Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem No. 10CITY OF , LADE LSINOR E ` DREAM EXTREME- REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: ROBERT A. BRADY CITY MANAGER DATE: JANUARY 11, 2011 SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 35135: A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE AN EXISTING 9.07 ACRE SITE INTO FOUR (4) PARCELS WITHIN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C-2) DISTRICT Background On August 17, 2010, the project was reviewed by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission expressed concerns relating to the following items: 1) ADA accessibility, 2) parking for the existing building/use as well as future uses, 3) applicability of the 100 feet street frontage requirement, and 4) applicability of the minimum 25,000 square foot lot size requirement. The Planning Commission elected to continue the project to September 7, 2010, October 5, 2010 and again to November 2, 2010 to allow the applicant and staff more time to gather information addressing the identified concerns. Discussion The proposed parcel map will subdivide the aforementioned 9.07-acres of general commercial zoned land into four (4) individual parcels. Parcel No. 1 will be .79 acres (34,388 square feet), Parcel No. 2 will be .57 acres (25,002 square feet), Parcel No. 3 will be .91 acres (39,618 square feet), and Parcel No. 4 will be 6.81 acres (296,644 square feet). It should be noted that the site is currently developed with one (1) existing commercial building (Trevi Entertainment Center) on the proposed fourth (4th) parcel. The project was presented to the City of Lake Elsinore Planning Commission on August 17, 2010, September 7, 2010, October 5, 2010, and November 2, 2010 for review and consideration. Items for discussion at these meetings included the ADA accessibility, parking, lot street frontage and lot size. Ultimately, the Planning Commission expressed AGENDA ITEM NO. 10 Page 1 of 38 Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135 January 11, 2011 Page 2 of 2 satisfaction with the proposed project and voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135. Fiscal Impact Ultimately, the proposed project will have a positive fiscal impact to the community and the City. It is estimated that the future businesses within Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135 will ultimately generate sales tax revenues for the City of Lake Elsinore. In addition to the sales tax revenue that will be generated, it is anticipated that the development of the project will provide necessary construction jobs. Finally, the project has been conditioned to require that the applicant contribute fees toward traffic improvements, school facilities, park facilities, fire services, police services, water facilities, and sewer facilities. Recommendation 1. Adopt a Resolution No. 2011-_ adopting findings that the project is consistent with the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan; and, 2. Adopt a Resolution No. 2011- recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135 based on the Findings, Exhibits, and proposed Conditions of Approval. The proposed project is located in Redevelopment Project Area No. 1. Staff recommends that the Redevelopment Agency concur with City Council adoption of the Resolutions listed above. Prepared by: Kirt A. CouryeG Project Planner Reviewed by: Matt Harris MIX Senior Planner Approved by: Robert A. BradyO City Manager Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. City Council Resolutions 3. Conditions of Approval 4. Planning Commission Staff Report with Exhibits dated November 2, 2010 5. Planning Commission Minutes 6. Full Sized Plans Page 2 of 38 VICINITY MAP TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 35135 LOCATED AT 32250 MISSION TRAIL CITY COUNCIL Page 3 of 38 Page 4 of 38 RESOLUTION NO. 2011- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT THE PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP) WHEREAS, Matthew Liesemeyer, MHL Consulting, Inc., submitted an application for a Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide 9.07 acres of land into four (4) individual parcels for property located at 32250 Mission Trail (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP requires that all discretionary projects within an MSHCP criteria cell undergo the Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process ("LEAP") and Joint Project Review ("JPR") to analyze the scope of the proposed development and establish a building envelope that is consistent with the MSHCP criteria; and WHEREAS, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP further requires that the City of Lake Elsinore adopt consistency findings demonstrating that the proposed discretionary entitlement complies with the MSHCP cell criteria, and the MSHCP goals and objectives; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Section 16, requests for subdivision of land are a discretionary action to be considered, reviewed, and approved, conditionally approved or denied by either the Lake Elsinore Planning Commission and/or the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the recommendation of Planning Commission following its consideration on August 17, 2010, September 7, 2010, October 5, 2010, and November 2, 2010, as well as evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on January 11, 2011. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council has considered the Project's consistency with Findings of Consistency with the MSHCP. SECTION 2. That in accordance with the MSHCP, the City Council makes the following Consistency Findings: 1. The Project is a project under the City's MSHCP Resolution, and the City must make an MSHCP Consistency finding before approval. Pursuant to the City's MSHCP Resolution, the Project is required to be reviewed for MSHCP consistency, including consistency with other "Plan Wide Requirements." The Project site is not located within an MSHCP Criteria Cell. Based upon the site reconnaissance survey there are no issues regarding Page 5 of 38 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2011- PAGE 2OF4 consistency with the MSCHP's other "Plan Wide Requirements." The Project site is surrounded by development and all on-site improvements are incorporated, and no habitat is present on site. 2. The Project is subject to the City's LEAP and the County's Joint Project Review processes. As stated above, the Project is not located within a Criteria Cell and therefore the Project was not processed through a Joint Project Review. 3. The Project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. A reconnaissance survey revealed that no riparian, riverine, vernal pool/fairy shrimp habitat or other aquatic resources exist on the site. As such, the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP are not applicable. 4. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines. The site does not fall within any Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Areas. Neither a habitat assessment nor further focused surveys are required for the Project. Therefore, Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP are not applicable to the Project. 5. The Project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures. The MSHCP only requires additional surveys for certain species if the Project is located in Criteria Area Species Survey Areas, Amphibian Species Survey Areas, Burrowing Owl Survey Areas, and Mammal Species Survey Areas of the MSHCP. The site is surrounded by development and all on-site improvements are incorporated. Therefore, the provisions of MSHCP Section 6.3.2 are not applicable. 6. The Project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines. The Project site is not within or adjacent to any MSHCP criteria or conservation areas. Therefore, the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines of MSHCP Section 6.1.4 are not applicable. Page 6 of 38 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2011- PAGE 3 OF 4 7. The Project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. There are no resources located on the Project site requiring mapping as set forth in MSCHP Section 6.3.1. 8. The Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. The Project site is not within or adjacent to any MSHCP criteria or conservation areas. Therefore, the Fuels Management Guidelines of MSHCP Section 6.4 are not applicable. 9. The Project will be conditioned to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee. The Project will not be required to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee given that the site is fully improved and developed. 10. The Project is consistent with the MSHCP. Based upon the information provided above, the Project is consistent with the MSHCP. SECTION 3. Based upon the evidence presented, the City Council hereby adopts the findings above regarding the Project's consistency with the MSHCP. SECTION 4. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, this 11th day of January, 2011. AMY BHUTTA MAYOR ATTEST: CAROL COWLEY INTERIM CITY CLERK Page 7 of 38 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2011- PAGE 4 OF 4 APPROVED AS TO FORM: BARBARA LEIBOLD CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE I, Carol Cowley, Interim City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, hereby certify that Resolution No. was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at a regular meeting held on the 11th day of January 2011, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CAROL COWLEY INTERIM CITY CLERK Page 8 of 38 RESOLUTION NO. 2011- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 35135 LOCATED AT 32250 MISSION TRAIL WHEREAS, Matthew Liesemeyer, MHL Consulting, Inc., submitted an application for a Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide 9.07 acres of land into four (4) individual parcels for property located at 32250 Mission Trail (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of reviewing and making decisions relating to the subdivision of land: and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the recommendation of Planning Commission following its consideration on August 17, 2010, September 7, 2010, October 5, 2010, and November 2, 2010, as well as evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on January 11, 2011. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Prior to making a decision, the City Council has reviewed and analyzed Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135 pursuant to the appropriate Planning and Zoning Laws, and Chapter 17.124 (General Commercial District) and Chapter 16 (Subdivisions) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code ("LEMC"). SECTION 2. The City Council hereby finds and determines that Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135 is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code 21000 et seq.: "CEQA") and the Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (14 California Code of Regulations 15000 et seq.: "CEQA Guidelines") pursuant to Section 15315 (Minor Land Divisions) categorical exemption. Specifically, the Planning Commission finds that the Tentative Parcel Map allows for the subdivision of 9.07 acres of land into five (5) individual parcels for property located at 32250 Mission Trail. SECTION 3. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning Law and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the City Council makes the following findings for approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135: 1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan (Government Code Section 66473.5). The parcel map is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Zoning Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The parcel Page 9 of 38 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2011- PAGE 2 OF 3 map as designed, assists in achieving the development of a well-balanced and functional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses (GOAL 1.0, Land Use Element) by encouraging the development of commercial businesses that strengthen and diversify the City's economic base. 2. The effects this project is likely to have upon the housing needs of the region, the public service requirements of its residents and the available fiscal and environmental resources have been considered and balanced. The project will provide general commercial facilities of substantial size conveniently located relative to commercial businesses and regional circulation routes. The project will provide necessary public services and facilities, will pay all appropriate fees, and will not result in any adverse environmental impact. 3. Subject to the attached conditions of approval, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant environmental impact. The project has been adequately conditioned by all applicable departments and agencies and will not therefore result in any significant environmental impacts. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 4. Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the attached conditions of approval, the City Council hereby approves Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135. SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, this 11th day of January, 2011. AMY BHUTTA MAYOR ATTEST: CAROL COWLEY INTERIM CITY CLERK Page 10 of 38 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2011- PAGE 3 OF 3 APPROVED AS TO FORM: BARBARA LEIBOLD CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE I, Carol Cowley, Interim City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, hereby certify that Resolution No. was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at a regular meeting held on the 11th day of January 2011, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CAROL COWLEY INTERIM CITY CLERK Page 11 of 38 Page 12 of 38 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 35135 PLANNING DIVISION 1. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees, and Agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135. 2. Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135 will expire two (2) years from date of approval unless within that period of time an appropriate instrument has been filed and recorded with the County Recorder, or an extension of time is granted by the City of Lake Elsinore City Council in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the LEMC. 3. The Tentative Parcel Map shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Title 16 unless modified by approved Conditions of Approval. 4. Prior to final recordation of the Tentative Parcel Map, the improvements specified herein and approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council shall be installed, or agreements for said improvements, shall be submitted to the City for approval by the City Engineer, and all other stated conditions shall be complied with. All uncompleted improvements must be bonded for as part of the agreements. 5. Prior to final recordation of the Tentative Parcel Map, the applicant shall submit for and obtain Commercial Design Review approval associated with Parcels 1, 2, 3, and 4 of Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135. 6. All lots shall comply with minimum standards contained in the LEMC. 7. A precise survey with closures for boundaries and all lots shall be provided per the LEMC. 8. The applicant shall comply with the following City programs: the City Source Reduction and Recycling Element and Household Hazardous Waste Element, the County Solid Waste Management Plan and Integrated Waste Management Plan. 9. Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall submit a letter of verification (will- serve letter) from appropriate utility providers to the City Engineer, for all required utility services. 10.The applicant shall pay applicable fees and obtain proper clearance from the Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD) prior to issuance of building permits. 11. The applicant shall pay all applicable fees including park fees. Page 13 of 38 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PAGE 2 OF 7 TPM 35135 12. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing electric utility company. 13. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing gas utility company. 14. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing telephone utility company. 15.A bond is required guaranteeing the removal of all trailers used during construction. 16. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall submit a Reciprocal Easement Agreement with Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) for review and approval by the Community Development Director or Designee and the City Attorney. The CC&R's shall provide reciprocal ingress, egress and parking as between all parcels and shall include methods of funding and maintaining common areas, parking and drive aisle areas, landscaped areas including parkways, water quality management best management practices and methods for common maintenance of all underground, and above ground utility infrastructure improvements necessary to support the Center. In addition, CC&R's shall establish methods to address design improvements. The CC&R's shall be executed by the property owner and recorded against the properties. 17. Each building owner shall have full access to commonly owned areas (parking), facilities and utilities. 18. Prior to final map approval, the applicant and the property owner shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgement of Conditions" form and shall return the executed original to the Planning Division for inclusion in the case records. 19.The applicant shall place a weatherproof 3' x 3' sign at the entrance to the project site identifying the approved days and hours of construction activity (i.e., 7:00 A.M. - 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday with no construction activity to occur on Saturdays, Sundays or legal holidays) and a statement that complaints regarding the operation can be lodged with the City of Lake Elsinore Code Enforcement Division (951) 674-3124. The sign shall be installed prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 20. Prior to final map approval, a landscaping and irrigation plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planning Division. The plan shall address the existing slope areas along the Mission Trail frontage. In addition, all approved landscaping and irrigation improvements shall be fully installed prior to final map approval. ENGINEERING DIVISION 21. Provide Parcel Map per current Subdivision Map Act to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer, prior to recordation. 22.All parcels shall have access to public right-of-way through the existing driveway, by means of a reciprocal easement among properties, as evidenced by a Reciprocal Page 14 of 38 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PAGE 3 OF 7 TPM 35135 Easement Agreement with Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions in such form as approved by the Community Development Director and City Attorney in accordance with Condition No. 16. The CC&R's shall provide specific means for construction and maintenance of the improvements within the easement. 23. Install permanent survey monuments in compliance with the City's municipal code. 24.All drainage facilities in this project shall be constructed to Riverside County Flood Control District Standards and hydrology manual. 25. Developer shall mitigate any flooding and/or erosion downstream caused by development of the site and/or diversion of drainage. 26.All natural drainage traversing the site (historic flow) shall be conveyed through the site in a manner consistent with the historic flow or to one or a combination of the following: to a public facility; accepted by adjacent property owners by a letter of drainage acceptance; or conveyed to a drainage easement as approved by the City Engineer. 27.All storm drain inlet facilities shall be appropriately stenciled to prevent illegal dumping in the drain system; the working and stencil shall be approved by the City Engineer. 28.All required soils, geology, hydrology and hydraulic and seismic reports shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer. 29.All Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). 30.Arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults, etc.) on site and/or out on the roadway or alley shall be the responsibility of the property owner or his agent. Overhead utilities (12 KV or lower) shall be undergrounded. Temporary power shall be installed per the requirements of Building Official. All power lines (temporary or permanent) shall comply with CALTRANS standards for vehicle clearance. 31.The applicant shall preserve or install blue dot markers in the roadway at a right angle to Fire Hydrant locations per Riverside County Standards. 32. Sight distance into and out of this project location shall comply with CALTRANS Standards. FEES: 30.The applicant shall pay all Engineering Division assessed Capital Improvement, Plan Check and Permit fees (LEMC 16.34). Applicable mitigation fees include: o Stephens Kangaroo Habitat Fee (K-Rat): $500 per gross acre due at Grading Permit; oTraffic Infrastructure Fee (TIF): $3.84 per square foot (commercial) of buildings. The Page 15 of 38 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PAGE 4 OF 7 TPM 35135 project may be eligible for reimbursement of road improvements constructed on Mission Trail (99.2%), due at Building Permit oTransportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF): $10.49 per square foot of new retail construction. This fee can be paid at Building Permit Issuance but shall be paid by occupancy. o Drainage Fee: $0 (Lake Management District) NOTE: Above fees quoted are subject to change. Fees will be assessed at the prevalent rate at time of payment in full. FLOOD PLAIN: 31. The map area lies outside of a FEMA special flood hazard zone. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT / POLLUTION PREVENTION 32. Both a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post construction are required for this project. The Applicant, at their expense, agrees to implement site design changes and/or revisions resulting from the review for approval of the WQMP, processing the changes and/or revisions through the appropriate City Departments for approval prior to implementation. 33.The site design techniques in the WQMP shall achieve post development runoff flow rates, velocities, duration and volume from a 2 year and 10 year 24 hour rainfall event to prevent significant increases in downstream erosion compared to the pre-development condition and prevents significant adverse impacts to stream habitat. The WQMP shall provide measures to minimize the impact from the pollutants of concern and hydrologic conditions of concern identified for the project. Where the pollutants of concern include pollutants that are listed as causing or contributing to impairments of receiving waters, BMPs must be selected so that the project does not cause or contribute to an exceedance of water quality objectives. The WQMP shall provide information regarding design considerations, and the long-term operation and maintenance requirements for BMPs requiring long-term maintenance as well as the mechanism for funding the long- term operation and maintenance of the BMP's. 34. DURING CONSTRUCTION, NPDES education guidelines and Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be posted to inform users of this development of environmental awareness and good housekeeping practices that contribute to protection of storm water quality and meet the goals of the BMPs in Supplement "A" of the Riverside County NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan (Required for lots of one acre or more or lots that are part of a larger common plan (ex. shopping center infill lot)). Install NPDES approved stabilized entrance onsite to prevent tracking of material onto Mission Trail. Page 16 of 38 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PAGE 5OF7 TPM 35135 PLEASE NOTE: the discharge of pollutants into street, gutters, storm drain system, or waterways - without Regional Water Quality Control Board permit or waiver - is strictly prohibited by local ordinances and state and federal law. IMPROVEMENTS: 35. The owner shall dedicate on the parcel map additional right-of-way to the City along Mission Trail adjacent to the property frontage for a total right-of-way of 60' as measured from centerline to the project property line on Mission Trail. 36. A note shall be placed on the parcel map identifying that the construction of offsite and onsite improvements per SMA 66411.1 (a). 37. At the discretion of the City Engineer, either cash-in-lieu of improvements or construction of offsite improvements shall be required prior to issuance of the first permit (or other grant of approval for development of the parcel is issued by the City). If constructed, improvements shall be to City Standard; new improvements shall match or transition to existing improvements. 38. All public improvements shall comply with ADA standards. 39. Provide public street lighting, consistent with City Standards. 40. A California Registered Civil Engineer shall prepare the improvement plans required for this project. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to Riverside County Road Department Standards latest edition, and City Codes (LEMC 12.04 and 16.34) PRIOR TO GRADING PERMIT 41. A grading plan signed and stamped by a California Registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted for City review and approval for all addition and/or movement of soil (grading) on the site. The plan shall include separate sheets for: Grading, Erosion control Haul route(s) to be used for movement of import or export material. Traffic control. 42. The grading submittal shall include all supporting documentation and be prepared using City standard title block, standard drawings and Lake Elsinore Design Manual (available at www.lake-elsinore.org). 43. All grading plan contours shall extend to minimum of 25 feet beyond property lines to indicate existing drainage pattern. Page 17 of 38 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PAGE 6OF7 TPM 35135 44. If the grading plan identifies alterations in the existing drainage patterns as they exit the site, a Hydrology and Hydraulic Report for review and approval by City Engineer shall be required prior to issuance of grading permits. All grading that modifies the existing flow patterns and/or topography shall be approved by the City Engineer. 45. The applicant shall apply for, obtain and submit to the City's Engineering Division a letter from Southern California Edison (SCE) indicating that the construction activity will not interfere with existing SCE facilities (aka SCE NIL). 46. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer. Slopes steeper than 2 to 1 shall be evaluated for stability and proper erosion control and approved by the City. 47. A seismic study shall be performed on the site to identify any hidden earthquake faults, liquefaction and/or subsidence zones present on-site. A certified letter from a registered geologist or geotechnical engineer shall be submitted confirming the absence of this hazard prior to grading permit. 48. The applicant shall obtain all necessary off-site easements and/or permits for off-site grading and/or drainage acceptance from the adjacent property owners prior to grading permit issuance. PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT 49. The applicant shall submit a "Will Serve" letter to the City Engineering Division for this project and specify the technical data for the water service at the location, such as water pressure and volume, etc. Submit this letter to the Engineering Division prior to applying for a building permit. 50. All required public right-of-way dedications and easements shall be prepared by the applicant or his agent and shall be submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval prior to issuance of building permit. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY/FINAL APPROVAL: 51. All required public right-of-way dedications, easements and vacations and easement agreement(s) for ingress and egress through adjacent property (ies) shall be recorded with a recorded copy provided to the City prior to final project approval. 52. Slope maintenance along right-of-ways and open spaces shall be maintained by the property owner. Documentation of maintenance responsibility shall be in a recordable format and recorded prior to occupancy/final. Page 18 of 38 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PAGE 7 OF 7 TPM 35135 53. Provide on compact disc GIS Shape files of all final maps and street and storm drain plans. BALL DATA MUST BE IN projected Coordinate System: NAD 83 State Plane California Zone VI U.S. Fleet. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 54. Developer shall comply with all City Ordinances regarding construction debris removal and recycling as per Section 8.32 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 55. Prior to approval of the Parcel Map, the applicant shall annex into Community Facilities District No. 2006-5 (Park, Open Space and Storm Drain Maintenance) to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the future development. Upon completion of the annexation, the annual CFD special tax will begin when a when a new building permit is issued for the new parcels; the remainder parcel containing the existing commercial building will be exempt from the CFD special tax unless a new building permit is issued. Applicant shall pay to the City a non-refundable deposit in the amount of $5,000 to cover the cost of the annexation process. RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 56. The applicant shall comply with all Riverside County Fire Departments requirements and standards. Provide fire protection facilities as required in writing by the Riverside County Fire Department. ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT 57. The applicant shall request a "will serve" letter from the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. Submit the "Will Serve" letter to the City Engineering Division from the applicable water agency stating that water and sewer arrangements have been made for this project. Submit this letter prior to issuance of a building permit. Page 19 of 38 CITY OF ^ LADE LSINORE DREAM EXTREME- REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ROBERT A. BRADY, CITY MANAGER DATE: NOVEMBER 2, 2010 SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 35135: A REQUEST TO SUBDIVE AN EXISTING 9.07 ACRE SITE INTO FOUR (4) PARCELS WITHIN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C-2) DISTRICT APPLICANT: MATTHEW LIESEMEYER, MHL CONSULTING, INC., 26924 MERCED STREET, MENIFEE, CA 92584 OWNER: TRACY KOBOLD, INLAND PACIFIC CALIFORNIA, LLC, 10710 WESTMINISTER BOULEVARD, #130, WESTMINISTER, CO 80020 Project Request The applicant is proposing to subdivide 9.07 acres of land into four (4) individual parcels pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 17.124 (General Commercial District), and Chapter 16 "Subdivisions" of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), and Section(s) 66425 et seq. of the California Subdivision Map Act (CSMA). Project Location The 9.07 acre project site is located at 32250 Mission Trail. Access to the project site is available from Mission Trail. Page 20 of 38 Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135 November 2, 2010 Page 2 of 5 Environmental Settin The site is bounded on all sides by existing commercial uses. Project Existing Site Commercia[/Vacant North Existing Commercial oourn txistin Commercial East Existin Commercial West Fxisfinn Project Description cuNING GENERAL PLAN z general Commercial) I General Commercial C-1 (Neighborhood General Commercial Commercial C-2 (General Commercial General Commercial C-2 General Commercial General Commercial C-2 (General Commercial) East Lake S ecific Plan The proposed parcel map will subdivide the aforementioned 9.07-acres of general commercial zoned land into four (4) individual parcels. Parcel No. 1 will be .79 acres (34,388 square feet), Parcel No. 2 will be .57 acres (25,002 square feet), Parcel No. 3 will be .91 acres (39,618 square feet), and Parcel No. 4 will be 6.81 acres (296,644 square feet). It should be noted that the site is currently developed with one (1) existing commercial building (Trevi Entertainment Center) on the proposed fourth (4th) parcel. Background On August 17, 2010, the project was reviewed by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission expressed concerns relating to the following items: 1) ADA accessibility, 2) parking for the existing building/use as well as future uses, 3) applicability of the 100 feet street frontage requirement, and 4) applicability of the minimum 25,000 square foot lot size requirement The Planning Commission elected to continue the project to September 7, 2010, October 5, 2010 and again to November 2, 2010 to allow the applicant and staff more time to gather information addressing the identified concerns. Analysis The following is in response to the previously identified Planning Commission concerns • ADA Accessibility: ADA Accessibility has been approved by the City Building Official for the existing Trevi building. When development comes forward for the unimproved proposed parcels, each parcel/development will be required to provide ADA access. Page 21 of 38 Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135 November 2, 2010 Page 3 of 5 • Parking for existing as well as future uses: The subject property is subject to that certain Shopping Center Reciprocal Easement Agreement" dated March 30, 1988 recorded against the property in accordance with the original approval of the Center. The Reciprocal Easement Agreement anticipates the future development of individual pads and requires reciprocal ingress, egress and parking as between all parcels as well as common area maintenance and related provisions. The applicant has provided a conceptual site plan identifying how the proposed parcels can ultimately be developed (Attachment 6) with building location and on- site parking. It should be noted that parking for the existing Trevi building was approved under Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-09. No additional parking studies are required at this time. Each parcel will be required to satisfy its own parking requirements through the Commercial Design Review process. • Parcels to have 100 feet of Street Frontage Width: Section 17.124.050 requires that "any new lot created in the C-2 District shall have one hundred (100') feet of street frontage." However; Section 17.124.040 provides "within centers which have Design Review approval pursuant to Chapter 17.184 and which share reciprocal facilities such as parking and access, smaller lots (i.e. less than 25,000 square feet) in the form of individual pads may be permitted provided it can be shown that development upon those lots can comply, with the exceptions of street frontage width (emphasis added), with all of the standards of this Chapter (i.e. Chapter 17.124 C-2 General Commercial District)." Existing within a Shopping Center which has Design Review approval, Section 17.124.040 of the Zoning Code affords the Planning Commission discretion to recommend to the City Council approval of lots smaller than 25,000 square feet and/or lots with less than one hundred (100') foot street frontage width. In order to clarify the intent of Section 17.124.040, staff is recommending a LEMC amendment (see discussion below). In addition, staff has conditioned the project to submit for and obtain Design Review approval prior to final map recordation as contemplated by Section 17.124.040 (see proposed Condition No. 5). In addition, Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Section 16.20.040 requires "all lots shall have frontage upon a public or private street which shall be open to and usable by vehicular traffic, and all lots shall have a minimum 20-foot wide direct vehicular access to such street." The 20-foot wide direct vehicular access requirement is achieved via shared (reciprocal) driveways and drive aisles. -,vuu zbsquare Teet of lot area: The applicant has revised the proposed Tentative Parc el map to comply with this code requirement. Page 22 of 38 Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135 November 2, 2010 Page 4 of 5 The applicant is proposing to subdivide the identified property for the creation of four (4) individual parcels pursuant to subdivision and development standards (i.e. lot size, lot frontage) set forth in Chapter 17.124 (General Commercial District), of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Section 16 "Subdivisions" of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Section(s) 66425 et seq. of the California Subdivision Map Act (CSMA). City Planning and Engineering staffs have reviewed the project, and have no concerns regarding the proposed request. Proposed LEMC Amendment In order to clarify the flexibility allowed with respect to street frontage for individual lots in shopping centers with Design Review approval and subject to recorded reciprocal access and parking requirements, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council direct the City Attorney to prepare an amendment to the LEMC. In conjunction with minor modifications to Section 17.124.040 and 17.124.050, the following provision could be added: "Notwithstanding the requirements of Sections 17.124.040 and 17.124.050, within centers that have Design Review approval pursuant to Chapter 17.184 prior to recordation of a final map and which share reciprocal facilities such as parking and access pursuant to a binding agreement recorded against all parcels within the center, the Planning Commission may recommend approval and the City Council may approve lots smaller than 25,000 net square feet and/or lots with less than 100 feet of street frontage width so long as in the aggregate the lots within the center comprise a minimum of insert # square feet and not less than 100 feet of street frontage and so long as each individual lot otherwise complies with all other standards of this Chapter 17.24 (C-2 General Commercial District)." Environmental Determination Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this project has been deemed exempt pursuant to Section 15315 (Minor Land Divisions). The site is not within a MSHCP Criteria Cell, and is already developed. As a result of existing development, there are no potential impacts to any species or habitat covered by the MSHCP. No further environmental clearance is necessary. Recommendation • Adopt a Resolution No. 2010- adopting findings that the project is consistent with the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan; and, • Adopt a Resolution No. 2010- recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135 based on the Findings, Exhibits, and proposed Conditions of Approval. Page 23 of 38 Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135 November 2, 2010 Page 5 of 5 • Request the City Council to direct the City Attorney to prepare an Ordinance amending the LEMC consistent with the discussion above. Prepared By: Kirt A. Coury, ~G Project Planner Reviewed By: Matthew C. Harris, Senior Planner Approved By: Robert A. Bradyj City Manager Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Planning Commission Resolutions 3. Planning Commission Conditions of Approval 4. Acknowledgement of Draft Conditions of Approval Form 5. Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135 (reduction) 6. Full Size Plan Page 24 of 38 III sl}4 Ili W Z=a - _ ~ p - ¢e U'.- 5 - 13 -w _ n m nw I~ _ <u _ w o ww rc. o < a - _ : <u ~ n w o 3 la < c u W o- OIL - n c _ i w U o~ ~ c m U i44 c ~ o a_ u o m . 2 0 O c~ U ~ O III ~ ~`a w e _ I F in K VI W U U O d V o~ n F ¢°m i d s1 ¢ W m yy ss 3 3 ww W u ~ W Q w xl W o J ~ Oz Uu O ~ t~ii O K v~ O m Q'I,~ Z~ O a ~ - U' ~o W n z 0Iq KI',~ W ¢ i5 Z< ¢ ¢ ¢ ~ a O'$ W m q ¢ e ~ i O'3 w~„ °3so I W u p,l ~ s m°e tt ..nw:m¢ xy U all'a zl FI: 5 Flo _ I e~ w m U' ~ a a Ui x:"~ O w OIw- O ¢ x case el a : II _ e w~ - tip" 0 .e~ tD 2 r C4 ~Y 0 i 'i~ { f/ I n se i tl(I I ~1 ~ II ~e I I I. L is! W rn ' 9; I' e - ga ' 16 x~, IIr ~lNl~, a J - - owe N I' W o PASS- > L cL r I- w ~ ~ III I I I < IN ~ j ~ A\\\\ l ! I~ Sava' ,~I I J t I I I I iJ - - m I aka ~ I .I= \ I loll o h Fae = Page 25 of 38 Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of August 17, 2010 Page 4 of 8 (3) Public Works Director Se closed and there is partial O'Neal indicated indicated that the gate at the facility but it is not there could be liability the facility is for the Assistant City Attorney Mann indicate that the facility is on pry to property an the City is not liable unless the artial fencing poses a head and safety c\ntire pose a health d safety concern then the City can act have the owner cure the property with fencing arounerty. CommissioneCity Manager Brady if th City can require that there be und the property until it is r pened or re- sold. Ci Manager Brady indicated th the City can determine if the is a nuis ce at the property regarding s ety issues and liability, and if so, the City ca require that a fence be put aro d the property. Chairman Gc~nzales confirmed that the City 'll decide whether there is a nuisance at th roperty and go on from there. Plan Commercial (C-2) District Recommendation a. Adopt a resolution adopting findings that the project is consistent with the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan: and, b. Adopt a resolution recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135 based on the Findings. Exhibits, and proposed Conditions of Approval. City Manager Brady provided an overview of the project and requested that Planning Consultant Coury review it with the Commission and answer questions. Planning Consultant Coury provided an overview of the project to the Commission and indicated that the applicant was present. He noted that there was a typo on the Resolution, JHL Consulting, Inc. was corrected to MHL Consulting, Inc. and indicated that it would be corrected on City Council Resolution as well. Page 26 of 38 Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of August 17, 2010 Page 5 of 8 Vice-Chairman Mendoza stated his concern about the adequacy of existing spaces onsite. Commissioner O'Neal asked Planning Consultant Coury who the reciprocal agreement was with. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that the reciprocal agreement was with the adjacent property owner, Trevi Entertainment Center. Commissioner O'Neal stated to Mr. Coury that when Trevi Entertainment Center was approved, the Commission was concerned that if there was more development there would not be enough parking. He also indicated that letters were sent to the property owner to clean up the lots and the owner did not comply. Commissioner Jordan asked why it doesn't state in the Conditions of Approval, that the City requests the "Will Serve" letters prior to parcel map approval and indicated that it would be better to request this at final map or parcel map approval. Public Works Director Seumalo indicated that the subdivision map process is dividing the land and that staff doesn't necessarily know what the land use is going to be. At Building Permit issuance, staff does know what the land use is, therefore, the water need is known and that is why staff does it in that sequence. Commissioner Jordan indicated that she didn't see a Traffic Control Plan in the engineering conditions and wanted to know if a Traffic Control Plan was required, Public Works Director Seumalo stated that staff reviewed the land division with no specific uses in mind. Commissioner Jordan asked if parking was considered. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that staff looked at it with concern but stated that there are no uses proposed with the map at this time and the only use that exists there is Trevi Entertainment Center. Vice-Chairman Mendoza noted that parcel no. 4 is part of Trevi so if they wanted to take it away, they could. The applicant, Matthew Liesemeyer of MHL Consulting, addressed the parking issue indicating that there was a consultant hired to do a traffic analysis for the entire complex, including Trevi Lanes, the Casino, the Theater and the Hotel and there were extra parking spaces identified. He stated that the amount of existing parking spaces onsite far exceeds Page 27 of 38 Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of August 17, 2010 Page 6 of 8 zoning requirements. He also addressed Condition No. 19 indicating that the 2nd plan check for the slope landscaping plans was submitted to the City's landscaping consultants so as to upgrade the existing slope landscaping along the property's Mission Trail frontage. Commissioner Morsch indicated that he would feel more comfortable if the Commission were to get a conceptual plan to show circulation of parking. He addressed issues regarding the lot configurations, street frontage, and that the tentative tract map does not show a 10 foot dedication. He also indicated that with what he reviewed, it is in violation of the General Plan. Planning Consultant Coury addressed the 10 foot dedication and stated that staff would review and follow-up with the Commission. Commissioner Morsch suggested that staff review the issues and return to the Commission with another tentative tract map that is in compliance along with an exhibit with a site plan that would demonstrate feasibility with the parking circulation, etc. Mr. Liesemeyer indicated that he prepared an exhibit but staff did not include it with the uses onsite. Commissioner O'Neal asked Mr. Liesemeyer to identify the parking issues of the development. Mr. Liesemeyer indicated that he would outline where the parking stalls will be allocated for uses onsite. Commissioner Morsch asked if the City is required to provide American Disabilities Act (ADA) access from Mission Trail to the Trevi Center and stated that he is mentioning this so that this can be incorporated into the next design. City Manager Brady indicated that there was ADA access that was constructed when Trevi was put in which is adjacent to the driveway between the theater and Trevi Lanes. Commissioner Morsch stated that there was no indication that it was ADA accessible and thinks the slope is too steep. Planning Consultant Coury requested clarification on the following: 1) Identify ADA access 2) Identify Parking and Conceptual Plan 3) Resolve the 100 foot frontage for the remaining parcel 4) Verify that the newly created parcels shall conform to the 25,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size requirement. Page 28 of 38 Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of August 17, 2010 Page 7 of 8 MOTION was made by Commissioner Morsch, and seconded by Vice- Chairman Mendoza to continue Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135 to September 7, 2010, Planning Commission meeting. AYES: Gonzales, Mendoza, Jordan, Morsch NOES: O'Neal ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None STAFF COMMENTS Public W ks Director Seumalo indicated that the akeshore Drive Overlay project is , ' before City Council for consideration ftwawarding the bid on August 24t an instruction is to start the first week of Oct er. Also, there is a bid opening fover Walk that will also go before ity Council for consideration on 24tH Planni ng Consultant Coury h`ad no comments. Senior Planner Harris indicated th t a few of the Commissioners had questidns regarding the status of the Lake Elsl re Casino sign that went to the Planning Commission and was denied and sta d that the sign had been completely painted over. ist Porche' had no comments. City Mang Brady stated that the CUP that was co idered for the Church and denied by th Planning Commission at the last Plann' g Commission meeting has been appe ed and will be considered by the City ouncil on August 24, 2010. He also quested that the Commissioners pick up their Planning Commission Agenda cket at City Hall and Office Sped t Herrington will contact them once it is re V. BUSINESS ITEM(S) Commission Morsch stated that he and his concert in the rk last Saturday night and [is was a lot of fun. went to McVicor Park for a to the Silver Beatles which Page 29 of 38 Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of October 5, 2010 Page 2 of 13 Recommendation: Approve the following Minute(s) a. August 17, 2010 \ b. September 7, 2010 MO ON was made by Commissioner\Q'~ Vice airman Mendoza and unanimously ca August 2010, and September 7, 2010, K minutes. seconded by to approve the is Commission AYES: Chairman Gonzales, Vice Chairman Mo C missioner Jordan, Commissioner Conn issioner O'Neal NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None PUBLIC HE ING ITEM(S) (2) Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135: A request to subdivide an existing 9.07 acre site into five (5) parcels within the General Commercial (C-2) District Recommendation: a. b. and proposed Conditions of Approval. City Manager Brady provided an overview of the project and requested that Planning Consultant Coury review it with the Commission and answer questions. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that this project was heard at the August 17, 2010, Planning Commission meeting and several items were brought up for discussion. He noted that the Tentative Parcel Map was modified to a five (5) lot parcel map instead of a four (4) lot parcel map and indicated that instead of the Trevi Lanes site being identified as a remainder parcel, it is now designated parcel five (5) and in an effort to address the Planning Commission's concerns, he stated that the applicant provided a Conceptual Site Plan and also addressed the following Commission concerns: Page 30 of 38 Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of October 5, 2010 Page 3 of 13 • ADA accessibility. • Parking for existing as well as future uses. • Remainder parcel to have 100 feet of street frontage width. • Each new parcel is required to have a minimum 25,000 square feet of lot area. He indicated that Staff is in support of the project and recommended approval of the project. REQUESTS TO SPEAK The applicant, Matthew Liesemeyer of MHL Consulting gave his name and address. He indicated that he would answer any questions that the Commission had regarding the project and noted that Public Works Director Seumalo had additional information for the Commission. Public Works Director Seumalo stated that he received an e-mail that was forwarded by the applicant with concerns about some of the Conditions of Approval and indicated that he didn't have the opportunity to speak with the applicant but had no problem revising the Conditions that the applicant requested and stated that the following Conditions were revised. Condition No. 21 Provide Final Parcel Map per current Subdivision Map Act to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer, prior to recordation. Condition No. 24 New drainage facilities in this project shall be constructed to Riverside County Flood Control District Standards and hydrology manual. Condition No. 26 Eliminate this Condition because it is redundant to Condition No. 21. Condition No. 37 Strike this Condition and implement a new and more general Condition which reads: Improvements on public right-of-way shall require approved plans and encroachment permits. Condition No. 39 Strike this Condition because it has been replaced with the new Condition No. 37. Mr. Liesemeyer stated they he agreed with all of the Conditions including the revised Conditions of Approval. Page 31 of 38 Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of October 5, 2010 Page 4 of 13 Commissioner Morsch requested that Condition No. 17 be re-worded to state commonly accessed area because there is no commonly owned area. City Attorney Leibold suggested changing the wording to read: Each building owner shall have full access to common areas established by way of the Reciprocal Agreement. Commissioner Morsch indicated that Section 17.124.040 states that within Centers which have design review approval, he read it as a Condition that allows the City to approve lots that are less than 25,000 sq. ft. provided design review has been approved and indicated that they have not yet reviewed a design approval on this project. City Attorney Leibold indicated that the Center was approved and a Reciprocal Easement Agreement was recorded and runs with the land presently and as a Condition of Approval, prior to recordation of the parcel map, the City required that the applicant bring forward design review. As such, she stated that the map can't be finaled until the City has design review with respect to the new created parcels but the Center and the expectation of the creation of the additional pads and reciprocal parking and access requirements are already addressed. Commissioner Morsch asked for clarification from the City Attorney regarding this provision. City Attorney Leibold indicated that her interpretation of this provision is that if you have a Center that is subject to design review then the lots are relieved from the 25,000 square foot size and the one hundred foot frontage requirement because it says that you have to comply with all other standards except lot width. Commissioner Morsch indicated that his interpretation of the provision is for lots that are less than 25,000 sq. ft. and indicated that the Trevi site is 6 acres and therefore does not fall under the provision. City Attorney Leibold indicated that it is up to the Commissioners discretion regarding the language of all provisions. Commissioner Morsch asked if there would be a problem with making one hundred (100) feet of frontage for the Trevi parcel. Mr. Liesemeyer indicated that it would be a problem because then they cannot get a complete division and would be cutting down one of the other four (4) parcels. Page 32 of 38 Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of October 5, 2010 Page 5 of 13 Commissioner Morsch indicated that he is complying with Section 050 of the Code. Commissioner Jordan indicated that Trevi is an existing use and is already established and the other four (4) parcels will accommodate future uses. Therefore, she interprets the Code as not requiring one hundred (100) feet of frontage for parcel five because it is an existing parcel. Commissioner O'Neal indicated that he agrees with Commissioner Morsch's interpretation of the Code and stated that when reviewing parcel three, which is 16,000 sq. ft., the applicant is representing that he can build a 2,000 sq. ft. building. Commercial buildings cost a lot of money to build and he would most likely not be able to rent a 2,000 sq. ft. building for the amount of cost. He indicated that he doesn't agree with what is proposed. Vice-Chairman Mendoza indicated that whoever purchases the parcels will be at a disadvantage with the development. Chairman Gonzales indicated that the buildings are going to be small and once this is developed they will lose parking in front of the building and there will be no parking for deliveries. Mr. Liesemeyer indicated that the owner plans on retaining ownership of all of the parcels and he has nothing planned to go in there currently. Commissioner Gonzales stated that the owner is probably hoping to subdivide them and then lease them to somebody to build something there. Mr. Liesemeyer stated that the owner was considering building them himself. Commissioner Morsch suggested that Mr. Liesemeyer bring back to the Commission another plan for design review that would justify the smaller lots and include on the site plan, parcel data, parking count requirements, parking provided, and ADA access from Mission Trail to the buildings. There was lengthy discussion between the Commissioners and the City Attorney regarding the interpretation of the Code. Vice Chairman Mendoza suggested expanding the parcels as long as the circulation is still adequate. Mr. Liesemeyer asked how they would distinguish this. Page 33 of 38 Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of October 5, 2010 Page 6 of 13 Commissioner Jordan suggested that Mr. Liesemeyer make all of the lots at least 25,000 square feet then there would be adequate building size and the Commission would not be requesting him to specify a minimum building size. Mr. Liesemeyer questioned the Commission dictating the size of a building when he believes that it is up to the property owner. Commissioner Morsch indicated that Mr. Liesemeyer would be restricting the building size by the lot size and if they had a bigger lot, they could have a bigger building. From the development standpoint, it is important to optimize the size of the building, therefore a better opportunity to lease it, and to sell it. Commissioner Mendoza indicated that if it was a larger parcel, this would accommodate other requirements to the building such as American Disabilities Act requirements, and another easement. Mr. Liesemeyer requested specific direction from the Commission regarding what they wanted him to do. MOTION was made by Commissioner Jordan, seconded by Vice-Chairman Mendoza and unanimously carried to continue this project to November 2, 2010, incorporating the proposed changes that Staff read into the record with lots not less than 25,000 square feet gross and design review as stated as a Condition precedent to recordation and a waiver of the one hundred (100) foot frontage requirement as it relates to Trevi Lanes, Parcel 5. AYES: Chairman Gonzales, Vice Chairman Mendoza, Commissioner Jordan, Commissioner Morsch, Commissioner O'Neal NOES: None ABSENT: None Page 34 of 38 Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of November 2, 2010 Page 2 of 7 a. July 6, 2010 b. July 20, 2010 OTION was made by Commissioner O'Neal, seconded by C missioner Jordan and una 'mously carried to approve tly 6, 10, Planning Commission mutes, and the July 20, 10, Plar g Commission minutes. Chairman Gonzales,`4 Commissioner Jordan Commissioner O'Neal NOES: \ None ABSENT: N67 ABSTAIN: None PUBLIC ARING ITEM(S) (2) Tentative Parcel Map No a. Chairman Mendoza, )mm'i stoner Morsch, ager Br§@y provided an overview of the project and requested ning CgnsUltant Coury review it with the Commission and answer Planning Consultant Coury indicated that the project was continued from three (3) previous meetings to this evening's Planning Commission meeting. He stated that there has been extensive discussion relative to the proposed parcel map and that the applicant is requesting to subdivide an existing 9.07 acre site into four (4) parcels within the General Commercial (C-2) District and Staff is recommending approval of the project. Commissioner Jordan requested that the Conditions of Approval should be revised to state "Final Map" instead of "Tentative Parcel Map". Page 35 of 38 Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of November 2, 2010 Page 3 of 7 Commissioner Morsch thanked the City Manager and the City Attorney for working out the issues that he had. He indicated that Shopping Centers are different than a single building on a C-2 Commercial lot and stated that the proposed Amendment should bring this particular project into compliance but believes that the City should look further ahead and entertain the idea of a new section to the Code that addresses Shopping Centers specifically. He concurs that the Amendment to Title 17 is needed and supports the project as it stands. Commissioner O'Neal had no comments. Vice-Chairman Mendoza thanked the Commission and thanked staff for corr Chairman Gonzales thanked the Passed and adopted the following "Resolution No. 2010-44 - A City of Lake Elsinore, Cal consistent with the Multiple MOTION was made Jordan and unant consistent with the A patient with the Commission of the that the project is )n Plan (MSHCP) 0I y~~econded by Commissioner I findings that the project is Conservation Plan (MSHCP). ,Ies, Vice Chairman Mendoza, Jordan, Commissioner Morsch, O'Neal ABSENT Passed and None following Resolution: "Resolution No. 2010-45 - A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, recommending to the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135, located at 32250 Mission Trail with revisions to the Conditions of Approval. MOTION was made by Vice-Chairman Mendoza, seconded by Commissioner Jordan and unanimously carried recommending to the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 35135, located at 32250 Mission Trail with revisions to the Conditions of Approval. his Page 36 of 38 Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of November 2, 2010 Page 4 of 7 AYES: Chairman Gonzales, Vice Chairman Mendoza, Commissioner Jordan, Commissioner Morsch, Commissioner O'Neal NOES: None ABSENT: None There was discussion between the Commissioners regarding the proposed Amendment to the Code and various issues that ne"0 to be reviewed within the Code. „s City Manager Brady suggested bringing consideration. He indicated that the initiated by Staff and then brought to the City Council. He noted that St' issues with the Development Code as 'I be reviewed after the Commissioner Morsch ask should be concurrently with after the adoption of,the„Gel City Manager l~rady sL will need to lopzat the the General ill Pl~w E zoning and, updatethe the Ge~teral, flan I review is back tosthe Commission for for Codg',lAfrrendments is sion for recd p endation to iat there are @)number of exists but suaacsted that it to amend the Code Plan, before hand, or ed that ice the General Plan is adopted, Staff uses a4f the associated land designations that sh Staf&ill then need to do the consistency . ~ ~ RE", IoprneptjCdde which should be completed after ing Consultant Coury what he thinks about Planning C %pnsultan> bury indicated that the design review process includes parking staid 5culation, landscape, and building design, etc. He stated that he unde"r &E Commissioner Morsch s point of view that if a blanket map were adopted without knowing what development will occur, it could create problems that would need to be fixed in the future. He indicated that Planning Staff reviews these issues during the design review process and the project has to meet and comply with all development standards when the project design comes forward. He noted that the responsibility is put on the developer because they risk subdividing a property according to today's design standards knowing that tomorrow's standards could change following the General Plan, and Zoning Code Update, etc. Page 37 of 38 Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of November 2, 2010 Page 5 of 7 Commissioner Morsch indicated that he feels that the design review should take place at the same time that the parcel map is reviewed because there are various elements that go into Commercial Designs. He also stated that the City should give Developers of Shopping Centers as much latitude and flexibility as possible and aid Commercial Development community as they are bringing tenants of these Shopping Centers to the City. Commissioner Jordan indicated that she thinks that the design review should not take place at the same time that the parcel map is reviewed because a design review is very specific and to do this at the same time that the tentative parcel map is done is too early. _Ad Commissioner Morsch indicated that Corr into the residential subdivision concept commercial. Commissioner Jordan indicated that Vice-Chairman Mendoza indicated thati different opinion on various projects that in the end the majority decides kWher a Chairman Gonzales noted a later date. City Manager updated and4l proiNf, nd the Riven Senior Pla er Harris Planning Connt~ y Office Specialist Rei" done also. 5rissioner is going to have a 'front of the Commission but is approved or disapproved. need to be reviewed at Municipal Code still needs to be that the Lakeshore DriJe (4 corners) are no comments. had no comments. no comments. %Sreion Manager Brady indic d that at the last City Council ftveeting, the Council ved the Draft Housing ment for rview and they reque ed a Joiht Study with the Planning Com 'ssion on Tuesday, November 113 ++'~2010, at 5:00 p.m. t the Cultural Center. He als indicated that the Planning Cci* ission also receive %ha py of the Draft Housing lement for review and requeste hat they forwaromments or questions to taff prior to the Study Session 'so that they cathe answ ers available in a ti ely manner. may be locked ment and not Page 38 of 38