HomeMy WebLinkAbout060601 PC Agendain 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) 694-6~?.~,. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting wfll
enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR
35.102.35.104 ADA Title II]
AGENDA
TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
JUNE 6, 2001 - 6:00 P.M.
Next in Order:
Resolution: No. 2001-014
CALL TO ORDER:
Flag Salute:
Commissioner Telesio
Roll Call:
Chiniaeff, Mathewson, Telesio, Webster and Guerriero
PUBLIC COMMENTS
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.
A,qenda
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the Agenda of June 6, 2001
R:~PLANCOMM~Agendas~2001 ~6~6-01 .doc
1
2 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes from April 4, 2001
2.2 Approve the minutes from April 18, 2001
COMMISSION BUS NESS
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.
3 Planninq Application's for Harveston are PA00-0419 (GPA), PA99-0418 (SP 13,
Development Code Amendment, and SP Zonin,q Standards), PA00-0189 (EIR), PA99-024'~,
(Chan.qe of Zone), PA99-0446 (Development A.qreement), PA00-0295 (Vestin.q Tentativ,,
Tract 29639), PA01-0030 (Tentative Tract 29928), PA01-0031 (Tentative Tract 29929) anH
PA01-0032 (Tentative Tract 30088), located east of Interstate 15, north of Santa Gertrudi=~
Creek, west of Mar.qarita Road and south of the northern City limit. - Patty Anders,
Associate Planner/Saied Naaseh, Project Planner V/Dave Hoclan, Senior Planner/Debbiu
Ubnoske, Director of Plannin.q. Continued from May 16, 2001..
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Continue the Harveston Specific Plan and all it's associated applications (all referenced
in Subject heading above). A verbal recommendation on the continuance will be made
at the June 6, 2001 meeting.
4 Plannin,q Application No. 01-0140, (Southwest Traders) - Rick Rush, Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Adopt the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. 01-0140 (Development
Plan);
4.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. 01-0140 A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCT A 64,630 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING FOR THE
PURPOSE OF EXPANDING THE EXISTING SOUTHWEST
TRADERS BUSINESS LOCATED AT 27565 DIAZ ROAD AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 92t-030-004
R:~PLANCOMMVkgendas~2001~6-6-01 .doc 2
5 Plannin.q Application No, PA01-0025, (Temecula Radiator and Auto Repair) - Michael
· " McCoy, Project Planner II
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Adopt a notice of exemption for Planning Application no. PA01-0025 pursuant to section
15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.
5.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA01-0025 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN), TO CONSTRUCT
AND OPERATE A 21,382 SQUARE FOOT TWO-STORY AUTO
REPAIR SERVICE BUILDING ON '1.8 ACRES LOCATED ON
THE NORTH SIDE OF RANCHO WAY WEST OF DIAZ ROAD
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-040-042.
6 Plannin.q Application No. PA01-0204, (Macy's) - Don Hazen, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1
Make a Determination of Consistency with a project for which an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) was previously certified and Findings that a Subsequent EIR is not
required; and
6.2 Adopt Resolution No. 2001- approving Planning Application No. 01-0204
(Development Plan - Fast Track) for Macys Department Store, based upon the
Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA01-0204 - (DEVELOPMENT PLAN - FAST TRACK) TO
CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A TWO-STORY, 165,000
SQUARE FOOT MACYS DEPARTMENT STORE AS THE
FOURTH ANCHOR TENANT AT THE SOUTH END OF THE
PROMENADE MALL, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF WINCHESTER ROAD (STATE HIGHWAY 79
NORTH) AND YNEZ ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NO. 910-130-073.
R:~:~LANCOMM~Agendas~001~6-6-01 .doc
3
Plann n.q Application No. PA01-0248 (Mall Expansion) - Don Hazen, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
6.3 Make a Determination of Consistency with a project for which an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) was previously certified and Findings that a Subsequent EIR is not
required; and
6.4 Adopt Resolution No. 2001- approving Planning Application No. 01-0248
(Development Plan - Fast Track) for the Mall Expansion, based upon the Analysis and
Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval.
PC RESOLUTION NO. 200t-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA0t-0248 - (DEVELOPMENT PLAN - FAST TRACK) TO
CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A TWO-STORY, 80,000 SQUARE
FOOT EXPANSION OF IN-LINE SHOPS CONNECTING MACYS
TO THE EXISTING MALL PROMENADE, AT THE SOUTH END
OF THE PROMENADE MALL, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF WINCHESTER ROAD (STATE HIGHWAY 79
NORTH) AND YNEZ ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NO. 9t0-t30-073.
COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS
PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT,
ADJOURNMENT
Next Regular Meeting:
June 20, 2001, Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
p,:~PLANCOMM~gendas~2001 ~6-6-01 .doc 4
ITEM #2
MINUTES FROM APRIL 4, 2001
CALL TO ORDER
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 4, 2001
The City of Temecuia Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:00 P.M., on
Wednesday April 4, 2001, 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:
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No comments.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Agenda
RECOMMENDATION:
Commissioners Chiniaeff, Telesio, Webster, and Chairman
Guerriero.
Commissioner Mathewson.
Director of Planning Ubnoske,
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks,
Assistant City Attorney Curley,
Senior Planner Hazen,
Associate Planner Thornsley, and
Minute Clerk Hansen.
1.1 Approve the Agenda of April 4, 2001.
2 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes of January 31, 2001
With respect to the Agenda, Chairman Guerriero noted that it was being recommended that
Agenda Item No. 3 be pulled, and that Agenda Item No. 4 be continued to the April 18, 2001
Planning Commission meeting.
R: Pla nCom rn~rninut es,~040401
MOTION: Commissioner Webster moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1, and 2,
including the amendments to Agenda Item No. 1. Commissioner Chiniaeff seconded the motion
and voice vote reflected approval with the exceptiop, of Commissioner Mathewson who was
absent.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
3 Clarification of the use approved with PA00-0260 - Outback Restaurant location
~. 40275 Winchester Avenue - Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Plannin.q
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Provide direction to staff.
This item was pulled from the Agenda,
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
Plannin A lication 00-0427 Develo merit Plan Davcon Develo ment Inc. to desi n and
~in s on two se arate lots with the build~
totalin 18 787 s uare feet on 1.08 acres and the buildin on lot 7 totalin 16 381 s uare
~f the Winchester Road west of Dia.__[.z Road
acro~ Water District RCWD APN 909-310-006 ~9-310-
007 (Lot 7)]. - Thomas Thornsle¥, Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA00-0427 pursuant to
Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines;
4.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 200t-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. 00-0427 - A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF TWO ADJOINING INDUSTRIAL
BUILDINGS ON TWO SEPARATE LOTS WITH THE BUILDING
ON LOT 6 TOTALING '18,787 SQUARE FEET ON 1.08 ACRES,
AND THE BUILDING ON LOT 7 TOTALING 16,381 SQUARE
FEET ON 1.0t ACRES, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
THE WINCHESTER ROAD, WEST OF DIAZ ROAD, KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO'S. 909-310-006 (LOT 6) & 909-3'10-
007 (LOT 7).
This item was continued to the April 18, 200t Planning Commission
meeting.
Mr. Paul Lewis, representing the applicant, queried the Planning Commission for input regarding
the revisions being made to the project in order to avoid having to have numerous blueprints
drawn up, specifically requesting input regarding the area which now will have a roll-up door
where the loading dock had been located, and whether the straight wall would be acceptable to
the Planning Commission.
In light of this item being continued to the April 18, 2001 Planning Commission meeting,
Assistant City Attorney Curley advised that it would be inappropriate to negotiate the project at
this time; and relayed that the Planning Commission could communicate with Director of
Planning Ubnoske to provide direction.
Reiterating the Planning Commission's previous comments relayed at the March 28th hearing,
Commissioner Chiniaeff noted that the Commission had been opposed to a loading dock being
visible from the street, and likewise would most likely be concerned with a roll-up door location if
it was visible from the street.
Providing clarification, Senior Planner Hazen noted that the primary issue with staff regarding
this project was not the location of the roll-up, but that the aisle was not wide enough to be
utilized as a loading space.
Director of Planning Ubnoske provided additional information for the applicant as to avenues to
better facility this approval process; and noted that staff could obtain general input from the
Planning Commission via communications, while noting that this hearing was not the
appropriate setting since this item was being continued.
Plannin.q Application No. 00-0417 (Development Plan} Mar.qarita Medical Condo
Development, LLC, c/o Edward Anderson, to desi.qn, construct and operate two medical
office buildin.qs, with three suites in each, totalin.q 13,257 square feet of floor space, (BId.q.
"A" with 5,987 square feet and BId.q. "B" with 7,270 square feet) on a 1.5 acre lot located on
the southeast corner of Marqarita Road and North General Kearny Road. - Thomas
Thornsley, Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. 00-0417 (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.
5.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-008
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. 00-0417 - A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION, AND OPERATION OF TWO MEDICAL
OFFICE BUILDINGS ON 1.5 ACRES WITH BUILDING "A"
HAVING 5,987 SQUARE FEET AND BUILDING "B" HAVING
7,270 SQUARE FEET, TOTALING t3,257 SQUARE FEET,
LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MARGARITA
ROAD AND NORTH GENERAL KEARNY ROAD, KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. APN 921-090-087.
Clarifying the rationale for this item being continued from the March 28, 2001 Planning
Commission meeting, Associate Planner Thornsley provided the staff report (of record), noting
that after reviewing the Mitigation Monitoring Plan with the COA's, staff found that this project
had been designed and developed in accordance with the documents with the exception of one
item, that being the requirement for an acoustical study, advising that a condition has been
added as part of the construction plan requiring that an acoustical study be completed.
In response to Commissioner Webster's queries regarding the community wall along the creek
edge referenced in the Design Guidelines of the Specific Plan, Associate Planner Thornsley
noted that the language was vague, providing additional information regarding staff's review of
this matter. Director of Planning Ubnoske advised that this wall would be addressed during the
next project's development with respect to the map. Commissioner Webster recommended that
if the map and legend graphics were vague, that the text section be referenced when this issue
was addressed.
Mr. Ed Anderson, representing the applicant, noted that while the requirement for this site was
for a fifteen percent (15%) landscaping plan, that this particular proposal included a thirty
percent (30%) landscaping plan, additionally relayed that the proposal exceeds the parking
requirements; noted the architectural features which provide a positive visual appearance for
this corner site; advised that the applicant has agreed to replace the existing sidewalk along
North General Kearny Road with a meandering sidewalk, per the Specific Plan Guidelines; and
noted that the applicant has also agreed to incorporate the requirements of staff and the City to
landscape the proximate parcel along Margarita Road which was not being developed at this
time.
For Commissioner Webster, the applicant's representative relayed that to the best of his
knowledge this project would utilize reclaimed water for landscaping purposes.
Mr. Ed McArdle, the applicant's architect, for Commissioner Webster, noted that to address
energy conservation issues, the walls were made thicker, energy efficient glass was being
utilized, the ceiling area would also be insulated, and the overhangs would be constructed larger
than typical in order to screen the windows, in addition to the use of trees.
Commissioner Chiniaeff advised that this was an attractive office project, commending the
architect for the design, relaying that this project would fit nicely on this corner; and supported
allowing the acoustical study to be submitted Prior to the Issuance of the Building Permit.
Commissioner Webster noted his concurrence with Commissioner Chiniaeff's comments.
Relaying that he was pleased with this project, specifically with the single-story concept,
Commissioner Telesio noted that he was sorry for the past necessary continuance of this item
to address environmental review issues, relaying gratitude for the applicant's cooperation.
Concurring with the previous comments, Chairman Guerriero commended the applicant for the
great architecture; and noted the need for additional medical services in town, which this use
would help to satisfy.
MOTION: Commissioner Webster moved to close the public hearing; and to approve staff's
recommendation with the added condition that an acoustical study be provided prior to the
Issuance of Building Permits. Commissioner Chiniaeff seconded the motion and voice vote
reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Mathewson who was absent.
COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS
With respect to Commissioner Webster's queries on the status of the City's compliance
regarding requirements denoted in a letter from the Water District, Director of Planning
Ubnoske relayed that she would investigate.
Regarding the Reclaimed Water Project under construction on Rancho California Road,
Chairman Guerriero noted that the flashing directional signs directs traffic in one
direction, while the fiagmen on site directed traffic in a different direction which created
safety issues. In response, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks noted that he would
investigate.
PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Referencing the supplemental agenda material provided in response to Commissioner
Telesio's request (regarding recommendations from staff for approval of projects which
did not address outstanding issues that staff had with certain proposals), Director of
Planning Ubnoske noted that she had requested Assistant City Attorney Curley do draw
up some different language for the recommendations; and requested the Commission to
review the data and provide input to staff. Assistant City Attorney Curley provided
additional information, advising that there were timelines associated with moving a
project forward which provide a window of time for staff to negotiate issues to be
addressed; relayed that the additional language would provide focus as to where staff
believes the project to be when it comes forward to the Planning Commission, clarifying
that when there were minor issues needing to be addressed, staff was of the opinion that
a recommendation of denial would not be appropriate; and for Commissioner Chiniaeff,
relayed that the range of options for recommendations would be used as seen fit on a
project-by-project basis.
Commissioner Chiniaeff relayed that each project should be viewed on an individual
basis; and advised that if staff had an issue with a project that that should be
communicated to the Planning Commission.
Assistant City Attorney Curley clarified that the sample recommendation options
provided in the supplemental agenda material was for the purpose of providing a wider
range of recommendations, which would be informational for the Planning Commission.
ADJOURNMENT
At 6:40 P.M. Chairman Guerriero formally adjourned this meeting to the next re~3ular meetin.q
to be held on Wednesday~ April '187 200'1 at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula.
Ron Guerriero,
Chairman
Debbie Ubnoske,
Director of Planning
R: Pla nCom m/minut es/040401 5
MINUTES FROM APRIL 18, 2001
CALL TO ORDER
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL '18, 200t
The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:00 P.M., on
Wednesday April 18, 2001, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
ALLEGIANCE
ROLLCALL
The audience was led in the Flag salute by Chairman Guerriero.
Present:
Absent:
Also Present:
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No comments.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Agenda
RECOMMENDATION:
Commissioners Chiniaeff, Mathewson, Telesio, and Chairman
Guerriero.
Commissioner Webster.
Senior Planner Hazen,
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks,
Assistant City Attorney Curley,
Associate Planner Thornsley, and
Minute Clerk Hansen.
1.1 Approve the Agenda of April 18, 2001.
2
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes from Joint PC/CC Workshop of January 16, 2001.
2.2 Approve the minutes of February 7, 2001.
2.3 Approve the minutes of February 21, 2001.
R PianComm~minutes/041801
MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1, and 2.
the motion was seconded by Commissioner Chiniaeff and voice vote reflected approval with
the exception of Commissioner Webster who was absent, and Commissioner Telesio who
abstained with regard to Item Nos. 2.2, and 2.3.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
3
Plannin A lication No. 00-0448 Develo ment Plan Davcon Develo merit Inc. to desi n
~ns on two se arate lots with th~
Lot 3 totalin 29 186 s uare feet on 1.66 acres and the buildin on Lot 4 totalin 29 186
s uare feet on 1.71 acres located on the eastside of Madison Ave where Madison.~Ave "T"
intersects with Sanborn Rd. - Thomas Thornsle¥, Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 To appoint a design subcommittee for revisions to the proposed freeway frontage
showroom/office building.
Senior Planner Hazen provided an overview of the project (of record), noting that due to the
previous concerns of the Planning Commission, the project was being redesigned; and
recommended that the Planning Commission appoint one or two Commissioners to_serve on a
Subcommittee to assist in the preliminary plans.
In response to Commissioner Telesio, Senior Planner Hazen provided the rationale for staff
recommending appointing Planning Commissioners to serve on a Subcommittee, noting the
desire to involve the Planning Commission in the redesign planning.
Initially, Commissioner Chiniaeff volunteered to serve on the Subcommittee.
Commissioner Telesio recommended that the item be presented to the Planning Commission,
as a whole, in the early stages of conceptual design. Senior Planner Hazen cautioned that this
could set a precedent whereby every applicant will desire to obtain the Planning Commission's
input in the preliminary stages of planning.
Commissioner Chiniaeff suggested that the applicant bring to the Planning Commission four or
five preliminary sketches of design concepts in order to gain input from the Commission in a
workshop-type setting.
For Chairman Guerriero, Senior Planner Hazen relayed that staff was specifically requesting
input form the Planning Commission regarding architectural style, advising that the applicant
was very receptive to staff's feedback, noting staff's reluctance to provide specific direction, and
have the applicant pursue that avenue without some input from the Commission.
In response to Chairman Guerriero, Assistant City Attorney Curley advised that the options (i.e.,
to appoint one or two Commissioners to serve on a Subcommittee, or to have the applicant
bring forward preliminary design plans to the Planning Commission, as a whole) before the
Planning Commission were all sound from a legal perspective.
For Chairman Guerriero, Senior Planner Hazen confirmed that staff had understood the
direction of the Planning Commission and that staff would work with the applicant to bring
forward to the Commission preliminary design plans rather than appointing Commissioners to
serve on a Subcommittee.
It was noted that no formal action was taken regarding this item, and that staff would bring back
new design plans for this project to the Planning Commission at a future date.
4 Director's Hearinq Update for March 2001
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Receive and File.
Since this was a receive and file item, the Planning Commission took no formal action with
respect to this matter.
For informational purposes, Assistant City Attorney Curley advised that the Harveston Project
would not be presented at the May 2, 2001 Planning Commission meeting, but at the May 16th
meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
5
Plannin,q Application 00-0427 (Development Plan) Davcon Development 'Inc. to desiqn and
construct two adjoininq industrial buildin,qs on two separate lots with the buildinq on lot 6
totalinq 18,787 square feet on 1.08 acres, and the buildin,q on lot 7 totalin,q 16,381 square
feet on 1.01 acres located on the south side of the Winchester Road west of Diaz Road
across from Rancho California Water District (RCWD) [APN 909-310-006 (Lot 6) & 909-310-
007 (Lot 7)]. - Thomas Thornsley, Associate Planner - Continued from April 4, 2001
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA00-0427 pursuant to
Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines;
5.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-009
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. 00-0427 - A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF TWO ADJOINING INDUSTRIAL
BUILDINGS ON TWO SEPARATE LOTS WITH THE BUILDING
ON LOT 6 TOTALING 18,787 SQUARE FEET ON '1.08 ACRES,
AND THE BUILDING ON LOT 7 TOTALING 16,38'1 SQUARE
FEET ON 1.0t ACRES, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
THE WINCHESTER ROAD, WEST OF DIAZ ROAD, KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO'S. 909-3'10-006 (LOT 6) & 909-310-
007 (LOT 7).
For the record, Commissioner Chiniaeff indicated that had met with staff and the applicant on
April 5, reviewing the design of the building, relaying his apologies to staff due to his attendance
at this meeting while staff was having discussions with the applicant, advising that it would have
been more prudent to have stepped out during these discussions.
In response to Assistant City Attorney Curley, Commissioner Mathewson relayed that in light of
his absence the second time this item was before the Planning Commission, that he had
reviewed the material included in the last two agenda packets.
Via overheads, Associate Planner Thornsley provided a presentation of the project plan,
highlighting the revisions to this particular proposal, relaying that the applicant worked with staff
and has eliminated the loading docks, specifying the location of the rolPup doors on one of the
buildings, advising that due to the lack of necessity, the alternate building would not have a roll-
up door; noted staff's recommendation for an additional offset to aid in the screening of the
building; relayed that additional landscaping will be added on the side of the building where the
pop-out dock had been located; and noted the relocation of some of the parking in order to
place additional landscaping along the west property line.
Mr. David Wakefield, representing the applicant, noted that the applicant accepted the
conditions and agreed with staff's findings.
In response to Commissioner Chiniaeff, Associate Planner Thornsley presented the most recent
design plans overhead, specifying the added windows on one side of the building, and the
concrete recessed feature on the other side of the building.
Commissioner Mathewson advised that the applicant had addressed his previous concerns.
Chairman Guerriero thanked the applicant for his efforts in working with staff to resolve the
Planning Commission's concerns regarding this project.
MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to close the public hearing; and to approve staff's
recommendation. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Chiniaeff and voice vote
reflected approval ~ of Commissioner Webster who abstained.
COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS
For Chairman Guerriero, Senior Planner Hazen relayed that the Cosco use was on
schedule for the sandblasting and sign installation.
Chairman Guerriero commended the Public Works Department staff for the great work
on the Ist Street Bridge Project.
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks noted that May 1st would be the Ribbon Cutting
Ceremony for the 1st Street Bridge.
PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
A. Senior Planner Hazen apprised the Planning Commission regarding the agenda for the
May 2, 2001 Planning Commission meeting, noting that five projects would be presented
to the Commission that evening, relaying that if the Planning Commission opined that
the agenda was too full, staff could revise the agenda at this time. in response, the
Planning Commission relayed no opposition to the agenda schedule.
ADJOURNMENT
At 6:21 P.M. Chairman Guerriero formally adjourned this meeting to the next regular meeting
to be held on Wednesday, May 2, 200t at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula.
Ron Guerriero,
Chairman
Debbie Ubnoske,
Director of Planning
R: Pla nCom m/minut es/041EO 1 5
ITEM #3
CITY OFTEMECULA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Subject:
Planning Commt~s.~s
Debbie Ubnosk~, Director of Planning
June 6, 2001
PA00-0419 (GPA), PA99-0418 (SP 13, Development Code Amendment, and SP
Zoning Standards), PA00-0189 (EIR), PA99-0245 (Change of Zone), PA99-0446
(Development Agreement), PA00-0295 (Vesting Tentative Tract 29639), PA01-
0030 (Tentative Tract 29928), PA01-0031 (Tentative Tract 29929) and PA01-0032
(Tentative Tract 30088)
PREPARED BY: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning
RECOMMENDATION:
Continue the Harveston Specific Plan and all it's associated
applications (all referenced in Subject heading above), A verbal
recommendation on the continuance will be made at the June 6,
2001 meeting.
BACKGROUND:
The Harveston Specific Plan and all it's associated applications was
scheduled for the May 16, 2001 Planning Commission meeting and
was continued to the June 6, 2001 meeting to work out final
conditions of approvals and financing issues related to the
Community Facilities District. These issues are still being worked
out; therefore, the item is being continued until all issues are
resolved.
R:\S P\Harveston S?xPC Docs\6.6.01.stffreport2conl..doc
ITEM #4
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
June 6, 2001
Planning Application No. 01-0140(Development Plan)
SOUTHWEST TRADERS
Prepared by: Denice Thomas, Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff
recommends the Planning Commission:
1. ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. 01-0140 (Development Plan);
2. ADOPT a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-
0140 A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT A
64,630 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING FOR THE PURPOSE OF
EXPANDING THE EXISTING SOUTHWEST TRADERS BUSINESS
LOCATED AT 27565 DIAZ ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS
PARCEL NO. 921-030-004
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
Bruce Lindquist, Linco Development
REPRESENTATIVE:
Konrad Rieger, Reiger & Associates
PROPOSAL:
To design and construct a 64,630 square foot building for the
purpose of expanding the existing Southwest Traders business
located at 27565 Diaz Road.
LOCATION:
West side of Diaz Road, south of Sarah Way and north of Via Dos
Picos.
EXISTING ZONING:
Light Industrial (LI)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North: Light Industrial (LI)
South: Light Industrial (LI)
East: Open Space Conservation (OS-C)
West: Public Institution (PI)
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
Business Park (BP)
R:~D P~001\01-0140 SW Traders~Staff Report,doc
1
EXISTING LAND USE: Industrial
SURROUNDING LAND
USES:
North: Light industrial user
South: Light industrial user
East: Existing Southwest Traders Facility
West: EMWD Treatment Facility
PROJECT STATISTICS (DEVELOPMENT PLAN)
Lot Area:
473,061 square feet (10.86 acres)
Building Area:
64,630 square feet
Building Height:
Landscaped Area:
Parking Required:
Parking Provided:
40 feet
101,918 square feet (21.5%)
160 vehicular, 6 handicapped, 8 bicycle, 7 motorcycle
177 vehicular, 6 handicapped, 5 bicycle, 5 motorcycle
Lot Coverage: 26.1%
Floor Area Ratio: 0.27
BACKGROUND
This project was submitted to the Planning Department on March 21,2001. On April 12, 2001 the
applicant was provided Development Review Comments for the project and on April 19, 2001 the
applicant submitted the revised plans to the Planning Department. A letter detailing items missing
from the plans was faxed to the applicant on April 26, 2001. The project was deemed complete on
May 14, 2001.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project is a proposal to design and construct a 64,630 square foot industrial building for the
purposes of expanding the existing Southwest Traders business located at 27565 Diaz Road. The
existing business distributes pre-packaged frozen dairy products, paper goods, beverages, janitorial
supplies and desserts to the southern California region. The proposed expansion will be
constructed to the immediate west of the existing 63,596 square foot facility and is anticipated to be
occupied by approximately 122 employees.
The hours of operation for the facility will be 24 hours per day split into 3 shifts. The marketing,
sates, administration and receiving offices will work from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. The warehouse
operations will be performed during the 2nd shift, and during the 3rd shift, the route drivers load their
trucks for delivery during the day.
ANALYSIS
The project conforms to the development standards of the Light Industrial ;~ne designation.
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SWTraders\Staff Report.doc
2
Zoning Criteria
Target Floor Area Ratio
Zoning Requires
0.40
Minimum Street Frontage
Yard Area Adjacent to Street
Rear Yard
Minimum Width 100 feet
Minimum Depth 120 feet
80 feet
Maximum Height
Maximum Lot Coverage
Minimum Landscape Open Space
20 feet
10 feet
50 feet
Project Provides
0.27
Approximately 415 feet
Approximately 1,058 feet
Approximately 415 feet
20 feet
160 feet
40 feet
4O% 26%
20% 21.5%
Site Desiqn
The project is located at 27565 Diaz Road on the west side of Diaz Road south of Sarah Way and
north of Via Dos Picos. The proposed building will be constructed adjacent to and west of the
existing building. The site has 2 driveways that access Diaz Road, one at the northeast corner and
one at the southeast corner. Customer and employee parking are located on the eastern and
northern sides of the property. Truck parking is proposed to be approximately 160 feet from the rear
property line with loading ramps on the northern and western elevations.
The Fire Safety Division has reviewed the project. As designed, emergency vehicles are able to
access the site to provide the appropriate fire and life safety services.
Architecture, Color and Materials
The proposed building will be constructed of tilt-up concrete. The building dimensions are 230 feet
wide by 281 feet long, with a height of up to 40 feet. The Development Code discourages building
walls that are in excess of 50 feet long without some sort of offset. The existing building helps
screen the proposed building from public view, however there is clear view to the building when
traveling north on Diaz Road. In an attempt to soften the visual impact of the building from that view
and adhere to the Development Code, the proposed building will be constructed with offsets on the
northern and southern elevations. The northern and southern elevations are designed using tri-
level panel offsets. The variation of the offsets steps up from the outer edges of the elevations to
the center of the elevation. The panels progressively get taller from the exterior of the elevation to
the center of the elevation providing a break in the roofline, in addition to offsets, the applicant has
provided variations in color on each panel. The outer edge of the elevation will be painted with a
very light beige, the next panel will be painted light beige, and the center panel will be painted beige.
The subtle variation in color helps to accentuate the ofsets.
The eastern and western elevations provide varying rooflines to create some visual interest. The
western elevation is not visible from the public right of way and the eastern elevation has only
minimal visibility to the public right of way. The eastern elevation is 6-feet higher than the existing
building which will be visible from the public right of way. The existing building will be connected to
the proposed building with a fully enclosed production transfer bridge.
The colors and materials used on the proposed building will match the existing building. The
building will be a combination of stucco, sandblasting, and a graduated paint job. A 6-foot forest
green band will be painted along the center of the building to match the e;4sting building.
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SWTraders\Staff Report.doc
3
Landscapinq
The Development Code requires projects within the Light Industrial (LI) designation to provide a
minimum of 20% landscaping coverage. The amount of landscape materials proposed by the
applicant is 101,918 square feet, which is 21.5% lot coverage. Additionally, the appl.icant is
proposing 4,181 square feet of hardscape, which includes an employee eating area, walkways,
patios, and plazas. The City's landscape architect has reviewed and commented on this project's
conceptual landscape plan and landscape conditions of approval are included as part of this
package.
The front landscape area along Diaz will be revised to include the removal of nine eucalyptus trees,
and four sycamore trees. Five eucalyptus trees and four sycamores will remain and will be
protected in place. This area provides a varying landscape buffer ranging from a minimum of
10-feet to a maximum of 30-feet. The front landscape area will consist of 15 gal London Plane
Trees and the sycamores to be saved. This area will also consist of a turf area and 5 gal shrubs of
varying species. The landscape area between the parking field and the east elevation will be
planted with 24" box California Peppers, 24" box Fern Pines and 15 gal London Plane Trees. Five
gal shrubs and turf will also be planted in this area.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
An Initial Study has been prepared for this project and accompanies this staff report. The project
will have no potential significant environmental impacts and staff is recommending adoption of a
Negative Declaration.
EXISTING ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
The General Plan Land Use designation for the site is Business Park (BP). Existing zoning for the
site is Light Industrial (LI). A variety of industrial uses, including the type of warehouse and
distribution use that is being proposed are permitted in the Light Industrial (LI) zone with the
approval of a development plan. The project as proposed, meets all minimum standards and is
consistent with the General Plan and the Dewlopment Code.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The project has been determined by staff to be consistent with all-applicable City ordinances,
standards, guidelines, and policies. It is staff's opinion that the project is compatible with
surrounding developments in terms of design and quality.
FINDINGS
Development Plan
1. The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for (BP)
Business Park development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the
development standards for (LI) Light Industrial in the City of Temecula Development Code.
The site is therefore properly planned and zoned and found to be physically suitable for the
type and density of industrial 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, and fire and
building codes.
2. 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
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SW Traders\Staff Report.doc
4
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.
Attachments-
PC Resolution - Blue Page 7
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval for PA01-0140 (Development Plan) Blue Page ! 1
2. Initial Environmental Study
Exhibits for PA01-0140 (Development Plan) - Blue Page 25
A. Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C. General Plan Map
D. Site Plan
E. Grading Plan
F. Elevations
G. Floor Plan
H. Landscape Plans
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SWTraders\Staff Report. doc
5
ATFACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
APPROVING PA01-0140
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
R:\D Pt2001\01-0140 SWTraders\Staff Report.doc
6
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-
0140 A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT A
64,630 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING FOR THE PURPOSE OF
EXPANDING THE EXISTING SOUTHWEST TRADERS BUSINESS
LOCATED AT 27565 DiAZ ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS
PARCEL NO. 921-030-004
WHEREAS, Ken Smith representing Southwest Traders, Inc., filed Planning Application No.
01-0140, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, Planning Application No. 01-0140 was processed including, but not limited to a
public notice, in the time and manner prescribed byState and local law;,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered Planning
Application No. 01-0140 on June 6, 2001, 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
suppor~ 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. 01-0140 subject to the conditions
after finding that the project proposed in Planning Application No. 01-0140 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. Findinqs. The Planning Commission, in approving Planning Application No.
01-0140 (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
(BP) Business Park development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development
standards for (LI) Light Industrial 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 Cit~vide 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.
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
R:\D P~2001\01-0140 SWTraders\Staf[ Report. doc
7
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 in-fill site. Furthermore, grading has
already occurred at the site, which is a portion of a larger commercial shopping center. 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.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. A Negative Declaration has prepared and
adopted by the Planning Commission. Whereas, no further environ mental review if required for the
proposed project.
Section 4, Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby
conditionally approves Planning Application No. 01-0140 (Development Plan) request for a
Development Plan to design and construct a 64,630 square foot building for the purpose of
expanding the existing Southwest Traders business located at 27565 Diaz Road and known as
Assessors Parcel No. 921-030-004, subject to the project specific 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 6th day of June 2001.
ATTEST:
Ron Guerriero, Chairman
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretaryof the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
PC Resolution No. 01- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City
of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 6th day of June, 2001, by the following vote:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:\D P~2001\01-0140 SWTraders\Staff Report.doc
8
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PA01-0140 DEVELOPMENT PLAN
R:\D P~2001\01-0140 SW Traders\Stall Report.doc
9
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No:
Project Description:
DIF Category:
Assessor's Parcel No:
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
PA01-0140 (Development Plan)
Proposal to design and construct a 64,630
square foot building for the purpose of
expanding the existing Southwest Traders
business located at 27565 Diaz Road.
Business Park/Industrial
921-030-004
June 6,2001
June 6,2003
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or
money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand Three
Hundred Twenty-Eight Dollars ($1,328.00)which includes the One Thousand Two Hundred
and Fifty Dollar ($1,250.00) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus
the Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public
Resources Code Section 21108(a) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If
within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the
Planning Department the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall
be void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
General Requirements
The permittee/applicant shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless, the City and any agency
or instrumentalitythereof, and/or any of its officers, employees, and agents from any and all
claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentalitythereof, or
any of its officers, employees, and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary
damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof,
advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters
of the City, concerning the Planning Application which action is brought within the
appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4
(Section 21000 et seq., including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167).
The City shall promptly notify the permittee/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding
brought forth within this time period. The City shall estimate the cost of the defense of the
action and applicant shall deposit said amount with the City. City may require additional
deposits to cover anticipated costs. City shall refund, without interest, any unused portions
of the deposit once the litigation is finally concluded. Should the City fail to either promptly
notify or cooperate fully, permittee/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify,
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SW Traders\Staff Report.doc
10
defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its
officers, employees, or agents. Should the applicant fail to timely post the required deposit,
the Director may terminate the land use approval without further notice to the applicant.
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 development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits D
(Site Plan), E (Grading Plan), F (Elevations), G (Elevations), H (Floor Plan), I (Landscape
Plans) and J (Color and Materials Board), 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 Director. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being
maintained, the Planning Director shall ha,,e the authorityto require the propertyowner 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.
All mechanical and roof equipment shall be fully screened from public view by being placed
below the lowest level of the surrounding parapet wall.
All downspouts shall be internalized.
The colors and materials for the project shall substantially conform to those noted directly
below and with Exhibit "J" (Color and Material Board), contained on file with the Community
Development Department - Planning Division.
Sandblasted Concrete Wall Color:
Wall Trim:
Frazee 7753M- Harvest Tan
Frazee 7751 W- Beach Grass
Frazee 7750 W- Beach Basket
Frazee AC102N- Raintree
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
10.
11.
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.
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.
The applicant shall revise Exhibits "D, E, F, G, H, I and J", (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
Planning Division staff. The applicant shall submit five (5)full size copies, one (1) reduced
8.5"xl 1" copy of Exhibits D through H, two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of
approved Exhibit 'T' (Color and Materials Board) and of the colored version of approved
Exhibit "F", the colored architectural elevations, to the Community Development Department
R:\D P~2001\01-0140 SW Traders\Staff Report.doc
11
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
13. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
14.
Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department - Planning Di',ision for approval. These plans shall
conform substantially with the approved Exhibit 'T', 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 Cityof Temecula Fee Schedule at time of
submittal).
One (1) copyof 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 ~th the approved
plan).
Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits
15.
All required landscape planting and irrigation shall ha',e been installed consistent with the
approved construction landscape plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the
Planning Director. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The
irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order.
16.
Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Director, 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 Director, the bond shall be released.
17.
The applicant must provide proof of exemption from taxes pursuant to Section 50(c)(3) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986. If applicant fails to produce proof of non-profit organization
status, the Development Impact Fees associated with this project must be paid to the City of
Temecula.
18.
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 60 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
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SWTraders\Staff Report. doc
12
persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense.
Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning 909 696-3000."
19.
20.
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.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed
by this permit.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
21.
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
22. 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.
23. 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.
24. All improvement plans, grading plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent
projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on
standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars.
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and
approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary
erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private property.
The Developer shall post secudty and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and
erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to
approval by the Department of Public Works.
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.
A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted to
the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address
special study zones and the geological conditions of the site, and shall provide
recommendations to mitigate the impact ofground shaking and liquefaction.
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 proper[ies and provide specific recommendations to protect the
R:\D P~2001\01-0140 SWTraders\Staff Report.doc
13
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.
30.
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.
31.
As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer
shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
32.
33.
a. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
b. Planning Department
c. 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.
Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department
and the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
34.
The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site
work performed on adjacent properties as directed bythe 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 cashier's check or
money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee. If
the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this
property, no new charge needs to be paid.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Pe~nit
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:
37.
d. Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C.
paving.
e. Driveways shall conform to the applicable Cityof Temecula Standard No. 207A.
f. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in
accordance with City of Temecula Standard Drawings Nos. 800, 801,802, and 803.
g. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in
accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400. 401and 402.
h. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
i. 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.
j. All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed
through undersidewalk drains.
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:
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SW Traders\Staff Report,doc
14
k. Improve Diaz Road (Major Highway Standards - 100' PJW) to include installation of
sidewalk. The Developer shall provide a cash deposit for half width raised landscape
median on Diaz Road along the property frontage at $50 per lineal foot.
38. 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.
I. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: sidewalks, drive
approaches, etc.
m. Storm drain facilities
n. Sewer and domestic water systems
o. Under grounding of proposed utility distribution lines
39. 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.
40. 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.
41. The Developer shall record a written offer to participate in, and waive all rights to object to
the formation of an Assessment District, a Community Facilities District, or a Bridge and
Major Thoroughfare Fee District for the construction of the proposed Western Bypass
Corridor in accordance with the General Plan. The form of the offer shall be subject to the
approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
42. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
written clearance fi-om the following agencies:
43.
44.
p. Rancho California Water District
q. Eastern Municipal Water District
r. 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.
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
45. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1998 edition of the
California Building, Plumbing, Mechanical and Fire Codes; 1998 National Electrical Code;
California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the
Temecula Municipal Code.
46. A reciprocal use agreement, whose wording shall be approved by the Building Official, shall
be recorded to permit the product conveying tunnel to cross property lines prior to the
issuance of a building permit. This agreement shall only be valid for the purpose of product
R;\D P~2001\01-0140 SWTraders\Staff Report.doc
15
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
conveyance across property lines as long as both properties are under the ownership and
business operation of Southwest Traders.
Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plan showing compliance with
Palomar Lighting Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All streetlights 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.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to commencement of
any construction or inspections.
Disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the buildings 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). Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to
check for handicap accessibility
All buildings shall comply with the applicable provisions of the California Disabled Access
Regulations effective April 1, 1998. Please note that the existinq buildinq and premises will
be required to be brouqht into compliance with current California Disabled Access
Regulations as published in the 1998 edition of the California Building Code.
Provide the proper number of disabled parking spaces located as close as possible to the
main entries in accordance with California building Code Table 11B-6. Provide a site plan
as requested above which indicates compliance with this.
Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans and
structural calculations submitted fur plan review.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule fur plan review.
Provide house-electrical meters at each building for the purpose of providing power for fire
alarm systems and exterior lighting.
Schematic plumbing plans, electrical plan and load calculations, along with mechanical
equipment and ducting plans shall be submitted for plan review stamped and original signed
by an appropriate registered professional.
Obtain street addresses from the Building Official prior to submittal of plans for plan review.
Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrant to the project that indicates the hours
of construction, shown below, as allowed by City of Temecula Ordinance No. 0-90-04,
specifically Section G (1) of Riverside county Ordinance No. 457.73, for any site within one-
quarter mile of an occupied residence.
Monday-Friday
6:30 a.m. 4:30 p.m.
Saturday
7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Holidays
R:\D P~2001\01-0140 SW Traders\Staff Report.doc
16
59.
60.
61.
Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. ESFR system will be required as
agreed upon in meetings with the City Fire and Building and Safety staff.
Restroom fixtures, number and type shall be in accordance with the provisions of the 1998
edition of the California Building Code, Appendix Chapter 29.
Provide an approved precise grading plan for plan check submittal for checking of site
disabled accessibility.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
The following are the Fire Department Conditions of Approval for this project. Ali questions
regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau.
62. 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.
63. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The
developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 2625 GPM at
20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 1850 GPM for a
total fire flow of 4475 GPM 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 III-A)
64. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC
Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum of 6 hydrants, in a combination of on-site and off-
site (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and
adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 300 feet apart, at each intersection
and shall be located no more than 180 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department
access road(s) frontage to an hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any
adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required.
(CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B).
65. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150
feet from a water supply on a public street, as measured by an approved route around the
exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire
flow shall be provided. For this project on site ire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2)
66. 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 902.2.2.2.3 and Subdivision Ord 16.03.020)
67. if construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection pdor
to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2)
68. 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 surtace for
80,000 lbs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
69. 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
R:\D p~2001\01-0140 SWTraders\Staff Report.doc
17
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
weather surface designed for 80,000 lbs. 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)
The gradient for a fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC
902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14)
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)
Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via ail-
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, approved numbers or
addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be
plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a
contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and industrial
buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum
of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall gave a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or
numbers on both the front and rear doers. Single family residences and multi-family
residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire
Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4)
Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and
type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system.
Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to
installation. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9)
Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for
monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm
system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans shall
be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10)
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be
provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be located
to the right side of the main entrance door. (CFC 902.4)
R:\D P~2001 \01-0140 SW Traders\Staff Report.doc
18
80.
81.
82.
83.
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 fire fighting personnel. (CFC 902.4)
Prior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire
Department for approval, a site plan designating Fire Lanes with appropriate lane painting
and or signs.
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, building final or occupancy, buildings
housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions of Uniform Fire Code
Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. The storage of
high-piled combustible stock may require structural design considerations or modifications to
the building. Fire protection and life safety features may include some or all of the following:
an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage
arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department
access doors and Fire department access roads. (CFC Article 81 )
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developedapplicant
shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the
storage of combustible liquids, flammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both
the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau.(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3)
Special
84.
85.
86.
87.
Conditions
Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report WILL be required to be submitted
and to the Fire Prevention Bureau. This report shall address, but not be limited to, all fire and
life safety measures per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, NFPA - 13, 24, 72 and 231-C.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final a simple plot plan and a
simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format must be submitted to the
Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention
for approval.
The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and
update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code permit.
These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval per
the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105)
The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of
Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material
Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any
quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any
additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E)
OTHER AGENCIES
88. The applicant shall comply with the conditions set forth in the letter from Rancho Water
dated March 28, 2001.
89. The applicant shall comply with the Gas Company letter dated March 30, 2001.
90. The applicant shall comply with the Riverside County Flood Control And Water Conservation
District letter dated May 8, 2001.
91. The applicant shall comply with Department of Environmental Health letter dated
April 3, 2001.
R:~D P~2001\01-0140 SW Traders\Staff Report.doc
19
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
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SWTraders\Staff Report.doc
20
Csaba F. Ko
Do~ V. Kulberg
March 28,2001
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 4 OF PARCEL MAP, BOOK 1, PAGE 97
APN 921-030-004
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0140
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.
The proposed project shows the construction of a soccer field. This area is a
candidate for the use of recycled water. RCWD has an existing reclaimed
waterline within Diaz Road that is available to service this site. The developer
should contact RCWD to discuss this issue.
If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees and
District S~cr~t~-y/^a,=,a,trativ*recluirement s.
~s,~,,&Kr~*gerr~U' Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an
Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD.
Representative at this office.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brannon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
01 ~SB:at080~F012-T6\FCF
c: Andrew Webster, Planning and Capital Projects Manager
The
Company
A ~-~Sempra Energy'company
March 30, 2001
Southern California
GasCompany
1981W. Lugonia Avenue
Redtands, CA 9237~-9720
Mailing Address;
PO Box 3003, S¢8031
Redlands, CA 92373-0306
Gas Co. Ref. No. 01-201 OM
City of Temecula
Planning Department
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Attention: Denice Thomas
Re: Case No. PA01-0140, Project located at 27565 Diaz Road.
Thank you for the opportunity to review your plans for the referenced project. We have
no comments or recommendations to submit on this particular development project. If
you need any additional information, please call Gertman Thomas at (909) 335-7733.
Sincerely,
John DeWitt
Technical Supervisor
TO:
FROM
RE:
County of Riverside
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAl, HEALTIt
CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ATTN: Denice Thomas
GREGOR DELLENBACH, Environmental Health Specialist IV
PLOT PLAN NO. PA01-0140
DATE: April 3, 2001
1. The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the Plot Plan No. PA01-0140 and has no
objections. Sanitary sewer and water services may be available in this area.
2. PRIOR TO ANY PLAN CHECK SUBMITTAL for health clearance, the following items are
required:
a) "Will-serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies.
b) Three complete sets of plans for each food establislunent (including vending machines) will be
submitted, including a fixture schedule, a finish schedule, and a plumbing schedule in order to
ensure compliance with the California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific
reference, please contact Food Facility Plan examiners at (909) 461-0284).
c) A clearance letter from the Hazardous Services Materials Management Branch (909) 358-5055
will be required indicating that the project has been cleared for:
· Underground storage tanks, Ordinance # 617.4.
· Hazardous Waste Generator Services, Ordinance # 615.3.
· Emergency Response Plans Disclosure (in accordance with Ordinance # 651.2.)
· Waste reduction management.
d) A letter from the Waste Regulation Branch (Waste Collection/LEA).
GD:gd
(909) 955-8980
NOTE: Any current additional requirements not covered, can be applicable at time of Building
Plan review for final Department of Environmental Health Clearance.
CC2
Doug Thompson, Hazardous Materials
APR t.,
DAVID P. ZAPPE
General Manager-Chief Engineer
City of Temecula
Planning Department
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
;~,47 ~._uu~
1995 MARKET STREET
RIVERSIDE. CA 92501
909.955.1200
909.788.9965 FAX
70082 I
Attention: Denice Thomas
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re: PA 01-0140
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 citx, land use cases, or provide State Division of Real
Estate letters or other flood hazard reports for such cases. ~istrict comments/recommendations for such cases
are normallv limited to items as specific interest to the District including District Master Drainage Plan
facilities, other regional flood control and drainage facilities which could be considered a logical component or
extension of a master plan system, and District Area Drainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In
addition, information of a general nature is provided. The District has not reviewed the proposed project in
detail and the following comments do not in any way constitute or imply District approval or endorsement of
the proposed project with respect to flood hazard, public health and safeD,, or any' other such issues.
PA 01-0140 is a proposal to design, construct and operate a 64,630 square foot addition to an existing 67.000
square foot industrial building located approximately 1,100 fee;~ south of Avenida AIvarado and west of Diaz
Road.
A small portion of the parcel is within the 100-year Zone AE floodplain limits for Murrieta Creek as
delineated on Panel No. 060742-0005B of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps issued in conjunction ~vith the
National Flood Insurance Program administered by the Federal Emergency management Agency (FEMA).
The water surface elevation for the FEMA flow rate of 28,500 cfs is 1015.00 at the upstream edge of the
properV/. A District flood study determined the base flood elevation for the master plan riow rate of 36.300
cfs to be 1016.94 at the upstream edge of the property. All the elevations are based on 1929 NGVD.
Due to the extreme hazard posed by Murrieta Creek, the City should condition the applicant to provide all
studies, calculations, plans or other information needed to meet FEMA requirements. In order to allow
development to proceed, we recommend that the CiD, require thc applicant to participate in a financing
mechanism such as an assessment district to ensure that necessary improvements for Murrieta Creek are
constructed. In this case, the new building should be floodproofed by constructing the finished floor a
minimum of 12 inches above the District's base flood elevation for 36.300 cfs, which is 1016.94.
This project is located within the limits of the District's Murrieta Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan
for which drainage fees have been adopted: applicable fees should be paid by cashier's t~heck or money order
to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of building or grading permits. Fees to be paid should be at the
rate in effect at the time of issuance of the actual permit.
Questions regarding this matter may be referred to me at 909.955. I214.
Very truly yours,
STUART E. MCKIBBIN
Senior Civil Engineer
SKM:slj
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
INITIAL STUDY
R:\D P~2001\01-0140 SWTraders\Staff Report. doc
21
City of Temecula
Planning Department
Notice of Proposed Negative Declaration
PROJECT:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
Planning Application No. 01-0140 (Development Plan) - Southwest
Traders, Inc.
Ken Smith, Southwest Traders Inc.
27565 Diaz Road Temecula, CA 92592
To design and construct a 64,630 square foot building for the purpose of
expanding the existing Southwest Traders business.
The City of Temecula intends to adopt a Negative Declaration for the project described above. Based
upon the information contained in the attached Initial Environmental Study and pursuant to the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); it has been determined that this
project as proposed, revised or mitigated will not have a significant impact upon the environment. As a
result, the Planning Commission intends to adopt a Negative Declaration for this project.
The Comment Period for this proposed Negative Declaration is May 16, 2001 to June 5, 2001. Written
comments and responses to this notice should be addressed to the contact person listed below at the
following address: City of Temecula, P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033. City Hall is located
at 43200 Business Park Drive.
The public notice of the intent to adopt this Negative Declaration is provided through:
~X The Local Newspaper. _ Posting the Site. _ Notice to Adjacent Property Owners.
If you need additional information or have any questions concerning this project, please contact (Name
and Title) at (909) 694-6400.
Prepared by ~ -"~
(Signa~uje)
Denice, Thomas Associate Planner
(Name and Title)
R:\DP\2001\01-014OSWTraders\NOI.doc
City of Temecula
Planning Department
Agency Distribution List
PROJECT: Southwest Traders Inc.
DISTRIBUTION DATE: May 16, 2001 to June 5, 2001 CASE PLANNER: Denice Thomas
CITY OF TEMECULA:
Building & Safety ............................... (X)
Fire Department ................................. (X)
Police Department ............................... (X)
Parks & Recreation (TCSD) ................... (X)
Planning, Advance .............................. (X)
Public Works ..................................... (X)
............ ()
STATE:
Caltrans ........................................... (X)
Fish & Game ..................................... (X)
Mines & Geology ............................... (X)
Regional Water Quality Control Bd .......... (X)
State Clearinghouse ............................. (X)
State Clearinghouse (10 Copies) .............. (X)
Water Resources ................................. (X)
........... ()
FEDERAL:
Army Corps of Engineers ...................... (X)
Fish and Wildlife Service ...................... (X)
............ ()
............ ()
Planning ............................................ (X)
.......... ()
RIVERSIDE COUNTY:
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ............ (X)
Airport Land Use Commission ................ ( )
Engineer ........................................... (X)
Flood Control ..................................... (X)
Health Department ............................... (X)
Parks and Recreation ............................ ( )
Planning Department ............................ (X)
Habitat Conservation Agency (RCHCA) .... (X)
Riverside Transit Agency ....................... (X)
.......... ()
UTILITY:
Eastern Municipal Water District ............. (X)
Inland Valley Cablevision ...................... ( )
Rancho CA Water District, Will Serve ...... (X)
Southern California Gas ........................ (X)
Southern California Edison ..................... (X)
Temecula Valley School District .............. (X)
Metropolitan Water District .................... (X)
REGIONAL:
Air Quality Management District ............. (X)
Western Riverside COG ....................... (X)
........... ()
CITY OF MURRIETA:
OTHER:
Pechanga Indian Reservation ...................(X)
Eastern Information Center ..................... (X)
Local Agency Formation Comm .............. ( )
RCTC ............................................. ( )
Homeowners' Association ...................... ( )
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Environmental Checklist
Project Title Planning Application No. 01-0140 (Development P~an) - Southwest
Traders, Inc.
Lead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula I
P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Contact Person and Phone Number Denice Thomas,Associate Planner
(909) 694-6400
Project Location 27565 Diaz Road, Temecula, CA 9289
Project Sponsor's Name and Address Ken Smith, Southwest Traders Inc.
27565 Diaz Road Temecula, CA 92592
General Plan Designation Business Park (BP)
Zoning Light Industrial (LI)
Description of Project To design and construct a 64,630 square foot building for the
purpose of expanding the existing Southwest Traders business.
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting The project is located in the LI (Light Industrial) zones. The uses to
the north, south, and west of the project are existing industrial uses.
Street improvements, water and sewer are constructed within the
vicinity of the project.
Other public agencies whose approval Riverside County Fire Department, Riverside County Health
is required Department, Eastern Municipal Water District, Rancho California
Water District, Southern California Gas Company, Southern
California Edison Company, General Telephone Company, and
Riverside Transit Agency
Location Map
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SW Traders\Initial Study.doc
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one I
impact that is a "Potentially Significant impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics
ricultural Resources Population and
~,esources, Water
;ultural Resources
ic Problems
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
, and Water Quality
_and Use Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise
~ulation and Housing
Public Services
Recreation
)ortationFFraffic
lities and Service Systems
Determination
(To be completed by the lead agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant impact on the environment, and a
X
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by
the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required
~ find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant
t
un ess mit gated mpac on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in
an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially
significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARAT ON pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to
that earlier E R or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is requ red.
Signature
Denice Thomas, Associate Planner
Printed name
May 7, 2001
Date
City of Temecuia
For
R:\D p~.001\01-0140 SW Traders\initial Study.doc
2
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
Less Than
Potentially Significant With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant NO
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X
b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not I X
limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and historic building
within a state scenic highway?
c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or X
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which X
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
Comments:
No Impact. The project will not affect a scenic vista. The project is not located in an area where there
is a scenic vista. It is located in an area with existing industrial uses. Further, the project is an
expansion of an existing industrial use. The proposed development is situated behind the existing
building, which effectively blocks it from view. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
No Impact. Diaz Road is not designated as a scenic resource nor is the site within the view of a state
scenic highway. As a consequence, no significant impact to scenic resources will result from the
proposed project or the future development of the site.
No Impact. The project site is located in an industrial area behind an existing industrial building. The
building is visible for a matter of seconds when traveling north on Diaz Road. The City's Development
Code discourages long unarticulated walls. In an attempt to provide a more aesthetically pleasing
view of the building from Diaz Road, the building has been designed with a stepped parapet, offsets
on the north and south elevations, and a graduated paint band. The proposed expansion is consistent
with the existing industrial building that is onsite and will enhance the site in terms of visual character
and quality. Therefore, the project will not have a significant adverse impact.
Less Than Significant. The project will produce and result in light/glare, as all development of this
nature results in new light sources. All light and glare has the potential to impact the Mount Palomar
Observatory. The project will be conditioned to be consistent with City Ordinance No. 655 (Ordinance
Regulating Light Pollution). With this mitigation measure in place, less than significant impacts are
anticipated.
R:\D P~2001\01-0140 SW Traders\Initial Study.doc
3
2. Agricultural Resources. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional
model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
Issues and Supporting Information Sources
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland
of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,
to non-agricultural use?
b. Conflict with the existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
c. Involve other changes in the existing environment which,
due to their location or nature, could result in conversion
of farm and, to non-agricultural use?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Significant
Impact
X
X
X
Comments:
2a.-c. No Impact. The project site is not currently in agricultural production and in the historic past has not
been used for agricultural purposes. The site is not under a Williamson Act contract nor is it zoned for
agricultural uses. This property is not considered prime or unique farmland of statewide or local
importance as identified by the State Department of Conservation and the City of Temecula General
Plan. In addition, the project will not involve changes in the existing environment which would result in
the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. Therefore, there is no significant impact related to
this issue.
3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
Less Than
PotentiallySignificant With Less Than
SignificantMitigation SignificantNo
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable X
air quality plan?
b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially X
to an existing or projected air quality violation?
c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any X
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient
air quality standard (including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors?
] d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant X
concentrations?
e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number X
I of people?
R:\D P~2001\01-0140 SW Traders\initial Study.doc
4
Comments:
3.a, b.
Less Than Significant Impact. The project as proposed will comply with State and National ambient
air quality standards. The construction related standards found in Table 6-3 of the South Coast Air
Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook (April 1993) indicates that
industrial projects 1,102,520 square feet or greater may significantly impact air quality. This project is
64,630 square feet building which is well below the level indicated for potentially significant. No
significant impacts related to conflicts with air quality plans will result from the proposed project
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in item 3. a,b above, the project falls below acceptable
standards as established by thresholds for impacts associated with construction of industrial
development. Table 6-2 of the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook (April 1993) identifies an
operational related standard of 276,000 square feet, which indicates that operation of an industrial
business less than that is not anticipated to cause significant impacts to air quality. Again, this building
is 64,630 square feet. As a consequence a less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this
project.
No Impact. The project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. There are no significant
pollutants in proximity to the project nor is it anticipated that the project will generate pollutants. The
project shall comply with the environmental standards as detailed in the Development Code for
industrial development. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
.6,
Less Than Significant Impact, The project may create objectionable odors during the construction
phase of the project. These impacts will be or short duration and are not considered significant over
the long term. The project shall comply with the environmental standards as detailed in the
Development Code for industrial development. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the
project.
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
Less Than
Potentially Significant With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Supporting Information Sources ~mpact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or X
through habitat modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in
local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat X
or other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c. Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected X
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native X
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors,
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SW Traders\Initial Study.doc
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
Less Than
Potentially Significant WithLess Than
Significant Mitigation SignificantNo
Issues and Supporting Information Sources ~mpact Incorporated rmpact Impact
or impede the use of native wildlife nurser~ sites?
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting X
i I biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ,
ordinance?
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation X
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
Comments:
4.a-e
No Impact. The General Plan does not designate the project site as a potentially sensitive ha'bitat site.
The site is outside the habitat area identified for the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly and does not contain
wetlands as defined by the Clean Water Act. The site has been rough graded previously into
developable industrial pads. There is no anticipated biological impact associated with this project.
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The project is located within the fee
area for the Stephan's Kangaroo Rat (SKR) Long-Term Habitat Conservation Plan. All development
within this fee area is required to pay a mitigation fee. This project will be required to pay a mitigation
fee for the SKR. As a consequence, with mitigation measures incorporated into the Conditions of
Approval for this project, a less than significant impact is anticipated.
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Less Than
Potentially Significant With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant NO
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact incorporated Impact impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X
a historical resource as defined in Section 1506.57
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X
an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 1506.57
I c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological X
I resource or site or unique 9eologic feature?
d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred X
outside of formal cemeteries?
Comments:
5.a-d. No Impact. Construction of the expansion building will occur on land that has been graded. Due to
previous land disturbance, it is unlikely that cultural resources remain on this site. Additionally, the
City of Temecula Environmental Impact Report nor the City's General Plan identifies this project site
as an area of significant cultural resources.
R:\D P\2001\01-0140 SW Traders\Initial Study.doc
6
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project?
i)
Issues and Supporting Information Sources
Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on
the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based
on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
Strong seismic ground shaking?
Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Landslides?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the project,
and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1801oB
of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial
risks to life or property?
Have soil incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste
water?
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
X
X
X
Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X
X
X
Comments:
6.a.i, ii,No Impact. The City's General Plan and General Plan Environmental Report does not identify the
project site as being located within a known fault zone.
6.a.ii, iv;b, and d.
Less Than Significant ImpacL There may be a potentially significant impact from Seismic-related
ground failure because the project site is located within a liquefaction zone. The project is located in
Southern California, an area that is seismically active. Any potential significant impacts will be
mitigated through building construction, consistent with the Uniform Building Code standards. Further,
the project will be conditioned to provide soil reports prior to grading and recommendations contained
in this report are complied with during construction. The soil reports will also contain
recommendations for the compaction of the soil, which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant
impacts from seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure, liquefaction, subsidence and expansive
soils. After mitigation measures are performed, a less than significant impact is anticipated as a result
of this project.
Less Than Significant Impact. The development of the site may be affected by liquefaction,
subsidence or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill, due to its location within the
liquefaction zone. Potential impacts shall be mitigated by compliance with State of California AIquist-
Priolo Special Studies Zone development criteria and construction in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code standards. A soils report shall be required as part of the development and shall
contained recommendations for the compaction of the soil which will serve to mitigate any potentially
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SW Traders\Initial Study.doc
significant impacts from seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure (including liquefaction),
erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill and
expansive soils. Erosion control techniques will be included as a condition of approval for
development projects at the site. Potential unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill will
be mitigated through the use of proper compaction of the soils and landscaping. After mitigation
measures are performed, a less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project.
6.e. No Impact. Septic sewage disposal systems are not proposed for this project. The project is
connected to the existing public sewer system in Diaz Road; therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
Less Than
PotentialIy Signitlcant With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Signilicant NO
Issues and Supporting Information Sources ~mpact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X
environment through the routine transportation, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely X
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of X
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, X
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would X
the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an X
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, X
injury or death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Comments:
7.a.,b. Less Than Significant Impact. The project proposes to store as part of their inventory, among other
things, plastic products. The Fire Safety Division has expressed concerns regarding storage of these
plastics and has required the project proponent to prepare and submit a Fire Protection Engineering
R:\D P~2001\01-0140 SW Traders\initial Study.doc
8
Report to be considered during the plan check process. In addition, the project shall be required to
obtain clearance from the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health.
,0,
No Impact. This project site is not located within ¼ of an existing or proposed school. The nearest
school site is over two miles away. No impact is anticipated.
No Impact. This project site is not nor is it located near a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 that would create a significant
hazard to the public or the environment. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
7.e.,f.
No Impact. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a
public or private airstrip. The nearest airport is French Valley, whose runway is approximately 5 miles
to the east. No impact upon airport uses will result from this proposal.
No Impact. The project will take access from maintained public streets and will therefore not impede
emergency response or evacuation plans. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
No Impact. The project will not result in an increase to fire hazard in an area with flammable brush,
grass, or trees. The project is an industrial building for manufacturing and warehousing in an area of
similar Business Park/Light Industrial uses. The project is not located within or proximate to a fire
hazard area. No impacts are anticipated.
8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
Less Than
Potentially Significant With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Supporting Information Sources ~,~paot Incorporated Impact ~rnpect
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge X
requirements?
b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere X
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate
of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which
would not support existing land uses or planned uses for
which permits have been granted)?
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site X
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site X
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in
flooding on- or off-site?
e. Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the X
capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage
, systems or provide substantial additional sources of
If polluted runoff?
· Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X
g. Place housing within a lO0-year flood hazard area as X
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SW Traders\Initial Study. doc
map?
h. Place within a lO0-year flood hazard area structures X
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, X
J injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X
Comments:
Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements. The project is required to comply with the requirements of the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control
Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed or the project is
shown to be exempt. By complying with the NPDES requirements, any potential impacts can be
mitigated to a level less than significant. With mitigation a less than significant impact is anticipated as
a result of this project.
8.b.f.
Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. The project will not have an affect on the
quantity and quality of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge
capability. Further, construction on the site will not be at depths sufficient to have a significant impact
on ground waters or aquifer volume. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
8.c.d.
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will not substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation and/or
flooding on- or off-site. Some changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns and the rate and amount
of surface runoff is expected whenever development occurs on previously permeable ground.
Previously permeable ground will be rendered impervious by construction of buildings, accompanying
hardscape and driveways. While absorption rates and surface runoff will change, potential impacts
shall be mitigated through site design. Drainage conveyances are required for the project to safely
and adequately handle runoff that is created. As designed the proposed project would have a less
than significant impact on the existing facilities.
Less Than Significant Impact. The project is not anticipated to create or contribute runoff water,
which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. The project is conditioned to accommodate the
drainage created as a result of the development of the subject site. In addition, the project is
conditioned so that the drainage will not impact surrounding properties. A less than significant impact
is associated with this project.
No Impact. This project represents a development plan for an industrial user within an area zoned for
industrial uses. No residential property is affected; no impact is associated with this project.
Less Than Significant Impact. The project may expose people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding. According to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District,
the project site is in area that is subject to severe flood hazard from Murrieta Creek. Further, the site is
located within the limits of the 100-year (Zone AH) floodplain/floodway as delineated on Panel No.
060742 0005B of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps issued in conjunction with the National Flood
Insurance Program administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The
project is located within the dam inundation area identified in the City of Temecula General Plan Final
Environmental Impact Report. Utilizing existing emergency response systems can mitigate impacts.
R:\D P~2001\01-0140 SW Traders\Initial Study.doc
10
This project as conditioned requires the developer to pay flood mitigation fees to the Riverside County
Flood Control and Water Conservation District. Less than significant impact is anticipated as a result
of this project because mitigation measures are in place for the site and genera~ area of the site.
No Impact. The project site is not subject to inundation by sieche, tsunami, or mudflow as these
events are not known to happen in this region. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
9. Land Use and Planning. Would the project:
Less Than
Potentially Significant With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Supporting Information Sources ~mpac~ Incorporated impact Impact
a. Physically divide an established community? X
b. Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or X
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific
plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigation an
environmental effect?
c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or X
natural community conservation plan?
Comments:
No ImpacL The project is an industrial building that has been designed to accommodate
manufacturing and warehousing uses within an industrial park containing similar uses. There is no
established residential community on the site nor in the vicinity. Therefore, no impacts as a result of
this project are anticipated.
No impact. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan Land Use Designation of BP
(Business Park) and the zoning designation of LI (Light Industrial), which call for the development of
well designed business and employment centers. Typical uses include light manufacturing, storage,
industrial supply and wholesale businesses. The proposed development plan meets the intent of these
designations. Impacts from all General Plan Land Use Designations were analyzed in the
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General Plan. Agencies with jurisdiction within the City
commented on the scope of the analysis contained in the EIR and how the land uses would impact
their particular agency. These agencies were given the opportunity to comment on the project and
their comments are made a part of the Conditions of Approval for the project. The project site has
been previously graded and services have been extended to the area. As a result, the project is not
anticipated to conflict with existing land uses.
,0.
Less Than Significant Impact. The project is located within the fee area for the Stephen's Kangaroo
Rat (SKR) Long-Term Habitat Conservation Plan. All development within this fee area is required to
pay a mitigation fee. This project will be required to pay a mitigation fee for the SKR. With this
measure in place, the project is anticipated to have less than significant impacts.
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SW Traders\initial Study.doc
11
10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Issues and Supporting Information Sources
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
SignificantWith
Mitigation
incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
NO
impact
X
X
Comments:
10.a.b. No Impact. The project will not result in the loss of available, known mineral resources or in the loss
of an available, locally important mineral resource recovery site. The State Geologist has classified
the City of Temecula a classification of MRZ-3a, containing areas of sedimentary deposits, which have
the potential for supplying sand and gravel for concrete and crushed stone for aggregate. However, it
has been determined that this area contains no deposits of significant economic value based upon
available data in a report entitled Mineral Land Classification of the Temescal Valley Area, Riverside
County, California, Special Report 165, prepared in accordance with the Surface Mining and
Reclamation Act (SMARA) of 1975. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
11. NOISE. Would the project result in:
Less Than
Potentially Significant With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Exposure of people to severe noise levels in excess of X
standards established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive X
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels X
in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient X
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, X
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would X
the project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
Comments:
11.a.,d. Less Than Significant Impact. The project may expose people to severe noise levels during the
development/construction phase (shod term). Construction machinery is capable of producing noise in
R:\D P~2.001\01-0140 SW Traders\initial Study.doc
12
the range of 100+ DBA at 100 feet, which is considered very annoying and can cause hearing damage
from steady 8-hour exposure. This source of noise will be of short duration and not long-term.
Construction hours are regulated by the City Development Code, to which the applicant shall comply.
Therefore noise as a result of construction will not be considered significant.
11.b.,c. Less Than Significant Impact. The uses conducted by the project are not activities that would
expose persons to or generate excessive groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels.
Processes such as injection molding, packaging and warehousing are typical manufacturing uses and
similar to existing uses in the Westside Business Park. While industrial development wilt create noise
levels greater than the currently vacant land, long-term noise generated by this project would be within
the limits of the General Plan and Development Code standards. No impacts are anticipated.
11.d.
Less Than Significant Impact. The project may result in temporary or periodic increases in ambient
noise levels during construct[on. As mentioned in response 11 .a. construction machinery is capable of
producing noise in the range of 100+ DBA at 100 feet, which is considered annoying. However, this
source of noise from construction of the project will be of short duration and therefore would not be
considered significant. Furthermore, construction activity will comply with City ordinances regulating
the hours of activity. A less than significant impact would be anticipated.
11 .e.f.
No Impact. This project is not within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, therefore,
employees working in the project area will not be exposed to excessive noise levels generated by an
airport. Consequently no impact is anticipated as a result of this project.
12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
Less Than
Potentially Significant WithLess Than
Significant Mitigation Significant NO
Issues and Supporting Information Sources ~mpac~ Incocporated Impact Impact
a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either X
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension
of reads or other infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, X
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the X
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Comments:
12.a.
Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either
directly or indirectly. The project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation of BP
(Business Park) and Zoning Designation of LI (Light Industrial). The proposed industrial development
could cause some people to relocate to, or within the Temecula area. However, it will not induce
substantial growth beyond what is projected in the City's General Plan.
12.b.c.
No Impact. The project will not displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing, as the site
is developed with an industrial use within the Light Industrial (LI) zone. Additionally, the project site is
located within an existing industrial area, which does not permit residential development. The project
will neither displace housing nor people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing. No
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SW Traders\Initial Study.doc
13
13.
PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or
altered Government services in any of the following areas:
Issues and Supporting Information Sources
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associates with the provisions of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the construction
of which could cause significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times or other performance objectives for any of the
~ublic services?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
impact
X
Fire protection? X
X
Police protection? X
Schools?
Parks? X
X
Other public facilities?
Comments:
13.a.,b.,c.,e.
Less Than Significant Impact. The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a
need for new or altered fire, police, recreation or other public facilities. The project will incrementally
increase the need for some services. However, the project will contribute its fair share through City
Development Impact Fees to the maintenance or provision of services from these entities. Less than
significant impacts are anticipated.
13.d. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a
need for new or altered school facilities. The project will not cause significant numbers of people to
relocate within or to the City. The cumulative effect from the project will be mitigated through the
payment of applicable School Fees. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
13.f. Less Than Significant Impact. The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a
need for new or altered public facilities. The Rancho California Water District and the Riverside
Department of Environmental Health have been made aware of this project. A condition of approval
has been placed on this project that will require the proponent to obtain "Will Serve" letters from all of
the public utilities agencies. Service is currently provided to the developed portion of the site so
extending service to the expansion portion is probable, which would result in less than significant
impacts as a result of the project.
14. RECREATION. Would the project:
Less Than
Potentlally Significant With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant NO
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Would the project increase the use of existing X
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require X
the construction or expansion of recreational facilities
which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
R:\D P~2001\01-0140 SW Traders\initial Study.doc
Comments:
14.a.b. No Impact. The project is an industrial project that is relatively small in scale the anticipated need to
increase the neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities as a result of this project is
unlikely. The project may cause some employees to relocate from existing facilities elsewhere in
Southern California to the City of Temecula and it is worth noting that the applicant shall be required to
pay Development Impact Fees, which contribute towards the provision of recreational facilities in the
City. With the design of the project and the mitigation measures in place, impacts are anticipated to be
less than significant as a result of this project.
15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
Less Than
Potentially Significant With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Irnl)act
a. Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in X
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in
either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity
ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections?
b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of X
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
c. Result in a change ~n air traffic patterns, including either X
an increase in traffic levels or a change Jn location that
results in substantial safety risks?
d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature X
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e. Result in inadequate emergency access? X
f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? X
g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs X
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)? I
Comments:
15.a,b. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is not anticipated to cause significant impacts
to the existing traffic system within the City, largely because of its ancillary nature. The project at hand
is an expansion of an existing project, which is consistent with the zoning and general plan
designations. During the preparation of the General Plan and the General Plan EIR the impacts of this
type of development were considered. Additionally, the City's Traffic Engineer reviewed the
cumulative impacts during the approval process and has determined that the project's traffic impacts
warrant no fudher study or mitigations.
15.c.d. No Impact. The proposed development of this property will not result in a change in air traffic patterns
by increasing the traffic levels in the vicinity. The site is not within the French Valley Airport's flight
overlay district. The design of the project will not pose a threat to the health, safety, and welfare of the
people utilizing the roads in the vicinity of the project because there are no sharp curves or dangerous
intersections proposed. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
15.e. No Impact. The project will not result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses.
The project is an industrial building for manufacturing and warehousing use in an area developed with
R:\D P\2001\01-0140 SW Traders\Initial Study.doc
15
15.f.
15.g.
industrial uses. The project, as designed, complies with current City standards and has adequate
emergency access. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
No Impact. The proposed development complies with the City's Development Code parking
requirements for industrial uses. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
No Impact. The project site is located on a road that has access to public transportation. The project
as proposed does not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative
transportation. Because the project does not propose to significantly increase its employee base,
alternative transportation programs specifically designed for this project are not necessary.
16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project:
Less Than
Potentially Significant With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Supporting Information Sources ~mpact incorporated Impact Impact
a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the X
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b. Require or result in the construction of new water or X
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the X
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the X
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
new or expanded entitlements needed?
e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment X
provider which serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to X
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X
regulations related to solid waste?
Comments:
16.a.,b., e.
Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not exceed wastewater treatment requirements,
require the construction of new treatment facilities, nor affect the capacity of treatment providers. The
project will have an incremental effect upon existing systems. However, the Final Environmental
Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's General Plan states: "implementation of the proposed General
Plan would not significantly impact wastewater services." Since the project is consistent with the City's
General Plan, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
16.c. No Impact. The Drainage Study prepared for the underlying Tentative Parcel Map No. 29895
indicated that the amount of runoff from the project is not anticipated to be any greater than what was
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SW Traders\initial Study.doc
anticipated by construction of the site. Consequently construction of new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities is not anticipated.
16.d.
Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not significantly impact existing water supplies nor
require expanded water entitlements. The project will have an incremental effect upon existing
systems. While the project will have an incremental impact upon existing systems, the Final
Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's General Plan states: "both EMWD and RCWD have
indicated an ability to supply as much water as is required in their services areas (p. 39)." The FEIR
further states: "implementation of the proposed General Plan would not significantly impact
wastewater services (p. 40)." Since the project is consistent with the City's General Plan, no
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
16.f.g.
Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not result in a need for new landfill capacity. Any
potential impacts from solid waster created by this development can be mitigated through participation
in Source Reduction and Recycling Programs, which are implemented by the City. Less than
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
Less Than
Potentially Significant With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues and Supporting Information Sources ,-.paot Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality X
of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population
to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal ~;ommunity, reduce the number of
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b. Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively X
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future projects?
c. Does the project have environmental effects which will X
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Comments:
17.a.
No Impact. The project does not have the potential to degrade the quatity of the environment on site
or in the vicinity of the project. The site lies within an existing industrial area and has been to
accommodate industrial development. The project wilt not substantially reduce the habitat of fish or
wildlife because the majority of the site is already developed with an existing industrial business. No
historic resources are anticipated to be impacted because grading has already occurred on the site.
17.b.
Less Than Significant Impact. Cumulative impact analysis was conducted for the project with
regards to drainage, traffic, air quality, noise and service systems. In all aspects, the proposed
development is consistent with the General Plan designation for the property, and as such, impacts
generated by the proposed development are no greater than what is anticipated at buildout of the
City.
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SW Traders\Initial Study.doc
17
17.c.
Less Than Significant Impact. The project was analyzed with regards to noise, hazards and
geologic events. In all aspects, the project has been designed or conditioned to reduce impacts to a
less than significant level.
18. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR,
or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or
In this case a discussion should identify the following
on attached sheets.
a. Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
b. Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the above check list were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and
state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c. Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation incorporated,"
describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and
the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
18.a.
The City's General Plan and Final Environment Impact Report were used as a referenced source in
preparing this Initial Study. The Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the City's General
Plan in July, 1993. The proposed determination of this study was that the project did not have a
significant effect on the environment, prompting the preparation of a Negative Declaration.
18.b. There were no earlier impacts, which affected this project.
18.c.
2.
3.
4.
As conditioned, this project is anticipated to impose less than significant impacts on the environment.
As a result no mitigation measures have been incorporated as a part of this initial environmental study.
SOURCES
City of Temecula General Plan.
City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report.
South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
The City of Temecula Development Code.
R:\D P\2001\01-0140 SW Traders\tnLtial Study.doc
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
EXHIBITS
R:\D P~2001\01-0140 SWTraders\Staf[ Report. doc
22
ClTY OFTEMECULA
PROJECT SITE
CASE NOS. - PA01-0140
EXHIBIT - A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- June 6, 2001
VICINITY MAP
R:~D P~001\01-0140 SW Traders\Staff Report.doc
23
CITY OFTEMECULA
EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (LI)
EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - BUSINESS PARK (BP)
CASE NOS. - PA01-0140
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
R:\D P~2001\01-0140 SW Traders\Staff ReporLdoc
24
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO.- PA01-0140
EXHIBIT- D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
SITE PLAN
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SW Traders\Staff Report.doc
25
CITY OFTEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0140
EXHIBIT- E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
GRADING PLAN
R:'~D P~2001\01-0140 SW Traders\Staff Report.doc
26
CITY OF TEMECULA
I~1~-I-1 I¢'1 I,I~'I-'F~'I----~EXI:STIINq BiUILi~i:t~
CASE NO. - PA01-0140
EXHIBIT- F
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
ELEVATIONS
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SW Traders\Staff Report.doc
27
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0140
EXHIBIT - G
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -June 6, 2001
FLOOR PLAN
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SWTraders\Staf: Report.doc
28
CITY OF TEMECULA
SOCCER
FIELD
BUILDING ADDITFON
CASE NO. - PA01-0140
EXHIBIT- H
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -June 6, 2001
LANDSCAPE PLAN
R:\D P~001\01-0140 SW Traders\Staff Report.doc
29
ITEM #5
RECOMMENDATION:
t.
2.
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
June 6, 2001
Planning Application No. PA01-0025 (Development Plan) -
Temecula Radiator and Auto Repair
Prepared By: Michael McCoy, Project Planner
The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff
recommends the Planning Commission:
ADOPT a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA01-0025 pursuant to
Section 15332 of the California Environmental QualityAct Guidelines.
ADOPT a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0025
(DEVELOPMENT PLAN), TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A 21,382
SQUARE FOOT TWO-STORY AUTO REPAIR SERVICE BUILDING ON t.8
ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF RANCHO WAY WEST OF
DIAZ ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-040-042.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Graham Eves, Temecula Radiator and Auto Repair
REPRESENTATIVE: Joseph Jardine, Kaytind Commercial Contracting
PROPOSAL: Development Plan application to design, construct and operate a 21,382 square foot
two-story automobile and RV repair service facility with ancillary office space, storage
space, and an automobile showroom display-only area.
LOCATION: Rancho Way, west of Diaz and one-half mile north of Rancho California Road on
Parcel 3 of PM 29055.
EXISTING ZONING: LI (Light Industrial)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North: LI
South: LI
East: LI
West: LI
PROPOSEDZONING:
LI
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: BP
R:\D P~001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep~inal PC SffRept. doc.doc
EXISTING LAND USE: VACANT
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North: Professional Office
South: Office and Industrial
East: Industrial
West: Commercial
PROJECT STATISTICS
Site Area:
Building Area:
(gross floor area)
Two-story building height:
Landscaped Area:
Parking/Paved/Hardscape:
Lot Coverage/Floor Area Ratio:
Target Floor Area Ratio:
78,607 square feet (1.8 acres)
17,402 square feet- first story
3,890 square feet - second story
29 feet high
15,728 square feet (20% of site)
49,785 square feet (63% of site)
27%/0.27
.40
Required Parkin,q Ratio Breakdown:
Office Area @ I space/300 s.f. = 29 spaces
Automobile and RV Repair @ 4 spaces/seNce bay = 48 spaces
Parkinq Provided:
Standard Spaces:
Handicap Spaces:
Motorcycle Spaces:
Bicycle Spaces:
Temporary Vehicle Storage:
Total Vehicle Parking:
93 spaces
4 spaces
3 spaces
5 spaces (Classllracks)
28 spaces
98 spaces (excluding bicycle rack)
BACKGROUND
The applicant owns the existing Temecula Radiator and Auto Repair facility, located about one-half
mile north of the project site. The existing facility no longer meets the space requirements for the
current level of business, and the applicant is seeking approval to construct the new facility to
accommodate his current and future customer base. The proposed project was previously reviewed
at a pre-application review meeting on April 20, 2000. The applicant subsequently submitted a
development plan application on January 11,2001 and a Development Review Committee (DRC)
meeting was held on February 8, 2001. The applicant resubmitted revised plans on April 24,
2001and the project was deemed complete and scheduled for public hearing on May 23, 2001.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposal is for the design, construction and operation of a 21,382 square foot tilt-up concrete
automotive repair and service facility with ten automobile service bays, an RV repair warehouse, 630
square foot automobile display showroom, and a 28 space temporary parking area in the rear
portion of the 1.8 acre project site. The second floor area is designated for future leasable office
space and has been factored into the overall required parking calculation.
R:~D P~001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final PC SffRept. doc. doc
2
SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT
The project site is located on the north side of Rancho Way, a short east to west connector road
between Diaz Road and Business Park Drive. On the east side of the project site is the Downs
Commercial Fueling Facility. On the west side of the project site is the Rancho California Business
Park. To the adjacent north of the project site is a Diaz Park commercial office park. To the south of
the project site is the U.S. Border Patrol ofice, an automotive service building, a plumbing supply
building, and a vacant parcel currently under development at the corner of Rancho Way and
Business Park Drive.
ANALYSIS
Site Desiqn
The proposed building is set back approximately 62 feet from the front property line, 123 feet from
the west property line and 75 feet from the east property line. The rear of the building is setback
approximately 48 feet from the north property line. The building is designed in an east to west
rectangular manner centered within the middle of the lot. An 8-foot high tilt-up concrete wall will
surround the majority of the project site, while the front portion of the site fronting Rancho Way will
remain open for daily business and customer parking. Since the south, east, and west sides of the
perimeter concrete wall will be visible from Rancho Way, Staff believes that these wall sides should
have greater scoring detail and relief than a simple fiat unarticulated surface, and that the chain link
gate and slatting material should be of a higher quality design as conditioned on Condition of
Approval No. 11. An outdoor employee lunch/break area with permanent tables, benches and a
lattice cover screened by landscaping, will be provided along the east rear side of the building.
A triple bin concrete trash enclosure with a lattice cover is sited in the rear of the building along the
rear property line within the temporary vehicle storage parking area.
Access and Circulation
Access to the site will be from two 24-foot wide driveways located on each side of the building along
Rancho Way. Several customer parking spaces and drop-off spaces will be sited along the front and
east sides of the building, including-four disabled spaces, three motorcycle spaces, and a bicycle
rack. A four-foot wide painted disabled access path will cross the front parking lot off the public
sidewalk adjacent to the building entrance near the southeast corner of the building. The interior of
the project site will be accessed through two eight foot high view obscuring chain link rolling gates
along each driveway entrance. Fire Department trucks and emergency vehicles will have proper
turning radius distances and perimeter circulation access for emergency purposes. The west side of
the project site will provide for 36 employee parking spaces and the north side of the building will
provide 38 vehicle storage parking stalls, to accommodate temporaryvehicle storage.
Architecture Desiqn
The proposed building will be constructed of tilt-up concrete that features a rough sandblasted
texture on the lower half and vertical columns and a smooth finish on the upper hatf along the front
and east facing elevations. The rear and west facing elevations will have completely smooth
concrete panels. The building entrance is an L-shaped recessed design with vertical spandrel glass
and horizontal sandblasted concrete headers supported by vertical columns. A decorative paved
courtyard with landscape planters will provide a focal point for the main entrance. The front of the
building features a recessed aluminum storefrcnt colonnade with green reflective glass supported by
sandblasted concrete columns stepped out from the storefront to provide a defined element to
complement the building entrance. Several 5 x 5 windows with green reflective glass are placed in
the upper section of the frontage above the storefront colonnade and also along the upper rear north
facing elevation, which more effectively break up the building wall mass and bring in abundant
natural light.
R:\D P~2001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final PC Stf Rept. doc. doc
3
The concrete panels will be painted in an "Apache Tan" color with the lower sandblasted concrete
banding on two of the elevations to provide a distinct but complementary shading contrast. The tops
of the upper windows on the front and rear elevations will have a rectangular shape painted in a
darker tan "Fandango" color, to add greater color variation and complement the primary tan shade of
the building. The building walls will have several vertical and horizontal reveal lines that provides
additional relief and enhancement to the wall mass.
The west side service area is accessed through three 14 foot high metal roll-up doors on the west
side of the building and one 14 foot high roll-up door on the east side of the building, painted to
match the building color. Along the building's northwesterly section, a 22-foot long oil and coolant
waste storage structure will project outward from the building. The structure wilt be sandblasted
concrete with a standing seam pitched metal roof and a sliding metal door for easy access to the
storage drums. The storage area w~ll be screened fi`om public view.
LandscapinR
Twenty percent (20%) of the site has been landscaped which is consistent with the 20 % minimum
landscaping requirement of the LI zone. A 15-foot wide bermed landscape planter with a variety of
trees and shrubs will front the project site along Rancho Way. Staff has recommended that a 3:1 or
4:1 berm be installed along the project frontage similar to the existing landscape berm design to the.
adjacent west and southwest along Rancho Way to create a more aesthetically pleasing effect and
properly screen the front parking area as conditioned on Condition of Approval No. 12 (b). The front
of the building is landscaped with 24-inch box trees, such as Flowering Pear and Fern Pine, and a
variety of 5-gallon shrubs. The recessed storefront colonnade is landscaped with a 7-foot wide
planter area behind the walk path that extends to the building entrance. The building entrance
provides focal landscaping with two large planter areas providing trees and shrubs that surround a
circular wall seat. Within the walled area of the project site is a 5-foot wide perimeter landscape
planter with evenly spaced 15-gallon bottle trees and a variety of shrubs. Several planter fingers and
islands with fern pines, bottle trees and shrubs are evenly spaced throughout the interior parking lot.
An employee lunch area with four tables placed against the east side of the building is protected on
two sides by a landscaped planter area with trees and shrubs.
The applicant has proposed a late change on the conceptual landscape plan to replace previously
proposed Flowering Pear trees in the two entrance planters with six wide-trunk Canary Island Date
Palms. Staff believes this replacement would not be a positive or practical change given the value
of having effective shade coverage within this entry plaza, and that the architectural style of the
building is not complemented with palms. Staff recommends requiring the original plan with Pear
trees or an acceptable alternative as conditioned on Condition of Approval No. 12 (a). The City
Landscape Consultant recommends that if Canary Island Date Palms were installed in this location,
they should have a minimum twelve (12) foot brown trunk height to mitigate the conflict of the longer
fronds with the paved courtyard area.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
A Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. PA01-0025 can be made pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15332, Class 32 In-fill. Section
15332 applies to in-fill development projects on sites that: are less than five (5) acres and are
substantially surrounded by urbanized uses; consistent with the applicable general plan designation
and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning; have no value as habitat
for endangered, rare or threatened species; and that can be adequately served by utilities and public
services. The site meets all of the criteria noted above and will not result in any significant effects
relating to traffic, noise, air quality or water quality, and is already served by all required utilities and
public services.
R:\D P~2001',PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final PC SffRept. doc.doc
4
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY
The BP Business Park General Plan designation is intended for business and employment centers
that offer attractive architectural design, innovative site planning, and substantial landscaping and
visual quality. The LI Light Industrial zoning code designation lists automotive repair services as a
permitted land use with the approval of a development plan pursuant to Chapter 17.05 of the
Development Code. The project as proposed, meets all minimum ordinance standards and is
consistent with the General Plan, Development Code and the Design Guidelines.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The project as conditioned, has been determined by staff to be consistent with applicable City
policies, standards and guidelines. The project is compatible with the types of uses and quality of
surrounding development and Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve
PA01-0025 based on the findings and attached Conditions of Approval.
FINDINGS
The proposed use is consistent with the land use designation and policies for Business Park
(BP) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development
standards for the Light Industrial (LI) zoning district contained in the City's Development
Code. All infrastructure is available to serve the site and the building is 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, and all fire and building codes.
The overall development of the land will not adversely impact the public health, safety and
general welfare of the community. The Development Plan for the project has been reviewed
by City Departments and outside agencies whose responsibility it is to ensure protection. All
aspects of construction will be inspected by the City for compliance with applicable Building
Codes.
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
known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish,
wildlife or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an in-fill 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.
Attachments:
1. PC Resolution - Blue Page 6
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 7
2. Exhibits- Blue Page 8
A. Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C. General Plan Maps
D. Site Plan
E. Elevations
F. First Floor Plan
G. Second Floor Plan
H. Landscape Plan
I. Transversal Section Plan
R:\D P~001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final PC Sff Rept. doc.doc
5
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
R:\D P~2001',PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep~Final PC SffRept. doc.doc
6
PC RESOLUTION NO. 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA01-0025 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN), TO CONSTRUCT AND
OPERATE A 21,382 SQUARE FOOT AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR AND
SERVICE FACILITY ON 1.8 ACRES, LOCATED ON THE NORTH
SIDE OF RANCHO WAY, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NO. 921-040-042.
WHEREAS, Graham Eves filed Planning Application No. PA01-0025 (the "Application") 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 byState and local law;,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on
June 6, 2001, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and
interested persons had an oppodunity to, and did, testify either in support or opposition to this
matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearings and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to and based upon
the findings set forth hereunder;
WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption ofthis Resolution have occurred.
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 Planning Commission, in approving the Application,
hereby recommends the following findings as required in Section 17.05.010 of the Temecula
Municipal Code.
A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all
applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the City. The subject site is designated
for Business Park uses by the General Plan. The BP Business Park General Plan designation is
intended for well-designed business and employment centers that provide distinctive architectural
design, innovative site planning, and above average landscaping and visual quality, that includes
complementary mixed-use projects, such as support commercial and services. The (LI)zoning code
designation lists auto repair services as permitted land uses 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 Design Guidelines.
R:\D P\2001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\PC Resolution doc. D(~
B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public
health, safety and general welfare. The design of the project has been reviewed for consistencywith
the Temecula Development Code, which regulations are placed upon projects in order to protect the
public health, safety and general welfare of the citizenry. Review has been conducted by the Fire
Department, Building Department, Planning Department and the Department of Public Works, and
these entities have conditioned the project to operate in compliance with applicable codes and
regulations. Emergency vehicle access is provided by the project.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The Planning Commission ofthe City of Temecula
has determined that the project qualifies as an in-fill development in accordance with the conditions
as set forth in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15332, as
follows:
A. The project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designation of BP
Business Park and all applicable General Plan policies as well as the applicable zoning designation
and regulations of the LI Light Industrial ~ning zone.
B. The proposed development occurs within the city limits on a project site of no
more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. The project site is 1.8 acres, and
existing businesses are to the east, north, west and south. Adjacent to the east is the Downs
Commercial Fueling station. To the adjacent North is the Diaz Park commercial office park
development. To the adjacent west is the Rancho California Business Park. On the opposite
side of Rancho Way facing the project site is the Rogers Auto Se~ce, U.S. Border Patrol office,
Ferguson Plumbing Supplies, and a vacant parcel currently under development as an office
building.
C. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
The site has been previously disturbed and utilities have already been brought to the area to service
the site.
D. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic,
noise, air quality, or water quality. The proposed commercial use shall be required to comply with the
Performance and Environmental Standards of the Temecula Development Code which restrict such
nuisances such as noise, air or water pollutants. The amount of traffic generated by the project is
not anticipated to exceed those anticipated for the uses at this site.
E. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. The
Rancho California Water District has indicated that water service is available. The Riverside County
Department of Environmental Health has no objections to the project, and the Gas Company
reviewed the proposal and had no comments at this time.
Section 4. Conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula hereby
conditionally approves the Application for all of the foregoing reasons and subject to the project
specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference
together with any and all other necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary.
R:\D P~2001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\PC Resolution doc. D(]~
2
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning
Commission this sixth day of June 2001.
ATTEST:
Ron Guerriero, Chairman
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTYOF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
PC Resolution No. 01- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City
of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of. ,2001, by the following
vote:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:\D P~2001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\PC Resolution doc,D(~
3
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
R:\D P~001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final PC St~Rept. doc.doc
7
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. PA01-0025 - Development Plan
Project Description: Design, construction, and operation of a 21,382 square foot
automotive repair and service facilitytilt-up concrete building on a 1.8 gross acre lot
located on the north side of Rancho Way, west of Diaz Road and north of Rancho
California Road.
Assessor's Parcel No. 921-040-042
Approval Date: June 6, 2001
Expiration Date: June 6, 2003
PLANNING DIVISION
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 required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California
Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant
has not delivered to the Community Development Department- Planning Division the check
as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of
condition [ Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c) ].
General Requirements
The permittee/applicant shall indemnify, defend with counsel of City's own election, and hold
harmless, the City and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers,
employees, and agents from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or
any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, and agents, to
attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the
City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative
body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning
Application which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations period and
Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4 (Section 21000 et seq., including but not by
the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167). The City shall promptly notify the
permittee/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought forth within this time period.
The City shall estimate the cost of the defense of the action and applicant shall deposit said
amount with the City. City may require additional deposits to co, er anticipated costs. City
shall refund, without interest, any unused portions of the deposit once the litigation is finally
concluded. Should the City fail to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, permittee/applicant
shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City,
any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents.
R:\D P\2001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final COk doc.doc
3. 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.
4. The exterior of the building shall not be used for outdoor storage other than temporarily
parked vehicles under repair, unless appro'~d by the Planning Department.
5. The vehicle display showroom area shall only be utilized for vehicle display purposes.
No on-site vehicle sales or advertising of vehicles will be permitted.
6. Only operable vehicles shall be permitted to park in the front section of the project site
outside the 8-foot high perimeter wall.
7. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit "D"
(Site Plan), approved with Planning Application No. 01-0025, or as amended by these
conditions contained on file with the Community Development Department - Planning
Division. In addition, the site plan shall relect the following change:
a. The disabled access path shall be relocated a distance to be directly in line with the
stripped area adjacent to the first disabled vehicle parking stall closest to the building
entrance.
8. Any outside wall-mounted lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly
upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. Details of these lights shall be submitted to
the Planning Department during plan check for review prior to installation. The installation of
wa~l pack style light sha~l not be used along the street side ele',etion.
9. All parking lot lights and other exterior lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted
to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check approval and shall comply with the
requirements of Riverside County Ordinance No. 655.
10. Building elevations shall conform substantially to the approved Exhibit"E" (Elevation Plans),
or as amended by these conditions. All mechanical and roof equipment shall be screened
from public view by architectural features integrated into the design of the structures.
11. The proposed eight (8) foot perimeter concrete walt around the project site shall be of a
decorative finish with appropriate scoring detail and relief as reviewed and approved by the
Planning Department and is subject to a building permit. The view obscuring chain link fence
and backing material on interior driveway entrance shall be of appropriate design as
reviewed and approved by the Planning Department.
12. Landscaping shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibit"H" (Conceptual Landscape
Plan). Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the
reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Planning. If it is determined that the landscaping is
not being maintained, the Director of Planning 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. Additionally, the following criteria must be met prior to
development of the project:
R:\D P\2001\PA01-0025 Ternecuta Radiator & Auto Rep\Final COr~, doc.doc
The proposed Canary Island Date Palms located in the front plaza planter areas
shall be substituted for a more effective shade canopy tree to be chosen by the
applicant and approved by the Planning Department.
The landscaped berm along the length propertyfrontage adjacent to Rancho Way
shall have a gradual slope height of 3:1 or 4:1, similar to the adjacent existing
landscaped berm to the west of the project site.
The exterior parking area of the project site shall be effectively screened from the
public right-of-way with landscaping and earth berms that can be maintained at a 3-
foot height.
d. Plantings along the property frontage adjacent to Rancho Way shall be compatible
with existing plantings to the west of the project site as required byCity Code.
e. All utilities shall be effectively screened by proper placement within landscaped
areas.
13. The colors and materials used for this building shall conform substantially to the approved
color and material board, or as amended bythese conditions.
Material Color
Primary Wall Exterior
Secondary Wall Exterior and Vertical Columns
Accent Trim
Man Doors, Roll-up doors and Storage doors
Storefront Framing
Window Glass
Dunn Edwards SP2680 Apache Tan
Sandblasted Concrete Finish
Dunn Edwards SP 354 Fandango
Dunn Edvards SP 2680 Apache Tan
Clear Anodized Aluminum Frame
Green Refective Vision Glass
14.
The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided
by the Community Development Department - Planning Division staff, and return one signed
set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files.
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
15.
The applicant shall submit to the Planning Department for permanent filing two (2) 8" X 10"
glossy photographic color prints of the approved Color and Materials Board and of the
colored version of approved Exhibit "E", 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.
16.
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 the Issuance of Building Pe~nits
17. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
18. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the
Planning Department for approval. The location, number, genus, species, and container size
of the plants shall be shown. These plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient
R:\D P~2001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final COk doc.doc
Ordinance and conform substantially to the approved Exhibit "H" Conceptual Landscape
Plan or as amended by these conditions. The cover page shall identify the total square
footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be accompanied by the following
items:
a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal).
b. One (1) copyofthe approved grading plan.
c. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient
Ordinance).
d. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan).
Prior to the Issuance of Occupancy Permits
19. The courtyard plaza area shall have installed either an eighteen (18)inch high by eighteen
(18) inch wide rounded capped circular wall seat or decorative fixed benches around the
courtyard plaza with the design reviewed and approved by the Planning Department prior to
installation. The employee lunch break area shall have permanent tables with benches and
shade cover installed with the design reviewed and approved by Planning Department.
20. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall haw been installed consistent with the
approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Director of
Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation
system shall be properly constructed and in good working order.
21. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Planning, to
guarantee the maintenance of the plantings, in accordance with the approved construction
landscape and irrigation plan shall be filed with the Community Development Department-
Planning Division for one year from final certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the
landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the
Director of Planning, the bond shall be released upon request bythe applicant.
22. 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 of 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.
23. A separate building permit and Planning Department approval shall be required for all
proposed signage.
R:\D PX2001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final C(~ doc.doc
24. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed
by this permit.
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND SAFETY
25.
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.
26.
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.
27. 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.
28. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
29. 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)
30. All building and facilities must complywith applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
all details on plans. (Califomia Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
31. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire
alarm systems.
32. 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.
33. Provide an approved automatic lire sprinkler system.
34. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans
submitted for plan review.
35. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic
and mechanical plan for plan review.
36. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer
engineer are required for plan review submittal.
37. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
38. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
R:\D P~2001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final CO~, doc.doc
building construction.
39. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block wails if not on the approved
building plans, will require separate approvals and permits.
40. Post conspicuously at the entrance to the project the hours ofconstruction as
allowed by City of Temecula Ordinance #0-90-04, and specifically Section G (1) of the
Riverside County Ordinance # 457.73, for any site within one-quarter mile of an occupied
residence. Construction hours are as follows:
Monday - Friday 6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
Saturday 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
No work is permitted on Sundayor Government Code Holidays
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
41. Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed bythe Developer at no cost to any
Government Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the site plan
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
42. 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.
43. 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.
44. 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 ora Gradinq Permit
45. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civit Engineer and shall be reviewed and
approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary
erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and pdvate property.
46. 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.
47. 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.
48. A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted to
the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address
special study zones and the geological conditions of the site, and shall provide
recommendations to mitigate the impact ofground shaking and liquefaction.
49. 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
P,:\E) P~2001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final CO~, doc.doc
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.
50. 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.
51. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the Developer
shall receive written clearance fi.om the following agencies:
a. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
b. Planning Department
c. Department of Public Works
52. 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.
53. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department
and the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
54. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site
work performed on adjacent properties as directed bythe Department of Public Works.
55. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation Distdct by either cashier's check or
money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee. If
the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this
property, no new charge needs to be paid.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
56. Improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of
Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works.
The following design criteria shall be observed:
a. Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C.
paving.
b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable Cityof Temecula Standard No. 207A.
c. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in
accordance with City Standard No. 800, 801,802 and 803.
d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in
accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400. 401and 402.
e. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
f. All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed
through undersidewalk drains.
57. 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:
a. Improve Rancho Way (Principal Collector Highway Standards- 78' R/W) to include
dedication of half-width street right-of-way plus six feet, sidewalk, and utility laterals
R:\D P\2001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Fina~ COk doc.doc
(including but not limited to ~eter and sewer).
b. Both driveways on Rancho Way shall be constructed full width including curb
returns.
58. 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.
a. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: sidewalks, drive
approaches, signing, and other traf~c control devices as appropriate
b. Storm drain facilities
c. Sewer and domestic water systems
d. Under grounding of proposed utility distribution lines
59. All access rights, easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be submitted and reviewed
by the Director of the Department of Public Works and City Attorney and approved by City
Council for dedication to the City where sidewalks meander through private property.
60. 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.
61. 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.
62. The Developer shall record a written offer to participate in, and waive all rights to object to
the formation of an Assessment District, a Community Facilities District, or a Bridge and
Major Thoroughfare Fee District for the construction of the proposed Western Bypass
Corridor in accordance with the General Plan. The form of the offer shall be subject to the
approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
63. 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
64. 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.
65. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall
be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of
Public Works.
FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU
66. 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.
R:\D P~001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final COk doc.doc
67.The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-Ill-A-1. The
developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 1875 GPM
at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM
for a total fire flow of 2725 GPM with a 3 hour duration. The required fire flow may be
adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or
automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire
Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2,
Appendix Ill-A)
68.The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC
Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-I. A minimum of 4 hydrants, in a combination of on-site
and off-site (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, at each
intersection 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 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)
69.As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of
150 feet from a water supply on a public street, as measured by an approved route
around the exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying
the required fire flow shall be provided. For this project on site fire hydrants are
required. (CFC 903.2)
70Jf construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection
prior to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2)
71 .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 lbs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
72. 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 lbs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of
.25 feet. ( CFC sec 902)
73.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)
74.The gradient for a fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent.
(CFC 902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14)
75.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)
R:\D P~2001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final CO~, doc.doc
76.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 )
77.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)
78.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)
79.Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, approved numbers or
addresses sha~l be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be
plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall
be of a contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and
industrial buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite
numbers a minimum of six (6) inches in size. A~I suites shall gave a minimum of six (6)
inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single family
residences and multi-family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and /or
numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4)
80.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)
81 .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 sha~l be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation.
(CFC Article 10)
82.Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall
be provided. The Knox-Box shal~ be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be
located to the right side of the main entrance door. (CFC 902.4)
83.AII 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 fire fighting personnel. (CFC 902.4)
84.Prior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the
Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating Fire Lanes with appropriate lane
painting and or signs.
~.:\O p~2001\PA01~0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Fina~ CO~ doc.doc
85.Prior to the building final, buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible stock,
shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: an
automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage
arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire
Department access doors and Fire department access roads. Buildings housing high-
piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions California Fire Code Article 81
and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81)
86.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, flammable liquids or any other
hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention
Bureau.(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3)
87.Special Conditions
88.Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final a simple plot plan and a
simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format must be submitted to
the Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire
prevention for approval.
89.
The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and
update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code
permit. These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and
approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105)
90.The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department
of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Ha~rdous Material
Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city;, should any
quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any
additional hazardous material not listed in e~sting reports. (CFC Appendix II-E)
J-~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 approvat and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be
subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant Name
R:\D P~001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final CO~ doc.doc
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
EXHIBITS
R:\D P~2001\PA01-0025 Temecu[a Radiator & Auto Rep\Final PC St~Rept. doc.doc
8
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. PA 01-0025
EXHIBIT - A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JUNE 6, 2001
VICINITY MAP
R:\D P~001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final PC StJRept. doc.doc
9
CITY OF TEMECULA
EXHIBIT B - ZONING 'MAP
DESIGNATION -
EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN MAPS
DESIGNATION -
CASE NO. PA01-0025
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JUNE 6, 2001
R:\D P~2001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final PC St~Rept. doc.doc
10
CITY OF TEMECULA
I,. I,. I. fi. hs I. h~ h= h, I,o ~ h I~ I~
MA~ ~ 5
I" r' I" {" I'" I" {" P {" I'° r
r ~ r
CASE NO. PA01-0025
EXHIBIT- D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JUNE 6, 2001
SITE PLAN
R:\D P~001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final PC StJ Rept. doc.doc
11
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. PA01-0025
EXHIBIT - E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JUNE 6, 2001
ELEVATIONS
R:\D P~001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final PC SffRept. doc.doc
12
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. PA01-0025
EXHIBIT - F
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JUNE 6, 2001
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
R:\D P~2001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final PC SE Rept. doc.doc
13
CITY OF TEMECULA
JJ~ll
CASE NO. PA01-0025
EXHIBIT- G
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE -JUNE 6, 2001
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
P,:\D P~001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final PC St~ Rept. doc.doc
14
CITY OF TEMECULA
i~ i I'Ft I i ~'~i I I ell I'~1 [ I ~111 I'~l i
~UMINARY P~NG
............................................................................
CASE NO. PA01-0025
EXHIBIT - H LANDSCAPE PLAN
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JUNE 6, 2001
R:\D P~001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final PC St~ Rept, doc.doc
15
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. PA01-0025
EXHIBIT I
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - JUNE 6, 2001
TRANSVERSAL SECTION PLAN
R:\D P~001\PA01-0025 Temecula Radiator & Auto Rep\Final PC SU: Rept. doc.doc
16
ITEM #6
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
June 6, 2001
Planning Application No. 01-0204 (Development Plan - Fast Track)
For Macys Department Store, and
Planning Application No. 01-0248 (Development Plan - Fast Track)
For the Mall Expansion
Prepared by: Carole K. Donahoe, AICP, Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff recommends the
PLanning Commission:
1. MAKE a Determination of Consistency with a project for which an Environmental Impact Report
~EIR) was previously certified and Findings that a Subsequent EIR is not required; and
2. ADOPT Resolution No. 2001- approving Planning Application No. 01-0204 (Development Plan
- Fast Track) for Macys Department Store, based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the
Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
3. ADOPT Resolution No. 2001- approving Planning Application No. 01-0248 (Development
Plan - Fast Track) for the Mall Expansion, based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the
Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0204 -
(DEVELOPMENT PLAN - FAST TRACK) TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE
A TWO-STORY, 165,000 SQUARE FOOT MACYS DEPARTMENT STORE
AS THE FOURTH ANCHOR TENANT AT THE SOUTH END OF THE
PROMENADE MALL, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
WINCHESTER ROAD (STATE HIGHWAY 79 NORTH) AND YNEZ ROAD,
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 910-130-073.
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0248 -
(DEVELOPMENT PLAN - FAST TRACK) TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE
A TWO-STORY, 80,000 SQUARE FOOT EXPANSION OF IN-LINE SHOPS
CONNECTING MACYS TO THE EXISTING MALL PROMENADE, AT THE
SOUTH END OF THE PROMENADE MALL, LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WINCHESTER ROAD (STATE HIGHWAY 79
NORTH) AND YNEZ ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.
910-130-073.
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01.doc
1
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
Forest City Development
REPRESENTATIVE: Dan Van Leeuwen, Project Developer
PROPOSAL:
To construct and operate a two-story, 165,000 square foot Macys Department Store as the
fourth anchor tenant at the Promenade Mall; and
To construct and operate a two-stow, 80,000 square foot expansion of in-line shops
connecting Macys to the existing Mall promenade.
LOCATION:
At the south end of the Promenade Mail, located at the southeast corner of Winchester
Road (State Highway 79 Nodh) and Ynez Road
EXISTING ZONING: SP-7 - The Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan No. 263.
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
CC Community Commercial
BP Business Park
SP-6 - Campos Verdes Specific Plan
CC Community Commercial and LI Light Industrial
PROPOSED ZONING: Not Requested
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
CC Community Commercial, PI Public/Institutional Facilities, and PO Professional
Office
EXISTING LAND USE: The Promenade Mall
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Winchester Marketplace and former Costco commercial center
Vacant
Lowes, Guaranty Bank, Hometown Buffet, residential subdivisions, apartments
Palm Plaza commercial center
BACKGROUND
Forest City Development entered into a Development Agreement with the City of Temecula on December 16, 1997,
and opened the Promenade Mall of Temecula in October of 1999. The approval of Planning Application No. 97-
0118 (Development Plan) for the Promenade Mall included the ability to add a fourth anchor tenant and 90,000
square feet of additional retail shops. However, Condition No. 28 of the Conditions of Approval for PA97-0118
requires that for "Anchor No. 4 and the area identified as 50,000 (square feet of) retail each applicant shall submit a
Development Plan application for review by the Community Development Department - Planning Division and
approval by the Planning Commission."
On March 6, 2001, City staff met with Forest City representatives. On April 25, and April 26, 2001, Forest City
submitted formal applications for both the Macys Store and the Mall spine/expansion. Subsequent exhibits and
forms were received on May 3, 9, 11, and 23, 2001 to complete the application. Staff requested revised exhibits to
be received no later than May 29, 2001.
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01.doc
2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposals are consistent with the previously approved square footages for the Mall. However, the site design
varies slightly, with the "retail store of 50,000 square feet" eliminated between the fourth anchor (Macys) and the
Entertainment Plaza. Instead, Forest City proposes a spine of in-line shops totaling 80,000 square feet, connecting
Macys to the existing promenade, rather than the spine previously approved at 40,000 square feet.
ANALYSIS
Site Desiqn
This new configuration modifies the existing parking lot adjacent to the Entertainment Plaza, and brings Macys
closer to the Mall Loop Road. The proposed slope arrangement will provide access to both levels of Macys and the
in-line shops directly from adjacent parking lots.
Circulation
The new configuration modifies existing circulation patterns on the west side of the Entertainment Plaza. The drop-
off area is retained. However, customers must circulate north or south, to shops or the Mall Loop Road. The
configuration is designed to discourage high speed traffic taking short cuts through the parking lot.
Landsca~
All proposed buildings will be trimmed with landscaping, either in extensive planter areas, border planters, or tree
wells.
Particu{ar attention was given to the sloped area at the end of the main drive aisle leading to Robinsons-May and
the entrance to the Macys loading docks. As much of the slope as possible has been retained, while still allowing for
truck and emergency access to Macys. This slope is proposed for heavy landscaping, as is the continuous planter
bordering the east side of the drive aisle, as a way to screen the loading dock from most views from the Mall Loop
Road.
Shade Tree Requirements
Staff held several meetings with the applicant to discuss the Planning Commission's previously expressed concern
about the lack of shade trees on the existing Mall site. Following a review of various documents with the applicant
and the City Attorney, staff concurs that the approved Construction Landscape and Irrigation Drawings are
consistent with the Conceptual Landscape Plans approved by the Planning Commission on July 6, 1997.
Furthermore, landscaping installed at the site conform to the Construction Drawings, and, after two years, remain
-consistent. The City Landscape Architect has requested that the Mall Expansion project be conditioned to examine
all Eucalyptus on site for infestation by the Lerp Psyllid, and to replace unhealthy trees where necessary. Condition
of Approval No. 6b. addresses his request.
Research of the casefiles and minutes indicates that Forest City designed the landscaping with three (3) objectives
in mind:
1. Of primary concern was security at the Mall, and particularly, in the parking lots. To ensure that vehicles
were clearly visible, parking lots were generally open areas, with shade trees along the perimeter
adjacent to the Loop Road and exterior drive aisles. Additional shade trees were proposed closest to the
buildings, and along main or central drive aisles leading from the buildings to the Loop Road.
Remaining shade trees were scattered in the parking area in random pattern. Visibility from parking ~ot
lights are optimal with this pattern.
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Macys Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01 .doc
3
Staff has visited the site and confirms that employees park furthest out, near the Loop Road, and
generally have unobstructed visibility as they approach their vehicles.
Secondarily, Forest City preferred to enhance the Mall buildings and the anchors, by installing a rich
array of landscaping at the building edges. For many of the anchors, accent trees as well as shade trees
break up the expanse of walls and provide a canopy for seating areas at their entrances.
Lastly, anchor tenants wanted view corridors from the adjacent roadways, Ynez and Winchester Roads.
Given that there would be development on the outlots fronting the Mall, it was important for the anchors
to have these unobstructed view corridors.
However, because of the concern expressed by the Commission, Forest City has proposed planting 36 additional
California Pepper trees (evergreen) and 22 additional Sweet Gum trees (deciduous) throughout the existing Mall
site, for a total of 58 additional shade trees. Moreover, the parking lots affected by the Mall Expansion and Macys
are proposed to provide an excess of shade trees. Calculations for spaces within the limits of work are as follows:
1. Area west of Macys: 583 stalls 73 shade trees required 63 provided
2. Area fronting Macys: 77 stalls 10 shade trees required 24 provided
3. Area east of Macys: 252 stalls 32 shade trees required 36 provided
Total: 912 stalls 114 shade trees required 123 provided
Buildinq Architecture
Macys is proposing to construct their newest prototype, already operational in the northern California city of
Roseville and the southern California city of Lakewood. Photographs of the Lakewood facility are included in this
packet as Attachment 4.
The architecture features a series of different sized walls strategically placed to suggest a layered effect. While wall
textures are the same, the walls are scored with reveals in three different configurations. The contrast of colors is
subtle, and emphasizes the stark white front wall, upon which the Macys signature black signage is placed. The
main feature is the full glass backdrop at the entrances to the building, where shoppers and merchandise on the
second floor can be visible from the street. Macys has been conditioned to add a horizontal reveal line to the white
walls, similar to the store in Lakewood, in order to present a cross line that visually draws the eye downward like
wainscoting. Macys has also been conditioned that the white and adjacent beige walls be a minimum of 18 inches
thick, in order to present depth and shadows in these areas. Lastly, staff has conditioned Macys to provide depth to
the glass front and corner walls that protrude above the lower rooflines, in order to present a more substantial
structure, rather than a wall fa~:ade.
The architecture of the Mall expansion is consistent with the already established architecture at the Mall. The
expansion is conditioned to use the same color and materials as previously approved for the Mall.
Macys Loadinq Dock
Staff identified the proposed loading dock location as an item of concern to the applicant. Because of its
proximity to the Mall Loop Road, it will be more visible from that roadway than those of the other anchor stores.
Furthermore, it is anticipated that Macys' deliveries will be by a shuttle system, with semi-trucks arriving every
evening to leave a merchandise trailer at the dock, and to retrieve the trailer emptied the previous day.
Essentially, a trailer will be visible during all weekday daylight hours.
As mentioned previously in this staff report, the applicant chose to heavily screen the entrance area with slope
and landscaping. Perspectives have been provided (see Exhibits 1o5 and I-6). The applicant has indicated that
Macy's is unwilling to redesign the store floor plan to relocate the loading area.
R:',D P~2001\01-0204 Macys Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT,PC 6-6-01 .doc
4
Park N Ride Spaces
In response to the City's request for Park N Ride spaces at the Mall site, Forest City has already installed
signage and striping at two locations, totaling 75 spaces. Both locations are directly adjacent to signalized
entrances to the Mall, one from Winchester Road and the other from Margarita Road, via North General
Kearney (Exhibit J to be presented at the public hearing).
Forest City's actions have more than doubled their previous offer on May 2, 2000, to provide 31 stalls, and have
utilized a second area previously recommended by the Commission. Staff has visited the Mall and confirms that
the second site off Winchester Road is already well used. Forest City will work with the City and the Riverside
Transit Agency to advertise the availability of these locations to the community. Lastly, Forest Cit~ agreed.to
monitor and analyze the use of the existing 75 spaces. They agreed to explore ways to meet an increase ~n
demand should that become necessary in the future.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Environmental impact Report (EIR) No. 340 was prepared for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan No. 263,
which was certified by the City of Temecula in July 1993. An Addendum to the EiR was adopted by the City Council
in 1994. An initial Environmental Study (lES) was conducted prior to the approval of Planning Application No. 97-
0118 (Development Plan) in order to determine if the project is within the thresholds established in the Temecula
Regional Center Specific Plan EIR. The conclusion of the May 15, 1997 lES is that the Development Plan was
consistent with the EIR's findings.
According to Section 21166 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no subsequent or supplemental
environmental impact report is required for the project unless one or more of the following events occurs:
substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions to the EIR; substantial changes
have occurred which respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which will require
major revisions in the EIR; or, new information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified and complete
has become available.
Because Planning Application Nos. 01-0204 and 01-0248 propose development in accordance with land uses and
size of development as previously approved with PA97-0118, staff concludes that none of the items noted above
have occurred, and therefore, no further environmental analysis is required.
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY
The project is consistent with the City's General Plan since the General Plan currently designates the site as
Community Commercial, Professional Office and Public/Institutional Facilities. The proposed development plans
are consistent with these designations. The proposed projects are consistent with the Temecula Regional Center
Specific Plan No. 263 because it meets all the requirements of that Plan.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
Staff recommends approval of both the Macys Department Store development plan as well as the Mall Expansion
development plan.
FINDINGS
1. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable
requirements of state law and other ordinances of the City.
The General Plan designation for the property is CC Community Commercial, Pi Public/Institutional
Facilities and PO Professional Office. The City approved the Temecula Regional Center Specific
Plan Nc. 263 in accordance with these General Plan designations. The City also approved Planning
R:~D P~001~01-0204 Macys Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01.doc
5
Application No. 97-0118 (Development Plan) for the Promenade Mall in accordance with Specific
Plan No. 263. The proposed development plan for Macys Department Store as the fourth anchor
tenant is consistent with all of these referenced documents.
2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general
welfare.
The proposed development plan has been reviewed and examined for consistency with all
applicable codes that are imposed upon development for the protection of the public health, safety
and general welfare. Various outside agencies as well as various City departments have either
issued no comment letters or provided Conditions of Approval which have been placed upon the
project.
Attachments:
PC Resolution for PA01-0204 for Macys- Blue Page 7
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
PC Resolution for PA01-0248 for the Mall Expansion - Blue Page 8
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
Exhibits o Blue Page 9
A. Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C. General Plan Map
D. Site Plans
D-1. Mall Site Plan
D-2. Mall Expansion and Macys Site Plan (Drawing SK 62)
E. Elevations
Mall Expansion East and West Elevations (Drawing DD-01-20-01)
Macys West Elevation (A20-01)
5-1.
E-2.
E-3. Macys South Elevation (A20-02)
E-4. Macys East Elevation (A20-03)
F. Floor Plans
F-1. Mall Expansion Lower Level (A-LP-01-01)
F-2. Mall Expansion Upper Level (A-LP-01-02)
F-3. Macys Lower Level (Al0-01 )
F-4. Macys Upper Level (A10-02)
F-5. Macys Lower Floor Block Plan (REF-1)
F-6. Macys Upper Floor Bock Plan (REF-2)
G. Landscape Plan
G-1. Sheet L1-30
G-2 Macys, Sheet L4-01
G-3 Mall Expansion, Sheet L4-02
G-4 Mall Expansion, Sheet L4-03
G-5 Mall Additional Shade Tree Plan, Sheet CL-01
H. Conceptual Grading Plan, Drawing
I. Perspectives
I-1. Mall Expansion West Elevation
I-2. Mall Expansion East Elevation
I-3 Macys East Elevation (#6)
I-4 Macys West Elevation (#7)
I-5 Macys Loading Dock Elevation (#8)
I-6 Macys Loading Dock Elevation (#9)
'~ J. Park N Ride Exhibit (by Forest City)
4. Lakewood, CA photographs
5. Traffic Letter Update
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01.doc 6
A~-I'ACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION No. 2001-
FOR PA01-0204 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN - FAST TRACK)
FOR MACYS DEPARTMENT STORE
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Mac~ Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRRT.PC 6-6-01.doc
7
PC RESOLUTION NO. 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA01-0204 - (DEVELOPMENT PLAN - FAST TRACK) TO
CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A TWO-STORY, 165,000 SQUARE
FOoT MACYS DEPARTMENT STORE AS THE FOURTH ANCHOR
TENANT AT THE SOUTH END OF THE PROMENADE MALL,
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WINCHESTER
ROAD (STATE HIGHWAY 79 NORTH) AND YNEZ ROAD, AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 910-130-073.
WHEREAS, Forest City Development filed Planning Application No. PA01-0204 (the
"Application") in a manner in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development
Code, Subdivision Ordinance, and the Temecula Regional Center Speci~c Plan No. 263;
WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the
time and manner prescribed byState and local law;,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on
June 6, 2001, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and
interested persons had an opportunity to, and did, testify either in support or opposition to this
.matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearings and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission approved the Application subject to and based upon the findings set
forth hereunder;
WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption ofthis Resotution have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated
by reference.
Section 2. Findinqs. That the Planning Commission, in approving the Application,
hereby adopts the following findings as required in Section 1(~.09.140 of the Temecula Municipal
Code.
A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with at[
applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the City.
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\PC Resolution Development Plan 6r Macys. DOC
1
1. The General Plan designation for the property is CC Community Commercial,
PI Public/Institutional Facilities and PO Professional Office. The City approved the
Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan No. 263 in accordance with these General Plan
designations. The City also approved Planning Application No. 97-0118 (Development Plan)
for the Promenade Mall in accordance with Specific Plan No. 263. The proposed
development plan for Macys Department Store as the fourth anchor tenant is consistent with
all of these referenced documents.
B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public
health, safety and general welfare. The proposed development plan has been reviewed and
examined for consistency with all applicable codes that are imposed upon development for the
protection of the public health, safety and general welfare. Various outside agencies as well as
various City departments have either issued no comment letters or provided Conditions of Approval
which have been placed upon the project.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula
determines that the proposa~ is consistent with a project for which an Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) was previously certified, and find that a subsequent EIR is not required.
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 340 was prepared for the Temecula Regional Center
Specific Plan No. 263, which was certified by the City of Temecula in July 1993. An Addendum to
the EIR was adopted by the City Council in 1994. An Initial Environmental Study (lES) was
conducted prior to the approval of Planning Application No. 97-0118 (Development Plan) in order to
determine if the project is within the thresholds established in the Temecula Regional Center
Specific Plan EIR. The conclusion of the May 15, 1997 lES is that the Development Plan was
consistent with the EIR's findings.
According to Section 21166 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no subsequent or
supplemental environmental impact report is required for the project unless one or more of the
following events occurs: substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major
revisions to the EIR; substantial changes have occurred which respect to the circumstances under
which the project is being undertaken which will require major revisions in the EIR; or, new
information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified and complete has become
available.
Because Planning Application Nos. 01-0204 and 01-0248 propose development in accordance with
land uses and size of development as previously approved with PA97-0118, staff concludes that
none of the items noted above have occurred, and therefore, no further environmental analysis is
required.
Section 4. Conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approves the
Application for all of the foregoing reasons and subject to the project specific conditions set forth in
Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all other
necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary.
R:\D Pt2001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\PC Resolution Development Plan Or Macys. DOC
2
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning
Commission this sixth day of June, 2001.
Ron Guerriero, Chairman
ATTEST:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
PC Resolution No. 01- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City
of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the sixth day of June, 2001, by the following vote:
AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:~D P~001\01-0204 Mac~ Store and Mall Spine\PC Resolution Development Plan Dr Macys. DOC
3
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. 01-0204 - Development Plan, Fast Track for Macys
Project Description: To construct and operate a two-story, 165,000 square foot
Macys Department Store as the fourth anchor tenant at the
Promenade Mall
Development Impact Fee Category: $2.00 per square foot (pursuant to the
Development Agreement for the Promenade Mall Project PA96-
0333)
Assessor's Parcel No. 910-130-073
Approval Date: June 6, 2001
Expiration Date: June 6, 2003
PLANNING DIVISION
Within
1.
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
2.
Requirements
The permittee/applicant shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless, the City and any agency
or instrumentalitythereof, and/or any of its officers, employees, and agents from any and all
claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentalitythereof, or
any of its officers, employees, and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary
damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof,
advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters
of the City, concerning the Planning Application which action is brought within the
appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4
(Section 21000 et seq., including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167).
The City shall promptly notify the permittee/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding
brought forth within this time period. The City shall estimate the cost of the defense of the
action and applicant shall deposit said amount with the City. City may require additional
deposits to cover anticipated costs. City shall refund, without interest, any unused portions
of the deposit once the litigation is finally concluded. Should the City fail to either promptly
notify or cooperate fully, permittee/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify,
defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mail Spine\Planning COAs.doc
1
officers, employees, or agents. Should the applicant fail to timely post the required deposit,
the Director may terminate the land use approval without further notice to the applicant.
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 Exhibits "D-I"
and "D-2" (Site Plans), contained on file with the Community Development Department -
Planning Division.
Landscaping shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits "G-I" through "G-5"
(Landscape Plans). Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to
the reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Planning. If it is determined that the
landscaping is not being maintained, the Director of Planning 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 addition of 58 shade trees shall be installed throughout the Mall site in
accordance with Exhibit "G-5" and as directed by the City Landscape Architect, who
shall determine the feasibility of specific locations on a case by case basis for the
maximum health and viability of existing and new trees.
Within 14 days from the approval of this project, the applicant shall have all existing
Eucalyptus trees examined for infestation by the Lerp Psyllid, and unhealthy trees
shall be identified on the Mall Construction Landscape and Irrigation Drawings, to be
replaced where necessary prior to occupancy of any buildings approved by these
conditions.
Building elevations shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits "E-1" through "E-4"
(Building Elevations), and Exhibits "1-1" through "1-6" (Building Perspectives), contained on
file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. All mechanical and
roof equipment shall be screened from public view by architectural features integrated into
the design of the structure.
A horizontal reveal line shall be added to the white walls that front the building on all
three sides, in order to present a cross line like wainscoting.
The white wall and adjacent beige wall shall be a minimum of 18 inches thick in
order to present depth and shadows in these areas.
All glass fronts and corner walls that protrude above the lower rooflines shall provide
depth in order to present a substantial building structure rather than a vail fa(;ade.
The colors and materials for the Mall Expansion project shall substantially conform to the
approved colors and materials contained on file with the Community Development
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Mac)s Store and Mall Spine\Planning CO~s.doc
2
Department - Planning Division for Planning Application No. 97-0118. Anydeviation from
the approved cotors and materials shall require appro',el of the Director of Planning.
Colors
Materials
Stucco Walls
Stucco Accent
Stucco Accent
Cloth Canopy
Split-faceUtility Brick Wainscot
Aluminum Storefront
Metal Entry
Vision Glass, % inch
Sherwin Williams #SW 1074 - Ostrich Feathers
Sherwin Williams #SW 1316 - Winnipeg Sand
Sherwin Williams #SW 1066 - Salmon Suede
Sherwin Williams #SW 1468 -Tourmaline
To match Winnipeg Sand
Sherwin Williams #SW 1320 -Tasteful Tan
Sherwin Williams #SW 2419 - Tempest Blue
Ford - Blue
10.
11.
12.
The colors and materials for Macys Department Store shall substantially conform to the
colors and materials as follows:
Materials
Stucco Walls
Stucco Walls
Stucco Walls
Canopy and Storefront System
PPG Glass
Colors
Benjamin Moore #2161-50 - Yellow Squash
Benjamin Moore #2115-70 - Oyster
Benjamin Moore #2163-60 - Latte
Brushed A~uminum
Azurlite Float Glass
All landscaping plans shall be consistent with the approved construction plans for the
Promenade Mall (PA97o0118).
Bicycle racks shall be installed pursuant to the requirements ofthe Development Code.
The applicant shall comply with the Conditions of Approval for Planning Application No.
PA97-0118 unless superceded by these Conditions of Approval.
Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits
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.
The applicant shall revise any exhibits necessary to reflect the final conditions of approval as
14.
adopted by the Planning Commission, and that will be provided by the Community
Development Department - Planning Division staff. The applicant shall submit five (5) full
size copies and two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of the approved Color and
Materials Board and any renderings displayed at the public hearing, to the Community
Development Department - Planning Division for their files. All labels on the Color and
Materials Board and renderings 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.
R:\D P~001\01o0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\Planning CO~,s.doc
3
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 "E", or as amended by these conditions. The
location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The
plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover page shall identify
the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be
accompanied by the following items:
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.
18.
19.
20.
An Administrative Development Plan application for signage shall be required for any
signage.
a. A separate building permit shall be required br all signage.
All required landscape planting and irrigation shall ha~e been installed consistent with the
approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Director of
Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation
system shall be properly constructed and in good working order.
Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Planning, to
guarantee the maintenance of the plantings, in accordance with the approved construction
landscape and irrigation plan shall be filed with the Community Development Department -
Planning Division for one year from final certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the
landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the
Director of Planning, the bond shall be released.
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, 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."
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\Planning COAs.doc
4
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.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed
by this permit.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
22. 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. 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 Pen'nit
26. 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.
27. 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.
28. 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.
29. A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted to
the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address
special study zones and the geological conditions of the site, and shall provide
recommendations to mitigate the impact ofground shaking and liquefaction.
30. The Developer shalt 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
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\Planning CQ~s.doc
5
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:
a. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
b. Planning Department
c. Department of Public Works
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. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department
and the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
35. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site
work performed on adjacent properties as directed bythe Department of Public Works.
36. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier's check or
money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee. If
the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this
property, no new charge needs to be paid.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
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:
a. 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 Cityof Temecula Standard No. 207A.
c. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
d. 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.
38. 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.
a. Storm drain facilities
b. On-site traffic devices as appropriate
c. Sewer and domestic water systems
d. Under grounding of proposed utility distribution lines
39. 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.
40. The Developer shall obtain/provide an easement for ingress and egress over/to the adjacent
property.
41. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as
R:\E) P~001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\Planning CO~s.doc
6
required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and ali
Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate 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.
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
44. AIl 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.
45. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance
with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. Ail 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.
46. 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.
47. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
48. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
49. 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 si§nage. Provide all details on plans. (Califomia Disabled
Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
50. Ail building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
51. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance ofthe building.
52. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry
53. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
54. Provide house electrica~ meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\Planning CO~,s.doc 7
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
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. 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.
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.
Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved
building plans, will require separate approvals and permits.
Show all building setbacks.
Post conspicuously at the entrance to the project the hours ofconstruction as allowed by
City of Temecula Ordinance #0-90-04, and specifically Section G (1) of the Riverside
County Ordinance # 457.73, for any site within one-quarter mile of an occupied
residence. Construction hours are as follows:
Monday - Friday
Saturday
6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
64.
No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Code Holidays
The area of the building exceeds California Building Code Table 5-B, The applicant
shall justify excess areas and identify mitigation measures to the Building Official,
FIRE DEPARTMENT
65.
Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by
the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the
California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in
force at the time of building plan submittal.
66. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~ Store and Mall Spine\Planning COAs.doc
8
construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The
developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 3375 GPM at
20 PSi residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a
total fire flow of 4225 GPM with a 4 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted
during the approval process to reflect changes in des gn, construction type, or automatic fire
protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as g~ven
above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A)
67. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC
Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum of 5 hydrants, in a combination of on-site and off-
site (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads
and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 300 feet apart, at each
intersection and shall be located no more than 180 feet from any point on the street or Fire
Department access road(s) frontage to an hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available
from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be
required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendixlll-B).
68. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150
feet from a water supply on a public street, as measured by an approved route around the
exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire
flow shall be provided. For this project on site ire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2)
69. 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 902.2.2.2.3 and Subdivision Ord 16.03.020)
70. 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)
71. Prior to buitding construction, all locations where structures are to be buitt 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 lbs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
72. 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 lbs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. (
CFC sec 902)
73. 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)
74. The gradient for a fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC
902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14)
75. 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)
76. 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)
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\Planning C~s.doc
9
77.
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 )
78.
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)
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, approved numbers or
addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be
plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be ora
contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and industrial
buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum
of six (6)inches in size. All suites shall gave a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or
numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single family residences and multi-family
residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire
Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4)
80.
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)
81.
82.
83.
84.
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. (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 fire fighting personnel. (CFC 902.4)
Prior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire
Department for approval, a site plan designating Fire Lanes with appropriate lane painting
and or signs.
85.
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, building final or occupancy, buildings
housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions of Uniform Fire Code
Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. The storage of
high-piled combustible stock may require structural design considerations or modifications to
the building. Fire protection and life safety features may include some or all of the following:
an automatic fire sprinkler s~tem(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage
arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department
access doors and Fire department access roads. (CFC Article 81)
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~ Store and Mall Spine\Planning CO~s.doc
10
86. Special Conditions
87. Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report will be required to be submitted and
to the Fire Prevention Bureau. This report shall address, but not be limited to, all fire and life
safety measures per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, NFPA- 13, 24, 72 and 231-C.
88. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final a simple plot plan and a
simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the DWG format must be submitted to the
Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention
for approval.
89. The applicant shall complywith the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and
update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code
permit. These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and
approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105)
90. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department
of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Ha;~rdous Material
Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city, should any
quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any
additional hazardous material not listed in e~sting reports. (CFC Appendix Il-E)
91. The applicant will contribute a fair share portion of the replacement and upgrade ofthe
special "Mall Fire Department Communications System" in accordance with the Mall
Specific Plan and original Conditions of Approval.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
92. All perimeter landscaping and parkways shall be maintained by the property owner or private
maintenance association.
93, The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of
construction debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul construction debris.
OTHER AGENCIES
94. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California
Water Districts transmittal dated May 14, 2001, 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
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\Planning COAs.doc
11
May 14, 2001
Donald Hazen, Senior Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AVAILABILITY
PORTION OF PARCEL NO. 1
OF PARCEL MAP NO. 28530-I
APN 910-130-072
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0204
MACY'S DEPARTMENT STORE EXPANSION
Dear Mr. Hazen:
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.
The developer will be responsible for installing and/or relocating any water
facilities required by this development.
If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees
and requirements.
Water availabili~ would be contingent upon the prope~, o~er signing an
Agency Agreement that assigns water m~agement rights, if any. to RCWD.
If you should have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services
Representative at this office.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brmmon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
01\SB:at 126\F012-T3\FCF
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
FOR PA01-0248 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN - FAST TRACK)
FOR THE MALL EXPANSION
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01.doc
8
PC RESOLUTION NO. 01-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
PA01-0248 - (DEVELOPMENT PLAN - FAST TRACK) TO
CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A TWO-STORY, 80,000 SQUARE
FOOT EXPANSION OF IN-LINE SHOPS CONNECTING MACY'S
TO THE EXISTING MALL PROMENADE, AT THE SOUTH END OF
THE PROMENADE MALL, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF WINCHESTER ROAD (STATE HIGHWAY 79 NORTH)
AND YNEZ ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.
910-130-073.
WHEREAS, Forest City Development filed Planning Application No. PA01-0248 (the
"Application") in a manner in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development
Code, Subdivision Ordinance, and the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan No. 263;
WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the
time and manner prescribed byState and local law;,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on
June 6, 2001, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and
interested persons had an opportunity to, and did, testify either in support or opposition to this
matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearings and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission approved the Application subject to and based upon the findings set
forth hereunder;
WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption ofthis Resolution have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated
by reference.
Section 2. Findinqs. That the Planning Commission, in approving the Application,
hereby adopts the following findings as required in Section 16.09.140 of the Temecula Municipal
Code.
A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all
applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the City.
1. The General Plan designation for the property is CC Community Commercial, PI
Public/Institutional Facilities and PO Professional Office. The City approved the Temecula
Regional Center Specific Plan No. 263 in accordance with these General Plan designations.
The City also approved Planning Application No. 97-0118 (Development Plan) for the
Promenade Mall in accordance with Specific Plan No. 263. The proposed development plan
R:~D p\2001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\PC Resolution Development Plan 6r Mall Expansion. DOC
for the expansion of in-line shops connecting Macys to the existing Mall promenade is
consistent with all of these referenced documents.
B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public
health, safety and general welfare. The proposed development plan has been reviewed and
examined for consistency with all applicable codes that are imposed upon development for the
protection of the public health, safety and general welfare. Various outside agencies as well as
various City departments have either issued no comment letters or provided Conditions of Approval
which have been placed upon the project.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula
determines that the proposal is consistent with a project for which an Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) was previously certified, and find that a subsequent EIR is not required.
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 340 was prepared for the Temecula Regional Center
Specific Plan No. 263, which was certified by the City of Temecula in July 1993. An Addendum to
the EIR was adopted by the City Council in 1994. An Initial Environmental Study (lES) was
conducted prior to the approval of Planning Application No. 97-0118 (Development Plan) in order to
determine if the project is within the thresholds established in the Temecula Regional Center
Specific Plan EIR. The conclusion of the May 15, 1997 lES is that the Development Plan was
consistent with the EIR's findings.
According to Section 21166 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no subsequent or
supplemental environmental impact report is required for the project unless one or more of the
following events occurs: substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major
revisions to the EIR; substantial changes have occurred which respect to the circumstances under
which the project is being undertaken which will require major revisions in the EIR; or, new
information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified and complete has become
available.
Because Planning Application No. 01-0204 and Planning Application No. 01-0248 propose
development in accordance with land uses and size of development as previously approved with
PA97-0118, staff concludes that none of the items noted above have occurred, and therefore, no
further environmental analysis is required.
Section 4. Conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approves the
Application for all of the foregoing reasons and subject to the project specific conditions set forth in
Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all other
necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary.
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~ Store and Mall Spine\PC Resolution Development Plan f)r Mall Expansion. DOC
2
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning
Commission this sixth day of June, 2001,
Ron Guerriero, Chairman
ATTEST:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that
PC Resolution No. 01 - was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City
of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the sixth day of June, 2001, by the following vote:
AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:~D P~2001\01-0204 Mac~ Store and Mall Spine\PC Resolution Development Plan ~)r Mall E)q3ansion.DOC
3
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No. 01-0248 - Development Plan, Fast Track for the Mall
Expansion
Project Description: To construct and operate a two-story, 80,000 square foot
expansion of in-line shops connecting Macys to the existing
Mall promenade
Development Impact Fee Category: $2.00 per square foot (pursuant to the
Development Agreement for the Promenade Mall Project PA96-
0333)
Assessor's Parcel No. 910-130-073
Approval Date: June 6, 2001
Expiration Date: June 6, 2003
PLANNING DIVISION
Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project
1. 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 permittee/applicant shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless, the City and any agency
or instrumentalitythereof, and/or any of its officers, employees, and agents from any and all
claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentalitythereof, or
any of its officers, employees, and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary
damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof,
advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters
of the City, concerning the Planning Application which action is brought within the
appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4
(Section 21000 et seq., including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167).
The City shall promptly notify the permittee/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding
brought forth within this time period. The City shall estimate the cost of the defense of the
action and applicant shall deposit said amount with the City. City may require additional
deposits to cover anticipated costs. City shall refund, without interest, any unused portions
of the deposit once the litigation is finally concluded. Should the City fail to either promptly
notify or cooperate fully, permittee/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify,
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\COAs for the Mall Expansion.doc
1
defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its
officers, employees, or agents. Should the applicant fail to timely post the required deposit,
the Director mayterminate the land use approval without further notice to the applicant.
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 Exhibits "D-1"
and "D-2" (Site Plans), contained on file with the Community Development Department -
Planning Division.
Landscaping shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits "G-I" through "G-5"
(Landscape Plans). Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to
the reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Planning. If it is determined that the
landscaping is not being maintained, the Director of Planning 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 addition of 58 shade trees shall be installed throughout the Mall site in
accordance with Exhibit "G-5" and as directed by the City Landscape Architect, who
shall determine the feasibility of specific locations on a case by case basis for the
maximum health and viability of existing and new trees.
Within 14 days from the approval of this project, the applicant shall have all existing
Eucalyptus trees examined for infestation by the Lerp Psyllid, and unhealthy trees
shall be identified on the Mall Construction Landscape and Irrigation Drawings, to be
replaced where necessary prior to occupancy of any buildings approved by these
conditions.
Building elevations shall substantially conform to the approved Exhibits "E-1" through "E-4"
(Building Elevations), and Exhibits "1-1" through "1-6" (Building Perspectives), contained on
file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. All mechanical and
roof equipment shall be screened from public view by architectural features integrated into
the design of the structure.
A horizontal reveal line shall be added to the white walls that front the building on all
three sides, in order to present a cross line like wainscoting
The white wall and adjacent beige wall shall be a minimum of 18 inches thick in
order to present depth and shadows in these areas.
All glass fronts and corner walls that protrude above the lower rooflines shall provide
depth in order to present a substantial building structure rather than a veil fa~;ade.
The colors and materials for the Mall Expansion project shall substantially conform to the
approved colors and materials contained on file with the Community Development
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Mac~ Store and Mall Spine\COAs for the Mall E~ansion.doc
2
10.
11.
12.
Prior
13.
14.
Department- Planning Division for Planning Application No. 97-0118. Any deviation from
the approved colors and materials shall require approval of the Director of Planning.
Materials
Stucco Walls
Stucco Accent
Stucco Accent
Cloth Canopy
Split-faceUtility Brick Wainscot
Aluminum Storefront
Metal Entry
Vision Glass, ¼ inch
.Colors
Sherwin Williams #SW 1074- Ostdch Feathers
Sherwin Williams #SW 1316 - Winnipeg Sand
Sherwin Williams #SW 1066 - Salmon Suede
Sherwin Williams #SW 1468 - Tourmaline
To match Winnipeg Sand
Sherwin Williams #SW 1320 - Tasteful Tan
Sherwin Williams #SW 2419 - Tempest Blue
Ford - Blue
The colors and materials for Macys Department Store shall substantially conform to the
colors and materials as follows:
Materials
Stucco Walls
Stucco Walls
Stucco Walls
Canopy and Storefront System
PPG Glass
Colors
Benjamin Moore #2161-50 - Yellow Squash
Benjamin Moore #2115-70 - Oyster
Benjamin Moore #2163-60 - Latte
Brushed Aluminum
Azurlite Float Glass
All landscaping plans shall be consistent with the approved construction plans for the
Promenade Mall (PA97-0118).
Bicycle racks shall be installed pursuant to the requirements ofthe Development Code.
The applicant shall comply with the Conditions of Approval for Planning Application No.
PA97-0118 unless superceded by these Conditions of Approval.
to the Issuance of Grading Permits
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.
The applicant shall revise any exhibits necessary to reflect the final conditions of approval as
adopted by the Planning Commission, and that will be provided by the Community
Development Department - Planning Division staff. The applicant shall submit five (5) full
size copies and two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of the approved Color and
Materials Board and any renderings displayed at the public hearing, to the Community
Development Department - Planning Division for their files. All labels on the Color and
Materials Board and renderings shall be readable on the photographic prints.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Pe~nits
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
R:\D P\2001\01-0204 Macy~ Store and Mall Spine\CC~,s for the Mall Expansion.doc
3
conform substantiallywith the approved Exhibit "E", or as amended by these conditions. The
location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The
plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover page shall identify
the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be
accompanied by the following items:
a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecuia Fee Schedule at time of submittal).
b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
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.
18.
a. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage.
All required landscape planting and irrigation shall haw been installed consistent with the
approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Director of
Planning. 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 Director of Planning, to
guarantee the maintenance of the plantings, in accordance with the approved construction
landscape and irrigation plan shall be filed with the Community Development Department-
Planning Division for one year from final certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the
landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the
Director of Planning, the bond shall be released.
20.
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, cleady and conspicuously stating
the following:
"Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not
displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for
persons with disabilities may be towed away at 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.
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Macy~ Store and Mall Spine\CQC~s for the Mail Expansion.doc
4
21.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed
by this permit.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
22. 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 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.
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. 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
26. 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.
27. 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
approvat by the Department of Public Works.
25. 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.
29. A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted to
the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address
special study zones and the geological conditions of the site, and shall provide
recommendations to mitigate the impact ofground shaking and liquefaction.
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
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\CO~,s for the Mall Expansion.doc
5
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
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. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department
and the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
35. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site
work performed on adjacent propedies as directed bythe Department of Public Works.
36. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation Distdct by either cashier's check or
money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee. If
the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this
property, no new charge needs to be paid.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Peri, it
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:
a. 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 Cityof Temecula Standard No. 207A.
c. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
d. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and
adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and ~sibility.
38. 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.
a. Storm drain facilities
b. On-site traffic devices as appropriate
c. Sewer and domestic water systems
d. Under grounding of proposed utility distribution lines
39. 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.
40. The Developer shall obtain/provide an easement for ingress and egress over/to the adjacent
property.
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 a Certificate of Occupancy
42. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~ Store and Mall Spine\COAs for the Malt Expansion.doc 6
43.
written clearance from the following agencies:
a. Rancho California Water District
b. Eastern Municipal Water District
c. Department of Public Works
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
44.
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.
45.
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.
46.
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.
47.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
48. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal br plan review.
49.
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)
50.
All building and facilities must complywith applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
ail details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
51. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance ofthe building.
52, Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry
53. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
54.
Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire
alarm systems.
55.
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
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Mac)s Store and Mall Spine\COAs for the Mall E~3ansion.doc
7
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
Building Official, to implement in the building design.
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.
Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block wails if not on the approved
building plans, will require separate approvals and permits.
Show ail building setbacks.
Post conspicuously at the entrance to the project the hours ofconstruction as allowed by
City of Temecula Ordinance #0-90-04, and specifically Section G (1) of the Riverside
County Ordinance # 457.73, for any site within one-quarter mile of an occupied
residence. Construction hours are as f~llows:
Monday - Friday
Saturday
6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
64.
No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Code Holidays
The area of the building exceeds California Building Code Table 5-B. The applicant
shall justify excess areas and identify mitigation measures to the Building Official.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
65.
Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by
the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the
California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in
force at the time of building plan submittal.
66.
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-Ill-A-1. The
developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 3375 GPM at
20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a
total fire flow of 4225 GPM 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
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~ Store and Mall Spine\C(~.s for the Mall E;cansion.doc
8
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)
67. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC
Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum of 5 hydrants, in a combination of omsite and off-
site (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads
and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 300 feet apart, at each
intersection and shall be located no more than 180 feet from any point on the street or Fire
Department access road(s) frontage to an hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available
from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be
required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and AppendixlH-B).
68. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150
feet from a water supply on a public street, as measured by an approved route around the
exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire
flow shall be provided. For this project on site ~re hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2)
69. 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 902.2.2.2.3 and Subdi~sion Ord 16.03.020)
70. 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)
71. 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 lbs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
72. 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 lbs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. (
CFC sec 902)
73. 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)
74. The gradient for a fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC
902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14)
75. 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)
76. 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)
77. 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 sha~l 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
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\COAs for the Mall Expansion,doc
9
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 )
78.
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)
79.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, approved numbers or
addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be
plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the proper'b/. Numbers shall be of a
contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and industrial
buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum
of six (6)inches in size. All suites shall gave a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or
numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single family residences and multi-family
residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire
Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4)
80.
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)
81.
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)
82.
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building t~nal, 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. (CFC 902.4)
83.
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 fire fighting personnel. (CFC 902.4)
84.
Prior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire
Department for approval, a site plan designating Fire Lanes with appropriate lane painting
and or signs.
85.
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, building final or occupancy, buildings
housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions of Uniform Fire Code
Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. The storage of
high-piled combustible stock may require structural design considerations or modifications to
the building. Fire protection and life safety features may include some or all of the following:
an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage
arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department
access doors and Fire department access roads. (CFC Article 81)
86. Special Conditions
87.
Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report will be required to be submitted and
to the Fire Prevention Bureau. This report shall address, but not be limited to, all fire and life
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\COAs for the Mall E~ansion.doc
10
88.
89.
90.
91.
safety measures per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, NFPA -13, 24, 72 and 231-C.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final a simple plot plan and a
simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format must be submitted to the
Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention
for approval.
The applicant shall complywith the requirements of the Fire Code permit process and
update any changes in the items and quantities appro',ed as part of their Fire Code
permit. These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Pre,,ention Bureau for review and
approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105)
The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department
of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material
Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city;, should any
quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any
additional hazardous material not listed in e)~sting reports. (CFC Appendix II-E)
The applicant will contribute a fair share portion of the replacement and upgrade of the
special "Mall Fire Department Communications S~stem" in accordance with the Mall
Specific Plan and original Conditions of Approval.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
92. All perimeter landscaping and parkways shall be maintained by the property owner or private
maintenance association.
93. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of
construction debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul construction debris.
OTHER AGENCIES
94. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California
Water Districts transmittal dated IVey 14, 2001, 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
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~ Store and Mall Spine\COAs for the Mall Expansion,doc
11
May 14, 2001
Donald Hazen, Senior Planner
CiO' of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AVAILABILITY
PORTION OF PARCEL NO. 1
OF PARCEL MAP NO. 28530-1
APN 910-130-072
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0204
MACY'S DEPARTMENT STORE EXPANSION
Dear Mr. Hazen:
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located ~vithin 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.
The developer will be responsible for installing and/or relocating any water
facilities required by this development.
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 that assigns water management rights, if any. to RCWD.
If you should have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services
Representative at this office.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brmmon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
01~SB:atI26\F012-T3\FCF
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
EXHIBITS
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Mac~ Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01 .doc
9
CITY OFTEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT - A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
VICINITY MAP
R:~D P~001\01-0204 Macys Store and Mell Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01 .doc
[0
CITY OF TEMECULA
EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION - SP-7 (Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan No.-263)
EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - CC Community Commercial, PO Professional Office, PI Public/Institutional
CASE NO. - PA01-0204 and PA01-0248
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
R:~D P~2001\01-0204 Macys Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01 .doc
CITY OFTEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT - D-1
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
MALL SITE PLAN
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01.doc
12
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT - D-2 MALL EXPANSION AND MACYS SITE PLAN (DRAWING SK 62)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01.doc
13
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT - E-1 MACYS EXPANSION EAST AND WEST ELEVATIONS (DRAWING DD-01-20-01)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
R:~D P~001\01-0204 Macys Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT- E-2
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
MACYS WEST ELEVATION (A20-01)
R:~D P~2001\01-0204 Macys Store and Mail Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01 .doc
ClTY OFTEMECULA
LEVEL pi_AN
LEVEL
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT- E-3
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
MACYS SOUTH ELEVATION (A20-02)
R:~D P~2001\01-0204 Macys Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01 .doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
, __
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT - E-4 MACYS EAST ELEVATION (A20-03)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
R:~D P~2001\01-0204 Macys Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01 .doc
I7
CITY OFTEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT- F-1
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
MALL EXPANSION LOWER LEVEL (A-LP-01-01)
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Macys Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT. PC 6-6-01 .doc
18
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT- F-2
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
MALL EXPANSION UPPER LEVEL (A-LP-01-02)
R:X[3 P~2001\01-0204 Macys Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01 .doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
I I
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT- F-3
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
MACYS LOWER LEVEL (A10-01)
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT,PC 6-6-01.doc
20
CITY OF TEMECULA
" ' ' ~;~'!r '
1~ '~'" , , , _!~- , ,, _ ,
®, _ ;__~'-- _ _ _
_ Ii ~ , I "~ !~ ,
L~'
® - -- , -- ] -- ] -- - -T - . - i -
~,,
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT - F-4 MACYS UPPER LEVEL (A10-02)
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01.doc
21
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT- F-5
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
MACYS LOWER FLOOR BLOCK PLAN (REF-1)
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01.doc
22
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT- F-6
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
MACYS UPPER FLOOR BLOCK PLAN (REF -2)
R:\D PX2001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Malt Spine\STAFFRPT,PC 6-6-01 ,doc
23
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT - G-1
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
SHEET L1-30
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01.doc
24
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT - G-2
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
MACYS, SHEET L4-01
R:\D P~2.001\01-0204 Mac~ Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01 .doc
25
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT- G-3
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
MALL EXPANSION, SHEET L4-02
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01.doc
26
CITY OFTEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT - G-4
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
MALL EXPANSION, SHEET L4-03
R:\O P~2001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01.doc
27
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT - G-5 MALL ADDITIONAL SHADE TREE PLAN, SHEET CL-01
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Macys Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT. PC 6-6-01 .doc
28
CITY OF TEMECULA
~ - ,// ,.
[l ~-1~~' ~-,.,' ,.,. .... :x-x_.;-- ,,---
%.4
GASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT- H GRADING PLAN, DRAWING C-1
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
R:\D P~2001\O1-0204 Macys Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01 ,doc
29
CITY OF TEMECULA
PERSPECTIVE - WEST ELEVATION EXPANSION
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT - I-1
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
MALL EXPANSION WEST ELEVATION
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Macys Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT,PC 6-6-01 .doc
30
CITY OF TEMECULA
PERSPECTIVE ' EAST ELEVATION EXPANSION
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT - I-2
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
MALL EXPANSION EAST ELEVATION
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Macys Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01 .doc
3]
CITY OF TEMECULA
PERSPECTIVE 6
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT - I-3
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
MACYS EAST ELEVATION (#6)
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Macys Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01 .doc
32
CITY OF TEMECULA
macy
PERSPECTIVE 7
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT - I-4
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
MAC¥S WEST ELEVATION (#7)
F~:\D P~.001\01-0204 Macys Store and Malt Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01 ,doc
33
CITY OFTEMECULA
PERSPECTIVE 8
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT - I-5
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
MACYS LOADING DOCK ELEVATION (#8)
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Macys Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01 .doc
34
CITY OFTEMECULA
PERSPECTIVE 9
CASE NO. - PA01-0204
EXHIBIT - I-6
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - June 6, 2001
MACYS LOADING DOCK ELEVATION (#9)
R:~,D P~2001\01-0204 Macys Store ar~cl Marl Sp[ne\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01 .doc
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
LAKEWOOD, CA PHOTOGRAPHS
R:\D P~2001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01.doc
37
ATrACHMENT NO. 5
TRAFFIC LETTER UPDATE
R:\D P~001\01-0204 Mac~s Store and Mall Spine\STAFFRPT.PC 6-6-01.doc
38
WILBUR
SMITH
ASSOCIATES
ENGINEERS · PLANNERS
2200 E. ~<ATELLA AVE, * SUITE 355 * ANAHEIM, CA 928~6-6047 · (714) 978-8110 * FAX (714) 978-
May 14, 2001
Mr. Dan VanLeeuwen
Forest City Development
949 S. Hope Street ,
Los Angeles, CA 90015
RE: Planned Promenade Mall Expansion
Dear Mr. VanLeeuwen:
In response to your request, Wilbur Smith Associates (WSA) has reviewed the planned mall expansion
relative to previously assessed traffic generation impacts. Based on our recent discussion, it is our
understanding that the current expansion proposal includes an additional 165,000 square feet of floor area
associated with the new Macy's store and 80,000 square feet of floor area involving the concourse and
stores leading to the new Macy's store. WSA's review of this proposed mall expansion finds it to be
consistent with all previnus analyses of trip generation impacts associated with the Promenade Mall/Power
Center.
In the trip generation studies prepared for the Promenade Mall/Power Center, Costco, and proposed
Bel Vilhggio/Overland Corporate Center it was consistently assumed that there would be a 255,000
square-foot expansion of the Promenade Mall. The attached table reflects this expansion under the
Phase 2 Mail uses. It should be noted that the currently proposed e.,xpansion is actually 10,000 s~uare
feet less than that which has been assumed in the previous studies. This table was presemed in our
March 14, 2001 Consistency Letter prepared for the Bel Villaggio project
Should you or the City of Temecula Planning Department staff have any questions concerning this
evaluation, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES
Robert A. Davis
Principal Transportation Planner
Attachment
ACCRA GHANA · ~ NY. ANAHEIM CA · A'flJ"~A, GA · BALTIMORE. MD
· ' BANGKOK. THAILAND CARACA,~. VENEZUELA
[EXING¥oN.CLrVELAND'k'yOH. LONDON,* COLUMBIA,ENGLAND SC * COLUMBUS, OH · FALLS CHUf4C~ VA · HONOLULU, ~ * HONG KONG · HOUSTON, TX * ISUN, NJ · KlflWAIT · KNOXV~LL£. TN
· M/LWAUKEF., W~ · NEW HAVEN. CT · O~LANDO. FL · OVERLAND PAJ'~f~ KS · PNILADELPHIA PA · ~-~H, PA. RAtEIG~ NC
h~iCHMOND, VA * SALT LAKE CITY. U~AH · SAN FRANCISCO. CA * SAN JOSE CA * TALL,,~HA~SSEE. FL .,]AMPA, FL · TOPONTO, CANADA · WASl41NGTON. DC
EMFtOYEE-OWNED COMPANY