HomeMy WebLinkAbout050102 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) 694-6444. Notification 48 houm prior to a meeting will
enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR
35.102.35.104 ADA Title II]
AGENDA
TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
May 1, 2002- 6:00 P.M.
Next in Order:
Resolution: No. 2002-011
CALL TO ORDER:
Flag Salute: Guerriero
Roll Call:
Guerriero, Mathewson, OIhasso, Telesio and Chairman Chiniaeff
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 not 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 May 1, 2002
R:',PLANCOMM~,ge ndas~2002\5-1 ~02,doc
1
COMMISSION BUSINESS
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before a
public hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the
approval of the project(s) at the time of hearing. If you challenge any of the
projects in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondences
delivered to the Commission Secretary at, or prior to, the public hearing.
Continued from April 24, 2002
2
Planninq Application No. 01-0309 (Development Plan) - Rick Rush Proiect Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. 01-0309 pursuant~o Section
15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act;
2.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. 01-0309, DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT,
ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A t6,200 INDUSTRIAL/
WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON t.09 VACANT ACRES,
GENERALLY LOCATED ON WINCHESTER ROAD NORTH OF
C'OLT COURT AND SOUTH OF ZEVO DRIVE KNOWN AS
ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 909-360-020
New Items
3
Plannincl Application No. 01-0610 (Tentative Parcel Map) and Planninq Application No. 01-
0611 (Development Plan) -Emerv Papp Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning
Application No 01-0610 and 01-0611;
3.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled:
R:~OLANCOMM~Agendas~2002~5-1-02.doc
2
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. 01-06`10, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 30468 TO CREATE '14
PARCELS ON 32.6 ACRES, AND PLANNING APPLICATION
01-06'1'1 A RELATED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 400 UNIT
MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT COMPLEX;
108,'100 SQUARE-FEET OF RETAIL/OFFICE USES; AND A
'18,000 SQUARE-FOOT CHILD DAY CARE CENTER,
GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY
79 SOUTH, BETWEEN JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND
AVENIDA DE MISSIONS, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL
NO. 961-010-006.
4 Villacle of Old Town Workshop - Presentation b,/the Al~l~licant
COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS
PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
Next Meeting: May 15, 2002 - Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park
Drive, Temecula, CA 92590
R:~PLANCOMM~Agendas~002',5-1-02.doc
3
ITEM #2
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
May 1,2002
Planning Application No. 01-0309 (Development Plan)
Prepared By: Rick Rush, Project Planner
ADOPT a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. 01-0309 pursuant to Section
15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act;
ADOPT a Resolution entitled:
-- --- PC RESOLUTION-NO. 2002-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-
0309, DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND
OPERATE A 16,200 INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON
1.09 VACANT ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED ON WINCHESTER
ROAD NORTH OF COLT COURT AND SOUTH OF ZEVO DRIVE
KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 909-360-020
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
Don Mosco Builders
A proposal to design, construct and operate a 16,200
square foot industrial/warehouse building
Located on Winchester Road north of Colt Court and South
of Zero Drive
Light Industrial (LI)
North: Light Industrial (LI)
South: Light Industrial iLl)
East: Light Industrial (LI)
West: Light Industrial (LI)
Business Park (BP)
Vacant
North: Vacant
South: Industrial Building
East: Vacant
West: Industrial Building
RAD P't2001\014)309 Mosco Lot 20\Staff Report for Continuance.doc
PROJECT STATISTICS (DEVELOPMENT PLAN)
Lot area (gross):
57,064 (1.31 acres)
Lot area (net)
47,480 (1.09 acres)
Building square footage:
16,200 square feet
Building height: 27'-0"
Landscaped area:
11,645 square feet (24%)
Parking required:
31 vehicular, 2 handicapped, 2 bicycle, and 1 motomycle
Parking provided:
33 vehicular, 2 handicapped, 3 bicycle, and I motomycle
Lot.coverage:_
35%
Floor area ratio: .35
BACKGROUND
This application was continued from the April 3rd Planning Commission meeting. The following is a
summary of the concerns that were expressed by the Planning Commissioners.
· The front entry to the building looked as if it was a plant on and not an integrated part of the
overall design of the building.
· The building offered very little variation in parapet heights.
· The building needed more windows of various shapes and sizes.
· The lack of a licensed amhitect designing the project.
At the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the applicant retained the services of a
licensed architect. Since the April 3, 2002 meeting, the architect and staff have met to discuss the
proposed changes to the architecture. However, the revisions required by staff took the applicant
longer than they had anticipated. And the application had to be continued a second time from the
April 24~h meeting to May 1st. The plans are now complete and address the concerns expressed by
the Planning Commission.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ANALYSIS
As previously proposed, the building will be constructed utilizing concrete tilt-up with single score
lines. The applicant has redesigned the front entry and the front elevation by utilizing varying
material finishes, paint colors and varying window shapes and sizes. The applicant has created a
simulated entry statement at the southeast corner of the building, which ties into the actual entrance
to the office portion of the building. The effect has been created by raising the panel height two feet
above the panels on the south and east elevation. Storefront glass has also been added to the
panels further tying into the office portion of the building. Additionally the applicant will finish the
area with an exposed aggregate concrete with a clear sealer.
The height of the office portion has also been raised, but the applicant was cautious to not raise this
portion too high as to visually compete with the remainder of the elevation. This height difference
creates three differing heights along the south elevation. However, staff notes that the lower office
may also visually appear as an "appendage" to the main building by being the lowest of the three
R:~D P~2001\O1-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Siaff Report for Continuance.doc
2
heights. An alternative approach may be to have the office be the tallest and most prominent
element of the building.
Three rows of windows (41/2' x 41/2') have been added along the south elevation of the office to
include one row of spandrel windows. The applicant is proposing to use the same windows on the
south elevation to tie into the windows on the office. Knockout panels have been proposed along
the east and west elevation that will tie into the windows finished with bluish gray paint. However,
staff recommends substituting the knockout panels with a matching spandrel glass because of its
public visibility.
The proposed the redesign is consistent with the Design Guidelines and the industrial performance
standards outlined in the Development Code. The simulated entry statement and the actual office
entrance meet the requirements for a creative entry statement as defined in the Development Code.
The applicant has provided varying complimentary blue and gray colors, which serve to add to the
overall architectural theme. The use of varying window shapes and sizes along the south elevation
creates an interesting view from Winchester Road. The office portion has been designed as in
integral part of the primary building although staff recommends further discussion of the height of
the office. The proposed building will blend well with the surrounding architecture and will be a
welcome addition to the adjacent properties.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The project is exempt from environmental review based on Section 15332 (In-Fill Development
Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and there are no potentially significant
environmental constraints on the site. The project qualifies for a Class 32 infiil development
exemption because the project is consistent with the General Plan designation and zoning
regulations; is located on a site within the city limits, which is served by all utilities; and is less than 5
acres in area.
CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION
Staff has determined that the proposed project is consistent with the City's Design Guidelines and
conforms with all of the applicable development regulations. Staff recommends approval of the
Development Plan with the attached conditions of approval.
FINDINGS
Development Plan (Section 17.05.010F)
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 proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for Business
Park (BP) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development
standards for Light Industrial (LI) 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 overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety, and general welfare.
R:\D ~2001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff'Repor~ for Continuance doc
3
The archtecture proposed for the warehouse is consistent with the Architectural
requirements as stated in the Design Guidelines and the Industrial Performance Standards
of the Development Code. 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.
Attachments:
PC Resolution No. - 02- - Blue Page 5
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 8
2. Exhibits o Blue Page 18
A. Vicinity Map
B. General Plan Map
C. Zoning Map
D. Sitb Plan
E. Grading Plan
F. Building Elevations
G. Floor Plan
H. Landscape Plan
3. Staff Report Dated April 3, 2002
R:'~D P~280]\01 ~309 Mosco Lot 20\Staff Report for Continuance.doc
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
R:~D P~2001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report for Continmmce~doc
5
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-
0309, DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND
OPERATE A 16,200 INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON
1.09 VACANT ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED ON WINCHESTER
ROAD NORTH OF COLT COURT AND SOUTH OF ZEVO DRIVE
KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 909-360-020
WHEREAS, Don Mosco Builders, filed Planning Application No. 01-0309 (Development Plan
Application), in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on
April 3, 2002 and May 1,2002, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time
the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in
opposition to this matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to and based upon
the findings set forth hereunder;
WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
HEREBY 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. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby
makes the following findings as required by Section 176.05.010F of the Temecula Municipal Code:
1. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with a~l
applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the city.
The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for Business
Park (BP) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development
standards for Light Industrial (LI) 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.
2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety, and general welfare.
The archtecture proposed for the warehouse is consistent with the Architectural
requirements as stated in the Design Guidelines and the Industrial Performance Standards
of the Development Code. The project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, has been
R:~D PL2001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report for Continuance.doc
6
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.
Section3. Environmental Compliance. The project will have no significant
environmental impacts and has been found to be categorically exempt, Pursuant to Section 15332
class 32 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby
conditionally approves the Application, a request to develop a 16,400 square foot
warehouse/industrial building set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this
reference together with any and all necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary.
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning
Commission this 1st day of May 2002.
ATTEST:
Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson
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. 02-._was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of
Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 1st day of May, 2002, by the following vote of the
Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:~,D P~2001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report for Continuance.doc
7
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
R:',D IA2001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20k%a ff Report for Continuance.doc
8
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No.:
Project Description:
DIF Category:
Assessor's Parcel No.:
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
PA01-0309 Development Plan
Planning Application to construct, establish
and operate a 16,200 square foot
Warehouse/industrial building on 1.09 acres of
vacant land
Business Park/Industrial
909-360-020
May 1, 2002
May 1,2004
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 Sixty-
Four Dollars ($64.00) 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
2. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to
indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own
selection, the City shallrbe deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or
instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees,
consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions, awards,
judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek monetary
damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of
the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or
legislative body including actions approved bythe voters of the City, concerning the Planning
Application.
3. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or
proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further booperate fully in the
defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all action the City deems to
be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense.
4. All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this
Development Plan.
R:~D PX2001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20\Staff Report for Continuance.doc
9
10.
11.
The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of
this development plan.
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 (Building Elevation), G (Floor Plan), H (Landscape Plan),
and I (Color and Material 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 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.
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 'T' (Color and Material Board), contained on file with the Community
Development Department - Planning Division.
Warehouse/Manufacturing Area
Office Wall
Two Primary Building Features
Window Glass
Doors and Knock-out Panels
Light Concrete Grey
Medium Shade Grey
Natural Exposed Aggregate
Reflective Blue Grey Glass
Bluish Grey
12. The construction landscape drawings shall indicate coordination and grouping of all utilities,
which are to be screened from view per applicable City Codes and guidelines.
Prior to 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.
14. The applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
for permanent filing two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of 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.
15. The applicant shall submit a parking lot lighting plan to the Planning Department, which
meets the requirements of the Development Code and the Palomar Lighting Ordinance.
The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely impact the
growth potential of the parking lot trees.
16. A copy of the Grading Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department.
R:~D PX2001~01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report for Contifiuance.doc
~0
17. 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 Issuance of Building Permit
18. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
19. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department - Planning Division for approval. These plans shall
conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "F", or as amended by these conditions. The
location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The
plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover page shall identify
the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall show temporary
· irrigation and seeding for the Phase lB area. The plans shall be accompanied by the
following items:
a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal).
b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
c. Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
d. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan).
20. The applicant shall submit details of the employee patio area to include type of furniture to
be installed.
Prior to Building Occupancy
21. The property owner shall fully install all required landscaping and irrigation, and submit a
landscape maintenance bond in a form and amount approved by the Planning Department
for a period of one-year from the date of the first occupancy permit.
22. The construction plans shall indicate the application of painted rooftop addressing plotted on
a 9-inch grid pattern with 45-inch tall numerals spaced 9-inch apart. The numerals shall be
painted with a standard 9-inch paint roller using fluorescent yellow paint applied over a
contrasting background. The address shall be odented to the street and placed as closely as
possible to the edge of the building closest to the street.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
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.
R:~D Pk2001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report for Continuance.doc
11
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
approval by the Department of Public Works.
28. ^ 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 of ground 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 flied 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
d. Southern California Edison
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 adiacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
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. tf
the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this
property, nonew charge needs to be paid.
R:~D PX2001\014)309 Mosco Lot 20\Staff Report for Continuance.doc
12
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 City of Temecula Standard No. 207A.
c. Streetlights 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. 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.
g. All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed
through under sidewalk drains.
38. 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.
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 from the following agencies:
a. Rancho California Water District
b. Department of Public Works
43. 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.
44. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall
be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of
Public Works.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
45. 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 PX2001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20\Staff Repor~ for Continuance.doc
46. 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-I. The
developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 1750 GPM at
20-PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 1850 GPM for a
total fire flow of 3600 GPM with a 2 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted
during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire
protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given
above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A)
47. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC
Appendix Ill-B, Table A-IIIoB-1. 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)
48. 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)
49. ~laximum 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
50. 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)
51. Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shalt have
approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads
are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads sha~l be an all weather surface for
80,000 lbs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
52. 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)
53. 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)
54. The gradient for fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC
902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14)
55. Prior to building construction, dead end roadways and streets in excess of one hundred and
fifty (150) feet, which have not been completed, shall have a turnaround capable of
accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4)
56. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water
system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. Plans shall be
signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature
block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. After
the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to the Fire
Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be
installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building
RSD Px2001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report for Continuance.doc
14
materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire
Protection Association 24 1-4.1 )
57. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers"
shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3)
58. 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 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)
59. 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)
60. 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)
61. 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)
62. 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)
63. 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.
64. Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible
stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: an
automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage
arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department
access doors and Fire department access roads. Buildings housing high-piled combustible
stock shall comply with the provisions California Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable
National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81)
65. 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)
SI3ecial Conditions
66. Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report may 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, and 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
67.
R:~D P~2001\01-0309 Mosco Lol 20~S~aff Report for Con6nuance,doc
15
Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention
for approval.
68. 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)
COMMUNITY SERVICES
70. All perimeter landscaping and parkways shall be maintained by the property owner or private
maintenance association,
71. 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.
72. The developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure
area.
BUILDING AND SAFETY
73. 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.
74. 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 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.
75. 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.
76. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
77. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
78. 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 A. pril 1, 1998)
79. All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
all detaiis on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
80. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building.
81. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
82. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
83. Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire
alarm systems.
R:'d) PL2001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report for Continuance,doc
16
84. 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.
85. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system.
86. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans prior
to permit issuance.
87. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic
and mechanical plan for plan review.
88. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer
engineer are required for plan review submittal,
89. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility.
90. A pro-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
91. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standard and any block walls if not on the approved
building plans, will require separate approvals and permits.
92. Show all building setbacks.
93. Signage sha'll be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours
of construction, shown below, as allowed by the 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. - 6:30 p.m.
Saturday 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
No work is permitted on Sundays of holidays.
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
94. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated July 17, 2001 from the California
Historical Resources Information System.
95. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated August 4, 2001 from the Riverside
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District.
96. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated July 11,2001 from Rancho Water.
97. The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated June 29, 2001 from County of
Riverside Department of Environmental Health.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance
with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be
subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant's Signature
Date
Name printed
RAD PL2001 \014)309 Mosco Lot 2(3Staff Report for Continuance.doc
JUL~-l?-2001 10: 0~
~ALIFORNIA
HISTORICAL
I~ESOURCES
INFORMATION
~YSTEM
989 ?~7 54~3 P,01/8~
Eastern Information C~ter
Oepsrtment of ~Whrol~ogy ·
University of Ce~ow~a
Riverside, GA 92521-0416
Phwle (909) 7e7.57,45
I:~x tS)9) ?~-S40e
July 17, 2001
TO: Rick Rush
City of Temacula Planning Department
RE: Cultural Resource Review
Case: PA01-0309/Mosco Lot 20
Records at the Eastern Information Center of the California Historical ResoUrces Information
System have been reviewed to determrt~e if this project would adversely affect prehistoric
or historic cultural resources:
__ The proposed project area has not been surveyed for cultural resources and contains or is adjacent to
known cultural resource(al. A Phase I study is recommended.
Based upon existing data theproposed project area has,the potential for containing cultural resources.
A Phase I study is recommended.
A Phase I cultural resource study (MF # ) identified one or more cultural resources,
The project area contains, or has the possibiliW of containing, cultural resources. However, due [o the
nature of the project or prior data recovery studies, an adverse effect on cultural resources is net
anticipated. Further study is not recommended.
V~ A Phase I cultural resource study (MF #2734 and MF #3513) identified no cultural resources within the
project boundaries.
There is a Iow probability of cultural resources. Further study is not recommended.
If, during construction, cultural resources ore encountered, work should be halted or diverted in the
immediate area while a qualified archaeologist evaluates the finds and makes recommendations.
1/ Due to the archaeological sensitivity of the area, earthmoving during construction should be monitored
by a professional archaeologist,
I/ The submission of. a cultural resource management report Is recommended following guidelines for
Archaeological Resource Management Reports prepared by the California Office of HlatoHcPreservsflon,
P~eservation Planning Bulletin 4(el, December 1989.
Phase I Records search end field survey
~' Phaesll Testing [Evaluate resource significance; propose mitigation measures for "significant" sites.]
· -, Phaselll Mitigati~n[D~tarec~verybyex~avat~~n~preservati~ninp~ace~~r~c~mbin~ti~n~fthetw~~]
V' Phase IV Monitor earthmoving activities
COMMENTS; The project area is located immediately adjacent to, but does not appear to
encompass any portion of, previously recorded archaeological site C .A-RIV-237. Because of
the proximity of this. potentially significant cultural resources site, it ~s recommended that a
qualified archaeologmt monitor development of the project area as a precaution against
adverse impacts to components of RIV-237.
If you have any questions, please contact us.
Eastern Information Center
DAVID P. ZAPPE
General Manager-Chief Engineer
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
1995 MARKET STREET
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
909.955.1200
909.788.9965 FAX
51180.1
City o.f Temecula
Planmng Department
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, California 92589-9033
Attention: ~tr.~J~
Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: ~.~ et --(~
The Di_strict does no.t normally reqommend c.o...nd, ition, s for land divisions. .or other_la, nd. use cases in incorporated
c[.ties. [ ne D strict alSO aoes not p~an check_,ci.ty i.ana use .cas.es, or provlp.e. State uivis.lon of Real Estate.!~.em.. or.
omar need hazard reports for sucn cases, uismc[ commems/recommen(3ations mr SUCh cases are normally ~imtten
to items of specific interest to the Dis,~ includin~q Di.stri.ct Ma.stet Drainage Pla. n fa. dlitie, s other regional fl. ood
control and drelna!3e/acilities which cou[u De consi(3er(~:l a logical componentor ex~enslo.n, m a.master p]a.n system.,
and District Area Drainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition, information or a genere! nature ~s
provided.
The District has n.of.[.eview, ed the proposed.project in. de.~ll and the fo!lowing .ch .e~..ked comments do. ri. et in a. ny way
.constitute or imply IJistri~ appmv, a[ or en(3omemem or me pmposeo project wire respect to r[ooo nazam, public
health and safety or any omer SUCh issue:
This pm. je.ct wo. uld not b~. impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facflities nor ara other facilities of
regionat [merest proposee.
This project involves Distrtc{ Master Plan facilities. The .D. ist~ct will a. ccept .ownem. hi_g. of su.ch fa.ciliti.es on~
,written request of the City: .Facilitie.s must b~. cons~_.cted t.o ojst[i.'ct s~a.n, earos .anq D.i .stn.'.'ct.plan. cnec~..a.na
ins .p~'ti.on will be require~ mr District acceptance. Plan check, mspecaon ano aomin[swauve lees
requireo. .
. This p.roje~t, propos.e~, c..h~.nnels s.t. orm .drains. 36.Incl,.es or. I..arger.in ,diameter, or other facilities that could be
consmere~ regional In nature eno/or a logical extension or me acopte(3 ·
Master Drainage ?.,lan; The Disthct .wou. la .O9. ns_i.de.r a. cc~. pfi,ng .owne~h_ip of s.u ,ct1 faa. Ilti .es on..written .reque~.,!
/ of the City. Faciliues must b~. conse~_.c~ea, to .uLstric~ s.m.., naars.s, a. n9 .ui.s~.'.ct Plan cn...e~, ana m. ~Sl~CUOn
, / be requirC~l for District acceptance. Plan (mecK, ~nspection ano eanllnlstrauve tees W~ll De requlreo.
[/ This preJeof is located within the limlts of the Districts-'""- I~er-~E'r4 ~ (-r~'~ecuc~'~ Area
Drainage P an for .wh ch .dm. ina. ge ~ ,halve .be:e. n_,a.dppted appl!ceble tees. s. ho.u!d De pe~a ..by cashle_r's
' check or money o.r~.r only m m,e ~-~ .o~o. ?;on,?9~ u[s.th.'c~ p.dor m £ssu. a.n/~.. ~ oui~d[n.g or graalnjt pe~.sI
whichever comes nrst. Fees to oe psi(3 snore(3 De at me rate in eaec~ at me time or issuance of me actua
permit.
GENERAL INFORMATION
~-his prelect_may require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination.System. (NPDES) permit from the State Water
esources conffol Board. Clearance mr grading, recerdatio.n., 0[. omer an.m 9ppmva/~hould not be given until the
City has determined that the project has be~n granted a permn or Is shown to De exempt.
If this project involves a Federal Em.erg.en..cy Man.age, m..ent Age, ncy (FE.MA.) map .Eed fl ..ogd plain,.the, n.the City s_h_o.u, ld
require the. appli .can. t to provide au stua~.es, ..celcu~.ons. paps. eno_ oa!..e..r inr.o.rm.a, son..r~l, u~re_o ~los. me~.iL~)~ivlM~)
re.quiremenrs, ann Should further require mat me a. pp,cant Detain a ~ormmonal Letter or Map r~ew Ion
prior to grading, recordation or other final approva~ of the project, and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior to
occupancy.
If.a natum_l watercourse or mapped flood plai.n, is imp.act.ed b_y this. proj.ect~ _tl3. e' City,s..hould req.uire_~e a[~p. li.cant, to.
.o0.Dmin a sec'don 1601/1603 Agreement frbm_ me GaJif._orma uepanmen[~ visn eno oa, me an.(3 a ~J!ean water,ct
~e,,ction 404 Permit from the U,S...Army corps or .t:ngi.ne_e. rs, o.r .wfitte. n. ?rr.e. spo.n_o.en,,ce. ~re~m .m..es_e a.g. en. es
mo~cating the project is exe, mpt fro ,m. mese_requ~rem..e, ms.. A_c;~e.a. n ~wat.er,A~ = ,e~on 4? wa~er uua. l~ c;e~mncatjo_n
may be required from the ~ocal California ~egiona water uuality conlro~ uoaro prior to issuance orme corps ,~u4
permit.
C:
~TE. MCKIBBIN Senior Civil Engineer
Date: ~='~' ~} ~...~.-
July 11, 2001
Rick Rush, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AND SEWER AVAILABILITY
PARCEL NO. 20 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 28471-1
APN 909-360-020
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA~l-0309
Dear Mr. Rush:
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the
boundaries of Rancho California Water Disltict (RCWD). Water and sewer
service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements
between RCWD and the property owner.
If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees
and requirements.
Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an
Agency Agreement that assigns water management fights, 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 Brannon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
JUL 1 8 2001
0 BSB:at 172~F012-T3~FCF
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE · HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
June 29, 2001
City of Temecula Planning Department
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589
RE: Plot Plan No. PA01-0309
Dear Rick Rush:
The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the P10t Plan No. PA00-0507 and has no objections.
Sanitary sewer and water services may be available in this area.
PRIOR TO ANY PLAN CH~:CK SUBMITTAL for health clearance, the following items are required:
a) "Will-serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies.
h)
Three complete sets of plans for each food establishment (to include vending machines) will be
submitted, including a fixture schedule, a f'mish schedule, and a plumbing schedule in order to ensure
~ompliance with the California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific reference, please
contact Food Facility Plan examiners at (909) 600-6330).
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.
· Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with Ordinance f451.2.
.4, Waste Reduction Management
Sincerely,
8am~'~'-Marfin~onmental Health Specialist
· (909) 955-8980
NOTE:
CCi
Any current additional requirements not covered can be apphcable at time of Building Plan
review for final Department of Environmental Health clearance.
Doug Thompson, Hazardous Materials
JUL 0 5 001
Local Enforcement Agency * RO. Box 1280, Riverside, CA 92502-1280 * (909) 9554~982 * FAX (909) 781-9653 * 4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor, Rivemide, CA 92501
Land Use and Water Engineering * BO. Box 1206; Rive~ide, CA 92502-1206 * (909} 955 8980 * FAX (909) 955~903 * 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor, Riverside, CA 92501
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
EXHIBITS
R:XD P~2001~01-0309 Mosco Lot 20XStaff Report for Continuance.doc
18
CITY OF.TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0309
EXHIBIT - A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 1, 2002
VICINITY MAP
R:\D P~.001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20\Staff Report for Continuance.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
EXHIBIT B - GENERAL PLAN MAP
DESIGNATION -(LI) LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
EXHIBIT C - ZONING
DESIGNATION - (LI) LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
CASE NO. - PA01-0309
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 1, 2002
R:'~D P~2001~1-0309 Mosco Lot 20\Staff Report for Continuance.doc
20
ClTY OFTEMECULA
.J
t
CASE NO. - PA01:0309
EXHIBIT - D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 1,2002
SITE PLAN
R:',.D :P~001'~1-0309 Mosco Lot 20',,St~ff Report for Continuance.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0309
EXHIBIT - E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 1, 2002
GRADING PLAN
R:~D P~001~01-0309 Mosco Lot 20\Staff Reporl for Continuance.doc
CITY OFTEMECULA
O 5 IO 20 40
I
CASE NO. - PA01-0309
EXHIBIT - F
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 1, 2002
BUILDING ELEVATIONS
R:~3 P~001~01-0309 Mosco Lot 20\Staff Report for Continuance.doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
510
CASE NO. - PA01-0309
EXHIBIT - G
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 1,2002
FLOOR PLAN
R:~D P,',2001~01-0309 Mosco Lot 20\Staff Report for Continuance.doc
24
CITY OF TEMECULA
PREUMI
LOT 20 IND[
CASE NO. - PA01-0309
EXHIBIT - H
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - May 1,2002
LANDSCAPE PLAN
R:~D P~001~1-0309 Mosco Lot 20\Staff Report for Continuance.doc
25
ATFACHMENT NO. 3
STAFF REPORT DATED APRIL 3, 2002
R:~ P~001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20VStaf~ Report for Continuance,doc
ORI IiV4L
STAFF REPORT- PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
April 3, 2002
Planning Application No. 01-0309 (Development Plan)
Prepared By: Rick Rush, Project Planner
1. ADOPT a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. 01-0309 pursuant to Section
15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act;
2. ADOPT a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-
0309, DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND
OPERATE A 16,200 INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON
1.09 VACANT ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED ON WINCHESTER
ROAD NORTH OF COLT COURT AND SOUTH OF ZEVO DRIVE
KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 909-360-020
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
Don Mosco Builders
A proposal to design, construct and operate a 16,200
square foot industrial/warehouse building.
Located on Winchester Road north of Colt Court and South
of Zevo Drive
Light Industrial (LI)
North: Light Industrial (LI)
South: Light Industrial (LI)
East: Light Industrial (LI)
West: Light Industrial (LI)
Business Park (BP)
Vacant
North: Vacant
South: Industrial Building
East: Vacant
West: Industrial Building
PROJECT STATISTICS (DEVELOPMENT PLAN)
Lot area (gross):
57,064 (1.31 acres)
Lot area (net)
47,480 (1.09 acres)
Building square footage:
16,200 square feet
Building height: 27'-0"
Landscaped area:
11,645 square feet (24%)
Parking required:
31 vehicular, 2 handicapped, 2 bicycle, and 1 motomycle
Parking provided:
33 vehicular, 2 handicapped, 3 bicycle, and 1 motorcycle
Lot coverage: 35%
Floor area ratio: .35
BACKGROUND
The applicant submitted a Development Plan application on June 22, 2001. The application as
submitted was deemed incomplete on July 19, 2001. The applicant resubmitted on September 13,
2001, and the project was deemed complete on October 10,2001. A Development Review
Committee (DRC) meeting was held on November 1, 2001. During the DRC meeting staff
expressed concerns with the proposed architecture for the building.
The amhitectural concerns included building entry location and accentuation, window shapes and
sizes, large blank, flat surfaces, loading doors facing the street, and long unarticulated walls. Staff
also expressed concerns with the colors and materials used on the building.
The applicant resubmitted revised plans on three separate occasions. On March 14, 2002 it was
determined by staff that the revised plans met the minimum requirements of the Development Code
and the Design Guidelines.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Site Desi(3n
The project is located on the east side of Winchester Road and south of Zero Drive. Access to the
site is taken from a single driveway off of Winchester Road. Customer parking for the site is located
along the south property line and the west elevation near the front entrance. Employee parking is
located at the rear of the site. The applicant is also providing four motorcycle spaces and three
bicycle spaces. Loading and unloading of products will take place at the rear of the site and will not
be visible from the public view. in order to meet Fire Preve. ntion requirements the applicant has
provided drive aisles of at least twenty-six feet and has provided a hammerhead turn around for fire
trucks.
The applicant has provided an employee lunch area at the rear of the building. Condition o1
Approval number nineteen requires the applicant to submit a detail of this area to include type o!
furniture to be installed prior to the issuance of a building permit. The trash enclosure for the site has
been located in the southeast corner of the site and will not be visible from Winchester Road.
R:~D P~2001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report.doc
2
Landscaping on three sides will surround the trash enclosure to soffen its from view on site. The
trash enclosure will be constructed with concrete tilt-up and will be painted to match the building.
The applicant has provided an exposed aggregate path from the public right of way to the entrance
of the building that matches the exposed aggregate located at the driveway entrance.
Amhitecture, Color and Materials
The proposed building will be constructed of tilt-up concrete. The building dimensions are 110 feet
wide by 140 feet long, with a height of 27 feet. As proposed the building has five-foot offsets on
both the south and the north elevation that create a shadowing effect. The Roll up doors are located
on the rear elevation of the building as to not be visible from the public right of way. The office
portion of the building has been located along the west elevation just a little off center nearest to the
north property line. Two separate five and a half inch reveal lines have been provided on all four
elevations of the building.
Landscapinq
The Development Code requires projects within the Light Industrial (LI) designation to provide a
minimum of twenty percent landscaping coverage. The amount of landscape materials proposed by
the applicant is 11,645 square feet, which is twenty-four percent lot coverage. Additionally, the
applicant is providing 1,200 square feet of hardscape, which includes an employee eating area, and
an exposed aggregate concrete path of travel to the entrance. 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 Winchester Road has been well planted with a mixture of trees,
shrubs and lawn area. The majority of the landscaping provided on the site has been concentrated
in this area as to be visible from Winchester Road. The trees to be located in this area are Fern
Pines, Flowering Pears, and London Plane trees. The front landscaping areas provided vary from a
minimum of twenty feet to a maximum of forty-five feet. The landscaping along this elevation
extends all the way to the building and around the office portion of the building. The landscaping
extends along the north elevation at a width of five feet until the area where the building is right on
the property line. Within this area three Canary Island Pines have been located to further break up
this wall plan. The landscaping along the north property line starts again right at the rear of the
building and extends to the rear property line. An approximate six hundred square foot planting area
has been provided in the northeast corner to include trees and shrubs. The remanding landscaping
along the east property line is within a seven feet landscape buffer. A seven-foot landscape buffer
and a three hundred square foot planting area have been proposed along the south property line.
The applicant is proposing to add landscaping along the south elevation to further break up this
elevation.
ANALYSIS
The project conforms to the development standards of the Light Industrial zone designation.
Target Floor Area Ratio
Minimum Width
Minimum Depth
Minimum Street Frontage
Yard Area Adjacent to Street
Rear Yard
O.4O O.27
100 feet 190 feet
120 feet 287 feet
80 feet 190 feet
20 feet 45 feet
10 feet 88 feet
Maximum Height
Maximum Lot Coverage
Minimum Landscape Open
Space
50 feet 27 feet
40% 35%
20% 24%
Site Desi(~n
The site as proposed will assure internal on site consistency with sound industrial site development
practices. The site meets the main elements of sound industrial site design as illustrated in the
Design Guidelines. The site is also consistent with the requirements for circulation as defined in the
Industrial Performance of the Development Code. The Fire Prevention Division has reviewed the
project. As designed, emergency vehicles are able to access the site to provide the appropriate fire
and life safety services.
Amhitecture, Color and Materials
In order to create an entry statement the applicant has used a medium sandblast finish on the office
portion of the building, which helps this portion of the building to stand out from the rest of the front
elevation. A concrete tile roofing material has also been added to the office to further distinguish it
from the remainder of the building. Varying window sizes and shapes have been utilized on the
entry to include a glass entry door. The windows will be composed of a clear aluminum frame and
Azurite Green reflective glass. The medium sandblast finish will be added to three separate panel
sections on the north and south elevation. The sandblasting has been added to break up the wall
plans by adding a contrasting material to these elevations.
At the recommendation of staff the applicant has provided colors that are more consistent with earth
tone colors. The primary color on the building, roll up doors and man doors is beige. The reveal
lines will be painted with a dark brown color, which really helps these lines to stand out. This color
ties in with the brown tile material used on the front elevation of the building.
The offsets as provided work well to break up the building elevations and to create shadowing along
the south and north elevation. The earth tone colors provided will serve to be a complimentary
addition to the area. The architecture as proposed meets the desirable elements for architecture as
stated in the Design Guidelines. It also meets the requirements in the Development Code for
amhitectural design
Landscapin(~
The landscaping as proposed exceeds the minimum requirements for the Industrial zoning district.
As proposed the landscaping will be a complimentary addition to the project and the building design.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The project is exempt from environmental review based on Section 15332 (In-Fill Development
Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act and there are no potentially significant
environmental constraints on the site. The project qualifies for a Class 32 infill development
exemption because the project is consistent with the General Plan designation and zoning
regulations; is located on a site within the city limits, which is served by all utilities; and is less than 5
acres in area.
R:~D P~2001~01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~S~aff Report.doc
4
CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION
Staff has determined that the proposed project is consistent with the City's Design Guidelines. and
conforms with all of the applicable development regulations. Staff recommends approval of the
Development Plan with the attached conditions of approval.
FINDINGS
Development Plan (Section 17.05.010F)
The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for Business
Park (BP) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development
standards for Light Industrial (LI) 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.
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.
Attachments:
1. PC Resolution No.-02-
- Blue Page 6
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 9
Exhibits - Blue Page 20
A. Vicinity Map
B. General Plan Map
C. Zoning Map
D. Site Plan
E. Grading Plan
F. Building Elevations
G. Floor Plan
H. Landscape Plan
R:~D P~2001~01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff ReporLdoc
5
ATI'ACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
R:~D P~.001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report.doc
6
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-.__
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-
0309, DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND
OPERATE A 16,200 INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON
1.09 VACANT ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED ON WINCHESTER
ROAD NORTH OF COLT COURT AND SOUTH OF ZEVO DRIVE
KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 909-360-020
WHEREAS, Don Mosco Builders, filed Planning Application No. PA01-0309 (Development
Plan Application), in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development
Code;
WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on
April 3, 2002, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and
interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this
matter;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to and based upon
the findings set forth hereunder;
WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
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. Findin.qs. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby
makes the following findings as required by Section 176.05.01 OF of the Temecula Municipal Code:
The proposal is consistent with the land use designation and policies reflected for Business
Park (BP) development in the City of Temecula General Plan, as well as the development
standards for Light Industrial (LI) ih 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.
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
R:~D P~2001\01 ~)309 Mosco lot 20~Staff Report.doc
function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety and welfare.
Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The project will have no significant
environmental impacts and has been found to be categorically exempt, Pursuant to Section 15332
class 32 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.
Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby
conditionally approves the Application, a request to develop a 16,400 square foot
warehouse/industi'ial building set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this
reference together with any and all necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary.
Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning
Commission this 3rd day of April 2002.
ATTEST:
Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson
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. 02-__was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of
Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 3rd day of April, 2002, by the following vote of the
Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:XD P~2001\014)309 Mosco Lot 20XStaff Report.doc
8
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No.:
Project Description:
DIF Category:
Assessor's Parcel No.:
Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
PA01-0309 Development Plan
Planning Application to construct, establish
and operate a 16,200 square foot
warehouse/industrial building on 1.09 acres of
vacant land
Business Park/Industrial
909-360-020
April 3, 2002
April 3, 2004
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 Sixty-
Four Dollars ($64.00) 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
2. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to
indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the City's own
selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or
instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees,
consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions, awards,
judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek monetary
damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of
the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or
legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning
Application.
3. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or
proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the
defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all action the City deems to
be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense.
All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this
Development Plan.
R:~D P~2001\014)309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report.doc
10
10.
11.
The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of
this development plan.
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 (Building Elevation), G (Floor Plan), H (Landscape Plan),
and I (Color and Matedal 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 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.
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 'T' (Color and Material Board), contained on file with the Community
Development Department - Planning Division.
Primary wall exterior:
Exterior Accent
Building Glazing
Roofing Material
Sandblast Finish
Behr paint #3A15-3 "Caisson"
Behr paint #3A15-5 "Hercules"
Azurelite Green Reflective (Downey Glass Manufacture)
Brown Concrete Tile
Medium Sandblast
12. The construction landscape drawings shall indicate coordination and grouping of all utilities,
which are to be screened from view per applicable City Codes and guidelines.
Prior to 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.
14. The applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department - Planning Division
for permanent filing two (2) 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of 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.
15. The applicant shall submit a parking lot lighting plan to the Planning Department, which
meets the requirements of the Development Code and the Palomar Lighting Ordinance.
The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely impact the
growth potential of the parking lot trees.
16. A copy of the Grading Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department.
R:~D P~2001\014)309 Mosco Lot 20kSlaff Report. doc
17. 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 Issuance of Building Permit
18. A Consistency Check fee shall be paid per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule.
19. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department - Planning Division for approval. These plans shall
conform substantially with the approved Exhibit "F", or as amended by these conditions. The
location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The
plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The cover page shall identify
the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall show temporary
irrigation and seeding for the Phase lB area. The plans shall be accompanied by the
following items:
a. Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal).
b. One (1) copy of the approved grading plan.
c. Water usage Calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water
Efficient Ordinance).
d. Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan).
20. The applicant shall submit details of the employee patio area to include type of furniture to
be installed.
Prior to Building Occupancy
21. The property oWner shall fully install all required landscaping and irrigation, and submit a
landscape maintenance bond in a form and amount approved by the Planning Department
for a period of one-year from the date of the first occupancy permit.
22. The construction plans shall indicate the application of painted rooftop addressing plotted on
a 9-inch grid pattern with 45-inch tall numerals spaced 9-inch apart. The numerals shall be
painted with a standard 9-inch paint roller using fluorescent yellow paint applied over a
contrasting background. The address shall be odented to the street and placed as closely as
possible to the edge of the building closest to the street.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
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 fudher 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 st[eet 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.
RSD PL2001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report.doc
12
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
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 of ground 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
shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
a. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
b. Planning Department
c. Department of Public Works
d. Southern California Edison
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 by the Department of Public Works.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
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.
13
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. FIowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C.
paving.
b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A.
c. Streetlights 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. 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.
g. All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed
through undersidewalk drains.
38. 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.
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 wdtten offer to participate in, and waive all rights to object to
the formation of an Assessment District, a Community Facilities District, or a Bridge and
Major Thoroughfare Fee District for the construction of the proposed Western Bypass
Corridor in accordance with the General Plan. The form of the offer shall be subject to the
approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
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. Department of Public Works
43. 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.
44. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall
be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of
Public Works.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
45. 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 I~2001\014)309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report.doc
14
46.
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 1750 GPM at
20-PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 1850 G PM for a
total fire flow of 3600 GPM with a 2 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted
during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire
protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given
above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A)
47. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC
Appendix Ill-B, Table A-Ill-B-1. 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)
48. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion ob 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)
49.
Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum turning radius on any cul-
de-sac shall be forty-fi~ve (45) feet. (CFC 902.2.2.2.3 and Subdivision Ord 16.03.020
50.
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)
51.
52.
Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have
approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads
are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for
80,000 lbs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2)
Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to I~e 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)
53.
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)
54.
The gradient for fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC
902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14)
55.
Prior to building construction, dead end roadways and streets in excess of one hundred and
fifty (150) feet,, which have not been completed, shall have a turnaround capable of
accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4)
56. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water
system plans to the F~re Prevention Bureau for approval pnor to installation. Plans shall be
signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature
block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. After
the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to the Fire
Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be
installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building
materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC, 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire
Protection Association 24 1-4.1 )
57.
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers"
shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3)
58.
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 (8) 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)
59.
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)
60.
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)
61.
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)
62.
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)
63.
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.
64.
Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible
stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: an
automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage
arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department
access doors and Fire department access roads. Buildings housing high-piled combustible
stock shall comply with the provisions California File Code Article 81 and all applicable
National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81)
65. 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)
R:XD Px2001\014)309 Mosco Lot 20XStaff Report.doc
16
Special Conditions
66.
Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report may 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.
67.
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.
68.
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)
69.
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)
COMMUNITY SERVICES
70. All perimeter landscaping and parkways shall be maintained by the properly owner or private
maintenance association.
71. 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.
72. The developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure
area.
BUILDING AND SAFETY
73. 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.
74.
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 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.
75.
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.
76.
Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction
work.
77. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review.
R:~D P~2001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report.doc
17
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
Disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building is required. The
path of travel shall meet the California Disabled Access Regulations in terms of cross slope,
travel slope stripping and signage. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access
Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
All building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide
all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998)
Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building.
Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
Provide house electrical meter provisions for power for the operation of exterior lighting, fire
alarm systems.
Restroom fixtures, number and type, to be in accordance with the previsions 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 prior
to permit issuance.
Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic
and mechanical plan for plan reviewl
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.
Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours
of construction, shown below, as allowed by the 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-Fdday
6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
Saturday
7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
No work is permitted on Sundays of holidays.
R:~D PO.001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report.doc
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
94.
95.
96.
The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated July 17, 2001 from the California
Historical Resoumes Information System.
The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated August 4, 2001 from the Riverside
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District.
The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated July 11,2001 from Rancho Water.
97.
The applicant shall comply with the attached letter dated June 29, 2001 from County of
Riverside Department of Environmental Health.
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above
Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance
with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be
subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant's Signature
Date
Name printed
RAD P~2001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report.doc
19
JUL-17-2001 10:07
~ALIFORNIA
~ISTORICAL
~ESOURCES
INFORMATION
~YSTEM
ARU/E I C/ANTHRO UCR
Eastern Information Center
Oepadment cf Anthropology
University of c~sr~or~a
Riverside. CA 92521-041~
Phone (909) 787.5745
Fax (909) ?8?~.~0e
July 17, 2OO1
TO: Rick RUsh
City of Temecula Planning Department
RE: Cultural Resource Review
Case: PAOl-O309/Mosco Lot 20
Records at the Eastern Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information
System have been reviewed to determ~he if this project would adversely affect prehistoric
or historic cultural resources:
__ The proposed project area has not been surveyed for cultural resources and contains or is adjacent to
known cultural resource(s). A Phase I study is recommended.
__ Based upon existing data the proposed project area has the potential for containing cultural resources.
A Phase I study is recommended.
Phase I cultural resource study {MF #
) identified one or more cultural resources.
The project area contains, or has the possibility of containing, cultural resources. However, due to the
nature of the project or prior data recovery studies, an adverse effect on cultural resources is not
anticipated. Further study is not recommended.
A Phase I cultural resource study (MF//27:34 and MF #3513) identified no cultural resources within the
project boundaries.
There is a Iow probability of cultural resources. Further study is not recommended.
If, during construction, cultural resources are encountered, work should be halted or diverted in the
immediate area while a qualified archaeologist evaluates the finds and makes recommendations.
,,~ Due to the archaeological sensitivity of the area, earthmoving during construction should be monitored
by a professional archaeologist.
The submission of a cultural resource management report is recommended following guidelines for
Archaeological Resource M.a.nagement Reports prepared by the California Office of Historic Preservation,
Preservation Planning Bulletin 4fa/, December 1989.
Phase I Records search and field survey
Phssell Testing[Evaluateresourcesignificance;propose mitigation measures for "significant" sites.]
Phase m Mitigation [Data recovery by excavation, preservation in place, or a combination of the two,]
Phase IV Monitor earthmoving activities
COMMENTS: The project area is located immediately adjacent to, but does not appear to
encompass any portion of, previously recorded archaeological site CA-RIV-237. Because of
the proximity of this potentially significant cultural resources site, it is recommended that ·
qualified archaeologist monitor development of the project area as a precaution against
adverse impacts to components of RIV-237,
If you have any questions, please contact us.
Eastern Information Center
DAVID P. ZAPPE
General Manager-Chief Engineer
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
1995 MARKET STREET
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
909.955.1200
909.788.9965 FAX
51180.1
City of Temecula
Planning Department
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, California 92589-9033
Attention: ~C.~< ~$0:
Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: ~/~ O t -'O ~ c~
The District does not normally recommend condition, s for land divisions or .o.ther~la. nd use cases in incorporated
cities. The District also does not plan check ~ lano use cases, or provide State uivision of Real Estate letters or
9th.er flood, hazard_ rep.orts for su.c.h c~_ses. Dis.~ com_.ments/reco.mme_ndations for such ...c~.ses a.re normally limited
to k. em.s ot specific Lnterest to me. uistrict inauoin.g Di.stri.ct Ma.ster urainage Plan tad~itie, s, omer regional flood
control and drainage facilities whicn could be consioereo a mgical componemor extension or a master p~an system
and District Area utainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). Ih addition, information of a genera nature is
provided.
The District has not reviewed the proposed.project in detail and the fo!lowing checked comments dq not in any way
constitute or imply District approval or enoorsement of the preposeo project with respect to flooo hazard, public
health and safety or any other such issue:
This pr.oject would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of
regional interest proposed.
This project involves District Ma.st. er Plan facilities. The Dist~ct will accept .owne~hi~. of such facilities on
.written..requ .~..t of the b.'ity: .Fac_iliti.e.s ynust I~. constru_.cted t.o u st[i.'ct sta.n, aaros .ana. Dis~ct.plan. check .a.nd
insp~c~on Will De I~L~:lUIreO rot IJis~rlcl; acceptance. Plan cnec~ ~nspection ano aaministraave tees Will De
required.
This p.roje~t, proposes channels s!orm .drains. 36.inches o[ I.arger in .dia. mater or other facilities that could be
conslaerea regional in nature ana/or a logical extension ot me aeop[ea
M.a.,ster .D..tain_age Plan. Th.e.District would consider a. cc~. pfl.ng .o~em. ~p 9t s.u .ch tacl. l~e.s on.whiten ..mque.s.!
/ or me City. ~-acilities mus~ oe constructed to uistrict s~anaaros, ana u~stric~ p~an cnec~ ana ins .p~caon win
/ be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required.
.._}/___This project is I. ocate.d, within the Ii.mits .of the. District's lq~f.~ET4 ~ ~T'~'~C~L~'~ Area
urain, age Plan mr .wnich .dm. ina. ge tees nave pe.en_ a.a.olDted; applicable tees s?o.u!d be pa~d ..by cashie.r's
ctS..e~, or money o.raer only to m.e FI .o~:1..Control uistric[ prior toissuance of ouilaing or graaingpermits~
whichever comes nrst. Fees to De paia snould be at the rate in e~ect at the time of issuance of the achJal
GENERAL INFORMATION
~eiS project may require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Syst_em (NPDES.) permit from the State Water
seurce.s Control Board. Clearance for grading, recordation, or oti].er final .approva/shoutd not be given until the
City has aetermined that the project has been granted a permit or is ShOWn to oe exempt.
If thi.s pr.o~ect inv,.olves a Fedem. [ Em,,ergenGy Man.age.m. ent Age. ncy (FE.MA.) reap .ped fl ..ogd plain then.the City should
reqmre me applicant to proviae an studi,es, cacura~ons, p~ans ano.. omer Intormafion req_ uire_d m meet FEMA
reguirements and should further require mat the applicant obtain a L;.onditional Letter of Map ~evision (CLOMR)
prior to grad ng, recordation or other rna approva~ of the project, ana a Letter of Map Revis on (LOMR) prior to
occupancy.
If a, natu~l watercoume or mapped flood plain is imp.acted b_.y this project, the. City should req.uire the a[3p. licant to
obtain a ~ection 160111603 Agreement from_ the L;alifomia uepartment of Fisn and Game an.a a C!ean water Act
S .e~t. io.n 4.0.4 Permit. from the..U.S...Army L;orps of .Engi.n_ee.rs, e.r .written corresponden..ce. Iro_m .m..es_e a.g.en~es
inaica..ting me project is exempt ~rom mese requirements. A_Laean water Act Section 401 Water uuality ue_mncation
may De required -from the local California Regional Water uuality Control Board prior to issuance of the L;orps 404
permit.
Very truly yours,
Senior Civil Engineer
Date: ~,3e~-'
July 11, 2001
Rick Rush, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AND SEWER AVAILABILITY
PARCEL NO. 20 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 28471-1
APN 909-360-020
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0309
Dear Mr. Rush:
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the
boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water and sewer
service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements
between RCWD and the property owner.
If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees
and requirements.
Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an
Agency Agreement 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 Brannon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
JUL 1 6 ~001
01 ~SB:aU 72~F012-T3~FCF
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE. HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY
June 29, 2001
City of Temecula Planning Department
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589
RE: Plot Plan No. PA01-0309
Dear Rick Rush:
The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed the Plot Plan No. PA00-0507 and has no objections.
Sanitary sewer and water services may be available in this area.
1. PRIOR TO ANY PLAN CllECK SUBMITTAL for health clearance, the following items are required:
a) "Will-serve" letters fi.om the appropriate water and sewering agencies.
b) Three complete sets of plans for each food establishment (to include vencYmg machines) will be
submitted, including a fixture schedule, a fmish schedule, and a plumbing schedule in order to ensure
6ompliance with the California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific reference, please
contact Food Facility Plan examiners at (909) 600-6330).
c) A clearance letter fi.om 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.
· Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with Ord'mance g651.2.
· Waste Reduction Management
Sincerely,
Sam Mart~mnmental Health Specialist
(909) 955-8980
NOTE:
CCi
Doug Thompson, Hazardous Materials
Any current additional requirements not covered can be applicable at time of Building Plan
review for final Department of Environmental Health clearance.
- . ~ ~:2~: i'--,l
JUL 0 5 ?_001 ',
i~ ;:
Local Enforcement Agency * I~O. Box 1280, Riverside, CA 92502-1280 * {909) 955.8982 * FAX (909} 781-9653 * 4080 Lemon Street, 9lb Floor, Rivemide, CA 92501
Land Use and Water Engineering * RO. Box 1206~ Riverside, CA 92502-1206 * (909) 955-8980 * FAX (909) 955-8903 * 4080 Lemon Street, 2nd Floor, Riverside, CA 92501
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
EXHIBITS
CITY OFTEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0309
EXHIBIT - A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- APRIL 3, 2002
VICINITY MAP
R:~D P~2001~01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report.doc
21
CITY OFTEMECULA
EXHIBIT B - GENERAL PLAN MAP
DESIGNATION -(LI) LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
EXHIBIT C - ZONING
DESIGNATION - (LI) LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
CASE NO. - PA01-0309
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - APRIL 3, 2002
R:~D P~2001',01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report,doc
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0309
EXHIBIT - D
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- APRIL 3, 2002
SITE PLAN
R:~D P~2001~01-0309 Mosco Lot 20~Staff Report.doc
23
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0309
EXHIBIT -E
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- APRIL 3, 2002
GRADING PLAN
R:~D P'~2001~01-0309 Mosco Lot 20\Staff Report.doc
CiTY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0309
EXHIBIT -F
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- APRIL 3, 2002
BUILDING ELEVATIONS
R:\D P~001\01-0309 Mosco Lot 20'~Staff Report.doc
25
CITY OFTEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0309
EXHIBIT -G
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- APRIL 3, 2002
R:~D P~2001~1-0309 Mosco Lot 20'~Staff Report.doc
26
FLOOR PLAN
CITY OFTEMECULA
PRELIMI
LOT 20 IND!,
CASE NO. - PA01-0309
EXHIBIT -H
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- APRIL 3, 2002
LANDSCAPE PLAN
R:',D P~001',D1-0309 Mosco Lot 20gStaff Report.doc
27
ITEM #3
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
May 1, 2002
Planning Application No. 01-0610 -Tentative Parcel Map
Planning Application No. 01-0611 - Development Plan
Prepared By: Emery Papp, Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff
recommends the Planning Commission:
ADOPT a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. 01-0309 pursuant to
Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act;
2. ADOPT a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-._
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0610,
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 30468 TO CREATE 14 PARCELS ON 32.6
ACRES, AND PLANNING APPLICATION 0t-061t A RELATED
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND
OPERATION OF A 400 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT
COMPLEX; t08,100 SQUARE-FEET OF RETAIL/OFFICE USES; AND A
15,000 SQUARE-FOOT CHILD DAY CARE CENTER, GENERALLY
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, BETVVEEN
JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND AVENIDA DE MISSIONS, KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 961-010-006.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
McComic Consolidated, Inc.
PROPOSAL:
Tentative Parcel Map 30468 (PA01-0610) is a proposal to
create 14 parcels, 12 for commercial uses and 2 for multi-
residential uses, ranging in size from 0.21-acres to 11.91-
acres, on 32.6 acres.
The Development Plan (PA01-0611) is a proposal to
construct 108,100 square-feet of retail/office space, 400
multi-family residential units, and a 15,000 square-foot child
day care center.
LOCATION:
South of Highway 79 South, north of Temecula Creek, east of
Jedediah Smith Road, and east of Avenida De Missions
EXISTING ZONING:
Planned Development Overlay 4 (PDO-4)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
R:~P M~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~C Staff Report 05-01-02,doc
1
Professional Office and Very
Low Density Residential
Open Space/Conservation
Professional Office
Highway Tourist Commercial
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Professional Office
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES: North:
South:
East:
West:
PROJECT STATISTICS (DEVELOPMENT PLAN)
LOT AREA (gross):
32.60 Acres
LOT AREA (net):
9.75 Acres
FOOTPRINT:
Commercial Component:
Residential Component:
BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE:
Vacant (Proposal for Rancho
Community Church)
Temecula Creek
Vacant
Vacant (Proposed TM 30180)
BUILDING HEIGHT (max.):
2.8 Acres
4.7 Acres
LANDSCAPED AREA:
Commercial Component: 123,100
Residential Component: 404,174
Attached Garages: 18,060
Remote Garages: 18,480
Carports: 48,400
Hardscape: 98,010
PARKING REQUIRED:
Commercial Component: 39'
Residential Component: 41 '-9"
Overall: 31.4%
Commercial Component: 27.3%
Residential Component: 37.2%
PARKING PROVIDED:
Commercial Component:
Residential Component:
Commercial Component:
Residential Component:
831 Total: includes 17
handicapped; 396 uncovered;
96 attached garages; 80
remote garages; and 242
covered
593 Total: includes 542
uncovered; 11 handicapped; 9
motorcycle; and 31 bicycle
831 Total: includes 17
handicapped; 396 uncovered;
96 attached garages; 80
remote garages; and 242
covered
674 Total: includes 615
uncovered; 15 handicapped;
12 motorcycle; and 32 bicycle
LOT COVERAGE: Overall: 35.80%
Commercial Component: 33,20%
Residential Component: 37.20%
R:~P M~001~)1-0610 TPM30468 Ternecula Creek Village~PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc 2
FLOOR AREA RATIO:
Overall:
Commercial Component:
Residential Component:
.37
.24
.45 (reference only, no Code
standard)
BACKGROUND
Planning Applications 01-0610 and 0611 originate from a proposal by the Old Vail Partners and
LandGrant Development for the Temecula Creek Village project site. The original proposal was
complicated when the City's first General Plan designated the property as Professional Office. Old
Vail subsequently filed a series of state and federal actions against the City for inverse
condemnation and related claims.
The claims were settled in November 2000. The City Council adopted Ordinance 2000-13 that
established Planned Development Overlay 4 (PDO-4), and Resolution 2000-13 that amended the
General Plan Circulation Map to remove a portion of Via Rio Temecula from the circulation map.
The passage of the Ordinance and the Resolution led Old Vail and the City to enter into a settlement
agreement. The agreement was signed on November 28, 2000, and contained provisions for 400
multi-family residential units and 123,000 square feet of commercial space.
The applicant submitted a Pre-Application for Planning Department review on September 7, 2001.
During this review period, staff was able to address a number of concerns that the applicant
incorporated into the Development Plan. The applicant submitted a Tentative Parcel Map
application and a Development Plan application on December 5, 2001. The applications were
deemed incomplete on January 3, 2002 and the applicant was notified of the items needed to
complete the application. The applications were deemed complete on April 22, 2002, and the
proposal is consistent with the provisions of the settlement agreement (Attachment 4).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Environmental
This project does not qualify for an exemption from CEQA review. An initial study was prepared and
it was determined this project could have potentially significant impacts on the environment unless
mitigated. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program has
been prepared (Attachment 2).
Tentative Parcel Map
The applicant proposes to divide 32.6 acres into 14 parcels (12 for commercial uses and 2 for
residential uses) ranging in size from .21 acres to 11.91 acres. The combined acreage of the
commercial component is 11.9 acres and the combined acreage of the residential component is
20.7 acres. Three primary ingress/egress locations are identified, with a fourth, gated entryway near
the easterly boundary for emergency vehicle access only. The Parcel map also identifies a 20-foot
wide easement along the southerly project boundary for the construction of a multi-purpose trail.
Site Plan
The applicant proposes to construct 123,100 square-feet of commercial space and 400 multi-family
apartment units on 32.6 acres. The site ia divided into four sub-areas. Sub-Area A is a retail and
support commercial area encompassing the westerly 6.9 acres of the site. The proposed uses
include two restaurants, office and retail space, a bank, and a child daycare facility. The restaurants
and bank are oriented along the Highway 79 South frontage to encourage pedestrian access. The
office, retail and daycare buildings are located along the rear of the site, which can be accessed
from the public trail.
R:~P M~001~)1-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc
3
Sub-Area C is the Village Commercial Area located in the north-central area of the site. This five-
acre Sub-Area is proposed to contain offices, retail shops, a restaurant, and public transit facilities.
Primary vehicular access will be from Highway 79 South via a signalized intersection at the easterly
end of the sub-area. A bus turnout is proposed near the westerly end of the sub-area to encourage
pedestrian traffic. The buildings along Highway 79 South are separated by a central green, which
accents pedestrian plaza areas incorporated into the office and retail buildings in this sub-area. The
majority of parking for the Village Center has been internalized and placed away from the highway
frontage. The ends of the main driveways contain parking stalls that serve access points for the
multi-purpose trail. Vehicular access to residential areas from the ends of the cul-de-sac bulbs is
prevented through the use of gates at vehicular access points into the residential areas.
Sub-Areas B and D encompass the remaining portions of the site and are proposed to contain 25
multi-family apartment buildings containing 400 units ranging in size from 820 square-feet one-
bedroom units to 1,256 square-feet three-bedroom units, two pdvate clubhouses with pools and .
spas, and four play areas for residents. The buildings vary in height and are clustered to provide
sufficient opportunities for landscaping and open space. The buildings are also oriented and
staggered to provide varying offsets, which prevents an "institutional" look. The site layout
incorporates an eight-foot wide multi-purpose trail along the southern perimeter of the site, adjacent
to Temecula Creek. The project will provide four public access points to the trail.
Access/Circulation
Vehicular access to the site will be from four locations. Full-turn movements will be permitted from
the drive aisle located off of Jedediah Smith Road and from the main entryway for Sub Area C. The
full-turn movement for the Village Commercial area off of Highway 79 South will be made possible
by constructing a signal light approximately 1,100 feet from the easterly boundary of the project site.
One of other two vehic!e access points will be right-in, right-out movements only, and the fourth
access point is intended for emergency vehicle access only near the easterly boundary along
Highway 79 South.
Internally, the two commercial areas are separated by Sub-Area B, which is a gated residential area.
Residents will have the ability to travel unrestricted through the site. Non-residents, however, will
have to exit the site onto Highway 79 South and re-enter the site if driving from one commercial area
to the other. Pedestrians can walk freely throughout the site.
Based on the proposed uses, the site is required to provide 542 parking spaces for commercial
uses; 814 combined parking spaces for residential uses, and to provide for handicapped, motorcycle
and bicycle parking spaces. As proposed, the site contains 615 commercial parking spaces, 814
residential spaces and meets the Development Code requirements for handicapped, motorcycle and
bicycle parking spaces. Because the site is "over-parked" by 73 spaces, staff has requested the
applicant remove some parking spaces near the drive aisle at Jedediah Smith Road to
accommodate a wider driveway apron. A wider driveway apron would facilitate emergency vehicle
access at this location. Staff has also requested the applicant remove some parking behind Pad C5
to relocate the loading zones in this area.
Pedestrian access to the site will be facilitated by a traffic signal on Highway 79 South fronting the
Village Center, a bus turnout also fronting the Village Center, a meandering sidewalk in the
landscape zone fronting 79 South, and the multi-purpose trail at the southerly end of the site. The
multi-purpose trail will have four entry areas that will enable pedestrians to walk along the creek and
enter the site at a location of their choice. Internally, the site plan indicates ADA compliant access
throughout the site.
R:~P M~001~01-0610 TPM30468 Ternecula Creek Village~PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc
4
Building Design
There will be a total of ten commereial buildings that will range in size from 3,529 square-feet to
27,272 square-feet. They will range in height from approximately 35 to 39 feet, with three of the
buildings being two-story. The commereial buildings will be distinguished from the residential
buildings primarily by their roofing material. The commercial buildings feature a contemporary
arehitectural style that incorporates classical and modern features. All of the commercial buildings
will have a uniform patina green metal seam reof. Tower structures with heavy timber trellises will
also be a common theme throughout the commercial components, and will accent building
entrances. The building exteriore will consist of a painted stucco body with three accent colore,
heavy use of stone veneer, and painted aluminum parapet wall caps. The applicant has submitted a
material sample board that shows the preposed colors and materials.
There will also be a total of 25 apartment buildings, each containing from eight to twenty "stacked"
units. There are no town-home units being proposed, and floor plans range in size from 820
square-feet to 1,256 square-feet. Each unit will also have private patio or balcony space with a
minimum size of 156 square-feet. The buildings will range in height from appreximately 31'10" to
41'9" feet, with 14 of the buildings being three-story. The residential buildings will be distinguished
from the commereial buildings by their hip reofs and use of reof tiles. The choice of materials also
will differ slightly between the two residential Sub-Areas. Sub-Area B will use a faux slate roof tile,
and the exterior of the buildings will combine a stucco body with one trim color, hardboard siding,
and "Jackson Valley Quarrystone" veneer. Sub-Area D will incorporate a reof tile that resembles
wood shake, and the exterior of the buildings will combine a stucco body with three accent colors in
lieu of wood siding, and "Oakridge Mountain Ledge" stone veneer. The applicant has submitted a
material sample board that shows the preposed colors and materials.
tn addition to the apartment buildings, the project will incorporate two private clubhouses with pool
and spa areas for private recreation opportunities. The clubhouses blend elements frem the
commereial buildings and apartment buildings. The applicant proposes two elevations for the
clubhouses. The first set of elevations closely resembles the arehitectural style of the commereial
component of the project. It incorporates features such as the metal seam reof, towers, exposed
heavy timbers and generous use of glass. The alternative set of elevations preposes asphalt
composition roof tiles, towers, exposed heaw timbers, and wood siding.
Landscaping
The project site is divided into four sub-areas. Individually, each of the sub areas meets the
minimum landscape coverage requirement. The commereial component of the project is required to
have a minimum of 25% landscape coverage. The combined commercial landscaped area will
provide 27.3% of coverage. The residential component of the project is required to have a minimum
of 30% landscape coverage, and 37.2% coverage is provided. Overall, 33.5% of the project site is
dedicated for landscaping and open space.
The frentage along Highway 79 South will be softened by a landscaped zone that will incorporate a
meandering sidewalk. In addition, existing oak trees in this area will be protected in place. This
landscape zone ensures that front setback requirements are maintained. Vehicular access points
along the highway will be accented by a landscaped median in the driveway approach. The
medians will also be functional in that they will be designed to indicate turn movements. Pedestrian
access points have been conditioned to use 36-inch box specimen trees to accent their location
(Planning Dept. Condition No. 9).
The rear of the site will incorporate a twenty-foot wide landscaped easement that will contain an
eight-foot wide multi-use trail. The trail will span the entire length of the southern boundary. There
will be four public access points along the trail. The City's landscape architect has requested that
the applicant plant native species along the south side of the trail along the creek. The landscaping
R:~P M~001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creel( VillagetPC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc
5
plans indicate that existing vegetation along the slope of the creek will be undisturbed. A twenty-foot
side setback along the easterly property line will be planted with trees and hydro seeded. This open
space area allows the opportunity for pedestrians to access all portions of the site perimeter.
The project perimeter will be planted with 15-gallon California Sycamores, and existing Oak Trees
along the Highway 79 South frontage will be protected in place. The landscaped area along 79
South will also be planted with 15-gallon Mondell Pines, assorted shrubbery and lawn. The frontage
along Jedediah Smith Road will be planted with 15-gallon Chinese Flame trees. The easterly
boundary of the site will be planted with 24-inch box Fern Pines and 15-gallon Engelman Oaks. The
rear of the project site will incorporate 15-gallon Engelman Oaks, 15-gallon Mondell Pines, various
shrubs and groundcover.
Internal landscape components of the site include the Village Center's Central Green, play areas,
and open turf areas separating multi-family buildings. The Central Green fronts Highway 79 South,
and invites pedestrian activity. Adjacent to the Central Green is a large pedestrian plaza area that
incorporates a fountain and seating areas. The pedestrian plaza is also connected to a path that
leads to the multi-use trail.
The landscape plans also indicate several species of trees that are used to break up lengthy
expanses of wall space in the commercial component. Buildings will be primarily accented with
various 15-gallon trees and Queen Palms with eight-feet of clear trunk. Parking areas will utilize 24-
inch box Fern Pines, Engelman Oaks, and 15-gallon Chinese Flame trees.
ANALYSIS
Environmental Determination
This project does not qualify for an exemption from CEQA and an initial environmental assessment
was prepared. The initial environmental assessment for this project identified issues that could
potentially be significant without mitigation. These issues include Geology and Soils, Noise, Public
Services, Utilities and Service Systems, Transportation/Circulation, Biological Resources, and
Cultural Resources. As a result of the determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a
Mitigation Monitoring Program have been prepared. The key factors identified and the Mitigation
Measures are summarized below:
ISSUE
Ground Rupture/Exposure to Risk
Expansive Soils
Air Pollutants
Noise Levels
Traffic
Emergency Services
MITIGATION
Site development to be, in accordance with
report prepared by EnGen Corp., 5-21-01.
Upon completion of final grading, near surface
samples will be tested for expansion.
The site will be watered at least four times a
day, and comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and
403 to control fugitive dust.
Measures to reduce noise shall be
incorporated into the construction contract.
Sound walls will be constructed as patio fences
for ground floor units close to Highway 79.
Construction of a traffic signal light, and right
in, right out movements for other
ingress/egress locations will address these
concerns.
City will strive to maintain current ratios for
prevision of police and fire services.
R:~P M~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc
6
School Impact
Paleontological/Archaeological Resources
Provide information to TVUSD concerning
proposed number of new students, and a
phasing plan.
Field inspections during grading and
construction shall be performed by City
inspectors.
Tentative Parcel Map
This project conforms to all requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and City application
requirements. The Public Works Department has some concerns with respect to reciprocal access
locations throughout the site. These concerns are addressed in the Conditions of Approval.
Site Plan
The project conforms to all of the PDO-4 requirements with two exceptions. The PDO-4 document
refers to the High Density Residential portion of the Development Code in reference to the multi-
family apartment buildings. Building separation requirements for multi-family units require that two-
story buildings be separated by at least 15 feet, and three-story buildings be separated by at least
20 feet. There is one occurrence where the required separation is 12 feet, and the required
separation is 15 feet. The applicant has been advised and concurs with a condition meet the
requirement (Planning COA No. 17). All other setbacks have been met.
Another area where the project is deficient is in providing designated loading areas for the
commercial buildings. There are too few loading areas and they have been placed in locations
where they may be difficult to access due to circulation issues; or located in areas where they can
potentially block drive aisles when being used. The applicant has been advised and is working to
relocate the loading areas. Some parking spaces may be removed, but the site is over-parked
based on the Development Code requirements, and removing parking spaces will not be an issue.
Staff views this as a minor adjustment to the site plan and can verify acceptability on the
construction plans.
The proposed lot coverage for the commercial component of the project is within the allowable
range. The PO designation allows up to 50% lot coverage and this component proposes 33.2%.
The residential component allows up to 30% lot coverage and staff has determined the lot coverage
fer this component to be 37.2%. Staff feels that because the commercial component of the site is
allowed up to 50% lot coverage (based on the PO designation) and only 33.2% is covered, and
because this is a mixed-use project, it is appropriate to average lot coverage for the entire site.
Furthermore, the settlement agreement supercedes the Development Code with respect to the
development of the residential component. The overall lot coverage for the site is 35.8%. Staff
feels this level of lot coverage for the mixed-use project is acceptable.
Access and Circulation
The Public Works Department has analyzed the projected traffic impact of the project and
determined that the impacts are consistent with the traffic volumes projected for the site by the
General Plan EIR. In fact, a General Plan Circulation Element amendment was approved on
November 28, 2000 to abandon a street on the site, acknowledging that the traffic volumes on said
street would be diverted onto Highway 79 South. The environmental determination on that action
indicated that traffic impacts would be minimal.
The Fire Department has also reviewed the site plan and determined that there is proper access
and circulation to provide emergency services to the site.
R;~P M~001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Viilage~PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc
7
Planning staff has minor concerns wit aspects of the circulation plan and has added conditions to
address those concerns. The trash enclosures in the commercial component are designed with
side opening doors. Staff is concerned that the proximity of some of the enclosures to parked
vehicles is such that rolling out the bins for pick-up could potentially damage parked vehicles. Also,
in the residential component, the trash enclosures are designed to have roll-outs stacked three-
deep, with doors opening on the end. Staff is concerned that when picking-up waste, the truck
driver will need to leave unattended bins in the drive aisle while dumping the second and third roll-
outs. This could cause circulation problems and potential for damage. The applicant has been
advised and concurs with a condition to address these concerns (Planning Dept. COA No 19).
Staff is also concerned that the drive aisle from/to Jedediah Smith Road is too narrow and may
cause excessive vehicle stacking. Staff has advised the applicant to remove some parking spaces
from the area adjacent to the westerly property line and toward Highway 79 South, and to widen the
driveway apron at Jedediah Smith Road. This is not a requirement, but the applicant has expressed
willingness to make the change.
Building Design
The design of the buildings is consistent with the requirements of the Development Code and the
City's Design Guidelines. This project will make a statement of quality of design in a rapidly
urbanizing area of the City. The variations in building forms, height, massing, materials and colors
will create visual interest from the street and set a standard for futUre development in the area. The
commercial component of the project is distinctive from the residential component primarily from the
choice of roofing material. There are other common architectural themes that tie the two
components together, such as the use of stone veneer and open heavy timber trellises. Because
there are common themes in the building architecture, staff endorses the use of differing roofing
materials for the commercial and residential components.
Staff has some concerns with the proposed elevations for the private clubhouses for the recreation
sub-areas. The applicant has proposed two different sets of elevations for the clubhouses. Staff
prefers the alternative clubhouse elevations with some modifications. Staff recommends
incorporating the same roofing material as proposed for the apartment buildings in each respective
sub-area, and also matching the stone veneer used in each respective sub-area.
Landscaping
The landscape plan exceeds the minimum requirements for lot coverage. The City's landscape
architect has reviewed the plan, and the applicant has incorporated the changes. Landscaped
setback areas, finger planters in parking areas, and trees to soften the impacts of large wall
expanses have been provided and placed to the satisfaction of staff, and meets the Development
Code standards. Staff feels the landscaping could be enhanced by providing larger specimen trees
(24-inch box minimum) along the frontage of Highway 79 South, and to incorporate even larger
specimen trees (36-inch box) at access points and other areas of interest. Staff feels that varying
the height of the tree canopy around the project perimeter would be more visually stimulating
(Planning Dept. COA Nos. 7 and 9).
The multi-purpose trail along the south side of the project will provide a visually pleasing passive
recreation opportunity. The final design of the trail has been conditioned to be reviewed and
approved by the Community Services Department. The easement for the trail also provides
additional buffering away from the 100-year flood plain. The Community Services Department has
st
conditioned the developer to construct the trail prior to the issuance of the 221 residential building
permit. The property owner or a private maintenance association has also been conditioned to
maintain all open space and recreation areas.
R:~P M~2001~)1-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~PC Staff Repor105-01-02,doc
8
A condition of approval will require that a one-year landscape maintenance bond be submitted prior
to occupancy of the fist unit. Also, the project is conditioned to locate parking lot lighting such that it
will not impede the growth potential of parking lot trees.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
Staff has determined that the proposed project is consistent with the City's Design Guidelines and
conforms to all applicable development regulations, and is consistent with the Settlement
Agreement. Staff recommends approval of Tentative Parcel Map 30468 and the associated
Development Plan subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
FINDINGS
Tentative Parcel Map (Section 16.09.140 A-H)
· 1.
The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are
consistent with the Subdivision Ordinance, Development Code, General Plan, and the City
of Temecula Municipal Code;
Staff has reviewed the proposal and finds that Tentative Parcel Map No. 30468 is
consistent with the General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance, the Development Code, and
the Municipal Code.
The tentative map does not divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant
to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the land is subject to a Land
conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will not be
too small to sustain their agricultural use;
The proposed land division is not land designated for conservation or agricultural use.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed
by the tentative map;
The project consists of a Parcel Map on property designated for Professional Office uses,
which is consistent with the General Plan, as well as, the development standards for the
PDO-4 zoning designation.
The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval,
are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidable
injure fish or wildlife or their habitat;
Per the CEQA Guidelines, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this
project. The proposed Mitigation Monitoring Program will ensure that the impacts are not
likely to cause significant damage to the environment.
The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious
public health problems;
The project has been reviewed and commented on by the Fire Safety Division, the Building
Safety Division, Public Works, Community Services and Planning Staff. As a result, the
project will be conditioned to address all concerns. Further, provisions are made in the
General Plan and the Development Code to ensure that the public health, safety and
welfare are safeguarded. The project is consistent with these documents.
R:~P M~001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecuta Creek Village~PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc
9
6. The d~sign of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling
opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible;
There are solar possibilities available to the tentative parcel map; however, the applicant
has not submitted any information in regard to solar possibilities.
The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements
acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed
subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to
those previously acquired by the public will be provided;
The Public Works Department, expressed concerns regarding potential conflicts with
easements or accesses during the project review stage. The concerns expressed by
Publics Works have already been addressed, or will be addressed in the Conditions of
Approval.
8. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby);
The applicant is responsible for payment of fees, which will address the City's parkland
dedication requirements.
Development Plan (Section 17.05.010 F)
1. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan and with all applicable
requirements of state law and other City Ordinances.
The plan to develop 123,100 square-feet of commercial space and 400 multi-family
apartment units on 32.6 acres is consistent with the PDO-4 policies and development
regulations, and the terms of the Settlement Agreement. The proposed plan incorporates
architectural and landscape designs, which will enhance land use objectives along Highway
79 South.
2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety, and general welfare.
The project has been conditioned to conform to the Uniform Building. Code, and all
construction will be inspected by City staff prior to occupancy. The Fire Department staff
has also found that the site design will provide adequate emergency access in the case of a
need for emergency response to the site.
Attachments:
1. PC Resolution - Blue Page 11
A. Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 15
2. Initial Study - Blue Page 16
Under Separate Cover
3. Exhibits - Blue Page 17
A. Vicinity Map
B. General Plan Map / Zoning Map
C. Tentative Parcel Map 30468
D. Site Plan
E. Grading Plan
F. Building Elevations
G. Floor Plans
H. Landscape Plan
4. Settlement Agreement (11-28-00) Blue Page 26
R:~P M~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~PC Staff Report 05-01-02,doc
10
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
R:~ M~001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~C Staff Report 05-01-02,doc
11
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 0'1-06t0,
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 30468 TO CREATE 14 PARCELS ON 32.6
ACRES, AND PLANNING APPLICATION 0'1-06'1'1 A RELATED
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND
OPERATION OF A 400 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT
COMPLEX; '108,100 SQUARE-FEET OF RETAIL/OFFICE USES; AND A
15,000 SQUARE-FOOT CHILD DAY CARE CENTER, GENERALLY
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, BETWEEN
JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND AVENIDA DE MISSIONS, KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 961-0t0-006.
WHEREAS, McComic Consolidated, Inc. submitted applications for a Tentative Parcel Map
and a Development Plan on December 5, 2001; and
WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Applications on May 1,2002, 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 hearing and after due consideration of the
testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Applications subject to conditions after
finding that the project proposed in the Applications conformed to the City of Temecula General
Plan;
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. Tentative Parcel MaD Findin(~s. The Planning Commission in recommending
approval of the Application, makes the following findings:
The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are
consistent with the Subdivision Ordinance, Development Code, General Plan, and the City
of Temecula Municipal Code;
Staff has reviewed the proposal and finds that Tentative Parcel Map No. 30468 is
consistent with the General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance, the Development Code, and
the Municipal Code.
The tentative map does not divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant
to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the land is subject to a Land
conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will not be
too small to sustain their agricultural use;
The proposed land division is not land designated for conservation or agricultural use.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed
by the tentative map;
R:~P M~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc 12
The project consists of a Pamel Map on property designated for Professional Office uses,
which is consistent with the General Plan, as well as, the development standards for the
PDO-4 zoning designation.
The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval,
are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidable
injure fish or wildlife or their habitat;
Per the CEQA Guidelines, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this
project. The proposed Mitigation Monitoring Program will ensure that the impacts are not
likely to cause significant damage to the environment.
5. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious
public health problems;
The project has been reviewed and commented on by the Fire Safety Division, the Building
Safety Division, Public Works, Community Services and Planning Staff. As a result, the
project will be conditioned to address all concerns. Further, provisions are made in the
General Plan and the Development Code to ensure that the public health, safety and
welfare are safeguarded. The project is consistent with these documents.
6. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling
opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible;
There are solar possibilities available to the tentative parcel map; however, the applicant
has not submitted any information in regard to solar possibilities.
The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements
acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed
subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to
those previously acquired by the public will be provided;
The Public Works Department, expressed concerns regarding potential conflicts with
easements or accesses during the project review stage. The concerns expressed by
Publics Works have already been addressed, or will be addressed in the Conditions of
Approval.
8. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby);
The applicant is responsible for payment of fees, which will address the City's parkland
dedication requirements.
Section 3 Development Plan Findin.~s. The Planning Commission in recommending
approval of the Application, makes the following findings:
1. The proposed use is in conformance with the Genera Plan and with all applicable
requirements of state law and other City Ordinances.
The plan to develop 123,100 square-feet of commercial space and ;400 multi-family
apartment units on 32.6 acres is consistent with the PDO-4 policies and development
regulations, and the terms of the Settlement Agreement. The proposed plan incorporates
architectural and landscape designs, which will enhance land use objectives along Highway
79 South.
2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health,
safety, and .general welfare.
R:~P M~2001~01-06t0 TPM30468 Ternecula Creek Village~PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc 13
The project has been conditioned to conform to the Uniform Building Code, and all
construction will be inspected by City staff prior to occupancy. The Fire Department staff
has also found that the site design will provide adequate emergency access in the case of a
need for emergency response to the site.
Section 4. Environmental Coml31iance. The initial environmental assessment for this
project identified issues that could potentially have significant impacts without mitigation. A Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program have been prepared for this project to
reduce potential impacts to levels that are less than significant.
Section 5. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby
conditionally approves the Applications, a request to divide 32.6 acres into 14 lots, and to develop
ten buildings totaling 123,100 square-feet~of commercial space; and 25 multi-family apartment
buildings totaling 400 residential units, as set forth on attached Exhibit A, attached hereto, and
incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all necessary conditions that may be
deemed necessary.
Section 6 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning
Commission this 1st day of March 2002.
ATTEST:
Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
sh
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 1 day of May, 2002
by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary
R:~P M~001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Vii[age'PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc
14
EXHIBIT NO. lA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
R:~P M~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc
15
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No.
PA00-0610 Tentative Parcel Map
PA00-0611 Development Plan
Project Description:
PA00-0610: Tentative Parcel Map 30468
subdividing the site into 14 parcels, 12 for
commercial uses and 2 for high-density
residential use.
PA00-0611: Construct 400 multi-family
residential units on approximately 20.7
acres and 123,100 square feet of
commercial space on approximately 11.9
acres.
Development Impact Fee Category:
Multi-Family Residential and Retail
Commercial
Assessor's Parcel No.:
961-010-006
Approval Date: TBD
Expiration Date: TBD
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 One thousand three hundred and fourteen dollars
($1314.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice
of Determination 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
2. The parcel map shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and
to all the requirements of the City of Temecula's Subdivision Ordinance, unless
modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in
accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request, if
made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
3. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby
agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the
R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc
1
City's own selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to
include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed
officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents
from any and all c~aims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the
City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek monetary damages resulting, directly
or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any
agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative
body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the
Planning Application. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and.
landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable
and shall fudher cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves
its right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the
City and its citizens in regards to such defense.
4. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all
mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Program and
conditions set forth.
5. After grading, all slopes shall be planted in accordance with the City's Slope
Planting Guidelines. Jute netting will be required on all slopes greater than ten
linear feet.
6. An Administrative Development Plan application shall be submitted and
approved by the Planning Department for buildings on Pads C1, C2, C3, C9 and
C10, prior to issuance of building permits.
7. The final landscape plan shall indicate street trees planted along the Highway 79
South frontage as a minimum of 24-inch box for each variety shown.
8. The applicant is advised that Highway 79 South is a state highway, and that all
landscape approvals are to meet CalTrans requirements.
9. Perimeter trees shall include some specimen trees of the varieties indicated on
the final landscape plan. Specimens shall be a minimum of 36-inch box and
shall be placed in a manner that vehicular and pedestrian entrances are
accented and provide variation in canopy height. In addition to perimeter trees,
please add three (3) 24-inch box Chinese Flame trees, and all eighteen (18) 36-
inch box Red Crepe Myrtle trees to conform to the number of specimens
identified in the planting legend.
10. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the
approval of this development plan.
11. 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.
12. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved
floor plans, elevations and the Color and Material Boards on file with the
Community Development Department - Planning Division.
13. 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 have the
R:\P M~?.001~1-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc
2
14.
15.
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, Property Owner's Association,
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. Parapet
wails shall be of sufficient height above the roofline to screen said equipment.
The colors and materials for the project shall substantially conform to those noted
directly below and with the Color and Material Boards on file with the Community
Development Department - Planning Division.
Areas A and C:
Primary wall exterior:
Stucco Accent 1:
Stucco Accent 2:
Stucco Accent 3:
Trim and Bands:
Roof
Stone Veneer
Area B:
Primary wall exterior:
Stucco Accent:
Hardie Board Siding:
Fascia, Trim, Bands and Railings:
Garage Doors
Roof Tile
Stone Veneer
Area D:
Primary wall exterior:
Stucco Accent 1:
Stucco Accent 2:
Stucco Accent 3:
Fascia, Trim, Bands and Railings:
Roof Tile
Stone Veneer
Frazee Desert Fawn (8222 W)
Frazee Burnt Copper (8355 D)
Frazee Safari Tan (7754 M)
Frazee Lulled Beige (8232 W)
Frazee Almond White (8180 W)
Patina Green Metal Seam Roof
Cheyenne Limestone
Frazee Clay Beige (8721 W)
Frazee Daplin (8234 M)
Frazee Lulled Beige (8232 W)
Frazee Swiss Coffee (487)
Frazee Lulled Beige (8232 W)
Silhouette Slate (ISTCS 4930)
Jackson Valley Quarrystone (SP 103)
Frazee Hay Seed (8220 W)
Frazee Daplin (8234 M)
Frazee Festoon (8274 W)
Frazee Burnt Copper (8355 D)
Frazee Swiss Coffee (487)
Wolf Grey Shake (1 SKCB 5969)
Oakridge Mountain Ledge
16. The construction landscape drawings shall indicate coordination and grouping of
all utilities, which are screened from view per applicable City Codes and
guidelines.
17. Ail multi-family residential buildings shall meet the building separation
requirements of Section 17.06.050 B of the City's Development Code.
18. The applicant shall submit a fence plan for review and approval for Sub-Areas B
and D prior to the issuance of the first residential building permit.
R:\P M',2.001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of ApprOval.doc
3
19. The applicant shall redesign the trash enclosures such that no unattended rollout
container(s) be left in the drive aisle during pick up.
Prior' to Issuance of a Building Permit
20. Prior to issuance of building permits, Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions
(CC&R's) shall be approved by the Planning Department and recorded with the
Riverside County Recorder. The CC&R's shall contain provisions for the creation
of a Property Owner's Association for the maintenance of all landscaping on the
commercial parcels, and maintenance of all internal roadway and hardscape
surfaces within those parcels.
21. The applicant shall insure that all trees planted along the Highway 79 South
property line of the subject development be a minimum size of 24" box trees.
The applicant shall revise the landscape plans and resubmit the plans for
Planning Department approval prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Prior to Issuance of an Occupancy Permit
22. All perimeter and slope landscaping, including the Highway 79 South landscape
planter area shall be installed to the approval of the Planning Director, prior to the
first certificate of occupancy.
23. All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by
this Development Plan.
24. A one-year landscape maintenance bond of sufficient amount shall be submitted
and approved by the Planning Department.
25. The applicant and owner of the real property represented by this approval shall
join and maintain active membership in the Crime Free Multi-housing Program.
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
26. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the
Planning Department.
27. 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.
PUBLIC WORKS PA01-0610 (Tentative Parcel Map)
The Department of Public Works recommends the following Conditions of Approval for
this project. Unless stated otherwise, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer
at no cost to any Government Agency.
General Requirements
1. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative map all
existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and
drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted
for further review and revision.
2. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the
Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside
of the City-maintained road right-of-way.
R:~P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc
4
3, 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.
4. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the California Department of
Transportation prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or
proposed State right-of-way.
5. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be
coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements
contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of
Temecula mylars.
6. All on-site drainage facilities shall be privately maintained.
7. The vehicular movement for the following locations shall be restricted as follows:
a. Highway 79 South at the easterly access to the site shall be restricted to a
right in/right out movement subject to approval by CalTrans. The method of
controlling this movement shall be approved by the Director of Public Works.
b. Highway 79 South at the driveway east of Jedediah Smith Road shall be
restricted to right in/right out movement subject to approval of CalTrans. The
method of controlling this movement shall be approved by the Director of
Public Works.
Prior to Approval of the Parcel Map, unless other timing is indicated, the Developer shall
complete the following or have plans submitted and approved, subdivision improvement
agreements executed and securities posted:
8. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall
receive written clearance from the following agencies:
a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
b. Rancho California Water District
c. Eastern MunicipaIWater District
d. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
e. City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau
f. Planning Department
g. Department of Public Works
h. Riverside County Health Department
i. Cable TV Franchise
j. CalTrans
k. Community Services District
I, Verizon Telephone
m. Southern California Edison Company
n. Southern California Gas Company
o. Fish & Game
p. Army Corps of Engineers
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:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc
5
a. Improve Highway 79 South (Urban Arterial Highway Standards) to include
installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping,
and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer)
b. Provide a lane drop transition per CalTrans standards to the driveway east of
Jedediah Smith Road
c. Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Jedediah
Smith Road.
d. Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Main
Project entrance.
10. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in
the design of the street improvement plans:
a. Street centerline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00%
minimum over A.C. paving.
b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard No. 207A
c. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in
accordance with City Standard No. 800,802 and 803.
d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street
frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400 and 402
e. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
f. 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.
g. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable
TV shall be provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required
where adequate right-of-way does not exist for installation of the facilities. Alt
utilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and
the utility provider.
h. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground
11. Private roads shall be designed to meet City public road standards. Unless
otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the
design of private streets:
a. The Developer shall improve Jedediah Smith Read (60 feet curb to curb) to
include the installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter,
sidewalk, raised median, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities
(including but not limited to water and sewer) as shown on the tentative
parcel map.
i) The raised median island on Jedediah Smith Road shall be 4 feet wide,
200 foot long
ii) The roadway ~design shall be coordinated with the adjacent property
owner
b. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90).
12. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil
Engineer and reviewed by the Department of Public Works for any street closure
and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department
of Public Works.
R:\P M~?.001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of ApprovaLdoc
6
13. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Highway 79 South on the
Parcel Map with the exception of five (5) openings as delineated on the approved
Tentative Parcel and approved by CalTrans.
14. Corner property line cut off for vehicular sight distance and installation of
pedestrian facilities shall be provided at all street intersections in accordance with
Riverside County Standard No. 805.
15. All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to
the public or other appropriate agency and shall continue in force until the City
accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all
encumbrances as approved by the Department of Public Works.
16. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision that is
part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said
section. Prior to City Council approval of the Parcel Map\Final Map, the
Developer shall make an application for reapportionment of any assessments
with appropriate regulatory agency,
17. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid.
18. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with
the Parcel Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be
recorded with the map. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning
Department for review and approval. The following information shall be on the
ECS:
a. The delineation of the area within the 100-year floodplain.
b. Special Study Zones.
c. · Geotechnical hazards identified in the project's geotechnical report.
19. The Developer shall comply with all constraints that may be shown upon an
Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to
the subject property.
20. The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site
property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior
to submittal of the Pamel Map for recordation, enter into an agreement to
complete the improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462
and Section 66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the
Developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property
interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of
these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an
appraisal report obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost. The
appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the
appraisal.
21. The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the Intent to
Develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street
improvements.
22. Bus bays will be designed at all existing and proposed bus stops as directed by
Riverside Transit Agency and approved by the Department of Public Works
23. A minimum 24 foot wide easement shall be dedicated for public utilities and
reciprocal ingress/egress access for all private streets and drives.
R:\P Iv~2.001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc
7
24. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be
delineated and noted on the final map.
25. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where
sidewalks meander through private property.
26. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage
facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within
the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be
submitted for review and recorded as directed by the Department of Public
Works. On-site drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way shall be
contained within drainage easements and shown on the final map. A note shall
be added to the final map stating "drainage easements shall be kept free of
buildings and obstructions."
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits
27. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall
receive written clearance from the following agencies:
a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
b. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
c. Planning Department
d. Department of Public Works
e. Community Services District
28. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance
with City of Temecula standards and approved by the Department of Public
Works prior to commencement of any grading. The plan shall incorporate
adequate erosion control measures to protect the site and adjoining properties
from damage due to erosion.
29. A Soils Report shall be prepared by-a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and
submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check.
The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide
recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary
pavement sections.
30. A Geotechnical Report shall be prepared by a registered engineer or engineering
geologist and submitted to the Department of public Works with the initial grading
plan check. The report shall address special study zones and identify any
geotechnical hazards for the site including location of faults and potential for
liquefaction. The report shall include recommendations to mitigate the impact of
ground shaking and liquefaction.
31. A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted
to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study
shall identify storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this
site and upstream of the site.' It shall identify all existing or proposed off-site or
on-site, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff.
Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm
water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study shall
include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading
or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff sha~l
R:\P M~.001\01-0610 TPM30468 Ternecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval,doc
8
be provided as part of development of this project. The basis for analysis and
design shall be a storm with a recurrence interval of one hundred years.
32. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resoumes
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.
33. 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.
34. The Developer shall obtain letters of approval or easements for any off-site work
performed on adjoining properties. The letters or easements shall be in a format
as directed by the Department of Public Works.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits
35. Parcel Map shall be approved and recorded.
36. A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for
review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil
Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final
Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
37. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the California
Building Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit,
City Grading Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final
grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough
grading plan.
38. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee
as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal
Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06.
Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy
39. 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
40. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and
public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public
Works.
41. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans
and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
42. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or
broken due to the construction operations of this project shall be repaired or
removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
R:\P M'~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc
9
PUBLIC WORKS PA0t-061t (Development Plan)
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
1. A Grading Permit for 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.
2. 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.
3. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the California Department of
Transportation prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or
proposed State right-of-way.
4. 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.
5. All on-site drainage facilities shall be privately maintained.
6. The vehicular movement for the following locations shall be restricted as follows:
a. Highway 79 South at the easterly access to the site shall be restricted to a
right in/right out movement subject to approval by CaITrans. The method of
controlling this movement shall be approved by the Director of Public Works.
b. Highway 79 South at the driveway east of Jedediah Smith Road shall be
restricted to right in/right out movement subject to approval of CalTrans. The
method of controlling this movement shall be approved by the Director of
Public Works.
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit
7. A permit from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is
required for work within their right-of-way.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
R:'~P M~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc
t0
11. 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 of ground shaking
and liquefaction.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. As deemed necessary by the Director of the Department of Public Works, the
Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
a. San Diego Regional Water Quatity Control Board
b. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
c. Planning Department
d. Department of Public Works
e. Community Services District
f. Fish&Game
g. Army Corps of Engineers
15. The Developer shall comply with all constraints that may be shown upon an
Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps
related to the subject property.
16. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning
Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval.
17. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements
for off-site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department
of Public Works.
18. The site is in an area identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map as Flood Zone
A. This project shall comply with Chapter 15, Section 15.12 of the City Municipal
Code which may include obtaining a Letter of Map Revision from FEMA. A Flood
Plain Development Permit shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works
for review and approval.
Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit
19. 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:
R:\P rvf~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Ternecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc
11
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 City of Temecula Standard No.
207A.
c. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in
accordance with City Standard No. 800, 802 and 803.
d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street
frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400 and 402.
e. All street and driveway centedine intersections shall be at 90 degrees.
f. Public Street improvement plans shall include plan and profile showing
existing topography, utilities, proposed centerline, top of curb and flowline
grades.
g. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and
adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility.
20. 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 Highway 79 South (Urban Arterial Highway Standards) to include
installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping,
and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer)
b. Provide a lane drop transition per CalTrans staadards to the driveway east of
Jedediah Smith Road
c. Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Jedediah
Smith Road.
d. Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Main
Project entrance.
21. Private roads shall be designed to meet City public road standards. Unless
otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the
design of private streets:
a. The Developer shall improve Jedediah Smith Road (60 feet curb to curb) to
include the installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter,
sidewalk, raised median, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities
(including but not limited to water and sewer) as shown on the site plan.
i) The raised median island on Jedediah Smith Road shall be 4 feet wide,
200 foot long
ii) The roadway design shall be coordinated with the adjacent property
owner
b. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90).
22. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way end pevement
transitions per CalTrans' standards for trensition to existing street sections.
23. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements in conformance
with applicable City Standards end subject to approvel by the Director of the
Department of Public Works.
R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc
12
a. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: pavement, curb
and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic
signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate
b. Storm drain facilities
c. Sewer and domestic water systems
d. Under grounding of proposed utility distribution lines
24. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil or
Traffic Engineer and reviewed by the Director of the Department of Public Works
for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as
required by the Department of Public Works.
25. Bus bays will be designed at all existing and proposed bus stops as directed by
Riverside Transit Agency and approved by the Department of Public Works.
26. 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.
27. 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.
28. The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the
adjacent property.
29. 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
30. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall
receive written clearance from the following agencies:
a. Rancho California Water District
Eastern Municipal Water District
c. Department of Public Works
31. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard
No. 805.
32. All public improvements, including traffic signals, shall be constructed and
completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the
Director of the Department of Public Works.
33.The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or
broken shall be ~epaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the
Director of the Department of Public Works.
R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc
13
COMMUNITY SERVICES
General Conditions:
1. 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.
2. Developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash
enclosure areas.
3. All perimeter walls, trail fences, entry monumentation, parkways, landscaping,
pedestrian portals, private recreational amenities and all open space shall be
maintained by the property owner or a private maintenance association~
4. The Developer shall provide to the City of Temecula an eight (8) foot multi-use
trail easement deed for public access.
5. The Developer shall provide to the Temecula Community Services District
(TCSD) an eight (8) foot maintenance easement deed for the multi-use trail.
6. A multi-use trail will be constructed by the developer as indicated on the
development plan. Specifications and standards to be approved by TCSD.
7. Prior to the 221st residential building permit the development of the trial shall be
completed and accepted by TCSD.
Prior to Building Permits:
8. The developer shall satisfy the City's park land dedication (Quimby) requirement
through the payment of in-lieu fees equivalent to 2.43 acres of park land, based
upon the City's then current land evaluation. Said requirement includes a 50%
credit for private recreational opportunities provided on-site and shall be pro-
rated at a per dwelling uni[ cost prior to the issuance of residential building permit
requested.
9. If additional arterial street lighting needs to be installed, prior to the first building
permit or installation of arterial street lighting, the developer shall complete the
TCSD application process and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the
transfer of street lighting into the TCSD maintenance program.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
1. 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.
2. 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 2250 GPM at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed
sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a total fire flow of 3100 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
R:\P M',2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc
14
3. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per
CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum (based on the greatest hazard
building)of 3 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 400 feet apart, at each intersection
and shall be located no more than 225 feet from any point on the street or Fire
Department access road(s) frontage to an hydrant. The required fire flow shall
be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing
fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B).
4. 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)
5. 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)
6. 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)
7. 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)
8. 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)
9. 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)
10. The gradient for a fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15)
percent. (CFC 902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14)
11. 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)
12. 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)
13. 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
R:~P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc
15
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)
14. 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)
15. 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 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)
16. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a directory
display monument sign shall be required for apartment, condominium,
townhouse or mobile home parks. Each complex shall have an illuminated
diagrammatic layout of the complex, which indicates the name of the complex, all
streets, building identification, unit numbers, and fire hydrant locations within the
complex. Location of the sign and design specifications shall be submitted to and
be approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior to installation.
17. 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)
18. 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)
19. 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)
20. 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)
21. 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.
22. Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled
combustible stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life
safety features: an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific
commodity class and storage arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke
R:\P M~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Ternecula Creek Village\Cond[tior~s of Approval.doc
t6
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)
23. 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)
Special Conditions
24. Prior to issuance of building permits, fuel modification plans shall be submitted to
the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval for all open space areas
adjacent to the wild land-vegetation interface. (CFC 'Appendix II-A)
25. Prior to issuance of building permits, plans for structural protection from
vegetation fires shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and
approval. The measures shall include, but are not limited to, enclosing eaves,
noncombustible barriers (cement or block walls), and fuel modification zones.
(CFC Appendix II-A)
26. Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report may 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, and
NFPA - 13, 24, 72 and 231-C.
27. 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.
28. 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)
29. 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)
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
1. The applicant shall comply with all the mitigation measures identified in the
attached Mitigation Monitoring Plan. (Environmental Mitigation Measures)
2. The applicant shall comply with all CalTrans requirements concerning signal
lights for Highway 79 South.
3. The applicant shall comply with all CalTrans requirements concerning street
trees along Highway 79 South.
R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc
17
By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the
above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained
in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to
make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval.
Applicant's Signature
Date
Name printed
R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of ApprovaLdoc
18
A'R'ACHMENT NO. 2
INITIAL STUDY
R:~P M~.001~1-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc
16
City of Temecula
Planning Department
Notice of Completion
SCH #
Project Title:
Lead Agency: City of Temecula
Street Address: 43200 Business Park Drive
City: Temecula, CA Zip: 92590
Contact Person: Francisco 1.
Urbina
Title: Associate Planner
Phone:(909) 694-6400
Project Location
City of Temecula, Riverside County
Cross Streets: State Highway 79 South
and Jedediah Smith Road
Assessor's Parcel No.: 950-110-014
Within 2 miles
State Hwy #: Interstate 15
Airports: n/a
Waterways: Murrieta Creek
Railways: none
Schools: Temecula Valley High, Loma Linda Middle, Sparkman Elementary, and
Redhawk Elementary
Total Acres: 32.6
CEQA Document Type
[ ]NOP IX]Mitigated Negative Declaration [ ]Supplement EIR
[ ]EIR (Prior SCH
[ ]Early Consultation [ ]Draft EIR
[ ]Subsequent EIR [ ]Other
Local Action Type
[ ]General Plan Update [ ]Specific Plan
[ ]General Plan Amendment [ ]Master Plan
[ ]General Plan Element [ ]Planned Unit Development
[ ]Community Plan [ ]SitePlan/PlotPlan
[ X ]Other Development Plan Application
[ ]Rezone
[ ]Prezone
[ ]Use Permits
[I,X ]Subdivision of Land
[ ]Annexation
[ ]Redevelopment
[ ]Coastal Permit
[ ]City Development Project
Development Type
[ X ]Residential: Units:400
[ ]Office: Sq.ft.
[ X ]Commercial: Sq.ft.
[ ]Industrial: Sq.ft.
[ ]Educational:
[ ]Recreational:
[ ]Other:
__Acres:21.07.__
Acres
Acresll.53
Acms
[ ]Water Facilities: Type
Employees [ ]Transportation
Employees [ ]Mining:
Employees [ ]Power:
[ ]Waste Treatment:
[ ]Hazardous Waste:
MGD
Type
Mineral
Type
Type
Type
Project Issues Discussed in Document
[X]Aesthetic/Visual
[ ]Agricultural Land
[X]Air Quality
[X]Archeological/Historical
[ ]Coastal Zone
[X]Draiuage/Absorption
[ ]Economic/Jobs
[ ]Fiscal
[X]Flood Plain/Flooding IX]Schools/Universities [X] Water Quality
[ ]Forest Land/Fire Hazard [ ]Septic Systems [X]Water supply/groundwater
[X]Geologic/Seismic [X]Sewer Capacity IX]Wetland/Riparian
[ ]Minerals [X]Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grad IX]Wildlife
[X]Noise [X]Solid Waste [X]Growth Inducing
IX]Population/Housing Balances [ ]Toxic/Hazardous IX]Land Use
IX]Public Services/Facilities [X]Traffic/Circulation IX]Cumulative Effects
IX]Recreation/Parks {X]Vegetation [X]Other: Light & Glare
Present Land Use: Vacant
Current Zoning: PDO4 (Planned Development Overlay Zoning District No. 4)
General Plan Use: (PO) Professional Office
Project Description: PA01-0610 is a Tentative Parcel Map application to divide 32.6 acres into 14 parcels (12 for commercial
uses and 2 for residential uses) ranging in size from .21acr{~s to 11.91 acres to accommodate a concurrent Development Plan
application (PA01-0611) for a mixed use development conhaining 108,100 square feet of retail/office uses, 400 multi-family
residential units, and a 15,000 square foot day care center building. PA01-0611 is a Development Plan application to construct a
R:'O PX2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek Village~lOTICE OF COMPLETION Official Copy.doc
1
mixed-use project on 32.6 acres consisting of 108,100 square feet of retail/office uses, 400 multi-family residential units, and a
15,000 general retail building or optional children's day care.
Mailto: State Clearinghouse, 1400TenthS~reet, Sacramento, CA 95814 (916)445-0613
R:~D PX2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek Village~lOTICE OF COMPLETION Official Copy.doc
2
REVIEWING AGENCIES CHECKLIST
KEY
S=Document sent by lead agency
X=Documem sent by SCH
T=Suggested distribution
T Resources Agency
__ Boating/Waterways
Coastal Commission
__ Coastal Conservancy
Colorado River Board
T Conservation
T Fish and Game
__ Forestxy
Office of Historic Preservation
Parks and Recreation
Reclamation
__ S.F. Bay Conservation & Development Commission
Water Resources (DWR)
Business, Transportation, & Housing
Aeronautics
S Califomia Highway Patrol
S Caltrans District No. 8
T Department of Transportation Planning (Headquarters)
__ Housing & Community Development
Other
State & Consumer Services
General Services
__ OLA (Schools)
Environmental Affairs
Air Resources Board
--~ APCD/AQMD
California Waste Management Board
T SWRCB: Clean Water Grants
SWRCB: Delta Unit
T SWRCB: Water Quality
SWRCB: Water Rights
T Regional WQCB #9
Youth & Adult Corrections Corrections
Independent Commissions & Offices
__ Energy Commission
T Native American Heritage Commission
Public Utilities Commission
__ Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy
State Land Commission
__ Tahoe Regional Planning Agency
Food & Agriculture
Health & Welfare
Health Services
OTHERS: ~X California Indian Legal Services
~ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Public Review Period (to be filled in by lead agency)
Staxting Date April 1, 2002
Ending Date A;~ril 30, 2002
Date March 28, 2002
Lead Agency (Complete if Applicable):
Consulting Firm n/a
Address
City/State/Zip
Contact
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula. CA. 92590
Francisco J. Urbina
For SCH Use Only:
Date Received at SCH
Date Review Starts
Date to Agencies
Date to SCH
Clearance Date
Notes:
Phone (909) 694-6400
R:~D PX2001\014)611 Temecula Creek Valage'~NOTICE OF COMpLETIoN Official Copy.doc
3
Applicant
Address
City/State/Zip
Phone
McComic Consolidated, Inc.
9968 Hilbert Street, Suite 102
San Diego, CA. 92131
(858) 653-3003, ext 26
R:YD P~2001\014)611 Temecula Creek Village~lOTICE OF COMPLETION Official Copy.doc
4
Imm
3~11 S~ITH
City of Temecu;a
P.O. Box 9033, Temecule, CA 92589-9033
Environmental Checklist
Project Title
Temecula Creek Village
Lead Agency Name and
Address
City of Temecula Planning Department
P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Contact Person and Phone Francisco Urbina, Associate Planner
Number (909) 694-6400
Project Location
32.6-acres located south of State Highway 79, immediately east of
the conceptual linear extension of Jedediah Smith Road and
approximately 250 feet west of Avenida de Missiones
Assessor's Parcel Number: 950-110-014
Project Sponsor's Name
and Address
McComic Consolidated, Inc.
c/o Markham Development Management Group, Inc.
41635 Enterprise Circle North, Suite B
Temecula, CA 92590
R:kD F~.O01 \01-0611 Temecula Creek Village\CEQA Initial Study.doc
General Plan'Designation Planned Development Overlay (PDO-4)
Zoning
Planned Development Overlay (PDO-4)
Description of Project
Construct 400 residential units on approximately 20.7 acres.
Residential Development will consist of two and three-story
structures. Construct 123,000 sq.ft, of single story office/retail space
on approximately 11.9 acres. Access to the project site will be from
Jedediah Smith Road and State Highway 79. See more detailed
description in the enclosure to this Initial Study.
Surrounding Land Uses and
Setting
(briefly describe the project's surroundings) State Highway 79 (SH 79)
serves as the north boundary of the project site, with Temecula
Creek and associated flood control zoned for conservation located
south of the project site. Surrounding land uses include vacant land
to the west zoned for Highway/Tourist Commemial (HT), vacant land
to the east zoned for Professional Office (PO), existing Low Medium
Residential (LM) homes approximately 300-feet east of the project,
vacant.land immediately north of SH 79 zoned for Professional Office
(PO), one existing single-family home zoned Very Low Density
Residential (VL) located at the northeastern corner of SH 79 and
Jedediah Smith Road and existing Very Low Density Residential
(VL) homes located approximately 500-feet north of SH 79.
2
Other pubic agencies
whose approval is required
(e.g. permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) No
stream channels or wetlands are located on this creek terrace
located south of State Highway 79; therefore, no U.S. Corps of
Engineers 404 Permit or California Department of Fish and Game
1603 Agreement appears to be required. San Diego Regional Water
Quality Control Board approvals are required such as issuing a
Notice of Intent, review and approval of a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Program.
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following
pages.
Land Use Planning
Hazards
Population and Housing
X Noise
X Geology and Soils
X Public Services
Water
X Utilities and Service Systems
R:'~D 1~2001 '4)l-0611 Tcmccula Crock VilIag¢\CEQA Initial Study.doc
3
X Air Quality Aesthetics
X Transportation/Circulation
X Cultural Resources
X Biological Resources
Recreation
Energy and Mineral Resources
Mandatory Findings of Significance
None
A. 'INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
McComic Consolidated, Inc. proposes to develop a 32.6-acre site in the City of Temecula for high
density, multi-family residential and office/retail uses. This proposed project would contain a mixture of
uses designed to allow residents to meet many service, employment and recreational needs onsite,
thereby providing a focal point for neighborhood activity. The proposed project contains provision for a
transit stop as well as an internal sidewalk system that integrates with existing pedestrian facilities,
encouraging non-automotive modes of transportation. The criteria used to design this project are
consistent with the Village Center concept presented in the City of Temecula General Plan. Please .
refer to Figure 1 for the Regional Location, Figure 2 for the Site Location and Figure 3 for the Site Plan.
The Specific Plan for the project site indicates that structures are limited to 2-stories. It appears that
this limit applies only to commercial structures. If this is correct, 3-story residences will not conflict with
the key objectives of the Specific Plan.
The Temecula City Council designated the project site as Planned Development Overlay (PDO-4) by
Ordinance 2000-13 on November 28, 2000. The project area is divided into Multi-Family Residential
Areas, Village Commercial Area and Retail/Support Commemial Area. The Supplemental Design and
Setback Standards issued as part of the ordinance provide for either medium or high-density residential
development in the Multi-Family Residential Area provided that the project is consistent with the
guidelines for the density chosen. The project will be constructed accordingly to the guidelines of High
Density Residential development. The General Plan descriptions of these land use designations state:
Hi(ih Density Residential (13-20 Dwellina Units per Acre Maximum)
The High Density Residential designation is intended to provide for development of attached residential
developments. Typical housing types include multi-family or garden apartments. Congregate care
facilities could be approved as a conditional use with the provisions of the Development Code.
Increases in the density for congregate care may be allowed under special provisions of the
Development Code and may be subject to additional environmental analysis.
Professional Office (Floor Area Ratio of .3 to 1.0)
The Professional Office designation includes primarily single or multi-tenant offices and may include:
supporting uses. Office developments are intended to include Iow-rise offices situated in a landscaped
garden arrangement and may include mid-rise structures at appropriate locations. Typical uses include
legal, design, engineering or medical offices, corporate and governmental offices, and community
facilities. Supporting convenience retail and personal service commemial uses may be permitted to
serve the needs of the on-site employees. The development of mixed-use projects including
compatible/complementary mixtures of office, support commercial, residential, and services, is allowed
through the Planned Development Overlay process of the Development Code.
B. LOCATION
The proposed 32.6-acre Temecula Creek Village project is located on the south side of State Highway
79 (SH 79) immediately east of the theoretical extension of Jedediah Smith Road in the City of
Temecula, California. Jedediah Smith Road is currently only located on the north side of SH 79. The
southern boundary of the property is Temecula Creek and associated flood control and open space.
Unsectioned land within T7S, R2W on the Temecula, California USGS 7.5' Topographic Quadrangle,
San Bernardino Base and Meridian. (Please see Figure 1).
C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
I. Proiect Objectives
R:',D F~2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek Village\CEQA Initial Study.dcc
5
Ternecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
Construct 400 residential units in two and three-story structures on approximately 20.7 acres.
Construct 123,000 sq.ft, of one and two-story office/retail space on approximately 11.9 acres. Access
to the project site will be from State Highway 79. State Highway 79 (SH 79) serves as the north
boundary of the project site, with Temecula Creek and associated flood control zoned for conservation
located south of the project site. Surrounding land uses include vacant land to the west zoned for
Highway/Tourist Commercial (HT), vacant land to the east zoned for Professional Office (PO), existing
Low Medium Residential (LM) homes approximately 300-feet east of the project, vacant land
immediately north of SH 79 zoned for PO, one existing single-family home zoned Very Low Density
Residential (VL) located at the northeastern corner of SH 79 and Jedediah Smith Road and existing VL
homes located approximately 500-feet north of SH 79.
The objective of the Temecula Creek Village project is to comprehensively plan and develop a 32.6-
acre in-fill project within the City of Temecula applying the "Village Center" design concept. According
to the City's General Plan,
Village Centers are intended to contain a concentration and mixture of compatible uses
including retail, office, public facilities, recreation uses and housing, designed to encourage non-
automotive modes of transportation.
The proposed project includes all of the above suggested compatible uses. Specific features of the
project include:
Specific permitted and conditional uses
A comprehensive sidewalk plan within the proposed project site capable of being connected to a
future pedestrian network in the surrounding area.
Development scaled for pedestrian uses
Gathering places for local residents to enhance neighborhood unity
Transit opportunities to reduce reliance on private automobiles
Buffers to protect residential uses from nuisance noise on existing streets
II. Proposed Proiect
The Temecula Creek Village Development is being designed and developed to consist of a range of
neighborhood convenience uses that are compatible and complementary to the existing residential
development in the vicinity and the high-density residential uses proposed for the site. For planning
purposes, the proposed project site is divided into four sub areas (please refer to Figure 3). Sub Area
A, the Retail/Support Commercial Area, encompasses the western 6.9-acres of the project site and is
proposed to consist of offices and retail uses, a daycare center, restaurants and a drive-thru bank. Sub
Area C, Village Commercial Area, encompasses the north-central 5-acres of the project site and is
proposed to consist of offices, retail, restaurants and public transit facilities. Sub Areas B and D
encompass the central and south-central 9-acres and eastern 11.7-acres respectively and are
proposed to consist of High Density Multi-Family residential areas and a private club house, pool and
play area for residents. An 8-foot wide 3,380-foot long public, multi-purpose trail will constructed along
the northern bank of Temecula Creek as part of the project and will form the southern boundary of the
project. The pi'oject will provide four public access points to the trail within development.
6
T~mecula Creek Village INITIAl. STUDY
Uses in Sub Areas A and C have been selected that provide support services to existing and future
area residents. Uses have been chosen that cater to both the pedestrian and the automobile
customers. Permitted uses are indicated in Sections 17.22.130 through 17.22.138 of the Temecula
Municipal Code for Planned Development Overlay District No. 4. Examples of permitted uses include
professional and medical offices, specialty retail and services, banks and financial institutions, barber
and beauty shops, health and exemise clubs, day care facilities and sit-down restaurants. Some auto-
oriented uses are permitted in Sub Area A in order to reduce vehicle trips along SH 79 for auto-oriented
services. The mix of actual uses may vary, but will remain within the respective ranges in the PDO-4
schedule of permitted uses for the Retail/Support Commercial and Village Commercial Areas. The
estimated 123,000 square feet of retail and office space represents a Floor-Area Ratio (FAR) of
approximately .237, well' within the permissible FAR of .3to 1.0.
Sub Areas B and D are the residential component of the proposed project. A total of 400 multi-family
residential units are proposed for development as 128 one-bedroom units, 254 two-bedroom units and
18 three-bedroom units. The gross density of this portion of the project will be 19.32 dwelling units per
acre. The proposed density conforms with the range of density permitted in this residential land use
category. The proposed multi-family residential area also includes a pool, clubhouse, and play area.
If approved, the proposed 32.6-acre Temecula Creek Village project will result in the development of
11.9-acres of office/retail uses and 20.7-acres high-density multi-family residential uses. A minimum
24-foot set back from the eastern property line will be provided to buffer existing single-family
development to the east. The buildings closest to SH 79 will be located at the minimum required front
setback for SH 79. Parking for the Village and Retail/Support Commercial Areas will be provided at 1
space for every 200 square feet of facilities. Covered parking for the residential facilities will be
provided at the required ratios of 1 space for each one or two-bedroom unit and 2 spaces for each
three-bedroom unit. Uncovered parking for the residential facilities will be provided at the required
ratios of .67 spaces for each one or three-bedroom unit and 1.17 spaces for each two-bedroom unit.
III. Proposed Proiect Development
The proposed project would be develoPed in the following manner:
a. Site Clearance and Grading
The developer will clear all portions of the site that will not remain in open space. Once the site is
cleared, grading will proceed in accordance with the grading standards outlined in the proposed project
grading plan, California Building Code Standards, and City standards. It is forecast that grading fill will
balance material on the site, with approximately 50,000 cubic yards of cuts and a comparable amount
of fill, minus shrinkage. Figure 4 shows the conceptual grading plan. Grading is expected to take place
over a one to two month period.
b. Construction of Infrastructure and Structures
As the proposed project is an urban infill development in a suburban/urban area, infrastructure
connections are available for all utilities at the edge of the project site. Utility infrastructure will be
extended to all areas of the project site from existing connections in SH 79.
7
FIGURE 2
Site Location
Source: 3-D TopoQuads, Delorme
Tom Dodson & Associates
Environmental Consultants
avo~ m.~m Hvla~a~r
0¥01:1H~flg HYlOgO=Jl'
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
c. Occupancy
With a total of 400 dwelling units, the proposed project is forecast to contain a population of 1,132
persons (400 x 2.83 persons per household). The 123,000 square feet of office/retail space will provide
employment for onsite and local residents. Given the type of office and retail uses, an estimated six
jobs per 1,000 square feet, or up to 738 new jobs, are forecast to be generated by the
commerciaVoffice portion of the project site.
d. Procedural Considerations
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was adopted to implement the goal of maintaining the
quality of the environment for the people of the State. Compliance with CEQA, and its implementing
guidelines, requires that an agency making a decision on a project must consider its potential
environmental effects/impacts before granting approval. An agency, in this case the City of Temecula,
must examine feasible alternatives and identify feasible mitigation measures as part of the
environmental review process where significant adverse environmental impacts are forecast to occur.
The City of Temecula, is required to identify the potential environmental impacts of the project and
determine whether there are feasible mitigation measures that can be implemented to substantially
lessen or avoid significant environmental effects of the project. The first step in this process,
completion of an initial Study to determine whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required,
has been completed by The City for the proposed project. Based on information developed in the Initial
Study, the City of Temecuia has determined that implementation of the proposed project is not forecast
to cause any significant adverse impacts to the environment and therefore no environmental analysis
beyond the Initial Study and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration is required.
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Temecula will serve as CEQA Lead Agency for the
Initial Study. The decision that will be considered by the City of Temecula is whether to approve or
reject the proposed land use entitlements outlined above. This Initial Study evaluates the potential
effects to the physical environment from approval and implementation of the proposed project.
The City of Temecula prepared this Initial Study. The Initial Study and Notice of Intent to adopt a
Negative Declaration for the proposed project has been distributed directly to all public agencies and
interested persons identified on the mailing list, as well as any other requesting agencies or individuals.
All reviewers will be allowed 30 days to review the initial Study and submit comments to the City. The
Initial Study is also available for public review at:
The City of Temecula
Community Development Department- Planning Division
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Phone (909) 694-6400
Fax (909) 694-6477
After the 30-day Initial Study review period, the City of Temecula will take action to adopt or reject the
10
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
Initial Study and make a decision regarding the proposed project and associated applications. The City
of Temecula will review the comments received during the public review period and the information in
the Initial Study for compliance with the CEQA. Information concerning the Initial Study, public review
schedule, and meetings for this proposed project can be obtained by contacting the City of Temecula at
the above address.
Determination
(To be completed by the lead agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
X
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been
made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1 ) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2)
has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on
attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant
unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze
only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided
or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Printed Name Francisco J. Urbina
Associate Planner
Date: March 28, 2002
for Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Director
R:',D P~2001~01-0611 Tcmecula Creek VilIag¢\CEQA Initial Study.doc
11
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
ao
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
Physically divide an established community?
Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general plan,
specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigation an environmental effect?
Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan
or natural community conservation plan?
X
X
X
Comments:
· a
The project site is located in a rapidly developing urban/suburban area. Residential uses exist
to the east and to the south across Temecula Creek; very Iow density residential development
exists to the north of SH 79. The properties immediately west of the project and immediately
north of SH 79 are vacant, disturbed lots. Interstate 15 is located approximately 1.5 miles west
of the project site. The construction and occupancy of 400 residential units and 123,000 square
feet of office/retail on this approximately 32.6-acre property is consistent with existing nearby
commercial and residential uses and as specified in the approved Planned Development
Overlay District 4 (PDO-4). The type of project proposed and the location of the project
eliminate any possibility of causing adverse impact from physically dividing an established
community.
b
The project site is designated on the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code as
Planned Development Overlay No. 4 (PDO-4). Sections 17.22.130 through 17.22.138 were
added to the Temecula Municipal code supplemental standards and requirements for PDO-4.
The proposed project is fully compliant with these codes. Implementation of the proposed
Temecula Creek Village project has no potential to conflict with any agency plans or policies
that have been adopted in order to avoid or mitigate an environmental effect. Site development
will require mitigation to prevent erosion and sedimentation during construction and during
occupancy, and mitigation may be required to compensate for potentially significant biological
resources located on the property. With this mitigation no significant conflicts are forecast to
occur from implementing the proposed project. Details of the mitigation measures for these
issues are provided under the respective issue evaluations presented below.
c
The project site is heavily disturbed habitat dominated by ruderal vegetation. No habitat
community represented on the site is listed in any agency plans as part of a habitat
conservation plan or a natural community conservation plan. The project is located within the
Riverside County Habitat Conservation Plan for Stephen's kangaroo rat. A mandatory
development fee of $500 per acre will be assessed 'for the project.
12
Temecuta Creek Village
INITIAL STUDY
Based on the site's high density residential and professional office designations, and the infill
character of the project site, the proposed Temecula Creek Village project is consistent with the
village center and planned development overlay concepts presented in the General Plan and
Development Code. The proposed project does not pose any significant adverse land use
impacts with implementation of required mitigation. Potential mitigation for other issues is
discussed in the appropriate sections of this Initial Study. No mitigation is required for land use
issues beyond those that are already included in the proposed project Planned Development
Overlay.
POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
PntenfiaJly
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Mitigation Significant NO
X
X
X
Comments;
a
The Ci~ General Plan designates PDO-4 for the development of 340 to 400 multi-family units.
The proposed project is designed with 400 units and is therefore within the established range.
At an occupancy rate of 2.83 persons per unit, the maximum population that will occupy this
project is forecast to be 1,132 persons. The proposed office/retail uses on site are only
approximately two-thirds of the minimum FAR square footage anticipated in the General Plan
for this site (.23 compared to a minimum of .3), and 23% of the maximum FAR (.23 compared to
the maximum FAR of 1.0). Based on this evaluation, the proposed project is not forecast to
cause significant growth within the City of Temecula beyond that which is planned for in the
General Plan. Assuming 600 employable persons occur within the 400 units, the jobs/housing
ratio for this project is 1.2:1, a net positive for the City.
The project site is presently unoccupied and the proposed project has no potential to displace
any existing housing. The project will provide critically needed apartment housing units for the
City, and equally important, the adjacent professional and commercial development can reduce
the overall trip ge~neration by allowing pedestrian trips to replace vehicle trips.
R:~D P~001~01-0611 Tcmecula Creek Viilage\CEQA [nitial Study.doc
13
Temecula Creek Village i INITIAL STUDY
The project site is presently unoccupied and the proposed project has no potential to displace
any existing population. The project provides essential rental housing that is currently in very
short supply within the City and surrounding area. No mitigation is required.
i)
iv)
GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
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?
Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
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
1801-B 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?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Comments:
a
Fault investigation by Petre Geotechnical, Inc. indicate that three active splays of the Wiidomar
Fault are located on the eastern portion of the project site. The project has been designed so
that no structures a~e located within 50-feet of each side of the fault traces, as prescribed by
Petra Geotechnicai. The incorporated building setbacks are considered sufficient to reduce
impacts to a less than significant level.
14
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
b
A detailed description of the City's geology and soils is contained in Chapter 4.1 of the City's
General Plan Environmental Impact Report (GPEIR). According to the GPEIR, the City of
Temecula is in Groundshaking Zone II which will experience moderate to intense groundshaking
in the event of a major regional earthquake. Geologic mitigation measure 5 is identified in
Section 4.1.3 of the GPEIR and it is deemed adequate to reduce potential groundshaking
impacts to a level of nonsignificance.
A review of the City's Subsidence/Liquefaction Hazards in the General Plan (Figure 7-2) and the
geotechnical report prepared by EnGEN Corporation indicate that the project site is located
within a zone of potential subsidence or liquefaction.
II1-1
Site development with be conducted in accordance with the Geotechnical/Geological
Engineering Study recommendations prepared by EnGEN Corporation on May 21, 2001.
Implementation of this mitigation measure is considered sufficient to reduce potential impacts
from liquefaction to a less than significant level.
A geotechnical investigation by EnGEN Corporation indicates that there is a Iow potential for
earthquake induced landslides or rockfalls on the project site because of the favorable geologic
structure and topography of the area (its flat). A copy of this geotechnical study is available at
the City Planning Department office for review if desired.
Development of the project site will expose it to potential erosion and downstream
sedimentation. The General Plan requires mitigation for projects to control e~osion. Further,
specific requirements have been established under the state-wide NPDES program that
requires every project with ground disturbance greater than five acres to implement a Storm
Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during construction and over the long-term. Best
Management Practices (BMPs) are identified in the SWPPP to control erosion on a site and any
sedimentation generated by disturbing the site for development. Mitigation is required to control
potential erosion and sedimentation. The following mitigation measure will be implemented.
111-2
The SWPPP prepared for this project will implement BMPs identified in the County's
Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). The required performance standard is to
minimize erosion on the site in accordance with DAMP BMPs and to contain all eroded
sediment on the project site.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure II1-1 is considered sufficient to mitigate potentially
significant impacts result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction
or collapse as a result of the proposed project. No additional mitigation is required.
According to the geotechnical report by EnGEN Corporation, preliminary tests indicate that the
shrink/swell of potential of onsite soils is considered Iow. No change in the geotechnical
recommendations is expected; however, the following mitigation measure will be required to
ensure no significant impacts from soil expansion.
111-3
Upon completion of fine grading of the building pad, near surface samples will be obtained
and tested to verify the preliminary expansion test results.
'RAD P~2,001X01-0611 Temecula Creek Village\CEQA Initial Study,doc
15
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
ao
,d.
If fine grading surface samples indicate that additional measures are required, the projec~
developer's soils engineer will prepare the minimum of an addendum to document whether
additional geotechnical mitigation measures cause an additional adverse impacts not already
described in this initial Study.
The project site will be served by a sewer collection system so there is no potential for the site
to have adverse impacts related to use of subsurface wastewater disposal systems.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
intedere 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)?
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, in a manner which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site?
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site 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 which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm
water drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area
as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
16
Temecula Creek Village
INITIAL STUDY
Expose people or structures to a s~gnificant risk of
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudfiow?
X
X
Comments'.
a
The proposed project would permit development of 400multi-family residential dwelling units
and 123,000 sq. ft. of office/retail space. This type of development does not typically generate
any wastewater, other than domestic or municipal, which will require treatment or waste
discharge requirements. No water quality standards are forecast to be violated by implementing
the proposed project which will deliver its wastewater flows to the regional wastewater plant.
Wastewater will be delivered to the regional treatment plant for treatment under waste discharge
requirements established by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. During
construction and occupancy implementation of BMPs as outlined in Supplement A of the
Riverside County DAMP will be implemented which will control pollution to a level of
nonsignificance. See mitigation measure 111-2.
b
The project site is located on an old terrace which has no potential to serve as a recharge
location for surface runoff. Therefore, the project has no potential to adversely interfere with
groundwater recharge. The proposed project does not include any extraction of groundwater,
so no adverse direct impact can result from implementing the proposed project. The GPEIR
addresses water demand from development in the City of Temecula, including 772 acres of
medium density residential uses and 520 acres professional office uses. The GPEIR concludes
that cumulative water demand within the City can be met by the City's two purveyors without
having a significant adverse impact on the environment, including depletion of the areas
groundwater supplies. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan
designation for the property and thus is considered consistent with the GPEIR. Therefore, the
proposed project will not contribute to. a significant cumulative, indirect adverse impact on the
area groundwater aquifers.
C
The project site presently drains via sheetflow in a southerly direction into Temecula Creek and
ultimately the Santa Margarita River. After construction of the proposed project, drainage from
the project site would be routed by underground pipes to an outlet of an existing double 6 x 12
ft. wide box culvert located south of Jedediah Smith Road. Erosion and siltation issues are
addressed in previous discussions under geology and hydrology.
d-f
The proposed project would increase runoff as a result of increasing the impervious surface on
the project site. Currently, approximately 60 cubic feet per second of flows are created; by storm
events; after construction of the proposed project storm events would create flows of 80 cubic
feet per second. The project will incorporate depressed landscaped areas or other measures at
each sub area to prevent siltation downstream. Runoff will be reduced by onsite detention
basins to a level comparable with the undeveloped value referenced above. No significant
adverse impact is forecast to affect properties downstream of the site from developing the
project as proposed.
R:~,D Pk20OIX0 I-0dl I Temecula Creek VilIag¢\CEQA Initial Study.doc
17
Ternecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
g,h
The project site is located on a terrace approximately 10 feet above the 100-year flood hazard
area. The flood plain encroaches approximately 10 fe~t into the property for about 45 feet of
length along the public trail at the southern extent of the property. Two more incursions of the
100-year flood plain occur at the southwestern corner of the property. In one location the 100-
year flood plain enters about 16 feet into the public trail for about 24 feet. In the second the final
approximately 70 feet of the western most portion of the trail are located in the flood plain as are
portions of 3 parking spaces. No buildings or structures are located within the 100-year flood
plain. No potential for exposure to significant flood hazards will occur from developing the
project site as proposed. Buildings will be flood-proofed in accordance with Federal Emergency
Management Administration (FEMA) regulations by elevations finished floors above base flood
elevations.
According to Figure 7-4 the project site is located within a dam inundation flood hazard area
downstream from Vail Lake. Rupture of the dam and release of flows could cause loss of life
and property. The Office of Emergency Services is responsible for reviewing population control
and evacuation procedures in areas designated as potential for loss of life in the event of a dam
failure. Dams are over-designed to minimize potential failures. Typically within a city where a
potential for dam inundation exists there are two measures implemented:
1. The city's Emergency Services agency develops and maintains dam failure evacuation plan
2. The city prohibits critical and essential uses within the designated dam inundation areas.
The City has implemented a multi-hazard functional plan pursuant to the California Emergency
Services Act. The proposed project does not contain critical or essential facilities. No mitigation
is required.
Due to the project area's distance from the ocean and elevation, there is no potential for a
tsunami. The project area is not located near a large surface water body and there is no
potential for inundation by seiche or mudflow.
18
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
do
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:
Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors?
Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
X
X
X
X
X
Comments:
a
The proposed project meets the objective of providing adequate multifamily housing adjacent to
a commercial and job generating development. The overall reduction in trip generation and
vehicle miles traveled will be fully consistent with SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan and
Guide (RCPG) and the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). Development of the
project site with mitigation measures as outlined in the SCAQMD "CEQA Air Quality Handbook"
will not conflict with any applicable air quality plan. A jobs/housing balance of 1.2:1 results in a
net benefit for the project to the City's overall balance.
b
Air quality within the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB) is improving, and development of the
proposed project will be in full conformance with the RCPG and AQMP because it contains all of
the elements identified in these plans to minimize trip generation and vehicle miles traveled.
The proposed project's development will ensure that the emissions will be minimized to the
maximum extent possible and will contribute to the regional programs being implemented to
ensure that air quality emissions in the SoCAB will ultimately be brought within the carrying
capacity of the Basin.
C
The CEQA Air Quality Handbook contains a screening table for operations and construction
impacts. Under Table 6-2 of the Handbook, the threshold for potential cumulative significant air
emissions is 261 apartment units. The comparable threshold for development of office and
commercial development is 96,221 square feet and 50,000 square feet respectively.
R:~D P~2001~1-0611 Temecuta Creek VilIag¢\CEQA Initial Study.doc
19
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
Operational emissions include mobile sources, energy consumption, consumer products and
miscellaneous other sources. According the California Air Resources Board URBEMIS7G
model analysis conducted by Hans Giroux in February 2002 the project will exceed SCAQMD-
recommended significance thresholds for ROG and Nox until beyond the year 2010. By 2015,
attrition of older, more polluting cars from the vehicle fleet will allow all pollutants to remain
below these thresholds.
Table 1. URBEMIS7G Model Summary Report
(Year 2003 Emissions; Pounds/Day; Summer Season)
ROG NOx CO PM-10
Mobile Sources 78.7 75.3 559.3 48.8
Area Sources 20.4 4.1 4.9 <0.1
Year 2003 Total Emissions 99.1' 79.4' 564.2 48.8
SCAQMD Threshold
55 55 550 150
Year 2005 Total Emissions 85.9' 72.5' 511.4 48.8
Year 2010 Total Emissions 63.2' 56' 390.5 48.8
Year 2015 Total Emissions 46.4 44.2 286.0 48.7
'= exceeds SCAQMD- recommended significance threshold
Soume: URBEMIS7G Computer Model, summary attached.
According the California Air Resources Board URBEMIS7G model analysis conducted by Hans
Giroux in 2002, construction related daily equipment exhaust emissions are predicted to fall well
below significance thresholds as depicted in Table 2. The emissions calculations assume 10
pieces of 100 horsepower (HP) heavy grading equipment operating for 8 hours a day for a total
of 8,000 HP/day
Table 2. Daily Equipment Exhaust Emissions
CO 1.9 15 550
ROG 0.6 5 75
NOx 8.6 69 100
SOx 0.6 5 150
PM-10 0.3 2 150
* = emissions in pounds/1000 HP, SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, Table A9-3-A
20
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
Daily construction exhaust emissions do not include diesel equipment exhaust from grading
equipment or fugitive dust (PM-10) emissions. According the California Air Resources Board
URBEMIS7G model analysis conducted by Hans Giroux in 2002, construction related PM-10
impacts can be kept to a less than significant level with implementation of the following
mitigation measures.
V-1
The City will require contractors to apply water to the disturbed portions of the project site at
least four times per day. On days where wind speeds are sufficient to transport fugitive dust
beyond the working area boundary, the City will require contractors to increase watering to the
point that fugitive dust no longer leaves the property (typically a moisture content of 12%),
and/or the contractor will terminate grading and loading operations.
V-2
The project will comply with regional rules such as SCAQMD Rules 403 and 402 which would
assist In reducing short-tarm air pollutant emissions. Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be
controlled with best available control measures so that the presence of such dust does not
remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. Rule 402
requires dust suppression techniques to be implemented to prevent fugitive dust from creating
a nuisance offsite. These dust suppression techniques are summarized below.
a. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of three months will
be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown or otherwise stabilized in a manner
acceptable to the City.
b. All on-site roads will be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or chemically
stabilized.
c. All material transported off-site will be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to
prevent excessive amounts of dust.
d. The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations will be
minimized at all times.
V-3
All material stockpiles subject to wind erosion during construction activities, that will not be
utilized within three days, will be covered with plastic, an alternative cover deemed equivalent to
plastic, or sprayed with a nontoxic chemical stabilizer.
V-4
All vehicles on the construction site will travel at speeds less than 15 miles per hour. This will
be enforced by including this requirement in the construction contract between the developer
and the contracted construction company with penalty clauses for violation of this speed limit.
V-5
The contractor will require all vehicles leaving the project site to use a wheel washer to remove
dirt that can be tracked onto adjacent roadways.
V-6
Where vehicles leave the construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the streets will be
swept daily or washed down at the end of the work day to remove soil tracked onto the paved
surface.
V-7
The contra~or will establish a car-pool program for construction employees which will include
incentives with the goal of achieving a 1.5 persons per vehicle ridership for this construction
project.
V-8
All engines will be property operated and maintained. These measures will be enforced through
the monthly submission of certified mechanic's records.
V-9
All diesel-powered vehicles and equipment will be operated with the fuel injection timing
retarded 2 degrees from the manufacturer's recommendation and use high pressure Injectors.
R:~D PX2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek Village\CEQA Initial Study.doc
21
T~necula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
d
e
v-10 All diesel-powered vehicles will be turned off when not in use for more than 30 minutes and
gasoline - powered equipment will be turned off when not in use for more than five minutes.
V-11
The construction contractor will utilize electric or natural gas powered equipment in lieu of
gasoline or diesel powered engines, where feasible end where economically competitive.
None of the activities at the project site (multifamily residences or the commercial/office uses)
have a potential to generate significant volumes of pollutants or create substantial pollutant
concentrations that could harm sensitive receptors.
None of the activities at the project site have a potential to generate significant odors or create
substantial odor concentrations that could harm sensitive receptors.
6. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC. Would the project:
Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in
either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections?
Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated
roads or highways?
Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
X
~ X
X
X
e. Result in inadequate emergency access? X
f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? X
g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks?
X
Sources: City of Temecula General Plan and Environmental Impact Report, Traffic Signal Warrant
Analysis prepared by Urban Crossroads (Temecula Creek Apartment/Retail Development Traffic Signal
Warrant Analysis) for the proposed project in November of 2001, supplemental traffic analysis dated
,January 4, 2002 and Mamh 12, 2002 prepared by Urban Crossroads for Temecula Creek Villlage, City
22
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY'
of Temecula Public Works Department Memorandum dated February 13, 2002, and Planning
Applications No. PA99-0261 (Planned Development Overlay Area No. 4 (PDO-4) and PA99-0371
(General Plan Amendment to the Temecula Circulation Element Initial Study to delete a portion of Via
Rio Temecula form the Circulation Element).
Comments:
a,b
A Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis prepared by Urban Crossroads (Temecula Creek
Apartment/Retail Development Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis) for the proposed project in
November of 2001 indicates that the intersection of the main project entrance at SH 79 and
Jedediah Smith Road will warrant a traffic signal for the opening year.
Based on the available data, the proposed project can be implemented without causing any
significant adverse impacts to the circulation system. The project is conditioned to obtain
encroachment permits and traffic signal warrant analysis from the California Department of
Transportation prior to issuance of grading permits and prior to the construction and installation of
two traffic signals along the project site's State Highway 79 South frontage (e.g. at the intersection
of State Highway 79 South and the intersection of the project site's main village commercial
driveway and State Highway 79 South.
The proposed project is also conditioned to comply with the traffic mitigation conditions specified
in the City of Temecula Public Works Department memorandum dated February 13, 2002 (copy
attached) and conditioned to comply with.
C
The project site is located approximately 5 miles from the nearest airport, French Valley, and
therefore has no potential to adversely impact any air traffic patterns.
d
Based on the available data, the proposed project circulation system improvements will not cause
any roadway hazards.
e
Emergency access to the project site will be via controlled non-public gated fire access located to
the eastern most drive from SH 79 and via grass-crete along the public trail in addition to
vehicular access provided by a private road entry at the western extent of the property, two
entrances from SH 79 in the central portion of the property and the main entrance at SH 79 and
Jedediah Smith Road. No mitigation is required.
The applicant has provided adequate parking spaces to meet the City's Development Code
requirements in both the commercial/office (Subareas A and C) and multifamily development
(Subarea B and D) areas. No mitigation is required.
g
The project provides a bus bay and seating with shelter designed to be used as a transit stop.
Parking spaces will be provided for 12 motorcycles and 32 bicycles at the non-residential facilities.
No conflict or adverse impact to adopted alternative transportation policies, plans or programs is
forecast to occur from implementing the proposed project. No mitigation is required.
R:~D PX2001~01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc
23
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
issues and Suppo~ling Information Sources
Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
Have a substantial adverse effect of federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filing, hydrological interruption, or other means?
X
24
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
X
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
X
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional,
or state habitat conservation plan?
X
Comments:
a
The habitat assessment conducted by L & L Environmental, Inc. indicates that the project site is
dominated by ruderal/disturbed lands with a mixture of native and non-native trees. No suitable
habitat for any state or federally listed Threatened or Endangered species was found on the
project site. No threatened or endangered species, including no Quino checkerspot butterflies
(QCB), no Stephen's kangaroo rat (Dipedomys stephenst) and no California gnatcatchers
(CAGN) were identified on the property. The project site is located within the Riverside County
HCP for the Stephen's kangaroo rat (Dipodemys stephenst) and the project will be required to
contribute $500 per acre to the HCP fund.
At the time of completion of this initial study, the Riverside County Transportation and Land
Management Agency (TLMA) had completed a Preliminary Draft Western Riverside County Multi-
Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). This preliminary draft plan shows a proposed
wildlife corridor adjacent to the subject project site along Temecula Creek. The width of this
proposed wildlife corridor had not been determined at the time of the preparation of this initial
study.
The paniculate tarplant (Hemizonia paniculata) was observed on the property and is listed by the
California Native Plant Society (CNPS) as a List 4 species, indicating that it is on a watch list for
R:kD P~2001 ~1-0611 Tcmecula Creek Villagc\CEQA Initial Study.doc
25
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
plants of limited distribution. Impacts to CNPS List 4 species is not considered significant under
CEQA. Native trees present on the site include coast live oak, western sycamore, Fremont
Cottonwood (Populus fremonti/) and red willow (Salixlaevigata). Most of these plants will be
removed from the site, but due to their distribution and small number on the site, no significant
biological resource impacts are forecast to occur.
b, c According to the habitat assessment, no riparian or wetland resources occur on the project site.
Therefore, development of the proposed project cannot adversely impact such resources. No
mitigation is required.
d
The project site is surrounded by urban/suburban development on three sides and is considered
an infill parcel. The site has limited habitat value as it is currently ruderal land, old building pads
and patchy trees along a well used highway. The project will not directly impact Temecula Creek,
and indirect effects from development are being controlled to minimize impacts to riparian habitat
values at the site. As such this site's development has very Iow potential 'to adversely impact
wildlife movement.
e
There are native and non-native tree species on the site that may require acquisition of a permit
for removal. The developer is required to obtain such a permit and no mitigation is required to
ensure that the permit will be obtained prior to removal of any trees on the property. ~
Development of the proposed project does not conflict with the provisions of any habitat
conservation plan and, in fact, with the mitigation outlined above should support implementation of
such plans. No additional mitigation will be required for the proposed project.
8. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
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?
X
X
Comments:
a
There are no mineral resource designations nor any known mineral resources on this project site
Because the site is located on a ridge, outside of alluvial deposits, no potential for sand and
gravel resources exists on the project site. No mitigation is required.
b
Development of the site has no potential to lose access to known and available mineral resources
because none occur on the project site, nor is access required across the site to such resources.
26
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
No mitigation is required.
9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
Issues and Supporting Information Sources
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transportation, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials?
b. Crate a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials,, substances, or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles or a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk or
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
,Comments:
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Signiticant Unless Mitigation Significant NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
a-c
The proposed project will consist of residential, office and retail uses that do not involve significant
potential for routine transport or use of hazardous materials or routine generation of hazardous
wastes beyond those normally encountered in urban/suburban "village center" type setting,
typically termed "household hazardous wastes". The potential for significant impacts to the
environment from upset or accidental release of chemicals is very Iow because no hazardous
R:kD PX200IX01 ~0611 Temecula Creek Village\CEQA Initial Study.doc
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
wastes other than "household hazardous wastes" are expected to be present on the site. No
mitigation is required.
d
A review of the Leaking Underground Storage Facilities Information System available at
https://geotracker2.arsenaultlegg.com/found no hazardous sites located on or immediately
adjacent to the proposed project site. Based upon the information available to us, it appears that
there are no hazardous sites on or near the site and that there will be no significant impact.
e, f The project site is five miles from the nearest airport or private air strip and has no potential to
adversely impact airport operations.
g
Development of the project site has no potential to modify or adversely affect an adopted
emergency response plan or evacuation plan. Minimal disturbance to SH 79 will occur from
implementing the proposed project and adequate emergency access is being provided to the site
from this highway.
h
The project site does contain a minimal wildland fire hazard onsite based on the presence of the
ruderal habitat. The proposed project will eliminate the wildland fire hazard on the property if it is
approved. The project has incorporated design features such as emergency access and fire truck
turn arounds as required for fire safety. No adverse wildland fire hazard impact is forecast to
occur and no mitigation is required.
28
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
, 10. NOISE. Would the project:
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Untess Mitigation Significant NO
Exposure of people to severe noise levels in excess
of standards established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
X
Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
X
A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
X
A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
X
For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
X
R:kD P',2001 ~01-0611 Temecula Creek ViIlage~,CEQA hitial Study.doc
29
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
X
Comments:
a
According to the Temecula Creek Apartment/Retail Development Noise Study prepared by Urban
Crossroads (November 15, 2001), the primary source of noise on the project site is SH 79. In
order to comply with the City's 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise standard at the proposed multi-family
residences, the following mitigation measures are required.
X-1
A minimum 6.5 foot high above pad elevation wall barrier will.be constructed ah the first floor
patio areas for apartments facing SH 79. Where applicable, the barriers should wrap around the
ends of the patio areas to prevent flanking of noise into the site. Barrier construction materials
will comply with the standards presented in the Noise Study prepared by Urban Crossroads for
the project.
Xo2
During construction, vehicle staging areas and stockpiling will be located as far as is practicable
from existing residential dwellings.
X-3
The applicant will require that construction activities be limited to no more than the hours of
6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. Monday through Friday and 7:00 a.m. 6:30 p.m. on Saturdays per City
Noise Control Ordinance Section 8.32.020.
X-4
The applicant will respond to any noise complaints received for this project by measuring noise
levels at the affected receptor. If the noise level exceeds an Ldn of 65 dBA exterior or an Ldn of
45 dBA Interior at the receptor, the applicant will Implement adequate measures to reduce noise
levels to the greatest extent feasible.
X-5
The applicant will require that all construction equipment be operated with mandated noise
control equipment (mufflers or silencers). Enforcement will be accomplished by random field
inspections by applicant personnel during construction activities.
b
The above mitigation measures will insure that the development of the proposed project will not
expose current or future residents to excessive groundborne vibration or noise levels.
c
Future background noise levels will be dominated at the project site by noise generated from
traffic on SH 79, directly north of the project site. The proposed project permits or conditionally
permits the development of use such as restaurants, small health club, small
dance/aerobics/martial arts studio (less than 5000 sq. ft.), laundromat, and specialty retail uses in
30
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
d
e-f
Sub Areas A and C. These businesses may operate during evening hours causing nuisance
noise to residents in the development and in the surrounding area.
Therefore, the following mitigation measure will be implemented.
X-6
In addition to ensuring compliance with the City of Temecula General Plan, noise ordinances,
and other applicable regulations, the City will require noise standards specific to each business
in the proposed development, that operates in the evening (7 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and night-time
hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.), as a component of a Conditional Use Permit. These noise
standards will ensure that noise levels at the nearest residences do not exceed 50 dBA at the
exterior wall facing the commercial area, or is below the background noise level.
The noise study prepared for the project indicates that the proposed project will not have any
significant impact to off-site noise levels along the study area roadways or other sensitive land
uses in the area.
Construction noise levels will be above background noise levels during daylight hours, but the City
General Plan requires construction noise mitigation by restricting construction activities to daylight
hours as reiterated in mitigation measure X-3. With implementation of this measure the short-
term noise impacts are not forecast to be significant to the surrounding land uses.
The project site is located five miles from the nearest airport or a private airstrip and has no
potential to be exposed to significant airport operation noise impacts.
R:XD 1~001~01-0611 Tcmecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
11: PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result In a need for new
or altered Government services in any of the following areas:
Potentially
Potentially Sigtflficant Less TI,an
Significant Unless Mitigation Significant NO
Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associates with the provisions of
new or physically altered governmental facilities,
need for new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times
or other performance objectives for any of the public
services?
X
b. Fire protection?
X
c. Police protection?
X
d. Schools?
X
32
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
e. Parks? X
f. Other public facilities?
X
Comments:
a-d
The proposed project is an infill development and all services are already available to the project
site. The development of 400 apartment units and 123,000 sq. ft. of office/retail space will place a
small increment of cumulative demand on the service systems (fire, police, schools, and parks).
Based on a review of the GPEIR all of the service system impacts from developing the proposed
project can be mitigated to below a significant level by implementing mitigation measures
identified in that document. These measures include: Fire Service, Measures 1 and 2; Police
Service, Measures 1-3, and Education Measures 1-3 and 5, as appropriate. The number of
students generated at this site will be offset by payment of requisite fees by residential and
commercial square footage mandated by State law.
,e
For park and recreation services, the City requires developers of residential projects greater than
fifty dwelling units to dedicate land based upon five acres of usable parkland per one thousand
residents or pay in lieu fees. The ultimate project buildout will house an estimated 1,132.5 people
based upon a generation of 2.83 persons per unit. The proposed project will create a 3,380-foot
long by 20-foot wide multi-use public trail. This is the equivalent of 1.55-acres of created
parkland. However, the City of Temecula ordinance does not allow for the creation of trails to
satisfy Quimby requirements. The project will also develop private play areas and private
recreational facilities. The City has the discretion to allow qualified recreational facilities to fulfill
up to half of the Quimby acreage requirements. The proposed project will be required to create
or pay in lieu fees for a total of 5.66-acres of parkland. These fees are mandatory and no
additional mitigation is required.
The proposed project will be required to pay development impact fees. This is a mandatory
requirement of the City to mitigate impact to public facilities. No further mitigation is required.
R:XD PX200I\01-0611 Temecula Creek Villag¢\CEQA Initial Study.doc
33
Ternecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b. Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c. Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e. Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project's projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs?
g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Comments:
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
a
The proposed project will deliver wastewater to the regional treatment wastewater reclamation
plant in Temecula. The facility is operated by the Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) and it
has capacity to meet the demand from the proposed project within its authorized treatment
capacity. This facility operates within its waste discharge requirements. Therefore, the proposed
project is not forecast to cause e violation of wastewater treatment requirements, either directly or
indirectly.
b
According to the GPEIR, adequate capacity exists within the EMWD water supply and wastewater
treatment systems to provide water and wastewater capacity for the proposed project. This
conclusion is also supported by urban water master plan adopted by the EMWD.
c
The site currently drains via sheetflow into Temecula Creek. The proposed project would
increase runoff as a result of increasing the impervious surface on the project site. Currently
· approximately 60 cubic feet per second of flows are created by storm events; after construction of
the proposed project storm events would create flows of 80 cubic feet per second. The project
will incorporate depressed landscaped areas or other means located at each sub area to prevent
34
TemecuIa Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
e
g
siltation downstream. The drainage analysis for the project site outlines the detailed information
regarding existing and future storm water runoff.
Adequate water supplies have been identified by the EMWD to meet the City of Temecula's
current and immediate future demands, including the proposed project. See also 12.b above.
Adequate wastewater treatment capacity has been identified by the EMWD to meet the City of
Temecula's current and immediate future demands, including the proposed project. See also
12.b above.
According to the General Plan and the County Solid Waste Management Plan adequate landfill
disposal capacity exists within the regional landfills to meet current and future demands. Solid
waste mitigation measures identified in the GPEIR (Measures 2 and 3) must be implemented by
all projects in the City to meet the City's source reduction requirements.
By participating in the City's source reduction and recycling element, the proposed project will
comply with ail statutes and regulations for management of solid waste. The proposed
commercial and residential project does not pose any significant or unique management
requirements.
Regarding energy supplies to the project and region, the City of Temecula's General Plan
identified adequate capacity for energy systems. Since this document was adopted electric and
natural gas utilities have been deregulated and short-term shortages in electricity and natural gas
will be experienced until new electrical generation and natural gas production have been installed
and are in operation. This impact is not considered a significant adverse impact at the level of
individual urban developments, because adequate capacity is available but at a higher costs than
have occurred in the past, i.e., the commercial systems are functioning but at a much higher cost
that forecast. The energy availability issue will cause short-term inconvenience during the higher
electricity and natural gas consumption periods, specifically on the hottest summer days when air
conditioning loads are the greatest or during the winter on cold days.
The City has adopted building codes that require implementation of energy conservation
measures for new development, Implementation of these design and construction standards are
considered adequate compliance with energy conservation goals and policies. The additional
energy demand resulting from the project would normally be considered a less than significant
impact. However, as noted above recent shortages in generation capacity may require the new
residents to pay higher costs for electricity or to accept short-term rolling black outs in response to
excessive short-term demand. These limitations will be resolved as new generating capacity is
brought on line over the next few years. This short-term electricity constraint is not considered to
be a significant adverse impact, particularly since the new structures will be constructed with an
awareness of these constraints.
13.
AESTHETICS. Would the project:
Issues and Supporting information Sources
Potentially
Significant
Unless Mitigation
Inconpornted
R:'~D P~200 l'x01-0611 Tcmecula Creek Villag¢\CEQA Initial Study.doc
35
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
Co
Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Substantially damage scenic resoumes, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and
historic building within a state scenic highway?
Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
X
X
X
X
Comments:
a
The proposed project is in an undeveloped area along the SH 79 urban corridor. No scenic vistas
have been identified or will be adversely impacted at the project location from developing the
proposed project based on the surrounding land uses, which are consistent with that proposed by
this project.
b
No major rock outcroppings or historic buildings exist on the project site. The project site is not
located on a scenic highway, but it will be required to meet design requirements along SH 79 to
be consistent with existing development. Removal of trees larger than 6-inch diameter at base
height will be required to be mitigated according to the City's Tree Protection Policy. This is a
planning and design issue for which the City has established design guidelines and no adverse
environmental impact or mitigation is required to ensure that the project conforms with local
design guidelines.
c
The proposed project will be located adjacent to existing single family units to the east of the
project site. Design requirements will be imposed on the proposed project by application of
standards in the Planned Development Overlay District in addition to the Community Design
Element standards and design plan. Based on the City's requirement to meet these design
guidelines, the proposed project has no potential to substantially degrade the existing visual
character of the site and surroundings which is comprised of a combined urban/suburban visual
setting.
d
The proposed project must meet the County's Ordinance 675 requirements for no conflict with
Palomar Observatory. Due to proximity to residential uses, the project has a potential to create
significant light and glare impacts onsite or impacting the surrounding area and uses. Therefore,
the following mitigation measure will be implemented.
XlII-1
All commercial and parking lighting within the project area will be directed so that no light or
glare falls off the property boundary (except to the north on SH 79) to the east, south or west of
the commercial portion of the project site.
Implementation of this measure will ensure that no light or glare sensitive areas are exposed to
significant light and glare impacts.
36
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Issues and Supporting Information Sources
Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resoume as defined in
Section 1506.5?
Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to Section 1506.57
Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Sigr~ficant Unless Mitigation Signiticant No
X
X
X
X
Commems:
a
A Phase I cultural resoumes survey of the project site was conducted by L & L Environmental Inc.
(October 7, 2001). As of March 20, 2002, a Phase II cultural resources survey was being
conducted by L & L Environmental to determine the existence and significance of any subsurface
(buried) cultural resources on the project site; this Phase II report will be completed and submitted
to the City of Temecula Planning Department for review and acceptance prior to the issuance of
any grading permits for the project site. Historic sites present on the site are considered mitigated
for by the excavation and recording that has been conducted as part of this and previous surveys.
If the Phase II report currently being prepared finds any subsurface cultural resources, mitigation
and monitoring recommendations will be provided in the report.
XlV-1
XlV-2
During initial grading and ground disturbance activities, a qualified cultural resources monitor
will be present and will have the authority to stop and redirect ground disturbance activities to
evaluate the significance of any cultural resources exposed.
If any cultural resources are exposed during initial grading and ground disturbance activities the
City will be contacted, and a qualified archaeologist will evaluate the resources. If discovered
resources merit long*term consideration, adequate funding will be provided to collect, curate
and report these resources In accordance with standard archaeological management
requirements.
XIV-3
The qualified cultural resources monitor will issue a second DPR523 site recordation form for
Site CA-RIV-3410 after the completion of site monitoring. The report will include any additional
site features detected during grading.
The cultural resources survey of the project site conducted by L & L Environmental Inc. indicates
that the potential for buried archaeological resources on the project site is high. With
implementation of the mitigation measures in Section XIVa, the potential for significant cultural
resource impact is reduced to a level of nonsignificance.
R:~D P~2001~01-0611 Tcm~cula Creek ViIIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc
37
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
c
d
The cultural resources survey of the project site conducted by L & L Environmental Inc. indicates
that the potential for buried paleontological resources on the project site is high. Due to the
potential for such resources to occur on the property, the following mitigation measure will be
implemented: .
xlv-4
During excavation and hill-side cutting activities, a qualified paleontological monitor will be
present and will have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities to evaluate the
significance of any paleontological resources exposed during the grading activity within the
alignment. If paleontological resources are encountered, adequate funding will be provided to
collect, curate and report on these resources to the ensure the values Inherent In the resources
are adequately characterized and preserved.
In the unlikely event that human remains are encountered on the project site, the mitigation
measures presented in this section in addition to the following measure will reduce potential
impacts to a less than significant level.
XlV-5
If any human remains are encountered during initial grading activities, all ground disturbing
activities in the vicinity of the discovery will be terminated Immediately and the County
Coroner's office will be contacted to manage such remains.
No additional mitigation is required.
15. RECREATION. Would the project:
a. Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
X
X
Comments:
a, b The proposed project includes recreation areas as part of the project including a swimming pool,
club house and play areas. The proposed project will also create a 3,380-foot long by an 8-foot
wide multi-use public trail. As discussed in Section 11 Public Services, the City requires
developers of residential projects greater than fifty dwelling units to dedicate land based upon five
acres of usable parkland per one thousand residents or pay in lieu fees. The proposed project
will be required to create or pay in lieu fees for a total of 5.66-acres of parkland. The project is
conditioned to comply with north bank of Temecula Creek trail improvement standards as
specified by the City of Temecula Community Services Department.
38
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
Based on the inclusion of these recreational features as part of the proposed project, existing
neighborhood park utilization is not forecast to increase significantly. The residents of the
development are IJkely to increase demand for regional facilities, such as baseball diamonds,
basketball courts, etc. However, these are managed facilities where the individual users are
typically integrated into existing leagues and the cumulative demand for such facilities is not
forecast to increase substantially from implementing the proposed project. No significant adverse
impact to recreational resources is forecast to occur from implementing the proposed project.
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number of restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the majo? periods of
California history or prehistory?
Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects?
Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Sig~'ificant Unless Mitigation Sigr~ficant NO
X
X
X
Comments:
a-c
The Temecula Creek Village Development consists of a 400 unit apartment complex and 123,000
sq. ft. office/retail space that is proposed to be constructed on an infill parcel of land located on
the south side of State Highway 79 immediately east of Jedediah Smith Road. The proposed
project is consistent with the details of the City of Temecula General Plan and zoning
designations as delineated on current land use and zoning maps. It is also consistent with the
concept of Village Center and Planned Development Overlay presented in the General Plan as a
method of integrating multiple uses over a large site containing more than one land use or zoning
designation. For eight of the environmental issues discussed in this Initial Study Environmental
Checklist Form (Land Use and Planning, Population and Housing, Water, Energy and Mineral
Resources, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Biological Resoume, Utilities and Service
R:XD P~2001~01-0611 Temecula C~ek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study,doc
39
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
Systems, and Recreation) no potential for significant adverse impact has been identified and no
project specific mitigation, other than standard conditions utilized by the City, will be required.
For the remaining seven issues, project specific mitigation will be required to ensure that
implementation of the proposed project does not cause significant adverse physical changes in
the environment. Specifically, mitigation is identified to control erosion and sedimentation on the
site and to control for possible expansive soils in the Geology and Soils Section. Mitigation to
prevent fugitive dust from impacting adjacent uses during construction and to address operational
emissions is addressed under the Air Quality Section. The project's traffic is identified as having a
potential to adversely impact the local cimulation system and a combination of recently completed
improvements and project specific improvements are required to ensure that the circulation
system operates at acceptable levels of service in the future. The site is identified as having a
potential for significant paleontological, archaeological and historical resources. Mitigation is
identified to reduce the potential impacts to such resources to a nonsignificant level of impact.
Mitigation is also provided to reduce the nuisance noise, from evening/night-time uses on the
project site, to a less than significant level. Under the Public Services section, mitigation is
required as indicated in the General Plan EIR to reduce potential impacts to reduce potential
impacts to fire, police and schools. Finally, mitigation is identified to control potential commercial
lighting impacts on adjacent residential property.
Based on the evaluation contained in this Initial Study, the City proposes to adopt a Mitigated
Negative Declaration as the appropriate environmental determination to comply with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
17. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering,
program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately
analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a
discussion should identify the following on attached sheets.
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.
Mitigated Negative Declaration for Planning Applications No. PA99-0261 and PA99-0371
Amendments to the City Zoning Map from Professional Office to Planned Development Overlay
No. 4 (PO-4) and General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element passed, approved and
adopted on September 26, 2001. Available at the City of Temecula.
· City of Temecula General Plan EIR, July 1993; available at the City of Temecula.
40
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
Mitigation Monitoring Program:
Site development with be conducted in accordance with the Geotechnical/Geological
Engineering Study recommendations prepared by EnGEN Corporation on May 21, 2001.
The SWPPP prepared for this project will implement BMPs identified in the County's Drainage
Area Management Plan (DAMP). The required performance standard is to minimize erosion
on the site in accordance with DAMP BMPs and to contain all eroded sediment on the project
site.
Upon completion of fine grading of the building pad, near surface samples will be obtained
and tested to verify the preliminary expansion test results.
V-1
The City will require contractors to apply water to the disturbed portions of the project site at
least four times per day. On days where wind speeds are sufficient to transport fugitive dust
beyond the working area boundary, the City will require contractors to increase watering to the
point that fugitive dust no longer leaves the property (typically a moisture content of 12%),
and/or the contractor will terminate grading and loading operations.
V-2
The project will comply with regional rules such as SCAQMD Rules 403 and 402 which would
assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emissions. Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be
controlled with best available control measures so that the presence of such dust does not
remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. Rule 402
requires dust suppression techniques to be implemented to prevent fugitive dust from creating
a nuisance offsite. These dust suppression techniques are summarized below.
a. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of three months
will be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown or otherwise stabilized in a manner
acceptable to the City.
b. All on-site roads will be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or chemically
stabilized.
c. All material transported off-site will be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to
prevent excessive amounts of dust.
d. The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations will be
minimized at all times. At no time will 32.6 acres or more of the project site be under
construction simultaneously.
V-3
All material stockpiles subject to wind erosion during construction activities, that will not be
utilized within three days, will be covered with plastic, an alternative cover deemed equivalent
to plastic, or sprayed with a nontoxic chemical stabilizer.
V-4
All vehicles on the construction site will travel at speeds less than 15 miles per hour. This will
be enforced by including this requirement in the construction contract between the developer
and the contracted construction company with penalty clauses for violation of this speed limit.
R:'a) F~2001~01-0611 Tcmccula Creek VilI~gc\CEQA Initial Study.doc
Ternecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
V-5
V-6
V-7
V-8
V-9
V-10
V-11
X-1
X-2
X-3
X-4
X-5
X-6
The contractor will require all vehicles leaving the project site to use a wheel washer to
remove dirt that can be tracked onto adjacent roadways.
Where vehicles leave the construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the streets will be
swept daily or washed down at the end of the work day to remove soil tracked onto the paved
surface.
The contractor will establish a car-pool program for construction employees which will include
incentives with the goal of achieving a 1.5 persons per vehicle ridership for this construction
project.
Ail engines will be properly operated and maintained. These measures will be enforced
through the monthly submission of certified mechanic's records.
All diesel-powered vehicles and equipment will be operated with the fuel injection timing
retarded 2 degrees from the manufacturer's recommendation and use high pressure injectors.
All diesel-powered vehicles will be turned off when not in use for more than 30 minutes and
gasoline - powered equipment will be turned off when not in use for more than five minutes,
The construction contractor will utilize electric or natural gas powered equipment in lieu of
gasoline or diesel powered engines, where feasible and where economically competitive.
A minimum 6.5 foot high above pad elevation wall barrier will be constructed ah the first floor
patio areas for apartments facing SH 79. Where applicable, the barriers should wrap around
the ends of the patio areas to prevent flanking of noise into the site. Barrier construction
materials will comply with the standards presented in the Noise Study prepared by Urban
Crossroads for the project.
During construction, vehicle staging areas and stockpiling will be located as far as is
practicable from existing residential dwellings.
The applicant will require that construction activities be limited to no more than the hours of
6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. Monday through Friday and 7:00 a.m. 6:30 p.m. on Saturdays per City
Noise Control Ordinance Section 8.32.020.
The applicant will respond to any noise complaints received for this project by measuring
noise levels at the affected receptor. If the noise level exceeds an Ldn of 65 dBA exterior or
an Ldn of 45 dBA interior at the receptor, the applicant will implement adequate measures to
reduce noise levels to the greatest extent feasible.
The applicant will require that all construction equipment be operated with mandated noise
control equipment (mufflers or silencers). Enforcement will be accomplished by random field
inspections by applicant personnel during construction activities.
In addition to ensuring compliance with the City of Temecula General Plan, noise ordinances,
42
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
XIV-1
XIV-2
XIV-3
XlV-4
XIV-5
and other applicable regulations, the City will require noise standards specific to each
business in the proposed development, that operates in the evening (7 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.)
and night-time hours (10:00 p,m. to 7:00 a.m.), as a component of a Conditional Use Permit.
These noise standards will ensure that noise levels at the nearest residences do not exceed
50 dBA at the exterior wall facing the commercial area, or is below the background noise
level.
All commercial and parking lighting within the project area will be directed so that no light or
glare falls off the property boundary (except to the north on SH 79) to the east, south or west
of the commemial portion of the project site.
During initial grading and ground disturbance activities, a qualified cultural resources monitor
will be present and will have the authority to stop and redirect ground disturbance activities to
evaluate the significance of any cultural resources exposed.
If any cultural resources are exposed during initial grading and ground disturbance activities
the City will be contacted, and a qualified archaeologist will evaluate the resources. If
discovered resources merit long-term consideration, adequate funding will be provided to
collect, curate and report these resources in accordance with standard archaeological
management requirements.
The qualified cultural resources monitor will issue a second DPR523 site recordation form for
Site CA-RIV-3410 after the completion of site monitoring. The report will include any
additional site features detected during grading.
During excavation and hill-side cutting activities, a qualified paleontological monitor will be
present and will have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities to evaluate the
significance of any paleontological resources exposed during the grading activity within the
alignment. If paleontological resources are encountered, adequate funding will be provided to
collect, curate and report on these resources to the ensure the values inherent in the
resources are adequately characterized and preserved.
If any human remains are encountered during initial grading activities, all ground disturbing
activities in the vicinity of the discovery will be terminated immediately and the County
Coroner's office will be contacted to manage such remains.
R:kD I~2001~01-0611 Tcmecula Creek Village\CEQA initial Study.doc
43
Temecula Creek Village INITIAL STUDY
SOURCES
1. City of Temecula General Plan
2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report
3. South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook
4. .Temecula Creek Village Planned Development Overlay
5. Planning Applications No. PA99-0261 and PA99-0371 Planned Development Overlay Area No. 4
(PDO-4) and General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element Initial Study.
6. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) 1997
7. Southern California Association of Governments "Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide",
1996
8. Phase I Archaeological Resource Survey and a Paleontological Records Review of the Temecula
Marketplace Project-Temecula, CA. L & L Environmental, Inc. October 7, 2001
9. Temecula Creek Apartment/Retail Development Noise Study. Urban Crossroads, 2001
10. Geotechnical/Geological Engineering Study Proposed Temecula Creek Village City of Temecula,
EnGEN Corporation, 2001.
11. Fault Investigation, 39-acre site located on Highway 79 east of Jedediah Smith Road, City of
Temecula. Petra Geotechnical, Inc. 2001.
12. Riverside County Flood Control District "Supplement A to the Riverside County Drainage Area
Management Plans, and Attachment to Supplement A', 1996
13. A Habitat Assessment and Tree Survey for APN #961-010-006. L & L Environmental, Inc., 2001.
14. Preliminary Drainage Study: Temecula Creek Village. Trans-Pacific Consultants, 2001.
15. Temecula Creek Apartment/Retail Development Trip Generation Comparison/Analysis and
subsequent traffic analysis addendums dated January 4, 2002 and March 12, 2002. Urban
Crossroads, 2001.
16. Temecula Creek Apartment/Retail Development Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis. Urban
Crossroads, November 16, 2001.
17. City of Temecula Public Works Department Memorandum dated February 13, 2002.
18. City of Temecula Community Services Department Memorandum dated December 31,2001.
19. City of Temecula Community Services Department Memorandum dated February 14, 2002 on
desired Trail Improvement Standards along north bank of Temecula Creek.
20. City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau Memorandum dated February 3, 2002.
21. City of Temecula Police Department Prevention & Plans Unit Memorandum dated December 30,
2001 on "Officer and Public Safety~ Measures regarding Temecula Creek Village.
22. Eastern Municipal Water District SAN53-Sewer Will Serve Letter dated March 6, 2002.
23. County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health Letter to Francisco J. Urbina, City of
Temecula Associate Planner dated December 19, 2002.
24. Rancho California Water District Letter on Water Availability dated December 20, 2001.
25. Southern California Gas Company Letter dated January 3, 2002 stating they have no comments
at this time.
26. Temecula Creek Apartment/Retail Development Noise Study prepared by Urban Crossroads
(November 15, 2001 ),
44
~z ~ _~ o~
E~~ ~ 8
0
E'~E
_CWO,DOE
0
e
0
0
0
ul
~ .90 .c: .e_ c o
0 [:
n- ~ E o-~
.- co
oe.-~ oe.-~
~E~ ~E ·
0
>, E.= ~
'o ~ ~..c:o
0 I- co (~
>.EmO
E ~o.~
,~,, ~'~ > o
o ,-= ~.c 8-~.c ~-
~E ~E ~E
>,E
>,E
r.)l-
(.9
PROJECT TRAFFIC ANALYIS
&
AGENCY COMMENTS
J~J MAR 1 3
By
URBAN
To: Ali Mogtmcmm, P.F_ ~
Irma g09.1~4-~75 ~
J~4l t~o: 00~0 Dmm
2O02
~ U~gen~ . E~ For RmK~w
rl ~ Reply
RECEIVED
March 12, 2002
Mr. Ron Finch
MCCOMIC CONSOLIDATED, INC.
g968 Hilt)ed St., Surge 102
San Diego. CA 92131
Subject:
Temecula Creek Apartment/Retail Development Initial
Study, SR-?9/Main Project Drfveway Inteme~ion Traffic
Control
Dear Mr.. Finch:
The firm of Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to submit this memorandum
evaluating the SR-79/Main Project Driveway Intemection Traffic Control. The
discussion presented below is based on the findings of the traffic study
prepared for the Temecula Creek Apa~,;ent/Retail Development dated
September 24, 2001.
~ b~c study ir~licated that a traffic signal would be required at the
intersection of the Main Project Driveway and SR-79 South. This finding was
based on the planning level warrants conducted for Opening Year condi~na
with the proposed project traffic.
Attachment 'A" contains an analysis of anticipated ~onditiona with a cross-
=i, uet stop, rather than a traffic signal at the study area interaeclldn. Based
onthis unsignalized analysis, it is expected that the intersection will operate
at an unacceptable Level of ,Service (F) during both the AM and PM peak
hours.
A right in/right out only driveway could be provided at the Main Project r~
Driveway and $R-79 South instead of the Iratfic signal. This access
restriction would eliminate the critical movements {left tums) and allow this
Intersection to operate acceptably. However, trafflo would be rerouted to
InClude addilbnal U.turn~ at upstream and downstream inteman~ns.
If'you have any questions regarding the analysis presented in this report,
please do not hesitate to give me a call at (g4g) 660-1gg4.
Sincerely,
URBAN CROSSROADS~ IN(;:.
Scott Sato, P.E.
Senior Associate
$s:m
Altachments
Volumm
Bale Vo~: 0 0 0
~ Ad~; ~.06 1.06
~C~ O~J 0 0 0
~ ~1: 43 0 6S
~s~VoL~ 0 0 0
Uae: ~ X.O0 2.00
~: 2.00 2.00 2.00
~ vo2~: 43 o ss
~C ~1: 0 0 0
Y~ V~.: 43 0 65
~L~I ~p ~e:
0 0 0 1307 -0 0 2358 0
0 0 O 3.305 0 0 2499 0
0 0 0 68~ 34 ~6 8S~ G
0 0 0 0 O O 0 O
0 O 0 2074 34 ?6 336S 0
1.00 1.00 2.C0 L.00 1.00 2.00 Z.00 L.00
X.O0 1.00 2.CO Z.0O 1.00 1.00 1.00 l. O0
0 0 0 2074 34 7E 33W~ O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2074 34 76 3365 G
]rol],~:n~t~p'~:ron~ 3.S :~ 2,3 ~ x2ooc x~ 2ocx:xx ~ w 2.2 ~ ~
~p.: S ~ 391 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 364 ~ ~
............ · f ............. ~-f] ............... fl ............... fJ ...............
~mAt: LT - L~ - ~ ~ - L~ - ~ LT - L~ - ~ ~ - ~ - ~
~: 20SS.O ~ ~
~'L-af£~x 7.S.101S (c) 2000 DOYX~ ~eoc~. ~-icenJed Co URBAN C]tOSSROADS, ZRV'~K
3 zooz
M~ZG8 o FI~ ~PeaJc (0¥.9) Mort N~r 11, 2002 ~:37:40 ~ge
Te~la ~k ~/ReCa~
~ Year W~ ~e~C
Avenge Oo~ ;~/veb): 387.8 .WOZSC ~ee
............ J ............... lJ ...............
~ee: 1 0 0 0 1 O 0 0 0 O O O .
............ I ........ ~ ...... ~ ...............
VO2UiM Nodule,
(2r~ Ad:l:
1,,~ I::La.]. Bls: 0 0
Ad,ed Vol: 20 0
hemed~*ol: 0 0
Znil;ial FL~: aO 0
Ole= Ad]: ,X. 00 3.00
Ad:J, 0.98 0.94
VoluM~ 21 0
hducf: Vol: 0 0
Final Vol.: 21 0
~T'~. CLca3 Ctp:
0 0 0 O O 2?48 0 8 1832 0
1.06 1.06 1.Dfc 1.06 1.04 1.04 1.08 1.04 1.06 1.06
0 0 0 0 0 2934 0 0 X~I2
30 0 0 0 0 1031 20 4S 843 O
0 0 0 0 0 8 0 4 0
30 0 0 0 0 394S 20 45 2?05
'-,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0G 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 O.~S O.SIS 0.94 0.98 0.9Il 0.85 O,PS 0.04
32 0 0 0 0 4274 21 4? 2831 0
0 o o o 0 0 0 o o 0
32 0 O 0 0 4174 21 47 2831 0
~..~ 7,S.I014 (C) aooo ~o~l~g Assoc. License~ t:o iIRaMf C~SSROA~M, l:Jwl:HR
MAR 1 3 200Z
By~
$~Ke 210
~rvine, CA 92606
p~ g4g.660.1994
~ 9a9.660.1911
TRANSPORTATION
PLANNING
TRAVEL DEMAND
MODEUNG
DATABASE
DEVELOPMENT
GIS
TRAFFIC
~NGINEERING
ACOUSTICAL
STUDIES
PARKING STUDIES
TR~J:FIC
IMPACT STUDIES
John Kain, AICP
Carleton Water~, RE.
Bill Law,on, AICP
5colt Sato, P.E.
3anuary 4,2002
By
Mr. Ron Finch
MCCOMIC CONSOLIDATED, INC.
9968 Hilbert St., Suite 102
San Diego, CA 92131
RECEIVE
SUBJECT:
Temecula Creek
Development Trip
Comparison/Analysis
Apartment/Retail
Generation
Dear Mr. Finch,
INTRODUCTION
The firm of Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to submit this letter
report documenting the previous and proposed trip generation
estimates for the Temecula Creek Apartment/Retail
development. The site is located south of Highway 79 between
Jedediah Smith Road and Avenida De Missiones in the City of
Temecula.
The previous land use alternative (included in the February 29,
2000 traffic study) consisted of 400 apartment dwelling units,
30,000 square feet of office use, and 93,000 square feet of
commercial retail use, Based on these land use estimates,
approximately 10,260 trips per day are expected with 414 trips
occurring during the AM peak hour and 985 trips occurring during
the PM peak hour.
A supplemental analysis conducted in August 2000, concluded
that if the project site were to be developed with 646,866 square
feel of office uses and 65,341 square feet of support retail, a total
of 10,775 daily vehicle trips would be generated with 945 trip
occurring during the AM peak hour and 1,275 trips occurring
during the PM peak hour. Based on this land use proposal,
approximately 495 fewer daily trips, 531 fewer AM peak hour
trips, and 290 fewer PM peak hour trips are expected to occur in
comparison to the February 2000 traffic study.
TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS
Based on comments provided by City staff, the trip generation for
a 15,000 square foot day care center was requested. Table I
Mr. Ron Finch
MCCOMIC CONSOLIDATED, INC.
Janua~ 4,2002
Page 2
indicates the rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), 1997 edition for
this use. Trip rates are also presented for a similar amount of commerciaJ retail uses.
Table 2 shows a comparison of trips generated by a day care and a commercial retail
development of the same size. As indicated in Table 2, a commercial retail
development of the same size would generate approximately 824 more trips per day,
but 139 fewer trips during the AM peak hour, and 19 fewer trips during the PM peak
hour.
If a 15,000 square food day care center is currently being proposed, and will replace a
similar amount of commercial retail use, peak hour trips at the study area intersections
will increase slightly.
If you have any questions regarding the analysis presented in this report, please do not
hesitate to give me a call at (949.) 660-1994.
Sincerely,
UI
Scott Sato, P.I
003~0-07
SS:jr
Attachments
TABLE 1
TRIP GENERATION RATES~
LAND USE ITE CODE QUANTIT'~
Day Care Center 565 15
Commercial Retail 820 15
UNITSz
TSF
TSF
PEAK HOUR TRiP RATES
AM PM
IN OUT IN J OUT
6,74 5.97 6.20 J 7.00
2,10 1.34 5.74 I 6.22
DAILY RATE
79.26
134.19
Source; ITE [Institu(e oi'Transportation Engineers) Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition. 1997.
TSF = thousand square fee[
UAUcJobst00380~excel~[00380*05.xJs]FinalTG tale s
TABLE 2
TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
LAND USE
Day Care Center
Commercial Retail
IDifference
~UANTIT~
15
15
UNITS~ t IN
TSF
TSF 130;
J 69
PEAK HOUR
AM
OUT IN
90 I 93
20 86
70 I 7
OUT DAILY
105 J 1,189
93 2,013
'~2 J -824
~ TSF = thousand square feet
DU = Dwelling Units
STU = Students
z Nora = Nominal
U:~UcJobst,00380\excel\[00380-05.xls]FinaITG rates
41 CO:
I~ne, CA,
STUDIES
Carleton ~
November 16, 2001
Mr. Ron Finch
MCCOMIC CONSOLIDATED, INC.
9968 Hilbert St., Suite 102
San Diego, CA 92131
RECEIVED
MDMG, INC.
OEC 0 6 ZOO1' ~
SUBJECT:
B
Temecula Creek Apartme
Development Traffic Signal Warrant
Analysis
Dear Mr. Finch,
INTRODUCTION
The firm of Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to submit this letter
report presenting the findings for the traffic signal warrant analysis
conducted for the main entrance of the traffic signal warrant
analysis of the Temecula Creek Apartment/Retail development.
This site is located south of Highway 79 between Jedediah Smith
Road and Avenida De Missiones in the City of Temecula. The
proposed site will include a 400 dwelling unit apartment complex
and 123,000 square feet of commemial retail/office uses. The
determination of whether a traffic signal is required at the project
driveway is based on the anticipated traffic volumes for Opening
Year with project conditions. Therefore, this letter report
describes the anticipated traffic due to the proposed project and
the expected traffic due to ambient growth (including cumulative
projects).
TRIP GENERATION
Trip generation of this site was derived using rates from the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), 1997 edition as shown
in Table 1. Table 2 shows that this project would generate a dally
total of 8,716 vehicular trips with 386 trips occurring during the AM
peak hour and 864 trips occurring during the PM peak hour.
TRIP DISTRIBUTION
Tdp distribution represents the directional orientation of traffic to and
from the project site. Trip distribution is heavily influenced by the
Mr, Ron Filch
MCCOMIC CONSOLIDATED, INC
November 16, 2001
Page 2
geographical location of the site, the location of residential, commercial, employment and
recreational opportunities and the proximity to the regional freeway system. The
directional orientation of traffic was determined by evaluating existing and proposed land
uses and highways within the community and existing traffic volumes. The trip distribution
pattern for the proposed project is graphically depicted on Exhibit A.
TRIP ASSIGNMENT
The assignment of traffic from the site to the adjoining roadway system has been based
upon the site's trip generation, trip distribution, proposed arterial highway and local street
systems. Based on the identified project traffic generation and distribution, project related
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes are shown on Exhibit B.
To assess Opening Year traffic conditions, project traffic is combined with existing traffic,
other development and areawide growth. The study year (Opening Year) for analysis
purposes in this report is 2004. Year 2004 traffic volumes have been calculated based on
a 2.0 percent annual growth rata of existing traffic volumes over a 3 year period for the
Year 2001 traffic data. The areawide growth rate has been provided by the City of
Temecula staff.
Exhibit C shows the ADT volumes which can be expected for Opening Year with project
traffic conditions.
WARRANT ANALYSIS RESULTS
For Opening Year with project traffic conditions, a traffic signal is projected to be warranted
at the intersection of the main project entrance and SR-79. Appendix *A" contains the
planning-level traffic signal warrants for this location.
Urban Crossroads, Inc. recommends the installation of a traffic signal at the site
entrance and Winchester Road in conjunction with development. The results of the
signal wan'ant indicated that the intersection of Winchester Road and the main project
entrance meet the minimum warrants for a traffic signal.
If you have any questions regarding the analysis presented in this report, please do not
h~sitate to give ~9),660-1994.
00380-04
SS:ko
Attachments
TABLE 1
TRIP GENERATION RATES
LAND USE IN
Apartments 0.08
Commercial Retail (93 TSF) 1.00
Office (30 TSF) 2.10
UNiTS~
'DU
TSF
TSF
PEAK HOUR
AMi I PM
, OUT IN OUT
I 0.43 0.42 0.20
0.64 3.09 3.35
0.29 0.64 3.12
DAILY
6.63
69.96
17.55
~ DU = Dwelling Units
TSF = Thousand Square Feet
2 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trio Generation, Sixth Edition, 1997, Land
Use Categories 220, 710 and 820.
U:~UcJobs~00380~axce~00380-O4.xls]T 4-2
TABLE 2
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
LAND USE
Apartment
Commercial Retail (93 TSF)
Office (30 TSF)
ISubtotal
[Internal Cal3ture (10%)
~otal
QUANTITY UNITS~
400 DU
93.0 TSF
30,0 TSF
PEAK HOUR
AM I PM
IN OUT IN OUT DAILY
32 172 168 80 2,552
93 60 287 312 5,506
63 9 19 94 527
les I 241 474 I 486 9,685
-19 I -24 I -47 I -49 I -969
169 I 217 I 427 I 437 I 8,716
~ DU = Dwelling Units
TSF = Thousand Square Feet
U:\UcJobs~00380~exce~00380-O4.xls]T 4-2
EXHIBITA
PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION
i/~ ~ ff
/ I~ zo
". SITE.,.,.,:,/
[
LEGEND:
10 - PERCENT TO/FKOM PROJECT
TEMECULA CREEK APARTMENT/RETAIL, Temecula, California - 00380'24
EXHIBIT[
PROJECT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADTi
3.9
MAIN PROJECT
DRIVEWAY
SITE
OVERLAND'
LEGEND:
28.7 - VEHIC].ES PER DAY (1000'S)
TEMECULA CREEK APARTMENT/RETAIL, Temecula, California - 00380:10
EXHIBIT C
OPENING YEAR WITH PROJECT
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT)
MAIN FRO. IECT
DRIVE1NAY
SITE
OVERLAND 1
LEGEND:
28.7 - VEHICLES PER DAY (1000'5)
TEMECULA CREEK APARTMENT/RETAIL, Temecula, California -00380:46
Major St:
Volume =
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS
(Based on Estimated Average Daily T~a~c-See Note 2)
SR-79 (S) Minor St: Project Entrance
46,800 Lanes= 3 Volume = 2,500 Lanes=
Year = 2004 WP
1 (one-way)
URBAN
RURAL XX Minimum Requirements
EADT
1. Minimum Vehicular
Satisfied Not Satisfied
XX
Number of lanes for moving
traffic on each approach.
Major Street Minor Street
1 1
2 + 46,800 1 2,500
2+ 2+
1 2+
Vehicles per day
on major street
(both approaches)
Urban Rural
8,000 5,600
9,600 6,720 *
9,600 6,720
8,000 5,600
Vehicles per day
on higher volume
minor-street approach
(one direction only)
Urban Rural
2,400 1,680
2,400 1,680 *
3,200 2,240
3,200 2,240
2. Interruption of Continuous Vehicles per day
traffic on major street
Satisfied Not Satisfied (both approaches)
Vehicles per day
on higher volume
minor-street approach
(one direction only)
Number of lanes for moving
traffic on each approach.
Major Street Minor Street
1 1
2 + 46,800 I 2,500
2+ 2+
I 2+
Urban Ruml Urban Rural
12,000 8,400 1,200 850
14,400 10,080 * 1,200 850 *
14,000 10,080 1,600 1,120
12,000 8,400 1,600 1,120
3. Combination
Satisfied Not Satisfied
XX
No one warrant satisfied
but following warrants
fulfilled 80% or more..
100% 100%
1 2
2 Warrants
2 Warrants
NOTES: 1. Heavier left tum movement from the major street may be included
with minor street volume if a separate signal phase is to be
provided for the left-tum movement.
2. To be used only for NEW INTERSECTIONS or other locations where
actual traffic volumes cannot be counted.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Francisco Urbina, Associate Planner
Annie Bostre-Le, Assistant Engineer
February 13, 2002
Tentative Pamel Map No. 30468
Temecula Creek Village
2r~ submittal
The Tentative Parcel Map dated January 25, 2002 has not address the following items that are
shown in bold and italicize. Please have the applicant revise the site plan and conceptual grading
plan, prior to our setting the Conditions of Approval for the above project.
Revise the Tentative Parcel Map to show the following:
1) Jododiah Smith Road
a) Curb to curb dimonc, ion ohall bo 56 foot
b) Show oxicting vomuc propocod improvomontc
c) Labol ac "Private Road"
2) Highway 70 South
a) Exicting vorcuc propocod improvomontc
b) Raic, od landccapod modian
c) Tho propocod Doooloration Lano, ploaso chow Iongth and width of additional right
of way dodication ~
d) Buc turnoutc
3) Cloarly idontify all tho cacomontc whioh onoumbor thic proporty
,1) Grocs vorcuc not acroago for oach parool
§) Dodication of abuttorc rightc of aooocc (roctrictod aococc) along tho following roadwayc with
tho oxcoption of tho drivoway and/or intomoction oponingc:
a) Highway 70 South
b) Jododiah Smith Road
Show reciprocal ingress/egress easement
Please submit the following documents:
7) Preliminary Titlo Roport
8) Drainage analysis
0) Gcological Roport
General comments:
1 O) Constance "A' has been identified as an uncontrolled fullaccess drivewayin the TIA.
This access should be restricted to right-in, right-out unless it can be clearly
demonstrated that a full access driveway is needed. In the event that a full access
driveway is necessary at Constance "A", the intersection must be signalized by the
applicant. The proposed project on the south side of State Route 79 South must also
be included in determining the need for a traffic signal at Constance "A ".
This project may be conditioned for the following:
11) Improve Jedediah Smith Road with a curb to curb dimension of 56 feet, installation of
sidewalk, street lights and drainage facilities
12) Improve Highway 79 South to include sidewalk, and street lights along property frontage
13) Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Jedediah Smith Road
14) All proposed driveway openings shall be restricted to Right In/Right Out with exception of the
intersection of Jedediah Smith Road and Highway 79 South.
15) The adequacy of the capacity of existing downstream drainage facilities shall be verified.
Any upgrading or upsizing of those facilities shall be provided as part of the development of
this project.
16) Reciprocal ingress and egress easement and reciprocal parking agreement between
proposed parcels for Tentative Parcel Map No. 30468.
17) The Applicant shall pay all prevailing fees, i.e. Development Impact fee.
CITY OF TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Francisco Urbina, Associate Planner
Cathy McCarthy, Development Services Administrator .~''/
DATE:
December 31,2001
SUBJECT:
PA 01-0610 Mixed Use on Highway 79 South and Jededia Smith Road (also see
PA 01-0020)
The TCSD has reviewed the Development Plan for the aforementioned project and provides the
following comments:
General Comments:
1. 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.
2. Installation of the landscape improvements within the medians shall commence pursuant to
a pro-job meeting with the TCSD Maintenance Superintendent and monitored in accordance
with the TCSD inspection process.
3. The developer, the developer's successors or assignee, shall be responsible for all
landscaping maintenance until such time as maintenance duties are accepted by the TCSD.
4. A multi-use trail will be constructed by the~leveloper with a combination hard and soft
surface. Location, specifications and standards to be approved by TCSD.
5. What buffering will be between the trail and the apartment?
6. All perimeter walls, entry monumentation, parkways, landscaping, pedestrian accesses,
trails, private recreational amenities and open space shall be maintained by the property
owner or a private maintenance association.
7. Will there be any children's play areas or tot lots?
8. Private recreational facilities floor plans need to be submitted.
Prior to Final Mal~:
9. Prior to recordation of final map landscape plans for the proposed raised medians shall be
reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Services.
10. Prior to recordation of final map the developer shall enter into an improvement agreement
and post securities for the landscaped median on Highway 79 South.
R:[SMITHBICONDITIONS~'~OMMENTS~PA01~610 MIXED USE 79S & J SMITH. DOC 1/4/02
11. Obtain an agreement with Caltrans that addresses the maintenance of the raised
landscaped median on Highway 79 South.
12. The developer shall satisfy the City's park land dedication requirement through the payment
of in-lieu fees equal to 4.86 acres of park land, based upon the City's then current appraised
park land valuation. (2.43 X 400 units X .005 = 4.86 acres.) Said requirements may receive
a credit up to fifty percent (50%) as allowed in Section 16.33.160 in the Temecula
Subdivision Ordinance.
Prior to Issuance of Buildin({ Permits
13. Prior to the first building permit or installation of the arterial street lighting, whichever comes
first, the developer shall complete the TCSD application process and pay the appropriate
energy fees related to the transfer of street lighting into the TCSD maintenance program.
Prior to Certification of Occul~anc¥:
14. The landscape improvements within the raised landscape medians shall be completed to
TCSD standards including the 90 day maintenance period.
R:tSMITHBiCONDITIONS~OMMENTStPA01~610 MIXED USE XgS & J SMITH. DOC I/4/02
CITY OF TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Francisco Urbina, Associate Planner
Cathy McCarthy, Development Services Administrator,
February 14, 2002
PA 01-0610 Mixed Use on Highway 79 South and Jedediah Smith Road (also
see PA 01-0020)
The TCSD has reviewed the resubmittal of the Development Plan for the aforementioned project
and provides the following comments in addition to the previously submitted comments on
memorandum dated December 31,2001.
1. The developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure
areas.
A multi-use trail will be constructed by the developer with a combination hard and soft
surface, as per the adopted Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan. Location,
specifications and standards to be approved by TCSD. (See the attached trails cross
section.)
3. The developer shall satisfy the City's parkland dedication (based on 400 multi-family units)
requirement th rough the payment of in-lieu fees equivalent to 2.43 acres of parkland, based
upon the City's then current land evaluation. Said requirement includes a 50% credit for
private recreational opportunities provided on-site and shall be pro-rated at a per dwelling
unit COSt prior to the issuance of each building permit requested.
R:~SMITHStCONDITIONS-COMMENTStPA01*0610 MIXED USE 79S & J SMITH 2-02.DOC 2/14/02
~,ll.-.g~j TRAIL TYPES
City of Temecula Multi.use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan
Separated Path Multi-UseTrail
Note: Skates and other small-wheeled uses not advised unless surface is concrete or asphalt
CITY OF TEMECULA , FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU
43200 Business Park Drive · Temecula · CA · 92590 · Telephone (909)694-640~ · fax (909)506-$169
(February 3, 2002)
PA01-0611 Temecula Creek Villages
Fire Prevention
The following are the Fire Department Conditions of Approval for this project. All questions
regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau.
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 fome at the time of building plan submittal.
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix Ill.A, Table A-III~A-1. The
developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 2250 GPM
at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM
for a total fire flow of 3100 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 Ill-A)
The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC
Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum (based on the greatest hazard building)of 3
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 reads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants
shall be spaced at 400 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than
225 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to an
hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the
system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2,
and Appendix Ill-B).
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)
o
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.O3.O2O)
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)
P:~PLANNING\Coa devpl'x2001~PA01-0611 Temecula Creek Villages - FIRE - Conditions of Approval.DOC
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
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)
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)
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)
Pdor to building construction, dead end road ways and streets in excess of one hundred
and fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of
accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4)
Pdor to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via
all-weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1)
Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water
system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. Plans shall
be signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval
signature block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow
standards. After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be
presented to the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system
including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency
prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC
8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1)
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective
Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3)
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, 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 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)
Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a directory display
monument sign shall be required for apartment, condominium, townhouse or mobile
home parks. Each complex shall have an illuminated diagrammatic layout of the
complex which indicates the name of the complex, all streets, building identification, unit
P:'LPLANNING\Coa devplL2001~A01-0611 Temecula Creek Villages - FIRE - Conditions of Approval. DOC
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
numbers, and fire hydrant locations within the complex. Location of the sign and design
specifications shall be submitted to and be approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior
to installation.
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)
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)
Pdor 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.
Pdor to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled
combustible stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety
features: an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class
and storage arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains,
Fire Department access doors and Fire department access roads. Buildings housing
high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions California Fire Code Article
81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81)
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 beth the County Health department and Fire Prevention
Bureau.(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3)
Soecial Conditions
Pdor to issuance of building permits, fuel modification plans shall be submitted to the
Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval for all open space areas adjacent to the
wildland-vegetation interface. (CFC Appendix II-A)
Prior to issuance of building permits, plans for structural protection from vegetation fires
shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval. The measures
shall include, but are not limited to, enclosing eaves, noncombustible barriers (cement or
block walls), and fuel modification zones. (CFC Appendix II-A)
P:EPLANNING\Coa devpl~2001LPA01-0611 Temecula Creek Villages - FIRE - Conditions of Approval.DOC
27.
Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report may 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.
28.
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.
29.
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
approvalper the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105)
30.
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)
P:~PLANNING\Coa devplL2001~PA01-0611 Temecula Creek Villages - FIRE - Conditions of Approval,DOC
FAX NO. :
CITY OF TE~ECOT~
:c. ~ L~i ~3:36F~1 P2
_TEMECULA POLICE DEPARTMENT PRRVENTZON & PLANs UNIT
DEVELOPMENT PLAN (Temecula Creek Village)
December 30, 2001
Development Plan (Temecula Creek village) (PA01-0611}
Francisco J. Urbina
The following comments are $-~;ttad by =he Teme~ula Police Department with regards to "Officer and
Public Safety" me&sures regarding this project.
Developers will ensure all hedging and. shrubbery surround/mr all retail/office areas and
residential units within the scope of this project be maintained at a height no greate~ than
:birth-six (3g) inches and below all windowsills of each building/unit.
2. Developers will further ensure thaC all trees planted within close proximity of all buildings be
kept at a safe dis~ance so as to d~ter roof accessibility b~ would-be burglars.
All ~arking Lots, driveways, and p~eatrian waXkways shall be 111uminat~d with a minim~
main~in~ one (1) foot-cand~e of l~gh= a~ ground level, evenl~ dispersed, eliminating ~1
~hadows. ~1 ~tarior lighting fixtures shall be vandal resistant. Photocells, tiers or o~er
~n~ =~ pre~en= deaotlvation by unau~or~zed persons shall con==o~ all exterior lighting. ~1
ligh~lng should ~ en~r~ sav~ng and mini~zed in th~ early mornln~ hours and ~ c~l~ancu w%~
Callforn~a S~e ~w on ener~ saving 1%gh%ing.
All exte:ior doors shall have their own vandal resistant light fixtures installed above. The
doorG shall be illuminated with a minimum one (1) foot candle of Light at grouad level, evenly
die~ersed. Ail exterior Lighting fixtures shall conform to the c~cor of the exterior building.
5. Any public telephones located on the exterior of any buildings shall be placed in a well-lSghted,
........ highL~v£aihla a~ea, and installe~with a "Call-Out Only" feature to c~tcr loitering. This
£ea~ure is no~ reo/~ired on public telephones lc~a~ed in the interior of ~ho buildings.
6. All ~ors, windows, locking mechanisms, hinges, and other miscollangous hardware shall be
commercial o~ institutional g~ade.
A~y banking or financial institution located cn the pre~ises of this project shall provide the
police de~ar~en~ wi~h complete e~ergenc~ recall info~tion on peroonnel, n~er of A~'m, hours
operations, n~er of ent~/exit~in~, n~er of cameras and ~eir loca~ons, ~ive-up
s~ioe windows, a o~y of th% int~iur blue-Brim% of the facility, ~e, tel~hone n~e= ~d
ad,ess of customs1 ~e~ic~s ~d ~11 i~fo~tion p~r~ining ~ the ala~ company.
A~y gated areas o$ this project (bo~h business or residential), shall ins~all a standard gate oode
box at the entry gate with th~ standard n~merals i through 0 including the * and # signs. The
police ~epartment will provide the en%r~ c~e ~o he installed prior to activation and use of the
ga=es. Co~e will be verified o~ a monthly basis ~ the police d~par~ent.
Day-care center shall have a minimum g-foot fencing surrounding the em=ira complex including the
play area to preven~ c~ildren from leaving the facility unaccompanied or any unauthorized entx~.
10.A~y graffiti painted or marked uPOn any b~ld&ng within the projec~ shall be removed or pain~e~
over within twang-four (24} hours of being discovered.
11. Provide building address on roof-~op by chalking Cut e grid 9" on teeter and a height e~ ag#,
~a~nting ~umsrals eith a stand~d 9~ pain~ roller using florescent yellow paint on normal build-up
FAX NO. : c. 30 ~0010~:~GAM P3 ~
~920M :
roofs, singl~ 9" width between ~umerals. Address shall be parallel to and facing the pr£ma~
12.All roof hatches shall be pain~ed ~In~e=n&tional Orange."
~3.$treet address shall be posted in a visible location, minimum 12 inches ~n height, on the street
side o£ ~he building w£~h a contrasting background.
14.Upon completion of the interior of all commercial/retail/office buildings, a monitored alarm
system shall be £nstalled and monitored 14-hours a day by a designated pri~at~ a~aL-m company, to
notify the ~olice department of any in~rusion.
L~mn N. Fanene Sr.
Crime Prevention & ~lans Officer
Board of Directors
President
Rodger D. Siems
~¢e President
Richard R. Hail
Marion V. Ashley
Randy A. Record
David J. Slawson
Board Secretary
M~ry C. White
G~neml Mana~r
Anthony J. P~¢k
Dire~or ~f the
Metr~olltan Water
Distria *f $~ Calif.
Marion V. Ashley
Joseph J. Kucblcr, CPA
Legal Counsel
R~dwinc and Sherri~I
WATER DISTRIC'I
..... SINCE 1950
March 6, 2002
Francisco J. Urbina
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
IAR 1 1 2.882
By
Dear Colleague:
Re:
SAN53- Sewer Will Serve
PA01-0611, located at the southeast corner of Highway 79 South
and Jedediah Smith Road
EMWD is willing to prOvide sewer service to the subject project. The prOvisions
of service are contingent upon the developer completing the necessary
arrangements in accordance with EMVVD rules and regulations. EMWD expects
the developer to provide proper notification when a water demand assessment is
required pursuant to Senate Bill 221 and/or 610. EMWD expects the developer
to coordinate with the apprOving agency for the prOper notification. Further
arrangements for service from EMWD may also include plan check, facility
construction inspection, jurisdictional annexation, and payment of financial
participation charges. The developer is advised to contact EMWD's New
Business Development Department eady in the entitlement process to determine
the necessary arrangements for service.
EMWD's ability to serve is subject to limiting conditions, such as water shortages,
regulatory requirements, legal issues, or conditions beyond EMWD's control.
Thank you for your cooperation in serving our mutual , ,e+,,
c .... mem. If you have any
questions, please cell me at (909) 928-3777, ext. 4468.
Since, rely,
Corey FCWallace
Civil Engineering Associate II
New Business Development Dept.
CFW/jw
Mailing/lddress:
G:~access~new_busi~dad~forms\WSWillServe.doc
Post Office Box 8300 Perris, CA 92572-8300 Telephone: (909) 928-3777 Fax: (909) 928-6177
Location: 2270 Trumble Road Perris, CA 92570 Internet: www. emwd,org
co n, · s . wc s ^a
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEA .
December 19, 2001
City of Temecula Planning Department
P,.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
O£'U £ 0 ZOO1
ATTN: Francisco J. Urbina
RE: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 30468:
RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
(14 LOTS)
CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF
Dear Gentlemen:
1. The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed Tentative Parcel Map No. 30468 and
recommends:
A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the water
company and the Environmental Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the water
system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one-inch equal's 200
feet, along with the original drawing to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal
pipe diameter, location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and joint specifications, and the size of the
main at the junction of the new system to the existing system. The plans shall comply in all
respects with Div. 5, Part l, and Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety Code, California
Administrative Code, Title ll, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities
Commission of the State of California, when applicable. The plans shall be signed by a registered
engineer and water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water
system in Tentative Parcel Map No. 30468 is in accordance with the water system expansion plans
of the Rancho California Water District and that the water services, storage, and distribution system
will be adequate to provide water service to such Parcel Map". This certification does not
constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to such Parcel Map at any specific quantities, flows
or pressures for fire protection or any other purpose. This certification shall be signed by a
responsible official of the water company. The plans must be submitted to the City of Temecula's
Office to review at least TWO WEEKS PRIOR to the request for the recordation of the final ma~.
This subdivision has a statement fi.om Rancho California Water District agreeing to serve domestic
water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand providing satisfactory financ;C
arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to
be made PRIOR to the recordation of the final map.
Local Enforcement Agency · PO. Box 1250. R~vel--~de. CA 92,~02-1280 !909~ 955-8982 · FAX 1909} 781-~653 · 40S0 Lemon Streel 9th Floor. Riverside. CA c
~bNTY O1= RIVERSIDE. HEALTh SERVICES AGENCY t~
PARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAl. HEAI.TI
This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be connected to the
sewers of the District. The sewer system, shall be installed according to plans and specifications as
approved by the District, the City of Temecula and the Environmental Health Department.
Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the
original drawing, to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter,
location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint specifications and the size of the sewers at
the junction of the new system to the existing system. A single plat indicating location of sewer
lines and waterlines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be signed
by a registered engineer and the sewer district with the following certification: "I certify that the
design of the sewer system in Tentative Parcel Map No. 30468 is in accordance with the sewer
system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that the waste disposal system
is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed Parcel Map". The plans
must be submitted to the City of Temecula's Office to review at least two weeks PRIOR to the
request for the recordation of the final map.
It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be completely finalized PRIOR to recordation of
the final map.
It will be necessary for the annexation proceedings to be completely finalized PRIOR to the
recordation of the final map.
Additional approval fi.om Riverside County Environmental Health Department will be required for
all tenants operating a food facility or generating any hazardous waste.
Sincerely,
(909) 955-8980
Health Specialist
Local Enforcement A§encl/ · BO, Box 12S0. Riverside, CA 92502-1280 · ~909) 955-89S2 · FAX ~909/ 781-9653 · 4080 Lemon Street. qlh Flool Riverside. CA 9250
December 20, 2001
Francisco Urbina, Case Planner
City of Temecula
Planning Depa~ anent
43200 Business Park Drive
Post Office Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
SUBJECT:
WATER AVAILABILITY
PARCEL MAP NO. 30468
APN 961-010-006
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01-0610
Dear Mr. Urbina:
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 including the construction of all
required on-site and off-site water ihcilities.
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 Brannon, P.E.
Development Engineering Manager
0 BSB:at294\F012-T6\FCF
r,~ The
Company,
A ~Sempra Energy~~ompany
Gas Company
1981W. Lugonia Avenue
Redlands, CA 92374-9720
! ~ PO 8ox 3003
Recli~nds, CA 92373-0306
January 3, 2002
Gas Co. Reference No. 02-002 OM
City of Temecula
Planning Department
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Attention: Francisco Urbina
Re: Case No. PA01-0611 (Development Plan) located at the southeast comer of
State Highway 79 South and Jedediah Smith Road.
Thank you for the opportunity to review your plans for the above 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, __
Steve Dunivin
Technical Supervisor
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
EXHIBITS
R:~P M~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek V[llage~PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc
EXHIBIT NO. 3A
VICINITY MAP
R:~ M~001~1-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~C Staff Report 05-01-02.doc
18
CITY OF TEMECULA
N
S
CASE NO.- PA01-0610 &0611
EXHIBIT 3A - VICINITY MAP
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - 5-1-02
EXHIBIT NO. 3B
GENERAL PLAN MAP
&
ZONING MAP
R:~P M~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc
19
CITY OF TEMECULA
r-r1 Terne~_~eek..vll.shp
ln Cityparcelsl .shp
g.shp
~o
EXHIBIT3B-ZONING MAP
DESIGNATION-PDO-4
~ Temec creek vil.shp
Cityparcelsl .shp
City_streets1 .shp
Gen_plan_cityl .shp
','~,".1 BP
~ CC
~ EM
M
~ NC
~0
· . Iv[
,OOOOOOO'
EXHIBIT 3B - GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION - Professional Office
CASE NO. - PA01-0610 &0611
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - 5-1-02
EXHIBIT NO. 3C
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 30468
(Large Exhibit)
If you would like to review, please contact
Emery Papp at (909) 694-6400.
R:~P M~.001\01-O610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc
20
EXHIBIT NO. 3D
SITE PLAN
(Large Exhibit)
If you would like to review, please contact
Emery Papp at (909) 694-6400.
R:~P M~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~PC Staff Report 05-0t-02.doc
21
EXHIBIT NO. 3E
GRADING PLAN
(Large Exhibit)
If you would like to review, please contact
Emery Papp at (909) 694-6400.
R:~P M~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc
22
EXHIBIT NO. 3F
BUILDING ELEVATIONS
(Large Exhibit)
If you would like to review, please contact
Emery Papp at (909) 694-6400.
R:~P 1~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~PC Staff Report 05-01-02,doc
23
EXHIBIT NO. 3G
FLOOR PLANS
R:~ M~001~1-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Vitlage~PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc
24
CITY OF TEMECULA
UNIT A
CASE NO.- PA01-0610 & 0611
EXHIBIT 3Ga- FLOOR PLAN - UNIT A
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - 05-02-02
CiTY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO. - PA01-0610 & 0611
EXHIBIT 3Gb- FLOOR PLAN - UNIT B
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - 05-02-02
CITY OF TEMECULA
42'-0"
CASE NO.- PA01-0610 & 0611
EXHIBIT 3Gc- FLOOR PLAN - UNIT C
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - 05-02-02
CITY OF TEMECULA
r
COMPOSITE 1ST & 2ND FLOOR PLANS
CASE NO.- PA01-0610 & 0611
EXHIBIT 3Gd- COMPOSITE FLOOR PLAN - AREA "D" BUILDING 1
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - 05-02-02
CITY OF TEMECULA
COMPOSITE 3RD FLOOR PLANS
CASE NO. - PA01-0610 & 0611
EXHIBIT 3Ge - COMPOSITE FLOOR PLAN -~AREA "D" BUILDING 4a
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - 05-02-02
CITY OF TEMECULA
COMPOSITE 2ND & 3RD FLOOR pIzAN
CASE NO. - PA01-0610 & 0611
EXHIBIT 3Gf - COMPOSITE FLOOR PLAN - AREA "B" BUILDING 1
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - 05-02-02
EXHIBIT NO. 3H
LANDSCAPE PLAN
(Large Exhibit)
If you would like to review, please contact
Emery Papp at (909) 694-6400.
R:~P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc
25
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
R:~P M~001~1-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~C Staff Report 05-01-02.doc
26
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of this 28~ day of November, 2000 by and
between the City of Temecula ("City"), a municipal corporation of the State of Califomia, and
Old Vail Partners, a California general partnership ("Old Vail") (collectively the "Parties").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, on or about June 28, 1988, the Board of Supervisors for the County of '
Riverside adopted Resolution No. 88-192 Creating Special Assessment Disffict No. 159, pursuant
to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 (Streets & Highways Code {}10200 et seq.).
WHEREAS, located within Special Assessment District No. 159 is that certain real
property, now commonly known as 30905 Highway 79 South, Temecula, California, Assessor's
Parcel Number 961-010-006 (the "Property"). The County of Riverside subsequently zoned the
Property "CPS" - Scenic Highway Commercial.
WHEREAS, on or about November 21, 1989, Old Vail purchased the Property.
WHEREAS, on or about December 1, 1989, the City, in furtherance of its incorporation
as a distinct political entity, included the Property within its municipal boundaries.
WHEREAS, on or about November 9, 1993, the City adopted a General Plan, which
designated the Property for "Office Professional" use.
WitF~REAS, on or about December 19, 1995, the City adopted a conformance Zoning
Ordinance which, consistent with the General Plan, designated the Property within the "Office
Professional" zone.
WHEREAS, as a result of the City's General Plan and/or Zoning Ordinance designations
and subsequent alleged actions or inactions with respect to the Property, Old Vail filed a series of
stat~ and federal actions against the City, inter alia, for inverse condemnation and related claims,
entitled:
Old Vail Partners v. County of Riverside et al, RSC Case No. 253598 and RSC
Case No. 268973, which actions were dismissed as to the City by the Superior
Court of the County of Riverside (Hon. Victor Miceli), and which dismissal of the
City was ultimately affirmed by the Fourth District Court of Appeals.
Old Vail Parmers v. County of Riverside et al, RSC Case No. 278127, in which
action, on or about April 25, 1996, the City and Old Vail executed a stipulation to
dismiss the action without prejudice and to toll all applicable statutes of
limitation.
A:~Settle.006.DOC November 28, 2000
Old Vail Partners v. County of Riverside et'al, USDC So. Dist., Case No.
941228H (CM), which action was transferred to the U.S. Dislrict Court, Central
District, and redesignated as CV 94-6309 (CBM (Ctx).
Old Vail Partners v. County of Riverside et al, USDC Central District, Case No.
CV 94-6309-CBM (Ctx), which action was dismissed by the District Court (Hon.
Consuelo B. Marshall), and upon the appeal thereof by Old Vail, the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeal issued an opinion reversing the decision of the District Court but
abstaining fi-om jurisdiction under Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971). Old
Vail's petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court was
denied.
Old Vail Partners v. City of Temecula, Case No. RIC 312020, which action was a
reinstatement of Old Vail's prior action, Case No. RSC 278127, and which,
following hearing on the City's demurrer, the City and Old Vail again executed a
stipulation to dismiss the action without prejudice and to toll all applicable
statutes of limitation.
The totality of all litigation proceedings referenced in these recitals shall generally be
denoted as the "Litigation".
WHEREAS, on or about June 27, 2000, the Planning Commission for the City of
Temecula duly held a public heating on Old Vail's Planning Application No. 99-0261, and
recommended that the City Council approve the petitioned amendments to the City Zoning Map
and Municipal Code.
WHEREAS, on or about July 17, 2000, the Planning Commission for the City of
Temecula considered Planning Application Nos. 99-0261 and 99-037,1 submitted by LandGrant
and Old Vail at a duly noticed public hearing, at which time the City staff and interested persons
had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support of or opposition to this matter. Planning
Application No. 99-0261 is an application for approval of an amendment to the City's
Development Code adding Sections 17.22.130 through 17.22.138 to the Temecula Municipal
Code establishing the "Temecula Creek Village Planned Development Overlay District (PDO-
4)" upon the Property (hereinafter "Temecula Creek Village PDO-4"). Planning Application
No. 99-0371 is a General Plan Amendment removing the western portion of Via Rio Temecula
from the General Plan Circulation Map. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing
and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission recommended approval
to the City Council of Old Vail's Planning Application No. 99-0261 and Planning Application
No. 99-0371. r~
WHEREAS, on or about September 26, 2000, the City Council for the City of Temecula
convened at a duly noticed public hearing to consider the recommendations of the Planning
Commission for the approval of Old Vail's Planning Applications 99-0261 and 99-0371. Upon
A:~Scttle.006.DOC Novcmbex 28, 2000
-2-
hearing all testimony either in support of or opposition to these matters, the City Council decided
to further review these matters and continue hearing until October 24, 2000.
WHEREAS, on October 24, 2000, the City Council for the 'City of Temeeula again
considered Old Vail's Planning Applications 99-0261 and 99-0371 at a duly noticed continued
public hearing, at which time City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did
testify either in support of or opposition to these matters. At the conclusion of this hearing and
after due consideration of the testimony, the City Council unanimously introduced Ordinance
No. 2000-13 approving Old Vail's Planning Application 99-0261, establishing the Temecula
Creek Village PDO-4 and certifying the preparation of a mitigated negative declaration in
accordance with applicable law.
WHEREAS, on November 28, 2000, the City Council unanimously adopted Ordinance
No. 2000-13 approving Old Vail's Planning Application 99-0261, establishing the Temeeula
Creek Village PDO-4 and certifying the preparation of a mitigated negative declaration in
accordance with applicable law and unanimously adopted Resolution No. 2000- t "~
approving the General Plan Amendment removing the western portion of Via Rio Temecula
from the General Plan Circulation Map, Planning Application No. 99-0371. The rights,
obligations and benefits conferred in connection with the approval of Ordinance No. 2000-_13
and Resolution No. 2000- I'~ shall hereinafter be referred to as "Entitlements" and include,
without limitation, a complete environmental clearance and all other official acts necessary to
implement as closely as possible the four hundred (400) multi-family residential units and one
hundred twenty three thousand (123,000) square feet of commercial space contemplated under
the Temeeula Creek Village PDO-4 and ordinance No. 2000-13.
WHEREAS, the Parties now desire to reach a full and complete settlement of all issues
which were, or could have been, raised in the Litigation and which were, or could have been,
raised with respect to the City's alleged actions or inactions with respect to the Property.
Nothing contained herein shall constitute a release of any claims arising after the date of this
Agreement.
NOW THEREFORE, the Parties, in consideration of the foregoing and of the mutual
promises and covenants hereinafter set forth, hereby agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1.
TERMS OF SETTLEMENT
Section 1.01. General Tenn. The Parties understand and agree that, in the context of
processing land use applications ugder Ordinance No. 2000-13, establishing the Temecula Creek
Village PDO-4, the City cannot guarantee the ultimate outcome of any public hearings before the
City Council or other public bodies of the City or otherwise, nor prevent any opposition thereto
by members of the public affected by or interested in future applications under the Temecula
Creek Village PDO4. The Parties further understand that land use regulations involve the
A:~SettIe.006.DOC Novcmbvr 28, 2000
exercise of the City's police power and, at the time of executing this Agreement, it is settled
federal and California law that government may not contract away its fight to exercise its police
power in the furore. Avco Community Developers Inc. v. South Coast Regional Com., 17 Cal.3d
785,800 (1976); City of Glendale v. Superior Court, 18 Cal. App.4th 1768 (1993). Subject to the
foregoing, the City, to the maximum extent allowed by law, and Old Vail, shall each endeavor to
facilitate and promote the proceedings necessary to complete processing of the land use
approvals required to implement as closely as possible the four hundred (400) multi-family
residential units and one hundred twenty three thousand (123,000) square feet of commercial
space contemplated under the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4. The City shall further diligently
and promptly process any future land use approval, environmental action and/or other act(s)
necessary to the ultimate implementation of the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4. The City shall
neither undertake, advocate nor promote the performance of any actions that would be inimical,
injurious or counterproductive to the Entitlements set forth in the Temecula Creek Village PDO-
4 and the General Plan Amendment.
Section 1.02. Legal Challenge to Project Approval. In the event that a claim, suit or
action of any nature whatsoever is undertaken to challenge the adoption of Ordinance No. 2000-
13 and Resolution No. 2000- ~'~ , or the Entitlement set forth therein, and subject to Section
1.01 above, the City and Old Vail covenant to diligently and jointly defend, at their separate cost,
the approval of the Entitlement set forth in the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4 and the General
Plan Amendment against any such claim, suit or action of any nature whatsoever seeking to
challenge, overturn or in any manner impair the approval of the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4
and/or the Entitlements. Ifa court, tribunal or other body of competent jurisdiction renders a
decision impairing or in any manner interfering with the Entitlements conferred by the City's
approval of Ordinance No. 2000-13 and Resolution No. 2000- ~ ') , then the City shall
facilitate and support to the fullest extent allowed by law Old Vail's efforts to preserve, restore or
rehabilitate those Entitlements granted by the adoption of Ordinance No. 2000-13 and Resolution
No. 2000- t "~ , but subsequently impaired by the court, tribunal or other body of competent
jurisdiction. The Parties agree that such facilitation and support does not in any way constitute a
guarantee of the outcome thereof.
ARTICLE 2.
MUTUAL RELEASE OF CLAIMS
Section 2.01. Scope of Release. The Parties hereto acknowledge and agree that the
mutual release and discharge of claims contained in Sections 2.02-2.03 is contingent upon the
vesting of the Entitlements. Such "vesting" of Entitlements shall occur on the later of the
following dates:
(1) The effective date of Ordinance No. 2000-13;
A:~Settle.006.DOC November 28, 2000
4-
(2)
The date upon which the statute of limitations has nm on the time for
filing a challenge to the approval of Ordinance No. 2000-13, the Temecula
Creek Village PDO-4 and Resolution No. 2000- ~ 'b , provided that no
claim, suit or legal action of any nature whatsoever, which seeks to
overturn, impair or hinder any Entitlement, is pending at such time; or
(3)
The date upon which any claim, suit or legal action of any nature
whatsoever has been finally determined in favor of those Entitlements
pertaining to the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4.
Section 2.02. Mutual Release and Discharge of Claims. In consideration of the promises
of the Parties specified in this Agreement, and contingent and effective upon the vesting of the
Entitlements as set forth in Section 2.01 above, the Parties shall fully and forever release, acquit,
and discharge each other, their officers, elected officials, attorneys, sureties, agents, servants,
representatives, employees, subsidiaries, affiliates, partners, predecessors, successors-in-interest,
assigns, and all persons acting by, through, under or in concert with them of and from any and all
past, present, or future claims, demands, obligations, actions, causes of action, including those
for damages, injunctive or declaratory relief, or for relief by way of writ of mandate, for costs,
losses of service, expenses, liability, suits, and compensation of any nature whatsoever, whether
based on tort, contract, or other theory of recovery, known or unknown, that they now have, have
asserted or could have asserted in the Litigation that relate to the Property or to the alleged
actions or inactions taken by the City prior to, and including, the date of this Agreement.
Nothing contained herein shall relieve any Party hereto of its/their continuing obligations
imposed by law or by the provisions of this Agreement.
Section 2.02.1 Easement on the Property. Nothing contained herein shall affect nor
supersede, nor be deemed to affect nor supersede, in any way any agreement with respect to
access easement across the property between the City and Old Vail.
Section 2.03. Waiver of California Civil Code Section 1542. The Parties hereto
acknowledge that they are familiar with Section 1542 of the California Civil Code which
provides:
A general release does not extend to claims which a creditor does
not know or suspect to exist in his favor at the time of executing
the release, which if known by him must have materially affected
his settlement with the debtor.
The Parties being aware of the aforesaid code section, each hereby expressly waives any
rights they might have thereunder.
This release shall not operate to release any claims the Parties may later have for the
enforcement of the obligations created by this Agreement.
A:~Settle.006.DOC
-5-
November 2g, 2000
Section 2.04. Dismissal of Litigation. The Parties acknowledge that, as of the execution
of this Agreement, Old Vail does not have any legal action pending against the City. Rather, the
preservation of Old Vail's fights as against the City in connection with the Property are generally
· memorialized in a "stipulation to dismiss without prejudice and toll all applicable statutes of
Ymfitations," executed by the Parties' respective legal counsel on or about September 15, 1998.
The Parties intend these claims as well as all other legal causes of action and/or other rights of
action existing at or before the execution of this Agreement to be mutually released in
accordance with the provisions of Sections 2.02-2.03 hereto, but only at~er the vesting of
Entitlements described in Section 2.01 hereto. No formal document filing with the any court of
competent jurisdiction shall be necessary to effectuate this mutual release and discharge of
claims upon the vesting of the Entitlements. However, upon the vesting of the Entitlements, the
"stipulation to dismiss without prejudice and toll all applicable statutes of limitations" shall be
deemed to be null and void, and instead, any and all Litigation against the City shall be deemed
to be dismissed by Old Vail with prejudice.
Section 2.05. No Assimunent of Claims. Old Vail warrants and represents to the City
that it has not assigned, conveyed or Otherwise transferred any of its rights to the claims
described in the Article to any other person, entity, film or corporation not a party to this
Agreement, in any manner, including by way of subrogation or operation of law or otherwise,
and that Old Vail is the sole owner of all of the claims described in this Article. In the event that
any claim, demand or suit is made or instituted against the City because Old Vail made an actual
assignment or transfer, Old Vail agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless against such
claim, and to pay and satisfy any such claim, including necessary expenses of investigation,
reasonable attorneys' fees and costs.
2.06. General Covenant to Cooperate. The City covenants to cooperate with Old Vail, its
successors-in-interest, assigns, agents, or duly designated representatives through all land use
processing, environmental clearance measures, and any other official acts necessary to
implement the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4, including, without limitation, employing all
reasonable means to assist Old Vail, its successors-in-interest and assigns through those
processes or procedures that may be under the jurisdiction of public agencies other than the City.
2.07. Incorporation of Recitals. The above-stated recitals are a material component of
this Agreement, and incorporated into this Article as though fully set forth herein.
ARTICLE 3
MISCELLANEOUS
Section 3.01. Verbal Representations. This Agreement contains the complete expression
of the whole agreement between the Pa~'les hereto, and there are no promises, representations,
agreements, warranties or inducements, either expressed verbally or implied, except as are fully
set forth herein. This Agreement cannot be enlarged, modified, or changed in any respect except
by written agreement between the Parties.
A 5Seille.006.DOC November 28, 2000
Section3.02. SeverabilitvofProvisions. Each provision ofthis Agreement, whetheror
not contained in separate paragraphs, shall be considered severable. If for any reason any such
provision(s) or parts of such provision(s) thereof are determined to be invalid, unenforceable or
contrary to any existing or future applicable law or judicial ruling, such invalidity shall not
impair the operation of nor affect those portions of this Agreement which are valid, but in such
event, this Agreement shall be construed and enfomed in all respects as if such invalid or
unenforceable provision(s) or part of such provision(s) has been omitted.
Section 3.03. Binding Effect. Each and all of the covenants, conditions and restrictions
in this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon the Parties, their
successors-in-interest, agents, representatives, assignees, transferees or any party claiming by
derivative right an interest in the Entitlements granted by the approval of the Temecula Creek
Village PDO-4.
Section 3.04. Representation of Comprehension. In entering into this Agreement, the
Parties represent that they have relied upon the legal advice of their attorneys, who are the
attorneys of their own choice, and that these terms are fully undertaken and voluntarily accepted
by them. The parties further represent that they have no question with regard to the legal import
of any term, word, phrase, or portion of tiffs Agreement, or the Agreement in its entirety, and
accept the terms of this Agreement as written.
Section 3.05. Authority to Execute Agreement. The Parties hereto represent and warrant
to each other that they have full authority to execute this Agreement, and that no individual,
corporation, partnership or other entity has any interest in the claims and/or potential claims
described herein. The Parties further represent and warrant that they will indemnify and hold
each other harmless from any and all claims, causes of action or other fights asserted by any
other person, corporation, partnership, or other entity with respect to any such assigned claims.
Section 3.06. Draftsmanship and Headings. The headings employed to identify the
provisions contained herein are solely for the convenience of the parties to this Agreement. If
any ambiguity appears in either the headings or the provisions attendant thereto, such ambiguity
shall not be construed against any party to this Agreement on the grounds that such party drafted
this Agreement.
Section 3.07. Notices. Except as otherwise expressly provided by law, any and all
notices or other communications required or permitted by this Agreement or by law to be served
on or given to either Party to this Agreement by the other Party shall be in writing and shall be
deemed duly served and given when personally delivered to the party to whom it is directed or to
any managing employee or officer of that Party, or, in lieu of personal service, on the fifth
business day following deposit in the United States mail, Certified, postage prepaid, addressed
tO:
A:~Set~Ie.006.DOC November 2S, 2000
-7-
Old' Vail Partners
c/o RSCH Holdings, Inc.
5230 Carroll Canyon Rd., Suite 310
San Diego, California 92121
City Clerk for the City of Temecula
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California 92589-9033
Section 3.08. Legal Costs. If any litigation is commenced between the Parties to this
Agreement concerning the rights and duties of either in relation to this Agreement, the prevailing
party shall be entitled to, in addition to any other relief that may be granted in the litigation,
reasonable attorneys fees as determined by the court presiding over the dispute.
Section 3.09. Venue and Choice of Law. Any action at law, suit in equity, or other
judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this Agreement or any provisions thereof, may only be
instituted in the Superior Court of California for the County of San Diego. The Parties further
agree that this Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted according to the laws of the State
of California.
Section 3.10. Execution in counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original and all of which together shall
constitute one and the same instrument.
1N WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this AGREEIVIENT in the
State of California.
CITY OF TEMECULA
Attested to:
Clerk
A:~Settle.006.DOC
-8-
November 28, 2000
OLD VAIL PARTNERS, a Partnership
By:
RSCH Holdings, Inc., a California
corporation,
General Partner/
By: .
esident
By:
cretary
Approved as to Form:
DETISCH & CHRISTENSEN
By: ~~5;~
Charles B. Christensen, Esq.,
Attorneys for OLD VAIL PARTNERS
RICHARD, WATSON & GERSHON, a Professional Corporation
Peter M Thorson, Esq
City Attorney for CITY OF TEMECULA
A:~SettI¢.006.DOC November 28, 2000
'9-
ITEM #4
VILLAGES OF OLD TOWN WORKSHOP
PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT