Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem No. 21MOHAMMAD YUNUS RAHL Ph.D., P.E. r. Rahi joined Associated Traffic Consult- ants as a Senior Transportation Engi- neer in July, 1988. Prior to that he was an Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering at Washington State University. Dr. Rahi received his Bachelor of Science degree in Civil Engineer- ing from Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology in March, 1980. He attended Washington State University from 1983 toJanu- ary, 1987 where he received his Master of Sci- ence degree in Civil Engineering in August, 1984 and Doctor of Philosophy degree in Civil Engi- neering in May, 1987. While at Washington State University, he specialized in Transportation Planning and Engineering, Traffic Engineering, Systems Analysis, Construction Management, and Operations Research. Before coming to the United States, Dr. Rahi worked for both private and government agencies in Bangladesh. While there, he worked with Asso- ciated Structural Engineers and Architects and was responsible for the design of several multi- story office and residential developments. He worked for Bangladesh River Research Institute as an Assistant Director where he studied soil properties of river -bed soils. He later joined Bang- ladesh University of Engineering and Technology where he taught Civil Engineering courses for ap- proximately two and a half years. As a graduate student at Washington State Uni- versity, Dr. Rahi worked as a Teaching and Re- search Assistant in Transportation and Traffic Engineering. Sponsored projects in which he was directly involved with include the'Spokane Light Rail Transit Feasibility Study' and 'Impacts of Expanded College Programs on SR -195 and Alter- native Transportation Services between Spokane and Pullman- Moscow Area'. After graduation, Dr. Rahi worked as a Research Associate at Washington State University on two projects sponsored by Washington State De- partment of Transportation. The reports pre- pared on this research were 'Inexpensive Travel Demand Models for Small Urban Areas', and •Concrete Barrier End Treatment for Low Speed Highways'. Dr. Rahi taught three undergraduate and gradu- ate -level courses as Assistant Professor at Washington state University during the 1987 -88 acadsmfcyear. The courses were Transportation Engineering, Construction Management and Civil Engineering systems Design. At the same time, he worked on several research topics including Application of Inexpensive Travel Demand Models to the City of Pullman. Level -of- Service for Ferry Systems, Morphological Analy- sis of the City, Origin and Destination Trips Estimation from Link Counts, Setting the Ve- hicle- Change Intervals at Signalized Intersec- tion, Computer - Integrated Construction-Auto- motion in Highway Work Zones and Emergency Management, and Transportation Gaps - A Pre- liminary Assessment and Prognosis. Since joining Associated Traffic Consultants, Dr. Rahi has worked on several interesting projects. He has prepared the traffic impact portion of EIR's for the development of new regional shopping centers, commercial and office developments, mixed -use developments and traffic operational changes.His broad range of experience in trans- portation engineering /planning includes parking studies, geometric design of highways, accident studies, traffic signal design and timing, bikeway planning, paratransit systems and transporta- tion system management. In July 1993, Dr. Rahi assumed the position of Principal Engineer. He is currently serving as President of Associated Traffic Consultants. Dr. Rahi is a Registered Professional Engineer in the State of California. MOFESMONAL ecowrr m0BE Sm" imotvt efTrrwFertation En9insan rrar,ysrtaten Rs rmh 9"rd Anwlsan 6oeisty of Civil En9insan oFOration Po mh 600loty of Amor ASSOCIATEDTRAFFlCCONSULTANIS • P. O. BOX 90134 Pasdww, Odramis 91109 -5134 . (61807959053 . FAX (6181795-7817 PACs. 77 OF O l� �z� W W wz� AONO z Ewa �aA way O r I w C b O U O a a C q a�M } W W 0 v US FQ wr M w v s U W O ' •O a` d 0 F a d N Q z 6 Q z d x a Q 0 N z �D N t� z° w Y v lei 0 v b U 0 d E u b H 1+ M T o% 9 5 O b V N w l� pFd z z C7 w ae 0 0 Q N 00 '40 F0. da gu F h gu C b t4 w a v V W W 0 V K W PAC '79 OF 7f ,5 a N O u s wz- C I, ay.4 w z� iR w d Z d o W o Q W d 1a 'Na) Id u fN fti b w d o v W m> a a o a+ A V) a d N Q z 6 Q z d x a Q 0 N z �D N t� z° w Y v lei 0 v b U 0 d E u b H 1+ M T o% 9 5 O b V N w l� pFd z z C7 w ae 0 0 Q N 00 '40 F0. da gu F h gu C b t4 w a v V W W 0 V K W PAC '79 OF 7f ,5 a N O u s MOHAMMAD YUNUS RAH1, PH.D, RE President, Associated Traffic Consultants P.O. Box 90134, Pasadena, CA 91109 -5134 Telephone: (818) 795-9353 Fax: (818) 795 -2817 PROFESSIONAL SPECIALTY: Traffic and Transportation Engineering, Transportation Planning, Transportation System management, Research, Analysis and Design. Registered Professional Engineer in California EDUCATION: Ph.D in Civil Engineering (Specialization: Transportation) from Washington State University, Pullman, Washington in January, 1987 M.S in Civil Engineering (Specialization: Transportation) from Washington Stara University, Pullman, Washington in May, 1984 B.S in Civil Engineering from Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology. Bangladesh in 1980 ACADE1v9C SPECIALTY: Civil Engineering, Construction Management, Urban and Regional Planning, Operations Research, Managerial Economics, Network Optimization, Statistics, Computer Simulation and Programming JOB E).TeRwxE: Principal Transportation Engineer, Associated Traffic Consultants, since July,'93 Senior Transportation Engineer, Associated Traffic Consultants from July,'88 to June, 93 Assistant Professor, Washington State University from August, '87 to June, '88 Post Doctoral Research Associate, Washington State University from February, '87 to July, '87 Research /Teaching Assistant, Washington State University from February, '83 to January, '87 Lecturer, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Bangladesh from September, '80 to January, '83 TECHNICAL SKILLS: Traffic Impact Studies: Site Development, General Plan, Specific Plan, Environmental Impact Report, Travel Demand Forecasting, Transportation Modeling, Travel Reduction and Management Programs, Transportation System Management, Impact Mitigation Plans, Parking Studies Traffic Signal System Design, Signal and Striping Plan, Signal Timing Optimization Plan, Signal Interconnect and Progressive Timing, Accident Studies and Analysis, Highway and Intersection Capacity and Level of Service Analysis, Geometric Design, Highway and Traffic Safety Design Computer Programming: Fortran, BASIC, MS -DOS, Windows, AutoCAD, Lotus, dBase, WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, PageMaker Traffic and Transportation Software: TRANPLAN, HCS, NCAP, PASSERII -90, ICU, SOAP, TRANSY17F, QRS PROFESSIONAL PUBLICATION: 'Morphological Modeling of the City and Its Transportation System: A Preliminary Investigation' in Transportation Research Record 1237, TRB, 1991 (With C. Khisty and C. Hsu) REFERENCES: 'Evaluation of Inexpensive Travel Demand Models for Small Urban Areas' in 7iansportation Research Record 1276, TRB, 1991 (With C. Khisty) 'An Origin - Destination Trips Estimation Method that Minimizes Site-Specific Data Requirements ", to appear in Transportation Research Record, TRB, 1993 (With Y. Chan) Available Upon Request [August, 1993) AGENDA ITZi.1 N'Ot. PAG = 72 OF C CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FROM: RON MOLENDYK, CITY MANAGER DATE: OCTOBER 26, 1993 SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27821 AND COMMERCIAL PROJECT NO. 93 -4, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF' MISSION TRAIL AND MALAGA' ROAD. At its regular meeting of October 6, 1993, the Planning Commission recommended approval -of Tentative Parcel Map No. 27821, Commercial Project No. 93 -4 and associated applications (Staff Report,= Minutes, and Exhibits enclosed). The proposed project entails the subdivision of 17.37 acres into five (5) commercial parcels and design review for the construction of a 26,000 square foot theater and associated infrastructure improvements. The theater is proposed to have eight screens with approximately 1,600 seats. (Exhibits "B" and "C") DISCUSSION I ' Items 'of discussion at the Planning Commission .are .listed as followsc • Concerns over the need for substantial:lighting:.to the rear and sides of the theater and stairway areas between the Dunes Casino and the proposed theater. Condition Number 19 for C 93 -4 states that adequate lighting on those areas shall be provided to the satisfaction of the=, community Development Manager. • Concerns with regard to security personnel being provided to patrol the center were raised. Mr. O'.Byrne stated that there will be a security person on the Dunes' parking lot. He further stated that they are presently working with the Dunes Casino and K -Mart to develop a combined security system'. He referred to a location behind proposed Parcel No. 3 of TPM No. 27821 (Exhibit "B") and reference was 'made •to a potential security tower. Condition No. 41 for C 93 -4 was added to alleviate this concern. • - Mechanical-and electrical I roof mounted-equipment associated with`the theater was a concern due the potential visibility from Casino Drive and Malaga Road. The Commission conditioned all electrical and mechanical equipment to be concealed from public view. Condition No. 13 for C' 93 -4 alleviates' this concern. • Staff expressed concern over the front central facade of the theater. Staff suggested that reveals similar- 'to those proposed on the side panel be used. These reveals will divide the panel into quadrants to add further interest. Condition No. 40 for C 93 -4 was added. • Concerns with regard to the number of handicap parking spaces were expressed. Mr. Berkes and Mr. Crowe responded by stating that sufficient spaces were,-provided and strategically placed between the theater and the future 12,000 square foot retail building. Mr. Crowe further stated that handicap spaces were not placed to the opposite side due to ,slope and grade constraints._ As proposed, these spaces are placed in an ideal location. AGENDA ITEM h0. �1 1?q PAGE � OF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OCTOBER 26, 1993 PAGE TWO SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27821 AND COMMERCIAL PROJECT NO. 93 -4, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF MISSION TRAIL AND MALAGA ROAD. ANALYSIS As proposed, redesigned, and conditioned, the project meets all applicable commercial .development requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. It is recommended that the City Council adopt Negative Declaration No 93 -8, approve Commercial Project No. 93 -4, and- approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 27821, based on Exhibits A thru E, the following, Findings and subject to the attached Condition of Approval. It is recommended that the Redevelopment Agency concur with City Council action. FINDINGS Tentative Parcel Man No. 27821 1. Conditions of Approval• have been prepared to address identified conditions under which the project is currently being considered. These conditions provide a safeguard to insure that the project is keeping with current City goals and policies. 2. This project, as approved, complies with the Goals an .Objectives of the General Plan. 3. The site, subject to the this type of development Design Review C 93 -4 attached conditions, is suitable for 1. Subject to the attached Conditions of Approval and the Mitigation Measures contained in Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 93 -8 for the site, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. • . 2. The project, as proposed complies with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the General Plan, and the Zoning District -in which it is located. 3. Conditions. and safeguards pursuant to Chapter 17.82.070, including guarantees' and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been incorporated into the approval of the subject project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the Objectives of Chapter 17.82. PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: APPROVED BY: APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: :CC \C93 -4.RPT Armando G. Villa, Assistant Planner AGENDA ITEM 140. PAGE.. OF - Monitoring Agency: City Engineering Department 25. No structures shall. be permitted to be developed over existing pipelines, power lines or other similar easements. - Responsible for.Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring phase: Prior to final inspection - Method of Monitoring: site visit - Monitoring Agency: City Engineering Department 26. Prior to final inspection, all onsite improvements shall be provided by, the applicant in accordance with the provisions of the discretionary approvals. The provision of all improvements shall be consistent with applicable State, County, and City codes and standards. - Responsible for implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to final inspection — Method of Monitoring:; Site visit - Monitoring Agency: City Engineering Department 27. The applicant, prior to issuance of building permit, shall meet with Southern California Edison _Company, ,Southern California Gas Company, General Telephone, Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, County Flood Control District,,and County Solid Waste Management Department to discuss provision services by the respective agencies. - Responsible for implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to issuance of building permit - Method of Monitoring:. Applicant show proof of meetings - Monitoring Agency: City Planning Department 28. The applicant, prior to issuance of building permit, shall provide whatever is requested by and pay all required fees for connection and service to the appropriate agencies. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to issuance of building permit 38 AGENDA 17E:..:::. �1 PAGE `_ OF - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to issuance of conditional use permit . - Method of Monitoring: Plan check and review - Monitoring Agency: City Planning Department PUBLIC SERVICES 22. Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall meet with the County Fire Department, County Sheriff's Department, and Lake Elsinore Unified School District to discuss services to be provided by these agencies. The applicant shall provide whatever required and pay all required fees imposed by these agencies. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to issuance of building permit - Method of Monitoring: Plan check and review - Monitoring Agency: City Planning Department 23. Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate —on all ` plans compliance with appropriate provisions of the Fire Code, fire flow standards, fire access standards, etc. of the County Fire Department. - Responsible for Implementation:. Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to issuance of building permit - Method of Monitoring: Plan check and review - Monitoring,Agency: UTILITIES City Planning Department 24. All utility lines serving the project shall be placed underground. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to final inspection Method of Monitoring: site visit 37 .AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE .L- OF _Z2 - Monitoring Phase: - Method of Monitoring: - Monitoring Agency: Prior to design review approval Plan check and review City Engineering and Planning Departments LAND USE is. Prior to construction, the applicant shall acquire all necessary entitlements, including approval of the tentative parcel map, design review, conditional use permit, variance, building and grading permits, etc. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to construction - Method of Monitoring: Plan check and review. - Monitoring Agency: City Planning Department TRANSPORTATION /CIRCULATION 19. The applicant shall provide all roadway improvements proposed on the tentative parcel map. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to final inspection - Method of Monitoring: site visit - Monitoring Agency: City Engineering Department. 20. The applicant shall execute a reciprocal parking agreement to ensure that all uses within the entire tentative parcel map area is provided with sufficient shared parking. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to issuance of building permit - Method of Monitoring: Plan check.and review - Monitoring Agency: City Planning Department 21. The applicant shall submit a parking study to consider a shared /offsite parking option with the existing K -Mart store and Casino. 36 PAGE /'C OF--L"— - Monitoring Phase: - Method of Monitoring: - Monitoring Agency: ,). Prior to issuance of building permit Plan check and review City Building Department 14. All outdoor lighting for walkways, off - street parking areas, lighting of signs, security, and driveways shall be provided in accordance with the City Zoning Code, subject to approval by the City. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring,Phase: - Method of Monitoring: - Monitoring Agency:' Prior to design review approval Plan check and review City Planning Department 15. Prior to design review approval, the City shall review building elevations and materials to ensure that proposed buildings would not produce excessive glare. 16 17 - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: - Method of Monitoring: - Monitoring Agency: Prior to design review approval Plan check and review City Planning Department Perimeter landscaping and trees as shown in the conceptual landscape plan shall be provided. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to final inspection - Method of Monitoring: - Monitoring Agency: Site visit City Planning Department The type and location of lighting standards and the intensity of lighting shall be approved by the City. - Responsible for implementation: Applicant 35 LI \JI♦ < 0. PAGE OF n - Method of Monitoring: - Monitoring Agency: Site visit City Planning Department PLANT LIFE 10. Landscaping provided shall. be consistent with the City's Street Tree List, Water Conservation ordinance, 'and Landscaping guidelines. - Responsible for Implementation:'-Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to approval of landscape plans - Method of Monitoring: Plan check and review - Monitoring Agency: City Planning Department NOISE 11. The contractor shall ensure that construction operations shall be limited to Monday through Saturday (except holidays) between the hours of 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Throughout construction - Method of Monitoring: Site visit - Monitoring Agency: City Planning Department 12. The contractor shall ensure that equipment is properly tuned and maintained to keep associated noise at the lowest possible level. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Throughout construction - Method of Monitoring:" Site visit - Monitoring Agency: _ City Planning Department 13. Prior. to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate on all appropriate plans that project design shall include glazing, roof, and floor, and wall insulation in accordance with Title 25 of the California Administrative Code and City standards. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant 34 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 58 OF - Monitoring Phase:. Throughout operations - Method of Monitoring: Plan check and review - Monitoring Agency: City Planning Department 7. The applicant, prior to final inspection, shall install energy- conserving appliances and implement Title 24 (California Administrative Code) requirements to reduce secondary (stationary source) impacts. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to final inspection - Method of Monitoring: Site visit - Monitoring Agency:, City Planning Department 8. Throughout restaurant operations, the applicant shall ensure odor protection by: a. Periodically exchanging and washing down refuse and trash bins. b. Cleaning up spilled material on a routine basis. C. Limiting onsite storage of waste to a maximum of 48 hours. d. Using disinfectant /deodorant as agents to retard spoilage, prevent access by flies and to mask any odor. e. Sealing all waste in bags. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Throughout restraurant operations - Method of Monitoring: Site visit - Monitoring Agencyi City Planning Department 9. The restaurant owner, prior to final inspection, shall install cooking exhaust systems that could accept control devices (either an absorption system or incinerator) to reduce cooking odors. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to final inspection 33 PAGE®1_ CF_11. AIR 5. 6. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to 'issuance of building permit - Method of Monitoring: Plan check and review - Monitoring Agency: City Building Department The contractor, throughout construction activities, shall: a. Comply with .Rules. 401 - 403 of the SCAQMD to reduce onsite dust levels. b. Periodically apply water and dust superannuates to graded areas. C. Cover any hauling fill. d. Stabilize disturbed areas if construction is delayed. e. Terminate soil disturbance when high winds (greater than 25 miles per hour) occur. f. Ensure that all. construction equipment is maintained in proper working order. g. Wash vehicles entering public roadways to reduce dust levels. - h. Limit allowable idling to 10 minutes. i. Park construction vehicles off traveled roadways. j. Wash or sweep access points daily. - Responsible.for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Throughout construction - Method of Monitoring: Site visit - Monitoring Agency: City Planning Department All employers of more than 100 employees shall submit a trip reduction plan, in accordance with SCAQMD Regulation XV, to the air district. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant 32 EARTH 1. A soils /geotechnical study, reviewed and approved by the City, prior to issuance of grading permit shall be prepared by the applicant. The study shall further evaluate the site's geologic stability and subsurface soil conditions. - Responsible for implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to issuance of ..grading permit - Method of Monitoring: Plan check and review - Monitoring Agency: City Engineering Department 2. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall prepare an erosion control plan in accordance with City standards, which shall be approved by the City Engineer. - Responsible for implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to issuance of grading permit - Method of Monitoring: Plan check and review - Monitoring Agency: City Engineering Department 3. Throughout construction, the contractor shall comply with appropriate provisions of the City Building Code to reduce the potential for soil erosion. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Throughout construction - Method of Monitoring: Site visit - Monitoring Agency: City Engineering Department 4. The project shall be designed and constructed in accordance with appropriate provisions of the Uniform Building Code (Section 2312, Seismic Zone 4 and City subdivision regulations). 31 PAGE -55 OF2-L- - MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM COMMERCIAL PROJECT 93 -4o, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 278216 AND VARIANCE NO. 93 -2 CITY'OF LAKE ELSINORE Effective January 1, 1989, the California Environmental Quality Act was amended to add Section 21081.6, implementing Assembly Bill (AB) 3180. As part of CEQA environmental- review procedures, AS 3180 requires a public agency to adopt a 'monitoring and .reporting program for assessing and ensuring efficiency of any required mitigation measures applied to proposed developments. As stated in Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code: 0 ... the public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project which it has adopted, or made a condition or project approval, in order to mitigate or avoid significant affects on the environment." AB 3180 provides general guidelines for implementing monitoring and reporting programs. Specific reporting and /or monitoring requirements, to be enforced during project implementation, shall be defined prior to final approval of the project proposal by the responsible decision maker(s). In response to established CEQA requirements and those of AB 3180 (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) , the proposed mitigation monitoring program shall be submitted for consideration prior to completion of the environmental review process to enable the decision maker's appropriate response to proposals. The mitigation monitoring program must be provided as part of the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration. The mitigation monitoring program is presented in this section. Each recommended mitigation measure is listed and categorized by impact topic, with an accompanying discussion of: The party responsible for implementation of mitigation measure. The phase of the project during which the measure should be monitored. The method of verifying compliance with mitigation measure. The agency responsible for monitoring compliance with mitigation measure. 30 PAGE Sy OF 2 20. CULTURAL a. Alteration of Archaeolocical sites The project site is presently cleared. No known prehistoric or historic archaeological sites exist onsite. No impacts are anticipated. b. Effects to structures No prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object is located onsite. No impacts are anticipated. C. Chance to Cultural values The commercial project is not of land uses which could change or affect any ethnic cultural values. No impacts are anticipated. d. Restriction of Sacred Uses The proposed project is not of land uses or intensities which could restrict existing religious or sacred uses. No impacts are anticipated. Mitigation Measures None required. 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE The project will not substantially reduce fish or wildlife pope communities, reduce endangered plant or cultural resources. degrade the quality of the environment, fish habitat or wildlife species, cause elation to drop, threaten plant or animal or restrict the range of rare or animal species, or eliminate important The project does not have the potential to achieve short -term goals to the disadvantage of long -term environmental goals. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable. The project will not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. 29 AGENDA ITE n No. �L . PAGE 53 3 of 79 could create health hazards. No significant impacts are anticipated. b. Exposure of People to Health Haaards Since the project would not create any health hazards, ,there would be no exposure of people to potential health hazards. No impacts are anticipated. ]litigation Measures None required. 18. AESTHETICS The proposed theater, restaurant, and retail shops require design review approval in accordance with Chapter 17.82 of the City Zoning Code. only design review of the proposed theater is being considered with the present application. The restaurant and retail shops would require design review, at a later time, prior to construction. The proposed theater would be designed similarly with the existing K -Mart store. There would be consistency in regards to building materials, colors, and elevations. An aesthetically pleasing project would be developed. Several single - family residences along Malaga Road presently have clear views of the lake. The proposed project could potentially affect these views.. Based on a site visit though, it appears that views of the lake would only be partially affected. In most cases, those residences along Malaga Road that already have views of the lake, would continue to have these views undisturbed. Only a few residences would have their views partially obstructed by the project. Though this is an impact, it is not considered significant. Mitigation Measures None required. 19. RECREATION The commercial project is not of significantly impact the quality recreational opportunities. Mitigation Measures None required. 28 land uses which would or quantity of existing PA37 S� OF 'I f. solid Waste and Disposal The site is located within the E1 Sobrante Landfill Service Area operated by the County of Riverside Solid Waste Management Department. The General Plan EIR indicated that any commercial development, including the proposed project, would be served with adequate solid waste services. No significant impacts are anticipated. g. street Lighting Annexation The site is already in the City and does not require annexation into the City's Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District. Mitigation Measures All utility lines serving the project shall be placed underground. No structures shall be permitted to be developed over existing pipelines, power lines or other similar easements. Prior to final inspection, all onsite improvements shall be provided by the applicant in accordance with the provisions of the discretionary approvals. The provision of all improvements shall be consistent with .applicable State, County, and City codes and standards. The applicant, prior to issuance of building permit, shall meet with Southern California Edison Company, Southern California Gas Company, General Telephone, Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, County Flood Control District, and County Solid Waste Management Department to discuss provision services by the respective agencies. The applicant, prior to issuance of building permit, shall provide whatever is requested by and pay all required fees for connection and service to the appropriate agencies. The applicant, prior to issuance of building permit, shall acquire "will serve" letters from appropriate agencies. - The applicant shall construct a 36 -inch storm drain pipe to the drainage channel, south of Malaga Road along Mission Trail Road. 17. HUMAN HEALTH a. Creation of Health Hazards The proposed project is not of land uses or intensities which 27 AGENDA {TEt PSJ. =�L . PA-3E 51 of %1� 16. UTILITIES a. Power or Natural Gas Power and natural gas are currently provided by the Southern California Edison Company and Southern California Gas Company, respectively. The General Plan .EIR indicated that any commercial development, including the proposed project, would be served with adequate power and natural gas. No significant impacts are anticipated. b. Communication systems Telephone service is currently provided by the General Telephone Company. The General Plan EIR indicated that any commercial development, including the proposed project, would be served with adequate telephone service. No significant impacts -are anticipated. C. Water Domestic water service is currently provided by the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. The General Plan EIR indicated that any commercial development, including the, proposed project, would be served with- adequate water service. No significant impacts are anticipated. d. sever Sewer service is also currently provided by the Elsinore Valley .Municipal Water District. The General Plan EIR indicated that, any commercial development, including the proposed project, would be served with adequate sewer service. No significant impacts are anticipated. e. storm Water Drainage Drainage shall be collected and conveyed via Riverside County Flood Control District facilities. The General Plan EIR indicated that any commercial development, including the proposed" project, would be served with adequate drainage utilities. No significant impacts are anticipated. The Lars Andersen and Associates drainage study indicated that the then proposed "K -Mart project has been provided a 36 -inch storm .drain pipe for its runoff. Based on our (their) estimated runoff, the pipe size will have capacity." The study further concluded that the project, as currently proposed, should construct a 36 -inch storm drain pipe to the drainage channel, south of Malaga Road along Mission Trail Road. 26 �� OF-21. anticipated. As mitigation, the applicant shall pay all commercial developer fees required by the school district. d. Parks and Recreation Likewise, the commercial project is not of land uses that would significantly affect park and recreational facilities. No impacts are anticipated. e. Maintenance The commercial project is not proposing public improvements at scales that would significantly burden the City's maintenance responsibilities. No significant impacts are anticipated. f. Otber Governmental Services The project is not of land uses or intensities that would affect other governmental services. No impacts are anticipated. Mitigation Measures Prior to issuance�of building permit, the applicant shall meet with the County Fire Department, County Sheriff's Department, and Lake Elsinore Unified School District to discuss services to be provided by these agencies. The applicant shall provide whatever required and pay all required fees imposed by these agencies. Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate on all plans compliance with appropriate provisions of the Fire Code, fire flow standards, fire access standards, etc. of the County Fire Department. 15. ENERGY a. Substantial Amounts of Enercv The project is not of land uses or intensities which would create significant energy impacts. The project would not use substantial amounts of fuel or energy. b. New sources of Enercv As.discussed previously, the project is not of intensities or land uses which would substantially increase energy demands or require development of new sources of energy. Mitigation Measures None required. 25 14 n� PAGE circulation and movement. e. Alterations to Waterborne Rail or Air Traffic The commercial project is not of land uses or intensities that could alter air traffic. Furthermore, no waterborne or rail traffic is located nearby the project site. No impacts are anticipated. f. Hazards to Motorists Bicyclists or Pedestrians Hazards to motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians would not occur since all street and entry improvements would be designed in accordance with City standards. City standards are based on reducing traffic - related hazards. mitigation measures The applicant shall provide all roadway improvements, proposed on the tentative parcel map. The applicant shall execute a reciprocal parking agreement to ensure that all uses.within the entire tentative parcel map area is provided with sufficient shared parking. The applicant shall submit a parking study to, consider a shared /offsite parking option with the existing K -Mart store and casino. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES . a. Fire Protection Fire protection is currently provided by the Riverside County Fire Department. The General Plan EIR indicated that any commercial development, including the proposed project, would be served with adequate fire protection. No significant impacts are anticipated. b. Police.Protection Police protection 'is currently provided by the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. The General Plan EIR indicated that any commercial development, including the proposed project, would be served with adequate police protection. No significant impacts are anticipated. C. schools The project is a commercial development and would not directly increase student enrollment at schools within the Lake Elsinore Unified School District: No significant impacts are 24 ACEN-1',% t':': :' i:0. engineer, the conclusions and recommendations of the 1987 traffic study still apply to the project as presently proposed. Conclusions and recommendations from the traffic study are incorporated into this document by reference. The traffic study concluded that traffic volume increases generated by the proposed theater, restaurant, and retail uses would be within the capacity of existing City streets, including Mission Trail Road and Malaga Road. The study also concluded that traffic volumes at the Mission Trail and Malaga Road intersection meet traffic signal warrants for minimum vehicular volume and interruption of continuous traffic. Finally, sight distance at the Mission Trail and Malaga Road intersection is adequate for the speeds and volumes projected. No significant impacts are expected. b. Effects on Parkin The proposed theater, retail shops, and restaurant require 662 parking spaces according to City standards. The project site plan, as presently proposed, provides only 343 spaces. The project, therefore, has a parking deficiency of 319 parking spaces. A Conditional Use Permit, in accordance with Chapter 17.66.070 of the Zoning Code allows preparation of a parking study to consider a shared /offsite parking option. The project could utilize parking at the Casino and K -Mart store if evidence is shown that conflicts would not result and agreements are executed between the affected parties. Approval of the parking study and conditional use permit ensures that sufficient amount of parking spaces would be provided. A reciprocal parking agreement is required to ensure that all uses within the entire tentative parcel map area would be provided with sufficient shared parking. No impacts are anticipated if the reciprocal parking agreement is executed. C. fact on Transportation Systems ` The propose& project is not of land uses or intensities that would significantly impact transportation systems. As previously discussed, the traffic study for the project indicated that the existing transportation and street system is capable of accommodating project traffic volumes. d. Alterations to circulation or Movement No significant impacts or alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and /or goods are anticipated. The project proposes additional entries and street improvements such as sidewalks and curbs and gutters along Malaga Road. These improvements would further improve PAGE .L OF significant impacts are anticipated. b. Interference of Emergency Plans As discussed previously, the project is not of intensities or land uses which could interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans. The site is not a critical location whereby emergency plans could be affected. Mitigation Measures None required. 11'. POPULATION The proposed commercial project is not of land uses or intensities that could directly increase population.' The project would not significantly alter the location, distribution, density or growth rate of human population for the City or overall region. Mitigation Measures None required. 12. HOUSING Likewise, the commercial project is not of land uses or intensities -that could directly increase the City's housing stock. Impacts to the City's and region's housing stock and patterns are not expected. Mitigation Measures None required. 13. TRANSPORTATION /CIRCULATION a. Generation of vehicular Movement Associated Transportation- Engineers prepared a traffic study for the K -Mart center and Tentative Parcel Map No. 27821 in 1987. The traffic study projected 15,860 average daily trips (90 AM peak hour trips and 773 PM peak hour trips) for the project as proposed in 1987. Associated Transportation Engineers re- evaluated traffic impacts for the proposed theater, restaurant, and retail shops as currently proposed. The re- evaluation indicated that these uses would generate 2,821 average daily trips, with 92 AM peak hour trips and 258 PM peak hour trips. According to Associated Transportation Engineers and the City's traffic F F, AGENDA ITEM, NO. r PAGE Al�- OF 71 B. LAND USE The project site is vacant and undeveloped. Only weeds and urban vegetation is found onsite. The proposed project would develop a 26,000 sf. theater, 10,000 sf. of retail shops, and a 5,390 sf. restaurant. The proposed project requires approval of a tentative parcel map, conditional use permit, design review, and variance. The site is designated General Commercial and zoned C -2, General Commercial District. The proposed project conforms with the City's General Plan and zoning classifications. Sufficient amount of landscaping in accordance with City requirements would be provided. Since the proposed project is consistent with the intended use of the site, based on the City's General Plan, impacts are not considered significant. Mitigation Neasures Prior to construction, the applicant shall acquire all necessary entitlements, including approval of the tentative parcel map, design review, conditional use permit, variance, building and grading permits, etc. 9. NATURAL RESOURCES a. Increase of Natural Resources As with any project, ultimate development of the site would require water, natural gas, and electricity which are all considered natural resources. The General Plan EIR indicates that any commercial proposal, including the proposed project would be adequately served and would not increase the rate of use of any of these resources. No significant impacts are anticipated. b. Depletion of Natural Resources The commercial project is not of land uses or intensities that could substantially deplete any non - renewable natural resource. No significant impacts are anticipated. Mitigation measures None required. 10. RISK OF UPSET a. Risk of Explosion or Release of Hazardous Bubstances The commercial project is not of land uses that could create a risk of explosion or release hazardous substances. No 21 AGENDA ITEM NO.._ PAGE �� S OF 7� 7. LIGHT AND GLARE: The project - site is presently undeveloped, with no onsite sources "of light and glare. offsite light is generated by s neighboring uses and street light and vehicle headlights primarily along Mission. Trail. Road.. The primary concern relating to_light and glare is the effect of the sitel's development on adjacent sensitive receptors such as residences. The major creators'of light and glare are the commercial structures, .signs, -; parking lot lights, and headlights from vehicles ingeessing and egressing the. site due to the proposed project. As mentioned previously, residences are located:to the south, across of Malaga. These'residences would be impacted by additional light and glare. Impacts, however., are not considered significant. The general area is already substantially developed with commercial uses along Mission Trail Road and Casino Drive and therefore, extensive amounts. of light and glare. are already generated. Consequently, it is unlikely that the perception of light and glare disturbance would be any greater than existing conditions. Furthermore, it is anticipated that project buildings would not be constructed of materials that would create excessive glare." As :part of the .project's design. review and approval process, the City would review exterior building materials to ensure that proposed buildings would not produce excessive glare. Finally,. the ,project's conceptual landscaping plan shows., that landscaping would be 'provided along the perimeter of the project site which would screen neighboring residences from onsite lights.." Mitigation measures are recommended to further ensure that light and, glare impacts would be reduced to insignificant levels. Mitigation Measures All outdoor lighting for walkways, off - street parking areas, lighting of signs,, security, and driveways shall be provided in accordance with the,City Zoning Code, subject;to approval. by the City. Prior to design review approval, I the City shall review building elevations and materials to ensure that proposed, . buildings would not produce excessive glare. Perimeter landscaping and trees as shown in the conceptual landscape plan shall be. provided. The type and location of lighting standards and the 'intensity of lighting shall be approved by the City.'", 20 pkc or 179 However, future commercial uses would not be of intensities that would increase noise levels to significant levels. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan's intended use of the site. Review of the General Plan EIR ; indicates that general commercial development, similar with the project, would not result in any significant impact., Furthermore, given that commercial uses presently surround the project site to the north, east, and west, it is anticipated__ that. the type of noise created with the project would be similar with existing conditions. -Mitigation measures are., recommended to further ensure that. impacts would be reduced to insignificant levels. There would be disturbances created by short-term construction: activities, especially residences to the .south. Noise generated by construction 'equipment, including trucks, graders, bulldozers, and concrete mixers could reach high levels. However, given the temporary nature.. of noise: disturbances and recommended mitigation, these impacts are not considered significant. b. exposure to severe Noise The areas neighboring the project site are also developed as commercial uses. Therefore, while residences to the south would be subjected to some increased noise, impacts are not considered significant since'traffic noise generated by the project would -be similar' with 'existing noise., already experienced in the general area. The perception of noise disturbances would be minimal'. Mitigation Measures Short -Term Measures The contractor shall ensure that construction- operations shall. be limited to Monday through Saturday (except .holidays). between the hours of 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM. The contractor shall ensure that equipment is properly tuned and maintained to keep associated noise at the lowest possible level. Long- Term Measures Prior to issuance of building - permit, the applicant. shall demonstrate on all appropriate plans that project design shall include glazing, roof, and `floor; and wall: insulation In accordance with Title 25 of the California Administrative Code and City standards. 19 ACZND -A ET. Z'.1 F:0. PACE `%3 OF that would form barriers that .could adversely "affect the it normal replenishment of plant species. No impacts are anticipated.' "- d. Reduction of Agricultural Crop The site is presently cleared. :Agricultural crops do not exist onsite. Nitigation Measures Landscaping provided shall be consistent with the City's. Street Tree List, Water Conservation ordinance, and 'f Landscaping guidelines. C 5. ANIMAL LIFE a. Cbanae in Animal Bpeciea since the site was previously.cleared, no animal species exist onsite., The project has no opportunity to ,change the diversity or .number of any ,sensitive animal species. Significant - impacts are not expected. b. Reduction of Uniaue Animal Species Likewise, unique, rare, and /or endangered animal species would not be affected by the project. No impacts are anticipated. C. Introduction of New Animal Species Commercial development is not of a use that would introduce jl new animal species. Additionally; the project vicinity is.not known to be part of any migration corridor for animals. As i! such, the project does not represent,a,potential barrier to the migration or movement of any animals. d. Deterioration of Habitat The site is not a habitat for fish or wildlife. No impacts are anticipated. Mitigation Measures None required. 6. NOISE a. Increases in Raise, _ It is "anticipated that.long -term ambient noise levels would; increase: over- existing levels, with ,future development. 18 - AGENDA 11 EM NO. PAGE 'E_ OF V f. Alteration of Groundwater Direction The site is not of a large enough size to significantly affect the regional direction or rate of flow of groundwater. No significant impacts are anticipated. g. Change-in-Groundwater ouantity Likewise, significant changes to groundwater quantity are not anticipated. h. Reduction in Public Water The project is not of land uses or intensities that would significantly reduce public water resources. No significant impacts are expected. i. Exposure to Water Related Hazards Project implementation would not expose people or property to water - related hazards, such as flooding. The .FEMA maps indicates that the site is designated Zone C, areas of minimal flooding. Additionally, the site is not .located within a coastal region and will not be affected by tidal waves. Impacts are not anticipated. _ Mitigation measures - None required. 4. PLANT LIFE a. Change in Plant Species The project site was previously cleared; only common urban plant species exist onsite. The project has no opportunity to change the diversity or number of any sensitive plant species. Significant impacts are not anticipated. b. Reduction of Unique Plant Bpeoies Likewise, unique, rare, and /or endangered plant species are not found onsite. No impacts are anticipated. . C. Introduction of New Plant Species New plant species would not be introduced except for landscaping. Landscaping would be similar with plant species provided with other similar commercial centers and would be consistent with the City's Street Tree List, Water Conservation ordinance, and Landscaping guidelines. Furthermore, the project is not of land uses or- intensities 17 AGENDA ITEM NO. Al PAGE OF 79 3. a. b. C. d. e. WATER Chances in Water movement No marine or fresh water resources are found within or near the project site. The project would not have an opportunity' to affect these resources. No impacts are anticipated. Given that the project site is vacant, impervious surfaces would be created with development. As a result, absorption rates, drainage patterns and surface runoff patterns could be affected. Regional absorption rates though, should not be significantly affected, given the limited size of the project site. Regional absorption should continue at relatively similar rates as existing conditions. Onsite drainage patterns would be altered, however, the point of collection would probably remain the same, as existing conditions. Therefore, drainage and runoff would continue to be collected and carried by the existing drainage system. Lars Andersen and Associates, in 1987 prepared a -storm drainage study for the then proposed K -Mart project. The study agreed with the foregoing conclusions. The study is incorporated into this document by reference. Alteration of Flood Waters The 'project site is not of' a large enough size to` significantly alter regional flood water courses. No significant impacts are expected. Chance in surface Water Amount The project would create additional impervious project site, though, is not large enough to change the amount of water in the -lake. additional flows discharged offsite to the la great enough to significantly increase lake wa t significant impacts are anticipated. Alteration of Surface Water ouality surfaces. The significantly The amount of ke would not be er levels. No Since the amount of runoff is not expected to significantly increase, the amount of, water discharged into -and water quality of the lake should remain unaffected. No significant impacts are anticipated. The area containing the proposed theater, retail shops and restaurant is not greater than 5 acres. Therefore, a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is not required. P AG =i : .lL PAGE yC OP 79 3. Cover any hauling fill. 4. Stabilize disturbed areas if construction is delayed. 5. Terminate soil disturbance when high winds (greater than 25 miles per hour) occur. 6. Ensure that all construction equipment is maintained in proper working order. 7. Wash vehicles entering public roadways to reduce dust levels.:. 8. Limit allowable idling to io minutes. 9. Park construction vehicles off traveled.roadways. 10.. Wash or sweep access points daily. All employers of more than 100 employees shall submit a trip reduction plan, in accordance with SCAQMD Regulation XV, to the air district. The applicant, prior to final inspection, .shall install energy- conserving . appliances and implement Title 24 (California Administrative Code) requirements to reduce secondary (stationary source) impacts. Throughout restaurant operations, the applicant shall ensure odor protection by:, 1. Periodically exchanging and washing down refuse and trash bins. 2. Cleaning up spilled material on _a routine basis. 3. Limiting onsite storage of waste 'to a maximum of 48 hours.. 4. Using .disinfectant /deodorant 'as agents to retard spoilage, prevent access by flies and to mask any odor. 5. Sealing all waste in bags. The restaurant owner, prior to final inspection, shall install cooking exhaust systems that could. accept control devices (either an absorption system or incinerator) to reduce cooking odors. 15 PAG= '3� OF %`? mobile source emissions from construction equipment. Since the site is relatively flat, only minimal grading and site preparation are needed. Therefore, excessive fugitive dust levels are not anticipated. Furthermore, it is,assumed that only a few heavy equipment are expected to operate at any one time; consequently, equipment emissions are expected to be minor and insignificant. Those land uses and people neighboring the construction- area. would be temporarily impacted. The level of impact, however, is considered insignificant, given the short temporary duration of construction and negligible -levels of anticipated construction- related dust and emissions to be generated. Long -term emissions would result from stationary and mobile sources. Stationary sources include emissions produced from onsite combustion, such as for space and water heating. Mobile emissions would result directly from additional motor vehicle traffic. ._Significant- impacts, however, are not anticipated. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan's intended use of the site. Review of the General Plan EZR indicates that general commercial development, similar with the project, would not result in any significant impact. Mitigation measures are recommended to further ensure that short and long -term, impacts _would be reduced.to insignificant levels. b. Creation of objectionable odors The project could-create odors from proposed restaurant uses. odors ,could result from decay of. foodstuff waste. Odors could_ be controlled by South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) which could order abatement of odor nuisance if enough.citizens complain. The process, however, is reactive and after the fact. Mitigation measures are. recommended to minimize odor potential earlier. C. changes in Climate, The proposed project is not of land uses or intensities which• could local or regional climatic conditions. No impacts are anticipated. mitigation measures The.contractor,.throughout construction activities, shall: 1. , Comply with Rules 401 - 403 of the SCAQMD to reduce onsite dust levels. 2. Periodically apply water and dust superannuates to graded areas.. 14 PAGE f. No beaches, rivers, oceans, bays or inlets are located within the City of Lake Elsinore. No stream is located onsite either. Furthermore, the site is not located near enough to the lake to directly impact it. Consequently, the project would not have any opportunity to affect these bodies of water. No significant impacts are anticipated. g. Bsoosure to Geologic Hazard According to the "Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR", the project site is not located within or near any seismically sensitive areas or areas subject to landslides. People and property associated with future development would not be impacted by these hazards anymore than other neighboring populations. Mitigation measures are recommended to further alleviate impacts. Mitigation Measures A soils /geotechnical study, reviewed and approved by the City, prior to issuance of grading permit shall be prepared by the applicant. The study shall further evaluate the. site's geologic stability and subsurface soil conditions. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall prepare an .erosion control plan in accordance with City standards, which shall be approved by=the City Engineer. Throughout construction,' the contractor shall' comply with appropriate provisions of the City Building Code to reduce the potential for soil erosion. The project shall be designed and constructed in accordance with appropriate provisions of the Uniform Building Code (Section 2312,.. Seismic Zone 4 and City subdivision regulations). 2. AIR a. Deterioration of Air ouality Changes in emission levels resulting from development of the site are related to short -term impacts associated with construction activities and long -term impacts created by increased motor vehicle emissions resulting from =future development. Short -term construction activities would result in: the generation of two types of pollutants: fugitive dust and 13 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. EARTH a. unstable Earth Conditions According to the "Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR ", the project site is not characterized by unstable geologic conditions. Consequently, the proposed project should not result in any possible unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures. b. Disruntions and Compaction of Soil The project could result in some disruptions, displacement, overcrowding and /or compaction of soils. However, significant impacts are not anticipated. The site has been previously cleared. The project would need to have a soils /geotechnical evaluation reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of grading permit. The evaluation would further evaluate soils impacts and recommend measures to alleviate impacts. Mitigation would reduce any impact to a level of insignificance. c. Chance in Topography or Relief Features The site is relatively flat with no significant ground surface relief features and is characterized, by generally uniform topography. Development of the site would not have an opportunity to significantly alter the topography or, any surface relief features. No impacts_are anticipated. d.- Modification of Unigue Features Since the site is relatively flat with no significantly unique geologic features, development would not have an opportunity to adversely affect any feature. No impacts are anticipated. o. Increase in Soi As with any development, soil erosion could result during construction, as grading and construction could loosen surface soils and make soils susceptible effects of wind and water movement across the surface. ' Impacts, however, are not considered significant since erosion would be controlled onsite in accordance with City.standards. Upon completion of any construction phase, the potential for onsite soil erosion would be eliminated since the developed areas would be either paved or landscaped. There would not be large areas of open soils. No significant impacts are anticipated. 12 rX,' ''• PAGE %� OF %� Yes Maybe No C. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) x III. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Narrative description of potential environmental impacts is attached Iv. Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect 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 the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the' project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. S- 3- Date x — 11 PA^st '�J 0F._ J i 20. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Yes Maybe No a, Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? X b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building; ,structure or object? C. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique . ethnic cultural values? — d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area. 21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat. of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife . population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant.or.animal community, reduce the number or, restrict the range of a rare,or; endangered plant or animal or ` eliminate important examples of, the major periods of California history or prehistory? — b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short - term,' to the disadvantage of long- term,, environmental goals? (A short term impact on the environment is one which occurs in 'a relatively brief, definitive -t X W:q X period of time while long. en. impacts will endure well into the future.) - 10 Or pAGZ: 3� r%� 15. ENERGY. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? 16. UTILITIES. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? C. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? g. Street lighting annexation and /or improvements? 17. HUMAN HEALTH. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? 18. AESTHETICS. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open'to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically- offensive site open to public view? 19. RECREATION. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? G Yes Maybe No — X X X_ _X X — X X' X X X X -X AGEND'. , E. D. Zf PAGE 33 OF Yes Maybe No 11. POPULATION. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? _X_ 12. HOUSING. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand -for additional housing? X 13.. TRANSPORTATION /CIRCULATION: Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? X — b. - Effects on parking facilities, or demand for new parking? i X C. -- Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and /or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail. or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal '! have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental j services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? X C. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including. roads? X f. Other governmental_ services? i _X 8 j AGEND„ 17E-: NO..�� PAGE 2 .1 OF b. Reduction of the numbers of any. unique, rare or endangered species of animals? C. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. NOISE. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7. LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? 8. LAND USE. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? 9. NATURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resources? 10.- RISK OF UPSET. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an - accident or upset conditions? b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? 7 Yes Maybe No X X —X — X — X X %C_: n 0 Yes Maybe No g• Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? — — X h. substantial reduction in the, amount of water otherwise .. available for public water supplies? X i. Exposure of people or property to water - related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? X Flood Zone Designation: C in -Year Flood Level: UNKNOWN 4. PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any . species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic P an )• _ — b. Reduction of the numbers of any, unique, rare or-.endangered species of plants? — C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area,.or.in.a 1 barrier to the norma replenishment of existing species? — d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? — 5. ANIMAL LIFE... Will the proposal result. in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, . land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? — 6 EV X W-44 X D per__ OF " 0 f-7 OF / 9 Yes Maybe No which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? C 2. AIR. Will the proposal result in: a. -.- Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? �L b. The creation of objectionable odors? X _ C. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? X 3. WATER. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? _ _ X b. Changes in absorption,rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? X C. Alterations to the course or loss of flood waters? _ _ X d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface-' . water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen-or turbidity? X f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? X f-7 OF / 9 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORK CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE I. Background 1. Name of Proponent: Camelot DrORerty Counselor. Inc. 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: P.O. Box 1149: Wildomar. CA 92595• (9091 677 -9339 - 3. Date of Checklist: Augur* ' 1993 4. Agency Requiring Checklist: City of Lake Elsinore Planning 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Commercial Project 93 -4 Tentative Parcel Map No 27821 Conditional Use Permit No. . -93-4. and variance No 93 -3 Ii. Environmental Impacts Explanation of all "yes ", "no ", and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets. Yes Maybe No 1. EARTH. -Will the proposal result in:. a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? _ _ �L b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering. of the soil ?. X C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features ? , X e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? X f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion 4 PAGE OF � Code. 5. Approval of Commercial Project 93 -4. The proposed theater, restaurant, and retail shops require design review approval in accordance with Chapter 17.82 of the City Zoning Code. Only design review of the theater is being considered with the present application. The restaurant and retail shops would require design review, at a later time,. prior to, construction. CONTACT PERSONS The Lead Agency-for preparing this Mitigated Negative Declaration is the City of Lake Elsinore Planning Department. Contact person for the project is: Lead Aaencv Armando Villa Assistant Planner Planning Department City of Lake Elsinore 130 Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92330 BY Section 15150 of the State CEQA Guidelines allows environmental documents to incorporate by reference all or portions of other documents that are a matter of public record. Where all or a portion of another document is incorporated by reference, information shall be considered to be incorporated and specified in the text of this document. ` The information - presented in this Mitigated Negative Declaration is based, in part, upon another document which includes the project site and which addresses issues affecting the project 'site. As permitted, the following documents are incorporated by-reference: (1) City of Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR, October 1990; (2) Storm Drainage Review for the K -Mart Project, prepared by Lars Andersen and Associates, 1987; (3) Traffic and Circulation Study for the K- Mart Center, prepared by Associated Transportation Engineers, 1987; and (4) Re- evaluation of Camelot Phase 2 Traffic and Circulation Study, prepared by Associated Transportation Engineers, 1993. These documents can be found at the City of Lake Elsinore; 130 South Main Street; Lake Elsinore, CA 92530; (909) 674 -3124. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the following evaluates those issues and topics checked off as either "yes ", "no ", or "maybe" in the attached environmental checklist form. ki ACENDA ITEV 1 D. 2A PAGE a 7 OF %9 would not result and agreements are executed between the affected parties. One of the proposed parcels would.have.a street frontage width of approximately 32 feet. Chapter 17.48.050 of the Zoning Code requires that the minimum street frontage width for any new parcel created in the C -2 zone be 100 feet. The project requires a Variance to permit the proposed street frontage width. The site's General Plan designation is General Commercial; Zoning is C -2, General Commercial. District. The proposed project conforms with the City's General Plan and.Zoning classifications. Access to the site would be provided from four entries off of Mission Trail Road and two entries off of Malaga Road. Two of the entries off of Mission Trail Road already exist and provide access to the K -Mart store. No improvements are proposed for Mission Trail Road; however, a sidewalk and curbs and gutters would be provided along Malaga Road. Sufficient amount of.landscaping in accordance with City requirements would be provided. Neighboring uses include residential uses to the _south and commercial uses to the north, east and west. PROPOSED ACTIONS Project implementation. requires the following discretionary;.. approvals by the City.of Lake Elsinore. 1. Certification of Compliance With The California Environmental, Quality Act. (CEQA). :Certification of this Mitigated - Negative Declaration in - accordance with CEQA, the .State CEQA Guidelines, and City of Lake Elsinore requirements. This Mitigated Negative Declaration is prepared for the. proposed. project and requires certification with the final decision on the project: 2. Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 27821., The proposed project requires approval of the tentative parcel map._ The map would subdivide the project site into six separate parcels. -The K- Mart is-already located on one of the six parcels. 3. Approval of Conditional Use Permit 93 -4. A Conditional Use. - Permit is required to allow preparation of a parking study to consider a shared /off site parking option. The Conditional Use Permit would be approved in accordance with Chapter 17.66.070; of the City Zoning.Code. 4. Approval of variance 93 -2.. A Variance is-required to allow one of the entries off of Mission Trail Road a street frontage width of approximately 32 feet. The Variance would be approved in accordance with Chapter 17.76 of the City.Zoning 2 No. 21 PAGE ,a p- COMMERCIAL PROJECT 93 -4t TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27821" CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 93 -4 AND VARIANCE NO. 93 -2 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 93 -8 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE PROJECT LOCATION The proposed site-is located at the northeast corner of Mission Trail and Malaga Roads, with a portion'abutting Casino Drive. The site is located within the southeastern portion of the City of Lake Elsinore. The Assessor's Parcel Number is 365- 040 -002, 014, 017, 018, and 019. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed . project would develop a 26,000 sf. theater, a 5,390 sf. restaurant, and 10,000 sf. of retail shops. •The proposed project would require approval of a tentative parcel map, design review, a conditional use permit, and a variance. The area where these uses are to be provided is 5.03 acres. The proposed tentative parcel map revises a previous tentative parcel map that was prepared for the site. In 1988, a tentative parcel map was approved which then subdivided the site into three parcels. The currently proposed map subdivides the site into 6 separate parcels. The total area of the tentative parcel map, area is 17.36 acres. This area includes the 5.03 acres that would develop the proposed theater, restaurant, and retail shops. Theo existing K -Mart store is located on one of the 6 parcels. The proposed theater, restaurant, and retail shops would be located on 3 other parcels. No development is presently proposed for the other 2 remaining parcels. The proposed theater, restaurant, and retail shops require design review approval in accordance with Chapter 17.82 of the City Zoning Code. Only design review of the theater is being considered with the present application. The restaurant and retail shops would require design review, at a later time, prior to construction. The proposed theater would be designed similarly with the existing K- Mart store. There would be consistency in regards to building materials, colors, and elevations. The proposed theater, restaurant, and retail shops require 662 parking spaces according to City standards. The project site plan, as presently proposed, provides only 343 spaces. The project,. therefore, has a parking deficiency of 319 parking spaces. A Conditional Use Permit, in accordance with Chapter 17.66.070. of the Zoning Code allows preparation of a parking study to consider a shared /offsite parking option. The project could utilize parking at the Casino and K -Mart store if evidence is shown that conflicts 1 _NOA ! i E% F- - PAGE� OF %9 :RCIAL PROJECT 93 -4, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27821s CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 93 -4 AND VARIANCE NO. 93 -2 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 93 -8 PREPARED FOR: CAMELOT PROPERTY COUNSELORS, INC. P.O. Box 1149 WilComar, CA 92595 PREPARED BY: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 130 Main street Lake Elsinore, CA 92330 August 1993 FILE COPY AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE - 7 OF .+G REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 6, 1993 PAGE EIGHT SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27821, COMMERCIAL PROJECT NO. 93 -4, VARIANCE NO. 93 -2, VARIANCE NO. 93 -4, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 93 -4 "CAMELOT CENTER PHASE II THEATER" 3. Approving the variance from the strict interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance represents a minor deviation from the Code necessary to fulfill the purpose of this Chapter and enable reasonable development of the property. Prepared by: Armando G. Villa, Assistant Planner Reviewed by: Approved for Planning Commission: \ �_ N CU,-ln Phyllis Rogers, Assistant City Manager C:PC93 -4.RPT AGENDA ! -- li— ; a. OF 2 PAGE a 3 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 6, 1993 PAGE SEVEN SUBJECT:: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27821, COMMERCIAL PROJECT NO. 93 -4, VARIANCE NO. 93 -2, VARIANCE NO. 93 -4, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 93 -4 ISCAMELOT CENTER PEASE II THEATER" 3. Conditions and safeguards pursuant to Chapter 17.82.070 of the Zoning Code, including guarantees and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been incorporated into the approval of the subject project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the Objectives of Chapter 17.82. CONTTTTONAT USE PERMIT'NO. 93 -4 - 1. That this proposed use, on its own merit and within the context of its setting, is in accordance with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Lake Elsinore General Plan. 2. That the requested use, as proposed will not be detrimental to the general health, safety, morals, and welfare of the persons residing in the neighboring area or the City. 3. That the site "is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, and for all the yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping, buffers and other features .required,by the Zoning Ordinance. 4. That there should not be a conflict with the shared parking allowed by this permit between the theater and.the adjoining uses. VARIANCE NO. 93 -2 1. Adequate conditions and safeguards pursuant to Section 17.76.050 have been incorporated in the approval of the variance to insure development of the property in accord with the objectives of the General Plan and the purpose of the planning district in-which the site is,.located.. 2. Special circumstance, pursuant to the purpose of Chapter 17.76, applicable to the subject property which do apply generally to other properties in the neighborhood, and, therefore granting of this variance shall not constitute a grant of a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity :and district in which the subject property is located. 3. Approving the variance from the strict interpretation of the . Zoning Ordinance represents a minor deviation from the Code. necessary to fulfill the purpose of this Chapter and. enable reasonable development of the property. VVARIANCE NO. 93 -4 1. Adequate conditions and safeguards pursuant to Section 17.76.050 have been incorporated in. the. approval of.the variance to insure development of the property in accord with the objectives of the General Plan and the purpose of the planning district in which the site is located. 2. Special _circumstance, pursuant to the purpose of Chapter 17.76, applicable to the subject property, which do apply generally to other properties in the neighborhood, and, therefore granting of this variance shall not constitute a grant of a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and district in which the subject property is located.: . AGENDA ITEM.' NO. 91L PAGE a a OF�9 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COM14I8SION OCTOBER 6, 1993 PAGE SIX SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27821, COMMERCIAL PROJECT NO. 93 -4, VARIANCE NO. 93 -2, VARIANCE NO. 93 -4, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 93 -4 "CAMELOT CENTER PHASE II THEATER" applicable commercial development and design requirements -of the Zoning Ordinance. Based on the aforementioned assumptions and methodology; the proposed theater should operate without, significant parking deficiencies. The parking study and survey indicate that the two major uses {theater and K -Mart) will not be competing for the same parking spaces to any great extent due to the different peak demand times in each use. The proposed theater exhibits an aesthetically pleasing architectural style. Pursuant to the requirements of the' California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) No. 93 -8 was prepared. The MND evaluates impacts resulting from the development of the commercial shopping center and associated infrastructure improvements. Although the project could have effects on the environment,- there will not be.significant effects in this case because the mitigation measures imposed will reduce the impacts to levels of insignificance. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that',the - Planning Commission consider the following actions: • Recommend to the City Council approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 27821 and Design Review for Commercial Project No. 93 -4. • Approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 93 -4, Variance No. 93 -2 and Variance'No. 93 -4. • Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration 93 -8. based on the Findings, Exhibits "A ", "B", "C "., .!'D ", "E ", and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. FINDINGS TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP -NO 27821 1. Conditions of Approval have been prepared to address identified conditions under which the project is, currently being considered. These conditions provide a safeguard to insure that the project is keeping.with current City goals and policies. ' 2. This project, as approved, complies with the Goals_ an Objectives of the General Plan. 3. The site, subject to the attached conditions, is suitable for this type of development. DESIGN REVIEW C 93 -4 -' 1. Subject to the attached Conditions of Approval and the• Mitigation Measures contained in Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 93 -8 for the site, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. 2. The project, as proposed complies with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the General Plan, and the Zoning District in which it is located. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE `2 OF �9 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 6, 1993 PAGE FIVE SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL NAP NO. 27821, COMMERCIAL PROJECT NO. 93 -4, VARIANCE NO. 93 -2, VARIANCE NO. 93 -4, CONDITIONAL OSE PERMIT N0. 93 -4 "CAMELOT CENTER PHASE II THEATER" applicant proposes to- improve an area adjacent to. the theater within the Casino to add approximately 49 spaces, thus totalling 328. variance No. 93 -2 Section 17.48.050 of the Municipal Code states that the minimum lot width along the street frontage of any new lot created in the C -2 (General Commercial) Zone shall be 100 feet. .Parcel #3 is proposed to have a width on the street frontage of 27 feet. The main concern is to allow each lot to have street access in the event the subdivided lots are independent of each other. Because the proposed site will be an integrated development which will have reciprocal access and parking agreements, strict interpretation of this requirements will not be essential. The development of parcel. #3 is dependent on the development of the rest of the center. XXTERIALS AND COLORS Body: Concrete Masonry Unit (CMU) /(split face. .block) with plaster bands, arches and pilasters. Color: Overall color will be "Freeze!'.# 4381 "Iced Apricot" complimented with #4383 "Ember.Glow" Roof: Clay Roof Tile; "Clay - croft" .Mariposa,.Clay barrel Tile San Joaquin Madera Blend W /Integral Color Grout PROJECT CONCERNS Site Plan_D_esian: Staff's circulation and site plan concerns were addressed and eliminated at the initial staff review. Parking space concerns can be ,mitigated by utilizing existing K- Mart - and Casino spaces. - However, the need for reciprocal and off -site parking agreements will be necessary. Staff also feels that adequate signage should be provided informing and directing patrons of the proposed commercial project to the additional parking on the Casino lot if it is needed. Furthermore, staff feels there should be adequate lighting provided in the area of the planned stairways between the theater and Casino sites and that additional lighting shall be provided in the area of the 49 parking spaces to be added on the Casino-site to make this area more inviting and safe for parking purposes.. Conditions have been added regarding these concerns. Architectural Plan Design:. Staff felt the initial architectural design was unacceptable due to its overly .box -like appearance. The revised design utilizes architectural features such.as exterior plastered diamond reveals, exterior cement columns -with arches, and cement cornices and moldings at the top of the exterior walls with height and depth variations. Staff believes the revised design to be an acceptable improvement.- ANALYSIS 1 1, . As proposed, redesigned and conditioned, the project meets all AGLI. -',• .'Li.i K0.1 L PAGE 270 OF 7/� REPORT TO THE PLANNING OCTOBER 61 1993 PAGE FOUR SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL HAP NO. 27821, COMMERCIAL PROJECT NO. 93 -4, VARIANCE NO. 93 -2, VARIANCE NO. 93- 4,'CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 93 -4 11CANELOT CENTER PEASE IX THEATERI, great; however, none the less the extra parking will_be available. Conditional Use Permit No. 93 -4 Section 17.66.070 of the Municipal Code states that shared and off - site parking, is permissible under special circumstances demonstrating no potential conflict in the land use principle peak demand hours. Shared parking will be provided within the - center utilizing existing K -Mart spaces and off -site parking will be provided from existing spaces and the addition of 49 spaces within the Casino site. According to the aforementioned ULI shared parking study, principal peak demand time for theaters and restaurants is 8:00 pm (weekdays and weekends). Subsequently, at 8:00 pm on weekdays, occupancy rates for retail uses are 87% and on weekends (Saturday), occupancy rates for retail uses are 55% (refer to table below). Based on these two occupancy rates, on any given weekday at peak demand time for theaters, the demand for retail parking spaces is 344 therefore leaving available-approximately 52 spaces of the 396 provided in the K -Mart center (396 - 344 = 52). 'On weekends (Saturday) , at peak demand time for theaters, the demand for retail parking spaces is 218 therefore leaving available approximately 178 spaces of the 396 provided in the K -Mart center available for theater use in the event of a spill over (396 - 218 = 178). The following` table illustrates the parking requirement based on different retail occupancy rates. RETAIL OCCUPANCY RATES AT 8:00 PM (PEAK DEMAND TIME FOR THEATERS) Parking counts' (contained within Exhibit "A ") were taken from Monday, August 9, 1993, through Sunday, August 22, 1993 (two weekends) which revealed that on both Saturdays at peak demand time for theaters, the average K -Mart parking lot occupancy was 14% of the 355 available spaces or 50 spaces, thus leaving 305 available (355 x 35% = 50), (355 - 50 = 305). The parking counts registered a maximum of-35% occupancy rate on Sunday, August 15, at 3 :00 pm which translates to 123 spaces (355•x 35% = 123), therefore leaving 232 spaces available for use by the theater in the event of a spill over (355 - 123 = 232). To further accommodate additional parking spill -over from the available spaces at the Camelot Center (theater), additional off - site parking will be readily available directly adjacent and to the east at the Casino. Currently, the Casino has 279 spaces. The PAGE /� OF n9 SPACES 0.100% @ 87% @ SS% PROVIDED REQUIREMENT OCCUPANCY. OCCUPANCY iSP /250 SF WEEKDAYS' WEEKENDS K -MART 355 346 302 191 86,479 SF LOT #4 RETAIL " SPACE 41 48 42 27 11,830 SF LOT # 3 TOTAL 396 394 344 218 Parking counts' (contained within Exhibit "A ") were taken from Monday, August 9, 1993, through Sunday, August 22, 1993 (two weekends) which revealed that on both Saturdays at peak demand time for theaters, the average K -Mart parking lot occupancy was 14% of the 355 available spaces or 50 spaces, thus leaving 305 available (355 x 35% = 50), (355 - 50 = 305). The parking counts registered a maximum of-35% occupancy rate on Sunday, August 15, at 3 :00 pm which translates to 123 spaces (355•x 35% = 123), therefore leaving 232 spaces available for use by the theater in the event of a spill over (355 - 123 = 232). To further accommodate additional parking spill -over from the available spaces at the Camelot Center (theater), additional off - site parking will be readily available directly adjacent and to the east at the Casino. Currently, the Casino has 279 spaces. The PAGE /� OF n9 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 6, 1993 PAGE THREE SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO., 27821, COMMERCIAL PROJECT NO. 93 -4, VARIANCE NO'. 93 -2, VARIANCE NO. 93 -4, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 93 -4. "CAMELOT CENTER PHASE II THEATER" According to Exhibit "A" (Camelot Center Phase. II Parking Study dated August 23,'1993)'which references a national shared parking study published by the Urban Land Institute (ULI)., when cinemas have two or more screens, the probability of achieving full seating capacity decreases simultaneously at all screens. The maximum total occupancy at 8:00 pm, Saturday (peak demand time for theaters) has been found to be approximately 538 occupancy of the available seating. The reason being a "block buster" first run movie may pack customers in to a particular theater, while experiencing very light attendance at other theaters in the complex. Accordingly, during the peak hour this 1,600 -seat theater complex is expected to have approximately 848 seats occupied (538 of 1,600 - -848), which in turn using the five (5) to one (1), parking ratio will generate a parking demand of 170 spaces (848/5 = 170). The theater parcel (parcel ({1) provides 178 space. Subsequently, based on a five (5) to one (1) parking ratio and a 538 seating occupancy rate, the anticipated number of required spaces will be exceeded by the: number of provided spaces (178 - 170 =+8). There is an additional 122 parking spaces provided on site for the future proposed retail and restaurant uses that when available can also be shared with the theater use. The following table illustrates the results of a parking standard survey conducted by International Parking _Design, Inc. on 115 California cities. The survey focused on the parking spaces required per fixed seats for public 'assembly which generally includes theaters. The survey further illustrates that approximately 258 of the surveyed cities have a -one (1). space per every five (5) seat requirement. MUNICIPAL PARKING STANDARD SURVEY - 115 SELECTED CALIFORNIA CITIES -' PARKING SPACE PER SEAT RATIO NUMBER OF CITIES PERCENTAGE 1 Space per 3 Seats 34 308 1 Space per 4 Seats 32 288 i Space per 5 Seats 29 258 1 Space per 6 Seats 4 3.48 1 Space per 8'Seats 3 2.68 1 Space per 10 Seats 4 3.48 1 Space per 16 Seats 1 .88 Cities surveyed that have no seat requirement 8 6.88 TOTAL 115 100% Even with the findings of the advocating at this time that theaters be revised based.c expected occupancy rates.! S1 in the section regarding a C[ additional parking will be av and in the Casino lot. The fi indicate that demand for the studies discussed above, staff is.not the City's parking requirements for n - a 1 space 'per 5 seats ratio and aff believes that as discussed below IP for shared parking that sufficient milable off -site in the K -Mart Center ndings of the studies mentioned above off -site parking may not be that . AGENDA iTE:.: PACE %8 OF no- REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 6, 1993 PAGE TWO SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 278211 COMMERCIAL PROJECT NO. 93 -4, VARIANCE NO. 93 -2, VARIANCE NO. 93 -4, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 93 -4 "CAMELOT CENTER PHASE II THEATER'S on December 11, 199i'after receiving a twelve e -(12) month extension of time. On February 9, 1988, the City Council approved Commercial Project No. 87 -13 and Zone Change 87 -10. The approval entailed the construction of a 86,479 square foot K -Mart store, six (6) retail buildings, and associated infrastructure. To date, only the K -Mart Store has been built therefore invalidating previous approvals for the other retail buildings. Tentative Parcel Map No. 27821 Subdivision of 17.37 _acres into five (5) commercial parcels as follows (Exhibit "B "): Commercial Project No. 93 -4 The proposed project entails design review for the development of Phase II of the Camelot Shopping Center and associated infra- structure improvements on proposed Parcels #1, #2, and #3 of proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 27821 (Exhibit "C "). - Parcel #1 entails the construction of a 26,000 square foot theater "Krikorian Theater '$. -. Parcels #2 will_be improved for future development of a 11,830 square foot retail building. Parcel #3 will be improved for future development of a sit -down restaurant. Parcels #2, and '-#3 will remain vacant and will be subject to subsequent design review. Parcel #4 consist of the existing 86,479 sf K -Mart, which as mentioned earlier previously received design review approval. Parcel #5 will remain vacant. This design review also entails the review of the site plan for Phase II which includes circulation (pedestrian and automobile), parking, landscaping, and trash enclosures for Parcels #1, #2, #3 to ensure overall consistency, and compliance with the Zoning _Code. Variance No. 93 -4 According to Section 17.66.030.D.2 of the Municipal Code, theaters are required to provide one (1) parking space per each three (3) seats. The theater is proposing to have 1,600 seats which according to the strict interpretation of the Code, will require 534 parking spaces (1,600 seats /3 = 534 spaces). The applicant requests that the Code requirements be reduced to one (1) parking space per each 'five (5) seats (1600 seats /5 = 320). There exists unique circumstances within the center that may warrant the reduction approval. These circumstance are described below. PAGE 17 OF n9 PARCEL AREA BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE /USE PARKING STALLS PROVIDED Parcel #1 3.10 acres 26,000 sf theater 178 Parcel #2 .97 acres 5,292 sf restaurant 81 Parcel #3 .91' acres 11,830 sf retail shops 41 Parcel #4 9.45 acres Existing 86,479 sf K -Mart 355 Parcel #5 2.88 acres Vacant N/A Total 17.37 acres 655 Commercial Project No. 93 -4 The proposed project entails design review for the development of Phase II of the Camelot Shopping Center and associated infra- structure improvements on proposed Parcels #1, #2, and #3 of proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 27821 (Exhibit "C "). - Parcel #1 entails the construction of a 26,000 square foot theater "Krikorian Theater '$. -. Parcels #2 will_be improved for future development of a 11,830 square foot retail building. Parcel #3 will be improved for future development of a sit -down restaurant. Parcels #2, and '-#3 will remain vacant and will be subject to subsequent design review. Parcel #4 consist of the existing 86,479 sf K -Mart, which as mentioned earlier previously received design review approval. Parcel #5 will remain vacant. This design review also entails the review of the site plan for Phase II which includes circulation (pedestrian and automobile), parking, landscaping, and trash enclosures for Parcels #1, #2, #3 to ensure overall consistency, and compliance with the Zoning _Code. Variance No. 93 -4 According to Section 17.66.030.D.2 of the Municipal Code, theaters are required to provide one (1) parking space per each three (3) seats. The theater is proposing to have 1,600 seats which according to the strict interpretation of the Code, will require 534 parking spaces (1,600 seats /3 = 534 spaces). The applicant requests that the Code requirements be reduced to one (1) parking space per each 'five (5) seats (1600 seats /5 = 320). There exists unique circumstances within the center that may warrant the reduction approval. These circumstance are described below. PAGE 17 OF n9 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: .'KEVIN SHEAR, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER FOR: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 6, 1993 SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL NAP NO. 27821, COMMERCIAL PROJECT NO. 93 -4, VARIANCE NO. 93 -2, VARIANCE NO.,93 -4, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 93 -4 °CAMELOT CENTER PHASE II THEATER" Depasquale Family Trusts C/O 31915 Mission Trail Lake Elsinore, Ca. 92530 APPLICANT Camelot Property Counselors Inc. P.O. Box 1149 Wildomar, Ca. 92595 PROJECT REQUESTS - • Subdivision of 17.37 acres into five (5) commercial parcels, ranging in size from .97 to 9.45 acres. (Exhibit "B") • Design Review of a Commercial Project (building structure and site plan design) in accordance with the requirements of Chapter '17.38 (Non - Residential Development Standards). and 17.82 (Design Review) of the Municipal Code. (Exhibit "C ", "DO' 0 and "E") • Conditional Use Permit to allow off -site and shared parking. • Variance from Section 17.48.050 to allow substandard lot width frontage. • Variance to- deviate from Section 17.66.030.D.2 regarding required parking spaces for theaters. 812E AND LOCATION The proposed subdivision is located at the northeast corner of Mission Trail and Malaga Road. The proposed Commercial Project is located within proposed parcels #1, #2', and #3, of the above, referenced five (5) parcel subdivision. The Commercial project (parcels #1, #2, and #3) encompass approximately 5.04 acres. ENVIRONMENTAL BETTING On April 26, 1988, the City Council approved Tentative Tract Map No. 23381 on the subject site. The tentative map approval expired AGENDA ITEM D.O. PAGE /�' OF EXISTING LAND USE ZONING GENERAL RIM Project Site Vacant C -2 Gen. Comm. North Shopping Center C -2 Gen. Comm. . East Casino C -2 Gen. Comm. South Single Family Residential R -1 /County Low Density West Shopping Center C -2 Gen. Comm. On April 26, 1988, the City Council approved Tentative Tract Map No. 23381 on the subject site. The tentative map approval expired AGENDA ITEM D.O. PAGE /�' OF Planning Commission Minutes October 6, 1993 Page 5 Condition No. 41: Security Plan shall be..submitted to the Planning Department and subject to the approval of the .Community Development Manager or designee. MOVED BY CHAIRWOMAN BRINLEY, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER METZE AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO APPROVE CONDI- TIONAL USE PERMIT 93 -4, VARIANCE 93 -2 AND VARIANCE 93 -4, BASED ON THE FINDINGS LISTED IN THE STAFF.REPORT. MOVED BY CHAIRWOMAN BRINLEY, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER METZE AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS .VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 93 -8. DVOINESS ITEMS 2. Commercial Project 93 -2A - Oak Grove Equities (Elsinore City Center) City Planner Leslie explained that. the request is Design Review for the development of Parcel 3, within a portion of Phase I of the Lake Elsinore "City Center, _consisting of a 62,075 square foot" commercial building to be occupied by.-an EXPO Market. The site is located at the southeast corner of Grape Street and Railroad Canyon Road. He further explained that this project is consistent with approved Specific Plan,. No. 91 -1 and the certified Environmental Impact Report No. 92- 3 prepared for this site. He then suggested- if the Commission finds the design as presented acceptable that condition number 36 be eliminated, and condition number 35 be modified, as follows: Condition No. 35: The walkway in front of the cart storage area at the front of the building shall be a minimum seven feet (71) wide and the planter shall be a minimum five feet (5') wide and bermed against the cart storage screen wall. Commissioner Neff asked for additional information on the Expo market with regard to type of business. Sharon Douglas provided an explanation of the use. He then" requested an update on the Wal -Mart project. Mr. Craig Schleuniger gave a status report on Wal -Mart. Commissioner "Bullard commented on the competition between the pharmacies (Expo /Wal- Mart). Concerned with the outside storage, of carts, clutters the area. Asked whether the buildings in between Expo and Wal -Mart will be vacant or if, they have been leased. Mr. Craig Schleuniger stated that he could not say when these stores would be built; the best would be to have them built at once, and we are working toward this on our leasing. Commissioner Bullard stated that he agrees with the window concept. . Commissioner Metze commented on the number of handicap spaces provided and whether there would be a problem with adding four (4) additional spaces on the right side of the building, and this added as a condition. Discussion ensued on handicap parking and the total spaces to be provided. AGENIDA i I r_; q is "'. -.+ 1 pAG[ /5 OF %° Planning Commission Minutes October 6, 1993 Page 4 Discussion ensued- on handicap parking spaces and site constraints; design and layout of the handicap parking and the amount of spaces utilized during peak hours. Commissioner Bullard asked if the air conditioning /heating units would be roof mounted, and if the facade at sight level camouflage these.units from the Casino. Mr. Burkes responded that these units will be roof mounted; a site line study was done and these units will be screened from view. Commissioner Metze - inquired about. the handicap space(s) for the restaurant. Mr. Crowe stated two spaces are provided. MOVED BY CHAIRWOMAN BRINLEY, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER NEFF AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 27821 AND DESIGN REVIEW OF COMMERCIAL PROJECT 93 -4 BASED ON: THE FINDINGS AND SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: . Condition No. 12: Applicant must meet all requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) . TM8 8h&II in-hide -----_ _, -- Within the Q%bd #Y #s #en: addition, service laterals eha}} gross adjaeent preperty 11ineg and shall be delineated On submittal te the Vafi40-r Condition No. 41: Provide sufficient .right -of -way for improvements on Casino Drive for an 80 foot right -of- way.., Improvements to be built at development_of Parcel 5. Condition No.' 42: As part of the construction of off -site public. improvements related.to Malaga- Road, and the Mission Trail and Malaga Road intersections, the applicant shall acquire the property on. the easterly__ corner of Mission Trail. and Malaga (APN 365- 051 -001) and dedicate this property to the City. Commercial Drive _t 93 -4 Condition No. 17h: All landscape improvements shall be bonded 120% Faithful Performance Bond, and released at completion of instal - lation of landscape requirements approval /acceptance; 20% may be refunded after acceptance and _ 100% will be held for one year for material and labor. Condition No. 40: The front central. facade of the theater building above the ticket windows shall include reveals similar to those proposed on the side panels of the structure that - divide .the panel into quadrants. This modification is intended to add further interest to this large vertical building plain. Other alternatives will be acceptable if they serve the same intent, subject to the approval of the Community Development Manager or designee. AGENDA ! i E:::1 : :0. / 9 PAr.E� Planning Commission Minutes October 6, 1993 Page 3 they have full time security; twenty -four hour security. As well, the lighting will' be increased and their parking_ lot improved. Chairwoman Brinley stated that Commissioner Wilsey, who could not be here tonight, expressed a concern with regard to security - -such as.a security person to patrol the area. Mr. O'Byrne responded that there will be a security person on the Dunes's parking lot. Chairwoman Brinley stated that the Dunes could not be made responsible for what is going on at the theater site. Mr. O'Byrne stated that he understood this, but as to the need of a security person at the theater would defer this to Mr. Krikorian, who operates theaters. Mr. O'Byrne stated "if we need a security person to have a safe place and. patrons there that is what we will have." Mr. O'Byrne. stated that he did not want to make a commitment for Mr. Krikorian, who could not be here this evening, but our intentions for Camelot Center are to'combine security with the Dunes Casino, K -Mart and Phase II. Mr. O'Byrne stated "there will be adequate security and if we need a security guard or guards that is what it will be." He further explained that they are presently working with the Dunes and K -Mart and we will combine a security system, Exhibit C reflects the plotting of a security tower. Commissioner Neff stated security was his only concern on the project. Commissioner Bullard stated he would like a condition added addressing security. Commissioner Metze commented that lighting is a must for.the rear of the facility. He inquired about signage at Malaga and Mission Trail and at the other end. Mr. O'Byrne stated that a Sign Program Amendment will be submitted. Commissioner Metze then inquired about handicap space within each theater and how this is determined. Mr. Burkes stated that Title 24 was originally used, but transferring to ADA requirements. He then explained that the amount of space to be provided depends on the number of seats in each auditorium. Commissioner . Metze asked Mr. Burkes if they would have a problem with providing additional handicap parking spaces on the right side of the theater building. Mr. Burkes responded that he would have no problem either way - -that would be civil engineering design criteria - -and if we can do it that is fine, but would defer to Mr. Crowe. Mr. Crowe, The Keith Companies, stated there is no problem with physically placing those spaces there. However, the way the other is arranged there is actually six spaces, and would defer this to the manager of the Krikorian Theaters. Mr. Crowe expanded on the design of the handicap spaces and drive aisle. He stated there is one constraint with placing the handicap parking in this location and that is, the theater building is so wide, the grade coming up from Malaga up to the building is fairly severe right at the entrance and the parking spaces on the right side the slopes on those spaces adjacent to the front range from 4 to 6 percent cross slope and that wouldn't meet the criteria for handicap spaces; 2 percent is the maximum allowable in a handicap zone, so we would not be able to use that particular area adjacent to Malaga. AGV.Li'. !T'::': NO..�]� r/O PAGE L-3 OF.10 Planning Commission Minutes October 6, 1993 Page 2 modification is intended to add further interest to this large vertical building plain. Other alternatives will -be acceptable if they serve the same ° intent, subject to the approval of the Community Development Manager or designee.. Chairwoman Brinley opened the public' °hearing at 7:14 p.m., and asked for any written communication. The Secretary reported no written communication. She then "aisked for anyone wishing to speak in favor.. Mr. Leonard O'Byrne, 38401 Oak Tree Loop, Murri'eta, President of Camelot Property Counselors Inc., stated they are in agreement with the conditions and have no problem with the added condition. He requested that condition number 41 for Tentative Parcel Map 27821 be modified to reads 'Provide sufficient right -of -way for improvements on Casino Drive for an 80 foot right -of -way:. Improvements to be built at develop ment of Parcel., 5". He then requested clarification on condition number -5 and 17.h. for 'Commercial Project ' "93 -4. - Chairwoman Brinley stated that condition number 17.h. is a standard condition which requires bonding (1208) to ensure that..the landscaping is maintained.'' Mr. Villa stated this is one bond held by the City._for'one year. Mr. Shear stated this is one bond of 120 %' and 'upon, completion' 26% can -'be released and the remainder (1008), is held, for one, year to ensure landscape maintenance. Mr. O'Byrne then introduced Sybil O'Byrne, Tim O'Byrne, Mr. Burkes architect, Neil Myers, operations manager for Krikorian Theaters,, Dr. Rahi of Associated Traffic..Consultants and Roger Drayer of.T.I. Maloney, Inc; landscape architect', and Jeff Christoff of Christoff and Manarino ' real estate, broker. He stated that they will answer any quesiions'that may arise. ' Chairwoman Brinley asked for anyone else wishing to speak in favor., Mr. Harvey French, 15393 Mountain.View;;inquired about the eventual road width for - Malaga. Chairwoman Brinley stated the applicant can address this after the close of the public hearing.' Chairwoman Brinley then asked for anyone'else wishing to speak in ; favor. .Receiving.no resp'on'se, she asked for those opposed Receiving :noresponse,_she asked for anyone I wishing to speak on the matter. Receiving no response, the public hearing was closed at 7:24 p.m. Chairwoman Brinley asked that"the applicant address the road.' width question posed by Mr. French.- Mr. O'Byrne stated that the General Plan designates Malaga as 100 -110 foot right -of -way, with an SO foot street. He then explained ,that,they would ,improve the intersection, which . includes signalization and improve . =the' street up, to the property line, but will'not widen the street at this time.' Chairwoman Brinley commented on lighting of the area behind -.` the theater and stairway areas between the'theater and Casino and this area being well illuminated, condition number 19. Mr. O'.Byrne stated the condition requires that the lighting be to the satisfaction -of the Community;; Development, Manager, and the area will be well lit.; security was a major concern of ours. The new 'owner /operator of the Casino has taken the. parking lot thaf we have reciprocal'easement- access to and`' AGENDA ITEM NO. 0' PAGE /- OF 741 MINUTES OF LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 1993 THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:00 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was-led by Commissioner Bullard..., ROLL CALL: PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Bullard, Neff, Metze and. Brinley ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Wilsey Also present were Community Development Manager Shear-'City Planner Leslie, Assistant Planner Villa and Engineering Manager O'Donnell. MINUTE ACTION Moved by Commissioner Bullard,. Second by, Commissioner' Metze and carried by unanimous vote of those present to approve Minutes -of September 1 1993, with clarification on 'Page 9,, 3rd paragraph and Page 10, condition number 75, change the word "pedestrian" to "children ", and to, receive and file Minutes of September, 15, 1993:` PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Harvey French, 15393 Mountain View, stated he has a question pertaining to Tentative Parcel Map 27821. Chairwoman Brinley asked that this be addressed 4uring the public hearing. - There being no further request to speak, Chairwoman Brinley closed ' the PUBLIC COMMENT Section. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Tentative Parcel.Map 27821, Commercil Project 93 -4, Variance 93 -2, Variance 93 -4, Conditional Use-, Permit 93 -4 - Depasquale Family Trust. JCamelot Property,Counselors, Inc.), Continued from 9 -1-93. Assistant Planner Villa explained'that the - request is- to subdivide 17.37 acres into 5 commercial parcels, ranging in size from .97 to. 9.45 acres; Design Review for the development of a 26,000: square foot theater on Parcel 1. Parcel 2 and 3 will be improved for future development, 1l, 830 .square feet of retail space and a 5,390 square foot sit -down restaurant,` and subject to subsequent design review; Condition Use Permit to ' allow off -site and shared, parking; Variance from Section 17.48.050.,' street frontage width, 'and; Variance to deviate ` from Section.17.66.030.D.2 regarding required parking spaces for theaters. The site is located'at_ the . northeast corner of ' Mission Trail-and Malaga. Staff requested the following modifications to the Conditions of Approval: tative Parcel Man 27 Condition No. 12 to read: Applicant.must meet all requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD)., eliminate the remainder of condition as it is redundant. ' Condition.No. 42, correct Assessor's_ Parcel Number from 365 - 052 -002 to_365- 051 - 001.` Commercial Droiecf -93 -4 Add. Condition No.. 40,-which will read: The front central ' facade.of the theater building above the ticket windows shall' include reveals similar to those proposed'on the side,panels of the structure that divide the panel into quadrants.- This AGENDA ITE : NO. 21 PAGE // OF '9 CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27821, CONT. 43. Developer shall design and install a traffic signal at the intersection of :Mission Trail and Malaga. It shall - -be operational no later than two (2) months after the theater opens. 44. A pedestrian access shall be provided', from the Casino Hotel to the project site. 45. Driveway-on Mission Trail Parcel #1 shall be,limited•to.right turn in and turn out only. 46. Dedicate 10 'feet along Malaga Road for additional right-of- way 47. Dedicate 20 feet along Mission Trail frontage for additional right -of -way. 3 AC / PAGE CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO, 27821, CONT. 28. All -compaction reports, grade certification, monument certification (with tie -notes delineated on 8 1/2 1", x 11" mylar) shall be submitted to Engineering Department before final inspection of off -site improvements will be scheduled and approved. 29. Applicant shall obtain all necessary off -site easements for off-.;site grading from the:adjacent property owners prior.to final map approval. . . 30. Comply with all conditions of the Riverside County ,Fire Department. This shall include providing any required - fire_ protection facilities. 31. All improvement plans and tract maps shall be digitized.' certificate of occupancy applicant shall submit tapes and or discs which are compatible with, - City's ARC Info /Gis or developer to pay $1,000 per sheet for city digitizing. 32. Developer shall provide No Parking and Street Sweeping Signs for streets within tract or pay a fee for installation by the City. 33. Developer shall install blue reflective pavement markers in the street at all fire hydrant locations. 34. Developer shall be subject to all Master Planned Drainage fees and will receive credit for all master planned drainage facilities constructed. 35. If grading exceeds 50 cubic yards, grading plans shall be prepared by a Civil Engineer and approved prior to final map approval. Prior to any grading, applicant shall obtain a grading permit and post appropriate security. 36. The owner shall provide the City with proof of his having filed a Notice of Intent with the Regional Water Quality Control Board for Natural Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and submit the storm water pollutant prevention plan prior to grading permit. 37. Submit Hydrology and Hydraulic Reports for review and approval by City Engineer prior to approval of final map. Developer shall mitigate any flooding and /or erosion downstream caused by development of site and diversion of drainage. 38. All drainage facilities shall be constructed to Riverside County Flood Control District Standards. 39. Lot drainage shall be conveyed to a public facility or accepted by adjacent property owners by a letter of drainage acceptance or conveyed to a drainage easement. 40. All natural drainage traversing site shall be conveyed through site, or shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer. 41. Provide sufficient right -of -way for improvements on Casino Drive for an 80 foot right -of -way. Improvements to be built at development of Parcel 5. 42. As part of the construction of off -site public improvements related to Malaga Road, and the Mission Trail and Malaga Road intersections, the applicant shall acquire the property on the easterly corner of Mission Trail and Malaga (APN 365- 051 -001) and dedicate this property to the City. AGEN`JA 17E."', NO. � 19 o� mq PACE /04-f3 lam+ CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATI{1E PARCEL MAP NO. 27821, CONT. 15. Prior to issuance of any grading permit or building permit, subdivider shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgment of Conditions" and shall return the executed. original to the . Community Development Department, Planning.Division. 16. The applicant shall cause -to be recorded an irrevocable reciprocal parking, circulation, loading and landscaping maintenance easement and agreement in favor of all lots, subject to.the approval of the Community Development Manager. In. addition, CC &R's shall.be.approved by.the City Attorney and the Community Development Manager which enforces standards of ' building maintenance and participation in landscape maintenance. The,-CC &R's shall be ,recorded, prior to ; finalization of the map. 17. All ''development. associated with - this: map,, requires separate Design Review approval in accordance', with Section 17.,82 of the Municipal Code prior to building permit approval, and shall be subject to review to determine.the ., required level of -, environmental documentation subject''Ito the provisions of the' California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. 18. A geotechnical /seismic report with.'findings, and associated recommendations to mitigate potential hazards will be required., to be submitted to the Engineering , „and Planning Departments prior to recordation of the,final map.. - Engineering Department 19. All Public Works requirements shall' be, complied with as 'a' condition of development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal'Code prior to final map approval. 20. Dedicate underground water rights to,the City (Municipal Code, Title 16, Chapter 16.52.030). Document can be obtained from the Engineering-Department.- 21. Pay -all Capital Improvement and Plan- .Check. fees (Municipal Code, Title 16, Chapter 16.34,.Resolution 85 -26). 22. Submit -a 'Will- Serve” letter to the City Engineering Department, from the applicable water district,.stating..that; water and sewer arrangements have been made for this project.`" Submit - this.letter prior to final, map approval._ 23. Construct all off -site public works improvements per approved. street plans (Municipal Code, Title 12). Plans must be approved and- signed.by the City Engineer prior:to final map approval. 24. Street improvement plans and specifcations.shall be prepared by a Civil Engineer. - Improvements shall, be designed and constructed to Riverside County Road Department Standards, latest edition, and City Codes, (Lake Elsinore Municipal Code 12.04 and 16.34). 25. Provide street lighting rand- show lighting improvements on street improvement plans as required,by the City Engineer. - 26. Enter -into a subdivision agreement-with the City for .off -site improvements and post appropriate bonds. Bonds or letter of, credit-.to,be approved by the City Attorney. s 27. Pay all fees and, meetl requirements of encroachment` permit issued =by the•Engineering Department for construction of ,off- site .public, works improvements (Municipal Code, Title 12, Chapter 12.08, Resolution 83 -78). AGENDA ITEV, NO. ±� IF3 _ •_ ,.. PAGE_ OF..;�( -_ - - - - --- - -- I CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE'PARCEL MAP NO' 27821 Planning Division - 1. Tentative Parcel Map No. 27821`will expire two (2) years from date of City Council - approval unless an extension of time is granted by the City of Lake Elsinore City Council in accordance with the Subdivision Map-Act. ' - . 2. 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 the Conditions of Approval. 3. A precise survey -with closures for boundaries and all lots shall be provided, per City Ordinance. 4. The City's Noise Ordinance must be met during .all site preparation'ictivity. 5. Pay all 'applicable fees in force at -time of issuance of building permits: 6. Prior to final approval of Parcel Map 27821 the improvements specified herein and approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council shall, be installed, or - the bonds and . agreement for said improvements, shall be submitted to the. City, and all other applicable conditions shall be complied. with. 7. Final Map shall reflect plotting as approved on plans date stamped October 6, 1993. 8. Building permits shall not be issued until proof that all school. mitigation fees have been paid is presented to City Building Division. 1. 9. The developer shall meet all requirements }of Southern: California Edison. Plans for a street lighting system shall be submitted to them for review and'approval. The cost'.of street lighting, installation as well as energy charges shall be the responsibility of the developer. Said plans shall be approved by the City and shall be installed in accordance with the City Standards. 10. Meet all requirements of Southern California Gas Company., 11. Meet all` requirements_ of General Telephone.` 12. Applicant "must' meet all requirements' of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). This shall inelode; 13. All trailers used during construction shall be subject to Planning Division review and approval prior to installation. All temporary signage and mailboxes' plans shall also be subject review and approval of'the Planning Division. 14. Any alterations to= the. - topography, ground surface-, or' any other site preparation activity will require the appropriate City permits. A Geologic Soils - Report with associated recommendations will be required for grading permit approval, and all 'grading, must meet -the City's Grading Ordinance,_ subject to, the approval of the Chief Building Official and Planning Division. Interim and permanent erosion control measures are required. The applicant shall bond 100% for- material and labor for one (1) year for erosion control landscaping at the time the site is rough graded. AGENDA ITEM 140. FACE 7 OF_[.= - 4...._CONT: .. 32. Any proposed metal mailbox shall be treated to blend with the center's design'theme.. Mailbox plans shall be submitted for approval prior to issuance of building permits, and shall be- subject to the -approval of the postal service and the Community Development— Manager or`°designee, prior to the issuance of building permit. 33. Prior to' issuance`of building permits, the applicant shall.° sign and complete an-, "Acknowledgment! of Conditions" and shall return the executed original to the Community Development ." Department for inclusion in the case records. 34. The applicant shall submit a graffiti removal program for the Camelot Center. This program - shall. include methods for ., immediate graffiti removal `and shall -be :subject to the approval of 'the Community Development Manager.or designee.. 35. The applicant shall cause to be recorded (in the Office of the County Recorder with two (2) copies thereof filed with the Planning Division) an irrevocable reciprocal parking, circulation, loading and landscaping maintenance easement and agreement in favor of all lots within the Camelot Center, subject to the approval of the Community Development Manager. In addition, CC &R's shall be approved, by the City Attorney and the Community Development Manager which enforces standards of building maintenance and participation. in landscape maintenance. 36. A pedestrian access agreement shall be provided.and: recorded in 'the Office of the County Recorder with two- (2)' copies - thereof filed with the Planning Division from the Casino site to the project.site (Theater). 37. The -- applicant shall provide evidence of agreements for off site and shared parking facilities between the owner of the Camelot Center and the Casino site.' This legal instrument shall be recorded.in the Office of the County =Recorder with. two (2) copies thereof filed with the Planning Division.. 38. The applicant shall provide signage',,indicating or-directing overflow traffic to the proposed Casino off -site parking. Number of signs and location shall be approved by the. Community Development Manager or designee. Enaineering Department - 39. Commercial Project No. 93 -4 shall be subject to allsapplicable conditions of approval for Tentative Parcel 27821 prior to issuance of building permits_ 40. The front central facade of the theater building above the ticket windows shall include reveals similar -.to those proposed on the side panels of the structure that divide-the panel into quadrants. This modification is intended to add further interest to this large .vertical- building ° plain. _ Other alternatives will be acceptable if they serve the same intent, subject-to the approval of the Community Development Manager or designee. 41. Security Plan shall be submitted to: the Planning Department . and subject to the approval of the Community. Development Manager or designee. PAv / OF '72 19. All exterior on -site lighting shall be shielded and directed_ on -site so as not„to create glare. onto neighboring. property (except for the area behind the theater which will necessitate substantial lighting for security) and streets or allow illumination above the horizontal plane of. the fixture. The applicant shall provide adequate parking lot lighting to the . satisfaction of the Community Development Manager on the area behind the theater .(Casino parking) for security purposes. The stairway areas between the theater site and the Casino parking shall provide adequate lighting to the satisfaction of the City. 20. All undeveloped lots /pads 'within the center shall be maintained in a neat and safe condition, with erosion and weed control methods applied by the developer as necessary to meet the approval of the Community- Development.Manager until such time as these lots /pads are built -out. If building permits are not issued within 90 days, all areas or ,pads graded,- during the grading- operation, shall be landscaped and irrigated. 21. The applicant shall amend the approved Uniform Sign Program for the Camelot.Center to reflect -the added design changes. The Revised'Master Signage Program shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. All signage including freestanding signs shall be by City Permit and in conformance with the approved Master Signage Program. The Master Signage Program shall be approved prior to issuance of Certificate of occupancy or release of utilities. Individual sign permits are required prior to the erection of each sign. 22. The project shall connect to sewer and meet all requirements of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District ( EVMWD) . Applicant. shall submit water and sewer plans to the EVMWD and shall incorporate all district conditions and standards. 23. Applicant shall annex into the City's Landscape -and Lighting District. 24. All, loading zones shall be clearly marked with yellow striping and shall. meet City and Specific Plan Standards for loading zones. 25. This project shall be subject to the Mitigation Monitoring Program contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration 93 -8. 26. Any tenant within this development that can potentially employ 100 people or more shall be subject to the requirements of Ordinance No. 941 (Trip Reduction Ordinance) adopted- .October 27, 1992. 27- Trailers utilized during construction shall, be approved by the Planning Division. 28. On- site surface drainage shall riot cross sidewalks. 29. Parking.stalls shall be double- striped with four- inches (4 ") lines two -feet (2') apart. 30. Painted arrows on the asphalt shall be,-located at all internal one -way drive aisles._. 31. Decorative pavement shall be provided at entry and crosswalks, to the satisfaction of the Community Development Manager or designee. AGE-ND' ITEM NO. PAGE OF %9 16. The parking lot landscaping designs shall provide at least one (1) twenty- four -inch (24 ") box tree for every ten (10) spaces, with appropriate planter box, subject to the approval of the City's Landscape Architect and.Community Development Manager or. designee. 17. The final landscaping/ irrigation plan, Is to be reviewed and approved by the City's Landscape Architect Consultant and the Community Development Manager or designee, prior., to issuance of building permit. A Landscape .Plan Check -Fee will be charged- prior to final landscape ,'approval based on the Consultant's fee plus forty percent J40%). a) All planting areas shall have ,permanent and automatic sprinkler system with 1008 plant and grass coverage using a combination of drip_ and "conventional irrigation methods. b). Applicant shall-plant street trees, selected from the City's Street Tree List, a maximum of thirty feet (30) apart and at least twenty- four -inch (2411) box. On areas where screening, .is necessary trees .shall be at least thirty six -inch (3611) box size. c) All planting''areas shall be separated -;from paved areas with a six inch (611) high and six inch (611) wide concrete curb. d) Planting within. fifteen feet (151) of ingress /egress points shall be no higher than ,'thirty -six inches (3611). e) .Landscape planters.shall be planted"with an appropriate. parking lot shade tree to ;provide for- 508 parking lot shading in fifteen (15) years. f) Any transformers and mechanical or electrical equipment shall be indicated on landscape�plan, and screened as part of the landscaping plan. g) The landscape plan shall provide for ground cover, shrubs, and trees, and meet all requirements of the City's adopted Landscape Guidelines.. Special attention to the use of Xeriscape -or drought resistant plantings with combination drip irrigation system to be used to prevent excessive watering. h) All landscape improvements shall be bonded,1208 Faithful . Performance Bond, and released+at completion of instal- lation of landscape requirements approval /acceptance; 208 may be refunded after acceptance and 1008 will be held for one year for material and labor. i) All landscaping and irrigation shall. be installed within affected portion of any phase at the time a Certificate of Occupancy is requested for any building.- All planting, areas shall include plantings inethe Xeriscape concept,, drought tolerant grasses and plants. j) Final landscape plan must be ;consistent with approved site plan. k) Final landscape plans to include planting and irrigation details. 18. All exposed slopes in excess of,three,!feet i(31) in height shall have a permanent irrigation system and erosion control: vegetation installed, approved by.the, ,Planning Division. f� AGENDA ITEM 14- I PAGE' CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COMMERCIAL PROJECT NO, 93 -4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 93 -4 "CAMELOT CENTER PRASE II THEATER" planning Department 1. Design Review approval for Commercial Project No. 93 -4 will lapse and be void unless building permits are issued.within one (1) year of Planning Commission approval. An extension of time, up to one (1) year per extension, may be granted by the Community Development Manager prior.to the expiration of.•the initial Design Review" approval upon application 'by: the. developer one (1) month prior-to expiration., 2. These Conditions of Approval shall be reproduced upon Page One of Building Plans prior to their acceptance by the Division of Building and Safety. 3. All site improvements shall- be constructed as, indicated on the approved site plan and elevations.• Revisions to approved site plans or building elevations shall be subject to the discretion of the Community Development Manager.. All plans,, submitted for Building Division Plan Check shall conform with the submitted plans or as modified by Conditions of Approval, or the Planning Commission through subsequent action. 4. Materials and colors depicted on the materials board shall be used unless modified by the Community Development Manager or his designee. 5. Applicant shall meet all Conditions of Approval prior to the issuance of a:' Certificate of Occupancy and release of utilities. - 6. Applicant is to meet all applicable. City Codes and Ordinances,. including State handicap requirements..? 7. Meet all Riverside County Health Department requirements. 8 Meet_`all Riverside County Fire Department requirements.' 9. No outdoor storage shall be allowed. 10. Trash enclosures shall be constructed per City standards as approved by the Community Development Manager,.or. designee, prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. , 11. All roof ladders and electrical panels shall be. located within the interior of the building or in specially designed areas concealed from public right -of -way view. 12. Applicant shall use roofing materials-with Class "A" fire rating. 13. All roof mounted or ground support air conditioning units or other mechanical equipment incidental to development shall be _ architecturally screened so that they are�not visible from neighboring property, public streets - (Malaga, Casino Drive or Mission Trail).' Screening plan shall. be -approved by the Community Development Manager or designee, prior to issuance of building permit. 14. All exterior down - spouts shall be constructed .within the interior of the building or concealed from public right -of -way view. 15. Bicycle racks shall be provided adjacent to major commercial uses. Placement, design and quantity shall be indicated on the -final landscaping plan, and subject to the approval of the Community Development Manager -or designee, .prior to the issuance of building permit. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 3 OF 7F - FA - Method of Monitoring: Applicant show proof of payment - Monitoring Agency: City Planning Department 29. The applicant, prior to issuance o: ' f building permit, shall acquire "will serve" letters from apopriate agencies... - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: .Prior to issuance of building permit - Method of Monitoring: - Monitoring Agency: Applicant provide will - serve letters City Planning Department 30. The applicant shall construct a 36 -inch storm drain pipe to the drainage channel, south of Malaga Road along Mission Trail Road. - Responsible for Implementation: Applicant - Monitoring Phase: Prior to.final inspection - Method of Monitoring: - Monitoring Agency: 39 Site visit City Engineering Department AGMA ITEM NO-.= y— PAGE �3 OF- 9 PLANNIN0 CC1:7 �rISSIOP4 EXHIBIT NU.2 ' CASE It01 .__43 DATE _ ----------J PARKING STUDY CAMELOT CENTER PHASE II THEATRE PROJECT AUGUST 2391993 Submitted by Camelot Property Counselors, Inc., Applicant FILE COPY =i.SINORE AU6.2 3 1993 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAt __Z..OFy� DECLARATION OF T. LEONARD OBYRNE I, T. LEONARD OBYRNE, declare that: • . 1. I am President of Camelot Property Counselors, Inc. I make this declaration in support of the parking survey completed by Donna Barber and study completed by Associated Traffic Consultants located in Pasadena, California (the "Study) covering the parking required for.the eight -plex theater in Camelot Center Phase II. 2. I attach hereto a true and correct original of the Study. T. Leonard O'Byrne State of California ) ) ss t County of Riverside ) On this 23rd day of August _ in the year 1993 before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared T. Leonard O'%pe , personally known to me, or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence, to be the President of the corporation that executed the within Instrument, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the within instrument pursuant to its by -laws or a resolution of its board of directors. Witness my hand and official seal. Notary Public in and for said State Page 1 - Declaration of T. Leonard OByme AGENM !TE ?3 1�0. FACE- _(15- ' OF11_ ". i OrP' -'6- NOTARYSEAL uKOVICH Calftrria 7c AUNTY Sxpms MAY 27,1995 Page 1 - Declaration of T. Leonard OByme AGENM !TE ?3 1�0. FACE- _(15- ' OF11_ DECLARATION OF DONNA BARBER I, DONNA BARBER, declare that: 1. 1 am Assistant Operations Manager for Kmart Corporation at a Kmart store located on Mission Trail, City of Lake Elsinore, State of California. 2. At the request of T. Leonard OByme, President of Camelot Property Counselors, Inc., I made or caused to be made under my supervision and direction a count of parking on both the Kmart parking lot ( "Kmart Lot ") and the Dunes Casino West lot ( "Dunes Lot ") for the time periods August 9, 1993 through August 22, 1993. 3. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the following is a true and correct count of the number of cars parked in the Kmart Lot and the Dunes Lot on the date and times set forth herein Fri 81113 12 pm 73 24 3 pm 86 20 6 pnz 6 33 8pm 52 29 Page I - Declaration of Donna Barber 52 %355= jq.1v% or �NnR6 �fFRK /ti1(v 647- ocwp�ED- 97 106 94 81 AGENDI'.7_fa �r,yyqq� PAC,_ OF_L1. 3 ;'!•NZ7 J�J&SPAGF.S DATE TIME przov�D D 355 ZrT LOT DUNES LOT TOTAL Mon 819 3 pnr 58 32 91 6 pm 39 30 69 8pm 23 25 48 Tue 8110 12 pm 105 25 130 3 pn: 90 15 105 6 pm 62 13 75 8pm 29 12 41 Wed 8111 12 pm 89 14 115 3 pn: 66 20 86 6 pm 52 17 69 8pm 20 11 31 Thu 8112 12 pm 71 34 105 ,3 pm 68 28 96 6 pm 60 22 82 8pm 54 19 73 Fri 81113 12 pm 73 24 3 pm 86 20 6 pnz 6 33 8pm 52 29 Page I - Declaration of Donna Barber 52 %355= jq.1v% or �NnR6 �fFRK /ti1(v 647- ocwp�ED- 97 106 94 81 AGENDI'.7_fa �r,yyqq� PAC,_ OF_L1. 3 Page 2 - Declaration of Donna Barber ACsV::... F _L _ 7 OFD RoUi0 O �555P� P DATE TIME KMART LOT DUNES LOT TOTAL Sat 8114 11 pm 81 27 108 3 pm 91 23 114 5 pm 92 37 129 6 pm 67 51 118 7 pm 58 60 118 ✓8 pm 60 /(o.% 123 %355 %350 66 126 Sun 8115 12 pm 91 64 155 v3 pm 123 56 179 5 pm 97 48 145 6 pm 62 30 92 7 pm 42 25 67 8 pm 27 17 44 Mon 8116 No Count Taken Tue 8117 No Count Taken Wed 8,118 12 pm 54 19 83 3 pm 39 28 67 6 pm 61 24 85 8p": 23 13 46 Thu 8,119 12 pm 62 28 100 3 pm 51 22 73 6 pm 63 21 84 8 pm 33 19 52 Fri 8.,20 12 pm 62 27 89 3 pm 44 22 66 6 pm 45 84 69 8 pm 36 27 63 Sat 821 12 pm 77 30 - 107 3 pm 64 24 _ 88 5 pm 65 28 93 6 pm 52 33 60 85, 104 7pm 44 j0,9�o 8 pm 39 52 91 Sun 8122 12 pm 88 49 137 3 pm (1142 47 158 5 pm 77'131. z 40 117 6pm 64 27 91 Page 2 - Declaration of Donna Barber ACsV::... F _L _ 7 OFD DATE TIME KMART LOT Sun 8122 7 pm 38. (Cont-) 8 pm 21 DUNES LOT TOTAL 24 62 12 33 I declare under penalty of perjury under.the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed on August 23, 1993, at Lake Elsinore, California. State of California ) ) ss County of Riverside ) On this 23rd day of August in the year 1993 before me, the undersigned, a notary public in and for said state, personally appeared Donna Barber. proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence, to be the person whose name she subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that she executed it. Witness my hand and official seal. Notary Public in and for said State � VOTAAV SEAL Ew JOUNTV -.; -. Ex;;ires ;,AAV 27.1995 Page 3 - Declaration of Donna Barber i._i:. 21' F::G2 —LE? OF '74 ILJ FILE COPY September 27, 1993 C LAKE ELS!Nc p rT FIVEr) City Planning Commission and City Council SEP 2 8 1993 City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street PLANNING DEPT Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Re: Lake Elsinore Theater Project This letter report addresses the parking related issues associated with the proposed Lake Elsinore Theater project. The project is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Mission Trail and Malaga Road in the City of Lake Elsinore. The project consists of developing a 26,000- sq. ft. 8- screen 1600 -seat theater complex to be operated by Krikorian Premiere Theatres, Inc. A total of 300 parking spaces will be provided which will be shared by the patrons of the theater complex and other tenants, namely a 5,390 -sq. ft. restaurant and a 11,830 -sq. ft. retail building. The mix of land uses of this project provides an ideal situation for application of shared parking methodology for determining net total parking requirement. The shared parking concept, documented by the Urban Land Institute (ULI), allows a reduction in parking requirement where it can be shown that the type of use and the hours of operation are such that the different uses do not compete for the same space during the same hour (Reference: "Shared Parking ", The Urban Land Institute, 1983). The shared parking concept may apply under two conditions or a combination of the two. . One condition would be that the operating hours of'uses are so different as to not compete for the same spaces. An example might be a banking /entertainment combination. If the entertainment development hours of operation did not conflict with the banking development hours of operation, theoretically all banking spaces could also be used as entertainment spaces. The use requiring the larger number of spaces would dictate the required parking and no, additional parking would be necessary for the alternate use. Another condition would be one in which all of the parking spaces provided are used by patrons of other uses. In other words, the patron would park in .a space while patronizing one use of the development and then walk to the other use without requiring an additional parking space. An example might be in a restaurant/cinema complex where patrons of a restaurant would park, have dinner, then proceed to the nearby theater, thereby using only one parking space for two': on-site uses. aftASSOCIATED TRAFFIC CONSULTANTS C Transportation, Planning 6 Engineering. Post Office Box 90134 Pasadena, CA 91109-5134 8181795 -9353 FAX-8181795-2817 AG =.._. ... 2I Pt.,_ac 'C 6 The above discussion implies that the parking requirement, as typically specified by some cities, can sometimes result in unnecessary additional spaces, thereby wasting valuable urban land. It is most likely because of this reason some cities currently specify a requirement for theater projects much lower than other cities. our research reveals that a number of Southern California cities (with operational movie theaters) require one space per each five seats of a theater complex. For example, the following cities have included such requirement in their parking codes for theater projects: CSC Parking Requirement City of Culver City 1 Space for each 5 fixed seats City of Monrovia 1 space for each 5 fixed seats City of Temple City 1 space for each 5 fixed seats Surveys conducted by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) have also revealed that average parking generation rate for movie theaters'has been 0.19 space per seat, i.e., 1 space per 5 seats (Reference: "Parking Generation ", Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington , D.C., August, 1987). The ULI surveys have indicated that a restaurant and a theater generally generate the peak parking demand during the same hour - 8:00 PM on atypical weekday as well as on a Saturday. In other words, a 100% code required parking spaces are expected to be occupied during the hour. A retail use generates a demand for approximately 87% of code required parking spaces during the same hour. Using a parking demand of 1 space per each 5 seats, the theater use of this project will require a total of 320 spaces (1600 seats /5 = 320 spaces) at 100% occupancy of its seats at 8:00 PM. The restaurant use will have a demand for 88 spaces (100% of code required 88 spaces) at this hour while the demand from the retail use will be for a total of 41 spaces (55% of code required 47 spaces). Therefore, The total number of parking spaces to be occupied will be 449 (320 + 88 + 41 = 449). However, at a multi- screen theater such as this project, the maximum total occupancy at 8:00 PM, Saturday (prime time) has been found to be approximately 53% of available seating (Reference: communications with personnel of major theater chains such as United Artists, Mann Theaters, etc.). The reason being a "block buster", first -run movie may pack customers into that particular theater, while experiencing very light attendance at the other theaters in the complex. Accordingly, during the peak hour this 1600 -seat theater complex is expected to have approximately 848 seats occupied (53% of 1,600 = 848), which in turn will generate a parking demand of 170 spaces (848/5 = 170). Adding the parking demand from the restaurant and retail uses to the theater parking demand at this hour, it is expected that a maximum of 299 spaces (170 + 88 + 41 299) will be occupied at the theater complex during the peak hour. This will be without counting the fact that some of the restaurant patrons will leave their cars parked in the ASSOCIATED TRAFFIC CONSULTANTS ❑ Transportation, Planning & Engineering - Post Office Boa 90134 Pasadena, CA 91109.5134 8181795 -9353 FAX - 818/795 -2817 AGENDA ITEMKOO. �I PAGE OF�L 7 restaurant parking spaces and then walk to the theater. Assuming that approximately 15% of restaurant patrons will walk to the theater, the maximum parking demand will reduce by 13 (88 x 0.15 = 13). Therefore, the net maximum demand for parking during the peak hour will be 286 spaces (299 - 13 = 286) The project will provide a total of 300 spaces. This will leave a total of 14 unoccupied spaces (300 - 286 = 14) during the peak parking demand. In addition, there are 51 spaces at the K -mart store (adjacent to this site, within the same center) and 49 spaces at the Casino site (directly to the west of this site) which will be available for shared parking to the customers of this project. - These additional 100 spaces (51 + 49 = 100) if considered in this shared parking analysis, will provide an even better parking vacancy ratio during the peak hours. In conclusion, our analysis indicates that a parking requirement of 1 space for each 5 seats of this theater project will be reasonable and workable under the aforementioned circumstances. Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, M. Yunus Rahi, Ph.D, RE President /Principal Engineer Associated Traffic Consultants. Enclosures: IckASSOCIATED TRAFFIC CONSULTANTS ❑ Transportation. Planning &Engineering Post Office Box 90134 Pasadena, CA 91109.5134 8181795 -9353 FAX — 81817952817 AGENDA :TEE,. No._ PAGE 7/ OF 3 U u /Ve-Y Gl Page 7 11. Schools, professional and private, adult. or trade: One (1) parking space for each 35 square feet of gross classroom floor area. 12. Shopping centers: a. One (1) parking spree fcr each 2E0 square feet of gross floor area for shopping centers of =ss than five (5) acres in net lot or parcel area and b. One (1) parking space for each 200 square feet of gross floor area for shopping centers of five (5) or more acres in net lot or parcel area. 13. Theat , auditoriums, stadiums, sports as, gymnasiums, ri similar plac of public assembly: One rking space for each five (5) fi a a s and for every uare eet of seating area where there are no fixed seats. C. Industrial Uses. 1. Industrial uses of all types, including warehousing and storage, within an enclosed building. a. One (1) parking space for each 500 square feet of gross floor area; and b. One (1) parking space for each vehicle operated or kept in connection with the use. 2. Open industrial uses and public utility facilities, including but not limited to, electric, gas, water, telephone, and oil pumping facilities not having business offices on the premises: a. One (1) parking space for each vehicle used in connection with the use; but b. A minimum of two (2) parking spaces shall be provided for each such use. AGENDA ITEM: NO. PAGE OF percent or the occupant ioaa is requtrea in partang spaces for employee partang. 8. For bars, parking shall be calculated based upon the occupant load of the lounge as determined by the Uniform Building Code. One (1) parking space for every 10 people calculated for the occupant load is required. 9. Exclusively, take -out food establishments and 'Iood establishments dealing in quickly consumed food items such as cookies, yogurt, and ice cream and with seating for eight or less can be located in shopping centers or multiple tenant buildings. Restaurant or take -out food establishments with incidental seating can occupy 20 percent of the retail space in a shopping center or multiple tenant building. For centers developed before 1990, the allowable amount of incidental seating shall be determined by the Development'lReview Committee based on the food establishment's location in relation to other food establishments, amount of available parking, and the current mix of uses.'; 10. Take -out /drive -duu restaurants shall be calculated based on 1.5 parking spaces for every table with a minimum of ten spaces required. Additionally, the drive - thru lane shall be at least 100 lineal feet in length to accommodate at minimum five (5) standard length automobiles. 11. For clinics, medical and dental offices, one per. two hundred square feet of gross floor area. I2. For hotels and motels, one per room. Miscellaneous 1. For churche eaters uditoriums and similar„ places of assembly, at least one space for eac ve seats in the principal assembly room counting twenty inches es ? o seating space on a bench as one seat shall be provided. In cases where temporary or movable seats are provided, there shall be one space for every forty square feet of area within the assembly room; in cases of a use without a building, there shall be one space for each five persons normally attending or using the facilities. 2. For hospitals, one per room. 3. For'convalescent,.nursing or rest homes, sanitariums or homes for the care of children or aged, one space for each four beds.',' 4. For boarding houses, clubhouses, fraternity or sorority houses, one space for each two beds, plus one space for each guest room. 5. For child cares services, one space for each staff member, plus one space for each twenty children. DESIGN REQUIREMENTS Residential 1. Each enclosed garage shall be not less than 18 feet in width and 20 feet in depth .G3A ITE1,4 NO. �� ��- ZN PAGZ_ZL _ OFD ,v PART IX OFF- STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS 9290. OFF- STREET PARKING FACILITIES. The uses permitted in each zone, as established by this Chapter, shall be deemed to include the off - street parking, facilities for automobiles, accessory or incidental to any principal permitted use in such zones. Every use permitted in any•ione by this Chapter, shall be provided with permanently maintained off - street parking facilities in the manner provided in this Part; such required parking facilities shall be used only for off - street parking, and any use inconsistent therewith shall be unlawful. 9291. PARKING SPACES REQUIRED. The off - street parking spaces required for each use permitted by this Chanter, shall be not less than the .following, provided that any fractional parking snace shall be computed as a whole: USE AND NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED Assembly Buildings -- including churches, stadiums, sports arenas, school auditoriums theta er dance halls, clubs and lodges having, no sleeping uarters 7n of er places of assembly. l� l seatsOnonel( fofor fiftyVe 0) square feetsof grossefloor areaiused for assembly purposes. Where fixed seats consist of pews or benches, the seating canacity shall be computed upon twenty -two (22) lineal inches per seat. Automotive sales or rental, boat sales or rental, trailer sales or rental, retail nurseries and other permitted uses not conducted in a building. One (1) parking space for each 1,000 square feet of gross land area devoted to open display or sales, provided that where such area exceeds 10,000 square feet, only one (1) parking space need be provided for each 5,000 square feet of such gross land area in ex- cess of 10,000 square feet, or one (1) space for each two (2) employees whichever is greater. (Ord. 78 -467) Banks, business or professional offices. area. One (1) parking space.for each 250 square feet of gross floor Bowling alleys. Three (3) parking snaces for each alley. Rev. 12/30 42 AG_X�PA ITC,.. "t �C PAS-2-2-ii- OF 27 MOVIE THEATER (443) Parking Spaces Occupied vs: SEATS On a: WEEKDAY PARKING GENERATION RATES C Ave Range of Standard Number of Average Number of Rates Deviation Studies Seats C 0.19 0.06 -0.46 0.11 11 1646 DATA PLOT AND EQUATION CAUTION -USE CAREFULLY -LOW R'. 1,100 p 1,000 w a 900- fo � y UO 800- 1�Jt w 700 @) U U) 600 ° J x 500 i 400-/ �� ° Y fl Li 300 Li ❑ n 200 ° a 100 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 800 1,200 1,600 2,000 2,400 2,800 1 3,200 X = NUMBER OF SEATS 0 ACTUAL DATA POINTS FITTED CURVE Fitted Curve Equation: P = 0.32(X) - 174.0 R' = 0.475 Parking Generation, August 1987 /Institute of Transportation Engineers so ,Dii T L'L PnC'.= �� OF i� t t » I involving office. regional retail, and residential facili- ties (see exhibit 28). Nonroom- related hotel activities and entertainment uses varied significantly. however If site specific data are not available for these two land uses. survev results could be used. Accumulation curves are then estimated for each land use, based on the selected hourly values de scribed in terms of the percent of maximum design-day parking demand expected at every hour duringthe day. The parking demand factor (step 2) multiplied by quantity of land use (step 1) produces an estimate of peak parking demand. This value multiplied by each hourly percentage produces an estimate of parking demand for every land use component by hour of day. STEP 4: ESTIMATE OF SNARED PARKINS The hourly parking demand for each land use is merged to estimate overall shared parking demand for a proposed project. This step is simply the hour-by- hour addition of parking demand for each use to esti- mate the aggregate accumulation. As noted previously, the method described above should be used for week- day and Saturday conditions to test for the controlling value. SAMPLE USE OF THE MUROOOL06Y The following sample situation has been devised to demonstrate the use of the recommended methodology 1. Objective: To estimate the peak parking require ments for a proposed mixed use development. 2. Plan: The proposed development has the following components: • Office = 400,000 square feet GLA • Retail = 300.000 square feet GLA • Hotel = 500 rooms plus 5,000 square feet of restaurant and conference facilities with 200 seat capacity. 3. Location: The project will be located in the down town of a medium size urban community whose regional population is approximately 1.5 million. 4. Mode Split:] 7 Based on surveys conducted at exist ing developments in the downtown, it is estimated that 75 percent of employees and patrons and 50 percent of hotel guests will use autos. The number of persons per auto is assumed to be typical (1.2 for employees. 1.8 for patrons. 1.4 for hotel guests). 17" Mode split" refers to the percentage of people at a site who use a particular mode of transportation, with the total of all modes equaling 100 percent. 47 AGE, .:c��'GG,, w PAGE � � OF. , , 13 EXHIBIT 28 REPRESENTATIVE HOURLY ACCUMULATION BY PERCENTAGE OF PEAK HOUR Mwel 4wr.wW leuY. CW.Rra (.r.. p4rr IIeuJ As. frr 1r QDI uY KID! 4w., •..w ft.. •ww u. M. MGM D., WJI ,4.WI LurYY Du Work., U..' wr..Y1 LrwY1 DW) DWY 600 a m 315. — — — — — —- 100e. sm... 100':. 100. 90e. 20'.. 30,• -- — 700 am 20 20'S, 8% 3% 2% 2% — 87 95 95 85 70 20 20 — — a00 a:n 07 60 18 10 5 3 — 79 88 ' 00 65 60 20 20 sox. sa,. 000 a r.. 93 80 42 30 - 10 6 — 73 81 8: 55 50 20 20 1011 100 1000 a m 100 80 a 45 20 8 — 68 74 85 45 40 20 20 100 100 1100 a.ln 100 100 87 73 30 10 — 59 :1 85 35 35 30 30 too 100 1200 KDOC 00 100 91 85 s0 30 30% 60 71 85 30 30 50 30 Ion JOG 100 p!r. 90 8n 100 95 70 45 70 59 70 85 30 30 7- 45 100 100 200pm. 9' 60 97 too 60 45 70 60 71 55 35 35 Ott 45 too 100 300 p ^, 93 40 95 .100- 60 45 70 61 73 85 ii 40 .. 45 too 100 400 :;: 77 40 87 90 so 45 70 66 75 87 iz s0 .n 45 100 100 5 no p a 17 20 79 75 70 60 SO 77 on �. 00 60 1UG IDo D Ou p n _. 20 82 65 90 90 80 85 8S 91 :0 70 - 100 IN 00fc. 84 100 95 90 94 57 u; -= in _ 4! l0n ;GO 80i c- �+� 5 UV 100 ® © 06 'ti ,6 0G 160 LOG LOG', 9OCt ^. - o! 100 100 IN 98 95 05 q5 100 1n0 :00 10 or F.:. - 32 38 90 95 100 `i9 96 Dq 100 ,.� q; SP 50 11 OD t m — — 13 13 70 85 80 100 `as 100 100 IN; ... 85 — — 120050f. - — — — 50 70 70 100 ino :(h? 100 !GO 70 — - nIF,.; involving office. regional retail, and residential facili- ties (see exhibit 28). Nonroom- related hotel activities and entertainment uses varied significantly. however If site specific data are not available for these two land uses. survev results could be used. Accumulation curves are then estimated for each land use, based on the selected hourly values de scribed in terms of the percent of maximum design-day parking demand expected at every hour duringthe day. The parking demand factor (step 2) multiplied by quantity of land use (step 1) produces an estimate of peak parking demand. This value multiplied by each hourly percentage produces an estimate of parking demand for every land use component by hour of day. STEP 4: ESTIMATE OF SNARED PARKINS The hourly parking demand for each land use is merged to estimate overall shared parking demand for a proposed project. This step is simply the hour-by- hour addition of parking demand for each use to esti- mate the aggregate accumulation. As noted previously, the method described above should be used for week- day and Saturday conditions to test for the controlling value. SAMPLE USE OF THE MUROOOL06Y The following sample situation has been devised to demonstrate the use of the recommended methodology 1. Objective: To estimate the peak parking require ments for a proposed mixed use development. 2. Plan: The proposed development has the following components: • Office = 400,000 square feet GLA • Retail = 300.000 square feet GLA • Hotel = 500 rooms plus 5,000 square feet of restaurant and conference facilities with 200 seat capacity. 3. Location: The project will be located in the down town of a medium size urban community whose regional population is approximately 1.5 million. 4. Mode Split:] 7 Based on surveys conducted at exist ing developments in the downtown, it is estimated that 75 percent of employees and patrons and 50 percent of hotel guests will use autos. The number of persons per auto is assumed to be typical (1.2 for employees. 1.8 for patrons. 1.4 for hotel guests). 17" Mode split" refers to the percentage of people at a site who use a particular mode of transportation, with the total of all modes equaling 100 percent. 47 AGE, .:c��'GG,, w PAGE � � OF. , , 13 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: RON MOLENDYK, CITY MANAGER DATE: OCTOBER 26, 1993 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITION OF APPROVAL NO. 24 FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 89 -17 AMENDMENT NO. 2 (LEWIS HOMES), THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF ROBB ROAD AND MOUNTAIN STREET BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting approval of the use of wood fencing (as an alternative material to concrete block) in some parts of their subject project. This matter was continued from the September 28, 1993, City Council meeting. The continuance has allowed additional time to analyze the proposed use of fencing on the subject Lewis Homes site and the previous use of wood fencing in other developments within the City. The Planning Commission approved on August 18, 1993, Design Review of four (4) new models for the applicant's 89 lot single - family residential subdivision located adjacent to Robb Road. The Commission placed a condition on their approval (Condition No. 24j that solid block walls are to be used on all side and rear property lines. The Planning Commission made this condition pursuant to recently amended Section 17.14.130.D.1 of the City's Zoning Code. The applicant is appealing this condition of approval. The applicant has proposed to use solid block walls on all side and rear property lines that form the tract perimeter. They also propose to use solid block walls on the fencing that faces the front yards and provides the connection between the side property line fencing and the sides of the homes. However, the applicant proposes to only use an unpainted wood fence on all interior side and rear property lines. The proposed wood fence would be of substantial .construction including overlapping 1" x 8" vertical slats and continuous top and bottom 2 x 4 and 2 x 6 cap and rails. The overlap in the vertical slats would compensate for possible future shrinkage in the wood and avoid gaps in the fencing. A detail of the proposed wood fencing was included on sheet 2, upper left hand corner, of the Wall and Fence Plans for the tract (No. 19750) that were included in the Council package passed out for the September 28th meeting. Ground elevations through the subject tract do change moderately. The average difference in elevation between pads within the tract is three (3) feet and even greater with areas outside of the tract. Therefore, the wood fencing proposed on most of the interior side and rear property lines will more than likely be at least partially, visible above the tops of the surrounding block walls. Staff has observed other existing developments within the City where interior side and rear yard fencing is partially visible from public right - of -ways and surrounding properties because of elevation differences (see example photographs contained in current Council package). Staff feels that the least visible fencing in the subject tract would be along the interior side property lines. The exception to this is where an interior side property line is also a phase line in which case it may be highly visible until such time as the next phase is constructed. The proposed wall along the rear of Lots 7 through 12 of Tract 19750 -3 is also lower down on the slope from the pads for these lots, therefore the side property line fences would be visible as they climb up the slope to pad level. Staff has found in some of the existing developments within the City that when a wood fence is painted it tends in some cases to blend bette AGENDA lTEt:l (• PAGE OF REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 26, 1993,. PAGE 2 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITION OF APPROVAL NO. 24 FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 89 -17 AMENDMENT NO. 2 (LEWIS HOMES) with surrounding block walls and the homes themselves (see example photographs of existing development contained in current Council package). Painted wood fences also appear not to show discolor- ation due to weathering and irrigation overspray as much as a natural wood fence. The interior rear property lines in this tract are much more elevated than the side property lines and therefore rear fences are much more likely to be visible from surrounding public right -of- ways and surrounding properties. In addition, most rear property lines in this tract are either tract perimeters or phasing lines. Staff would not recommend allowing use. of wood fencing as proposed on rear property lines in this tract with the possible exception of Lots 4 and 5 of Tract 19750 -3 which are not as greatly elevated. RECOMMENDATION If the City Council determines that in the case of the subject tract that use of wood fencing as'proposed would be acceptable as an alternative material to solid block in some areas; staff would recommend the following limitations: Wood fencing will be allowed only on certain interior side property lines on the subject' tract with the exception of side property lines that are also phase lines in which case a solid block wall shall be used unless the adjacent phase is built concurrently. Wood fencing on side property lines on Lots 7 through 12 of Tract 19750 -3 can only be used when the property line is on level with the pad, solid block wall must be used on those portions of the side property line along the rear slope of these lots. Wood fencing will also be allowed on the rear property lines of only Lots 4 and 5 of Tract 19750 -3. The wood fencing as allowed shall be constructed pursuant to the detail contained on the approved Wall and Fencing Plans and shall be painted to blend with either the surrounding block walls or the coloring of the homes. Six -foot (6') high solid block walls shall be constructed on all other side and rear yard property lines. Fencing proposed in future phases of this project will be subject to separate review and approval by the Community Development Manager or their designee pursuant to the guidelines as set forth above. Staff would also recommend that if the above limitations on use of wood fencing are acceptable that the City Council consider setting policy for staff to use the same limitations in similar cases on other development. The other alternative is to continue to consider use of alternative fencing materials by appeal on a case by case basis. PREPARED BY: Chip Leslie, City Planner REVIEWED BY: APPROVED BY: APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: ty Devel AGENDA ITEA. NO. �_ PAGE Or 1-5- CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: RON MOLENDYK, CITY MANAGER DATE: SEPTEMBER 28, 1993 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITION OF APPROVAL NO. 24 FOR R 89 -17 AMENDMENT NO. 2 (LEWIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA) THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF ROBB ROAD AND MOUNTAIN STREET On August 18, 1993, the Planning Commission approved Design Review of Residential Project No. 89 -17, Amendment No. 2 for approved Tract Map No. 19750. The design review approved four (4) model homes to be constructed on approximately 89 lots. (staff report, conditions of approval, and minutes attached) Section 17.14.130.D.1 (Fencing) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) states that in new subdivisions or developments of four (4) or more units a solid block wall a minimum of six (61) feet in height shall be provided along side and rear lot lines of less than twelve thousand (12,000) square feet in area to provide privacy and screening. Consequently, Condition of Approval No. 24 for the above design review project required that the tract comply with the referenced fencing requirements. A graphic representation of the above referenced Code section and Condition of Approval No. 24 is illustrated in Exhibit "B ". DISCUSSION In the past and prior to the amendment of Section 17.14.130.D.5 of the LEMC (ordinance 962), the Planning Commission was able to waive fencing requirements or approve alternative materials such as wood. The Planning Commission allowed wood fencing in lieu of decorative block walls in areas not directly adjacent to the public right-of- way as illustrated in Exhibit "A ". The recent LEMC amendment restricted the Planning Commission from allowing fencing options illustrated in Exhibit "A ". Consequently, according to the amended Section 17.14.130.D.5, only the City Council can approve alternative materials or waive fencing requirements. Due to their concern regarding the higher construction cost for building block walls, the applicant is requesting that the City Council grant certain waivers to allow wood fencing in areas that may not be visible from public right -of -way as illustrated and proposed in Exhibit "C ". Unfortunately, due to the terrain and topographical conditions, the subject subdivision has been graded in such a way that it exposes some interior lots therefore potentially exposing rear and side lot line fencing to the public right -of -way. The graded pad elevations substantially differ to the point where even after a house is built, it would not screen the future fence. Due to the topographical conditions of the subject tract in which interior side and rear lot lines may be visible from the public right -of -way therefore potentially exposing fencing, staff recommends pursuant to the intent of the recent Code amendment that the City Council uphold Planning Commission Condition of Approval No. 24. AGENDA I I EN! NO. PAO- L OFJi- REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 28, 1993 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING 24 FOR R 89 -17 CALIFORNIA) PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: APPROVED BY: APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: C:C.R89- 17.APP CONDITION OF APPROVAL NO. NO. 2 (LEWIS HOMES OF Armando G. Villa, Assistant Planner AGENDA ITEM NO. p�c OF. of CONCITIONs OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 89 -17 AMEND" PLUMIRV DIVISION 1.. Design Review approval for Residential Project 89 -17 Amendment 2 and Model homes will lapse and be void unless a building permit is issued within one (1) year of the approval date. An extension of time, up to one (1) year may be granted by the Community Development Manager or designee prior to the expiration of. the initial Design Review approval upon application by the developer one (1) month prior to expiration. 2. All Conditions of Approval shall be fully implemented within the project design in all phases and /or adhered to strictly.r 3. These Conditions of Approval shall be reproduced upon Page One of Building Plans prior to their acceptance by the Division of Building and Safety. 4. All site improvements shall be constructed as indicated on the approved plot plan and elevations for Phase One. Subsequent site plotting on the remaining Phases shall be subject to the approval of the Community Development Manager or designee. Revisions to approved site plan or building elevations shall be subject to approval from the Community Development Manager or designee. 5. Materials and colors depicted on the materials board shall be used unless modified by the Community Development Manager or designee. 6. All windows larger than one foot (11) by one foot (11) on all side and rear elevations (visible from public right -of -way) with the exceptions of those windows already .utilizing. treatments such as ledges or mullions shall incorporate stucco surrounds. 7. Applicant shall meet all Conditions of Approval prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and release of utilities. S. All structures shall meet setback requirements identified in the Municipal Code Section 17.23.080.B. Dwelling units proposed for Lot 23 of Tract 19750 -1 ands= 5 of T=ae= &9759 3 (as shown on Exhibit "E") shall maintain a fifteen (151) foot side setback. 9. A revised plotting plan shall be submitted to the Planning and Building Departments. by the applicant prior to Building Division issuance of permits which reflects all Conditions of Approval. These revised plans shall become the approved plot plan only upon the review and approval by the Community Development Manager or designee, prior to issuance of building permit. 10. The building addresses shall be a minimum of four inches (411) high and shall be easily visible from the public right -of -way. Developer shall obtain street addresses for all project lots prior to issuance of building permits. The addresses (in numerals at least four inches (4" high) shall be displayed near the entrance and be visible from the front of the unit. 11. Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the City's Grading Ordinance. Construction generated dust and erosion shall be mitigated in accordance with the provisions of Municipal Code, Chapter 15.72 and using accepted techniques. Interim erosion control measures shall be provided thirty (30) days after the site's rough grading, as approved by.the City Engineer. J J'3 ,AGGtiDA ETt ; N 12. .Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances including the Noise Ordinance. Construction activity shall be limited the hours of 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday thru Saturday to protect the adjacent neighbors from unreasonable noise. 13. Meet all State handicap requirements for the model home complex. 14. All signage shall be by City Permit. 15. Trailers utilized during construction shall be approved by Planning Division. 16. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall pay park -in -lieu fees in effect at the time of building permit issuance on a lot by lot basis. 17. Applicant shall pay school fees to the Lake Elsinore Unified School District. 18. The project shall connect to sewer and meet all requirements of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District ( EVMWD). Applicant shall submit water and sewer plans to the EVMWD and shall incorporate all district conditions and standards. 19. The design and construction of the project shall meet all County Fire Department standards for fire protection. 20. All mechanical and electrical equipment on the building shall be ground mounted. All outdoor ground or wall mounted utility equipment shall be consolidated in a central location and architecturally screened along with substantial landscaping, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director, prior to issuance of building permit. 21. All front yards and side yards on corner lots shall be properly landscaped with automatic (manual or electric) irrigation system to provide 1008 plant and grass coverage using a combination of drip and conventional irrigation methods. The final landscaping/ irrigation plan is to be reviewed and approved by the City's Landscape Architect Consultant and the Community Development Manager or designee. A Landscape Plan Check Fee will be charged prior to final landscape approval based on the Consultant's fee plus forty percent (40 %). a) Applicant shall plant street trees, selected from the City's Street Tree List, a maximum of thirty -feet (301) apart and at least twenty- four -inch (2411) box in size. b) Planting within fifteen -feet (151) of ingress /egress points shall be no higher than thirty- six - inches (3611). c) The landscape plan shall provide for ground cover, shrubs, and trees and meet all requirements of the City's adopted Landscape Guidelines. Special attention to the use of Xeriscape or drought resistant plantings with combination drip irrigation system to be used to prevent excessive watering. d) All landscape improvements on the model home complex shall be bonded 1208 Faithful Performance Bond, and released at completion of installation of landscape requirements approval /acceptance, and bond 100% for material and labor for on (1) year. e) All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed within affected portion of any phase at the time a Certificate of occupancy is requested for any building. AGENDA l7E4v4 d. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 89 -17, AMEND. —& f) One of the proposed lots of the model complex shall be Xeriscaped and signage provided identifying Xeriscape landscaping. g) Final landscape plan must be consistent with approved site plan. h) Final landscape plans to include planting and irrigation details. 22. All exposed slopes in excess of three feet (3') in height shall have a permanent irrigation system and erosion control vegetation installed, approved by the Planning Division. 23. Ali slopes on -site or off -site created by grading operations to support development of this tract shall be planted with erosion control vegetation as approved by the Planning 'Department and the city's.Landscape Architect. 24. A six foot (6') high masonry wall or decorative -block wall shall be constructed along the side and rear property lines and shall conform to Section 17.14.080 (Fences and Walls) and Section 17.14.130 of the Municipal Code. 25. Fences located in any front yard shall not exceed thirty -six inches (3611) in height with the exception that wrought -iron fences may be five feet (51) in height. Chain link fences shall be prohibited. 26. Garages shall be constructed to provide a minimum of nine- feet- six - inches by nineteen - feet - six - inches (916" x 191611) of interior clear space for two cars for a total interior clear space of nineteen -feet by nineteen- feet -six- inches (1916" X 19'6"). 27. Tubular steel fence that surrounds models shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer, prior to issuance of building permit, and shall be removed prior to residential occupancy of the model home. 28. Applicant shall stripe a Class II bicycle lane to Cal Trans specification along Robb Road. 29. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgment of Conditions" and shall return the executed original to the Community Development Department for inclusion in the case records. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 30. The applicant to provide schedule for circulation, parking, and public works improvements to be installed with .model complex prior to building permits subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 31. The three (3) existing models are to be completed, cleaned -up, and landscaped at the time the new models are opened. J eXHIsir NA" r Ww PlCOPI°.RTY a�if3 • W 06D ft:JJCE VJNEI?6 Noi SD�ID f5i ocf UI AL V AL2fA6Ei.P('fD of WoY. fAflAR. VAPO UJIIEKE V151131.L MP ADTTTAt6S -fJT ?D PUBUL RIGHT �OF -WA Y. i}f1Dse _ OF AtOPFKf f n Qo�� wNG F Aft -WAY Ldt 0%A,, .5„zer TYPLGAL LOT POr.41 L AGENDA ITEM NO. ��� OF EXHIBIT "6" twommy wile. ••A" -5TIZF6 r TYP 1 Gal.. L0 'r tb8TA•1 L z AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE"" 1— OF Planning Commission Minutes August 18, 1993 Page 5 Condition 30. The proposed Freeway Identification S -Vill be restricted to s#x4y --F6a} a 0) square feet. Applicant to s evised sign plans. Condition 32. Pr to y Council consideration, the .app be required to submit revised of elevat o cting the deletion of one (1) of the cupola, nation of sicinage, reduction of pitch and ve-1-0111 BUSINESS ITEMS 3. Residential Project 98 -17 Amendment #2 - Lewis Homes Assistant Planner villa explained that the request is for Design Review of four (4) model homes which will be built on Lots 19 through 23 of Tract 19750 -1, and plotting for Phase 1. The tract is located at the southeast corner of the inter- section of Robb Road and Mountain. The model home complex will be located on Ivy Court. Chairwoman Brinley asked if there was anyone representing the applicant and if there were any concerns. Ms. Mimi Rayl, representing Lewis Homes, questioned condition 8, 20 and 24 as follows: • Condition 8, the lot numbers need to be corrected. Lot 5 has a 63 foot wide frontage and believes this falls under the exception under Section 17.23.080.b. Lot 23, is a part of the model complex and while the lot area is substandard for the City's current standards the width is 65 feet, and would like to request permission to waive the 15 foot side yard set back. Chairwoman Brinley asked if this would not require a variance, correct? Assistant Planner - Villa responded in the affirmative. • Condition 20, ground mounting and screening of equipment. Community Development Manager Shear stated condition number 20 is a standard condition to prevent roof mounted equipment. • Condition 24, the masonry or decorative block wall. We came in with wall and fence plans that proposed the use of block wall along all areas visible from the public right -of -way as well as the returns to the homes, and wood fence details for side and rear yards that are not visible from public right -of -way. Explained that the wood fence detail they use is stronger and more stable that the average wood fence detail. Requested con- sideration of this as an alternative. Commissioner Neff asked if this would be painted. Ms. Rayl responded in the negative. Commissioner Metze asked how we are guaranteed that this would happen. Community Development Shear stated basically City Council has made the change to the regulations stipulating block walls, and gave a brief history on why this was changed. He then stated the applicant has the option to appeal that portion to Council. AGENDA I?E�MNO.� PAGE ID- D Or �a-z- Planning Commission Minutes August 18, 1993 page 6 Commissioner Metze commented on the block wall proposed for Robb Road and Lake Street and inquired whether this was to be installed in phases. Asked about the entry into the models /homes and the disposition of existing three models. Ms. Rayl stated the first phase of production is on the far east side of the project and we would phase our improvements over. The new model complex would be across from the existing model complex and the existing homes would be cleaned up and offered for sale. There would be an entry to the models from Mountain, and the production would start on the east and we would build the roads as we built the different phases. Commissioner Metze stated that he is concerned with the block wall, which was started and then stopped, inquired whether this can be completed as part Phase,I. Ms. Rayl stated that they had not gotten that far into the phasing - -when the different walls will be installed, but we have to submit to the City Engineer a schedule for the various improvements. Commissioner Neff stated that he thought this was for design review only. Chairwoman Brinley asked if this could be noted in the record as a concern by Commissioner Metze. Community Development Manager Shear responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Neff commented op condition number 8 and the applicant needing to submit a variance application for consideration of smaller side yard width. He commented on the costs to construction a block wall and build a fence, condition 24.- He then inquired about the time frame for the models and production. Ms. Rayl responded that the building plans are far enough along to be submitted for first plan check, if they haven't been already. Right now, we are refining our costs. Commissioner Bullard asked if the existing model homes will be improved and landscaped at the same time as the new models. Ms. Rayl responded in the affirmative. Chairwoman Brinley suggested this be added as condition number 31, the existing models will be cleaned up and landscaped at the same time as the new models. Commissioner Bullard commented on the block wall going down Robb Road, the fencing in the area and the different phasing. This should be noted as a concern, and we would like to see the block wall completed on the Robb Road side. Chairwoman Brinley suggested this be entered in the record as a concern of Commissioner Bullard, Metze and Brinley to be addressed. Commissioner Neff recommended the applicant discuss with City Council consideration of a trade -off. Perhaps, volunteering to construct the block wall beyond Robb Road, all along there where your existing graded lots are, as an alternative to constructing.interior side and year block walls. Chairwoman Brinley stated that she agrees with the other Commissioners on condition number 24. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2OX PAGE 31- _ OFM Planning Commission Minutes August 18, 1993 Page 7 Community Development Manager Shear informed the Commission that the plans have been submitted for -plan check and they are being plan checked at this time. MOVED BY COMMISSIONER BULLARD TO APPROVE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 89 -17 AMENDMENT NUMBER 2 AND THE PLATTING FOR PHASE 1 BASED ON EXHIBITS "A" THROUGH "G ", FINDINGS AND SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION OF APPROVAL LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND AMENDMENT TO CONDITION 8 TO REQUIRE A VARIANCE AND THE ADDITION OF CONDITION NUMBER 31. Assistant Planner Villa asked for clarification on condition 8. Discussion ensued on condition 8,- and this condition being corrected as discussed earlier, deleting "Lot 5 of Tract 19750 -3 ". COMMISSIONER BULLARD AMENDED HIS MOTION TO APPROVE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 89 -17 AMENDMENT NUMBER 2 AND THE PLATTING FOR PHASE 1 BASED ON EXHIBITS "A" THROUGH "G ", FINDINGS AND SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION OF 'APPROVAL LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT WITH AMENDMENT TO CONDITION 8 AND THE ADDITION OF CONDITION NUMBER 31, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER METZE, AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT. Condition No. 8: All structures shall meet setback requirements identified in the Municipal Code Section 17.23.080.B. Dwelling units proposed for Lot 23 of Tract 19750 -1 eW Let 5 of 'Praez --==:= = (as shown on Exhibit "E ") shall maintain a fifteen (151) foot side setback. Condition No. 31: The three (3) existing models are to be completed, cleaned -up, and landscaped at the time the new models are opened. Amendment #1 to the Central Business Park Sign Program Brookstone Development Arlie Blood (Steve Harrim Assistant Planner DeGange explained that the amendme will rmit buildings within the complex, who have more tKan three to its, to have a freestanding directory sign. a site is loca d at the - southeast intersection of Centr and Collier. Chairwoma Brinley asked if there was any representing the applicant a if there were any concernjw. Mr. Arlie Blood ve a brief histo7 on the center and high- lighted the past p blems with .' age. F Mr. Steve Harriman stat that "they are in agreement with the conditions, and will answ. any questions. Commissioner Metze asked if t is something that would be constantly changing. 'Associate nner DeGange responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Bullard commented on Exhibi "C" and "D" and the location of-- iigns. Chairwoman Brinley suggested no other signage be p itted - -no sandwich signs, no cardboard signs, etc, and this ded as condition number 5. MOVED BY COMMISSIONER NEFF, SECOND BY CHAIRWOMAN BRINLEY CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO APPROVE AMENDMENT AGENDA ITEM NO. �j �� PAGE J .3F�� CITY OF LM ELSINORE REPORT TO THE PLANNING TO: w PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: KEVIN SHEAR, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER FOR: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 18,'1993 SUBJECT: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF MODEL HOMES FOR R 69 -17 AMEND. 2 TRACT NO. 19750- 1, -2,-3 (LEWIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA) Mrs. Mimi E. Rayl Lewis Homes of California 1156 N. Mountain Avenue Upland, California 91785 -0670 Design Review of four (4) model homes for R 89 -17 Amend. 2 on Tract 19750 (model home complex will exhibit four (4) models and will be built on lots 19 thru 23 of Tract 19750 -1): Approval for plotting on Phase One. (Exhibits "E ", "F" and "G ") SIZE AND LOCATION The tract is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Robb Road and Mountain Street. The Model Home Complex will be located on Ivy Court. Phase One will start at the northwest and southwest intersection of Date Street and Spruce Street. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING =_. - X1,1- Residential Project 89 -17, Elsinore Terrace, was approved by the Planning Commission on December 6, 1989. The project approved 30 units in Tract 19750. On September 5, 1990, the Planning Commission approved Amendment I to the residential project by allowing a recreation facility within the approved residential project. The recreation facility was approved for Lot 16 of Tract 19750 -1 and was to include a cabana, spa, swimming pool, and sizable deck area. These two approvals are now expired. The applicant is proposing four single- family detached model types /floor plans. Listed below is a description of each model type: (Exhibits "A" thru "D ") Plan 307: (Exhibit "A") a two -story 1,947 square foot, 4 bedroom, 3 bathroom, structure with a 2 car garage; AGENDA I`EF,R NO PAV= Or" EXISTING LAND USE ZONING GENERAL PLAN Project Site Vacant /Four (4) Existing Models R -1 I14D North Vacant R -SFR Alberhill Ranch SP East vacant R -1 Cape Of Good Hope SP South SFR R -1 LMD West Vacant MIX USE SP Mixed Use =_. - X1,1- Residential Project 89 -17, Elsinore Terrace, was approved by the Planning Commission on December 6, 1989. The project approved 30 units in Tract 19750. On September 5, 1990, the Planning Commission approved Amendment I to the residential project by allowing a recreation facility within the approved residential project. The recreation facility was approved for Lot 16 of Tract 19750 -1 and was to include a cabana, spa, swimming pool, and sizable deck area. These two approvals are now expired. The applicant is proposing four single- family detached model types /floor plans. Listed below is a description of each model type: (Exhibits "A" thru "D ") Plan 307: (Exhibit "A") a two -story 1,947 square foot, 4 bedroom, 3 bathroom, structure with a 2 car garage; AGENDA I`EF,R NO PAV= Or" REPORT TO THE PLANNING AUGUST 18, 1993 PAGE TWO SUBJECT: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF MODEL HOMES FOR R 89 -17 AMEND. 2 TRACT NO. 19750- 1, -2, -3 (LEWIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA) Plan 341: (Exhibit "B ") a two -story 2,240 square foot, 4 bedroom, 3 bathroom, 1 bonus room structure with a 3 car garage; Plan 370: (Exhibit "C ") a two -story 2,802 square foot, 5 bedroom, 1 retreat in the master bedroom, 3 bathroom structure with a 3 car garage; Plan 371: (Exhibit "D ") a two -story 2,445 square foot, 4 bedroom, 3 bathroom, 1 family room structure with a 3 car garage; The applicant is proposing to start construction on the Model Home Complex and Phase One which includes twelve (12) lots (Exhibits "E" and G "). The following is a statistical summary for Phase One. _ _ Y��Y�Y�� • • 1._r__ Y;• Plan_# S.F. Cdr garage # of Du's 8 of chase 307 1,947 2 2 17$ 341 2,240 3 3 25% 370 2,802 3 4 33$ 371 2,445 3 3 25% TOTAL 12 100% Model Home Complex The proposed Model Home Complex is to be constructed on four (4) lots along Ivy Court. The four (4) model types are to be located on Lots 20, 21, 22, 23. Lot 19 will contain six (6) parking spaces. (Exhibit. "G") In an attempt to provide variation in the models /floor plans the applicant has proposed the following: (Exhibits "A ", "B ", "C ", and "D ") • 3 architectural front elevation variations for each model /floor plan; • 3 roofing tile types (flat, barrel /S- shaped, and spanish mission Style); • 9 different colors of roofing tile, siding /stucco /trim color schemes; and • 3 different front elevation embellishments (wood siding, brick and stone veneer). SPECIAL PROJECT CONCERNS Dwelling units proposed for Lot 23 of Tract 19750 -1 and Lot 5 of Tract 19750 -3 do not maintain a fifteen (151) foot side setback in accordance with Section 17.23.080.E of the Municipal Code, R -1 Single Family Residential District. (Exhibit "E "). These lots will - be conditioned to comply with the setback requirements. (Condition # 8) AGENDA ITEM NO PAGE O� REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 1993 PAGE THREE SURJECT: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF MODEL HOMES FOR R 89 -17 AMEND. 2 TRACT NO. 19750- 1, -2, -3 (LEWIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA) Section 17.14.130.D.1 states that new subdivisions or developments of four (4) or more units shall provide a solid block wall a minimum of six (61) feet in height along side and rear lot lines of lots less that twelve thousand (12,000) square feet to provide privacy and screening. The applicant is proposing wood fencing on the side and rear property lines (where not visible from public right -of -way). Staff will condition the project to comply with this Code requirement. (Condition 1 24) As proposed, and conditioned the models and plotting will meet all the development standards of the Zoning Ordinance, more specifically Section 17.82.010. As far as design, the overall development maintains integrity and will occur in a manner which will enhance the character and quality of surrounding properties. The architectural treatment including the materials, colors, and design will visually contribute to the area and environment. A Negative Declaration adopted in January 24, 1984 evaluated and mitigated the impacts associated with the creation of the subject tract map and developments of housing, therefore, no further environmental clearance is needed. It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Design Review of four (4) models, R 89 -17 Amendment 2 for Tract 17950, and the plotting for Phase One based upon the following Findings, Exhibits "A" thru "G", and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. FINDINGS 1. Subject to the attached conditions, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. 2. The project, as approved complies with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the General Plan. 3. This project complies with the design directives contained in Chapter 17.82.060 and all other applicable provisions of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 4. Conditions and safeguards pursuant to Chapter 17.82.070, including guarantees and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been incorporated into the approval of the subject project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the Objectives of Chapter 17.82 and the Canyon Creek Specific Plan, as approved. Prepared by: Reviewed by: Armando G. Villa, Assistant Planner Approved for Planning Commission: _ 1 Phyllis Rogers, sistant City Manager : \RB9- 17II.RPT AGENDA ITEM NO. tk PACE —SOF