Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout92_010 PC ResolutionATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 92-010 A RESOLUTION OFTHE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27196 TO SUBDIVIDE A 6.0 ACRE PARCEL INTO 5 PARCELS ON THE EAST SIDE OF BUSINESS PARK DRIVE AND SOUTHERLY OF SINGLE OAK DRIVE AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO, 921-020-054, WHEREAS, WesPark Industrial, LTD., filed Parcel Map No. 27198 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Tentative Parcel Map application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Tentative Parcel Map on February 3, 1992, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Tentative Parcel Map; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved said Parcel Map; NOW, THEREFORE, THEPLANNING COMMISSION OFTHECITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general plan. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: (1) There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. S\STAFFRPT~27198.TPM 7 (2) There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. (3) The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. The proposed Parcel Map is consistent with the SWAP and meet the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit: The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general plan. The Planning Commission finds, in approving of projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the following: (1) There is reasonable probability that Tentative Parcel Map No. 27198 proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time due to the current SWAP designation of LI (Light Industrial). (2) There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan because the project is surrounded by industrial development. (3) The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances, the project is consistent with Ordinance Nos. 460 and 348. Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are made: That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of development. S\STAFFRPT~27198,TFM 8 That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the proposed density of the development. That the design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. Fo That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. SJ That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed land division. A land division may be approved if it is found that alternate easements for access or for use will be provided and that they will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to wit: The proposed Tentative Parcel Map will not have a significant negative impact on the environment, as determined in the previously adopted Negative Declaration for the project. There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the General Plan being prepared at this time because the current SWAP designation is Industrial. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to, or interference with, the future adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact that the proposed project is consistent with SWAP, as well as Ordinances Nos. 348 and 460 and because the project is consistent with adjacent development. The proposed use complies with State Planning and Zoning Law. The project conforms to the current zoning for the site and to Ordinance 460, Schedule E. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lot configurations, access, and density. The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future passive energy control opportunities. All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated right-of- ways which are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic as evidenced on the Tentative Map showing access to Business Park Drive. S\STAFFRPT~2.7198.TFM 9 The design of the subdivision, the type of improvements and the resulting street layout are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the property within the proposed project. The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare. Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. That said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION III, the Tentative Parcel Map proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. SECTION II. Environmental Compliance. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby determines that the previous environmental determination (Adoption of Negative Declaration No, 33338 for Plot Plan No. 10909) still applies to said tentative parcel map. SECTION III. Conditions. 1. Attachment No. 2, attached hereto. SECTION IV. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of February, 1992, I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 3rd day of February, 1992 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: 4 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS $\STAFFRPT~27198,TPM 10