13.C.

City of Hemet
City Council Meeting
STAFF REPORT

Meeting: Special City Council Meeting - Jul 14, 2025

Department: Community Development
Submitted by: Mark Prestwich, City Manager
Monique Alaniz-Flejter, Community Development Director;

☐ Receive and File ☐ Consent Calendar ☐ Business Item ☒ Public Hearing

TITLE:

Public Hearing to Consider Revised Newland Simpson Project: General Plan Amendment (GPA 22-
003), Conditional Use Permit (CUP 22-006), and Tentative Parcel Map 38800 (MAP 23-008), to
Allow Construction of One (1) Industrial Building Totaling 884,760 Square Feet, Tentative Parcel
Map, and Associated Site Improvements. This is a Re-Noticed Hearing.

By the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR)
(State Clearinghouse No. 2023120462) has been prepared for the Newland Simpson Project. The
FEIR evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the proposed development and complies with
CEQA requirements as outlined in Public Resources Code §21000 et seq. and CEQA Guidelines
§15000 et seq.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

It is respectfully recommended that the City Council consider three (3) potential options:

OPTION #1 - Approve the Project

1. Adopt a Resolution certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No.
2023120462) for the Newland Simpson Project in accordance with the California Environmental
Quality Act, including adoption of the Findings of Fact, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program,
and Statement of Overriding Considerations. Findings will be provided at the meeting with
feedback from the Council on the Revised Project; and

2. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, approving the following
entitlements for the Newland Simpson Project. Findings will be provided at the meeting with
feedback from the Council on the Revised Project.

General Plan Amendment (GPA 22-003): Changing the land use designation from Mixed
Use to Business Park for consistency (Parcel 1 Only).

Conditional Use Permit (CUP 22-006): Allowing the construction of a high-cube warehouse
building totaling approximately 884,760 square feet and associated improvements.
Page 1 of 604 Page 105 of 806
 13.C.

Tentative Parcel Map No. 38800 (MAP 23-008): Subdividing the project site into three
parcels.

Building Height Exception: Approving an increase in building height consistent with Hemet
Municipal Code Section 90-1046(c)(3).

OPTION #2 – Deny the Project

Adopt a Resolution to deny certification of the FEIR (SCH No. 2023120462) and denial of GPA 22
003, CUP 22 006, TPM 38800, VAR 24 003 and the requested Building Height Exception (collectively,
the “Project Approvals”) as presented to the City Council on May 13, 2025 with additional input
provided by the Council on the Revised Project.

OPTION #3 – Provide Alternative Direction

Provide such alternative direction to the City Manager as the City Council may deem appropriate.

BACKGROUND:

On April 8, 2025, the Hemet City Council held a duly-noticed public hearing to consider the Newland
Simpson Road Project. The Planning Commission previously recommended denial of the Project on
the basis of its inconsistency with the City’s General Plan and the existence of multiple significant and
unavoidable environmental impacts.

The Project was processed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A
Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and circulated for public review, and a Final
EIR was subsequently compiled, including responses to comments and proposed mitigation
measures.

Upon review, the EIR found that the Project would cause four significant and unavoidable
environmental impacts:

 Loss of Prime Farmland (Agriculture and Forestry Resources)

 Exceedance of Greenhouse Gas Emissions thresholds
 Significant Noise impacts at nearby sensitive receptors
 Excessive Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) not meeting CEQA thresholds

Despite proposed mitigation, these impacts could not be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

The Final EIR complies with CEQA procedural requirements. However, CEQA Guidelines §15093
requires that before approving a project with unmitigated environmental impacts, a public agency
must adopt a “Statement of Overriding Considerations” explaining why the benefits of a project
outweigh the environmental harm.

At the April 8, 2025, meeting, the City Council directed staff to prepare a Resolution declining to
adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the proposed Project. This direction was based
on the following findings:

Page 2 of 604 Page 106 of 806

 13.C.

 The identified adverse environmental impacts are substantial;

 No feasible mitigation exists for four critical impact areas;
 The Project is inconsistent with the General Plan land use vision;
 Less impactful alternatives were available, including the No Project alternative;
 The Applicant rejected reduced-scale alternatives that could have potentially lessened
environmental effects.

CEQA discourages approval of projects with significant, unmitigable impacts unless the decision-
making body finds that overriding benefits justify those impacts. In this case, the City Council found
that the claimed economic, fiscal, and employment benefits were insufficient to outweigh the Project's
adverse effects.

At the May 13, 2025, meeting, the City Council considered a Resolution to deny certification of the
FEIR (SCH No. 2023120462) and to deny approval of GPA 22-003, CUP 22-006, TPM 38800,
VAR 24-003 and the requested Building-Height Exception (collectively, the “Project Approvals”).

However, an alternative option was presented to allow the applicant the opportunity to submit an
amended version of the Project. At that meeting, the Council voted to continue the item and directed
the City Clerk to schedule a duly noticed public hearing at the next available City Council meeting to
consider the amended Project described in the Applicant’s May 6, 2025, letter. The amended plan
proposes a reduced development consisting of a single 884,760 sq. ft. warehouse, eliminating
Building 2 and the 8.9-acre trailer lot.

On July 3, 2025, the City gave public advertising in the Press Enterprise and by mailing to property
owners and tenants, within 500 feet of the property parcel boundaries, and interested stakeholders
prior to the holding of a public hearing at which the project would be considered by the City Council.

DISCUSSION:

Amended Project Description

The revised Project includes development of a 74.88-acre Project site with an 884,760 square-foot
high-cube warehouse building, including 9,000 square feet of office space, 938 Auto Parking Stalls,
on-site Landscaping, 202 Truck Trailer Parking Stalls, and 146 dock doors. The Revised Project
would include approximately 170,945 SF of on-site landscape area.

The amended Project eliminates the previously proposed 309,338 sq ft Building 2 and 8.9 acre trailer
storage lot and limits development of the warehouse building improvements to Parcel 1 on 44.23 net
acres (FAR 47%). The project also eliminates the previously proposed parking variance. There is no
on-site development proposed for Parcels 2 and 3 (totaling ≈ 26.11 net acres) with this application.
Pursuant to Hemet Municipal Code Section 90-1046(3), the applicant is requesting approval of a ten
percent increase in the maximum building height (55’-0”) for structures that are setback a minimum of
100 feet from a residential use or zone, not including signs. The proposed building height of the
warehouse building is 60’-0” to the top of the parapet.

The Project also includes off-site infrastructure improvements along Simpson Road and Warren
Road, including roadway widening, installation of sidewalks, parkway landscaping, and installation of
a new sewer line as previously proposed. Additionally, the Project includes a Tentative Parcel Map
(TPM) to subdivide APN 465-140-043 and 465-140-042, resulting in a total of three parcels for the
Page 3 of 604 Page 107 of 806
 13.C.
Project site. Parcel 1 includes a General Plan Amendment to the Land Use Designation of Mixed
Use to Business Park for consistency with the current Zoning Designation of Business Park on the
property. Parcels 2 and 3 are not included with the General Plan Amendment and are proposed to
remain as Mixed Use.

Reduced Project Site Plan- Consistency with Newland Simpson Road Project EIR

A California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) consistency memorandum addressing the site plan
changes for the Project was prepared on June 27, 2025 (Exhibit D). The analysis concludes that the
reduction in proposed square footage and acreage in the site plan would not result in a substantial
increase in the severity of a previously identified environmental impact that would not be mitigated, or
any of the other circumstances requiring recirculation as described in CEQA Guidelines Section
15088.5. The impact reductions are as provided below:

 The Revised Project would result in 655 net fewer daily trips, 38 net fewer AM peak hour trips
and 51 net fewer PM peak hour trips. In terms of PCE, the Revised Project would result in 835
net fewer daily PCE trips, 49 net fewer AM peak hour PCE trips and 62 net fewer PM peak
hour PCE trips (Exhibit E).

Page 4 of 604 Page 108 of 806

 13.C.

 As shown in the attached memo (Exhibit F), Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Tables for the
Comparative Analysis of the Revised Newland Simpson Road Project, regional air pollutant
emissions from construction would be reduced by approximately 26 to 32 percent, dependent
on the specific pollutant. Regional air pollutant emissions from operations would be reduced by
approximately 24 to 27 percent, dependent on the specific pollutant. Localized construction
emissions would be decreased by approximately 33 percent and localized operational
emissions would be decreased by approximately 27 to 38 percent in comparison to the
Previous Project. In addition, while GHG emissions resulting from the Revised Project would
remain above SCAQMD’s 3,000 MTCO2e threshold, they would be reduced by approximately
26 percent compared to the Previous Project.

 The reduction in building square footage as part of the Revised Project would result in
decreased impacts related to aesthetics, hazards & hazardous materials, land use & planning,
on-site construction & operational noise, vibration, population & housing, public services,
utilities & service systems, and wildfire. Specifically related to aesthetics, since only Building 1
would be developed as part of the Revised Project, setbacks from the proposed building and
Warren Avenue would increase. Therefore, views of the Domenigoni Mountains would be more
expansive than those that would occur with implementation of the Previous Project.
Furthermore, the reduction in development footprint would result in fewer ground-disturbing
activities and a decrease in impacts related to agricultural and forestry resources, biological
resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, and tribal
cultural resources (Exhibit D).

New Fiscal Impact & Economic Benefit Analysis Prepared June 2025

A revised Fiscal Impact and Economic Benefit Analysis has since been provided by the applicant.
The analysis is dated June 30, 2025, and has been prepared by DPFG, a Development Planning and
Financing Group. The purpose of the fiscal impact analysis is to determine the estimated fiscal
impacts of the Project to the City's General Fund. Additionally, the Economic Benefit Analysis
estimates the number of annual jobs created and annual labor income generated during construction
on an on-going basis after construction is complete.

The three components of economic impact are further described below:

Direct Impact: Represents the initial change in the economy attributable to the development of the
Project, which occurs directly on the Project site.

Indirect Impact: Represents the impact on local industries based on inter-industry purchases as the
economy responds to new demand of the directly affected industries. This impact represents the
additional rounds of economic activity that occur consequently from the direct impacts, specifically
through the production of goods and services required to support businesses directly impacted.

Induced Impact: Represents the impact to the local economy based on the increased household
spending due to additional labor income generated, specifically through the purchase of goods and/or
services required to meet consumer demand generated by the Project’s employees.

As provided by the applicant, the tenant for this application is no longer speculative. Rialto Pacific
LLC, the tenant for this project, is an Inland Empire company that is selling services – not products –

Page 5 of 604 Page 109 of 806

 13.C.
such as unpacking boxes from overseas containers and stocking product for Costco, Target, and
WalMart. They will be textiles and apparel such as socks, shirts, and pants. These goods are
handled and serviced by Rialto Distribution, not resold.

Average Annual Jobs Created During Construction: Over an average annual basis, over the 18-
month construction period, it is estimated that the Project will generate:

902 Total Jobs

 641 Direct Jobs

 101 Indirect Jobs
 160 Induced Jobs

$54.26 Million in Annual Labor Income

 $40.48 Million in Direct Labor Income

 $6.11 Million in Indirect Labor Income
 $7.67 Million in Induced Labor Income

Ongoing Annual Jobs After Construction: Upon completion, on an Annual ongoing basis, it is
estimated that the Project will generate:

1,253 Total Jobs

 806 Direct Jobs

 244 Indirect Jobs
 203 Induced Jobs

$72.55 Million in Annual Labor Income

 $50.34 Million in Direct Labor Income

 $12.47 Million in Indirect Labor Income.
 $9.74 Million in Induced Labor Income.

The report indicates that the economic benefit to the City from the project includes $81.39 Million of
Cumulative Labor Income during the first 18-months of construction. Additionally, the report
concludes that on a permanent ongoing annual basis, it is estimated that the Project will result in
$362.76 million of Cumulative Labor Income for the first five (5) years of project occupancy and $ .73
billion in Cumulative Labor Income for the first 10-year period.

Community Benefits to be provided beyond the limits of the project:

 Developer to maintain access to APN 465-140-032 with a dedicated 20’ access road through
the project, at the project’s sole cost.

Page 6 of 604 Page 110 of 806

 13.C.
 Developer to provide full-width street improvements on Simpson Avenue, in lieu of standard
half-width improvements, at the project’s sole cost, applicable to the City’s existing public right
of way.
 Developer to fund or construct 1,000 linear feet of the regional running trail along the Salt
Creek Trail at the project’s frontage.
 Developer to fund or construct a new “Welcome to the City of Hemet” monument sign that is to
be no smaller in size than 3’ tall x 5’ wide. Developer to abide by all City signage guidelines;
and either payment or construction start of the signage shall be made prior to occupancy.
 Developer to repair asphalt infrastructure 1,000 linear feet east of the project along Simpson
Road, starting at the property’s easternmost property line. This will include a Grind & Overlay
repair as a minimum specification.
 Developer to repair asphalt infrastructure 1,000 linear feet north of the project along Warren
Road, starting at the property’s northernmost property line. This will include a Grind & Overlay
repair as a minimum specification.
 Developer to repair asphalt infrastructure at Warren Road and Domenigoni intersection
between the Salt Creek Bridge crossing and Domenigoni Parkway northern boundary. This
will include a Grind & Overlay repair as a minimum specification.
 Project must require any tenant, existing or future, to abide by City of Hemet truck routes. This
includes the provision that the City of Hemet can change the truck routes throughout the city;
and the tenant will direct future truck traffic to those revised routes.
 Developer to contribute $50,000 to the City of Hemet relating to the City’s study of the
Domenigoni Parkway median project.
 Developer to contribute $75,000 to the City of Hemet relating to the City’s Traffic Signal
Synchronization project for a radius of two miles of signals to the project boundaries.
 Developer to donate or construct $50,000 of artwork that celebrates the City of Hemet’s culture
and history as outlined in section 10 of the General Plan. Developer to coordinate with the City
Planner to ensure that either payment or commissioning of the artwork shall be made prior to
occupancy.
 Developer to schedule and host a job fair to be held within the city boundaries to support the
hiring of Hemet residents. This job fair shall be coordinated with the City Economic
Development Manager and requires at least four weeks' notice prior to the event.
 Developer to enhance the building’s corner office characteristics in order to tie in architectural
elements of the Western Science Center at the project’s sole cost.

Additionally, the Draft Conditions of Approval Agreed Upon by the Applicant as Presented to the
Council on April 8, 2025 include two (2) conditions to add screen trees along the western edge of
Parcel 1 and revise architectural elevations on the north and south elevations to be consistent with
the renderings presented with the Revised Project if approved (Exhibit M).

STRATEGIC PLAN INTEGRATION:

GOAL TWO: ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY

To ensure that Hemet is a hub, with access to quality jobs, shopping options, and a
varied and sustained tax base.
Objective 1: Develop business practices that welcome new development by streamlining processes.
Objective 2: Provide resources for new businesses to enhance the customer service experience.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Page 7 of 604 Page 111 of 806

 13.C.
An economic analysis dated June 30, 2025, has been prepared by DPFG for the project. The report
indicates that the economic benefit to the City from the project includes $362.76 million for the first
five years of project occupancy and $.73 billion for the first 10-year period.

ALTERNATIVE(S):

Alternative Council Action

Findings of Facts & Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC)

Because the Draft EIR identified unavoidable significant adverse impacts that could not be mitigated
below the level of significance, Findings of Fact (Findings) and a Statement of Overriding
Considerations are required. CEQA requires the Lead Agency to balance the benefits of a proposed
action against its significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts in determining whether or
not to approve the proposed Project. In making this determination, the City is guided by CEQA
Guidelines Section § 15093, Statement of Overriding Considerations, which states:

(a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal,
social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable
environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic,
legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposal (sic) project outweigh the unavoidable
adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered
“acceptable.”

(b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant
effects which are identified in the Final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the
agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the Final EIR
and/or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be
supported by substantial evidence in the record.

(c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be

included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of
determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings
required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091

The City Council may adopt the "Revised" Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project as
follows, and associated conditions of approval as provided in Exhibit C.

After balancing the specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the Project,
has determined that the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified above may be
considered acceptable due to the following specific considerations which outweigh the unavoidable,
adverse environmental impacts of the Project, each of which standing alone is sufficient to support
approval of the Project, in accordance with CEQA Guideline Section § 21081(b) and CEQA Guideline
Section § 15093. The specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the Project
are as follows:

1. The Economic Benefit Analysis estimates that the Project would create 1,253 total long-term labor
and office jobs which would generate $72.55 million in labor income on an annual basis. In addition,
Page 8 of 604 Page 112 of 806
 13.C.
the Project would generate 902 total jobs during construction, generating $54.26 million in labor
income during the construction period.

2. The City of Hemet has had unemployment rates ranging between 3.6 and 15.3 percent over
the last five years (EDD 2024). The Project would provide new employment opportunities for people
living in Hemet and the surrounding cities with ample opportunities for career training and
advancement. Most of the new labor and office jobs that would be created by the proposed Project
would be positions that are anticipated to be filled by people who would already be living within
Hemet and surrounding communities.

3. Based on the analysis of revenues and expenditure, the Project would generate a surplus to the
City’s general fund, which can be reinvested into public services, infrastructure, and community
programs.

4. The Project would also contribute $1.2 million in one-time site development impact fees and
$2.2 million in building development impact fees to the City and various other agencies including fees
for fire services; fees for storm drain facilities; transportation fees, inclusive of specific fees to be used
toward the Domenigoni Parkway median project and the City’s Traffic Signal Synchronization project;
and fees for the Hemet Unified School District.

5. The Developer is expected to spend $12,104,512 on offsite improvements, street enhancements

and utilities.

6. The Project implements capital investment through construction of a new building to enhance the
City’s economic and fiscal viability pursuant to the City of Hemet General Plan.

7. The Project would improve the jobs-housing balance in Hemet by providing a substantial number of
new job opportunities near existing housing, reducing commute times and increasing economic
stability for local residents.

8. The Project would implement roadway and pedestrian improvements that would be a catalyst to
future pedestrian improvements, which would improve pedestrian safety for current and future
residents in the area and workers at the facility.

9. The Project transforms an underutilized site with an economically viable development consistent
with the General Plan objectives for the Mixed Area #4 Focus Area, including General Plan Policy LU-
9.6. The City’s General Plan identifies the need for a balanced employment base with a diversity of
businesses, including industrial businesses. The Project would provide an industrial employment hub
in proximity to highways and available truck routes. By allowing industrial development in this
location, more employment opportunities would be available to the community.

10. The Project implements the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional
Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) Land Use Policies related to
population and housing by providing employment centers near a housing rich area.

Copies of the Draft EIR and Final EIR have been made available for review online at
https://www.hemetca.gov/797/Environmental-Documents.

Page 9 of 604 Page 113 of 806

 13.C.

Project Findings

Furthermore, as provided below, the statutory findings and findings required as provided in the
Background Section of this report in accordance with the Hemet Municipal Code would also be
required to be included if the direction is to approve the Revised Project.

General Plan Amendment

As part of the proposed project, the applicant requests a General Plan Amendment (GPA 22-003) to
change the land use designation of the site from Mixed Use (MU) to Business Park (B-P). This
amendment is intended to align the General Plan land use designation with the site’s existing zoning
designation of Business Park, thereby eliminating an internal inconsistency in the City’s land use
framework.

The Hemet General Plan serves as the City’s long-range policy guide for land use, development, and
infrastructure planning. General Plan amendments are considered legislative actions and are subject
to specific findings under California Government Code Section 65354. In accordance with state law,
the Planning Commission must provide a written recommendation to the City Council, which serves
as the final decision-making body.

Approval of a General Plan Amendment requires findings demonstrating that the amendment:

1. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not cause any internal inconsistencies in the
General Plan.

2. The proposed amendment reduces internal inconsistencies in the General Plan.

3. The proposed General Plan Amendment is not detrimental to the public health, safety, and
welfare.

4. That proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the overall goals, policies, and
objectives of the General Plan.

Conditional Use Permit

The applicant is requesting approval of Conditional Use Permit (CUP 22-006) to allow the
construction and operation of two industrial warehouse buildings, each exceeding 400,000 square
feet. Under Hemet Municipal Code Section 90-1043, warehouse and fulfillment center uses of this
size are conditionally permitted in the Business Park (B-P) zone and require approval of a CUP.

Conditional Use Permits are evaluated based on their potential impacts on surrounding uses,
operational characteristics, and consistency with the City’s General Plan. Although CUPs are typically
reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission, this CUP is being processed concurrently with
a General Plan Amendment, and therefore, the City Council serves as the final decision-making body.

The CUP has been reviewed by the City’s Development Review Committee (DRC)—which includes
representatives from Public Works, Engineering, Building, Police, Fire, and Planning and

Page 10 of 604 Page 114 of 806

 13.C.
recommended with conditions of approval to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses and public
infrastructure.

Approval of a Conditional Use Permit requires the following findings, per Hemet Municipal Code
Section 90-42.5:

1. That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of this chapter
and the purposes of the zone in which the site is located.

2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be
operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or
materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.

3. That the use and operation are consistent with the General Plan elements, goals, and policies;
and

4. That the type, intensity, sensitivity, and operating characteristics of the proposed use, and the
manner in which they will be located on the site, are compatible with existing land uses, the
character of established neighborhoods, or planned development in the vicinity.

Tentative Parcel Map

The project includes Tentative Parcel Map No. 38800 (MAP 23-008), which proposes to subdivide the
74.88-acre site into three parcels: two development parcels—one for each proposed warehouse—
and one for the ancillary trailer parking lot. This subdivision would allow for the independent
development and operation of each component of the project.

Under the Hemet Municipal Code (Section 70-1) and the California Subdivision Map Act (Government
Code §66410 et seq.), the Planning Commission acts as the advisory agency for tentative maps and
is responsible for reviewing, recommending, and conditionally approving or denying tentative
subdivision maps. As the TPM is being processed concurrently with a General Plan Amendment, the
City Council serves as the final decision-making body on this map.

In accordance with the Subdivision Map Act (Section 66474), a Tentative Parcel Map may only be
approved if the following findings can be made:

1. That the proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in
Section 65451 of the Government Code.

2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable
general and specific plans.

3. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development.

4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development.

5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their
habitat.
Page 11 of 604 Page 115 of 806
 13.C.

6. That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public
health problems.

7. That the design of the subdivision 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
subdivision. In this connection, the governing body may approve a map if it finds that alternate
easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these 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, and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public
at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed
subdivision.

8. The design of a subdivision for which a tentative map is required pursuant to Section 66426
shall provide, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling
opportunities in the subdivision.

Building Height Exception

The applicant is requesting a building height exception pursuant to Hemet Municipal Code Section
90-1046(c)(3) to allow warehouse buildings that exceed the standard maximum building height
permitted in the Business Park (B-P) zone.

Under current zoning standards, the maximum allowable building height is 55 feet. The proposed
warehouse buildings (Building 1 and Building 2) would have maximum parapet heights ranging from
56 to 60 feet, representing an increase of up to 10 percent above the allowable height limit.

Pursuant to HMC Section 90-1046(c)(3), the reviewing authority may authorize a 10 percent increase
in maximum building height for structures that are set back a minimum of 100 feet from any
residential use or residentially zoned property, excluding signs. The proposed buildings meet this
setback requirement.

Because the height exception is being processed concurrently with other discretionary entitlements,
the City Council serves as the final reviewing authority for this request.

ATTACHMENT(S):
Exhibit A Revised Project Description
Exhibit B Revised Project CEQA Findings of Facts & Statement of Overriding Considerations
Exhibit C Revised Project Fiscal and Economic Benefits Analysis
Exhibit D Revised Project CEQA Consistency Memo
Exhibit E Revised Project Trip Generation Memo
Exhibit F Revised Project AQ-GHG Reduction Memo
Exhibit G Revised Architectural Plans
Exhibit H Revised Tentative Parcel Map
Exhibit I Revised Preliminary Grading Plan
Exhibit J Revised Proposed General Plan Map

Page 12 of 604 Page 116 of 806