Type, Section or Code
Section Number 15162, Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations, Section 15182, Projects Pursuant to a Specific Plan
Reasons for Exemption
The proposed project is exempt from the requirements of CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines 15162 and 15182. On November 17, 2015, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH# 2013061012) was certified in connection with the approval of the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan. The proposed project has been determined to be consistent with the previously adopted Uptown Temecula EIR. Staff has determined that the project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15182 as the proposed hotel development is in conformity with the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan and the EIR that analyzed the impacts of a 260 unit apartment community. Staff has reviewed the EIR and has determined that the proposed project does not require the preparation of a subsequent Environmental Impact Report as none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. 15162) exist. Specifically, there are no substantial changes proposed by the proposed project that will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the proposed project are undertaken that will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and there is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was adopted, showing that: (a) the proposed project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the SEIR; (b) there are significant effects previously examined that will be substantially more severe than shown in the EIR; (c) there are mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the proposed project, but the City declines to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (d) mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the City declines to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. The application for a development plan for a 260 unit apartment community is consistent with the project that was analyzed by the EIR. The proposed project is required to meet all requirements and mitigation contained in EIR.