12 - Laserfiche WebLink

4. Whether grading takes into account environmental characteristics and is designed in keeping with the best engineering practices to avoid erosion, slides, or flooding to have as minimal an effect upon the environment as possible. The "Pad B" topography is flat and grading for the proposed drive-through restaurant use and related site improvements would be minimal and limited just to "Pad B." Erosion control and dust suppression measures would be documented in any building permit plans and would be administered by the City's Building and Safety Division and Engineering Department. "Pad B" is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The flood hazard maps of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) indicate that "Pad B" is not located within a 100-year flood zone. Based on the foregoing, the City Council can make this make this finding. 5. Whether streets, buildings, and other manmade structures have been designed and located in such manner to complement the natural terrain and landscape: "Pad B" is in a developed area of the City, within a previously developed shopping center. Development of this site would not involve the extension of any new public streets. "Pad B" is flat and thus any future redevelopment with a drive-through restaurant use would not require extensive grading and would not contrast unfavorably with the natural terrain. Based on the foregoing, the City Council can make this make this finding. 6. Whether adequate public safety measures have been incorporated into the design of the plan: "Pad B" currently provides adequate access for police, fire, and other emergency vehicles. The proposed drive-through restaurant use would be equipped with automatic fire suppression systems (sprinklers). Structures would be required to meet the requirements of the California Building Code, Fire Code, other applicable City codes, and State of California energy and accessibility requirements. Site specific soils analyses would be conducted in conjunction with the building permit review. Thus, approval of the Major Modification would not preclude adequate safety measures from being included in a future plan or project. Based on the foregoing, the City Council can make this make this finding. 7. Whether the plan conforms to the purposes of the PUD District: In 1989, a PUD rezone and development plan (PUD-89-6) application was approved for Phase III of the Rose Pavilion Shopping Center which included a condition of approval to allow for a 5,000 square-foot-restaurant on "Pad B." The PUD approval explicitly prohibited a drive-through restaurant on "Pad B." In 1992, the PUD development plan was modified (PUD-89-6-4M) to allow for the construction of the current oil change facility on "Pad B." The action to approve PUD-89-6-4M did not remove the condition of approval prohibiting a drive-through restaurant on "Pad B," thereby continuing to restrict a drive-through at this location. However, in consideration of the overall PUD, which permits drive-throughs at other locations within Phase III of the Rose Pavilion shopping Center, and the changed circumstances from when the original condition was applied,