dOCR:~CEQA%273PA99 IES.do~ 6 Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely h=ynrdous materials, substances, or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it cream a signfficant hazard to the public or the environment? For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety h-y-rd for people residing or warking in the project area? For a project within the vidnity of a pdvata airstrip, would the project result in a safety h~7=rd for people residing or warking in the project area? Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Expose people or structures to a significant dsk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 10. NOISE. Would the project result in: Exposure of people to severe noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive greundbome vibration or greundbome noise levels? A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vidnity above levels existing without the pro!ect? A c:,nstantial temporary or pedodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vidnity above levels existing without the project? For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or warking in the project area to excessive noise levels? For a project within the vidnity of a pdvate airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Signir~ R:\CEQA~273PA99 IES.dOCR:%CEQA%273PA99 IES.doc 7 11. PUBUC 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: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts assodates with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental faciliUes, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services? Fire protection? c. Police protection? d. Schools? e. Parks? Other public facilities? 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing radiities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Require or result in the cons~uction of new storm water drainage radiities or expansicn of existing facilities, the construction of which c~juld cause significant environmental effects? Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlemerits and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Result in a determination by the wastewater treatmere previder which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the pravider's existing commitments? Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capadty to accommodate the preject's solid waste disposal needs? Comply with federal, state, and local statures and regulations related to solid waste? R:%CEQA~73pA99 IES.docR:%CEQA~,73PA99 IES.doc 8 13. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and historic building within a state scenic highway? Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? ~m~sd 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 1506.57 Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.5? Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontologicel resource or site or unique geologic feature? Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? pm,m.y Sl;ulberd UnMm 15. RECREATION. Would the project: m..... su~.e,. ,.om~,m so.R. Would the project increase the use of exist~Hg neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical detedoretion of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? R:%CEQA%273PA99 IES.docR:%CEQAg.73PA99 IES.doc 9 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife spades, came a fish or wiidlh population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major pedods of California history or prahistor~)q Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable' means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects? c. Does the project have environmental effects which will .. cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? b. Comments; The proposed Development Agreement will not approve or result in any land use or other physical changes to the local environment. Any future development proposals will need to conform with the approved General Plan and Development Code and will receive appropriate environmental review pdor to their approval. Because the agreement proposes to allow development that is consistent with the previously appmved General Plan and Development Code and no detailed development plans have been submitted, new environmental impacts are identifiable. All future development plans will receive the appropriate environmental review when specific information is available. R:~CEQA%273PA99 IES.docR:~CEQA~73PA99 IES.doc 10 ITEM #5 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION November 3, 1999 Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) Prepared By: John De Gange, Project Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff recommends the Planning Commission: ADOPT a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0266; ADOPT Resolution No, 99- approving Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) based upon the analysis and the Findings contained within the staff report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; or ADOPT Resolution No. 99- denying Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) based upon the analysis and the Findings contained within the staff report APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Ollie House Inc. (Rohn Korman) PROPOSAL: To operate an indoor skateboard park in a 21,346 square foot portion of a building within an existing business park. 43300 Business Park Drive BP Business Park (subject and surrounding) LI Light Industrial (subject and surrounding) LOCATION: GENERAL PLAN: ZONING: LAND USE: Subject: North: South: East: West: Industrial Building Complex Industrial Building Complex International Rectifier City Hall Industrial Building Complex \\TEMEC_FSI01NVOLI\DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~266pa99.pc.doc BACKGROUND An application was received on July 8, 1999 with a Design Review Committee (DRC) meeting held on August 5, 1999. At the DRC meeting the Building and Fire Departments expressed some concerns relative to the construction of the skateboard ramps and how they would comply with Fire and Building codes and the anticipated occupancy loads associated with the use, Once these issues were resolved, the project was scheduled for a Director's Hearing on October 14, 1999. At the October 14th Directors Hearing, representatives from International Rectifier, the Rancho California Business Park Association and an individual building owner within the business park raised concerns with respect to the compatibility of this use with existing and permitted uses within the vicinity of this project. As a consequence of the concerns raised by these parties, the action taken at the Directors Hearing was that the item was to be referred to the Planning Commission, pursuant to Section 17.03 of the Development Code. A copy of the staff report, proposed Conditions of Approval and the minutes from the October 14th Director's Hearing are attached for your review, PROJECT DESCRIPTION This project is a request for approval of a Minor Conditional Use Permit to permit the operation of an indoor skateboard park. The applicant proposes to construct an indoor skateboarding facility in an 21,346 square foot unit located within an existing building at 43300 Business Park Drive. The proposed hours of operation for the project are Monday through Thursday from 2:00 PM to 9:00 PM, Friday 12:00 PM to 11:00 PM, Saturday from 9:00 AM to 11:00 PM, and Sunday from 10:00 AM to 9:00 PM. The number of employees needed for the operation ranges from 4 to 8. The anticipated number of parking spaces needed for this use is 26 spaces, The center which this proposed use is located within has 227 spaces. ANALYSIS The center in which this project is being proposed would appear to have ample parking for this use with 26 spaces required and 227 being provided. In addition, the hours of operation and the anticipated peak hours for the use generally would not conflict with other uses currently in the vicinity. Land Use ComDatibilitv Issues The project site is located within a light industrial area with existing industrial uses currently in operation. The zoning for the area allows a variety of manufacturing and warehousing activities as permitted uses. Because this project deviates from the anticipated uses within this zone a conditional use permit is required for this use. The project site is across Business Park Ddve from International Recti~er (HEXFET) which transports, stores and utilizes hazardous chemicals as part of its operations. Staff met with representatives from International Rectifier just prior to the October 14th Directors Hearing. At this meeting and at the hearing, their representatives expressed concerns with the compatibility of the two uses and urged the City to deny this request. They outlined their concerns as: 1 ) safety concerns in the event of a natural disaster, or an accident involving trucks transporting hazardous chemicals to and/or from their building; 2) concerns that the presence of this use would jeopardize their ability to expand due to scrutiny from regulating agencies; 3) concerns of \\TEM EC_FS I 01 \VOL l \DEPTS%PLANN ING\STAFFRPTX266pa99.pc.doc 2 traffic hazards generated by incompatible uses and the different traffic pattems associated with the two different uses. A copy of their correspondence is being provided for your consideration. Concerns were also raised by the Rancho California Business Park Association. The Association also met with staff prior to the Director's Hearing. The Association indicated that their board had already denied this applicant's application for Association approval. This denial was based on a variety of concerns stemming from what they felt were land use incompatibility issues which included unacceptable liability risks associated with having a use which attracts a large number of children within an existing industrial area, and the effect that a recreational use such as a skateboard park would have on properties' in the area ability to operate or expand existing uses, and/or attract new quality industrial uses. Staff explained to the association that CC & R's regulating uses were a private matter and could not be used by staff to either support or deny this project. The applicant and other proponents of the project have responded to these concerns by pointing out that currently there are existing uses within the vicinity of the project which should pose the same or similar concerns to International Recti~er and the Association. In the past, two other similar uses within the vicinity of this project, a church and a day care, were approved by the City with separate CUP applications (day care uses, however, are no longer permitted in the Light Industrial (LI) zone). In addition, the property which the project is being proposed adjoins the rear of the parcel in which City Hall is located. In addition, the applicant pointed out that the building size requirements and the parking demands for this use dictates that this project should be located within an industrial area where large buildings are available, rants are low and sufficient parking is provided. ENVIRONMENTAL The project qualifies under CEQA for a Categorical Exemption under Section 15301 Existing Facilities, Class 1 (b), because it is a minor alteration of an existing facility, involving negligible expansion of use beyond that previously existing. SUMMARWCONCLUSIONS Significant issues have been raised relative to the compatibility of this use with the uses that exist or that will ultimately be permitted in the vicinity of the proposed project. As a consequence, staff has referred this item to the Planning Commission for determination. It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider the testimony provided by both the proponents and opponents of this application and evaluate the analysis contained within this report. Findings for both approval and denial are being provided. In addition, if the Planning Commission decides to approve the project, proposed Conditions of Approval are attached. FINDINGS (for Approval) The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. The project has been reviewed for consistency with these documents and Staff has determined that the project as conditioned is consistent with the goals and policies contained within the General Plan and the development standards contained in the Development Code. \\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLl\DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRPT~266pa99-pc-doc 3 The proposed conditional use as conditioned can be considered compatible with the nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures, because there a similar uses within the vicinity (a church and day care) and because the proposed hours of operations do not conflict with the hours of operations for the light industrial uses in the area. The use is proposed to be located in a portion of an existing at 43300 Business Park Drive. The proposed project is located within an area of existing industrial uses which also includes a church. The site for the proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the project. Staff has reviewed the project and has determined that the project is consistent with the standards of the Development Code. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The project as conditioned is consistent with the goals and policies contained within the General Plan and the development standards contained in the Development Code. These documents were adopted by the City Council to assure that projects are is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. Compliance with these documents will assure this is achieved. FINDINGS (for Denial) The proposed conditional use is not entirely consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. The project has been reviewed for consistency with these documents and Staff has determined that the project is not entirely consistent with the goals and policies contained within the General Plan and the development standards contained in the Development Code. The proposed conditional use is not considered to be compatible with the nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the proposed use could be adversely affected by the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures. The use is proposed to be located in a portion of an existing at 43300 Business Park Drive. The proposed project is located within an area of existing industrial uses, some of which utilized and transport hazardous chemicals. The site for the proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the project. Staff has reviewed the project and has determined that the project is consistent with the standards of the Development Code with respect to the characteristics of the building and the lot it is located on. The nature of the proposed conditional use could potentially expose people to uses within the vicinity of this project that could be detrimental to their health, safety and general welfare. The project is not entirely consistent with the goals and policies contained within the General Plan and the development standards contained in the Development Code. These documents were adopted by the City Council to assure that projects are is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. This project potentially would not be able to comply with these documents. ~\TEM EC_FS 101WOL 1 \DEPTS~PLANNINGXSTAFFRPT'x266pa99 .pc.doe 4 ATTACHMENTS: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. PC Resolution (for approval) 99- - Blue Page 6 PC Resolution (for denial) 99- - Blue Page 9 Exhibit A Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 12 Staff Report for the October 14, 1999 Director's Hearing - Blue Page 18 Minutes from the October 14, 1999 Director's Hearing - Blue Page 19 Correspondence (letters of opposition) - Blue Page 20 Exhibits - Blue Page 21 A. Vicinity Map B. General Plan Map C. Zoning Map \\TEM EC_FS 101 \VOL 1 \DEPTSXPLANNING~STAFFRPT'~266pa99.pc .doe 5 A'R'ACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- \\TE M EC_FS I 01 \VOL 1 \DEPTSXPLANNING\STAFFKPT~266pa99.pC.doc 6 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0266, (MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT) A REQUEST TO OPERATE AN INDOOR SKATEBOARD PARK WITHIN A 21,346 SQUARE FOOT PORTION OF A BUILDING WITHIN AN EXISTING BUSINESS PARK, LOCATED AT 43300 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR°S PARCEL NO. 921-020-055 WHEREAS, the Ollie House Inc.. filed Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) which is in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) 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. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) on November 3, 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 hearings and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit); 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. That the Temecula Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit), hereby makes the following findings as required in Chapter 17.04: A. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. The project has been reviewed for consistency with these documents and Staff has determined that the project as conditioned is consistent with the goals and policies contained within the General Plan and the development standards contained in the Development Code. B. The proposed conditional use as conditioned can be considered compatible with the nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures, because there a similar uses within the vicinity (a church and day care) and because the proposed hours of operations do not conflict with the hours of operations for the light industrial uses in the area. The use is proposed to be located in a portion of an existing at 43300 Business Park Drive. The proposed project is located within an area of existing industrial uses which also includes a church. \\TEMEC_FSIOI\VOLI\DEPTS\PLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX266pa99.pc.dOC 7 C. The site for the proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the project. Staff has reviewed the project and has determined that the project is consistent with the standards of the Development Code. D. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The project as conditioned is consistent with the goals and policies contained within the General Plan and the development standards contained in the Development Code. These documents were adopted by the City Council to assure that projects are not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. Compliance with these documents will assure this is achieved. Section 3. Environmental Comnliance. The project qualifies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a Categorical Exemption under Section 15301 Existing Facilities, Class I (b), because it is a minor alteration of an existing facility, involving negligible expansion of use beyond that previously existing. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) to allow the operation an indoor skateboard park within a 21,346 square foot portion of a building within an existing business park. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of November, 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 3rd day of November, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary \\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLl\DEPTSXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX266pa99.pc.doc 8 A'H'ACHMENT NO. 2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- \\TEM EC_FS I 01 \VOL 1 \DEPTSXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX266pa99.pc,dOC 9 PC RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0266, (MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT) A REQUEST TO OPERATE AN INDOOR SKATEBOARD PARK WITHIN A 21,346 SQUARE FOOT PORTION OF A BUILDING WITHIN AN EXISTING BUSINESS PARK, LOCATED AT 43300 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR°S PARCEL NO. 921-020-055 WHEREAS, the Ollie House Inc. filed Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) which is in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) 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. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) on November 3, 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 hearings and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission denied Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit); 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. That the Temecula Planning Commission, in denying Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit), hereby makes the following findings as required in Chapter 17.04: A. The proposed conditional use is not entirely consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. The project has been reviewed for consistency with these documents and Staff has determined that the project is not entirely consistent with the goals and policies contained within the General Plan and the development standards contained in the Development Code. B. The proposed conditional use is not considered to be compatible with the nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the proposed use could be adversely affected by the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures. The use is proposed to be located in a portion of an existing at 43300 Business Park Drive. The proposed project is located within an area of existing industrial uses, some of which utilized and transport hazardous chemicals. \\TEM EC_FS 101 \VOL 1 \DEpTSXPLANNING~STAFFRPT~266pa99.pc.dcc 10 C. The site for the proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the project. Staff has reviewed the project and has determined that the project is consistent with the standards of the Development Code with respect to the characteristics of the building and the lot it is located on. D. The nature of the proposed conditional use could potentially expose people to uses within the vicinity of this project that could be detrimental to their health, safety and general welfare. The project is not entirely consistent with the goals and policies contained within the General Plan and the development standards contained in the Development Code. These documents were adopted by the City Council to assure that projects are is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. This project potentially would not be able to comply with these documents. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The project qualifies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a Categorical Exemption under Section 15301 Existing Facilities, Class I (b), because it is a minor alteration of an existing facility, involving negligible expansion of use beyond that previously existing. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of November, 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 3rd day of November, 1999 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary \\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX266pa99.pC.dOC I1 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL \\TEM EC_FS 101 \VOL 1 \DEPTSXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPTX2.66pa99.pC .doc CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) Project Description: Development Impact Fee: Assessor's Parcel No. Approval Date: Expiration Date: A Conditional Use Permit to permit the operation of an indoor skateboard park. None 921-020-055 November 3, 1999 November 3, 2001 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier"s check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Exemption required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department 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 develope~applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees and agents from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an 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 Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit). City shall promptly notify the developer/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding for which indemnification is sought and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. 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 the approval. The conversion of use shall conform substantially with Exhibit "A" (Site Plan) and Exhibit "B" (Floor Plan) approved with Planning Application No. PA99-0266, or as amended by these conditions. However, any improvements noted as future tenant Improvements on these plans are for information only and are not part of the Minor CUP at this time, /,\TEM EC_FS [ 01 \VOL I \DEPTSXP LANNING\STAFFRPTX266pa99 .pc.doe Noise levels generated by the project shall not exceed the standards set forth in the Noise Element of the General Plan or the environmental performance standards of the Development Code. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, a security plan shall be prepared and submitted to the Police Department for review and approval. Said plan shall include, but not be limited to staffing, security rules and regulations, operating policies, emergency protocols and twenty-four hour contact personnel. The project shall comply with Conditions of Approval of all underlying maps, development plans or Conditional Use Permits that may apply to the project site. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS - The Department has no conditions of approval for this case. FIRE DEPARTMENT 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 California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC 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 2 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. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) 10. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC 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) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spacad at 500 feet apart and shall be located no more than 250 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B) 11. As required by the California 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. (CFC 903.2) 12. 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. (CFC 902.2.2.1) 13. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3) \\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLI\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~266pa99.p~:.doc 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 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). (CFC 901.4.4) 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. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9) 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. (CFC 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 right side of the main entrance door. The Knox-Box shall be supervised by the alarm system. (CFC 902,4) 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. (CFC 902.4) DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND SAFETY - 19. Comply with applicable provisions of the 1998 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1998 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code. 20. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. 21. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 22. The Occupancy classification of the proposed buildings shall be B/A-2.1. 23. Provide Occupancy approvals for all existing buildings (i.e. finale building permits or Certificate of Occupancy) 24. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 25. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. 26. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. \%TEM EC_FS 101 \VOL 1 \DEPTSXPLANNINGXSTAFFRPT~266pa99.pc.doC 15 27. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1998 edition of the California Building Code. 28. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. 29. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans submitted for plan review. 30. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 31. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. 32. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. TEMECULAPOLICE DEPARTMENT 33. Applicant shall ensure all landscaping surrounding the building are maintained at a height no greater than thirty-six (36) inches. 34. Applicant shall ensure all trees on the property are maintained away from the building so as to deter roof accessibility for suspect(s). 35. Additionally, plants, shrubbery and trees will be maintained in areas not designated for foot traffic. These areas will maintained so as to have clear visibility by patrons and prevent concealment by suspect(s) to hide themselves both day/night time hours. 36. Light fixtures shall be installed to illuminate all parking areas, driveways, and pedestrian walkways. these areas shall be lit with a minimum maintained one (1) foot candle of light at ground level, evenly dispersed across the surface, eliminating all shadows. All extedor light fixtures shall be vandal resistant and positioned so as not to produce glare. the installation of all exterior lighting shall be in compliance with the Mr. Palomar Lighting Ordinance. 37. Vandal resistant light fixtures shall be installed above all exterior doors and loading dock areas around the building. These light fixtures shall illuminate the doors surface with a minimum maintained one (1) foot candle of light at ground level, evenly dispersed. All lights shall be in compliance with the Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance. 38. All exterior lighting shall be controlled by timers or other means that prevent the lights from being turned off by unauthorized persons. 39. Upon completion of the re-modification of the building, a monitored alarm system shall be installed to deter unauthorized entry/burglary and to notify the Police Department of unauthorized intrusion. 40. All doors, windows locking mechanisms, hinges, and other miscellaneous hardware shall be of commercial or institutional grade. ~\TEM EC_FS I 01 \VOL 1 \DEPTS~PLANNING~STAFFRP'I~266pa99.pc.doc 16 41. All exterior public pay telephones for this facility shall be placed in a well-lighted, highly visible area, and installed with a "Call-Out Only" feature to deter loitering. 42. Street address shall be posted in a visible location, minimum 12 inches in height, on the street side of the building with a contrasting background. 43. All roof hatches shall be painted "International Orange." 44. Provide building address on roof, 48" high numerals, 9" wide strokes, traffic paint, color to contrast with roof surface orientation as shown parallel to and facing pdmary street. 45. In accordance with City Ordinance 97-07, the sale, use or possession of any type of alcoholic beverage is prohibited unless a special permit is issued by the Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC). OTHER AGENCIES 46. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho California Water District transmittal dated July 20, 1999, a copy of which is attached. 47. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health transmittal dated July 26, 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. Applicanrs Signature Date ~\TEM EC_FS I 01 \VOL 1 \DEPTS\PLANNINGXSTAFFRPT~266pa99.pC.doc ATI'ACHMENT NO. 2 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING DIRECTOR'S HEARING DATED OCTOBER 14, 1999 '/\TE M EC_FS 101 \VOL 1 \DEPTSXPLANN INGXSTAFFRPTX266pa99.pc.doc 18 PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) is a request for approval to permit the operation of an indoor skateboard park. In ecc~'-rdanca with the City's Development Code, Rohn Korman of the Ollie House Inc. has applied for a Minor Conditional Use Permit to allow an indoor skateboarding fadlity within a 21,346 square foot unit located at 43300 Business PaW, Ddve. The project qualifies under CEQA for a Categorical Exemption under Section 15301 Existing Facilities, Class I (b), because it is a minor alteration of an existing facility, involving negligible expansion of use beyond that previously existing. No structural changes to the exterior of the building are being proposed as a result of this project. All previous Conditions of Approval under which the building that this facility will be located was constructed shall apply to this application. Future tenant improvements are noted on the floor plans and will require separate building. The parking requirements were reviewed for this proposal with the determination that the amount of parking required for this project and the parking available for the center which the project is located is sufficient. Staff has received four letters expressing concerns with the proposed project. In addition, staff met with representatives from Intemational Rectifier and members of the board goveming the business association for the center which this project is located. The board indicated that when this project was presented to them for approval, it was denied. The other City departments have reviewed the project and have included Conditions of Approval. Planning Staff recommends that the Planning Director not take action on Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit), but instead forward this item to the Planning Commission for consideration. If the Planning Director decides to approve the project Findings for approval Conditions of Approval have been included. This concludes Staffs presentation. Staff is available to answer any questions. F:~UC~pLANN1NG~'TAFFRFr~66p,99 .DH.doc 1 Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) FINDINGS 1. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. The project has been reviewed for consistency with these documents and Staff has determined that the project as conditioned is consistent with the goals and policies contained within the General Plan and the development standards contained in the Development Code. 2. The proposed conditional use as conditioned can be considered compatible with the nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures. The use is proposed to be located in a portion of an existing at 43300 Business Park Ddve. The proposed project is located within an area of existing industrial uses which also includes a church. 3. The site for the proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the project. Staff has reviewed the project and has determined that the project is consistent with the standards of the Development Code. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The project as conditioned is consistent with the goals and policies contained within the General Plan and the development standards contained in the Development Code. These documents were adopted by the City Council to assure that projects are is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. Compliance with these documents will assure this is achieved. F:\Depts\PLANNING'~qTAFFRF'~266pa99.DH .do~ CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) Project Description: A Conditional Use Permit to permit the operation of an indoor skateboard park. Development Impact Fee: None Assessor's Parcel No. 921-020-055 Approval Date: October 14, 1999 Expiration Date: October 14, 2001 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Exemption required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour pedod the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department 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 developer/applicant shall indemnity, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees and agents from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an 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 Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit). City shall promptly notity the developer/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding for which indemnification is sought and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. 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 pedod which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by the approval. The conversion of use shall conform substantially with Exhibit "A" (Site Plan) and Exhibit "B" (Floor Plan) approved with Planning Application No. PA99-0266, or as amended by these conditions. However, any improvements noted as future tenant Improvements on these plans are for information only and are not part of the Minor CUP at this time. F:XD~pt~PLANNING~TAFFRFT~66pa99.DH.do~ 2 Planning Application No. PA99-0266 Conditions of Approval Page 2 Noise levels generated by the project shall not exceed the standards set forth in the Noise Element of the General Plan or the environmental performance standards of the Development Code. Pdor to opening for business, a security plan shall be prepared and submitted to the Police Department for review and approval. Said plan shall include, but not be limited to staffing, security rules and regulations, operating policies, emergency protocols and twenty-four hour contact personnel. The project shall comply with Conditions of Approval of all underlying maps, development plans or Conditional Use Permits that may apply to the project site. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS - The Department has no conditions of approval for this case. FIRE DEPARTMENT 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 Califomia Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC 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 2 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. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) 10. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-Ill-B-I, A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 500 feet apart and shall be located no more than 250 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B) 11. As required by the California 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. (CFC 903.2) 12. 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. (CFC 902.2.2.1) 13. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3) F:\D~pU\pLANNING~TAFFRF~266pa99.DH.do~ 3 14. 15. 16. 17. 18, Pdor 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 stdp centers, businesses shall post the suite address on the rear door(s). (CFC 901.4.4) Pdor to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire spdnkler system. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9) Pdor 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. (CFC Article 10) Pdor 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. (CFC 902.4) 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. (CFC 902.4) DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND SAFETY - 19. Comply with applicable provisions of the 1998 edition of the Califomia Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1998 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code. 20. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. 21. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 22. The Occupancy classification of the proposed buildings shall be B/A-2.1. 23. Provide Occupancy approvals for all existing buildings (i.e. finale building permits or Certificate of Occupancy) 24. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) 25. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. 26. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. 27. Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1998 edition of the Califomia Building Code. F:\Depts\PLANNING~'TAFFRFr~266pa99 .DH.doc 4 28~ 29. 30. 31. 32. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with odginal signature on plans submitted for plan review. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits. TEMECULA POLICE DEPARTMENT 33. Applicant shall ensure all landscaping surrounding the building are maintained at a height no greater than thirty-six (36) inches. 34. Applicant shall ensure all trees on the property are maintained away from the building So as to deter roof accessibility for suspect(s). 35. Additionally, plants, shrubbery and trees will be maintained in areas not designated for foot traffic. These areas will maintained so as to have clear visibility by patrons and prevent concealment by suspect(s) to hide themselves both day/night time hours. 36. Light fixtures shall be installed to illuminate all parking areas, driveways, and pedestrian walkways. these areas shall be lit with a minimum maintained one (1) foot candle of light at ground level, evenly dispersed across the surface, eliminating all shadows. All extedor light fixtures shall be vandal resistant and positioned so as not to produce glare. the installation of all exterior lighting shall be in compliance with the Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance. 37. Vandal resistant light fixtures shall be installed above all exterior doors and loading dock areas around the building. These light fixtures shall illuminate the doors surface with a minimum maintained one (1) foot candle of light at ground level, evenly dispersed. All lights shall be in compliance with the Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance. 38. All exterior lighting shall be controlled by timers or other means that prevent the lights from being tumed off by unauthorized persons. 39. Upon completion of the remodification of the building, a monitored alarm system shall be installed to deter unauthorized entry/burglary and to notify the Police Department of unauthorized intrusion. 40. All doors, windows locking mechanisms, hinges, and other miscellaneous hardware shall be of commercial or institutional grade. 41. All exterior public pay telephones for this facility shall be placed in a well-lighted, highly visible area, and installed with a "Call-Out Only'' feature to deter loitering. 42. Street address shall be posted in a visible location, minimum 12 inches in height, on the street side of the building with a contrasting background. F:',DepLs\PLANNING\STAFFRFI~266pa99 .DH,doc 45. All roof hatches shall be painted "International Orange." Provide building address on roof, 48" high numerals, 9" wide strokes, traffic paint, color to contrast with roof surface orientation as shown parallel to and facing pdmary street. In accordance with City Ordinance 97-07, the sale, use or possession of any type of alcoholic beverage is prohibited unless a special permit is issued by the Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC). OTHER AGENCIES 46. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho California Water Distdct transmittal dated July 20, 1999, a copy of which is attached. 47. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health transmittal dated July 26, 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 F:\DcpI~\PLANNING~STAFFRF~266pa99.DH.doc 6 July 20,1999 John DeGange, Case Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY PARCEL NO, 3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 20873 APN 921-020-055 PLANNING APPLICATION NO, PA99-0266 Dear Mr. DeGange: 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:mc186FOI2-TS~FCF c: Laude Willjams, Engineering Services Supervisor TO: FROM RE: County of Riverside DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. PA99-0266 DATE: July 26~ 1999 1. The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the Conditional Use Permit No. PA99- 0266 and has no ob ections. Sanitary sewer and water services may be available in this area. 2. PRIOR TO ANY PLAN CHECK SUBMITTAL tbr health clearance. the following items are required: a) "\Viii-serve" letters from the appropriate water and sexvering agencies. b) Three complete sets of plans tbr each food establishment (to include rending machines) will be submitted. including a fixture schedule. a finish schedule. and a plumbing schedule in order to ensure compliance with the California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific retirenee. please contact Food Facility Plan examiners at (909) 694-5022). c) A clearance letter fi'om the Hazardous Services Materials Management Branch (909) 694-5055 will be required indicating that the project has been cleared lbr: · Underground storage tanks, Ordinance # 617.4. · tlazardous Waste Generator Services. Ordinance ~ 615.3. · Emergency Response Plans Disclosure l in accordance with Ordinance g 651.2.) · Waste reduction management. d) A letter [rom the Waste Regulation Branch (XV,'.~stc Collccdon/I. EA). CH:dr (909) 955-8980 NOTE: Any current additional requirements not covered. can be applicable at time of Building Plan review Ibr linal Department nf Environmental Health Clearance. CC: Doug Thompson. Hazardous Materials ATTACHMENT NO. 3 MINUTES FROM THE PLANNING DIRECTOR'S HEARING DATED OCTOBER 14, 1999 F:~Depts~PLANN/NG~STAFFRPT'a66pL~9.pc.doc 19 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF TIFF. CITY OF TE1V[ECULA PLANNING DIRECTOR OCTOBER 14, 1999 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Planning Director was called to order on Thursday, October 14, 1999 at 1:30 PM, at the City of Temecula Main Conference Room, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Senior Planner Matthew Fagan presiding. Also present were Project Planner John DeGange and Minute Clerk Cathy Davis. Senior Planner Matthew Fagan opened the public bearing for items not listed on the agenda at 1:32 PM. There were no requests to speak. 1. Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) Project Planner John DeGange presented the staff report for planning Application PA99- 0266 to operate an indoor skateboard park located at 43300 Business Park Drive. Senior Planner Matthew Fagan opened the public hearing at 1:34 PM. Applicant Ron Korman, 40137 Patchwork Lane, Muftieta, CA, spoke in favor of the project. He feels his project would be good for the youth of the community. There is already a church with a youth group in the same center. This is a $300,000 project with $170,000 of tenant improvements. It will be one of the top skate parks in the country. There are 160 skate parks in America and 140 of them are in light industrial zones. Any problems with International Recti~er should have been raised when the church was allowed to come in. This location has good parking and their business is primarily at 5:00 PM and will not cause any additional traffic. Dan Dietken, Intemational Recti~er, 41915 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590 spoke in opposition to the project. He is concerned because International Recti~er must account for all individual within 1,000 feet of their facility for safety reasons. He is concerned of a safety risk to the children using the skateboard park. He is also concerned with traffic. He also expressed the concern that International Recti~er has future plans for expansion, which may be affected by the skateboard park. He feels that the site is not an appropriate place for the skateboard park. Dave Beckman, 28835 Single Oak Drive, Temecula. CA 92590 spoke in opposition to the project. He is concerned with the increased traffic and an increase in night-time activity. He feels that it is not an acceptable use for the location and it is an area not conducive to having children around. Dennis M. Burke, Rancho California Business Park Association, 6670 Alessandro Boulevard, Suite B, Riverside, CA 92506 spoke in opposition to the project. He stated the Association had rejected this use. There is an unacceptable liability risk and it will interfere with the ability to attract quality tenants or business for the vacant land within the industrial park. He feels the project's location is not appropriate for the use. F:\DeptsXPLANNING',D$',M1NUrF~XI999\I0-14-99.mmuIn.doc I Mark IllsIcy, 41820 Rio Grande, Temecula, CA 92591 spoke in favor of the project. He told his · children about the project and they were very excited. There is nowhere for the kids to go to skate right now. He was also concerned iflmemational Rectifier is so dangerous then need to look at the risk as a community. He also wanted to know if this location is not appropriate, where do you put skate parks. David G. Bailey, 38300 Mesa, Temecula, CA 92590 spoke in favor of the project. He is a Police Officer for the City of Temecula and he sees the damage skateboarders cause to the community. He stateed the skateboards need someplace to go and that we are limiting their skateboarding to the streets. Applicant Ron Korman, 40137 Patchwork Lane, Murrieta, CA concurred with the Conditions of Approval. Senior Planner Matthew Fagan closed the public hearing at 2:05 PM. Senior Planner Matthew Fagan referred Planning Application PA99-0266 to the Planning Commission for their consideration. The project will be re-noticed for a planning Commission Hearing. The meeting was adjourned at 2:10 P.M. ~ew F enior Planner F:XDcpuXPLANNING\DIRHEAR\MINUTE~\I999\10-14-99.mmut~.doc 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 CORRESPONDENCE (LETTERS OF OPPOSITION) F:'d)q~PLANNI~G~TAFFRFI~66pa99.pc. doc 20 AUGUST 2, 1999 Mr. John DeGange City Planner City Of Temecula P. O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 ph. 694-6444 fax 694-1999 Dear Sir, It has been brought to our attention that there is a proposed indoor skateboard facility looking to take occupancy of the office/warehouse space next door to our place of business at 43300 Business Park Drive in Temeculm As per the telephone conversation between you and our office, this letter is sent in hopes of voicing my concerns and possibly stopping this ~'om taking place. With expensive manufacturing machinery, inventory, and computer systems on the premises, our concern is security and the possibility of vandalism. Our business hours are Monday through Friday 7:00 a. nt to 5:00 p.m., leaving our business unattended until the closing hours of the proposed skate park on weekdays and all day Saturdays and Sundays. Another concern is parking and traffic. Our business ships and receives continuously throughout the day and it is mandatory that the semi trucks have access to our building. With the existing Church traffic in the complex being very heavy at times, combining this with the additional traffic the skatepark will generate is more than the complex was designed for. Also with this added traffic comes safety issues, large trucks and forklifts in the best of circumstances don't mix with children and open the door for possible law suites. Along with noise.tr~h and loitering as possible problems we feel that the proposed use of this light manufacturing space is unreasonable and not a good fit for this complex. Northstar Tools Inc. 43300 BUSINESS PARK DR. SUITE AI04. TEMECULA. CA 92590 PHONE 909-695-7008 FAX 909-695-7010 BanTel CORPORATION 43300 Business Park Dr. Ste. A-101 Temecula, CA 92590 Phone: 909.308.1111 Fax: 909.506.9452 http:/www.bantel .corn NCR Authorized Distributor and Service Center August 2'd 1999 Mr. John DeGange City Planner City of Temeeula P.O. Box 9033 Temeeula. CA 92589-9033 Thank you for taking the time to consider my lener regarding the proposed skatebeard park at 43300 Business Park Drive. We have recendy met with our property. manager, various tenants of our office complex and the gentleman proposing the buildout of a skateboard park next door to our office and warehouse. We have serious reservations regarding this project and we would like to detail just a few of them below, prior to the public hearing which we are told is imnunent. · Noise: We feel the close pmximi.ty of this proposed park to our offices. meeting and conference rooms will greatly impact our ability to conduct business in a respectful and quiet fashion. · Business Reputation: Our customers visit us daily, the.v include Presidents. Chairman of the boards and CEO's of national banking iustitutlous in the 2 billion dollar range and higher. · Security and Safety: Our nighttime and weekend secretarial staff have voiced grave concerns regarding potential altercations and assaults in the proposed shared parking areas. · Parking: Currently twice a week our business neighbet the Temeeula Valley Chi'istian Center puts on wonderrid youth night services. Our parking lot fills to overflowing by 2:00 PM to 3:00 PM. How will the skateboard park affect our ability to park receive customers and deliveries? · Litter: We have read the additional terms proposed by the property manager and we do not feel it is as comprehensive as should be reqm/~l to keep our area clean. · Chemical, Biological or Hazardous Material Evacuation: Within our business complex are companies that store and sell eve~' disease known to man. as well as reputed biological warfare agents. Additionally, we have manufactunng conglomerates that receive hazardous material shipments daily. Have the evacuation and treatment plans of these campames been properly evuluated as to their effectiveness regarding "200 a day or more" skateboarding youths directly across the street ? or downwind from their storage facility? · Current Zoning Regulations: This industrial complex is just thaL a light industrial office park not avenue for parents to have their youths ~bv..sat as the orgamzer of this park has mentioned. I am sure there are locations far bener suited for this .type of recreation and far safer for all concerned than 43000 Business Park. In closing let me say that I do not feel this proposed skateboard park is in the best interest of the community. the business communi.ty and their ability to conduct business. I also do not feel the safety of the children has been properly considered. Let me add that should this park at this location. become a possibility. I will do all that is in my power to rally public opinion against it. ATM's are our Business Vice President BanTel Corporation I.T=mday August 3, 1999 2:~,gpm -- Pag~ 2I ~;0. 3 'cJ9 4:01P, P.2 BanTel 1999 4330D Business P~rk Ur. Ste Ad01 Tcmecula. CA 92590 Phone: 909,308.1111 Fax: 909.506.9152 http:.'WVa,t.bantelcnm NCR Autlnorized Distributor and Service Center Mr. John De~ CayP!amxer City of'Temecuh P.O: Box ~033 Te~ne~,l~,. CA 92589-9033 While actin8 on the bdtalf ofthc Pnnddcn~ ofBanTd Co~onnion, Mr. Joe Saputo, who Is cun~rn~y trayriling abroad, I submiztcd to you a ~ obje~i~ to thePr°P°sedshteboa~dParkonthc2"~ofAu~m_,sL AltbctimcilwasMr. Sapurns' positbn that be was no{ in favor offfie skate board park and he.asked me to voice those feelings. Since your receipt of nay letten' dated August 2~, slmations have devdoped which have forc~ me to retract my letter of objection. I rutat now, for ~c record, reWa~ that letter of objection. The position of BanT CorpOralion and it's President whsle unclear at thc moment will bc solidified Mr. Saputos' return to the Stares and 1 am confident he will makc his fedings known to you personally, whahcr for or a~insx this project. I would like to apologize for any confusion this may have caus4~:l you. President BlmTd Corporation ATM's are Our P_aLisiness BanTel C O R P O R A T I O N August 4th 1999 Mr. John DeCrange City Planner City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 43300 Business Park Dr. Ste. A-101 Temecula, CA 92590 Phone: 909308.1111 Fax: 909,506.9452 http:/www.bantel .com NCR Authorized Distributor,' and Service Center Dear Mr. DeGang¢, Let me introduce myself, my name is Joe Saputo, I am the President and CEO of BanTel Corporation. I have only returned late last night from two weeks in Europe. In my absence, my second in command, Mr. Chet Gorman was instructed by me to record our disapproval of the skate board park slated for our light industrial and manufacturing office complex. On the 2"d of this month Mr. Gotman sent you a letter detailing our objections. The afternoon of the 2"d Mr. Corman received a threatening call from the building owner, a Mr. Paul Akian. Mr Akian unequivocally told Mr. Gorman that if he did not retract our letter of objection immediately that our lease would not be renewed this coming December and we would be forced to relocate our offices. Not wanting to be responsible for our eviction, Mr. Go/man retracted his letter of objection. This is expressly against my wishes. I am emphatically opposed to this lunacy of locating a skate board park in this area. The original letter of objection sent to you should be placed in the official record as to our feelings regarding this issue. Mr. Gorman will be present at the hearings to state our feelings in person. Let me also state for the record that threats and underhanded business practices will not sway us from our decision. If objecting to this skate board park and stating the facts as we see them should cause us to lose our lease, so be it! The safety of the children and our employees comes first. ATM's are our Business Sincerely, / t ,_-._ // ~'~""~F'osep~h' ~ ' , to "'P?'esident, CEO BanTel Corporation Intemational Recti~er HEXFET America Facai~y: 41915 Business Park Drive ~. Ternecula ~ CA 92590 7_ Phone 909-676-7500 2 Fax 909-676-9154 October 13, 1999 Ms. Debbie Ubnoske Planning Manager, City of Temecula. 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Ms. Ubnoske It has come to InternatiOnal Recti~er's attention that the City of Temecula is considering an application for a Conditional Use Permit to allow property located adjacent to our manufacturing facility in the Rancho California Business Park to be used for a children' s skateboard park. We urge the City of Temecula to deny this Conditional Use Permit application because the proposed use of the property for a skateboard park is not compatible with the adjacent industrial park uses. Industrial parks were established to separate manufacturing operations from neighborhoods and are generally considered incompatible with recreational activities such as a skateboard park. As you are aware, the property proposed for a skateboard park is located in a busy industrial park where industries conduct manufacturing operations use heavy equipment, generate noise levels appropriate for an industrial park, and use and store hazardous chemicals and gases. Although International Rectifier has operated internationally for over 50 years without a safety or environmental incident, we are aware that even the safest of manufacturing and industrial operations could experience an accident or unplanned release under certain circumstances, such as a natural disaster scenario~ The well established noise control procedures and safety systems used in industrial parks are not intended for the protection of children in adjacent playgrounds. Situating a skateboard park in the vicinity of industrial operations poses unnecessary and inappropriate risks to the youngsters who will use it and raises unnecessary liability concerns for the adjacent industrial businesses. The City should also consider that locating a recreational activity intended for children in a busy industrial park will also have an adverse impact on the development of industrial uses in this area. International Rectifier currently employs over 600 people in the Iemecula area, and our site in the Business Park offers opportunities to expand operations and create more jobs. Approval of the skateboard park would create serious roadblocks to our possible future expansion in Temecula, because expansions that are safe and appropriate in an industrial area would receive greater scrutiny in an area used for child recreation purposes. This adverse impact on development would have a chilling effect on the development plans of other businesses in the area as well as International Rectifier. IfXltTaJll.:ltlfl MANUFACTURING FACILITIES UNITED STATES CANADA GREAT BRITAIN INDIA ITALY AND MEXICO WITH SALES OFFICES AND DISTRIBUTO~qS IN MAJOR CITIES THROUGHOUT THE WORLD Page (2) Debbie Ubnoske Finally, the location of the skateboard park in the proposed area would be incompatible with the traffic paRems in the Business Park. The roads within the Business Park are currently heavily used by large trucks. For example, more than 40 trucks per day use Business Park roads to service International Rectifier alone. The heavy traffic by these large industrial vehicles is incompatible with use by inexperienced young drivers and children who would be in the area on foot, bicycles, and skateboards. Moreover, we believe that adding the ti'affic associated with a recreational attraction to the Business Park's roads would have a detrimental impact on our already heavy traffic patterns. In this regard, we are concerned that the City of Temecula has not adequately studied the environmental impacts of this additional traffic, and we believe the City should do so before making a determination on the Conditional Use Permit. The City of Temecula should also consider the economic consequences of permitting this incompatible use in the Business Park. The current industrial occupants of the Business Park contribute greatly to Temecula's economy. International Rectifier alone has a $29 million payroll, and last year paid $1.6 million in local taxes and generated business for dozens of local businesses. As mentioned above, the addition ofa children's attraction to this area would both chill further expansion, encourage companies currently operating in the Business Park to consider relocating, and discourage other companies from moving into the area. We believe the Business Park's contribution to Temecula's quality of life and economy far outweigh any hoped-for benefit from a skateboard park that would be far better situated outside the Business Park. In summary, we urge the City of Temecula to deny the application for a Conditional Use Permit because the City cannot reasonably find that the proposed use will not adversely affect existing uses in the Business Park. Although International Rectifier supports the children in this area through many activities (including our Annual Scholarship Program, Summer Intern Program, Toys for Tots, United Way, etc.), we think it is important to prov;de recreational opportunities for children in areas that provide an appropriate and safe environment, without adding liability risk for the companies in the Business Park. Thank you for the opportunity to address this serious issue. Sincerely, Dan Dierken Facilities Director HEXFET America, International Rectifier RICHARD S FIORE pETER I~ RACOEIS JANET L S POWERS ERIN A MALONEy WILFRED J 5CHNEIDER. JR CHESTER A PUCHALSKI C MARK HOPKINS MARGARET G WANGLER JAMES C HARKINS. iV · OENNIS M BURKE CHRISTOPHER M JOHNSON MICHAEL R PERRY THOMAS L 8OSWOFqTH FIORE, RACOBS & POWERS 66?0 ALESSANORO. SUITE 8 RIVERSZDE, CALIFORNZA 92506'6310 TELEPHONE {909) 789-8100 FAX (909) 789-8105 WORLD WIDE WEB SITE: http:Hwww.fi0relawc0m O~qANGE COUNTY OFFICE 38 T~CHNOLOGY DRIVE, SUITE 250 IRVINE. CALIFORNIA 92618-2301 (9491 727.3111 FAX (949) 727-3311 COACHELLA VALLEy OFFICE 74,361 HIGHWAY IlL SUITE I PALM DESERT. CALIFORNIA 92260 (760} 776-6511 FAX (760) 776-6517 REPLY TO Planning and Directors Hearing City of Temecula October 14, 1999; 1:30 p.m. Re: Subject: Application for a Conditional Use Permit for Skateboard Park Objections of Rancho California Business Park Association The undersigned represents the Rancho California Business Park Association ("Association*'). The site for the proposed skateboard park is located within the Association. The Association has already denied the property owner's application for Association approval for the skateboard park. For the reasons set forth below. the Association opposes issuance of a conditional use permit for the proposed skateboard park and requests that the City deny the same. 1. Unacceptable Liability Risk It is inevitable that a skateboard park will attract children on skateboards. Those children will be riding their skateboards to and from and around the facility. Every nearby curb, driveway, sidewalk, planter or bump in the road will be incorporated into a skateboard trick or jump. Children on skateboards will be darting in and out of the street (Business Park Drive) and surrounding properties during the daytime and evening. Business Park Drive is already a heavily used avenue for trucks and large commercial vehicles. Trucks will be making deliveries and pickups for the existing industrial uses within the project. The industrial use across the street from the proposed skateboard ranch site informs the Association that up to 40 trucks a day visit its site. That is at least 80 truck trips past the skateboard park from that one use alone. Attracting children on skateboards to such a heavily used street is a recipe for disaster. It will only be a matter of time before a child darts out in front of and is hit by a truck or car. A more likely scenario is a near miss, where a truck or car swerves into opposing traffic to avoid striking a child. 00130123 WPD Although the child's life may be ~pared, the victims of the resulting traffic accident may not be as lucky. In the event one or more of the vehicles involved in such an incident have a payload of chemicals or other volatile material, a spill or rupture could threaten everyone in the vicinity. If so, there will be no safe or sane way to evacuate the children from the skateboard park. 2. Chilling Effect on Existing and Proposed Uses A more subtle, but important, side effect of allowing the skateboard park would be the resulting chilling effect on the ability to operate existing uses, expand existing uses and attract new, high quality light industry. The presence of large numbers of children in the industrial park will impose significant and additional burdens upon the ability to operate an industrial use within the industrial park. Children are highly sensitive recepturs. As a result, emissions standards for uses within the park will tighten, thereby increasing the cost of operation. The presence of children nearby will result in increased internal and external mitigation measures from a host of permitting agencies, including the City, once again increasing the cost of operation. Finally, the increased liability risk discussed above will drive away otherwise attractive uses. The Association has already seen evidence of this chilling effect. Owners have called the Association to complain that allowing the skateboard park will limit their ability to develop their property and/or attract tenants. Other owners have reported to the Association that the presence of the skateboard park will limit their ability to expand existing uses because of the increased regulatory burden. In short, the light, clean industry and resulting employment so desired by the City and its residents will turn away because of the demonstrated problems and difficulties of attempting to operate a business in close proximity to a use heavily visited by children. 3. Conclusion The proposed use is simply incompatible with the existing uses. Under no set of circumstances does it make sense to insert a magnet for unaccompanied and unsupervised children into the heart of an industrial park. No amount of mitigation measures can reduce the liability risk to an acceptable level. Allowing the skateboard park to be installed in the proposed location will drive away existing and potential business and industrial uses. The resulting increase in liability and loss of business if the skateboard park is allowed will be a net loss for the city and its residents. Respectfully submitted by FIORE, RACOBS & POWERS Dennis M. Burke On behalf of Rancho California Business Park Association 00130123 WPD EXHIBITS F:~Depts~pLANNING~STAFFRPT~66pa99.p~.doc 21 CITY OF TEMECULA ' >'go-=. CT ,® : CASE NO. - PA99-0266 EXHIBIT - A PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - NOVEMBER 3, 1999 22 CITY OF TEMECULA EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP DESIGNATION - LI LIGHT INDUSTRIAL >0'( )O0000mQ6--~C~( EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION - BP BUSINESS PARK CASE NO. - PA99-0266 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -NOVEMBER 3, 1999 F:~q~PLANNING~STAFFRFl12r~pa,Og.i~.doc 23 In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, labace contact officeoftheCommunityDevelopmentDepatmentat(909)694-6400. NoOficatjon4ihourspdortoameeto~OwiIhnabietheCAtytomake reasonaide arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35,102.35,104 ADA Tie ACTION AGENDA TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION Novernber 3, f999 {} 6:00 PM 43200 Business Park Drive Council Chambers Temecula, CA 92590 Resolution Next In Order #99-045 CALL TO ORDER: FLAG SALUTE: ROLL CALL: Chairperson Guerriero Fahey, Guerdem, Mathewson, Naggar, 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 net listed on the Agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the Commission Secretary. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address. For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Ranning Secretary before Commission gets to that item. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers. COMMISSION BUSINESS Approval of Agenda ACTION: APPROVED 4-0, GUERRIERO ABSENT Minutes from October 6, 1999 ACTION: APPROVED 4-0, GUERRIERO ABSENT PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 3, Case No.: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Environmental Action: Case Planner: Recommendation: ACTION: Planning Application No. PA97-0307 (Tentative Parcel Map 28627) Margarita Canyon, LLC 27740 Jefferson Avenue, Temecula, CA 92590 Located adjacent to Interstate 15, southwest of the intersection of Old Town Front Street and Highway 79 south (The future Western Bypass Corridor). Assessor's Parcel Number 922-210-047). Planning Application No. PA97-0307 is a proposal to subdivide an approximately 37 acre parcel in 10 commercial lots and one open spaca lot. City Staff is recommending that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be prepared for this project. John DeGange Continue CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 8, 1999 4-0, GUERRIERO ABSENT R:\WIMBERVG\PLANCOMM~AGENDAS\I999\l 1-3-99.doc Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Environmental Action: Planner. Recommendation: ACTION: Development Agreement between Pala Rainbow LLC and the City of Temecula (Planning Application PA99-0273) City of Temecula South of State Highway 79 (South) at the intersedion with Pala Road in the City of Temecula To approve a Development Agreement with Pala Rainbow LLC Adopt a Negative Declaration Dave Hogan, Senior Planner Recommend approval of the Development Agreement to the City Courtall APPROVED 4-0, GUERRIERO ABSENT 5. Case No: Applicant: Location: Proposal: Environmental Action: Planner: Recommendation: ACTION: Planning Application No. PA99-0266 (Minor Conditional Use Permit) OIlie House Indoor Skateboard Park 43300 Business Park Ddve To operate an indoor skateboard park within a 21,346 square foot podion of a building within an existing business park"" Exempt per CEQA Section 15301 John De Gange The Planning Commission Consider the Applicant's Request (Pursuant to Section 17.03 of the Development Code, the Director of Planning has referred this item to the Planning Commission) APPROVED 3-1, FAHEY OPPOSED/GUERRIERO ABSENT PLANNING MANAGERS REPORT COMMISSIONER REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: November 17, 1999, 6:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California, 92590 R:\V/~BERVG\pLANCOMMXAGENDAS\I999\I I-3-99,doc 2