HomeMy WebLinkAbout011900 PC AgendaIn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to partialpate in this
meeting, please contact the office of the Ci'q Clerk (909) 694-6~??,. Notification 48 hours pdor to a meeting
will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR
35.10235.104 ADA T~tle II]
ADDENDUM AGENDA
TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
A REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
JANUARY 19, 2000- 6:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER:
Flag Salute:
Roll Call:
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Commissioner Mathewson
Fahey, Mathewson, Webster, Guerriero
Next in Order:
Resolution: No. 2000-03
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Commission
on items that are listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes each.
If you desire to speak to the Commission about an item not on the Agenda, a pink
"Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the Commission SecretaW.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record.
For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the
Commission Secretary pdor to the Commission addressing that item. There is a three
(3) minute time limit for individual speakers.
CONSENT CALENDAR
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will
be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless
Members of the Planning Commission request specific items be removed from the
Consent Calendar for separate action.
1 Al~13reval of Aaenda
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the Agenda of January 19, 2000.
F:%DEPT$%PLANNING~PLANCOMM%Agendas%20OO~AddendUm to 1-29-00.cloc
1
2 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes of December 8, 1999.
3 Directors Headn{3 Update
RECOMMENDATION
3.1 Receive and file.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
Any person may submit wdtten comments to the Planning Commission before a public
hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of
the project(s) at the time of hearing. If you challenge any of the projects in court, you
may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public
hearing or in written correspondences delivered to the Commission Secretary at, or
prior to, the public hearing.
4
Planning Application No. PA99-0345 (Development Plan) - VCL Construction (located on
the east side of Jefferson Avenue. approximately 1.000 feet north of Rancho California
Road - Project Planner Steve Gdffin) - Continued from the January 5. 2000, Planning
Commission meeting
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0345, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 35,224 SQUARE-
FOOT, 101-ROOM OR 59,950 SQUARE*FOOT, 137-ROOM
HOLIDAY INN HOTEL ON 3.37 ACRES LOCATED ON THE
EAST SIDE OF JEFFERSON AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY
1,000 FEET NORTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, AND
ALSO IDENTIFIED AS PORTIONS OF PARCEL 1, 2, 3 & 6 OF
PARCEL MAP 23882
4.2 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0345 (Development
Plan) pursuant to Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines.
F:~DEPTS~PLANNING%PLANCOMM%Agendas%2000%Addendum to t-29-00.de¢
2
5
6
Rannine Application No. PA99-0379 (Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan) -
Willina (Buck) & Lynne Ramsev (located at the south side of Winchester Road, midway
between Ynez Road and Maraadta Road, on Pad E at the Promenade Mall - APN910-
320-028 - Project Planner Thomas Thomslev) - Continued from the January 5. 2000
Planning Commission meeting
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0379, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN
AND CONSTRUCTION OF A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT
COMMERCIAL BUILDING ON 1.2 ACRES AND A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A GAS
STATION/CONVENIENCE STORE WITH A DRIVE-THRU
RESTAURANT SERVICE LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
WINCHESTER ROAD BETWEEN MARGARITA ROAD AND
YNEZ ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 910-
320-028 AND LOT E OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PA98-0495
AND PARCEL MERGER PA99-0007
5.2
Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0379 (Conditional
Use Permit and Development Plan) based on the Determination of Consistency with
a project for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was previously certified
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 - Subsequent EIR's and Negative
Declarations.
Plannine Application No. PA99-0398 (Development Plan) - (located on the north side of
State Hiehwav 79 south approximately 500 feet west of Marearita Road and State
Hiehwav 79 south intersection) - Associate Planner Denice Thomas
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0398, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 21,151 SQUARE
FOOT MEDICAL OFFICE PLAZA ON 2.28 ACRES LOCATED
ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH
APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET WEST OF THE MARGARITA
ROAD AND STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH INTERSECTIONS
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 950-100-019
F:~DEPTS%PLANNING~PLANCOMM~AgendaS~2000~AddendUm to 1-29-00,doc
3
6.2 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0398 pursuant to
Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines;
6.3 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000- .
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0399, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29510 TO
SUBDIVIDE 3.42 VACANT ACRES INTO TWO (2) PARCELS
WITHIN THE HIGHWAY TOURIST COMMERCIAL ZONE
GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE
HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET WEST OF
MARGARITA ROAD AND STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH
INTERSECTION, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 950-
100-019
6.4 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0399 pursuant to
Section 15315 of the CEQA Guidelines.
7
Plannin;3 Aol~lication No. PA97-0307 (Tentative Parcel Mao 28627] - (located adiacent to
Interstate '15. south west of the intersection of Old Town Front Street and Hiahwav 79
south (the future Westem Bvoass Corddod. Assessor's Parcel #922-210-047-Project
Planner John DeGanoe - Continued from the December 8. 1999 Plannino
Commission meeting
RECOMMENDATION
7.1 Continue
COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS
PLANNING MANAGER'S REPORT
Planner's Institute
APA Design Review Workshop on February 26, 2000
Results of inquiry on Alcohol Sting Operations
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: February 2, 2000, 6:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business
Park Ddve, Ternecula, California.
R:~PLANCOMM%Agendas~Q00%Addendum to 1-29-00.doc
4
ITEM #2
MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 8, 1999
CALL TO ORDER
The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in an adjourned regular meeting
at 6:03 P.M.. on Wednesday December 8, 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 Webster.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Absent:
Also Present:
Commissioners *Fahey, Mathewson, Webster, and
Chairman Guerriero.
None.
Planning Manager Ubnoske,
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks,
Senior Engineer Moghadam,
Attorney Curley,
Senior Planner Fagan,
Senior Planner Hogan,
Project Planner Anders,
Project Planner DeGange, and
Minute Clerk Hansen.
*(Commissioner Fahey arrived at 6:13 P.M.)
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No comments.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
1. Approval of A~3enda
MOTION: Commissioner Webster moved to approve the agenda. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner Mathewson and voice vote reflected approval with the
exception of Commissioner Fahey who was absent.
2. Approval of Minutes-November 3, 1999
MOTION: Commissioner Webster moved to approve the minutes, as written. The
motion was seconded by Commissioner Mathewson and voice vote reflected approval
with the exception of Commissioner Fahey who was absent.
PlanCom,T,/minute~1120899
3. Appoint a New Co-Chair person
Commissioner Webster nominated Commissioner Mathewson for the position of Vice
Chairman of the Commission. Chairman Guerriero nominated Commissioner Webster
for the position of Vice Chairman of the Commission.
Commissioner Webster highly recommended Commissioner Mathewson for the
appointment, and it was the consensus of the Commission to appoint Commissioner
Mathewson as Vice Chairman of the Planning Commission (Commissioner Fahey was
absent).
4. Public Convenience or Necessity for Proposed Ultramar Gas Station
By way of overhead maps, Senior Planner Fagan presented the staff report (of record),
specifying the location of current licensed alcohol uses within proximity to this particular
use.
It was noted that Commissioner Fahey arrived at 6:13 P.M.,
For Commissioner Mathewson, Senior Planner Fagan provided additional information
regarding the justification for the findings of Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN) with
respect to the 10 licenses issued to similar uses within the City; relayed that in the past,
the Planning Commission had denied a PCN finding based on that particular use's
proximate location to sensitive uses (i.e. school); and confirmed that the Police
Department had relayed no opposition to the license issuance for this particular use.
tn response to Chairman Guerriero's querying, Senior Planner Fagan relayed that staff
did not calculate the number of existing licensed establishments within this census zone;
noted that at the December 15, 1999 Planning Commission meeting staff would present
to the Commission additional information regarding the concentration of existing licensed
establishments within corridors of the City, and further specify the types of uses in order
for the staff to receive input from the Commission.
Mr Ron Bradley, 30348 Via Canada, relayed that there were no licensed establishments
from the 1-15 freeway, east for 10 miles; noted the applicant's willingness to support
Sting Operations in cooperation with law enforcement; advised that the applicant and his
wife would be managing the store; reiterated that the Police Department expressed no
opposition to the licensing of this particular use; and recommended that the Planning
Commission make the PNC finding.
Mr. Clark Ramsey, the applicant, provided additional information regarding the
development plan for this particular use; and relayed that the beer and wine sales would
encompass approximately fifteen to twenty percent (15%-20%) of the convenience
store's revenues, noting the diminished value of the site if the beer and wine license was
not issued.
Mr. Wayne Hall, 4231 Agena Street, relayed concern regarding the proliferation of
licensed alcohol establishments within the City, specifically with respect to off-site sales;
noted that the majority of the illegal sales of alcohol occurred at these particular types of
uses; and relayed that due to the proximate existing licensed uses, he was opposed to
the finding of Necessity or Convenience.
PlarlComnvminutesl120899
The Commission relayed their concludinq remarks, as follows:
Commissioner Webster commended staff for the thorough provisions in the agenda
material, specifically with respect to the criteria data; and relayed that he could not justify
the PCN finding due to the proximate location of the existing licensed uses.
In concurrence with Commissioner Webster's comments, Commissioner Mathewson
relayed that at this point he could not make a finding of PCN due to the existing licensed
establishments, specifically in light of the location of the licensed use across the street.
Commissioner Fahey advised that since she was not present for the staff report, she
would be abstaining with regard to this Agenda Item.
Chairman Guerriero relayed that per his previous contact with ABC regarding the
number of existing licenses within this particular census zone he was concerned with the
proliferation of such uses in this particular area; referenced his work with the School
District, educating children and their parents with respect to the ills of alcohol and drug
abuse; and noted that he would have difficulty supporting the finding due to the number
of proximate existing licensed establishments.
For Commissioner Mathewson, Chairman Guerriero noted that via his conversations
with ABC. the concentration of licensed uses was directed by the City or the County
thereof, and was. at times, politically based.
MOTION: Commissioner Webster moved to deny the finding of Public Convenience or
Necessity. Commissioner Mathewson seconded the motion and voice vote reflected
unanimous approval with the exception of Commissioner Fahey who abstained.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
5. Plannin~l Application No. PA97-0307 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 28627)
Request to subdivide an approximate 37-acre parcel into 19 commercial
lots and one open space lot.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning
Commission approve the request.
Chairman Guerriero relayed that due to the delayed attendance of the applicant, it had
been requested that this Agenda Item be considered out of order, postponing the matter
until the applicant arrived.
MOTION: Commissioner Fahey moved to hear this Agenda item out of order,
postponing the matter until the applicant arrived Chairman Guerriero seconded the
motion and voice vote reflected unanimous approvaL.
(This Agenda Item was considered after Agenda Item No. 7. See page 8.)
3
planComm/minutes/120899
Planninq AI31~lication Nos. PA99-0243 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29286);
PA99-0244 (General Plan Amendment, and PA99-0245 (Zonincl Amendment)
l)
PA99o0243 (Tentative Tract Map No. 29286) is a request to subdivide
9.75 acres into 38 single family residential lots and tow open space lots
that comply with the Low Medium (LM) Density Residential zoning
classification (3-6 dwelling units per acre);
2)
PA99-0244 (General Plan Amendment) is a request to remove the
subject site from the Specific Plan Overlay designation on Figure 2-5 of
the General Plan and revert back to the underlying Land Use
Designation of Low Medium (LM) Density Residential zoning of the
General Plan Land Use map;
3)
PA99-0245 (Zoning Amendment) is a request to change the existing
zoning map from Specific Plan Overlay (SP) to Low Medium (LM)
Density Residential which is consistent with the underlying General
Plan Land Use designation of Low Medium (LM) Density Residential.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning
Commission approve the request.
Via overhead maps, Project Planner Anders presented a detailed overview of the staff
report (per agenda material), highlighting the location of this particular proposal; relayed
that due to the site's bifurcation by Margarita Road, both the applicant and staff concur
that inclusion in the Specific Plan would be inappropriate; noted that to implement the
revision, the proposal required a General Plan Amendment (although the Land Use
designation would remain the same), a Zoning Amendment (due to the site's inclusion in
the Specific Plan), and approval of a Tentative Tract Map; specified the proposed
densities; clarified the access points; relayed that due to contact from the Airport Land
Use Commission, the applicant had agreed to condition the project to review by the
Airport Land Use Commission; and noted that the Tentative Tract Map had been
developed in compliance with the City's Development Code, and the General Plan
[relative to the Low Medium (LM) density requirements].
For Commissioner Webster, Project Planner Anders relayed additional information
regarding the requirements of this particular project with respect to the Development
Code, and with respect to adherence to architectural standards (which would be
appreved per a Director's Hearing).
In response to Commissioner Webster's and Mathewson's queries, Deputy Director of
Public Works Parks clarified the access provisions, noting the proposed landscaped
median on Margarita Road which would limit left-turning movements on Margarita Road;
and clarified the right-of*way provisions, which would be consistent with the current
circulation plans.
Mr. Bill Green, representing the applicant, relayed concurrence with staffs comments;
and for Commissioner Fahey, provided additional information regarding the restrictions
PlanCommlminute~120899
associated with the implementation of two outlets, with respect to concerns relayed from
the Fire Department and the Public Works Department.
Mr. Bill Storm, the applicant, was available for questions and comments of the
Commission; and relayed concurrence with staffs comments.
The Commission presented their conclusions, as follows:
Commissioner Fahey noted that although she would have preferred larger lot sizes,
which would be consistent with the current standards, she was not opposed to the
proposed request.
In light of the restrictions associated with the access issues associated with this
particular site, Commissioner Mathewson relayed no opposition to the proposed
project since the Public Works Department was satisfied with the provisions of access.
Commissioner Webster relayed concurrence with the Tract Map, as proposed, due to
the limitations of the site; recommended that with respect to the architectural standards,
that the project be conditioned to require review of the Design Guidelines or a Product
Review.
Chairman Guerriero relayed concurrence with Commissioner Webster's comments.
MOTION: Commissioner Webster moved to close the public hearing; to approve staffs
recommendation with the attached conditions.
PC RESOLUTION NO. 99-49
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE SPECIFIC PLAN
OVERLAY MAP (FIGURE 2-5) OF THE GENERAL PLAN
(PLANNING APPLICATION NO, PA99-0244) FOR THE
PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF
MARGARITA ROAD AT THE NORTHERN CITY LIMIT
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 911-
640-003 AND ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE ICY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO
CHANGE THE ZONING FROM SP (SPECIFIC PLAN) TO
LOW MEDIUM (LM) DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
(PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0245) ON THE
PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF
MARGARITA ROAD AT THE NORTHERN CITY LIMIT
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 911-
640-003.
PlanComm/minutesl120899
RESOLUTION NO. 99-050
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA99-0243 FOR TENTATIVE TRACT
NO. 29286 FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF 9.75 ACRES
INTO 38 RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED ON THE EAST
SIDE OF MARGARITA ROAD AT THE NORTHERN CITY
LIMIT AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NUMBER 9'11-640-003.
Add-
· A Condition subjecting the project to review by the Airport Land Use
Commission.
A Condition requiring the applicant to submit Design Guidelines for review by
the Planning Commission or be subject to Product Review. per staffs and
the applicant's recommendation.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Webster and voice vote reflected
unanimous approval.
The applicant provided assurance that this project would reflect sure quality; and relayed
a preference that the project be subject to Product Review rather than Design Guidelines
Review.
Commissioner Webster clarified that the project had been conditioned to either be
subject to Design Guidelines Review, or Product Review, specifying the latitude.
Rancho Hiclhlands Drive General Plan Amendment (Planninq Al~131ication
PA99-0451 )
Request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map to change the Land Use
Designation for a portion of the Rancho Highlands Specific Plan from Open
Space to Highway Tourist Commercial.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning
Commission approve the request.
Relaying that this proposal if approved, would be the fourth Land Use Element
Amenc~ment for the year of 1999, Senior Planner Hogan provided an overview of the
staff report (of record); referenced sections of the Specific Plan (per agenda material)
with respect to the Grading Plan, and the Open Space/Recreation area; provided
additional information regarding the incorrect denoted acreage in the Planning Areas;
with respect to Commission querying, relayed that while staff was of the opinion that a
6
planComeTI/minute$1120899
Specific Plan Amendment was not necessary, that if it was the Commission's desire, that
the matter could be brought back to the Commission at a later date; and with respect to
the proposed CIP Project to construct a pedestrian bridge over the Interstate, noted that
the specific location of that project had not been determined.
The Commission's conclusionarv comments were, as follows:
Commissioner Webster queried the lack of provisions in this particular proposal with
respect to the requirement to implement a Park and Ride facility, as well as, the
requirement to have a Transportation Systems Management Team and the
establishment of a coordinator (in Planning Area No. 2) and with respect to Planning
Area No. 2, recommended that there be a Specific Plan Amendment to address the
revisions in this particular area.
In response to Commissioner Fahey's comments regarding the implementation of a Park
and Ride facility, Senior Planner Hogan relayed that the original intent of the requirement
was that there be consideration of alternative transportation details, noting that a Park
and Ride facility would be one option; specified that the language was vague as to
specificity, noting that the proposed pedestrian bridge could qualify as meeting this
padicular requirement.
Commissioner Fahey relayed that since there had been no implementation of any
alternative transportation plan, that if this particular site was not maintained as Open
Space, this site would be the sole area available for meeting that criteria.
Chairman Guerriero relayed concurrence with Commissioner Fahey's comments.
While concurring with staff's recommendation that revisions were necessitated,
Commissioner Webster relayed that with respect to the Land Use Plan and the
Grading Plan, this proposal was clearly identified as an Open Space/Slope area; noted
the intent for provision of a buffer within this area between the High Density Residential
and the Office Professional, and between the freeway and the development on site,
which this area satisfied; relayed concern with exceeding the development within
Planning Area No. 2, in conjunction with the lack of provision for an alternative
transportation element; reiterated the recommendation for a Specific Plan Amendment;
and relayed that he was not in favor of this proposal.
MOTION: Commissioner Webster moved to close the public hearing; and to deny staff's
recommendation due to the following: 1) the proposal's nonconformance with the
Specific Plan, and 2) the plan to develop additional acreage, rather than maintain an
Open Space area, noting the associated negative impact with respect to traffic.
Chairman Guerriero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
It was noted that at 6:58 P.M. the meeting recessed, reconvening at 7:09 P.M.
At this time the Commission considered Agenda Item No. 5.
7
PlanComrn/rnlnute$1120899
5. Planninq Al~plication No, PA97-0307 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 28627)
Request to subdivide an approximate 37-acre parcel into 19 commercial
lots and one open space lot.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning
Commission approve the request.
Chairman Guerriero advised that he would be abstaining with regard to this Agenda
Item, and therefore left the meeting at 7:10 P.M. (It was noted that Vice Chairman
Mathewson would now be presiding.)
Via overheads, Project Planner DeGange presented a detailed overview of the project
(of record); specified the location of the site, and the proposed lot sizes; relayed the
negative effect of the traffic impacts associated with this particular project; specified the
adverse effects regarding safety, queuing. merging, and weaving of traffic flows which
had been expressed by the Public Works Department and Caltrans with respect to the
applicant's proposed inadequate spacing between the I-15 freeway southbound offramp
and the proposed access into the site (which was approximately 160 feet); relayed that
based on the traffic concerns, staff was of the opinion that the mitigating measures
associated with the project did not adequately mitigate the impacts, and that staff had,
therefore, performed additional analysis and developed an alternative access point
(relocated approximately 250 feet to the west) which would adequately mitigate the
impacts; noted that the project would be conditioned to submittal (at a future point in
time) of a revised map, denoting a modified access point (250 feet west of the existing
access point); provided additional information regarding the adjacent property owner's
correspondence with the applicant due to the concern with respect to the provision of
access to the property to the south of this particular project, relaying that the
correspondence and the response correspondence from the applicant's representatives
had been provided for Commission review (per supplemental agenda material); advised
that Deputy Director of Public Works Parks would provide additional information
regarding the traffic issues; and with respect to the biological issues associated with this
project, specified the mitigation measures, the permitting process, and the Resource
Agency approvals required by the applicant.
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks reiterated the traffic issues associated with this
particular project; referenced a letter from Caltrans dated October 20, 1997, addressing
concern with respect to the proposed limited intersection spacing from the I-15 freeway
offramp, noting that Caltrans had recommended that the distance be a minimum of 410
feet, rather than the proposed 160 feet; relayed that although the applicant had made
efforts to work with staff with respect to the traffic concerns, that staff was of the opinion
that the proposed access point would adversely affect traffic flows; advised that in order
to mitigate the issue, staff had proposed an alternate plan, relocating the access point
(250 feet west of the existing access point); and introduced Senior Engineer Moghadam,
who would present, for demonstration purposes only, a simulated exhibit (via computer
software), displaying the flows of traffic with the proposed access point, in comparison to
staff's alternate recommended access point.
pianCornnvmirtutesl120899
Senior Engineer Moghadam reiterated the primary concern with the proposed access
point was the proximity to the I-15 freeway on-and off-ramps; presented a simulated
demonstration model, displaying the traffic flows (which incorporated the traffic
information from the applicant's data) with the proposed access provision, specifying the
significant traffic problems with vehicles attempting to enter the left-turning lane into the
project (relative to the inadequate spacing from the offramp); presented the alternate
plan developed by staff which was inclusive of relocation of the driveway access 250
feet to the west, displaying the improved flow of traffic; advised that the benefit of the
alternate plan was the provision for a longer distance for vehicles (from either the
northbound or southbound offramp) to adequately position their vehicles into the
appropriate lane for making a left-turn into the site; provided additional information
regarding the improved traffic flow from southbound Front Street due to the configuration
of this plan; and relayed that in light of the existing conditions in the area, that the
alternate plan provided the most viable solution to the circulation issues.
For Commissioner Webster, Senior Engineer Moghadam provided the rationale for the
software's depiction of the median modification; clarified the restrictions associated with
proposing a feasible circulation plan, noting that the alternate plan took into
consideration realistic potential movement of vehicles.
For Commissioner Webster, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that
although the applicant offered additional right-of-way provisions. that with the
implementation of the alternate plan, that the right-of-way provisions would not be
necessary; advised that the future potential project for a possible relocation of the
southbound on-ramp and off-ramp could not be considered for this particular project due
to the tentative nature of the proposal.
For informational purposes, Senior Engineer Moghadam clarified that the software
simulation display provision was new, and had been provided only for demonstration
purposes, noting that the applicant's traffic data had been implemented into the program.
For Commissioner Fahey, Senior Engineer Moghadam provided additiona~ information to
orient the Commission to the streets and configurations depicted in the simulated
display.
With respect to Vice Chairman Mathewson's comments, Senior Engineer Moghadam
provided additional information regarding the differential of access to the site with the
proposed access point, and the alternate access point, clarifying the impact associated
with vehicles exiting the freeway, specifying the aspects of the alternate configuration
which would alleviate this impact.
With respect to the alternate plan, Parks provided additional information regarding the
location of the signals, and the improved queuing with respect to the alternate plan.
For Vice Chairman Mathewson, Senior Engineer Moghadam advised that the priority
and intent of Caltrans was to avoid freeway congestion noting that the thawing of the
street signal (controlled by Caltrans) would be affected by their intent to avoid vehicles
backing up on the freeway; relayed that the alternate configuration plan would alleviate
traffic congestion from Front Street southbound; noted that the Caltrans standard to
maintain a minimum 410 foot distance with respect to spacing of signals was not
differentiated by whether the area was urban or rural, noting that Caltrans' preferred
spacinc~ was 525 feet.
For informational purposes, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed for
comparative purposes, that the spacing from the Winchester Road southbound offramp
to Jefferson Avenue was 400 feet, and that the spacing from the Rancho California Road
southbound offramp to Front Street was 600 feet, noting that this particular project
proposed spacing was 160 feet.
With respect to Fahey's querying regarding staff developing the alternate plan rather
than the applicant, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks provided additional
information regarding the applicanrs submitted provisions; clarified that the alternate
plan would not need to be the final plan, and that the applicant could propose an
alternate configuration as long as the 410 foot spacing was maintained; and noted that
staff had agreed with the applicant's data with respect to traffic volumes and motions,
and that the concern was regarding the weaving issues, the signal timing, and the
inadequate provision for spacing.
For Commissioner Fahey, Senior Engineer Moghadam advised that if the alternate plan
were implemented, additional traffic analysis would not be necessitated; and for
Commissioner Webster, provided additional information regarding the ultimate
development of the Western Bypass Connection, and the potential to restrict the left-
turning motions with respect to this project.
In light of the future circulation plans, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that
the configuration developed by staff would be adequate.
Mr. Larry Markham, representing the applicant, advised that with respect to the
Conditions, at this point he would solely relay the applicanrs opposition to Condition No.
14 (regarding the requirement to redesign the proposed access road); noted that
although the applicant had been diligently working with staff for many months, he was
troubled with the timing of the presentation of the alternate plan, relaying that the plan
had not been presented to the applicant prior to this meeting; relayed that due to the
new material displayed (which the applicant had not had the opportunity to analyze),
there was great difficulty in addressing the reconfiguration; noted that the applicant was
categorically opposed to the reconfiguration; advised that the applicant had been
directed to address the concerns referenced in the October 20, 1997 Caltrans letter;
provided additional information with respect to the data included in the letter and the
applicanrs efforts to address the issues over the last year; noted that the applicant had
additionally submitted a service station application, indicating that that particular site
would be adversely impacted by the presented alternate configuration; relayed that the
applicant had utilized an alternate computer software package for analysis, as directed
by staff; advised that the applicant's proposed configuration would be a more feasible
circulation plan in conjunction with the proposed future circulation elements for this
padicular area, than staff's configuration; via overheads, specified the proposed ultimate
circulation elements with respect to the re-design of the tnterctnange, relaying that the
alternate plan (inclusive of a double T-intersection) would most likely preclude the
potential proposal for hook on- and off-ramps; with respect to the impact of the
southbound offramp issues, noted that the applicant had provided mitigation for that
impact, specifying the applicant's offer to dedicate, and/or bond, or construct an
additional lane (denoted in the agenda material); requested a copy of the digital
10
information presented by staff in order to analyze the data; for Commissioner Fahey,
clarified that the applicant developed their analysis from the information package the City
had directed the applicant to utilize; and advised that per past conversations with the
City (i.e. the City Manager, Councilman Roberts) the applicant had relayed their
willingness to work with the City on the development of the Ultimate Interchange Design,
noting that Development Agreements had been submitted.
For Commissioner Fahey, Mr. Markham provided additional information regarding the
flooding issues, and the environmental impacts (specifying the numerous surveys which
had been conducted by the applicant); and relayed that that the project had been
conditioned with respect to these impacts. and that the applicant was agreeable to the
conditions thereof.
For Vice Chairman Mathewson, Mr. Markham clarified the applicant's additional property
site, which encompassed portions of the Murrieta Creek bottom, noting that that property
would be held aside for an Open Space parcel.
In response to Mr. Markham's comments, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed
that the data utilized in the simulation model presented by Senior Engineer Moghadam
was derived from the John Kain report (submitted by the applicant), and that the
volumes that were implemented in each configuration presented were representative of
the PM peak hour traffic volumes.
In response to Commissioner Fahey. Mr. Markham relayed that the applicant had
offered to accommodate the future reconfiguration plans for the 1-15; advised that the
applicant's proposed plan would be more feasible with the Ultimate Interchange
Revisions than the alternate plan developed by staff; and in response to Commissioner
Fahey's querying with respect to postponing this development until the proposed
changes for the Ultimate Interchange Design had been specifically identified, relayed
that the applicant had been working on this development for two years, and three
months.
Mr. John Kain, traffic engineer representing the applicant, relayed that although
simulation demonstrations could be helpful. that there were variations in the traffic
queues that were represented in the display, specifically with respect to the number of
vehicles accessing the project site, represented on the two configurations; noted that
while he was sure that staff had not intentionally misrepresented the volumes, that
variant elements were denoted on the circulation plans; and advised that the key
ultimate solution would be to have staff and the applicant work in conjunction with
Caltrans' proposed Loop Design for the Ultimate Interchange Design, in order to
accommodate a long-term circulation element for this particular area.
For clarification purposes with respect to the simulation display, Vice Chairman
Mathewson confirmed that staff would not have intentionally misrepresented data.
Mr. Samuel Alhadeff, attorney representing the applicant, relayed for the record that the
applicant was opposed to Condition No. 83 (requiring the applicant to comply with the
requirements of the Caltrans letter dated October 20, 1997); noted that the applicant had
been working with staff with respect to this project since 1997, advising that with the
added Condition of No. 83, the applicant could have concentrated their efforts on
Gaittans standards rather than the expended efforts to work with staff, inclusive of the
Plat~Com~vmif~utes/120899
conduction of five traffic studies completed in efforts to address staff concerns, and the
holding of numerous meetings with staff, if in the final conclusion, the Caltrans standard
was what the applicant was required to adhere to; for the record, reiterated the
requirements referenced in the October 20, 1997 Caltrans letter (per agenda material),
addressing the bulleted issues, as follows: 1) with respect to the proposed access to
Front Street within the close proximity of the I-15 ramps, and the required provision for
submittals of acceptable traffic patterns on the City's streets, as weft as the 1-15 ramps,
relayed that the proposed plan does comply with the City's General Plan, and the zoning
requirements, 2) with respect to the proposed plan's conflict with a plan by the City to
upgrade Front Street and the ramps terminating there as weft as the City's proposed
Western Bypass, advised that the proposed plan was an interim solution, acknowledging
that the Circulation Element would be revised; recommended that the Commission
support this proposed plan which would be a viable interim solution until the Ultimate
Interchange Plan was developed, noting that staffs plan would not be instrumental in
facilitating the proposed future circulation improvements for this particular area, 3) with
respect to the proposal being required to propose an alternate access point, reiterated
the willingness of the applicant to work with the City with respect to the Ultimate
Interchange Design.
Mr. Alhadeff relayed that perhaps the reluctance on the part of the City to accept the
applicant's proposed plan may have been due to the perception of the applicant's
increased property value due to the potential condemnation issues associated with the
design of the Ultimate Interchange; reiterated that the applicant had made efforts to work
with the City with respect to the Ultimate Interchange Design, submitting Development
Agreements; with regard to the simulated configuration presentation, relayed that he was
advised that a model could yield different results; referenced the staff report, indicating
that staff was of the opinion that the proposed circulation plan would work for the interim
condition; indicated that the volumes referred to in the staff report were representative of
the trip generation counts at build out; in conclusion, reiterated the applicant's desire to
work with the City with respect to the Ultimate Interchange Design, submitting
Development Agreements; reiterated that the applicant conducted five traffic studies in
order to address the concerns of staff; with respect to Caltrans comments, relayed that
the applicant should not be held captive to an existing condition, noting that the project
was in compliance with the City' General Plan, Circulation Element, and Zoning
requirements; for informational purposes, indicated that he had submitted data with
respect to the past legal issues associated with this parcel and the property to the south
of this particular project (per supplemental agenda material) regarding issues of access;
and advised that it would have been helpful for the applicant to have had access to the
simulation model representing staffs alternate configuration plan prior to this evening's
meeting.
Mr. Paul Eldridge, attorney representing the adjacent property owner, relayed the
location of the property of discussion located to the south of the particular project, noting
that the property was currently landlocked; relayed that although his clients had
expressed no opposition to this particular development plan, the recommendation was
that the Comn'fisslon condition the project based on the granting of access to this
southern property; acknowledged that there were no legal mandates requiring the
Commission to grant this access provision; advised that it should be the goal of any
government entity to encourage the most effective and beneficial use of real property,
reiterating that his client's property was currently landlocked; specified his client's
willingness to work with the applicant to develop an equitable agreement which would
12
PllnComm/minuteslt20899
provide provision of access; cited the Government Code, with respect to rights of
access; and implored the Commission to consider conditioning this project regarding
access provisions to the property to the south of this particular proposal.
Mr. Louis Kashmere, 29115 Front Street, relayed his concern with respect to the
adverse traffic and access impacts associated with the particular project; noted the
current high volumes of traffic in this area; advised that he would not be in favor of the
proposed project until he was assured it would not negatively affect his adjacent
property; suggested that the City investigate the rationale for the denial of this particular
Tract Map when it was presented to the County, prior to the City's incorporation.
Mr. Markham clarified for Mr. Kashmere the current traffic analysis with respect to the
updated current traffic volumes; provided additional information regarding the previous
submittal of a Tract Map to the County by the previous owners, which had been
withdrawn, and not denied; provided additional information regarding the Land Use
issues; recommended that the Commission approve this project, as proposed with the
adoption of a Negative Declaration, as opposed to the requirement for an environmental
impact report based on traffic issues; and in response to Commissioner Fahey's
querying as to whether a continuance would aid in the addressing of expressed issues of
concern, relayed that the applicant would desire an opportunity to analyze the simulation
model configuration presented by staff.
In response to Mr. EIdridge's comments, Mr. Robert Edmunds, attorney representing the
applicant, provided a detailed overview of the issues associated with the access issues
associated with the adjacent property (additional information provided in the
supplemental agenda material with respect to the legal issues associated with the
matter), noting that the legal issues of access were not in legal dispute, relaying that the
property was purchased with the knowledge that the parcels were landlocked, specifying
the options that were available to the owners; and recommended that the Commission
let the issue be resolved in the marketplace.
Attorney Curley provided additional information regarding the Commission's power to
condition the project with respect to the provisions of access to the adjacent property, if
that was its desire.
Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that staff would readily comply with the applicant's
desire for the information related to the simulation model; reiterated that the model was
solely for the purpose of a demonstration exhibit; and advised that staff did not base
their analysis on the simulated model program, but utilized it as a mode of displaying
their concerns and the alternate configuration plan.
With respect to Senior Engineer Moghadam's comments, Mr. Alhadeff advised that
these types of comments are what the applicant has had to deal with during the last few
months.
The Commissioner's concludinq remarks were. as follows:
In light of the applicant's desire to review staff's traffic configuration, and the submittal of
a plethora of supplemental agenda material which staff and the Commission had not had
an opportunity to review, Vice Chairman Mathewson queried the Commission with
13
PianComfft/rninutes/120899
respect to continuing the matter; and relayed that he could not make an informed
decision at this point.
In concurrence with continuing the matter, Commissioner Fahey relayed that she could
not support a configuration that did not take into account the Ultimate Interchange
Design and the future potential circulation elements; requested that staff address the
landlocked property located to the south of this particular proposal with respect to the
General Plan; and commended staff for their diligent efforts associated with the
presentation of the simulation model, which visually clarified the concerns of staff.
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks advised that the applicant had a right to have this
project considered without the potential freeway and potential circulation revisions due to
the fact that there was no approved study, no determined alignment or designated
funding for the potential projects; and relayed that if the applicant opted to wait until
there was a determined alignment, and designated funding, then at that point these
issues could be considered
Commissioner Fahey relayed that she could not support either presented configuration
plan due to the variables that had not been adequately addressed.
For Commissioner Webster, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that the PSR
could potentially be complete in a year, and that funding would then need to be
addressed.
In response to Commissioner Webster's querying, Attorney Curley advised that if the
PSR were complete, the Commission could consider the elements addressed.
For Commissioner Webster, Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that although she
recalled the past discussions with the applicant regarding a Development Agreement,
that neither staff nor the applicant had pursued that specific issue.
Due to the unresolved short-term and long-term traffic concerns, Commissioner
Webster recommended that in the interim period of continuance that there be an offer
on the applicant's behalf to pursue the Development Agreement in order to address
future Ultimate Improvements, rather than the City requiring that the issues be
addressed; suggested that with the pursuit of the Development Agreement, that the
applicant's proposed plan be approved, adding a Condition requiring provisions of a
turn-around at the temporary west end of 79 South, and if need be that the project be
conditioned to restrict a certain portion of the properly until the Ultimate Interchange
Design was completed; relayed that his recommendation would delete Condition No. 14;
with respect to Condition No. 83, concurred with the applicant on deleting the condition,
unless staff recommended maintaining the requirements, and ignoring the findings; with
respect to the access issues related to the property located south of this particular
project, recommended that staff and Counsel make a recommendation concerning that
issue.
Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that the matter could be continued to the January
19, 2000 meeting.
14
PlanCornm/minutesf120899
MOTION: Commissioner Fahey moved to continue the matter to the January 19, 2000
Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Webster seconded the motion and voice
vote reflected approval with the exceDtion of Chairman Guerriero who abstained.
PLANNING MANAGER'S REPORT
Planning Manager Ubnoske noted the provision of additional traffic data in the
staff reports due to the expressed concern of the Commission; and queried the
Commission as to the detail of traffic data desired.
Commissioner Webster relayed that the Commission had relayed to Senior
Planner Fagan that the traffic data's attached executive summary would be
sufficient provision of data.
COMMISSIONER REPORTS
For Commissioner Webster, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that
the current Caltrans project on the 1-15 freeway was to improve the condition of
the inside edges of the freeway.
With respect to Commissioner Webster's querying regarding the Meadowview
Gold Course Application, Senior Planner Fagan provided additional information
regarding the Director's Hearing which requested the applicant's provision of
additional information, relaying that the applicant had not yet responded.
C,
For informational purposes, Commissioner Webster provided copies of an article
regarding planning issues,
For Vice Chairman Mathewson, Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that
although there had been discussions regarding updating the Land Use Element,
that staff had not received direction from the City Council at this time.
With respect Vice Chairman Mathewson's querying with respect to the proposal
related to the Ultramar Gas Station use, Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that
that if the alcohol permit was not issued, the applicant may not pursue the
development plan;
Senior Planner Fagan relayed that if this project was to go forward it would not
be required to implement a Park and Ride facility; and advised that staff would
present additional information regarding that issue at a future point in time.
Vice Chairman Mathewson relayed that at the area near the Cinema at the
Promenade Mall, in the proximity area of the Farell's site, that there was a valet
canopy that impeded pedestrian access.
Senior Planner Fagan relayed that staff would contact Forest City, requesting the
relocation of the canopy,
For Vice Chairman Mathewson, with respect to the inadequate screening of the
Power Center from the line of sight from Margarita Road, Senior Planner Fagan
15
PlanComrrdminutesl120899
relayed that when the applicant was completed with the screening application,
staff would address the issue and provide an update to the Commission.
Commissioner Fahey relayed that on the Meadowview side of the Cinema (at the
Promenade Mall site) that the landscaping had been adversely impacted by
pedestrian travel, requesting that staff address the issue with Forest City.
ADJOURNMENT
At 9:11 P.M. Vice Chairman Mathewson formally adjourned this meeting to Wednesday,
December 15, 1999 at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park
Drive, Temecula.
Ron Guerriero, Chairman
Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager
16
ITEM #3
CITY OF TEMECULA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission
Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager
January 19, 2000
Director's Hearing Case Update
Planning Director's Agenda items for December, 1999:
Date Case No.
December 2, 1999 PA98-0409
December 9, 1999
December 23, 1999
December 23, 1999
PA99-0332
PA99-0406
PA99-0334
Proposal
The design, construction
and operation of an 8,049
square foot equipment
rental business building
To build and operate a Del Taco
2,164 square foot Del
Taco restaurant with drive-
thru services on a .73 acre
site.
An expansion of Rancho MEG
Ford to include a truck and Investments
used care sales lot, 1,500
square foot sales office,
parking, display and
circulation areas
Subdividing 4.85 acres WM15
into four parcels for Partners LP
commercial use
Attachments:
1. Action Agendas - Blue Page 3
Applicant Action
Rebel Rents Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\DIRHEARXMEMO\1999\D~Cmher 1999.memo.doe
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
ACTION AGENDAS
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\DIILHEAR\MEMO\I999\DeCember 1999.memo.doe
2
ACTION AGENDA
TEMECULA DIRECTOR'S HEARING
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 2, 1999 1:30 PM
TEMECULA CITY HALL MAIN CONFERENCE ROOM
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula. CA 92590
CALL TO ORDER: Matthew Fagan, Senior Planner
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address to the Senior
Planner on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3)
minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Senior Planner about an item no__~t listed on
the Agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the
Senior Planner.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state vour name and address.
For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Senior
Planner before that item is heard. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual
speakers.
PUBLIC HEARING
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Environmental Action:
Case Planner:
Case Engineer:
Recommendation:
Planning Application No. PA98-0409 (Development Plan)
Rebel Rents
Located on the south side of Winchester Road,
approximately 1650 feet west of Diaz Road.
The design, construction and operation of an 8,049 square
foot equipment rental business/building,
This project is categorically exempt under CEQA.
John De Gange
John Pourkazemi
Approval
ACTION: APPROVED
ADJOURNMENT
',\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLi\USER.PUBL\pLANNING\DIP. HEARXI999\I2-2-~9.AGENI)A.doc
1
ACTION AGENDA
TEMECULA DIRECTOR'S HEARING
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 9, 1999 1:30 PM
TEMECULA CITY HALL MAIN CONFERENCE ROOM
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
CALL TO ORDER: Matthew Fagan, Senior Planner
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address to the Senior
Planner on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3)
minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Senior Planner about an item not listed on
the Agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the
Senior Planner.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address,
For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Senior
Planner before that item is heard. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual
speakers.
PUBLIC HEARING
Case No: Planning Application No. PA99-0332 (Minor Conditional Use Permit)
Applicant: Dean Norby, Del Taco, 203041 Avenida De La Cadota, Laguna Hills,
CA 92653
Location: In the Winchester Meadows Shopping Center near the northwest
corner Margarita and Winchester Roads.
Proposal: A request to build and operate a 2,164 square foot Del Taco
restaurant with drive-thru service on a .73 acre site.
Environmental Action:This project is a Class 32 Categorical Exemption under CEQA
(Section Number 15332 In-fill Development Projects on sites under
five acres in an urbanized area.)
Case Pfanner: Thomas Thornsley
Recommendation: Approval
ACTION: APPROVED
ADJOURNMENT
\\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLi\USERPUBL\PLANNING\DIRHEAR\I999\i2-9-99.AGENDA.doc
ACTION AGENDA
TEMECULA DIRECTOR'S HEARING
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 23, 1999 1:30 PM
TEMECULA CITY HALL MAIN CONFERENCE ROOM
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
CALL TO ORDER: Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address to the Senior
Planner on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3}
minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Senior Planner about an item not fisted on the
Agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the Senior
Planner.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address.
For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Senior Planner
before that item is heard, There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers.
PUBLIC HEARING
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Case Planner:
Case Engineer:
Recommendation:
Planning Application No. PA99-0406 (Conditional Use Permit)
MEG Investments
2.51 acres at 28695 Ynez Road (northwest comer of Ynez Road and
North Plaza Drive)
An expansion of Rancho Ford to include a truck and used car
sales lot, including a 1,500 _+ square foot sales office; parking,
display and circulation areas; and associated landscaping
Environmental Action: Exempt
Steve Gdffin, Project Planner
Clement Jimenez, Assistant Engineer
Approval
ACTION:
APPROVED
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Environmental Action:
Case Planner:
Recommendation:
Planning Application No, PA99-0334 (Tentative Parcel Map)
WM 15 Partners L. P. (Gary Nogle)
Northwest comer of Winchester and Roripaugh Roads
The subdividing of 4.85 acres into four parcels for commercial use.
This project is Categorically Exempt from further evaluation under
CEQA Section 15315
Thomas 7nomsley
Approval
ACTION: APPROVED
ADJOURNMENT
\/TEMEC_FS10t\VOLI\USERPUBL\PLANNING\DIP~HEAR\I999\I2-23-99.AGENDA,doc
ITEM #4
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
January 19, 1999
Planning Application No. PA99-0345 (Development Plan: Holiday Inn)
Case Planner: Steve Griffin, AICP
RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department - Planning
Division Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
1. ADOPT A Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA99-0345, A DEVELOPMENT
PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND
OPERATION OF A 35,224 SQUARE-FOOT, 101- ROOM
OR 59,950 SQUARE-FOOT, 137-ROOM HOLIDAY INN
HOTEL ON 3,37 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE
OF JEFFERSON AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY 1,000
FEET NORTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, AND
ALSO IDENTIFIED AS PORTIONS OF PARCEL 1, 2, 3 &
6 OF PARCEL MAP 23882
ADOPT a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0345 pursuant
to Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines.
BACKGROUND
The Holiday Inn proposal was originally presented and considered by the Planning
Commission on December 15, 1999. It was continued to the meeting of January 5, 2000,
and then to the meeting of January 19, 2000, in order to provide sufficient time for the
applicant to prepare plans for a proposed first phase of the project, as well as to address
concerns and issues raised by the Commission at the December 15th hearing.
The December 15th staff report, included herein as Attachment 2, addresses the
potential ultimate 137-room project and contains the full discussion of that proposal and
the FAR incentive issues. This supplemental report contrasts the first and second
phases and addresses the issues raised by the Commission at the December 15th
F:\DEPTSXPLANNING\D P\99-0345 Holiday Inn~345PA99.Holiday Inn 1-19 Staff Report,doc
meeting. The attached Resolution and Conditions of Approval have been revised to
include both phases and all issues.
The first phase of the Holiday Inn project would consist of 101 rooms, or 36 less rooms
than the potential ultimate 137-room proposal. If the first phase is successful and
achieves the expected occupancy level, then the additional rooms would likely be
constructed in about two years time. For our purposes, however, the first phase must be
considered as if it were the final project because there are no guarantees that the hotel
would be expanded beyond the initial 101 rooms.
Following are the project statistics for both the first phase and the overall project.
FIRST PHASE PROJECT STATISTICS:
Site Area:
Building Area:
146,797 sq. ~. (3.37 acres)
35,224 sq. ft. (24% of site)
Building Footprint:
Landscaped Area:
Pool/PatioNValks:
Parking/Circulation:
17,426 sq. ft. (12% of site)
43,954 sq. ft. (30% of site)
11,494 sq. ft. (8% of site)
73,923 sq. ft. (50% of site)
Lot Coverage:
Target Floor Area Ratio:
Proposed Floor Area Ratio:
17,426 sq. ft. (12% of site)
44,309 sq. ft. (0.30 FAR)
35,224 sq. ft. (0.24 FAR)
Parking Required:
Parking Provided:
Building Height:
119 spaces, plus 4 motorcycle & 6 bicycle spaces
154 spaces, plus 4 motorcycle & 7 bicycle spaces
44 feet high (3-story)
OVERALL PROJECT STATISTICS
Site Area:
Building Area:
Building footprint:
Landscaped Area:
Pool/Patio/Walks:
Parking/Circulation Area:
Lot Coverage:
Target Floor Area Ratio:
Proposed Floor Area Ratio:
Parking Required:
Parking Provided:
Building Height:
146,797 sq. ft. (3.37 acres
59,950 sq. ft. (41% of site
22,109 sq. ft. (15% of site
39,271 sq. ft. (27% of site
11,494 sq. ft. (8% of site)
73,923 sq. ft. (50% of site
22,109 sq. ft. (15% of site
44,039 sq. ft. (0.30 FAR)
59,950 sq. ft. (0.41 FAR)
152 spaces, plus 4 motorcycle & 6 bicycle spaces
154 spaces, plus 4 motorcycle & 7 bicycle spaces
44 feet high (3-story)
F:\DEPTS\PLANNFNG\D P\99~}345 Holiday lnn~345PA99.Holiday Inn i - 19 Staff Rcport,doc
2
FIRST PHASE PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The only difference between the first and second phase is that the first phase contains
36 fewer rooms, consisting of approximately 80 lineal feet of the northerly extension of
the building. Thus the length of the structure would be shortened by this amount and the
vacated area would be landscaped with turf, trees and shrubs. All of the parking,
circulation and other site improvements associated with the ultimate project would be
installed in this first phase.
The shortened northerly extension of the building would be treated architecturally in the
same manner as the ultimate project with the exception that there would be one rather
than two of the gabled roof and column elements on each side of this portion of the
structure. This is because the split between the first and second phase would occur just
to the inboard side of the most northerly of these features. The additional elements
would be constructed if and when the project is expanded to the full 137 rooms. The
northerly "end" elevation from which the building would be extended in the second phase
is fully roofed and articulated in the same fashion as the ultimate project.
Since the basic colors are the same for both the first and second phase, the Commission
noted at the December 15th meeting that the applicant would not need to prepare
additional colored exhibits. Thus, all of the colored exhibits are of the ultimate 137-room
project.
The reduction in rooms and building area also obviously affects the project statistics.
There is a reduction in lot coverage, an increase in landscape percentage, a more
generous parking ratio, and a decrease in Floor Area Ratio. The 0.24 FAR for the first
phase in fact falls below the 0.30 target FAR specified in the Development Code, and
thus there is no need to readdress, or in the case of the economic and fiscal factors, to
recalculate the FAR incentive factors. The FAR issue is discussed in detail in the
attached December 15t" staff report.
ISSUES RAISED BY THE COMMISSION AT THE DECEMBER 15th MEETING
The Commission noted the following concerns or issues at the December 15th hearing,
some of which relate to the request for an increase in the FAR for the 137-room
proposal.
1. A discrepancy was noted between the plant quantities specified in the
Landscape Plan legend versus those actually shown on the plan.
The Landscape Plan now reflects consistent quantities on the plan and in the legend.
2. Consideration of denser planting and/or the incorporation of an additional type
of evergreen tree along the project's boundary with the freeway,
One type of deciduous tree, the Pistacia Chinensis, is being used along the easterly
boundary. The project Landscape Architect believes it would be desirable to retain at
least this one deciduous type of tree in order to provide seasonal interest and color
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\D P\99-0345 Holiday lnn~345PA99.Holiday Inn I-19 Staff Report.doc
3
along that edge. He also believes that the width of the planting space and the
combination of trees and shrubs along the property boundary, as well as the planting
on the opposite side of the parking lot adjacent to the building, provides a more than
generous landscape program adjoining the freeway.
The City Landscape Architect concurs that the location, number and selection of
trees and shrubs will eventually provide an attractive and adequately dense
landscape screen. If the Commission's concern is with the initial impact of the
plantings, he suggested that perhaps the 15 gallon trees along the easterly side
could be increased to 24" box. He also noted, however, that the existing trees in the
freeway right-of-way provide an immediate landscape affect.
The project Landscape Architect will be present at the hearing to address any of the
Commission's questions or concerns regarding the landscape program.
3. Consideration of landscape planting along the face of the retaining wall
abutting the freeway right-of-way in order to deter graffiti.
The applicant is presently attempting to obtain an encroachment permit from
Caltrans in order to allow grading within the freeway right-of-way. If this is successful
as expected, then there will be no need for a retaining wall. However, a Condition of
Approval has also been included which will require a planting strip or planting
pockets for spreading vines if a retaining wall is necessary.
4. The provision of additional details regarding the articulation of the wall
surfaces.
The plans for the first phase include details regarding the vertical offsets defined by
the outer edges of the windows at the second and third levels. These areas will be
recessed 4.5 inches from the walls on either side. Also, the horizontal wainscot
element dividing the first floor from the higher levels is raised eight (8) inches from
the wall surface below and 3.5 inches from the wall surface above this element.
The vertical articulation of the wall surfaces had previously been indicated at 6
inches (please see Attachment 7). Other than the gabled roof and column features,
these vertical offsets will provide the basic and most visible wall articulation and
shadow lines for the full height of the building, and thus in staffs judgment the depth
of these offsets are of paramount importance to the "substance" of the building and
the overall design impact of the project.
Staff does not know what the magic number is for the window offsets, but 4.5" would
appear at best to be the absolute minimum to provide the depth and shadow lines
that will provide interest and substance to the extensive wall surfaces. As a result,
we have asked the applicant to support this proposal at the Commission hearing with
a rendering or other graphic representation perhaps, and/or with a photograph of
another project using a similar offset.
F:\DEPTS~PLANNING\D P\99-0345 Holiday lnnx345PA99.Holiday Inn 1-19 Staff Report.doc
4
If the presentation is unconvincing, we are of the opinion that these vertical offsets
should be no less than 6" as previously proposed. Any modification to the 4.5"
proposal would have to be added by the Commission as a Condition of Approval.
5. The provision of additional architectural enhancements on the longer westerly
and easterly elevations, as well as the northerly elevation; to include the
consideration of more offsets or a contrasting material, and in recognition of
the requirements of the Design Guidelines to create a "base, middle and top"
to the building.
A used thin-brick material has been added to the base of each column element to a
height of 30 inches in order to align horizontally with the bottom edge of the first floor
windows. The brick will also be used for the arched elements over the first floor
windows. These arched elements were previously proposed as "plant-ons" formed
with foam and covered with stucco. These brick enhancements, called out as a
"desert sand" color to blend with the basic building colors, are indicated on the first
phase elevations only. A Condition of Approval has been included which will require
them to be used in the same fashion on the 137-room proposal as well.
The applicant believes that the addition of the brick enhancements will reinforce the
"base" of the building, which is also emphasized by the horizontal wainscot element
and the contrast in vertical articulation between the first floor and higher "middle"
portion of the structure (the vertical articulation is discussed under the previous item),
The applicant is of the opinion that the "top" of the building is adequately articulated
by the use of a full tile roof and the cornice detail used at all the eaves and at the top
of the column elements.
A sample of the thin-brick material will be available for the Commission's inspection
at the hearing. The applicant has also prepared a pencil rendering of the easterly
elevation of the structure in order to provide the Commission with a more realistic
impression of the appearance of the building from the freeway. The rendering will be
available at the hearing as well.
Concern with the compatibility of the flat concrete tile used on the main roof
versus the raised rib barrel metal roof used on the entrance canopy.
The applicant will provide a sample of the metal roof material at the upcoming
hearing (it was not available at the December 15th hearing). The metal roof is the
same color as the tile roofing, and staff is of the opinion that the variation in materials
will provide an appropriate and pleasing contrast to the main roof, However, the
applicant has stated that they would be willing to replace the metal roof with a tile
roof to match the main structure if that is the Commission's desire.
Provision for constructing the northerly access to its full width by the time the
project is completed.
Rosa's Caf~, the project responsible for improving the balance of the northerly
access drive, is expected to begin construction in the near future, and thus this drive
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\D P\994)345 Holiday lnn~345PA99.Holiday Inn 1 - 19 Staff Report.doc
5
should be fully improved by the time the Holiday Inn project is complete. The
applicant is expected to have specific information on the timing of the Rosa's Caf~
project by the time of the Commission hearing.
Furthermore, the applicant's traffic engineer is reviewing the traffic information to
determine what the affect would be if the Holiday Inn did not have the northerly
access point, but only the main entry drive. There is a thought that the absence of
this access point may not be critical to the level of service or a traffic safety issue
since the Holiday Inn project is obligated to construct a median which will disallow
left turns onto Jefferson Avenue.
The provision of details regarding the applicant's commitment to provide
meeting space at low or no cost to non-profit service and charitable
organizations in support of their request for an increase in the FAR.
The applicant has prepared a specific proposal, included herein as Attachment 6,
which provides that meeting space will be made available to charitable and non-profit
service groups for up to four days a month at 30% of the standard rate; a rate that
will allow the Holiday Inn to recover costs only. Although the City has no way to
enforce such provisions, it has been included in the official documentation as a
Condition of Approval and the applicant has stated they are committed and in fact
happy to provide this service to the community; a service which is not uncommon in
the hotel industry.
The applicant's willingness to forgo a freestanding sign in favor of a wall sign
for freeway identification.
Properties with freeway frontage are allowed either an individual freeway-oriented
freestanding sign or a freeway-oriented wall sign, but not both. However, if an
individual freestanding sign is used at the freeway, an individual freestanding sign
cannot be used along the property's street frontage, which in this case is Jefferson
Avenue. The exception is if three or more adjacent properties combine into a single
freeway-oriented freestanding sign, then they may each also have an individual
freestanding sign at their street frontage.
Although the applicant has indicated they would prefer to use a wall sign rather than
a freestanding sign for freeway identification, they do not want to commit to a sign
program at this juncture. There is a concern with achieving visibility to northbound
freeway traffic due to the Rancho California Road overpass. According to the
applicant, in order to achieve the desired visibility they may have to combine with
adjacent uses into a multi-tenant sign located as far to the south as possible.
It is staffs opinion that due to the location of the building in relationship to the street,
Holiday Inn will require a monument sign at the main entry off Jefferson Avenue. In
that case, they could not have an individual freeway-oriented freestanding sign, but
would have to combine into a single, multi-tenant sign. Also, regardless of what
approach they decide to take, any proposal would have to comply with the City's sign
standards.
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\D P\99-0345 Holiday lnn~345PA99.Holiday Inn I-I 9 Staff Report.doc
6
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
In consideration of the additional enhancements to the building, and provided the issue
of the depth of the vertical offsets in the wall surfaces is addressed to the Commission's
satisfaction - staff believes both phases of the project are consistent with applicable City
policies, standards and guidelines.
Staff is also recommending the approval of the requested increase in the FAR (from 0.30
to 0.41) for the 137~room ultimate proposal. This recommendation is based upon the
design quality of the project, the proposal to provide meeting space at reduced cost to
charitable and non-profit service groups, and also upon the project's fiscal and economic
benefits which are summarized in the December 15t" staff report and outlined in detail in
a letter from the applicant, included herein as Attachment 4.
Attachments
5.
6.
7.
PC Resolution - Blue Page 8
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 12
December 15, 1999, Staff Report on 137-Room Project - Blue Page 25
Exhibits - Blue Page 26
A. Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C. General Plan Map
D. Site Plans
E. Grading Plans
F. Elevations
G. Floor Plans
H. Landscape Plans
Applicant Letter in Support of Requested Increase in FAR - Blue Page 27
Focused Traffic Study (Selected Sections Only) - Blue Page 28
Applicant Letter Offering Low Cost Meeting Facilities - Blue Page 29
Applicant's Prior Proposal for Vertical Wall Offsets- Blue Page 30
F:\DEPTSXPLANNING\D P\99-0345 Holiday Inn~345PA99.Holiday Inn l-19 Staff Report.doc
7
A'H'ACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\D P\99-O345 Holiday Inn\345pA99.Holiday Inn I-19 StaffReport.doc
8
ATTACHMENT NO. I
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0345, DEVELOPMENT PLAN - THE DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 35,224 SQUARE-
FOOT, 101-ROOM OR 59,950 SQUARE-FOOT, 137-ROOM
HOLIDAY INN HOTEL ON 3.37 ACRES, LOCATED ON THE
EAST SIDE OF JEFFERSON AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY
1,000 FEET NORTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, AND
KNOWN AS PORTIONS OF PARCEL 1, 2, 3 & 6 OF PARCEL
MAP 23882
WHEREAS, VCL Construction filed Planning Application No. PA99-0345 (THE
"Application) in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development
Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0345 was processed, including but
not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No.
PA99-0345 on December 15, 1999, and continued the matter to January 5, 2000, and
January 19, 2000, at duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law, at which time the
City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or
in opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due
consideration of the testimony, the Commission conditionally approved Planning
Application No. PA99-0345.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby
incorporated by reference.
Section 2. Findings. The Planning Commission, in conditionally approving
Planning Application No. PA99-0345 (Development Plan) hereby makes the following
findings as required by Section 17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code:
A. The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies
reflected for HT Highway Tourist development in the City of Temecula General Plan, and
the standards for HT Highway Tourist development contained in the City's Development
Code. The site is therefore properly planned and zoned and found to be physically
suitable for the type and density of development proposed. The project as conditioned is
also consistent with other applicable requirements of State law and local ordinance,
including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CityWide Design
Guidelines, and fire and building codes.
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\D P\99~)345 Holiday lnnx345PA99.Holiday Inn ]-I 9 StaffReport.doc
9
B. The overall design of both the first and second phase of the project,
including the site, building, parking, circulation, entry features and other associated site
improvements, is consistent with and intended to protect the health and safety of those
working in and around the site. The project has been reviewed for and as conditioned
has been found to be consistent with all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and
regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and function in a
manner consistent with the public health, safety and welfare. Furthermore it has been
found that the project provides fiscal, economic and other community benefits and
enhanced design features consistent with the FAR incentive categories identified in the
Development Code (TMC 17.08.050A2), which support the requested increase in FAR
from 0.30 to 0.41 for the 59,950 square foot, 137-room second phase of the project.
C. The design of the proposed improvements is not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife
or their habitat. There is no fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will
not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The property is an in-fill site, surrounded by
development and previously graded. The project will therefore not individually or
cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of
the Fish and Game Code.
Section 3, Environmental Compliance. A Notice of Exemption has been
adopted for Planning Application No. PA99-0345 per the California Environmental
Quality Act Guidelines Section 15061 and 15332. These Sections allow exemptions for
in-fill development projects that meet certain prescribed criteria. The subject site
complies with these criteria and therefore the exemption can be applied to this project.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby
conditionally approves Planning Application No. PA99-0345 (Development Plan) for the
design, construction and operation of a 35,224 square foot, 101-room or 59,950 square
foot, 137-room Holiday Inn hotel on 3.37 acres located on the east side of Jefferson
Avenue, approximately 1,000 feet north of Rancho California Road, and also identified
as portions of Parcel 1, 2, 3 & 6 of Parcel Map 23882, subject to the project specific
conditions set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this
reference.
F:\DEPTS~PLANNING\D P\99-0345 Holiday lnnX345PA99.Holiday Inn 1-19 StaffReport.doc
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula
Planning Commission this 19th day of January, 2000.
Ron Guerriero, Ch_airperson
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the
19th day of January, 2000, by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
F:\DEPTS~PLANNING\D P\99-O345 Holiday lnn~345PA99.Holiday Inn 1-19 Staff Report.doc
I1
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\D P\9943345 Holiday lnn~345PA99.Holiday Inn I-19 StaffReport,doc
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No: PA99-0345 - Development Plan
Project Description:
Design, Construct and operate a 35,224 square
foot, 101-room or 59,950 square foot, 137-room
Holiday Inn Express hotel on 3.37 acres located
on the east side of Jefferson Avenue, north of
Rancho California Road (Portions of Parcel 1,
2, 3 & 6 of Parcel Map 23882)
DIF Category:
Service Commercial
Assessor's Parcel No: 921-060-036
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
January 19, 2000
January 19, 2002
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department -
Planning Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County
Clerk in the amount of seventy-eight Dollars ($78.00) for the County
administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Exemption as provided
under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of
Regulations Section 15062. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the
applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department -
Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project
granted shall be void by reason of failure of this condition (Fish and Game Code
Section 711.4c).
General Requirements
The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby
agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the
City's own selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to
include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed
officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents
from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgements, or proceedings against the
City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek monetary damages resulting, directly
or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any
agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative
body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the
Planning Application, City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and
landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\D P\99~1345 Holiday lnnx345PA99.Holiday Inn 1-19 StaffRepon.doc
13
10.
11.
12.
and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves
its right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the
City and its citizens in regards to such defense.
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otheR, vise,
it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial
construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is
thereafter diligently pursued to completion or the beginning of substantial
utilization contemplated by this approval.
Prior to the commencement of the construction of the second and final phase,
the project shall be reviewed in order to ensure continued compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act.
The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved
101-room first phase plans, or the 137-room ultimate project plans, which include
Exhibit D (Site Plan), E (Grading Plan), F (Elevations), G (Floor Plans), and H
(Landscape Plan), contained on file with the Community Development
Department - Planning Division, or as modified by the conditions contained
herein.
In consideration of the grant of an increase in the Floor Area Ratio, the applicant
and any subsequent owners in interest will provide the hotel meeting facilities to
charitable groups and non-profit service agencies for a minimum of four days per
month at 30% of the hoters standard rate for such facilities.
Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the
reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager. If it is determined that the
landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Manager shall have the
authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance
with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped
areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest.
The trash enclosure at the rear of the site shall be architecturally treated to
complement and blend with the design of the building subject to the review and
approval of the Planning Department.
All landscape planters shall maintain a minimum clear inside dimension of five (5)
feet. All planters adjacent to parking spaces shall be provided with a 12" wide
step-out the length of the planter.
A minimum five (5) foot wide landscape island shall be located at the easterly
end of the entry drive to screen the motorcycle parking area from public view.
The narrower landscape finger located closest to the westerly side of the building
shall be relocated to the approximate center of that row of parking spaces in
which it is located,
The project entry off Jefferson Avenue, including the area fronting the entry walls
and the area under the palms, shall be enhanced using flowering ground
F:\DEPTS~PLANNING\D P\99-0345 Holiday Inn~345PA99.Holiday Inn l-I 9 StaffReportdoc
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
covers/shrubs or other color subject to review and approval of the City
Landscape Architect.
In addition to the planted areas shown on the Landscape Plan, any sloped areas
created by the project on surrounding and abutting properties shall be planted for
erosion control in accordance with the Landscape Architect's requirements.
If a retaining wall is used along the easterly boundary of the property abutting the
freeway, a planting strip or planting pockets and irrigation shall be established
along the base of said wall in order to accommodate spreading vines or other
plant material that will screen the wall and deter graffiti. The planting space,
materials and irrigation shall be subject to review and approval by the City
Landscape Architect.
Trees shall be provided at 30 feet on-center along the private drive abutting the
westerly boundary of the project.
Any walls or fencing shall be of a material and design complementary to the
overall building and site design subject to review and approval of the Planning
Department.
The brick enhancements shown on the 101-room, first phase elevations at the
base of the columns and over the first floor windows shall also be used in the
same manner and at the same locations on the ultimate, 137-room project.
All compact-parking spaces will be marked for "COMPACT CARS ONLY."
The colors and materials for the project shall substantially conform to those noted
directly below and on Exhibit 'T' (Color and Material Board) contained on file with
the Community Development Department - Planning Division.
Second and third stow primary wall:
First story wall and column features:
Cornices and architectural grilles:
WainscotJwindow enhancements:
Roof tiles (canopy colored to match):
Glass:
Glass frame
La Habra Stucco Products X-79 "Villa"
La Habra Stucco Products X-25 "Saddleback"
La Habra X-50 "Crystal Light"
Coronado, tumbled/used thin brick, "Desert Sand"
Eagle Tile "Weathered Terre Cotta Gold"
Beger "Green/Silver Gray"
White Anodized aluminum:
20.
All outdoor lighting shall comply with the provisions of the Palomar Outdoor
Lighting Ordinance.
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
21.
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula
Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in
that ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already
been paid.
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\D P\99-0345 Holiday lnnx345PA99.Holiday Inn l-19 Staff Report.doe
15
22.
The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be
provided by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff,
and return one signed set to the Community Development Department - Planning
Division for their files.
23.
The applicant shall submit five (5) full size copies, one (1) reduced 8.5"xl 1" copy
of Exhibits D through H, and two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of
approved Exhibit "1" (Color and Materials Board) and of the colored version of
approved Exhibit "F", the colored architectural elevations, to the Community
Development Department - Planning Division for their files. All labels on the
Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be readable on the photographic
prints.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
24. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
25.
Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be
submitted to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for
approval. These plans shall conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "H",
or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, genus, species, and
container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with
the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover page shall identify the total square
footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be accompanied by
the following items:
Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of
submittal).
One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code
(Water Efficient Ordinance).
Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the
approved plan).
26.
An Administrative Development Plan application for signage shall be required for
any signage not included on Exhibits "D" and "F", or as amended by these
conditions. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage identified
on the approved Exhibits "D" and "F", or as amended by these conditions.
27.
Specifics regarding the design and materials of textured and decorative paving
shown on the plans is subject to review and approval of the Planning
Department.
Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits
28.
All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent
with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the
Planning Manager. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or
pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working
order.
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\D P\99-0345 Holiday Inn~345PA99.Holiday Inn 1-19 Staff Report.doc
16
29.
Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager,
to guarantee the maintenance of the landscape plantings, in accordance with the
approved construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the
Community Development Department - Planning Division for one year from final
certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system
have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Planning Manager, the
bond shall be released.
30.
Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a
permanently affixed reflectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded
text or equal, displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall
not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior
end of the parking space at a minimum height if 80 inches from the bottom of the
sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36
inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall
also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-street parking
facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, dearly and conspicuously stating
the following:
"Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible
spaces not displaying distinguishing placards or license
plates issued for persons with disabilities may be towed
away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be
reclaimed by telephoning 909 696-3000."
31.
In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall
have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue
paint of at least 3 square feet in size.
32.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any
use allowed by this permit.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to
any Government Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site
plan all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement
constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further review and revision.
General Requirements
33.
A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site fiat
work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works
prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street
right-of-way.
34.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works
prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City
right-of-way.
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\D P\99-0345 Holiday lnn~345PA99.Hotiday Inn l-I 9 Staff Report.doc
17
35.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the California Department of
Transportation prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or
proposed State right-of-way.
36.
All improvement plans, grading plans, and raised landscaped median plans shall
be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements
contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of
Temecula mylars.
37.
The vehicular movement from the driveway on Jefferson Avenue will be
restricted to right in/right out/left in.
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
38.
A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be
reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan
shall include all necessary erosion control measures needed to adequately
protect adjacent public and private property.
39.
The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the
grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City
Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works.
40.
A Soil Report shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and
submitted to the Director of the Department of Public Works with the initial
grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and
provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and
pavement sections.
41.
The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer in accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff
expected from this site and upstream of this site. The study shall identify all
existing or proposed public or private drainage facilities intended to discharge
this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify impacts to downstream
properties and provide specific recommendations to protect the properties and
mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream facilities,
including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make
required improvements, shall be provided by the Developer.
42.
The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources
Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent
(NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt.
43.
As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the
Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
b. Flood Control and Water Conservation District
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\D P\99-0345 Holiday InnX345PA99.Holiday Inn 1-19 Staff Report.doc
c. Planning Department
d. Department of Public Works
44.
The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an
Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps
related to the subject property,
45.
Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning
Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
46.
The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements
for off-site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department
of Public Works.
47.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable
to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either
cashier's check or money order, pdor to issuance of permits, based on the
prevailing area drainage plan fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation
charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be
paid.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
48,
improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City
of Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of
Public Works. The following design criteria shall be observed:
49.
a. Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum
over A.C, paving.
b. Driveway shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No.
207A.
c. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in
accordance with Ordinance 461.
d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street
frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400.
401 and 402.
e. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
f. Public Street improvement plans shall include plan and profile showing
existing topography, utilities, proposed centerline, top of curb and flowline
grades.
g. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections
and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and
visibility.
The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of
Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be
reviewed and approved by the Director of the Department of Public Works:
F:\DEPTS\PLANN1NG\D P\99-0345 Holiday lnnx345PA99.Holiday Inn I-19 Staff Report.doc
Jefferson Avenue (Major Highway Standards - 100' RAN) from Del Rio
Road to the southerly Parcel Map No. 23882 boundary:
Improve roadway to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage
facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water
and sewer) and a 12 foot wide raised landscaped median.
The raised landscaped median on Jefferson Avenue shall be continuous
with provisions for a dual left turn pocket as approved on the development
plan. The Developer can receive Development Impact Fee credits for the
other half of the raised landscaped median,
Provide additional right-of-way dedication along Jefferson Avenue for the
main entrance into the project site. The dedication shall be a minimum of
150 foot long 10 foot wide and shall be offered for dedication to the City.
This additional right-of-way shall be used as a deceleration lane.
50.
The Developer shall construct the following public improvements in conformance
with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the
Department of Public Works,
51,
a. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: pavement,
curb and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights,
signing, and striping.
A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil or
Traffic Engineer and reviewed by the Director of the Department of Public Works
for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as
required by the Department of Public Works.
52,
The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in
accordance with the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil
Engineer, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing
compaction and site conditions.
53.
The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the
adjacent property.
54.
The Developer shall provide an easement for ingress and egress to the adjacent
property.
55.
The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee
as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15,06 of the Temecula Municipal
Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06.
56,
The Developer shall vacate and dedicate the abutters rights of access along
Jefferson Avenue pursuant to the new location of the driveway.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
57, As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall
receive written clearance from the following agencies:
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\D P\99-0345 Holiday lnn~345PA99.Holiday Inn I-19 Staff Report.doe
20
a. Rancho California Water District
b. Eastern Municipal Water District
c. Department of Public Works
58.
All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved
plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of
Public Works.
59.
The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or
broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the
Director of the Department of Public Works.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
60.
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.
61.
Submit at time of plan review a complete exterior site lighting plan showing
compliance with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street
lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to
the Department of Building and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and
directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-
way.
62.
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.
63.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any
construction work.
64. The Occupancy classification of the proposed buildings shall be R-I/B/A-3.
65.
Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan
review.
66.
All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access
regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations
effective April 1, 1998)
67. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building.
68. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
69. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\D P\99~)345 Holiday lnnX345PA99.Holiday Inn 1-19 Staff Report.doe
70. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior
lighting, fire alarm systems.
71.
Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of
the 1998 edition of the California Building Code Chapter 29.
72. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system.
73.
Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on
plans submitted for plan review.
74.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing
schematic and mechanical plan for plan review.
75.
Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss
manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal.
76.
Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap
accessibility.
77.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start
of the building construction.
78.
Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the
approved building plans, will require separate approvals and permits.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
The following are the Fire Department Conditions of Approval for this project. All
questions regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire
Prevention Bureau.
79.
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.
80.
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 700 GPM for a total fire flow of 2200 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)
81.
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
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\D P\99~)345 Holiday InnX345PA99.Holiday Inn 1 ~19 StaffReport doc
22
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
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)
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)
Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall
have approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until
permanent roads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall
be an all weather surface for 80,000 Ibs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have
approved Fire Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion
of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department
access roads shall be an all weather surface designed for 80,000 Ibs. GVW with
a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. ( CFC sec 902)
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)
Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of
access, via all-weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention
Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1 )
Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the
water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to
installation. Plans shall be: signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire
Prevention Bureau approval signature block; and conform to hydrant type,
location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. After the plans are signed by
the local water company, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Prevention
Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be
installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible
building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and
National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1 )
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective
Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3)
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, all commercial
buildings shall display street numbers in a prominent location on the street side
of the building. The numerals shall be minimum twelve (12) inches in height for
buildings and six (6) inches for suite identification on a contrasting background.
In strip centers, businesses shall post the suite address on the rear door(s).
(CFC 901.4.4)
F:\DEPTSMPLANNING\D P\99-O345 Holiday Innx345PA99.Holiday Inn I - 19 Staff Report.doc
23
90.
91.
92.
93.
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)
OTHER AGENCIES
See attached correspondence from the Rancho Water District dated April 12, 1999.
See attached correspondence from the Department of Environmental Health dated April
14, 1999.
See attached correspondence from the County Flood Control District dated April 30,
1999.
See attached correspondence from the California Department of Transportation dated
September 28, 1999
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 Name
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\D P\99-0345 Holiday InnX345PA99.Holiday Inn 1-19 Staff Report.doc
24
September 8, 1999
Steve Griffin, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AVAILABILITY
PARCELS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4, AND 6
OF PARCEL MAP NO. 23822
APN 921-060-036
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0345
Dear Mr. Griffin:
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, jf 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
TO:
HEALTH
CITY OF TEMZCL'T..A PLA. N,'N'LNG DEPARTNIENT
.~TTN': Steve Gfirr"in, Project Planner
DATE:'September 7, 1999
FROM &~Gregor De/let. bach,Registered Environmental Health Specialist FV
RE: PA99-03.z5 (previously Pre-A~p No. PR990010) " -.-.
i. The Depamem or' Environmental Health has reviewed the Hot Plan No. pA99-034.5 m:d h,',.s no
objections. S~nirarv sewer and water ~c,".'/ces may bc available in d:is area. a .
PRIOR TO ANY PLAN CHECK SUBMITTAL rbr health ciearance. the fi~Howing items
required:
a) "Will~seB'e" le=ers from the appropriate water and sewerlag aget.cies.
b)
Ti~ee complete se~s of plans for each food establisbament (to include rending maciirtes) ?viii be
submitted. knclud/ng a fixture schedule. a Fmisla schedule. and a plumbing schedule in order to
ensure compli~ce with the Califorrda Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific
reference, please contac~ Food Facili~' Plan examiners at (909) d94-5022).
c)
Three complete sets of plans for the swimming pool/spa will be submitzeal. in order to ensure
compliance with the California Administrative Code, Calinebmia Health and Safe-Lzy Code and
Un;2brm Building Code.
Ci.ry of Temeeula
Planning Depa~ment
Post Office Box 90]3
TemecuXa, CA 92589-903.]
R.F'v~RSZDE COL~TY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION D[STRSCT
September 29, i999
909.788.9965 FAX
At'tent/on: Steve Griffin
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re: PA 99-0345
The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in
incorporated cities. The District also does not plan check ci~ land use cases, or provide State Division of Real
Estate le~ers or other flood hazard reports for such cases. District comments/recommendations far such cases
are normally limited to items as specific interest to the District including District M~ster Drainage Plan
facilities. other regional flood conh-ol and drainage facilities which could be considered a logical component or
extension of a master plan system, and Dis:riot Area Drainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In
addirion, information of a general nature is provided. The District has nor reviewed the proposed project in
detail and the follo~ving comments do not in any way constitute or imply Distric= approval or endorsement of
t.he proposed project with respect to flood h~ard. public health and safer/, or any other such issues.
PA 99-03:5 is a proposal r.o construct a [ST-room ho~el on ]..37 acres located northeast of Front Street and
Rancho California Road.
A small southwestern port/on of the parcel is ~vithin the I00-year Zone AE floodplain limits for ,[unriem
Creek as delineated on Panel No. 060742-0005B of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps issued in conjunction with
the National Flood insurance Program a~ministered by the Federal Emergency management Agency (FENLa-).
The water sut'face elevation for the FE:vD~. flow rate of 28,500 cfs is I008.00 at the upszream edge of the
property. A District flood study determined the base flood elevation for the master plan flow rate of 36,300
cfs to be 10l 1.76 at the upstream edge of the propera,'. The Ci.ty should be aware :ha: in 1993 stcrm';.'a:cr
flowed down Front Street and crossed this property. on its way to Murrieta Creek. The high-water mark during
the flood of January 1993 ~vas 1010.19. All the elevations are based on 1929 NGVD.
Because of extreme hazard posed by Murrieta Creek, the CiLy should consider not allowing development to
proceed until the ultimate flood control improvement can be constructed. If the Cite' chooses to ai[ow
development to proceed. we recommend that the Ci~.' require the applicant ;o participate in a ~nancing
meshanism such as an assessment district .to ensure neoessar':' improvements are constructed. [n addition.
Ci~.' should also condkion ;he aDpiican: ~o provide aH studies. caicu!~tions. plans or o[her in/orm~[~on needed
to meec FEMA requirements. in :his c~¢. ;he new buiiding should be ~ood;rDofed b?' cons:rue:in:
Enished Soar a minimum of [2 inches above the Distric='s base flood e~e','a:icn 5Dr ]~.j'D0 ass. ,,~hich
CR7 of Temecula :2- September 29. ! 999
Re'.' PA 9g-0.~45
This project is located within ~e limits o~'r. he Distric:'s Murriets Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage
Eor ,vhich ctrainege fees have been -~dopted; sppiicable fees should be paid by cashier's check ar mon¢.v order
to the Flood Control District prior to issu~mce of'building or grading permits. Fees to be paid shouid be at
rate in effect at the time of'issuance or~he actual
Questions reg,~rding fl~is rna~er may be referred to me ac 909/955. I 2 Z 4.
Ve~/truly yours,
STUART E. MCK. XIBIBIN
Senior Civil Engineer
SF~4:slj
DISTRICT B
4S4 W Fou~t~ Stree~, 6' Floor MS ?'2S
Sa~.eemar~ino. CA g2401-H00
PHONE (909) 383-~327
FAX (909) 383-6890
September
08-Riv-15-~..geO
OCT 0 5
Mr. Steve Griffin
Planning Depa~ment
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Dear Mr. Griffin:
Holidav Inn Express. Case Number PA99-0345.
VCL Construction. Aooficant
We have received the site plan for the above noted proiect scheduled for discussion at the recent
Development Review Committee meeting held September 23, 1 .ceg. Although ~,he date of this
meeting has passed, we ask that the following comments be included among those considered as
final conditions of approval for this three-story, 137-room hotel proiect.
This project is proposed on prcpe.,'ly that abuts I-I5 right of way located near Rancho Ca/ifornia
Road. We believe that an impact to our facilities may exist due to grading and possible slope
construction within the landscape area proposed along the easterly project bounder,/. Plan
approval and encroachment permit issuance will be necessary if such impacts are in fact
proposed.
When available, please forward copies of detaiied site grading and drainage plans so that any
construction impacts to Interstate 15 right of way may be determined end appropriate
recommendations made.
We apologize for our delayed response end for any inconvenience this may have caused. If you
have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Ms. Rosa F. Clark at (909) 383-6908 for
assistance.
SZncerety,
UNOA GRIMES, Chief
Office of ForecastthCJIGR-CEQA Review
T.'ar~sconaCion P!anni .c Division n_
Naidu A:huluru, Enctsacnmen[ Permits/Riv. Co.
Melvin Mendez, Encroachment Permits/Riv. Co.
RFC.'0PtISTeM_PAe~.034S.dcC
ATI'ACHMENT NO. 2
DECEMBER 15, 1999, STAFF REPORT ON 137-ROOM PROJECT
\\TEMEC FSI01\VOLI~Depts\PLANNING\D P\99-0345 Holiday InnX345PA99.Holiday Inn 1-19 StaffReport.doc
25
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
December 15, 1999
Planning Application No. PA99-0345 (Development Plan)
Case Planner: Steve Griffin, AICP
RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff
recommends that the Planning Commission:
ADOPT Resolution No. 99- approving Planning Application No.
PA99-0345 based on the findings and subject to the conditions
contained therein, and
ADOPT a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-
0345 pursuant to Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME: Holiday Inn Express
APPLICANT: VCL Construction
REPRESENTATIVE: Larry Levoff
PROPOSAL: The design, construction and operation of a 137-room Holiday Inn
Express Hotel on 3.37 acres
LOCATION: The east side of Jefferson Avenue, north of Rancho California Road
(Portions of Parcel 1, 2, 3 & 6 of Parcel Map 23882)
GENERAL PLAN
AND ZONE:
Subject:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Highway/Tourist Commercial / HTC
Highway/Tourist Commercial / HTC
Highway/Tourist Commercial / HTC
1~15 Freeway
Highway/Tourist Commercial / HTC
LAND USE: Subject: Vacant
North:
South:
East:
West:
Commercial
Vacant
I-15 Freeway
Vacant
R:\Gdffins\345PA99. Holiday Inn Staff Report.doc
1
PUBLIC INPUT: To date the staff has received no public input on this application.
PROJECT STATISTICS
Site Area:
Building Area:
Building footprint:
Landscaped Area:
Pool/Patio/Walks:
Parking/Circulation Area:
Lot Coverage:
Target Floor Area Ratio:
Proposed Floor Area Ratio:
Parking Required:
Parking Provided:
Building Height:
146,797 sq. ft. (3.37 acres)
59,950 sq. ft. (41% of site)
22,109 sq. ft. (15% of site)
39,271 sq. ~. (27% of site)
11,494 sq. ft. (8% of site)
73,923 sq. ~. (50% of site)
22,109 sq. ft. (15% of site)
44,039 sq. ft. (0.30 FAR)
59,950 sq. ft. (0.41 FAR)
152 spaces, plus I motorcycle & 6 bicycle spaces
154 spaces, plus 4 motorcycle & 7 bicycle spaces
44 feet high (3-story)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This proposal involves the design, construction and operation of a 137-room, 59,950 square foot,
3-story Holiday Inn Express hotel on 3.37 acres located on the east side of Jefferson Avenue,
approximately 1,000 feet north of Rancho California Road. The project site is a flag-shaped lot that
has the bulk of the property sitting back from the street frontage, adjoining the I-15 Freeway, with
a driveway extending westerly between two vacant parcels to Jefferson Avenue. The driveway is
intended as a common access point to serve the Holiday Inn as well as surrounding properties,
According to the applicant, the Holiday Inn Express is a high quality, limited-service, upper mid-
market franchise hotel. It is expected to serve both the travelling public as well as the longer-term
visitor. It features an intedor-con'idor design, larger public areas and hallways, several larger suites
for families, an extended (continental) breakfast / leisure room, a gym, guest laundry facilities, a
small business center (each room will also have high speed internet access), a meeting room, a
swimming pool, and a separate, large exterior patio. Being limited-service, it does not feature a
restaurant or a lounge.
The project meets or exceeds all of the basic standards called for in the Development Code for
Highway Tourist commercial development with the exception of the Floor Area Ratio (FAR). The
target FAR for this zone is 0.30, whereas the proposed FAR is 0.41 .The Planning Commission may
grant an increase in FAR beyond the 0.30 target, up to a maximum FAR of 1.0, based on a
determination of the extent to which the project provides exceptional community or public benefits
or aspects consistent with at least one of three incentive categories outlined in the Development
Code, This issue is discussed ~ater in this repo~ under "FAR ~ncentives."
R:\Griffins\345PA99.Holiciay Inn Staff Report.doc
2
BACKGROUND
A pre-application meeting was held with the applicant on July 1, 1999. The formal application was
submitted on September 1, 1999, and the Design Review Committee subsequently reviewed the
plans on September 23, 1999. The project was deemed complete on November 17, 1999.
ANALYSIS
Site Desian
The 3-story, L-shaped building is situated in a north-south direction on the central portion of the
site, between the 1-15 Freeway and two vacant parcels fronting Jefferson Avenue. A swimming pool
adjoins the west side of the building, and a large open patio occupies the inside portion of the "L"
on the east side of the building. Circulation aisles, parking spaces and landscaping encircle the
building and occupy the balance of the property. A canopied arrival point and the lobby entrance
are located at the south end of the structure, directly off the main entry ddve. The main vehicular
access point off Jefferson Avenue is defined by special entry features, a landscaped median, and
perimeter landscaping on both sides of the full length of the drive.
The hotel would have right/left-in, right-out only access off Jefferson from the main entry drive, as
well as access to a signalized intersection off another private drive to the north that aligns with Del
Rio Road on the opposite side of Jefferson Avenue. The ultimate plan shows an additional right-in,
right-out only access point to the south. This sedes of pdvate ddves is intended to eventually serve
all seven parcels comprising this Highway Tourist district. With the exception of the Holiday Inn
proposal and the previously approved but yet to constructed Rosa's Caf~ abutting the northwest
portion of the hotel property, none of the other five vacant parcels within this district have approved
plans.
Loading activity will mainly consist of small vans rather than larger trucks and therefore will be
accommodated at one location on the easterly side of the building, and also under the canopied
main entrance. Trash will be accommodated within an enclosure at the far north end of the
property.
Architecture
As noted above, the building is a 45-foot high, 3-story, L-shaped structure. The main lobby
entrance and most heavily articulated portion of the structure is at the southwest corner of the
building. This portion of the structure features three changes in wall plane, hipped and gabled roof
elements and column features surrounding large arched windows, as well as a large arched canopy
extending out over the vehicular arrival point. The main structure is fully roofed with fiat concrete
roof tiles, whereas the canopy has a raised rib barrel roof colored to match. There will be no
exposed roof equipment or views of fiat, unadomed roof surfaces. All of the roof eaves, column and
canopy elements feature an architectural cornice detail as well.
The gabled roof and column elements featured at the main entrance are duplicated at two locations
esch along the !en'~th of the westerly and easteft'/building elevations. T,hesa arc;
substantial elements with two changes in wall plane as well as an arched third story window to
simulate the more elaborate window treatment at the main entry. In addition to these featured
elements of the building, a raised horizontal wainscot band is provided to create a base to the
building between the first and higher levels, and the area extending between the first and third
R:',Gdffins\345PA99.Holiday Inn Staff Report.doc
3
levels at a width equal to the outer edges of the windows is recessed six inches to provide
additional vertical articulation. The windows at the first level, which are essentially flush with the
surface of the wall, are enhanced at their top edge with raised arched elements.
Of particular concern to staff has been the proposal to provide individual air conditioning units for
each of the rooms. This is apparently a more effective, as well more economical way, to provide
individualized air conditioning to each room, but it presents a design challenge in treating the
"exposed" units below each window. In this instance, the units will be flush with the exterior wall
surface of the building, with the bulk of the unit extending into the rooms themselves. They are also
using a finely Iouvered grille that will be painted to match and largely blend with the exterior wall
surfaces. Finally, a customized architectural metal grille will be placed over the functioning air
conditioning grille in order to help tie the units into the overall detailing of the building design.
The colors and materials for the project all exhibit muted earth tones. The main body of the building
above the first story and including the wainscot element will feature the lightest color, termed La
Habra, with the first story and column elements featuring a somewhat darker color called Villa. The
cornices and architectural air conditioning grilles will be painted white. The color of the roof tiles is
termed Weathered Terra Cotta Gold, which is the same color that will be featured on the metal roof
of the canopy ever main arrival point.
Landscapin~
The Landscape Plan reflects 27% landscape planting, or 7% more than the 20% required by Code.
This figure excludes the "hardscape" elements consisting of the pool area, separate exterior patio
and the decorative pedestrian walks. Significant areas of landscape planting and decorative
hardscape are provided adjacent to the east and west sides of the building, and in and around the
canopied lobby entrance as well. The north, west and east perimeters of the main portion of the
property also feature significant landscape planting at least twice the minimum five (5) foot width
called for by the Code. The landscaping interior to the parking areas, consisting of aisle-end
planters, landscape fingers and a landscape strip provided in the northerly parking lot, also meet
or exceed City requirements.
Worthy of special note is the main vehicular access point and entry drive. Large landscape planters
with low decorative walls and special landscape planting are located on both sides of the
intersection with Jefferson Avenue. This entry point is further enhanced with decorative paving and
a landscaped median which extends some 130 feet up the length of the driveway. The boundaries
of the drive also feature pedestrian walks and 5-foot wide landscaped easements on both sides
(the use of easements at these locations will allow the landscaping to also be incorporated into the
landscaping program of the adjacent vacant parcels when they develop). A 5-foot wide strip of
landscaping will also be provided on the far south side of the circulation drive opposite the hotel
structure.
The view of the project from the freeway at one of our major gateways is of particular concern to
staff. As alluded to above, the eastedy boundary of the property adjoining the freeway right-of-way
has been provided with a landscape planter over 10 feet in width, which is more than twice what
the Code requires. This area has been proposed for, and further conditioned to provide dense
s~reen planting ,,,,h higher 'vertical spec;men ~--- c~usters in or:er t,: soften - ~ ~h,s
~nu ennar, ce
boundary. There currently exists in the abutting freeway right-of-way several large trees and shrubs
which will provide an immediate effect as the on-site landscaping matures.
R:\Griffins\345PA99.Holiday Inn Staff Report.doc
4
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Incentives
The Planning Commission may consider an increase in the FAR, from the target FAR of 0.30, up
to a maximum FAR of 1.0, based on the degree to which the project meets the City's performance
standards, and provided the project meets at least one of three incentive categories described in
Section 17.08.050 of the Development Code. The categories include: (1) uses which provide
outstanding employment, fiscal, social and economic benefits, (2) projects which exhibit exceptional
architectural and landscape design, and (3) projects which provide public facilities beyond the
norm.
In support of the request, the applicant has submitted information which identifies factors in all
three incentive categories (please see attached letter). The information can be summarized as
follows:
Employment, fiscal and economic
· The creation of 63 permanent jobs with an estimated average annual payroll of $560,000. The
majority of the employees would be hired locally, according to the applicant.
Estimated annual tax revenues to the City of Temecula of over $240,000, including $235,000
in transit occupancy taxes (TOT), $1,000 in sales taxes (Note: the City's share of the sales
taxes is about 13% of the $7,600 total amount mentioned in their letter), and $5,376 in property
taxes (Note: the City's share of the property taxes is about 6% of the $96,000 mentioned in
their letter).
· Estimated annual expenditures of $1.0 million by guests in local restaurants, shopping and
entertainment facilities.
· Estimated annual expenditures by the hotel of $178,000 for local support services and supplies.
Architectural and landscape desion
One of the examples of exceptional architectural and landscape design listed in the
Development Code is "landscaped entry features." As described above, this proposal includes
a significant landscaped entry treatment involving corner entry features adjacent to Jefferson
Avenue, and a landscaped median extending nearly the full length of the main entry drive.
The applicant has also pointed out several ways in which they believe the project responds to
the City's performance standards. These include the use of creative entry treatments, vadety
of window shapes. varying building shapes. the use of a variety of complementary colors and
materials, and so on.
Public facilities
One of the examples listed in the Development Code under the public facilities category is "the
provision of community meeting centers." The Holiday Inn will have a 500 sc~uare foot
conference room as well as over 1,000 square feet in the great room that will be available for
meetings. While perhaps not meeting the definition of a "meeting center", these facilities will
provide both business and non-business meeting space within the community, and will be made
available to non-profit service or charitable organizations at little or no cost, according to the
applicant.
R:\Griffins\345PA99.Holiday Inn Staff Report.doc
5
The applicant also points out the quality and facilities offered by the hotel, the City's need for
such a hotel and the fact that the project will be responsible for the construction of a median
in Jefferson Avenue.
Based on these community benefits, staff believes the requested increase in FAR from 0.30 to 0.41
appears to be cleady supportable. Not only will the Holiday Inn create jobs and generate significant
revenues for the City and local businesses, but in our judgment, the project will also help support
the revitalization of Old Town Temecula, and hopefully spur additional quality development and
redevelopment along the Jefferson Avenue corridor. It will further provide attractive, convenient
accommodations for our guests and visitors.
Traffic and Public Facilities
The Public Works Department has reviewed the traffic report for the project and determined that
the tdps generated by this proposal will not exceed the trips anticipated by the Circulation Element
for this site. The project's Floor Area Ratio (FAR) falls within the range of the average building
intensity anticipated under the odginal traffic and public facilities analysis for the General Plan. The
applicant will be required to construct a median and deceleration Pane on Jefferson Avenue and
also pay traffic and development impact fees as conditions of approval in order to address impacts
associated with the traffic or other demands on public facilities occasioned by the project.
Please see attached for a copy of the Opening Year Conditions and Conclusions sections of the
focused Traffic Study done for the project. In essence the Study shows that with or without the
project, the intersection of Jefferson Avenue and Rancho California Road will operate at LOS "D"
in the AM and LOS "F" in the PM.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
It is anticipated that a Notice of Exemption will be filed for Planning Application No. PA99-0345 per
the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15061 and 15332. it is found
pursuant to Section 15061 that the project is exempt as a categorical exemption pursuant to Section
15332, and that the application of that exemption is not barred by one of the exceptions set forth
in Section 15300.2.
Section 15332 applies to in-fill development projects on sites that are less than five (5) acres and
substantially surrounded by urban uses; that are consistent with the applicable general plan
designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning; that have no
value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; and that can be adequately served
by all required utilities and public services.
The Holiday Inn proposal meets all of the cdteria for in-fill development, and therefore the project
is eligible for a CEQA exemption pursuant to Sections 15061 and 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines.
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY
The project is consistent with the HT Highway/Tourist commercial land use designation and zone
applicable to the property in the Temecula General Plan and Development Code. Upon approval
of the Development Plan as conditioned, the project will meet all of the standards and guidelines
R:\Gdffins\345PA99.Holiday Inn Staff Report.cloc
6
prescribed for Highway/Tourist commercial development in the Development Code and Design
Guidelines.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The project has been determined by staff to be consistent with applicable City policies, standards
and guidelines, and compatible with the nature and quality of surrounding development. Staff is
supporting the requested increase in the FAR (from 0.30 to 0.41 ) based on the project's fiscal,
economic and other benefits to the City and its residents, as well as its attractive design qualities
and features. We are therefore recommending conditional approval of PA99-0345 based on the
following findings.
RECOMMENDED FINDINGS
The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for (HT)
Highway/Tourist development in the City of Temecula General Plan, and the standards for
HT HighwayFFoudst commercial development contained in the City's Development Code.
The site is therefore propedy planned and zoned and found to be physically suitable for the
type and intensity of development proposed. The project as conditioned is also consistent
with other applicable requirements of State law and local ordinance, including the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEEQA), the City-Wide Design Guidelines, and fire and building
codes.
The overall design of the project, including the site, building, parking, circulation, entry
features and other associated site improvements, is consistent with and intended to protect
the health and safety of those working in and around the site. The project has been
reviewed for, and as conditioned has been found to be consistent with, all applicable
policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will
be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety and
welfare. Furthermore it has been found that the project provides fiscal, economic and other
community benefits and enhanced design features consistent with the FAR incentive
categories identified in the Development Code (TMC 17.08.050A2), which support the
requested increase in FAR from 0.30 to 0.41.
The design of the proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There is no
fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or
habitat off-site. The property is an in-fill site, surrounded by development and previously
graded. The project will therefore not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on
wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code.
R:\Gdffins\345PA99.Holiday Inn Staff Report.doc
7
ATI'ACHMENT NO. 3
EXHIBITS
\\TEMEC_FSIOI\VOLI\Depts\PLANNING\D P\99-0345 Holiday lnnX345PA99.Holiday Inn I-19 StaffReport.doc
26
CITY OF TEMECULA
/
/
O
CASE NO, - PA99-0345
EXHIBIT - A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- JANUARY 19, 2000
VICINITY MAP
%\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\GriffinSL345PA99.HOliday Inn Staff Report.doc
25
CITY OF TEMECULA
EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - HT HIGHWAY TOURIST
3P
EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - HT HIGHWAY TOURIST
CASE NO, - PA99-0345
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JANUARY 19, 2000
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS'iPLANNING\Grif~nS\345PA99.HOliday tnn Staff Report.doc
26
CITY OF TEMECULA
/
/
PROPOSED
101 ROOM
HOTEL
CASE NO.- PA99-0345
EXHIBIT - D - FIRST PHASE (101-ROOM)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JANUARY 19, 2000
SITE PLAN
F:\DEPTS~PLANNING~Griffins\345PA99.HOlklay Inn Staff Report.doc
27
CITY OF TEMECULA
PROPOSED
137 ROOM
HOTEL
WROUGHT IRON PENCE
SITE pLAN
CASE NO. - PA99-0345
EXHIBIT - D - ULTIMATE PROJECT (137-ROOM)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -JANUARY 19, 2000
SITE PLAN
R:\Griffins\345PA99.Holiday inn Staff Report. doc
27
CITY OF TEMECULA
/
CASE NO. - PA99-0345
EXHIBIT- F
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JANUARY 19, 2000
GPJ~DING PLAN
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1~DEPTS\PLANNING~Gdffins\345PA99.Holiday Inn Staft Report.doc
28
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA99o0345
EXHIBIT - F - FIRST PHASE (101-ROOM)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JANUARY 19, 2000
ELEVATIONS
F:\DEPTS%PLANNING\GdffinS\345PA99.HOIiday Inn Staff Report.ctoc
29
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA99-0345
EXHIBIT- F - FIRST PHASE (101-ROOM)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JANUARY 19, 2000
ELEVATIONS
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\Gdffin$\345PA99.Holiday Inn Staff Report.doc
29
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA99-0345
EXHIBIT - F - ULTIMATE PROJECT (137-ROOM)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JANUARY 19, 2000
ELEVATIONS
R:',Griffins%345PA99.Hotic~ay inn Staff ReOort, doc
29
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA99~0345
EXHIBIT - F - ULTIMATE PROJECT (137-ROOM)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -JANUARY 19, 2000
ELEVATIONS
R:\Griffins\345PAgg. Holiday inn Staff Rel~ott.doc
29
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO, - PA99-0345
EXHIBIT - G - FIRST PHSAE (101-ROOM)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- jANUARY 19, 2000
FLOOR PLAN
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING\GdffinS\345PA99.HOliday Inn Staff ReDort.cioc
30
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA99-0345
EXHIBIT - G - FIRST PHSAE (101-ROOM)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -JANUARY 19, 2000
FLOOR PLAN
F:\DEPTS~PLANNING%Gdffins\345PA99.Holiday inn Staff Reportdoc
30
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA99-0345
EXHIBIT- G - ULTIMATE PROJECT (137-ROOM)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JANUARY 19, 2000
FLOOR PLAN
R:\Gnffins~345PA99.Holic~ay inn Staff Report. doe
30
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA99-0345
EXHIBIT - G - ULTIMATE PROJECT (137-ROOM)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -JANUARY 19, 2000
FLOOR PLAN
R:\G~ffins',345pA99HolidaylnnStaffRepo~-doc
30
CITY OF TEMECULA
O OCC O
C
PRELMNARYR_~!I3pL~N
CASE NO. - PA99-0345
EXHIBIT- H - FIRST PHASE (101-ROOM)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -JANUARY 19, 2000
LANDSCAPEPLAN
F:\OEPTS\PLANNING\GriffinS\345PAgg. HOliday Inn Staff RelDort. doc
31
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO, - PA99-0345
EXHIBIT - H - ULTIMATE PROJECT (137-ROOM)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -JANUARY 19, 2000
LANDSCAPE PLAN
A'H'ACHMENT NO. 4
APPLICANT LETr'ER IN SUPPORT OF REQUESTED INCREASE IN FAR
\\TEMEC_FS101XVOLI\DeptsXPLANNING\D P\99-0345 Holiday lnnX345PA99.Holiday Inn 1-19 Staff Reporl.doc
27
ARCHITECTS
1700 HANINER AVENUE. SUITE 204. NORCO. CALIFORNIA 92860-2961
(909) 371-2057 FAX (909) 371-5924
To~
Honorable Chairman and Members
City of Temecula Planning Commission
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula. CA. 92589-9033
November 29, I999
Re: PA 9%0345
The following letter has been prepared to help outline the benefits and amenities our
project has to offer the city, and community.. We understand that in order to increase the Floor
Area Ratio (FAR) certain requirements and amenities need to be provided. Section 17.08.050 of
the City of Temecula Development Code outlines the three factors that can be considered by the
Planning Commission in granting an increase in the FAR. These factors are:
1.The project includes uses which provide outstanding and exceptional benefits to the city
with respect to the employment, fiscal. social, and economic needs of the community
2. The project provides exceptional architectural and landscapes design amenities which
reflect an attractive image and character for the city and
3. The project provides enhanced public facilities that are needed by the cit3', beyond
those required mitigation impact measures.
In order to address the first of the three considerations for approving an increase in FAR
several points have been outlined to demonstrate the benefits this project will bring to the City of
Temecula. Points 2 and 6 are critical to the developer and the investors of this project from a
hotel performance and investment cost stand-point.
1. JOB CREATION:
The 137-room project stands to create approximately 63 jobs with an anticipated average
payroll over 10 years of $558,000.00 annually within the Ci~' of Temecula. Should the
FAR not be approved and a smaller hotel be constructed the number of jobs would reduce
to approximately 48 and the payroll to $421.000.00. The net result would reduce payroll
by an estimated $I .37 million over a 10 year period.
the employees heine hired tbm within the Ciw of Ternecula.
In addition over 100 construction-related jobs, either hired directly by the general
contractor of this project or through sub-contractors. would be created during the
estimated 6-month construction period of the hotel.
2. HIGH OUALITY UPPER MID-NIARKET FRANCHISE:
Holiday Inn Express is a high quality. tried and tested upper mid-market franchise. Its
strict development guidelines require a extended complimentary breakfast, leisure room.
minimum 5 feet ,,vide inside corridors. a swimming pool. guest laundry. facilities. meeting
rooms. and enlarged public areas. A reduction in an>' of these design criteria will certainb'
three the project to reduce the quality. of its t~anchise to an economy brand such as
Travelodge or Days Inn.
The develooers are not desirous of developin.o a economv motel. however. it w'ould not
serve the best interest of the City of Temecula since several economv motels alreadv exist
in the city.
3. INCREASED OCCUPANCY. SALES, AND PROPERTY TAXES:
A detailed market feasibility, study for the Holiday Inn Express project has been
conducted. Based on the report there are considerable tax benefits to The Ci.ty of
Temecuta as a result ofapproving the 137-room project. Occupancy and average room
rate assumptions are summarized below and are detailed in the attached spread sheet.
The Holiday Inn Express based on its location, design, facilities. amenities. franchise
brand recognition and powerful reservation system was projected to achieve a first year
occupancy rate of 68.48 percent. with a stabilized occupancy of 73.60 percent in its third
year.
Average room rates were projected based on an actual average increase in room rates of
6.94 percent annually achieved by Temecula hotels clver the past 6 years. The project will
achieve an average room rate of $74.19 in its first year and increases were conservatively
limited to 4 percent within years 2 and 3, and at only 2 percent thereafter.
In summary.. an approval in the FAR variance will allow' the following estimated 10 year
average in tax collection to the City. of Temecula.
Transient Occupancy Taxes $235.000.00 armually "or" 52.35 million over 10 years
Sales Tax Collections
$ 7,600.00 annually "or" $76.6 thousand over 10 yeats
Property Tax collections S 96,000.00 annually "or" S960 thousand over 10 years
A total of $3.38 million dollars over 10 vears in tax collections are estimated to be
generated for the Citv of Temecula.
4. SECONDARY NON-HOTEL REVENUES TO TEB, IECULA AREA
BUSINESSES:
The Holiday Inn Express is a limited-sen'ice hotel. limited in that it does not provide a
full service restaurant and lounge on site. This limited aspect allows hotel guests to share
their expendable dollars ,,~ith local area restaurants. lounges. shopping and entertainment
facilities.
It is a well-known industry. fact that the tZy'pical hotel guest spends approximately $20.00
to $30.00 in other non-hotel related activities each day of their stay.
Based on a stabilized occupancy of 73.60 percent. 36.804 rooms would be sold annuall.~.
The average persons per room are estimated at an average of 1.4. for a total of 1,526
guests that would stay at the Holiday [rm Express annually.
The ~uests exvendin~ an average ofiust $20.00 ver day would equate to an estimated
$I.030.513.00 armuallv or $10.3 million over 10 years in non-hotel related revenues to
local businesses in Temecula.
5. LOCAL AREA HOTEL SUPPORT RELATED BUSINESS:
In terms of local area support services, the hotel would launder its own linens and towels,
landscaping is generally contracted to a local maintenance companies strictly from an
expertise and cost benefit point of view. The hotel will also generate considerable supply
purchases from local markets be it breakfast supplies, soaps. tissue paper, other day to
day guest supplies, property maintenance and management needs.
It is estimated that the project will generate on an average over I0 years the following
revenues to local area companies:
Brealct~.st ~bod supplies
$ 59.000.00 annually
Guest room / Cleaning supplies $ 69.000.00 annually
Maintenance / Printing /Misc.
$ 50.000.00 annually
Total S ! 78.000.00 annual!,x "or"l. "8 m ill/n o'.zr ! O2,'ezrs
6. DEVELOPERS LAND COST CONSTRAINTS:
Cost and a reasonable retarn on investment. as with any development. is a critical factor.
The cost of the land base of $I.4 million and the overall project development cost of $9.2
million has to be justified to the investors, providing them with reasonable return on
investment.
The type of facility. and its franchise dictate the average room rates and the occupancy a
hotel would secure. For mid size hotels the land cost must be based on $10,000.00 per
room.
In tD'ing to achieve a minimal FAR. the developers have purchased 3.4 Acres from
Cortez development at a reasonable market price of $9.40 per square foot.
The cost per room based on a smaller hotel is $13,662.00 far higher than is acceptable for
mid-priced hotel investors. The cost per room based on the 137-room project is
$10,0772.00 per room which is in line with investor requirements.
It must be noted that the anplicants have not requested anv offsets a_oainst transient
occupancv taxes.
6. FISCAL SUMMARY:
There are significant financial benefits to the City of Temecula. its local businesses and
the surrounding community. Holiday Irm's are a proven high quality franchise that are
represented in most American cities and perform well above industry standards. The
proposed Holiday Inn Express revenues to the City of Temecula are realistic and
achievable. We estimate that over a 10 year period the City. of Temecula. its residents and
local businesses will see a total of
$5.580,000.00 in payroll to local area residence
$3.380,000.00 in Transient Occupancy, Sales and Proper,:y tax Collections.
0.300.000.00 in local non-hotel related business revenues.
.780.000.00 in local area support related business revenues.
The developers hi_~h investment will r~roduce a modern hi_~h c:uali~.' hole! that will
produce an estimated economic benefit to the Citv of Temecula over the next 10 years of
S21.040.000.00.
In order to meet t~ctor #2 of Section 17.08.050 ( 2. The project provides exceptional
architectural and landscapes design amenities which reflect an attractive image and character for
the city ) every, effort was made to follow the cities General PerfOrmance Standards. Section
17.08.040 states. in part, "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".the following is a list of the General Pertbrmance
Standards followed by an explanation on how the project has met with that standard.
Use creative entry treatments with such features as canopies. awnings,
cornices or atriums.
This has been accomplished by our entrance canopy which includes a metal barrel
roof that matches the color of the main roof supported by large cylinder columns
finished to math the trim of the main building. Landscape features as well as a
cornice detail below the roof ties the canopy architecturally to the main building.
Use a variety of complementary colon and avoid the use of just one color and
dark colors.
We have provided a variation in our color scheme that has the tower elements and
the first floor portion of the building darker in color than the body. We have also
provided a cornice detail. a waist band detail and other trim elements which will
be a different color than the body or the tower elements.
Use various window shapes and sizes.
Although this is a hotel and there are several windows of the same size: We have
provided areas that will feature large arched windows. At the main entzance to the
hotel we have large arched windows that exceed 30'-0" in height and also help
complement our interior common space. The grid partern in the windows will
match the trim color of the building and provide visual interest.
Architectural air conditioning grills wilt be installed below the guest room
windows. Architectural grills are flush with the exterior finish of the structure and
streamline so that when painted the same color as the finish they will blend with
the area around them. Over the top of each grill a wrought iron decorative grill
will be mounted to the structure to provide visual interest. The ,,,,Tought iron ~rill
will protrude from the wall only enough to provide proper circulation for tlxe
conditioning grill and will be painted to match the trim of the building.
Vary. the building shapes by using curved or angled walls.
Although we do not have angled or curved walls. we have varied the shape of the
building by use of tower elements at the guest room portion of the hotel which
adds contrast to the building facade. The tower elements are created by the
,.'arS..'ing room sizes which ~:'ilI allow the tower elements to prot,mdc ncar'C~ 6 ~ee:.
The entrance portion of the building is highlighted b~' the large roof gables and
taller tower elements that protrude from the main structure. The entrance also
provides the location tbr the change in direction of the floor plan creating a basic
"L" shape to the structure.
Separate buildings or accessory. structures should be designed as an integral
par~ of the primal' building by using complementary. materials, common
architectural elements, and special landscape design techniques.
The only separate structures are the entrance canopy and the fence that surround
the pool area. Both contain the same primary building features and colors as the
main structure. The fence will be wrought iron that will match the trim of the
structure supported by plaster columns that will match the main body of the hotel
in color with an architectural cap that will match the trim as well.
Use a consistent design theme throughout the project. Employ
complementan.' or consistent details, shapes, materials and color. In addition,
consistent signage should be provided be provided with complementary.
colon, lettering, placement and materials.
A consistent design theme has been accomplished by the use of matching tower
elements. cornice details and colors. The tower elements at the entrance portion of
the hotel are larger than those located in the guest room portion of the hotel. this is
done intentionally to draw more attention to the entrance. The signage for the
project is not being reviewed at this time, and will be reviewed under a different
submittal.
The bulk of the building should be divided to reduce the apparent scale and
provide visual interest. Box-like designs should be avoided.
This has been accomplished by the use of proportional variations in the building
footprint. We have provided architectural projections between each line of
windows in order to create building shadows. Horizontal elements such as the
waist band and the comice have been provided to break the visual mass of the
facade into smaller areas. Tower elements have been designed with a gable roof
that divides the roof and provides visual interest. The tower elements at the guest
room portion are designed to provide contrast in the building facade without
taking the tbcus away from the main entrance of the hotel.
With respect to tiictor #3 of Section 17.08.050 (The project provides enhanced public
tixcilities that are needed by the ci.ty, beyond those required mitigation impact measures.) A
continence decision was made to provide facilities that would benefit the communi~' as a whole.
JEFFERSON STREET MEDIAN:
.;ks part of the development of this project. construction of a median 21ong
Jefferson Ave.. a Public Works goal for several years. will be constructed. Though
some assistance is being provided by the city. the size of the Holiday inn express
project makes the cost of the median bearable tbr the developer. Thc addition of
the median will add to the appeal and safe .ty of the area and help ignite addition
development at this location.
ENHANCED FACILITIES:
A large outdoor' plaza area bordered by landscape features haS been provided for
the use of both the community and guests. An out door pool area: adjacent to the
great room. with landscape surrounding the area has been provided for the guests.
A meeting room and Business Center ',','ill be provided near the main entrance of
the hotel for the use of both guests and local business. High speed Internet access
will be provided to all rooms. A large percentage of the rooms will be designed as
suites for families. With the help of ci~' staff and approval of the franchise the
building elevation has been modified from the Holiday Inn standard to incorporate
a more attractive image. As part of the overall development ',ve have provided an
enhanced entry. with landscaped medians and proposed monument signs to be
utilized by the entire development. It is our intention with these design amenities.
along with the landscape features, to provide an attractive image which reflects
the character of the community..
HIGH OUALITY MODERN HOTEL NEEDED IN TE~IECULA:
The developers are investing approximately $9.2 million in developing an
attractive, modern. state of the art interior corridor hotel. Interior corridor hotels
are perceived to be safer and achieve a higher level of security. for guests due to
the restricted number of entrances. Many of Temecula economy hotels are over 12
years old with some in poor repair, the Ci.t.t? of Temecula lacks in the number of
upper mid-market franchise hotels, such as the proposed Holiday in Express. It is
a well known fact that Temecula hotels sell out frequently during weekends and
festivals forcing visitors to either cancel their plans or stay within Temecula's
near by cities creating "leakage" in Temecula's transient occupancy tax revenues.
With the anticipated developmere of the Rogers-Dale project in Murrieta
proposed to open in the 200 l, the problem with weekend sellout will greatly
increase.
In conclusion. we believe that this project ',viII provide the city, with enhanced public
facilities. exceptional architectural and landscape amenities as ',','el1 as provide exceptional
benefits to the ci.ty with respect to the employment. fiscal. social and economic needs of the
community.. We do not believe: nor has city. staff concluded. that the increase in the F.A.R. will
create unmitigable impacts upon traffic circulation or overburden the utilities serving that area. I
hope the City of Temecula Planning Commission. in view of the points presented in this lener.
will look favorable on approving the hotel and the requested O. l 1 increase in the floor area ratio.
Sincerely,
Dan Hinson. Project Architect
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
FOCUSED TRAFFIC STUDY
(SELECTED SECTIONS ONLY)
\XTEMEC_FS101\VOL I\Depts\PLANNINGXD P\99-0345 Holiday Inn\345PA99.Holiday Inn I-I 9 Staff Report.doc
28
II
!
i
I
!
I
I
I
I
OPENING YEAR CONDITIONS
Exhibit S shows the ADT volumes which can be expected for Opening Year without
project traffic conditions. Exhibit T shows the ADT volumes which can be expected for
Opening Year with project traffic conditions.
Opening Year intersection levels of service for the existing network without the proposed
project are shown in Table 5. Table 5 shows HCM calculations based on the geometrics'
at the study area intersections without and with improvements. Opening Year without
project HCM calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix "D". Opening Year AM and
PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibits U and V
without the project, respectively.
For Opening Year without project traffic conditions, the following study area intersection is
projected to operate at Level of Service "F" dudng the PM peak hour, without
improvements:
Front Sb'eet (NS) at:
· Rancho California Road (E'W)
Opening Year intersection levels of service for the existing network with the proposed
project are shown in Table 6. Table 6 shows HCM calculations based on the geometrics
at the study area intersections without and with improvements. Opening Year with project
HCM calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix "E". Opening Year AM and PM
peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibits W and X with
the project, respectively.
For Opening Year with project traffic conditions, the following study area intersection is
projected to operate at Level of Service "F" during the PM peak hour, without
improvements:
I
!
!
!
t
!
!
!
!
t
!
I'
I
t
I
Front Street (NS) at:
· Rancho Califomia Road (EW)
For Opening Year with project traffic conditions, study area intemections are projected to
operate at Level of Service "D" or better dudng the peak hours with the improvements
listed in Table 6.
CONCLUSIONS
Site-specific circulation and access recommendations am depicted on Exhibit Y. Median
improvements along Front Street should provide for dght turns in/out and left turns in only
(no left turns out) at the central project driveway. The central project ddveway should also
provide a northbound fight turn lane for vehicles desidng to turn dght into the project site.
The south project ddveway to Front Street shoul~ be restricted to dght turns in/out only.
Stop signs along with stop legends and stop barn should be installed at the access
driveways.
Sight distance at each project ddveway to Front Street should be reviewed with respect to
standard Caltrans/City of Temecula sight distance standards at the time of preparation of
final grading, landscape and street improvement plans.
The project should participate on a pro-rata basis on funding city-wide traffic
improvements based upon adopted City fee programs.
If you have questions regarding this focussed traffic study, not hesitate to call
at (949) 474-0809.
Sinc~r:I~SSOCIATES, INC. '
Senior Associate I Principal
CB:JK:Rk:skf/10065
JN:0914-99-01
Attachments
7
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
APPLICANT LETTER OFFERING LOW COST MEETING FACILITIES
\\TEMEC_FSI01\VOLI\DepLsXPLANNING\D P~99-0345 Holiday Inn\345PA99.Holiday Inn 1-19 Staff Reporl doc
29
IT~esday ;aMP/% l~OO 11:/,3m -- FrOa '760 &~8 202~,' -- Page 2~
Sent By: VCL Construction; 760 438 2024;
Jan-4-00 11:42AM;
t4STRU'CTiO
/"' ! ..
Page 2/2
CilyQfTeneada FbammgC.~..;~'k-,
432001]usinnsP~kl)dve
Tamala, CA. ~L~8~-~033 ·
OUn ntoros~i,,
Mee~;manatasWilJlx:d~aa/i'.,i~o~30%o~ffieapplicsblemee~foco~rates
~rthedsystobeboekssibsnyFFsr
t~daysand~_,
1947 Comino vidn gable. 1109 · Coilsbad Colifolnlo 92008 * Tel; 760, 438 2888 1-800. 690-9100 FOx: 760. 438-2024
ATTACHMENT NO. 7
APPLICANT'S PRIOR PROPOSAL FOR VERTICAL WALL OFFSETS
\\TEM EC_FS 101 \VOL I \I]EPTS\PLANNING\D P\99-0345 Holiday lnnx345 PA99. lqol iday Inn I - 19 Staff Report,doc
30
z~J
',,b~J
I_
ITEM #5
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Janua~ 19,2000
Planning Application No. PA99-0379
(Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan)
Prepared By: Thomas Thornsley, Project Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff
recommends the Planning Commission:
1. ADOPT a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA99-0379 A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL
BUILDING ON 1.2 ACRES AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
TO OPERATE A GAS STATION/CONVENIENCE STORE WITH A
DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANT SERVICE LOCATED ON THE
SOUTH SIDE OF WINCHESTER ROAD BETWEEN MARGARITA
ROAD AND YNEZ ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NO. 910-320-028 AND LOT E OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PA98-
0495 AND PARCEL MERGER PA99-0007.
ADOPT a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-
0379 (Conditional Use PermitJDevelopment Plan) based on the
Determination of Consistency with a project for which an
Environmental Impact Report (FIR) was previously certified pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines Section. 15162 - Subsequent EIR's and
Negative Declarations.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
Willing Ramsey
PROPOSAL:
Planning Application No. PA99-0379 is a Conditional Use
Permit/Development Plan proposal to construct and operate
a 5,000 square foot gas station/convenience market
(Ultrmar) with a drive-thru restaurant (Kentucky Fried
Chicken), on a 1.2 acre lot.
LOCATION:
Located on the south side of Winchester Road between
Margarita Road and Ynez Road.
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Site CC (Community Commercial)
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
1
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
Site SP-7 (Retail Commercial)
Nodh: CC (Community Commercial)
South: SP-7 (Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan)
East: SP-7 (Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan)
West: SP-7 (Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan)
Promenade Mall
North: Commercial Center
South: Promenade Mall
East: Power Center
West: Krauses Sofa Factory (under construction)
PROJECT STATISTICS
Total Project Area Net:
Total Building Area
Landscape Area:
Paved Area:
Harriscape:
Parking Required:
Parking Provided:
Building Height:
52,272 square feet
5,000 square feet
16,727 square feet
27,000 square feet
3,545 square feet
3,000 s.f. retail
700 s.f. dinning
@ 5 spaces/1000 s.f.
@ 10 spaces/1000 s.f.
Total Required Parking
18'- 25'
1.2 acre
9.6%
32.0 %
51.6 %
6.8%
15 spaces
7 spaces
22 spaces
22 spaces
BACKGROUND
The application was formally submitted to the Planning Department on September 17, 1999. A
Development Review Committee (DRC) meetings was held on October 21, 1999, and the
applicant was provided with direction from staff to resolve site issues and enhance the architecture
for consistency with the mall. In the original application the convenience market was to include
liquor sales. (Liquor sale in conjunction with gasoline sales requires a Conditional Use Permit, as
do drive-thru services.) On December 8, 1999, the Planning Commission denied the applicanrs
request for Finding of Public Convenience or Necessity. Although the request for a liquor license
was denied the applicant wished to continue with the project and it was deemed complete on
December 23, 1999.
This application was scheduled before the Planning Commission on January 5, 2000, but was
continued and re-noticed for clarification of the project description in a new Notice of Public
Hearing.
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant is proposing Development Plan to build and operate a gas station/convenience
market (Ultramar) with a Conditional Use Permit for the drive-thru restaurant (Kentucky Fried
Chicken). The project is located on Winchester Road, at the western major entry into the
Promenade Mall, between Margadta and Ynez Roads. The proposed building is 5,000 square feet
and includes a market and restaurant with 700 square feet of dining area and an outdoor patio,
ANALYSIS
Site Desian and Circulation
The overall site is 1.2 acres with the building on the north side of the site backing up to Winchester
Road. Surrounding the building on three sides of the property are Winchester Road to the north,
the entry drive to the east, and the Mall Ring Road to the south. There are two points of access
to the site from the Ring Road, one of which is shared with Krauses Sofa Factory to the west. The
pumping islands are located between the building and the Ring Road. Vehicle parking is provided
adjacent to the mall access road and in front of the store.
The drive aisle serving the restaurant goes behind the building and parallel to Winchester Road.
Although this site design places the drive-thru along the roadway, the building orientation blocks
the view of vehicles at the fueling islands and half of the parking spaces. The length of the drive-
thru aisle is sufficient to achieve the required six vehicle stacking distance behind the menu board.
Parkina Analvsis
This project falls under the parking standards of the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan,
which requires restaurants to provide 10 parking spaces per 1000 square feet of dining area and
five parking spaces per 1000 square feet of retail. With 700 square feet of dining and 3,000 square
feet of retail this project will require 22 parking spaces. Twenty-two parking spaces are provided.
Architecture & Colors
The building design utilizes architectural features found on the elevations of the mall such as wall
finishes, roof elements and similar colors. The building is rectangular with angled tower/entry
features to accent the building's entry points. Exterior walls around the building will be
approximately 18 feet high with tower reaching 25 feet. The finish color of the stucco wall will be
"Aspin" (beige) with accent bands and cornice capping finished in "Nubian Brown" (beige/tan).
Along the base of the entire building will be a three foot band of tan split face concrete block
veneer. Over the drive-thru and the windows will be metal awnings finished in "Tourmaline" (aqua).
The gas canopy will be finished to match the building's colors and materials.
Landscaping
Three sides of this site am along roadways with landscaping that contribute heavily to the sites
thirty-two percent (32%) landscaping. Additional landscaping is provided around the building, the
patio and leading up to the storefront. Most of the perimeter landscaping is part of the mall master
landscape design. All of the roadways are tree lined. Along Winchester Road are Tulip, Calabrain
Pine, and Crape Myrtle trees. The mall entry drive is lined with Holly Oak and the Ring Road has
California Pepper trees. At the base of the building will be a mix of scrubs and flowering plants
surrounded by ground cover and tuff. The drive-thru lane runs along side of Winchester Road and
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
3
is being screened with landscaping. A berm will be installed in the landscape buffer to provide
additional screening of cars in the drive-thru and to help shield oncoming traffic from the glare of
headlights.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
This project is within the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan No. 263 for which an
Environmental impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified. Under California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15162 (Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations) this
project is exempt and a Notice of Exemption has been prepared for Planning Applications No.
PA99-0379.
Section 15162 applies when an EIR has been cedi~ed or negative declaration adopted for a
project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless there am substantial changes
not discussed or examined in the EIR.
The affected area of the site development meets this criteda noted above by developing consistent
with the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan No. 263 land uses which anticipated mixed uses
including gas stations. Therefore, the proposed project is eligible for a CEQA exemption pursuant
to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines.
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY
The project is consistent with the Community Commercial (CC) land use designation and the
Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan (SP-7) zoning applicable to the property in the Temecula
General Plan and Development Code. Upon approval of the Conditional Use Permit as
conditioned, the project will meet all of the guidelines and standards for commercial development
prescribed by the Development Code and Design Guidelines.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The project has been determined by staff to be consistent with applicable City policies, standards
and guidelines. We believe it is compatible with the nature and quality of surrounding development,
and will represent an attractive, functional and economic addition to the City's commercial and
employment base.
FINDINGS- DEVELOPMENT PLAN
The proposal, a gas station/convenience store with drive-thru restaurant service, is
consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected in the Community
Commercial (CC) land use standards in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the
development standards for Specific Plan (SP-7) development contained in the City's
Development Code and the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan. The site is therefore
properly planned and zoned and found to be physically suitable for the type and density of
commercial development proposed. The project as conditioned is also consistent with other
applicable requirements of State law and local ordinance, including the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City Wide Design Guidelines, Ordinance No. 655
(Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance), and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping provisions,
and fire and building codes.
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
4
The overall design of the project, including the site, building, parking, circulation and other
associated site improvements, is consistent with and intended to protect the health and
safety of those working in and around the site. The project has been reviewed for, and as
conditioned has been found to be consistent with, all applicable policies, guidelines,
standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and
function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety and welfare.
FINDINGS - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
The proposal. a gas station/convenience store with drive-thru restaurant service, is
consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected in the Community
Commercial (CC) land use standards in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the
development standards for Specific Plan (SP-7) development contained in the City's
Development Code. The site is therefore properly planned and zoned and found to be
physically suitable for the type and density of commercial development proposed. The
project as conditioned is also consistent with other applicable requirements of State law and
local ordinance, including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City Wide
Design Guidelines,, Ordinance No. 655 (Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance), and the City's
Water Efficient Landscaping provisions, and fire and building codes.
The overall design of the project, is compatible with the nature, condition, and development
of adjacent uses, including the site, building, parking, circulation and other associated site
improvements and will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures. The
project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned has been found to be consistent with,
all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that the
development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent the adjacent uses,
buildings, or structures.
The site of this proposed conditional use is an in-fill site of an approved development plan.
The development of this site adequate in size and shape to accommodate the building while
meeting the yard, parking and loading, landscaping, and other development features
prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning Commission in order to
integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood.
The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and
general welfare of the community. Base on the type of use as proposed and as
conditioned, will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the
community
The decision to approve the application for a conditional use permit is based on substantial
evidence, in view of the record as a whole, before the Planning Commission at the time of
their decision. This application has been brought before the Planning Commission at a
Public Hearing where members of the community have had an opportunity to be heard on
this matter before the Commission renders their decision.
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
5
Attachments:
1,
PC Resolution - Blue Page 7
Exhibit A. Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 11
Exhibit B. Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 22
Exhibits - Blue Page 25
A. Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C. General Plan
D. Site Plan
E. Elevation
F. Landscape Plan
G. Floor Plan
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.d0c
6
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
F:\Depts\pLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
7
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA99-0379 A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL
BUILDING ON 1.2 ACRES AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
TO OPERATE A GAS STATION/CONVENIENCE STORE WITH A
DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANT SERVICE LOCATED ON THE
SOUTH SIDE OF WINCHESTER ROAD BETWEEN MARGARITA
ROAD AND YNEZ ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NO. 910-320-028 AND LOT E OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PA98-
0495 AND PARCEL MERGER PA99-0007.
WHEREAS, Willing Ramsey, filed Planning Application No. PA99-0379, in accordance with
the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0379 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. PA99-0379 on
January 19, 2000, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff
and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this
matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headng and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission approved Planning Applications No. PA99-0379;
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. Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No.
PA99-0236 hereby makes the foltowing findings as required by Section 17.05,010,F of the
Temecula Municipal Code:
A. The proposal, to build and operate a gas station/convenience market (Ultramar) with
a drive-thru restaurant (Kentucky Fried Chicken) on a 1.2 acre site, is consistent with the land use
designation and policies reflected in the Community Commercial (CC) land use standards in the
City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development standards for Specific Plan (SP-7)
development contained in the City's Development Code. The site is therefore properly planned and
zoned and found to be physically suitable for the type and density of commercial development
proposed. The project as conditioned is also consistent with other applicable requirements of State
law and local ordinance, including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Temecula
Regional Center Specific Plan (SP-7), the City Wide Design Guidelines, Ordinance No, 655 (ML
Palomar Lighting Ordinance), and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping provisions, and fire and
building codes,
B. The overall design of the project, including the site, building, parking, circulation and
other associated site improvements, is consistent with and intended to protect the health and safety
of those working in and around the site. The project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned has
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT%379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
8
been found to be consistent with, all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations
intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent
with the public health, safety and welfare.
Section 3. Conditional Use Permit Findinos, The Planning Commission, in approving
Planning Application No. PA99-0379 hereby makes the following findings as required by Section
17.04.010.E of the Temecula Municipal Code:
A. The proposal, to build and operate a gas station/convenience market (Ultramar) with
a drive-thru restaurant (Kentucky Fried Chicken), is consistent with the land use designation and
policies reflected in the Community Commercial (CC) land use standards in the City of Temecula
General Plan, as well as the development standards for Specific Plan (SP-7) development
contained in the City's Development Code. The site is therefore properly planned and zoned and
found to be physically suitable for the type and density of commercial development proposed. The
project as conditioned is also consistent with other applicable requirements of State law and local
ordinance, including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Temecula Regional Center
Specific Plan (SP-7), the City Wide Design Guidelines,, Ordinance No. 655 (Mt. Palomar Lighting
Ordinance), and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping provisions, and fire and building codes.
B. The overall design of the project, is compatible with the nature, condition, and
development of adjacent uses, including the site, building, parking, circulation and other associated
site improvements and will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures. The
project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned has been found to be consistent with, all
applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development
will be constructed and function in a manner consistent the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures.
C. The site of this proposed conditional use is an in-fill site of an approved
development plan. The development of this site adequate in size and shape to accommodate the
building while meeting the yard, parking and loading, landscaping, and other development features
prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning Commission in order to integrate
the use with other uses in the neighborhood.
D. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety
and general welfare of the community. Base on the type of use as proposed and as conditioned,
will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community
E. The decision to approve the application for a conditional use permit is based on
substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission at the time
of their decision. This application has been brought before the Planning Commission at a Public
Hearing where members of the community have had a opportunity to be heard on this matter
before the Commission renders their decision.
Section 4. Environmental Compliance. A Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-
0379 was made per the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15162. This
section applies when an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been certified or negative
declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless there
are substantial changes not discussed or examined in the EIR.
The subject site complies with these criteria and therefore the exemption can be applied
to this project.
Section 5. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby
conditionally approves Planning Application No. PA99-0379 for a Development Plan for the design,
F:\DeptS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'F~379pa99 Ultrrnar.doc
9
construct and operation of a gas station/convenience market (Ultramar) on 1.2 acre and a
Conditional Use Permit to operate a drive-thru restaurant (Kentucky Fried Chicken), located on the
south side of Winchester Road between Margadta Road and Ynez Road, and known as Assessor's
Parcel No. 910-320-028, Lot Eof Lot Line Adjustment PA98-0495 and Parcel Merger PA99-0007,
and subject to the project specific conditions set forth in Exhibit A (Development Plan), and Exhibit
B (Conditional Use Permit), attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of January, 2000.
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 4th day of August,
1999 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
10
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
(DEVELOPMENT PLAN)
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
11
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA99-0379 (Development Plan - Retail building for Utramar
Gas and Kentucky Fried Chicken Restaurant)
Project Description:
A proposal to build a 5,000 square foot commercial
building for gas/convenience market and restaurant with
drive-thru services located on Out-lot "E" of the
Promenade Mall, on the south side of Winchester Road
between Margarita Road and Ynez Road.
DIF Category:
$2.00 per square foot (pursuant to the Development
Agreement for the Promenade Mall Project PA96-0333)
Assessor's Parcel No.:
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
910-320-001
January19,2000
January19,2002
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
1. The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
a cashiers check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of
Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file
the Notice of Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21106(b) and
California Code of Regulations Section 15062. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the
applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason
of failure of condition (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
General Requirements
The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to
indemnity, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own
selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency
or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees,
consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions,
awards, judgements, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek
monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and
the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal
board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning
the Planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner
of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further
cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all
action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to
such defense.
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFF~PT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
12
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall
become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction
contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter diligently
pursued to completion or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this
approval.
The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved Mitigation
Monitoring Program for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan.
The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "D"
(Site Plan), contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning
Division.
All ground mounted utility/mechanical equipment shall not be placed in prominent
locations visible to the public. This equipment shall be screened from view.
Per the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan the double detector check
assembly must be installed underground.
A six car stacking distance shall be maintained between the menu board and the
entrance to the drive~thru aisle,
Mounding shall be provided in the landscaping adjacent to the drive-thru aisle to
provide additional shielding of vehicles and their headlights.
Building elevations shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "E" (Building
Elevations), contained on file with the Community Development Department ~ Planning
Division. All mechanical and roof-mounted equipment shall be hidden by building elements
that were designed for that purpose as an integral part of the building. When determined
to be necessary by the Planning Manager the parapet will be raised to provide for this
screening.
Landscaping shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "F" (Landscape Plan).
Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable
satisfaction of the Planning Manager. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being
maintained, the Planning Manager shall have the authority to require the property owner
to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The
continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer
or any successors in interest.
The colors and materials for this project shall substantially conform to the following list of
approved colors and materials and with Exhibit "H" (Color and Material Board) contained
on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. Any deviation
from the approved colors and materials shall require approval of the Planning Manager.
Material
Stucco walls painted to match
Stucco cornice & color band to match
Aluminum Storefront System
Windows
Split Face Concrete Block Veneer
Canopies & Roof
Color
Omega #90, Aspin
Omega #64, Nubian Brown
Sherwin WiUiams #SW1320, Tasteful Tan
Ford's Vision Glass, Clear
Orco Block Co., Nu-Fad
Sherwin Williams #SW1468, Tourmaline
As per The Promenade Outlot Developer Guidelines the storefront windows shall be Ford
Blue or comparable.
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
13
10. Lighting installed under the fueling canopy shall be flush mounted and shielded to eliminate
stray light and glare. The under canopy lights for the fueling islands shall be recessed
mounted and shielded to eliminate stray light and glare beyond the project site.
11. The applicant shall comply with the Conditions of Approval for Planning Application No.
PA97-0118 (Promenade Mall) unless superceded by these Conditions of Approval.
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
12.
The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided
by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and return one
signed set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files.
13.
The applicant shall revise Exhibits "D, E, F, and H", (Site Plan, Elevations, Landscape Plan,
Color and Material Board) to reflect the final conditions of approval that will be provided by
the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and submit five (5) full
size copies and two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of approved Exhibit "D"
(Color and Materials Board) and of the colored version of approved Exhibit "C", the colored
architectural elevations to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for
their files. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations shall be readable on
the photographic prints.
14.
The applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
for permanent filing two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of approved Exhibit
"H" (Color and Materials Board) and of the colored version of approved Exhibit "E", the
colored architectural elevations. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations
shall be readable on the photographic prints.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
15. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
16.
Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department - Planning Division for approval. These plans shall
conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "F", or as amended by these conditions.
The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The
plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover page shall identify
the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be
accompanied by the following items:
Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal).
One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved
plan).
Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits
17.
An Administrative Development Plan application for signage shall be required for any
signage not included on Exhibits "D" and "E", or as amended by these conditions.
a. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage identified on the
approved Exhibits "D" and "E", or as amended by these conditions.
18. Bicycle racks shall be installed pursuant to the requirements of the Development Code.
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
14
19.
All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the
approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Planning
Manager. The plants shall be healthy and flee of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation
system shall be properly constructed and in good working order.
20.
Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to
guarantee the maintenance of the plantings, in accordance with the approved construction
landscape and irrigation plan shall be filed with the Community Development Department
- Planning Division for one year from final certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the
landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactor,J to the
Planning Manager, the bond shall be released.
21.
Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently
affixed reflectodzed sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying
the International Symbol of Accessibility, The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square '
inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking spaca at a minimum
height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or
centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground,
or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the
off-street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously
stating the following:
"Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces
not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for
persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense.
Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 909 696-3000."
In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a
surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least 3
square feet in size.
22.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed
by this permit.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
23.
Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to
any Government Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site
plan all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement
constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further review and revision.
General Requirements
24.
A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on-site fiat work and
improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way.
25.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way.
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
15
26.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Califomia Department of Transportation
prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State right-of-
way.
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
27.
A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and
approved by the Department of Public Works, The grading plan shall include all necessary
erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private
property.
28.
The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading
and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and
subject to approval by the Department of Public Works.
29.
A Soil, Report shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and submitted to the
Director of the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report
shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the
construction of engineered structures and pavement sections.
30.
The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in
accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and
upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private
drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and
identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect
the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream
facilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make
required improvements, shall be provided by the Developer.
31.
The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No
grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the
project is shown to be exempt.
32.
As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer
shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
Planning Department
Department of Public Works
Caltrans
33.
The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an
Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the
subject property.
34,
The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site
work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works,
35.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashiers check
or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan
fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this
property, no new charge needs to be paid.
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRp'r~379pa99 Ultrrnar.doc
16
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
36.
Improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of
Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works.
The following design criteria shall be observed:
Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C.
paving.
Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A.
Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages
in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400. 401and 402.
All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed
through undersidewalk drains.
37.
The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with
the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer
shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
38.
The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as
required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and
all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
39.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho Califomia Water District
Eastern Municipal Water District
Department of Public Works
Caltrans
40.
The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall
be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department
of Public Works.
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
41.
All design components shall 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.
42.
Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance
with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other
outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building
and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly
upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way.
43.
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.
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrrnar,doc
17
44. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
45. The Occupancy classification of the proposed buildings shall be B/S-3/M.
46. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
47.
Disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building is required. The
path of travel shall meet the California Disabled Access Regulations in terms of cross slope,
travel slope stripping and signage, Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled
Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
48.
All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
49. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
50. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
51.
Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire
alarm systems.
52.
Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1998
edition of the California Building Code Appendix 29. Obtain the Division of the State
Architect recommendation for the accessible restroom dimensions for toddlers from the
Building Official, to implement in the building design.
53. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system.
54.
Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans
submitted for plan review.
55.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic
and mechanical plan for plan review.
56.
Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer
engineer are required for plan review submittal.
57. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
58.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
59.
Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved
building plans, will require separate approvals and permits.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
60.
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.
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRpT~379pa99 Ultrmar,doc
18
61,
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 Ili-
A)
62.
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)
63.
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)
64.
If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection
prior to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2,2)
65.
Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have
approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads
are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for
80,000 Ibs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
66.
Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have appreved Fire
Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any
portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access reads shall be an all
weather surface designed for 80,000 Ibs, GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet.
( CFC sec 902)
67.
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 90Z2.2.1)
68.
Prior to building construction, dead end road ways and streets in excess of one hundred
and fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of
accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4)
69.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water
system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. Plans shall be:
signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature
block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards.
After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to
the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire
hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any
combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2
and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1 )
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
19
70.
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)
71.
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)
72.
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)
73.
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 Laborator,/listed central station. Plans
shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC
Article 10)
74.
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)
75.
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)
76.
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developer/applicant
shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the
storage of combustible liquids, fiammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from
both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau.(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3)
OTHER AGENCIES
77.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California
Water District's transmittal dated September 29, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
78.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside County
Flood Control's transmittal dated November 11, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
79.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Temecula Police
Departmenrs transmittal dated October 19, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
80.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health's trensmittal dated October 4, 1999, a copy of which
is attached.
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT%379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
20
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance
with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be
subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant's Signature
Date
Name printed
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrrnar.doc
21
Wa r
Board of Darectors:
September 29, 1999
Thomas Thornsley, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AVAILABILITY
PARCEL NO. 12 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 28530-1
APN 910-320-007
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-,~79
Dear Mr. Thornsley:
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the
boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service,
therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements
between RCWD and the property owner.
If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCVVD 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:mr162~F012-T6~CF
DAVID P. ZAPPE
General Manager-Chief Engineer
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
City of Temecula
Planni De artment n
Post go33
Temecula, California 92589-9033
Attention:
Ladies and Gentlemen:
l°c~5 MAP, KET
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
909/955-1200
909/788-9965 FAX
511801
The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in incorporated
cities. The District also 7oesI not lan check citXt land use cases, or provide State Division of Real Estate letters or
other flood hazard repOrts for sutcl~cases. Disthct comment~reoommendations for such cases are normally limited
to items of specific rote est to the District including Disthct Master Draina · Plan facilities, other re ional flood
control and draina e facilities which could be considered a logical componen~or extension of a master ~D~n s stem,
and District Area ~rainage P an fees (development mitigation fees). In addition, information of a general ns-~usre is
provided.
The District has not reviewed the proposed project in detail and the following checked comments do not in any way
constitute or imply Disthct approval or endorsement of the proposed project with respect to flood heard, public
health and safety or any other such issue:
I/" This pr.oject would not be impacted by Distdct Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of
regional roterest proposed.
This project involves District Master Plan facilities. The Disthct will acce t ownershi of such facilities on
written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District stangP~rds and ~)Pistdct plan check and
inspection will be required for Distdct acceptance. Plan check inspection and administrative fees will be
required.
This project proposes channels, storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter, or other facilities that could be
consadored egional in nature and/or a Io ical extension of the adopted
Maste Drainage Plan. The Disthct woul~ consider accepting ownership of such fac~ht~es on wntten request
of the City. Facilities must be constructed to Disthct standards, and D~strict plan check and inspection will
be reqruiredrfor District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required. L.t., '
check or money order only to t~e Flood Control District pdor {}o~ issuance of build"~/g or gradin permits
whichever comes first. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of issuance of~e actual
permit.
GENERAL INFORMATION
This project mar uire a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES permit from the State Water
Resources Coni/role~oard. Clearance for grading, recordation, or other final approval should not be given until the
City has determined that the project has been granted a permit or is shown to be exempt.
If this project involves a Federal EmergenCy Management Agency (FEMA) mapped flood plain, then the City should
require the applicant to provide all studies calculations, plans and other information reduired to meet FEMA
requirements and should further require that the applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision CLOMR)
pdor to grading, recordation or other final approval of the pro ect, and a Letter of Map Rev s on (LOMR(~ pdor to
occupancy.
If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain is im acted by this project, the City should require the a licant to
obtain a Section 1601/1603 Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Game and a Clean PV~ater Act
Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or wdtten correspondence from these a encies
indicating the prOject is exempt from these requirements. A Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quail Ce~cation
may be required from the local California Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of ~e Corps 404
permit.
STUART E. MCKIBB1N
Senior Civil Engineer
Date: tl- -
City of Temecula
Temecula Police Department
OCTOgGt 19. 1999
RE: PA99-0379
DEVELOPMENT REV1EW COMMITTEf
ULTRA MAR GAS STATION
CASE Pt.ANNER: THOMAS THORNSLEY
~ req)eck to the emlditimm of I4)~WOVIi f~'the above fefereficed Project Tra,,~,'ftal. the following
cmddons axe sulx,ltted by the Temem~ Pie Dtlarlment reganlng 'offic~ and puac r. qfety'
1. Applicant shag shaves all hedges amd shnd~oeqf surmoundlng the building be malntdr~ at · height
no geeam' than lhlt/-ix (36) indm.
2. Applicant sitill ensure any trees mToundlng the ixjdino are kept at s crmtance ~o as to detmr roof
3. AI padcing lots. driveways. and pedestrian walkways shag be aluminated with a minimurn
mdntdr~ one (1) foot~amle of light of Found levd. evenly dispersed, eliminating all shadows.
exterior DghthTg fLtdafas shall be vandal mistant. All extetlot gghtlrlg shad] be controged by photocell,
timers. oF other means to t0revent deecb%'adon by unauthorized persons.
4. NI extedo~ doo~ shall have thek own vandal restant ight fixture insfaDed above. The don
a~a be luminated with a minimum mainened one I1) test eandk of 5ght at ground level. evenly
dispined. Ag exterior sighGag ~lurss m~t confeint to 1he decor of 1he exterior buidlng.
Any pubic telephones located on the exterior of ~he bmlrsng In the complex shai be placed
well~lghted, highly visible ares0 and k~Tolled with · 'Call-Ore Only' fernurn to deter
6. M doors. windows. locking mechardsms. hinges, md other miscellaneous hardware shall be of
conunerclal or insljlafdo~ Fade.
7. Any grafttit l:mlnted or mal~ed upon the IN'era I~mll be rameyed IX printed over wiffiin twenty-
four 124) hems of being discovered.
8. Provide buacrmg addtin on re,f-top by chadking out · gdd g" on oemer and m height of a.8".
palntlng nunt~als with · dendard 9" Faint roht udm3 flores4~lt yelow pint on normal bultd-up roofs.
alngie 9' width between flumerids. Address Ihal be perilel to and facing the primary street.
9. Ni rDof hatches ehe~ be plnted qntemad~ond Orange'.
10. $treetac~dresssha~~bep~stedin~vis~biehc~t~~n~n1k1~mm1112iaches~nhe~ght~~nthestreet
side of the Ixdkl'~g wlb'l · eontrautlng background.
11. Upon completion of the upFadlng of 1he integer. · mon'd~ored ele~m system shai be Installed and
nm~tored 24-ho~ra · day by · delgnated private alarm company. TO nottfy the PoSes DepmnTnent of any
|nTrulloeo
TO:
County of Riverside
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
DATE: October 4. 1999
CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FROM ARENCE H~~nmental Health Specialist
RE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. PA99-0379
I. Department of Environmental Health request information concerning purveyors of water and
sewer. This information should be displayed on the exhibit(s).
The Department of Enviromnental Health is unable to submit tentative recommendations untii
receipt of the requested supplemental information concerning water and sewer availability.
CH:dr
(909) 955-8980
stand I c/doe
EXHIBIT B
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
(CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT)
F:\DeptS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
22
EXHIBIT B
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA99-0379 (Conditional Use Permit - To operate a gasoline
service station and drive-thru facility for a Kentucky Fried Chicken Restaurant)
Project Description:
A proposal to build a 5,000 square foot commercial
building for gas/convenience market and restaurant with
drive-thru services located on Out-lot "E" of the
Promenade Mall, on the south side of Winchester Road
between Margarita Road and Ynez Road.
Assessor's Parcel No.:
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
910-320-001
January 19, 2000
January 19, 2002
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
General Requirements
The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to
indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own
selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or
instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees,
consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions,
awards, judgements, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek
monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the
approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal
board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning
the Planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner
of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further
cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all
action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such
defense.
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall
become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction
contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter diligently
pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this
approval.
The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval for Planning Application No. PA99-
0379, unless superseded by these conditions of approval. All these conditions shall be
complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this conditional use permit.
This Conditional Use Permit may be revoked pursuant to Section 17.03.080 of the City's
Development Code.
F:\DeptS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
23
5. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval
of this Conditional Use Permit.
6. The installation of the landscaping along Winchester shall be in substantial conformance
with the site and landscape plans (Exhibits D & F) for the purpose of screening the view of
the drive-thru from the public right-of-way. Prior to the release for occupancy staff will
assess the installation of the screening materials to verify that they provide the intended
screening. Should the screening be deficient the Planning Manager shall have the authority
to require the developer to provide additional screening to meet the intent of the City's
Design Guidelines. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the
responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest.
7. At the end of the first year of occupancy, and pdor to the release of the Landscape Secudty
Bond, the landscaping will be inspected for conformance with the screening requirement.
Should replacement landscaping be needed the owner will be required to make these
improvements.
8. The use of window signs will be limited to those permitted by the City's Sign Ordinance No.
98-10 and in no case shall more than 20% of the window areas shall be used for signage.
OTHER AGENCIES
9. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California
Water Districrs transmittal dated September 29, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
10. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside County
Flood Control's transmittal dated November 11, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
11. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Temecula Police
Departmenrs transmittal dated October 19, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
12. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated October 4, 1999, a copy of which
is attached.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, I understand and I accept all the above
mentioned Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in
conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the
project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant's Signature
Date
Name printed
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
24
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
EXHIBITS
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
25
CITY OF TEMECULA
Project
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0379 (Conditional Use Permit)
EXHIBIT A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - January. 19, 2000
VICINITY MAP
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar,cioc
26
CITY OF TEMECULA
,O000000(
EXHIBIT B
DESIGNATION - SP-7 (Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan)
ZONING MAP
EXHIBIT C
DESIGNATION - CC (Community Commercial)
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0379 (Conditional Use Permit)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - January 19, 2000
GENERAL PLAN
F:%Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
27
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0379 (Conditional Use Permit)
EXHIBIT D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - January 19, 2000
SITE PLAN
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
28
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0379 (Conditional Use Permit)
EXHIBIT E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - January 19, 2000
ELEVATIONS
F:\DeptS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
29
CITY OF TEMECULA
~DR~I~-THRU RESTATJR&NT
"~,. SECTION A /"
CE MAGAZINE ~ ~ ..... ]
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0379 (Conditional Use Permit)
EXHIBIT F
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - January 19, 2000
LANDSCAPE PLAN
F:%D epts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Uitrmar,doc
30
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0379 (Conditional Use Permit)
EXHIBIT G
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - January 19, 2000
FLOOR PLAN
F:\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~379pa99 Ultrmar.doc
31
ITEM #6
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
January 19, 2000
Planning Application No. PA99o0398 (Development Plan)
Planning Application No. PA99-0399 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29510)
Prepared by: Denice Thomas, Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff
recommends the Planning Commission:
1. ADOPT a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-.__
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0398, A
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND
OPERATION OF A 21,151 SQUARE FOOT MEDICAL OFFICE PLAZA ON
2.28 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79
SOUTH APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET WEST OF MARGARITA ROAD
AND STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH INTERSECTION AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 950-100-019.
ADOPT a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0398 pursuant to Section
15332 of the CEQA Guidelines.
3. ADOPT a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0399,
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29510 TO SUBDIVIDE 3.42 VACANT
ACRES INTO TWO (2) PARCELS WITHIN THE HIGHWAY TOURIST
COMMERCIAL ZONE GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF
STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET WEST OF
MARGARITA ROAD AND STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH INTERSECTION
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR°S PARCEL NO. 950-100-019.
ADOPT a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0399 pursuant to Section
15315 of the CEQA Guidelines.
F:\DEPTS\PLANNING~Staffrpt\398pa99.pCl .doc
1
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND
USES:
Edward L. Anderson, 79 South Medical Plaza, LLC
Edward L. Anderson, 79 South Medical Plaza, LLC (PA99-0398)
Markham and Associates (PA99-0399)
PA99-0398: The design, construction and operation of a two (2)
building medical office plaza with a total square footage of 21,151
square feet on approximately 2.28 acres of vacant land.
PA99-0399: To subdivide 3,42 vacant acres into two (2) parcels within
the Highway Tourist Commercial (HT) Zone.
South of Dartolo Road, on the north side of State Highway 79 South,
approximately 500 feet west of the intersection of Margarita Road
and State Highway 79 South
Highway Tourist Commercial (HT)
North: Very Low Density Residential (VL)
South: Community Commercial (CC)
East: Highway Tourist Commercial (HT)
West: Professional Office (PC)
Highway Tourist Commercial (HTC)
Vacant
North: Residential
South: Vail Ranch Shopping Center
East: Arco Service Station
West: Vacant/Drainage Channel
PROJECT STATISTICS (DEVELOPMENT PLAN)
Total Area:
Building Area (footprint):
Building Height:
Landscaped Area:
Hardscaped Area:
Parking Required:
Parking Provided:
Lot Coverage:
Floor Area Ratio:
99,384 square feet (2.28 acres)
10,624 square feet
36 feet
19,945 square feet (20%)
57,608 square feet (58%)
71 vehicular, 3 handicapped, 4 bicycle, 4 motorcycle
104 vehicular, 6 handicapped, 6 bicycle, 6 motorcycle
0.12
0.20
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pc1 .doc
2
PROJECT STATISTICS (TENTATIVE MAP)
Total Area: 148,975 square feet (3.42 acres)
BACKGROUND
The Development Plan and Tentative Parcel Map No. 29510 were submitted to the Planning
Department for review on October 1, 1999. The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed
the project on October 28, 1999. The project was deemed complete on January 3, 2000.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Tentative Parcel Map No. 29510 proposes to subdivide 3.42 vacant acres into two (2) parcels. The
Development Plan is a proposal to design, construct, and operate a medical plaza on Parcel I of
Tentative Parcel Map No. 29510. The plaza will consist of two (2) two-story buildings totaling
21,151 square feet. The buildings will have an east and a west wing and a courtyard at the interior
of the project.
ANALYSIS
Site Design
The project is located on the north side of State Highway 79 South. Access to the site is provided
from a driveway located at the southwestern corner of the site from State Highway 79 South and
a ddveway located at the northeastern comer of the site from Dartolo Road. Parking for the project
is located on the east and the north sides of the project. Decorative paving is provided in the
driveway accessed from Highway 79 South, the entrance from Dartolo Road, as well as the
southern entrance to the parking lot. The decorative paving consists of scored, stained concrete.
A Courtyard, complete with planters and decorative paving, is located central to the two buildings.
The project provides an employee patio area with decorative paving and a seat wall at the western
edge of the project. The design of the site is compatible with existing development in the area.
Access, Traffic and Circulation
Access for the site will be taken from State Highway 79 South and Dartolo Road. Parking is
provided along the northern and eastern sides of the site, The Public Works Department has
reviewed this project and have not indicated that the impacts will be significant. Emergency
vehicles have access to all parts of each building from the parking areas along the front, side and
rear of the building.
Architecture, Color and Materials
The architectural style of the project complements the existing development across Highway 79
South. The low pitched roofiines with wide overhanging eaves are composed of clay cap and pan
tiles that are red-brown in color, The two-story stucco buildings are burnt ochre (dark gold &
brown mixture) in color with lighter ochre accents. The windows and door frames are accented with
teal color. The extensive trellis work throughout the project is stucco based with stained red-brown
wood lattice work.
\\TEMEC_FS101WOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRpT~398pa99,pc1.doc
3
Signaqe
Signage is not a pad of this application. The review of signage will be conducted under a separate
application at a later date.
Landscapino
Twenty-two percent (22%) of the site has been landscaped which exceeds the 20% minimum
landscaping requirement in the HT (Highway Tourist Commercial) zone. The project provides
landscape planters around the entire perimeter of the site. Additionally, interior planters are
provided along the walkways and the perimeter of the medical buildings, which provides some
separation between the parking lot and the plaza. The project proposes the retention of existing
mature tress along State Highway 79 South, which will in turn, serve as street trees and provide
some screening of the site.
Tentative Parcel MaD No. 29510
The proposed tentative parcel map is in compliance with the City's Subdivision Ordinance as well
as the California Subdivision Map Act. Further, the map as proposed is consistent with the
development requirements of the City's Development Code. Highway Tourist Commercial (HT)
Zone. The applicant's proposal was routed to the City's Public Works Department, as well as, the
Fire Safety Division for review. The responses from the various departments indicate that the
proposal is acceptable, assuming the attached conditions of approval are met.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
A Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0398 will be made pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15332.
The proposed project is eligible for a CEQA exemption pursuant to Section 15332 of the CEQA
Guidelines based on the following reasons:
The site is 2.28 acres which is less than the 5 acres required
The proposed development is consistent with the existing development in the area
The site has no value as a habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species
The site will be adequately served by public utilities and services
The medical plaza is being approved pursuant to the zoning and general plan
designations for the site.
A Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0399 will be made pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15315.
The proposed project is eligible for a CEQA exemption pursuant to Section 15315 of the CEQA
Guidelines based on the following reasons:
The property is in an urbanzied area zoned for commercial use
The division is for fewer than four (4) lots
The proposed division conforms to the General Plan, the Development Code, and
the California Subdivision Map Act
Services are available to the parcels
The parcel is not a division of a larger parcel divided within 2 years
The parcels do not have an average natural slope greater than 20 percent
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99,Dc1 .doc
4
EXISTING ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
The General Plan Land Use designation for the site is HT (Highway Toudst Commercial). Existing
zoning for the site is HT (Highway Tourist Commercial). A variety of commercial/retail and office
uses are permitted within this zone, with the approval of a Development Plan pursuant to Chapter
17.05 of the Development Code. The project as proposed, meets all minimum standards of and
is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code and the Design Guidelines. Further, the
parcels created by the proposed tentative map exceed the minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet
required in the Highway Tourist Commercial (HT) Zone.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The project has been determined by staff to be consistent with all applicable City ordinances,
standards, guidelines and policies. It is staffs opinion that the project is compatible with
surrounding developments in terms of design and quality.
FINDINGS
Development Plan
The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for (HT)
Highway Tourist Commercial development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well
as the development standards for (HT) Highway Tourist Commercial development
contained in the City's Development Code. The site is therefore properly planned and
zoned and found to be physically suitable for the type and density of commercial
development proposed. The project as conditioned is also consistent with other applicable
requirements of State law and local ordinance, including the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), the CityWide Design Guidelines, and fire and building codes.
The overall design of the project, including the site, building, parking, circulation and other
associated site improvements, is consistent with and intended to protect the health and
safety of those working in and around the site. The project has been reviewed for, and as
conditioned has been found to be consistent with, all applicable policies, guidelines,
standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and
function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety and welfare.
The design of the proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are
no fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife
or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. Furthermore,
grading has already occurred at the site, which is a portion of a larger industrial park. The
project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as
defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code.
Tentative Parcel MaD No. 29510
The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision is consistent
with the Development Code, General Plan, and the City of Temecula Municipal Code. The
project is compatible with the existing General Plan Land Use Designation and zoning
standards of Highway Tourist Commercial. Tentative Tract Map No. 29510 proposes to
divide 3.42 acres into one 2.28 acre parcel and one 1.14 acre parcel, which exceeds the
20,000 square foot minimum lot area required by the Development Code.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pc1 .doc
5
The tentative map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered
into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the land is subject to a
Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will
not be too small to sustain their agricultural use. The tentative map has not been previously
divided in the last two years and it is not designated as an agricultural land use area.
The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed
by the tentative map. The site does not have any serious topographical or environmental
constraints which, would inhibit the type of development permitted by the Development
Code or the General Plan.
The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval,
are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably
injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The site is within the vicinity of infill development and
is considered an in~ll site. The project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse
effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code.
The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious
public health problems. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The
project has been reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineer, Public Works Department and Fire
Department. These departments have conditioned the map to ensure public health, safety
and welfare.
The design of the subdivision provides future passive natural heating or cooling
opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible.
The design of the subdivision and 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
subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to
those previously acquired by the public will be provided. The map proposes access from
State Highway 79 South and Dartolo Road. The proposed access points will not obstruct
any easements.
Attachments- (Development Plan)
PC Resolution - Blue Page 7
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval for PA99-0398 (Development Plan) - Blue Page 10
PC Resolution - Blue Page 21
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval for PA99-0399 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29510)- Blue
Page 25
Exhibits for PA99-0398 (Development Plan) - Blue Page 35
A, Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C. General Plan Map
Site Plan
E. Grading Plan
F. North and South Elevations
G. East and West Elevation
H. First Floor Plan
I. Second Floor Plan
J. Landscape Plans
4. Exhibits for PA99-0399 (Tentative Parcel Map) - Blue Page 45
A. Tentative Parcel Map No. 29510
\\TEMEC_FS101WOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pc1.doc 6
ATTACHMENT NO. I
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
APPROVING PA99-0398
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
\\TEMEC_FS101WOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP"~398pa99.pc1.doc
7
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA99-0398, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 21,151 SQUARE FOOT
MEDICAL OFFICE PLAZA ON 2.28 ACRES LOCATED ON THE
NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH
APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET WEST OF MARGARITA ROAD AND
STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH INTERSECTION AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 950-100-019.
WHEREAS, the 79 South Medical Plaza, LLC, filed Planning Application No. PA99-0398,
in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA99-0398 was processed including, but not limited
to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered Planning
Application No. PA99-0398 on January 19, 2000, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by
law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either
in support or in opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission approved Planning Application No. PA99-0398 subject to the conditions
after finding that the project proposed in Planning Application No. PA99-0398 conformed to the City
of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by
reference.
Section 2. Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No.
PA99-0398 (Development Plan) hereby makes the following findings as required by Section
17.05.010.F of the Temecula Municipal Code:
A. The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for
(HT) Highway Tourist Commercial development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as welt as
the development standards for (HT) Highway Tourist Commercial development contained in the
City's Development Code. The site is therefore properly planned and zoned and found to be
physically suitable for the type and density of commercial development proposed. The project as
conditioned is also consistent with other applicable requirements of State law and local ordinance,
including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CityWide Design Guidelines, and
fire and building codes.
B. The overall design of the project, including the site, building, parking, circulation and
other associated site improvements, is consistent with and intended to protect the health and safety
of those working in and around the site. The project has been reviewed for and as conditioned has
been found to be consistent with all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations
intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent
with the public health, safety and welfare.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING~Staffrpt\398pa99.pC1 .doc
8
C. The design of the proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial
environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There is
no fish or wildlife habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish or wildlife habitat off-
site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. Furthermore, grading has already
occurred at the site, which is a podion of a larger industrial park. The project will not individually or
cumulativeiy have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and
Game Code.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. A Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No.
PA99-0398 was made per the Califomia Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15332. This
Section allows exemptions for infill development projects that meet certain prescribed criteria. The
subject site complies with these criteda and therefore the exemption can be applied to this project.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hamby conditionally
approves Planning Application No. PA99-0398 (Development Plan) for the design, construction and
operation of a 21,151 square foot medical office plaza on 2.28 acres located on the north side of State
Highway 79 South approximately 500 feet west of Margarita Road/State Highway 79 South intersection,
and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 950-100-019 subject to the project spedtic conditions set forth in
Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning
Commission this 19th day of January 2000.
Ron Guerdero, 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 19th day of January, 2000,
by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:~STAFFRP'D398pa99.pc1 .doc
9
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PA99-0398 DEVELOPMENT PLAN
\\TEMEC_FS101%VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNiNG\STAFFRPT%398pa99,pc1 .doc
10
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OFAPPROVAL
Planning Application No: PA99-0398 (Development Plan)
Project Description:
Design, construct and operate a 21,151 square foot
medical plaza on a 2.28 acre parcel
DIF Category: Office
Assessor's Parcel No:
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
950-100-019
January19,2000
January 19,2002
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of
seventy-eight Dollars ($78.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file
the Notice of Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and
California Code of Regulations Section 15062. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the
applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason
of failure of condition (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
General Requirements
The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to
indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own
selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or
instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees,
consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions,
awards, judgements, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek
monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the
approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal
board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning
the Planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner
of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further
cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all
action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such
defense.
This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall
become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction
contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter diligently
pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this
approval.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pC1.dOC
11
The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits D
(Site Plan), E (Grading Plan), F (Elevations), G (Floor Plans), and H (Landscape Plan),
contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division.
Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable
satisfaction of the Planning Manager. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being
maintained, the Planning Manager shall have the authority to require the property owner
to bring the landscaping into conformante with the approved landscape plan. The
continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer
or any successors in interest.
All mechanical and roof equipment shall be fully screened from public view by being placed
below the lowest level of the surrounding parapet wall.
7. All compact parking spaces will be marked for "COMPACT CARS ONLY."
The colors and materials for the project shall substantially conform to those noted directly
below and with Exhibit "1" (Color and Material Board), contained on file with the Community
Development Department - Planning Division.
Primary wall:
Secondary wall colors:
Window Trim and Door Frames:
Glass:
Paint Gutter and Casting:
Tile Roof:
Burnt Ochre (dark gold & brown)
Ochre (lighter gold & brown)
Teal
Clear
Red-Brown
Red-Brown
Prior to final approval of construction landscape plans the applicant shall submit
documentation of approvals from CalTrans for the landscaping proposed for their right-of-
way.
10.
The street trees proposed for the site shall be coordinated with the existing street trees on
the south side of State Highway 79 South (Vail Ranch Shopping Center) and shall provide
a straight row of street trees thirty (30) inches on center.
11.
The construction landscape drawings shall indicate coordination and grouping of all utilities,
which are screened from view per applicable City Codes and guidelines.
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
12.
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal
Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by
providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid.
13.
The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided
by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and return one
signed set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files.
14.
The applicant shall revise Exhibits "D, E, F, G, H and I", (Site Plan, Grading Plan,
Elevations, Floor Plan, Landscape Plan, and Color and Material Board) to reflect the final
conditions of approval that will be provided by the Community Development Department o
Planning Division staff, and shall submit five (7) full size copies, one (1) reduced 8.5"xl 1"
copy of Exhibits D through H, and two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of
approved Exhibit "1" (Color and Materials Board) and of the colored version of approved
Exhibit "F", the colored architectural elevations, to the Community Development Department
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pc1.doc
12
~ Planning Division for their files. All labels on the Color and Materials Board and Elevations
shall be readable on the photographic prints.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
15. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
16.
Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department - Planning Division for approval. These plans shall
conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "H', or as amended by these conditions.
The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The
plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover page shall identify
the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be
accompanied by the following items:
Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of
submittal).
One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved
plan).
Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits
17.
An Administrative Development Plan application for signage shall be required for any
signage not included on Exhibits "D" and "F", or as amended by these conditions. A
separate building permit shall be required for all signage identified on the approved Exhibits
"D" and "F", or as amended by these conditions.
18.
All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the
approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Planning
Manager. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation
system shall be properly constructed and in good working order.
19.
Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to
guarantee the maintenance of the landscape plantings, in accordance with the approved
construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Community Development
Department - Planning Division for one year from final certificate of occupancy. After that
year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition
satisfactory to the Planning Manager, the bond shall be released.
20.
Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently
affixed refiectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying
the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square
inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum
height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or
centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground,
or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the
off-street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously
stating the following:
\\TEMEC_FS101WOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pc1.doc
13
"Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not
displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for
persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense.
Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 909 696-3000,"
21.
In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a
surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least 3
square feet in size.
22.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed
by this permit.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any
Government Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site plan all
existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and
drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review
and revision.
General Requirements
23. A Grading Permit for either rough and/or precise grading, including all on*site flat work and
improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way.
24.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way.
25.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Califomia Department of Transportation
prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State right-of-
way.
26.
All improvement plans and grading plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent
projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on
standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars.
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
27. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and
approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary
erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private
property.
28.
The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading
and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and
subject to approval by the Department of Public Works.
29.
The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in
accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and
upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private
drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and
identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect
the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream
facilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make
required improvements, shall be provided by the Developer.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLl\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pc1.doc
14
30. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board.
31.
As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer
shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
32.
a. Planning Department
b. Department of Public Works
The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an
Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the
subject property.
33.
Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department
and the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site
work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works.
35.
The site is in an area identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map as Flood Zone X. This
project shall comply with Chapter 15, Section 15.12 of the City Municipal Code which may
include obtaining a Letter of Map Revision from FEMA. A Flood Plain Development Permit
shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
36. Parcel Map 29510 shall be recorded.
37.
Improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of
Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works.
The following design criteria shall be observed:
Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C.
paving.
b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A.
Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in
accordance with Ordinance 461.
Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages
in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400.401and 402.
e. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries.
f, All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
Public Street improvement plans shall include plan and profile showing existing
topography, utilities, proposed centerline, top of curb and flowline grades.
Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and
adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility.
All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed
through undersidewalk drains.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRpT~398pa99.pC1 .doc
15
38.
The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula
General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by
the Director of the Department of Public Works:
39.
Improve Dartolo Road (Principal Collector Highway Standards - 78' RAN) to include
dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements,
paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping,
utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer).
40.
All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions
per Caltrans' standards for transition to existing street sections.
41.
The Developer shall construct the following public improvements in conformance with
applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the Department of
Public Works.
Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: pavement, curb and
gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic
signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate
b. Storm drain facilities
c. Sewer and domestic water systems
d. Under grounding of proposed utility distribution lines
42.
The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with
the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer
shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
43. The Developer shall provide an easement for ingress and egress to the adjacent property.
44. The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the adjacent property.
45.
The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as
required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and
all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15,06.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
46. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
47.
a. Rancho California Water District
b. Eastern Municipal Water District
c. Department of Public Works
All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and
City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works,
48.
The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall
be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department
of Public Works.
\\TEMEC_FS101WOLl\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRP'I~398pa99,pc1 .doc
16
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62,
63.
64.
65.
All design components shall 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.
Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance
with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other
outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building
and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly
upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way.
A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted
to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School
Mitigation Fees.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
The Occupancy classification of the proposed buildings shall be B.
Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
Disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building is required. The
path of travel shall meet the California Disabled Access Regulations in terms of cross slope,
travel slope stripping and signage. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access
Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building.
Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
Provide house electricel meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire
alarm systems.
Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the provisions of the 1998
edition of the California Building Code Appendix 29.
Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system.
Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans
submitted for plan review.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic
and mechanical plan for plan review.
Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer
engineer are required for plan review submittal.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'R398pa99.pC1 .doc
17
66. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
67. A pro-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
68. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved
building plans, will require separate approvals and permits.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
The following are the Fire Department Conditions of Approval for this project. All questions
regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
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 400 GPM for a
total fire flow of 1900 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 Ili-
A)
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 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)
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)
If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection
prior to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2)
Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have
approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads
are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for
80,000 Ibs. GVVV. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire
Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any
portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all
weather surface designed for 80,000 Ibs. GVVV with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet.
( CFC sec 902)
\\TEMEC_FS101WOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pCl.dOC
18
76.
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)
77.
Prior to building construction, dead end road ways and streets in excess of one hundred
and fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of
accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4)
78.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water
system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. Plans shall be:
signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature
block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards.
After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to
the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire
hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any
combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2
and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1)
79.
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)
80.
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)
81.
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)
82.
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)
83.
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)
OTHER AGENCIES
84.
Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control
Distdct's transmittal dated November 8, 1999, a copy of which is attached. The fee is made
payable to the Riverside County Flood Control Water District by either a cashier's check or
money order, prior to the issuance of a grading permit (unless deferred to a later date by
the District), based upon the prevailing area drainage plan fee.
85.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the City of Temecula
Police Department transmittal dated October 25, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99,pC1 .doc
19
86.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside County
Department of Environmental Health transmittal dated October 14, 1999, a copy of which
is attached.
87.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho Water
transmittal dated October 11, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in 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 Name
\\TEMEC_FS101WOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pc1 .doc
20
DAVID P. ZAPPE
General Manager-Chief Engineer
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
City of Temecula
Temecula, California 92589-9033
Attention: ~7'~:N I ('. (~ T/"'J"~H t~,~ ·
Ladies and Gentlemen:
1995 MARKET STREET
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
?09/788-9965 FAX
51iS0.1
Re:
The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in incorporated
Cities. The District also does not lan check City land use Cases, or provide State Division of Real Estate letters or
other flood hazard reports for sucbP Cases. District comments/recommendations for such cases are norma y im ted
to items of specific roterest to the District including District Master Draina · Plan faCilities. other re iona flood
COntrol and draina · facilities which could be COnsidered a logiCal COmponen~or extension of a master ~n s stem,
and District Area ~rainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition, information of a general nsa~usre is
provided.
The District has not reviewed the proposed project in detail and the following checked COmments do not n any way
constitute or imply District approval or endorsement of the proposed project with respect to flood hazard, public
health and safety or any other such issue:
This pr.oiect would not be impacted by Dis~ct Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of
regional roterest proposed.
This project involves District Master Plan facilities. The Distdct will acce t ownership of such facilities on
written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to Dis~ct standPards, and District plan check and
inspection will be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be
required.
This pro ect proposes channels. storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter or other facilities that could be
considered regional in nature and/or a Io iCal extension of the adopted
Master Drainage Plan. The District woul~ COnsider accepting ownership of such tac,~bes on wntten reduest
of the City. FaCilities must be COnstructed to Dis~ct standards, and District plan check and inspection will
be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required.
This project is located within the limits of the District's Area
Drainage Plan for Which draina · fees have been adopted; a pl~Cable fees should be pa~d by Cashiers
check or money order only to ~e Flood Control Distdct prior ~o~ issuance of building or gradin permits,
whichever COmes first. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of issuance of?he actual
permit.
GENERAL INFORMATION
This project ma uire a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES permit from the State Water
Resources Con~'olr~oard. Clearance for grading recordation, or other final approval should not be given until the
City has determined that the pro ect has been granted a perm t or is shown to be exempt.
If this project involves a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA mapped flood plain. then the City should
require t~e appliCant to provide all studies Calculations plans and o~er information required to meet FEMA
requirements, and should further require that the appliCant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision CLOMR)
prior to grading, recordation or other final approval of the project. and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMRI prior to
occupancy.
If a natural waterCOurse or mapped flood plain is im acted by this project. the City should require the a liCant to
obtain a Section 1801/1603 Agreement from the Ca~mia Department of Fish and Game and a Clean P~ater Act
Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineere or Whtten correspondence from these a encies
indiCating the project is exempt from these requirements. A Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quaff Cert~Cation
may be required from the local California Regional Water Quality Control Board pdor to issuance of ~e Corps 404
permit.
Very truly yours,
," STUART F. MCKIBBIN
5'k. tsrR, cr rAc.-trt s· SeniorCivilEngineer
c: Date:
iNertday OCtober 25e 1999 12:08pm -- From # 0628:58, -- Page
~xe/z~w/1999 88:47 98950~_J38
PAGE 02
City of Temecula
Temecula Police Department
OCTOBER 25, 1999
RE:
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMIXa a srJ:
7g SOUTH MEDICAL pLAZA, LLC
~ PLMeiE~ DENIC~ THOMAS
WIth respect to the c~Hae~tJor~ of appmvaa fro' 1he ebove referenced Project Transmittel. the fclowing
concEtionl m'e submitted by the Temecull poEca Deparmlent regarding 'officer and p'dbHc safety'
1. AIN~t M mdl !ledgee lid ~hn~bbe~f I~-raun~ng the East and Welt W"mg Bulltinge be
m~ntdned at a height ao greater then thkly~lx {36) indies.
2, AWEcam shall ensure any tree sufrcHz~ng both bullclings am kel~t at · d'm ~ as to deter
rod act~'eMbilty by would-be burglars.
3. AJI perking lob, driveways, end pedeslffim walkways ~ be roundhated with a mlntm~n
malntatned one (1) foet-canclb of Ilght at Fund lave, evenly d'~med, eliminating all shadows. All
exted~ fighting fixlures dml be vandal mistant. All exterior 119hllng sh~dl be controlled by photocells,
'time~, or other man= to ;event de~,'ljvaIJon by unauUtmlzed persons,
4. All ededor doors dee have their own vandal resistant light rtxb~fe Tr,~,ied above. The door~
shaft be iumlneted with a m;,-' ,~am maintained one (1} foot cartie of ight at grgund level, evenJy
diq~,ftad. All ezteetm rigidleg ;',,idres must conform to the decel Of ~e exterior bulMIng,
5. Any pubic Jones located on ~e extedcx of belh tmlcl)ngs in the Ixm~plex shall be placed In ·
well-Gghted, Nghly vie'hie arM, and ;nntailed with a 'CaB-Out 0dy' teaMe to deter kltedng.
6. AJI does. windows. lock;rig mechanisms. hinges. and efher ndsce~lameous hardware shall be of
cemmecial Or inslttudofial grade.
7. Any greffi6 painted o, mMked upon the prendse shell be removed or painted over within twenty-
four (241 hmarl of being dlscovefed.
8. Pmvlde ixallcFmg eciclreu en mot-top by chalkleg out a gr'd g" on center and · height of 48',
painting namerule wllh · standeel 9' print roller udng ~otescent yellow paint on normal bsald-up roofs,
aingie 9" width between manands. Addtee8 shall be pmallel to end facing ~e prlma~y INt.
9. AI reef latches shall be panted qntemmtonal Orange'.
10. Street addrosa shall be irested In · v;atle localion. minimum 12 inches in height. on the street
ide of the butr,~ with · centresting background.
11. Upon camplet]on of 1he q~gredlng of the ;ntedor Of each banding, a monitore~ alarm system Shall
be instMled and monitored :~4-houre · dey by a deslgna'md private alarm c~rnpany. to notify the Police
Dep.artn~ent of eny intrusion..
12. RegEfdlng caza riMtuber PA99-0396, the pdlce de;Narlntent have no Inputs to Ibis related pro~ect.
AI quesllm. regaelng ~ese umdltlon~ dell be referred tO life Polce DaUnt Cdrne Prevemion &
Re seelion (90g) 506-2628,
Wa r
Jeffrey L. :qinkier
October 11, 1999
Denice Thomas, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
OCT i 3 7Qa9 ' ~i
SUBJECT:
WATER AVAILAB!LITY
PARCEL NO. 1 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 17440
APN 950-100-019
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0398
Dear Ms, Thomas:
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
t ,,c/z-.C/~2..~/~__......_,.__
~nNON, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
99~SB:mc271%F012-T6%FC F
County of Riverside
DEPARTNIENT OF ENVIRONSIENTAL HEALTH
DATE: October 14. 1999
TO: CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ATTN: Denice Thomas
FROM d~ GREGOR DELLENBACH. Environmental Health Specialist IV
RE: PLOT PLAN NO. PA99-0398
I. The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the Plot Plan No. PA99-0398 and has no
objections. SanitaU sewer and water services may be available in this area.
PRIOR TO ANY PLAN CHECK SUBMITTAL tbr health clearance. the following items are
required:
a) '-XVill-serve' letters ~'om the appropriate water and sexvering agencies.
b)
Three complete sets ofpl,'ms tbr each food establishment ('to include rending machines) will be
submitted. including a fixture schednle. a finish schedule. and a plumbing schedule in order to
ensure compliance w4th the California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific
retbrence. please contact Food FaciliD, Plan examiners at (909) 694-5022).
A clearance letter from 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.
· Hazardous Waste Generator Services. Ordinance # 615.3.
· EmergencyResponsePlansDisclosure(inaccordancewithOrdinm~ce#651.2.)
· \Vaste reduction management.
d) A lctter ti'om the Local Solid Waste Enforcement Agency (Medical Waste - contact Sam
Mm'tinez at (909,) 955-8982 ).
GD:dr
(909) 955-8980
NOTE:
Any current additional requiren~ents not covered. can be applicable at time of Building
Doug Thompson, Hazardous Materials
Bonnie Dierking. Supervising, Enviromnental Health Specialist
Sam Martinez. Enviromnental Health Specialist IV
stand3b Idoc
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
APPROVING PA99-0399
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29510
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'i~398pa99.pc1 .doc
21
A'FI'ACHMENT NO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0399,
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 295'10 TO SUBDIVIDE 3,42 VACANT
ACRES INTO TWO (2) PARCELS WITHIN THE HIGHWAY TOURIST
COMMERCIAL ZONE GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF
STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET WEST OF
MARGARITA ROAD AND STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH INTERSECTION
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 950-'100-0'19.
WHEREAS, the Highway 79 South Medical Plaza, LLC, filed Planning Application No.
PA99~0399 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29510) in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula
General Plan, Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance;
WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on
January 19, 2000, at a duly noticed public headrig 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 hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission approved the Application subject to the conditions after finding that the
project proposed in the Application conformed with the City of Temecula General Plan,
Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance;
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. Findinqs. That the Temecula Planning Commission, in approving Planning
Application No. PA99-0399 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29510), hereby makes the following findings
as required in Section 16.09.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code.
A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision is
consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, any applicable specific plan and the City of
Temecula Municipal Code;
B. The tentative map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract
entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the land is subject to a
Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will not be
too small to sustain their agricultural use;
C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development
proposed by the tentative map;
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING~Staffrpt\398pa99.pC1 .doc
22
D. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of
approval, are either:
1. Not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably
injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; or
2. A Notice of Exemption is being filed pursuant to Section 15315 of the CEQA
Guidelines;
E. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious
public health problems;
F. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling
opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible;
G. The design of the subdivision and 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
subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those
previously acquired by the public will be provided.
H. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby).
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. A Notice of Exemption for Planning Application
No. PA99-0399 was made per the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15315.
This Section allows exemptions for minor land divisions that meet certain prescribed criteda. The
subject site complies with these criteria and therefore the exemption can be applied to this project.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves
Planning Application No. PA99-0399 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29510) for the subdivision of 3.42
gross acres into two (2) lots, located north of State Highway 79 South, south of Dartolo Road, west
of Margarita Road, and known as Assessor's Parcel Nos. 950-100-019 subject to the project
specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this
reference.
\\TEMEC_FS101~VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING~StaffTpt\398pa99.pC1 .doc
23
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19 day of January, 2000.
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 19th day of January, 2000 by the
following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS~PLANNING\STAFFRp'~398pa99.pcl ,doc
24
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PA99-0399 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP No. 29510)
\\TEMEC_FS101WOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT%398pa99.pc1,dOc
25
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No:
Project Description:
Assessor's Parcel No:
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
PA99-0399 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 29510)
Subdivide 3.42 vacant acresintotwo (2)parcels
950-100-019
January19,2000
January19,2002
PLANNING DIVISION
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning
Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount
of Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to
file the Notice of Determination with a DeMinimus Finding for the Mitigated or Negative
Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code
of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the
applicant/developer has not delivered to the Community Development Department -
Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall
be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)).
General Requirements
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and
to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless modified by the conditions listed
below. A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and City
Ordinance, upon written request, if made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
3. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to
indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own
selection, the City from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgements, or proceedings
against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek monetary damages resulting, directly
or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency
or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including
actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. City shall
be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof,
or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors,
legal counsel, and agents. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner
of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further
cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all
action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such
defense.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\pLANNING\STAFFRpT~398pa99.pC1 .doc 26
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning
Division.
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal
Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by
providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid.
Prior to Recordation of the Final Map
6. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division:
a. A copy of the Final Map.
b. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes:
1)
This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar
Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the
California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations,
Ordinance No. 855.
2) This project is within a liquefaction hazard zone.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
The Department of Public Works recommends the following Conditions of Approval for this project.
Unless stated otherwise, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any
Government Agency.
General Requirements
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative map all existing and
proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and
their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision.
A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the Department
of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained
road right-of-way.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way.
10.
An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the California Department of Transportation
prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State right-of-
way.
11.
All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated
for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and
shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecuia mylars.
Prior to Approval of the Parcel Map, unless other timing is indicated, the Developer shall
complete the following or have plans submitted and approved, subdivision improvement
agreements executed and securities posted:
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pCl .doc
27
12 As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
a. Rancho California Water District
b. Eastern Municipal Water District
c. City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau
d, Planning Department
e, Department of Public Works
f. Riverside County Health Department
g. Cable TV Franchise
h. Caltrans
i. General Telephone
j. Southern California Edison Company
k. Southern California Gas Company
12.
The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula
General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by
the Department of Public Works:
Improve Dartolo Road (Principal Collector Highway Standards - 78' R/W) to include
dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street
improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities,
signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer).
All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement
transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections,
13.
Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design
of the street improvement plans:
Street centerline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum
over A.C. paving.
b. Ddveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207, 207A and/or 208.
Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in
accordance with Ordinance No. 461.
Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400
and 401.
Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the
project boundaries to ensure adequate continuity of design with adjoining
properties.
f. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFt:RPq~398pa99,pcl.doc
28
g. Landscaping shall be limited in the comer cut-off area of all intersections and
adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility.
All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed
through curb outlets per City Standard No. 301,302 and 303.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall
be provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required where
adequate right-of-way does not exist for installation of the facilities. All utilities shall
be designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
14.
Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Dartolo Road and State Route 79 South
on the Parcel Map with the exception of one access opening on Dartolo Road as delineated
on the approved Tentative Parcel Map.
15.
Corner property line cut off for vehicular sight distance and installation of pedestrian
facilities shall be provided at all street intersections in accordance with Riverside County
Standard No. 805.
16.
All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public
or other appropriate agency and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons
such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
17.
Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of an
existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Prior to
City Council approval of the Parcel Map, the Developer shall make an application for
reapportionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory agency.
18. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid.
19.
An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Parcel
Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with the map.
A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and
approval. The following information shall be on the ECS:
20. The delineation of the area within the 100-year floodplain.
21. Special Study Zones.
22. Geotechnical hazards identified in the project's geotechnicat report.
23. Archeological resources found on the site.
24.
The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an
Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject
property.
25.
The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property
interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submittal of the
Parcel Map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements
pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such agreement
shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING~STAFFRpT~398pa99.pc1 ,doc
29
off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion
of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal
report obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been
approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal.
26.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be
provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and
constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable 'IV,
and/or security systems shall be pro-wired in the residence.
27.
The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit
shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements.
28.
An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to approval of the Parcel Map
or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first.
29.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities,
utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division
boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted for review and
recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities located
outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on
the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating "drainage easements shaft be
kept free of buildings and obstructions."
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
30.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
a. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
b. Planning Department
c. Department of Public Works
d. Riverside County Health Department
e. Caltrans
f. Community Services District
g. General Telephone
h. Southern California Edison Company
i. Southern California Gas Company
31.
A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City of
Temecula standards and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any grading. The plan shall incorporate adequate erosion control
measures to protect the site and adjoining properties from damage due to erosion.
32.
A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the
Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identify
storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of
the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed off-site or on-site, public or private,
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pc1 .doc
30
drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an
adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or
private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all
facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm
water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. The basis for analysis
and design shall be a storm with a recurrence interval of one hundred years.
33.
The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board.
34.
The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading
and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and
subject to approval by the Department of Public Works.
35.
The Developer shall obtain letters of approval or easements for any off-site work performed
on adjoining properties. The letters or easements shall be in a format as directed by the
Department of Public Works.
36.
The site is in an area identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps as Flood Zone "X" and
is subject to flooding of undetermined depths, Prior to the approval of any plans, the
Developer shall demonstrate that the project complies with Chapter 15.12 of the Temecula
Municipal Code for development within Flood Zone. A Flood Plain Development Permit is
required prior to issuance of any permit. Residential subdivisions shall obtain a Letter of
Map Revision (LOMR) from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) prior to
occupancy of any unit. Commercial subdivisions may obtain a LOMR at their discretion.
37.
A Flood Plain Development Permit and Flood Study shall be submitted to the Department
of Public Works for review and approval. The flood study shall be in a format acceptable
to the Department and include, but not be limited to, the following criteria:
Drainage and flood protection facilities which will protect all structures by diverting
site runoff to streets or approved storm drain facilities.
Adequate provision shall be made for the acceptance and disposal of surface
drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
The impact to the site from any flood zone as shown on the FEMA flood hazard map
and any necessary mitigation to protect the site.
d. Identify and mitigate impacts of grading to any adjacent floodway.
The location of existing and post development 100-year floodplain and floodway
shall be shown on the improvement plan.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits
38. Parcel Map shall be approved and recorded.
39.
A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review
and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location
and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing
compaction and site conditions.
40.
Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the California Uniform Building
Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pc1 .doc
31
Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in
substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan.
41.
The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as
required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and
all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06.
Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy
42.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
a. Rancho California Water District
b. Eastern Municipal Water District
c. Department of Public Works
43.
All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public
agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works.
44.
All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City
standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
45.
The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken due
to the construction operations of this project shall be repaired or removed and replaced to
the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
BUILDING SAFETY DIVISION
46. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
FIRE SAFETY DIVISION
The following are the Fire Department Conditions of Approval for this project. All questions
regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau.
47.
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.
48.
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for commercial land
division per CFC Appendix Ill-A, Table A-Ill-A-1. The developer shall provide for this
project, a water system capable of delivering 4000 GPM at 20 PSI residual operating
pressure with a 4 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)
49. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC
Appendix Ill-B, Table A-Ill-B-1. 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 350 feet apart and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the
street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall
ATEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pc1 .doc 32
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)
50.
Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet, Minimum turning radius on any
cul-de-sac shall be forty-five (45) feet. (CFC 902,2,2.3)
51.
If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection
prior to any building construction, (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2)
52.
Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have
approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads
are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for
80,000 Ibs. GVVV. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
53.
Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire
Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any
portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all
weather surface designed for 80,000 Ibs. GVVV with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet.
( CFC sec 902)
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)
55,
Prior to building construction, dead end road ways and streets in excess of one hundred
and fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of
accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4)
56.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water
system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. Plans shall be:
signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature
block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards.
After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to
the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire
hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any
combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2
and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1 )
57.
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)
58.
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 timfighting personnel. (CFC 902.4)
OTHER AGENCIES
59.
Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control
District's transmittal dated November 8, 1999, a copy of which is attached. The fee is made
payable to the Riverside County Flood Control Water District by either a cashier's check or
money order, prior to the issuance of a grading permit (unless deferred to a later date by
the District), based upon the prevailing area drainage plan fee.
60. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated October 14, 1999, a copy of which
is attached.
\\TEMEC_FSlO1\VOL1~DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pc1 .doc 33
61,
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho Water
transmittal dated October 11, 1999, a copy of which is attached.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in 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 Signature
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99,pc1 .doc
34
INTY F
October 14, 1999
City of Temecula Planning Department
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
ATTN: Denice Thomas
RE: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29510 ( PA99-0399): BEING A SUBDIVISION OF
PARCELS I AND 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 17440, AS PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 99, PAGES
15 AND 16, OF PARCEL MAPS, AS MERGED BY CERTIFICATE OF MERGER NO. 606.
RECORDED NOVEMBER 20, 1989, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 405465, BOTH OF OFFICIAL
RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY.
(2 lots)
Dear Gentlemen:
1. The Department of Environmental Health h$ reviewed Tentative Parcel Map No. 29510 and
recommends:
A waler system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved b? the water
company and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the water system shall be
submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not less th,"m one-inch equal's 200 t~et. along with
the original drawing to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter.
location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and joint specifications. and the size of the main at the
_/unction of the new system to the existing system. The plans shall comply in all respects with Div.
5. Part I. and Chapter 7 of the Calilbrnia Health and Sat~t.x Code. CaliI'ornia Administrative Code.
Title l 1. Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of
California. when applicable. The plans shalI be signed by a registered engineer and water company
xvitb the l~,llowing certification: "I ceni6' that the design oF the water system in Tentative Parcel
Map No. 29510. is in accordance with the x~ater system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal
Water District and that the water services. storage. and distribution system will be adequate to
prox ide x~ater sen'ice to such Parcel Map". This certification does not constitute a guarantee that it
will supply water to such Parcel Map at any specific quantities. flows or pressures fbr fire
protection or any other purpose. This certification shall be signed by a responsible official of the
xxater compan.~. The plans must be submitted to the City of Temecula to review at least
WEEKS PRIOR to the request for the recordation of the final map.
l'!:is sL:bdi', !.~i~;r: has a st,lt,:';:'~c;~t l'r,~m East,zri: .Municipal WaLcr District
water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand providing satisFactoO financial
arrangements are completed x,,ith the subdivider. It MI1 be necessa
be made PRIOR to the recordation of the tinal map.
Local Enforcement Agency ' RO Box 1280 Riverside. CA 92502-1280 ~ !909) 955-8982 ' FAX 19091 7R1-9653 '; 40RI) Lemc~n Sn,-et
Land Use and Water Engineering ' PO Box 1206. Ri~elstde. CA 92502-I206 '/909) 955-8980; FAX ~909} 955-6903 40~U Lerno:~
· Page Two
Attn: Denice Thomas
October 14. 1999
This subdivision is '.',ithin the Eastem Municipal Water District and shall be connected to the
sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed according to plans mTd speci ficatitms as
appro~ed by the Eastern Municipal Water District. the City of Temecula and the Health
Depa~ment. Pernmnent prints of the plans of the sewer systcm shall bc submitted in triplicate.
along with the original drawing. to the City. of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal pipe
diameter. location of manholes. complete profiles, pipe and .joint specifications and the size or' the
sewers at the junction of the new system to the existing system. A single plat indicating location ot'
sewer lines and ~aterlines shall be a portion of the sewage pkms and profiles. The plans shall hc
signed by a registered engineer and the sewer district Mth the lbllowing certification: "I certil~
that the design of the sewer system in Parcel Map No. 29510, is in accordance with the so,act
system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that the waste disposal system
is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed Parcel Map". The plans
must be submitted to the City of Temecula to re,,ie,.~ at least two weeks PRIOR to the request for
the rccordation of the final map.
5. It will be necessm3· for financial arrm~gements to be completely ~nalized PRIOR to recordation of
the final map.
6. It will bc necessm3- tbr the annexation proceedings to bc completely ~nalized PIllOR to the
recordation of the final map.
7. Additional approval from Rivcrside County Environmental Health Department will be required lbr
all tenants operating a food facilit2,.' or generating any hazardous yeasic.
Sincerely.
GREGOR DELLENBACH, Environmental Health Specialist IV
GD:dr
(909) 955-8980
l ancho
Wa r
.Jeffrey L, Minkler
John F. Hennigar
Phillip L Forbes
Kenneth C. Dealy
October 11, 1999
Denice Thomas, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AVAILABILITY
PARCEL MAP NO. 29,510
APN 950-100-019
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA99-0399
Dear Ms. Thomas:
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 centact 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',S8:mc273~F012-T6~FCF
Rancho California Water District
ATI'ACHMENT NO. 3
EXHIBITS
\\TEMEC_FS101WOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFF{P'~398pa99.pcl .doc
35
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NOS. - PA99-0398 AND PA99-0399
EXHIBIT - A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JANUARY 19, 2000
VICINITY MAP
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLl\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99,pc.doc
35
CITY OF TEMECULA
Project
Site
EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - HIGHWAY TOURIST (HT) COMMERCIAL ZONE
Project
Site
O00000000000000C
EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - HTC HIGHWAY TOURIST COMMERCIAL
CASE NOS. - PA99-0398 AND PA99-0399
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- JANUARY 19, 2000
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOLI\DeptS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pC.doC
36
CITY OF TEMECULA
SITE PLAN
H
~HHAY
/ J
CASE NO. - PA99-0398
EXHIBIT- D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- JANUARY 19, 1999
SITE PLAN
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DeptS\PLANNING\STAFFRP"~398pa99.pc.dOC
37
CITY OFTEMECULA
/
/
HIGdV/AY 19 SOU~H
CASE NO. - PA99-0398 AND PA99-0399
EXHIBIT- E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JANUARY 19, 2000
GRADING PLAN
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\Depts\PLANNING\STAFFRPT%398pa99.PC.doc
38
CITY OF TEMECULA
NORTH ELEVATION
~ f ? t '! !!
.
II,~I.IILllLRI,~L~I,ItLilL~L~L !'Z'Z ..........~
--,~,~tB~Blll~~, ~ .~ .
~H EL~ATION
CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0398
EXHIBIT - F
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -JANUARY 19, 2000
ELEVATIONS
\\TEMEC_FS101WOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pc1.doc
40
CITY OF TEMECULA
II11'I'11 IlIlilll. IJIlll.......~II.~T~~;
EAST ELEVATION
WEST ELEVATION
CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0398
EXHIBIT - G
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- JANUARY 19, 2000
ELEVATIONS
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pc1 ,doc
41
CITY OF TEMECULA
~,T~ .~:~:!'~,,. !'
======================================= ......
~--
FIRST FLO01~ PLAN
CASE NO. - PA99-0398
EXHIBIT - H
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JANUARY 19, 2000
FLOOR PLANS
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398Pa99.Pc1 .doc
42
CITY OF TEMECULA
IIIfilHIfiHH-~i~'
I i
SECOND FLOOR PL~I ~ ~
CASE NO. - PA99-0398
EXHIBIT - I
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JANUARY 19, 2000
FLOOR PLANS
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99,pc1 .doc
43
CITY OF TEMECULA
' I I
PRELIMINARY PLANlqNG PLAN
CASE NO. - PA99-0283 THROUGH PA99-0398
EXHIBIT - J
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -JANUARY 19, 2000
LANDSCAPE PLANS
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'R398pa99.pcl,doc
44
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
\\TEMEC_FSI01\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRPT~398pa99.pc1 .doc
45
CITY OF TEMECULA
TEN TA ~1V~'
PARCEL MAP NO 295/0
|!
CASE NO. - PA99-0399
EXHIBIT- A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -JANUARY 19, 2000
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29510
\\TEMEC_FS101\VOL1\DEPTS\PLANNING\STAFFRP'~398pa99.pc1 .doc
46
ITEM #7
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission
Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager
January 19,2000
Planning Application PA 97-0307 ('l'entative 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 [Continued From the 12-8-99 Planning
Commission Meeting]
Prepared By:
John De Gange, Project Planner
Recommendation: Continue
At the Decamber 8, 1999 meeting the Planning Commission continued this item to this date based
on what was determined to be unresolved issues pertaining to the location of the proposed access
into the site and questions regarding the provision of access to the landlocked parcel(s) to the south.
Since that that time staff and the applicant have been in discussions regarding the access issue.
At the time of the wdting of this report, no definitive resolution has been attained, though staff and
the applicants and their consults are continuing discussions up to the time of the meeting. At the
meeting of January 19, 2000, staff will be providing a verbal report to inform the Planning
Commission of the status of the negotiations.
Pursuant to the applicant's request, PA97-0307 (Tentative Parcel Map 28627) - for Margarita
Canyon is asking for a continuance.
F:~DEFFS\PLANN1NG\staffrpt~307pa97pcxnem2.doc
1
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (909) 6946444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting
will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR
35.102.35.104 ADA Trtle II]
CALL TO ORDER:
Flag Salute:
Roll Call:
PUBLIC COMMENTS
ACTION AGENDA
TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
A REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
JANUARY 19, 2000- 6:00 P.M.
Next in Order:
Resolution: No. 2000-003
Commissioner Mathewson
Fahey, Mathewson, Webster, Guerdero
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Commission
on items that are listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes each.
If you desire to speak to the Commission about an item no__t 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 for the record.
For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the
Commission Secretary prior to the Commission addressing that item. There is a three
(3) minute time limit for individual speakers.
CONSENT CALENDAR
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will
be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless
Members of the Planning Commission request specific items be removed from the
Consent Calendar for separate action.
Al~omval of Aclenda - APPROVED 3-1, FAHEY ABSENT
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the Agenda of January 19, 2000.
R:~plancornrn~agendas~2000\l -19-00.doc
1
2 Minutes - APPROVED 3-1, FAHEY ABSENT
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes of December 8, 1999.
3 Directors Hearin<] Update - RECEIVE AND FILE 3-1, FAHEY ABSENT
RECOMMENDATION
3.1 Receive and file.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before a public
hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of
the project(s) at the time of hearing. If you challenge any of the projects in court, you
may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public
hearing or in written correspondences delivered to the Commission Secretary at, or
prior to, the public hearing.
4
Plannina Application No. PA99-0345 (Development Plan) - VCL Construction (located on
the east side of Jefferson Avenue, approximately 1,000 feet north of Rancho California
Road - Project Planner Steve Griffin) - Continued from the January 5, 2000, Planning
Commission meetin~l - APPROVED 4-0
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-003
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0345, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 35,224 SQUARE-
FOOT, 101-ROOM OR 59,950 SQUARE-FOOT, 137-ROOM
HOLIDAY INN HOTEL ON 3.37 ACRES LOCATED ON THE
EAST SIDE OF JEFFERSON AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY
1,000 FEET NORTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, AND
ALSO IDENTIFIED AS PORTIONS OF PARCEL 1, 2, 3 & 6 OF
PARCEL MAP 23882
4.2 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0345 (Development
Plan) pursuant to Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines.
R:~olancomm~agendas%2000\1-19-00.doe
2
5
6
Plannine Application No. PA99-0379 (Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan) -
VVilline (Buck) & Lvnne Ramsev (located at the south side of Winchester Road, midway
between Ynez Road and Marearita Road, on Pad E at the Promenade Mall - APN910-
320-028 - Project Planner Thomas Thornsley) - Continued from the January 5, 2000
Plannine Commission meetine - APPROVED 4-0
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-004
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0379, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN
AND CONSTRUCTION OF A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT
COMMERCIAL BUILDING ON 1.2 ACRES AND A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A GAS
STATION/CONVENIENCE STORE WITH A DRIVE-THRU
RESTAURANT SERVICE LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
WINCHESTER ROAD BETWEEN MARGARITA ROAD AND
YNEZ ROAD, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 910-
320-028 AND LOT E OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PA98-0495
AND PARCEL MERGER PA99-0007
5.2
Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0379 (Conditional
Use Permit and Development Plan) based on the Determination of Consistency with
a project for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was previously certified
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 - Subsequent EIR's and Negative
Declarations,
Plannine AI3plication No. PA99-0398 (Development Plan) - (located on the north side of
State Hi.ehwav 79 south approximately 500 feet west of Marf~adta Road and State
HiGhway 79 south intersection) -Associate Planner Denice Thomas - APPROVED 4-0
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-005
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0398, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 21,151 SQUARE
FOOT MEDICAL OFFICE PLAZA ON 2.28 ACRES LOCATED
ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH
APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET WEST OF THE MARGARITA
ROAD AND STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH INTERSECTIONS
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 950-100-019
R:~plancomrn~agendas~.000\l -19-O0.doc
3
6.2 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0398 pursuant to
Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines;
6.3 Adopt a resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000-006
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA99-0399, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 29510 TO
SUBDIVIDE 3.42 VACANT ACRES INTO TWO (2) PARCELS
WITHIN THE HIGHWAY TOURIST COMMERCIAL ZONE
GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE
HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET WEST OF
MARGARITA ROAD AND STATE HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH
INTERSECTION, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 950-
100-019
6.4 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA99-0399 pursuant to
Section 15315 of the CEQA Guidelines.
Planninq Application No. PA97-0307 (Tentative Parcel Map 28627) - (located adjacent to
Interstate 15, south west of the intersection of Old Town Front Street and Hiqhwev 79
south (the future Western Bypass Corridor). Assessors Parcel #922-210-047-Proiect
Planner John DeGancle - Continued from the December 8, 1999 Plannincl
Commission meeting - CONTINUED TO FEBRUARY 16, 2000 3-1 GUERRIERO
ABSTAINED
RECOMMENDATION
7.1 Continue
COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS
PLANNING MANAGER'S REPORT
Planners Institute
APA Design Review Workshop on February 26, 2000
Results of inquiry on Alcohol Sting Operations
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: February 2, 2000, 6:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business
Park Ddve, Temecula, California.
R:~lancomm~agendas~2000\l -19-O0.doc
4